Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums GT Research Scientific American Mind

The latest issue is focused on creativity, there are some great sources referenced relating to genius, creativity, and play. Also some findings mentioned that were surprising (boys who rough-house more when younger were measured later in life as having more flexible social skills.)

A couple of the concepts were very interesting when I considered them in terms of gifted misdiagnosis:
Cognitive inhibition and cognitive flexibility, and the idea that high levels of creative achievement may be strongly related to having solid skills in manipulating these.

There have been a number of studies in recent years indicating the numerous benefits of rough play. Here's the short version.

Of course that's not why I played rough with DD. I did it to hear her scream a joyous, "AGAIN!!"

Could you please explain this more?

Interesting. Good summary at the link. Is the book recommended there ("The Art of Roughhousing") worth reading, in addition to the summary?

Roughly through my lens: Cognitive inhibition is the mind's ability to filter out excessive information such as minute details to create an approximate view of the world (tree is a circle with a stick.) This keeps people on task and undistracted, and helps avoid the mental bunny trials.

Creativity, particularly at the idea generation works from unexpected connections, skipping past assumptions, etc. Or following the bunny trails.

Cognitive flexibility is changing of mental states and adapting to new scenarios or modes of thought.

Productive creativty needs the uninhibited cognition to be flexibly available on demand, but then needs to be pulled back when it is time to select a solution/idea and further altered to implement/follow through.

Some gifted kids may have low cognitive inhibition and are ideally following a path to learning the flexibity and inhibition. This demonstrates as creative, easily distracted, aware of a crazy amount of details (and remembers many of them,) their unconstrained thinking can easily develop new strategies for problem solving, learn deeply through discovered connections, etc. All in a package that reads uninhibited and distracted.

From there my thinking is they are likely to be misdiagnosed with all sorts of things when they are beginning the path of learning to flexibly manage their inhibitions. Done right you get a intelligent, creative, flexible problem solver in the end. I think you can nurture that transformation, but you can't force it.

(Portia, pm returned)

Couldn't tell you. I haven't read it.

I think the problem is increased adult supervision. I'm sure we didn't wrestle or attempt stupid physical things in front of our parents.

LOL When I read that, I heard my DS's voice ringing in my head during rough play with his Dad

I highly doubt that the roughhousing/social flexibility connection is a cause/effect relationship. I'd be more inclined to interpret that data as the personality which at a young age leans toward roughhousing, also inclines an older person toward social flexibility. My surmising is based on anecdotal evidence, however.

For example, our son (now 14) liked to roughhouse as a young boy, but not even close to the level of the neighbor boys' enjoyment of roughhousing (they were the same age). He would stand back and watch, would dart in-and-out quickly, but would not engage in the activity nearly as much. It wasn't because his parents didn't roughhouse with him (we did), nor was it because he is an only child (some of the other boys he watched were only children). He just didn't like it as much. Now, if you look at him compared with those same neighbor boys, they are far more socially flexible than he is. The boy in the neighborhood who was even less inclined to roughhousing is even less socially flexible.

I take that to be a personality issue that causes both effects, not that roughhousing causes social flexibility. If that makes sense.