Moving from sandwich to human body: introducing the concept of embodiment to the field of gifted education

Abstract

Gifted education has followed a paradigm that implies that giftedness is characterized by superior cognitive abilities emanating from the human brain. This view contrasts with a new concept of the human mind: embodiment. Its core message maintains that cognitive processes extend throughout the entire body. This approach is an already highly influential paradigm across various scientific disciplines. Yet, its potential for gifted education remains to be determined. Thus, the main objective of this work is to introduce the concept of embodiment from a gifted education angle. As a first step, we will explore the key principles of embodiment along with the most significant criticisms concerning more traditional concepts of cognition. Second, we utilize research findings to illustrate embodiment’s potential in the realm of gifted education. We suggest that gifted education should further examine the potential of the embodiment approach.

Keywords

• cognitive processes
• embodied cognition
• gifted education
• giftedness research
• learning
• motor activities

References

1. Al-Khalil, K., & O’Boyle, M. W. (2018). The neural basis of precocious mathematical ability: Some structural and functional characteristics of the math-gifted brain. In Psychobiological, clinical, and educational aspects of giftedness. (pp. 15–38). Nova Biomedical Books.
2. Alibali, M. W. (2005). Gesture in spatial cognition: Expressing, communicating, and thinking about spatial information. In Spatial Cognition and Computation, 5(4), 307–331). https://doi.org/10.1207/s15427633scc0504_2
3. Awad, S. (2019). Moving to Excellence: Embodiment in Gifted Education. Talent Web, 3(2). https://etsn.eu/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Research-Echoes-Embodied-Cognition-and-Gifted-Education.pdf
4. Bahnmueller, J., Dresler, T., Ehlis, A.-C., Cress, U., & Nuerk, H.-C. (2014). NIRS in motion—unraveling the neurocognitive underpinnings of embodied numerical cognition. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(JUL), 743. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00743
5. Besnoy, K. D., Dantzler, J. A., & Siders, J. A. (2012). Creating a Digital Ecosystem for the Gifted Education Classroom. Journal of Advanced Academics, 23(4), 305–325. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X12461005
6. Breckinridge Church, R., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (1986). The mismatch between gesture and speech as an index of transitional knowledge. Cognition, 23(1), 43–71. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-0277(86)90053-3
7. Briñol, P., Petty, R. E., & Wagner, B. (2009). Body posture effects on self-evaluation: A self-validation approach. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39(6), 1053–1064. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.607
8. Burgoon, J. K., Guerrero, L. K., & Floyd, K. (2016). Nonverbal communication. In Nonverbal Communication. Taylor and Francis. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315663425

9. Canales, J. Z., Cordás, T. A., Fiquer, J. T., Cavalcante, A. F., & Moreno, R. A. (2010). Posture and body image in individuals with major depressive disorder: A controlled study. Revista Brasileira de Psiquiatria, 32(4), 375–380. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-44462010000400010
10. Carney, D., Cuddy, A. J. C., & Yap, A. J. (2015). Review and Summary of Research on the Embodied Effects of Expansive (vs. Contractive) Nonverbal Displays. Psychological Science, 26(5), 657–663. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614566855
11. Casasanto, D., & Dijkstra, K. (2010). Motor action and emotional memory. Cognition, 115(1), 179–185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2009.11.002
12. Chartrand, T. L., & Bargh, J. A. (1999). The chameleon effect: The perception-behavior link and social interaction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(6), 893–910. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.76.6.893
13. Chemero, A. (2009). Radical embodied cognitive science. The MIT Press.
14. Cook, S. W., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2006). The Role of Gesture in Learning: Do Children Use Their Hands to Change Their Minds? Journal of Cognition and Development, 7(2), 211–232.
15. Cook, S. W., Mitchell, Z., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (2008). Gesturing makes learning last. Cognition, 106(2), 1047–1058. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2007.04.010
16. Coste, A., Bardy, B. G., & Marin, L. (2019). Towards an Embodied Signature of Improvisation Skills. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 2441. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02441
17. Dijkstra, K., Kaschak, M. P., & Zwaan, R. A. (2007). Body posture facilitates retrieval of autobiographical memories. Cognition, 102(1), 139–149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2005.12.009
18. Dijkstra, K., & Post, L. (2015). Mechanisms of embodiment. Frontiers in Psychology, 6(OCT), 1525. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01525
19. Friedman, R., & Förster, J. (2001). The Influence of Approach and Avoidance Motor Actions on Creative Cognition. https://doi.org/10.1006/jesp.2001.1488
20. Gagné, F. (2009). Talent development as seen through the differentiated model of giftedness and talent. In T. Balchin, B. Hymer, & D. J. Matthews (Eds.), The Routledge international companion to gifted education (pp. 32–41). Routledge.
21. Galton, F. (1869). Hereditary genius: An inquiry into its laws and consequences. Macmillan and Co. https://doi.org/10.1037/13474-000
22. Gerofsky, S. (2011). Seeing the graph vs. being the graph: Gesture, engagement and awareness in school mathematics. In Integrating gestures: The interdisciplinary nature of gesture. (pp. 245–256). John Benjamins Publishing Company. https://doi.org/10.1075/gs.4.22ger
23. Glenberg, A. M., Witt, J. K., & Metcalfe, J. (2013). From the Revolution to Embodiment. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8(5), 573–585. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691613498098
24. Goff, M., & Ackerman, P. L. (1992). Personality-Intelligence Relations: Assessment of Typical Intellectual Engagement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84(4), 537–552. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.84.4.537
25. Grassinger, R., Porath, M., & Ziegler, A. (2010). Mentoring the gifted: A conceptual analysis. High Ability Studies, 21(1), 27–46. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2010.488087
26. Hao, N., Xue, H., Yuan, H., Wang, Q., & Runco, M. A. (2017). Enhancing creativity: Proper body posture meets proper emotion. Acta Psychologica, 173, 32–40. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2016.12.005
27. Heller, K. A., Perleth, C., & Lim, T. K. (1978). The Munich Model of Giftedness Designed to Identify and Promote Gifted Students. In Gagné. Heller.
28. Hurley, S. (2002). Consciousness in Action. Harvard University Press.
29. Iachini, T. (2011). Mental imagery and embodied cognition: A multimodal approach. Journal of Mental Imagery, 35, 1–26.
30. Iverson, J. M., & Goldin-Meadow, S. (1998). Why people gesture when they speak [7]. In Nature (Vol. 396, Issue 6708, p. 228). https://doi.org/10.1038/24300
31. Jaeger, A. J., Wiley, J., & Moher, T. (2016). Leveling the playing field: Grounding learning with embedded simulations in geoscience. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 1(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-016-0026-3
32. Johnson-Glenberg, M. C., & Megowan-Romanowicz, C. (2017). Embodied science and mixed reality: How gesture and motion capture affect physics education. Cognitive Research: Principles and Implications, 2(1), 1–28. https://doi.org/10.1186/s41235-017-0060-9
33. Kalbfleisch, M. (2008). Neuroscientific Investigator of High Mathematical Ability: An Interview with Michael W. O’Boyle. Roeper Review, 30, 153–157. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190802199255
34. Kaufman, S. B., & Sternberg, R. J. (2008). Conceptions of Giftedness. Handbook of Giftedness in Children, 71–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-74401-8_5
35. Lakoff, G. (2002). Women, fire, and dangerous things: What categories reveal about the mind (9. pr., pa). Chicago Press.
36. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh: the embodied mind and its challenge to Western thought. Basic Books.
37. Lakoff, G., & Núñez, R. E. (2000). Where mathematics comes from: How the embodied mind brings mathematics into being. Basic Books.
38. Langten, S. R. H., Watt, R. J., & Bruce, V. (2000). Do the eyes have it? Cues to the direction of social attention. In Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 4(2), 50–59. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1364-6613(99)01436-9
39. Malinin, L. H. (2019). How Radical Is Embodied Creativity? Implications of 4E Approaches for Creativity Research and Teaching. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(OCT), 2372. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02372
40. Marstaller, L., & Burianová, H. (2013). Individual differences in the gesture effect on working memory. Psychonomic Bulletin and Review, 20(3), 496–500. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13423-012-0365-0
41. McCroskey, J. C., Richmond, V. P., & McCroskey, L. L. (2006). Nonverbal Communication in Instructional Contexts. In V. Manusov & M. L. Patterson (Eds.), The SAGE Handbook of Nonverbal Communication (pp. 421–436). Sage PublicationsSage CA: Thousand Oaks, CA.
42. Neubauer, A. C. (2013). Intelligence and academic achievement – with a focus on the actiotope model of giftedness. In S. N. Phillipson, H. Stoeger, & A. Ziegler (Eds.), Exceptionality in East Asia: Explorations in the actiotope model of giftedness (1st ed., pp. 100–113). Routledge.
43. Newell, A. (1990). Unified Theories of Cognition. Harvard University Press.
44. Newell, Allen, & Simon, H. A. (1976). Computer Science as Empirical Inquiry: Symbols and Search. Commun. ACM, 19(3), 113–126. https://doi.org/10.1145/360018.360022
45. Newen, A., Bruin, L. d., & Gallagher, S. (2018). Oxford Handbooks. The Oxford Handbook of 4E Cognition. Oxford University Press.
46. Niedenthal, P. M., Barsalou, L. W., Winkielman, P., Krauth-Gruber, S., & Ric, F. (2005). Embodiment in Attitudes, Social Perception, and Emotion. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 9(3), 184–211. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327957pspr0903_1
47. Núñez, R. E., Edwards, L. D., & Matos, J. F. (1999). Embodied cognition as grounding for situatedness and context in mathematics education. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 39(1–3), 45–65. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1003759711966
48. O’Boyle, M. W. (2008). Mathematically gifted children: Developmental brain characteristics and their prognosis for well-being. Roeper Review, 30(3), 181–186. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783190802199594
49. Otte, F. W., Millar, S.-K., & Klatt, S. (2019). Skill Training Periodization in “Specialist” Sports Coaching—An Introduction of the “PoST” Framework for Skill Development. Frontiers in Sports and Active Living, 1, 61. https://doi.org/10.3389/fspor.2019.00061
50. Pleiss, M. K., & Feldhusen, J. F. (1995). Mentors, Role Models, and Heroes in the Lives of Gifted Children. Educational Psychologist, 30(3), 159–169. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep3003_6
51. Pouw, W. T. J. L., de Nooijer, J. A., van Gog, T., Zwaan, R. A., & Paas, F. (2014). Toward a more embedded/extended perspective on the cognitive function of gestures. Frontiers in Psychology, 5(APR), 359. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00359
52. Raab, M., & Araújo, D. (2019). Embodied Cognition With and Without Mental Representations: The Case of Embodied Choices in Sports. Frontiers in Psychology, 10(AUG), 1825. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01825
53. Renzulli, J. (1979). What Makes Giftedness: A Reexamination of the Definition. Science and Children.
54. Rinn, A. N. (2012). Implications for Addressing the Psychosocial Needs of Gifted Individuals. Gifted Child Quarterly, 56(4), 206–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986212456076
55. Rizzolatti, G., & Craighero, L. (2004). The Mirror-Neuron System. Annual Review of Neuroscience, 27(1), 169–192. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.neuro.27.070203.144230
56. Rosenbaum, D. A. (2005). The Cinderella of psychology: The neglect of motor control in the science of mental life and behavior. American Psychologist, 60(4), 308–317. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.60.4.308
57. Sedlacek, M. (2017). Models of Mind That Are Implied by Cognitive Science. Journal of International Business Research and Marketing, 2, 33–36. https://doi.org/10.18775/jibrm.1849-8558.2015.25.3005
58. Seifert, L., Davids, K., Hauw, N., & McGann, M. (2019). Radical embodied cognitive science of human behavior: Skill acquisition, expertise and talent development. https://www.frontiersin.org/research-topics/9049/radical-embodied-cognitive-science-of-human-behavior-skill-acquisition-expertise-and-talent-developm#overview
59. Shapiro, L. (2004). The Mind Incarnate. MIT Press.
60. Shapiro, L. (2012). Embodied Cognition. In E. Margolis, R. Samuels, & S. Stich (Eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Philosophy of Cognitive Science (pp. 118–146). Oxford University Press.
61. Shapiro, L., & Stolz, S. A. (2019). Embodied cognition and its significance for education. Theory and Research in Education, 17(1), 19–39. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477878518822149
62. Spearman, C. (1927). The Abilities of Man their Nature and Measurement. Nature, 120(3014), 181–183. https://doi.org/10.1038/120181a0
63. Stern, W. (1911). Die differentielle Psychologie in ihren methodischen Grundlagen [Differential psychology and its methodological basics]. Verlag Johann Ambrosius Barth.
64. Stern, W. (1916). Psychologische Begabung und Begabungsdiagnose [Psychological giftedness and its diagnosis]. In P. Petersen (Ed.), Der Aufstieg der Begabten [The rise of the gifted] (pp. 105–120). Teubner.
65. Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. In Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. Cambridge University Press.
66. Sternberg, R. J. (1998). Abilities Are Forms of Developing Expertise. Educational Researcher, 27(3), 11–20. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X027003011
67. Sternberg, R. J. (2001). Giftedness as Developing Expertise: A theory of the interface between high abilities and achieved excellence. High Ability Studies, 12(2). https://doi.org/10.1080/13598130120084311
68. Sternberg, R. J. (2003). Our research program validating the triarchic theory of successful intelligence: Reply to Gottfredson. In Intelligence, 31(4), 399–413). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0160-2896(02)00143-5
69. Sternberg, R. J., & Davidson, J. E. (2005). Conceptions of giftedness, 2nd ed. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness, 2nd ed. Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610455
70. Stoeger, H., Debatin, T., Heilemann, M., & Ziegler, A. (2019). Online Mentoring for Talented Girls in STEM: The Role of Relationship Quality and Changes in Learning Environments in Explaining Mentoring Success. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 2019(168), 75–99. https://doi.org/10.1002/cad.20320
71. Stoeger, H., Hopp, M., & Ziegler, A. (2017). Online Mentoring as an Extracurricular Measure to Encourage Talented Girls in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics): An Empirical Study of One-on-One Versus Group Mentoring. Gifted Child Quarterly, 61(3), 239–249. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986217702215
72. Subotnik, R. F., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Worrell, F. C. (2011). Rethinking Giftedness and Gifted Education: A Proposed Direction Forward Based on Psychological Science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Supplement, 12(1), 3–54. https://doi.org/10.1177/1529100611418056
73. Subotnik, R. F., Olszewski-Kubilius, P., & Worrell, F. C. (2018). Talent development as the most promising focus of giftedness and gifted education. In S. I. Pfeiffer, E. Shaughnessy-Dedrick, & M. Foley-Nicpon (Eds.), APA handbooks in psychology®. APA handbook of giftedness and talent (pp. 231–245). American Psychological Association.
74. Sullivan, J. V. (2018). Learning and Embodied Cognition: A Review and Proposal. Psychology Learning & Teaching, 17(2), 128–143. https://doi.org/10.1177/1475725717752550
75. Sun, R. (2008). Introduction to Computational Cognitive Modeling. In The Cambridge Handbook of Computational Psychology (pp. 3–20). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511816772.003
76. Tannenbaum, A. J. (1986). Giftedness: A psychosocial approach. In R. J. Sternberg & J. E. Davidson (Eds.), Conceptions of giftedness (2nd ed., pp. 21–52). Unviersity Press.
77. TEDx. (2013, December 13). How the body shapes the way we think: Rolf Pfeifer at TEDxZurich. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mhWwoaoxIyc
78. Terman, L. M. (1922). A New Approach to the Study of Genius. Psychological Review, 29(4), 310–318.
79. Terman, L. M. (1925). Mental and Physcial Traits of a Thousand Gifted Children. Genetic Studies of Genius (Vol. 1). Stanford University Press.
80. Thurstone, L. L. (1938). Primary mental abilities. In Primary mental abilities. Chicago.
81. Topolinski, S. (2012). The sensorimotor contributions to implicit memory, familiarity, and recollection. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 141(2), 260–281. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025658
82. Walkington, C., Boncoddo, R., Williams, C., Nathan, M., Alibali, M., Simon, E., & Pier, E. (2014). Being Mathematical Relations: Dynamic Gestures Support Mathematical Reasoning. https://doi.org/10.13140/2.1.4080.0005
83. Willingham, D. B. (2004). Cognition: The Thinking Animal. (2nd ed.). Pearson Prentice Hill.
84. Wilson, M. (2002). Six views of embodied cognition. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 9(4), 625–636. https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03196322
85. Wilson, V. E., & Peper, E. (2004). The effects of upright and slumped postures on the recall of positive and negative thoughts. Applied Psychophysiology and Biofeedback, 29(3), 189–195. https://doi.org/10.1023/b:apbi.0000039057.32963.34
86. Ziegler, A. (2005). The actiotope model of giftedness. In Conceptions of Giftedness: Second Edition (pp. 411–436). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610455.024
87. Ziegler, A., & Phillipson, S. N. (2012). Towards a systemic theory of gifted education. High Ability Studies, 23(1), 3–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598139.2012.679085
88. Ziegler, A., Stöger, H., Balestrini, D. P., Phillipson, S. N., & Phillipson, S. (2014). {Systemic} gifted education. In D. F. A (Ed.), The handbook of secondary gifted education (p. 0). TX Prufrock.
89. Ziegler, A., Vialle, W., & Wimmer, B. (2013). The actiotope model of giftedness: A short introduction to some central theoretical assumptions. In S. Phillipson, H. Stoeger, & A. Ziegler (Eds.), Exceptionality in East Asia: Explorations in the actiotope model of giftedness (pp. 1–17). Routledge. http://ro.uow.edu.au/sspapers/526