RESEARCH ARTICLE
Examining the Psychometric Properties of the Home Rating Scale for Identifying Gifted Students (SIGS-2) in a Türkiye Sample
Sevinc Zeynep Kavruk,
Figen Turan,
Corresponding Author
Sevinc Zeynep Kavruk
Child Development Department, Central Campus, Faculty of Health Science, Aydin Adnan Menderes University, Aydin, Türkiye
Correspondence: Sevinc Zeynep Kavruk ([email protected])
Search for more papers by this authorFigen Turan
Child Development Department, Sihhiye Campus, Faculty of Health Science, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Türkiye
Search for more papers by this authorSevinc Zeynep Kavruk,
Figen Turan,
Corresponding Author
Sevinc Zeynep Kavruk
Child Development Department, Central Campus, Faculty of Health Science, Aydin Adnan Menderes University, Aydin, Türkiye
Correspondence: Sevinc Zeynep Kavruk ([email protected])
Search for more papers by this authorFigen Turan
Child Development Department, Sihhiye Campus, Faculty of Health Science, Hacettepe University, Ankara, Türkiye
Search for more papers by this authorFirst published: 08 March 2025
This study was produced from the doctoral thesis of the first author.
ABSTRACT
This study adapts the “Scales for Identifying Gifted Students (SIGS-2)” into Turkish for use from preschool onward, specifically during the candidate nomination stage. Conducted with 974 parents (675 mothers, 299 fathers) of children aged 5–10, it employs Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA) to evaluate the scale's structure and reliability. CFA results show excellent fit indices (CFI = 0.998, GFI = 0.994, IFI = 0.998, NFI = 0.993, NNFI = 0.998, RFI = 0.993) and an RMSEA of 0.017, indicating good model fit. Factor loadings ranged from 0.36 to 0.89, and item-total correlations were between 0.32 and 0.79, demonstrating effective discrimination. Reliability coefficients were high, with Cronbach's alpha, McDonald's omega, and Composite Reliability (CR) ranging from 0.87 to 0.96. The SIGS-2 Home Rating Scale aligns well with existing measures and reflects changes in IQ levels, showing its suitability for assessing gifted children in Türkiye. While parental nominations are valuable, they may be less reliable than test results in identifying giftedness.
Summary
-
The SIGS-2 Home Rating Scale, now adapted into Turkish, is a valid and reliable tool for identifying gifted children from preschool onwards.
-
Parental ratings on the SIGS-2 Home Rating Scale demonstrate alignment with teacher nomination scores and children's nonverbal ability test results.
-
The SIGS-2 Home Rating Scale facilitates the early identification of gifted children and enhances the multi-assessment process by integrating parental insights, offering a more comprehensive evaluation of giftedness.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Open Research
Data Availability Statement
The authors have nothing to report.
Supporting Information
| Filename | Description |
|---|---|
| pits23470-sup-0001-Appendix_A.docx26 KB | Supporting information. |
Please note: The publisher is not responsible for the content or functionality of any supporting information supplied by the authors. Any queries (other than missing content) should be directed to the corresponding author for the article.
References
- Ab Hamid, M. R., W. Sami, and M. M. Sidek. 2017. “Discriminant Validity Assessment: Use of Fornell & Larcker Criterion Versus HTMT Criterion.” Journal of Physics: Conference Series 890: 012163.
10.1088/1742-6596/890/1/012163 Google Scholar
- Barrett, P. 2007. “Structural Equation Modelling: Adjudging Model Fit.” Personality and Individual Differences 42, no. 5: 815–824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2006.09.018.
- Beaton, D. E., C. Bombardier, F. Guillemin, and M. B. Ferraz. 2000. “Guidelines for the Process of Cross-Cultural Adaptation of Self-Report Measures.” Spine 25, no. 24: 3186–3191. https://doi.org/10.1097/00007632-200012150-00014.
- Besnoy, K. D., N. C. Swoszowski, J. L. Newman, A. Floyd, P. Jones, and C. Byrne. 2015. “The Advocacy Experiences of Parents of Elementary Age, Twice-Exceptional Children.” Gifted Child Quarterly 59, no. 2: 108–123. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986215569275.
- Bildiren, A. 2017. “Reliability and Validity Study for the Coloured Progressive Matrices Test Between the Ages of 3-9 for Determining Gifted Children in the Pre-School Period.” Journal of Education and Training Studies 5, no. 5: 13–20. https://doi.org/10.11114/jets.v5i11.2599.
10.11114/jets.v5i11.2599 Google Scholar
- Bildiren, A., and Ö. B. Bilgen. 2019. “Okul öncesi Dönem üstün Yetenekli çocuklar Için Aday Bildirim ölçeği: Geçerlik ve güvenirlik çalışması.” Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Özel Eğitim Dergisi 20, no. 2: 269–289. https://doi.org/10.21565/ozelegitimdergisi.475278.
10.21565/ozelegitimdergisi.475278 Google Scholar
- Bildiren, A., Ö. Bıkmaz Bilgen, and M. Korkmaz. 2021. “National Non-Verbal Cognitive Ability Test (BNV) Development Study.” Sage Open 11, no. 3. https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211046945.
- Bildiren, A., G. Gür, A. S. Sağkal, and Y. Özdemir. 2020. “Okul Öncesi Öğretmenlerinin Üstün Yetenekli Çocukların Tanılanması ve Eğitimlerine İlişkin Algıları.” Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Fakültesi Özel Eğitim Dergisi 21, no. 2: 329–356. https://doi.org/10.21565/ozelegitimdergisi.572326.
10.21565/ozelegitimdergisi.572326 Google Scholar
- Bildiren, A., N. Kirişçi, S. Z. Kavruk, Y. Yıldırım, Ö. Bıkmaz-Bilgen, and B. Dildeğmez. 2024. “İlkokul dönemi üstün yetenekli çocuklar için aday bildirim ölçeği (İDABÖ) geliştirme çalışması.” Ankara University Faculty of Educational Sciences Journal of Special Education 25, no. 3: 297–311. https://doi.org/10.21565/ozelegitimdergisi.1359061.
10.21565/ozelegitimdergisi.1359061 Google Scholar
- Borland, J. H., and L. Wright. 2004. “Identifying Young, Potentially Gifted, Economically Disadvantaged Students.” Identification of Students for Gifted and Talented Programs 2: 25–42.
- Brown, L., R. J. Sherbenou, and S. K. Johnsen 1997. TONI-3, Test of Nonverbal Intelligence: A Language-Free Measure of Cognitive Ability. Austin, TX: Pro-Ed.
- Bryman, A., and D. Cramer. 2001. Quantitative Data Analysis With SPSS Release 10 for Windows: A Guide for Social Scientists. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203471548.
10.4324/9780203471548 Google Scholar
- Bujang, M. A., E. D. Omar, and N. A. Baharum. 2018. “A Review on Sample Size Determination for Cronbach's Alpha Test: A Simple Guide for Researchers.” Malaysian Journal of Medical Sciences 25, no. 6: 85–99.
- Büyüköztürk, Ş. 2014. Sosyal Bilimler için Veri Analizi el Kitabı. Ankara: Pegem A Yayıncılık.
- Çokluk, Ö., G. Şekercioğlu, and Ş. ve Büyüköztürk. 2012. Sosyal Bilimler için çok değişkenli Istatistik: SPSS ve Lisrel Uygulamaları. Ankara: Pegem Akademi Yayıncılık.
- Crocker, L., and J. Algina. 2006. Introduction to Classical and Modern Test Theory. Thomson Learning.
- Davcik, N. S. 2014. “The Use and Misuse of Structural Equation Modeling in Management Research: A Review and Critique.” Journal of Advances in Management Research 11, no. 1: 47–81.
10.1108/JAMR-07-2013-0043 Google Scholar
- DeVellis, R. F., and C. T. Thorpe. 2021. Scale Development: Theory and Applications. Sage publications.
- Ercan, İ., and İ. Kan. 2004. “Ölçeklerde güvenirlik ve geçerlik.” Uludağ Üniversitesi Tıp Fakültesi Dergisi 30, no. 3: 211–216.
- Field, A. 2013. Discovering Statistics Using SPSS. Sage Publications.
- Field, A., J. Miles, and Z. Field. 2012. Discovering Statistics Using R. Sage.
- Furnham, A., and K. Bunclark. 2006. “Sex Differences in Parents’ Estimations of Their Own and Their Children's Intelligence.” Intelligence 34, no. 1: 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2005.05.005.
- Gana, K., and G. Broc. 2019. Structural Equation Modeling With lavaan. John Wiley & Sons.
- Geiser, C., S. D. Mandelman, M. Tan, and E. L. Grigorenko. 2016. “Multitrait–Multimethod Assessment of Giftedness: An Application of the Correlated Traits–Correlated (Methods–1) Model.” Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal 23, no. 1: 76–90.
- George, D., and M. Mallery. 2010. SPSS for Windows Step by Step: A Simple Guide and Reference, 17.0. Pearson.
- Gorsuch, R. L. 2014. Factor Analysis: Classic Edition. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315735740.
10.4324/9781315735740 Google Scholar
- Gravetter, F., and L. Wallnau. 2014. Essentials of Statistics for the Behavioral Sciences. Wadsworth.
- Hair, J. F., W. C. Black, B. J. Babin, and R. E. Anderson. 2014. Multivariate Data Analysis. Pearson.
- Hair, J. F., G. T. M. Hult, C. M. Ringle, and M. Sarstedt. 2022. A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM) ( 3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
- Harrison, C. 2004. “Giftedness in Early Childhood: The Search for Complexity and Connection.” Roeper Review 26, no. 2: 78–84.
10.1080/02783190409554246 Google Scholar
- Hartas, D., G. Lindsay, and D. Muijs. 2008. “Identifying and Selecting Able Students for the NAGTY Summer School: Emerging Issues and Future Considerations.” High Ability Studies 19, no. 1: 5–18.
- Heller, K. A. 2004. “Identification of Gifted and Talented Students.” Psychology Science 46, no. 3: 302–323.
- Heller, K. A., C. Perleth, and T. K. Lim. 2005. “ The Munich Model of Giftedness Designed to Identify and Promote Gifted Students.” In Conceptions of Giftedness, edited by R. J. Sternberg and J. E. Davidson, ( 2nd ed., 147–170. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press). https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511610455.
10.1017/CBO9780511610455.010 Google Scholar
- Hertzog, N. B., R. U. Mun, B. DuRuz, and A. A. Holliday. 2018. “ Identification of Strengths and Talents in Young Children.” In APA Handbook of Giftedness and Talent, edited by S. I. Pfeiffer, E. Shaunessy-Dedrick, and M. Foley-Nicpon, 301–316. APA Books.
10.1037/0000038-020 Google Scholar
- Hodges, J., J. Tay, Y. Maeda, and M. Gentry. 2018. “A Meta-Analysis of Gifted and Talented Identification Practices.” Gifted Child Quarterly 62, no. 2: 147–174. https://www.nagc.org/sites/default/files/Position%20Statement/Definition%20of%20Giftedness%20%282019%29.pdf.
- İnal, G. 2011. Bilişsel Yetenekler Testi Form-6'nın Geçerlik Güvenirlik çalışması ve altı yaş çocuklarının Bilişsel Yeteneklerine Muhakeme Eğitim Programının Etkisinin Incelenmesi [The Validity and Reliability Study of the Cognitive Abilities Test Form-6 and the Effect of the Disciplinary Education Program on the Cognitive Abilities of the six-year-old Children] (Unpublished doctoral dissertation) Gazi University Institute of Educational Sciences, Ankara.
- Jabůrek, M., A. Ťápal, Š. Portešová, and S. I. Pfeiffer. 2021. “Validity and Reliability of Gifted Rating Scales-School Form in Sample of Teachers and Parents–A Czech Contribution.” Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment 39, no. 3: 361–371. https://doi.org/10.1177/0734282920970718.
- Johnsen, S. K. 2005. Identifying Gifted Students: A Step-by-Step Guide. Prufrock Press Inc.
- Johnsen, S. K. 2022. “ The Assessment Standard in Gifted Education: Identifying Gifted Students.” In NAGC pre-k–Grade 12 Gifted Education Programming Standards, edited by S. K. Johnsen, 94–127. Routledge.
10.4324/9781003236863-4 Google Scholar
- Johnsen, S. K., and J. VanTassel-Baska. 2022. “ Introduction to Part I on Assessments for Identification.” In Handbook on Assessments for Gifted Learners, 21–28. Routledge.
10.4324/9781003285991-3 Google Scholar
- Kane, M. T. 2013. “Validating the Interpretations and Uses of Test Scores.” Journal of Educational Measurement 50, no. 1: 1–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/jedm.12000.
- Karaçam, Z. 2019. “Ölçme araçlarının Türkçeye uyarlanması.” Ebelik ve Sağlık Bilimleri Dergisi 2, no. 1: 28–37. https://dergipark.org.tr/en/pub/esbder/issue/47180/570514.
- Karadağ, F. 2015. Okul öncesi Dönemde üstün zekâlı çocukların Belirlenmesi [The Determination of Potentially Gifted Children in Preschools]. (Unpublished doctoral dissertation) Dokuz Eylül University Institute of Educational Sciences, İzmir.
- Karasar, N. 2020. Bilimsel Araştırma Yöntemi: Kavramlar, Ilkeler, Teknikler ( 35th ed., 278–280. Anı Publishing).
- Kavruk, S. Z., and A. Bildiren. 2022. “Norm and Standardization Study for Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test, 5-9 Age Group.” Alpha Psychiatry 23, no. 5: 237–242. https://doi.org/10.5152/alphapsychiatry.2022.21799.
- Keli, G., and K. Mojca. 2021. “Parents Nominating Gifted Children in Their Early Years—The Case of Slovenia.” New Educational Review 66: 170–181. https://doi.org/10.15804/tner.21.66.4.14.
10.15804/tner.21.66.4.14 Google Scholar
- Kenny, D. A. 2015. Measuring Model Fit. (http://davidakenny.net/cm/fit.htm).
- Kiliç, S. 2016. “Cronbach's Alpha Reliability Coefficient.” Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences 6, no. 1: 47. https://doi.org/10.5455/jmood.20160307122823.
10.5455/jmood.20160307122823 Google Scholar
- Kline, R. B. 2011. “ Convergence of Structural Equation Modeling and Multilevel Modeling.” In SAGE Handbook of Innovation in Social Research Methods, edited by M. Williams and W. Paul Vogt, 562–589. SAGE Publications.
10.4135/9781446268261.n31 Google Scholar
- Korkmaz, M., A. Bildiren, N. Demiral, and D. Culha. 2018. “TONI-3 Sözel Olmayan Zeka Testinin 6-11 yaş örneklemi norm ve standardizasyon çalışması.” Anadolu Psikiyatri Dergisi 19, no. 1: 76–83. https://doi.org/10.5455/apd.292332.
10.5455/apd.292332 Google Scholar
- Lam, L. W. 2012. “Impact of Competitiveness on Salespeople's Commitment and Performance.” Journal of Business Research 65, no. 9: 1328–1334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusres.2011.10.026.
- Lavrakas, P. J. 2008. Encyclopedia of Survey Research Methods. Sage Publications.
10.4135/9781412963947 Google Scholar
- Liu, Y. 2003. “Developing a Scale to Measure the Interactivity of Websites.” Journal of Advertising Research 43: 207–216. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0021849903030204.
- Lohman, D. F., and M. Foley Nicpon. 2023. “ Ability Testing and Talent Identification.” In Identification: The Theory and Practice of Identifying Students for Gifted and Talented Education Services, edited by S. Hunsaker, 283–335. Taylor & Francis.
10.4324/9781003419419-16 Google Scholar
- Long, H., and J. Wang. 2022. “Dissecting Reliability and Validity Evidence of Subjective Creativity Assessment: A Literature Review.” Educational Psychology Review 34, no. 3: 1399–1443. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-022-09679-0.
- Mack, E., V. Scherrer, and F. Preckel. 2025. “How Smart Is My Child? The Judgment Accuracy of Parents Regarding Their Children's Cognitive Ability.” Child Development 96: 122–140. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.14156.
- Marsili, F., and M. Pellegrini. 2022. “The Relation Between Nominations and Traditional Measures in the Gifted Identification Process: A Meta-Analysis.” School Psychology International 43: 321–338. https://doi.org/10.1177/01430343221105398.
- McBee, M. T., S. J. Peters, and E. M. Miller. 2016. “The Impact of the Nomination Stage on Gifted Program Identification: A Comprehensive Psychometric Analysis.” Gifted Child Quarterly 60, no. 4: 258–278. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986216656256.
- McBee, M. T., S. J. Peters, and C. Waterman. 2014. “Combining Scores in Multiple-Criteria Assessment Systems: The Impact of Combination Rule.” Gifted Child Quarterly 58, no. 1: 69–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986213513794.
- Mollenkopf, D. L., J. Matyo-Cepero, J. D. Lewis, B. A. Irwin, and J. Joy. 2021. “Testing, Identifying, and Serving Gifted Children With and Without Disabilities: A Multi-State Parental Perspective.” Gifted Child Today 44, no. 2: 83–92. https://doi.org/10.1177/1076217520986589.
10.1177/1076217520986589 Google Scholar
- MoNE. 2023. Republic of Türkiye Ministry of National Education National Education Statistics Formal Education 2022/2023 (Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Millî Eğitim İstatistikleri Örgün Eğitim 2022/2023). https://sgb.meb.gov.tr/www/icerik_goruntule.php?KNO=508.
- MoNE. 2024. Republic of Türkiye Ministry of National Education Science and Art Centers Directive (Türkiye Cumhuriyeti Milli Eğitim Bakanlığı Bilim ve Sanat Merkezleri Yönergesi) 2024/2 794. https://dhgm.meb.gov.tr/meb_iys_dosyalar/2024_01/10220042_2794ocak2024.pdf.
- Mun, R. U., M. D. Ezzani, and G. Yeung. 2021. “Parent Engagement in Identifying and Serving Diverse Gifted Students: What Is the Role of Leadership?” Journal of Advanced Academics 32, no. 4: 533–566. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X211021836.
10.1177/1932202X211021836 Google Scholar
- Naglieri, J. A. 2003. Naglieri Nonverbal Ability Test—Individual Administration. San Antonio, TX: PsychCorp, A brand of Harcourt Assessment.
- National Association for Gifted Children. 2019. A Definition of Giftedness that Guides Best Practice. https://nagc.org/page/position-statements.
- Olszewski-Kubilius, P., F. C. Worrell, and R. F. Subotnik. 2018. “ The Role of the Family in Talent Development.” In APA Handbook of Giftedness and Talent, edited by S. I. Pfeiffer, E. Shaunessy-Dedrick, and M. Foley-Nicpon, 465–477. APA Books.
10.1037/0000038-030 Google Scholar
- Peters, S. J., and N. Pereira. 2017. “A Replication of the Internal Validity Structure of Three Major Teaching Rating Scales.” Journal of Advanced Academics 28, no. 2: 101–119. https://doi.org/10.1177/1932202X17701940.
10.1177/1932202X17701940 Google Scholar
- Pfeiffer, S. I. 2015. Essentials of Gifted Assessment. John Wiley & Sons.
10.1002/9781394259410 Google Scholar
- Pfeiffer, S. I., and T. Jarosewich. 2003. GRS: Gifted Rating Scales. Psychological Corporation.
- Pfeiffer, S. I., and Y. Petscher. 2008. “Identifying Young Gifted Children Using the Gifted Rating Scales— Preschool/Kindergarten Form.” Gifted Child Quarterly 52, no. 1: 19–29. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986207311055.
- Prinsen, C. A. C., L. B. Mokkink, L. M. Bouter, et al. 2018. “COSMIN Guideline for Systematic Reviews of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures.” Quality of Life Research 27: 1147–1157. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-018-1798-3.
- Renzulli, J. S. 2000. “The Identification and Development of Giftedness as a Paradigm for School Reform.” Journal of Science Education and Technology 9, no. 2: 95–114.
10.1023/A:1009429218821 Google Scholar
- J. S. Renzulli and S. M. Reis, ed. 2004. Identification of Students for Gifted and Talented Programs. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
- Ridgley, L. M., L. DaVia Rubenstein, and W. H. Finch. 2019. “Issues and Opportunities When Using Rating Scales to Identify Creatively Gifted Students: Applying an IRT Approach.” Gifted and Talented International 34, no. 1–2: 6–18. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332276.2020.1722041.
10.1080/15332276.2020.1722041 Google Scholar
- Ryser, G., and K. McConnell. 2004. SIGS: Scales for Identifying Gifted Students. Prufrock Press.
- Ryser, G. R., K. McConnell, L. Y. Sanguras, and T. Kettler. 2021. Scales for Identifying Gifted Students ( 2nd ed. Prufrock Press). https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003237792.
10.4324/9781003237792 Google Scholar
- Sanguras, L. Y., T. Kettler, S. Gibson, A. Torres, and H. Haqqi. 2023. “Improving Equity in Gifted Education: Analyzing the Fairness of the Scales for the Identification of Gifted Students (SIGS-2).” Gifted and Talented International 38, no. 1: 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/15332276.2023.2237555.
10.1080/15332276.2023.2237555 Google Scholar
- Sarmento, R. P., and V. Costa 2019. Confirmatory Factor Analysis—A -Case Study. arXiv preprint arXiv:1905.05598. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1905.05598.
10.48550/arXiv.1905.05598 Google Scholar
- Sarstedt, M., and E. Mooi. 2014. A Concise Guide to Market Research. The Process, Data, and Methods Using IBM SPSS Statistics ( 2nd ed. Springer). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-53965-7.
10.1007/978-3-642-53965-7 Google Scholar
- Şencan, H. 2005. Sosyal ve Davranışsal ölçümlerde Güvenilirlik ve Geçerlilik. Seçkin Yayınevi.
- Shrestha, N. 2021. “Factor Analysis as a Tool for Survey Analysis.” American Journal of Applied Mathematics and Statistics 9, no. 1: 4–11. https://doi.org/10.12691/ajams-9-1-2.
10.12691/ajams-9-1-2 Google Scholar
- Sommer, U., A. Fink, and A. C. Neubauer. 2008. “Detection of High Ability Children by Teachers and Parents: Psychometric Quality of New Rating Checklists for the Assessment of Intellectual, Creative and Social Ability.” Psychology Science 50, no. 2: 189.
- Sousa, V. D., and W. Rojjanasrirat. 2011. “Translation, Adaptation and Validation of Instruments or Scales for Use in Cross-Cultural Health Care Research: A Clear and User-Friendly Guideline.” Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 17, no. 2: 268–274. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2753.2010.01434.x.
- Sternberg, R. J. 2018. “21 Ideas: A 42-Year Search to Understand the Nature of Giftedness.” Roeper Review 40, no. 1: 7–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783193.2018.1393609.
10.1080/02783193.2018.1393609 Google Scholar
- Subotnik, R. F., P. Olszewski-Kubilius, and F. C. Worrell. 2012. “A Proposed Direction Forward for Gifted Education Based on Psychological Science.” Gifted Child Quarterly 56: 176–188. https://doi.org/10.1177/0016986212456079.
- Sümer, N. 2000. “Yapısal Eşitlik Modelleri: Temel Kavramlar ve örnek Uygulamalar.” Türk Psikoloji Yazıları 3, no. 6: 49–74.
- Tabachnick, B. G., and L. S. Fidell. 2013. Using Multivariate Statistics. Pearson.
- Tavşancıl, E. 2002. Tutumların ölçülmesi ve spss ile veri analizi, [Measurement of attitudes and data analysis with SPSS]. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık.
- Tezcan, S. 2017. Temel Epidemiyoloji. Hipokrat Kitabevi, 305–316.
- Trochim, W. M., and J. P. Donnelly 2006. The Research Methods Knowledge Base. Atomic Dog.
- Wellisch, M. 2021. “Parenting With Eyes Wide Open: Young Gifted Children, Early Entry and Social Isolation.” Gifted Education International 37, no. 1: 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261429419899946.
10.1177/0261429419899946 Google Scholar
- Williams, B., A. Onsman, and T. Brown. 2010. “Exploratory Factor Analysis: A Five-Step Guide for Novices.” Australasian journal of paramedicine 8: 1–13. https://doi.org/10.33151/ajp.8.3.93.
10.33151/ajp.8.3.93 Google Scholar
- Wu, E. 2010. “Screening and Identifying Gifted Children: What All Educators and Parents Should Know.” Gifted Education Press Quarterly 24, no. 2: 1–6.
