What is the relationship between heightened sensory sensitivity and anxiety in gifted students? How does heightened sensory sensitivity affect a gifted person’s experience of environmental stimuli? What cognitive and behavioral strategies can gifted students and adults use to manage their experience of offending stimuli? Join us in this interactive session as we: 1) Delve into the research about gifted students’ heightened sensory sensitivity and anxiety; 2) Address what the implications of the research are for parenting, counseling, classroom practice, and environmental design; and 3) Learn strategies for managing one’s personal response to offending environmental stimuli.

2. angelahousand.com

3. Graduated and Got a Job…
Watson College of Education
Angela Housand, Ph.D.
housanda@uncw.edu

4. Sensory
Processing
Sensi-vity
• High
levels
of
sensi-vity
to
subtle
s-muli
• Easily
over-­‐aroused
by
external
s-muli

5. Sensory
Sensi-vity
• Greater
CNS
Arousal
– Show
greater
responsiveness
to
sensory
s-muli
in
all
sensory
modali-es
– Emits
more
voluntary
motor
ac-vity
– More
reac-ve
emo-onally
• Might
also
explain
psychomotor
and
emo-onal
overexcitability

6. Sensory Sensitivity
• Anxiety • Relationship anxiety
• Social phobia • Behavioral inhibition
• Avoidant personality • High stress levels
disorder • Ill-health

7. Gifted Students
Heightened
experience of their
world
Qualitatively
different experience
than their age-peers

8. Gifted Students
Intense sensitivity
Heightened
emotional and
behavioral
responses

9. Sensory
Sensi-vity
of
GiCed
• Tested
giCed
vs.
normed
sample
on
the
Sensory
Profile
(Dunn,
1999)
• Significant
differences
on
12
of
14
sensory
sec-ons
between
groups
• GiCed
children
are
more
sensi-ve
to
their
physical
environment
• More
affected
by
sensory
s-muli

10. Gifted Students
• Anxiety
• Social Phobia
• Higher Stress Levels
• Behavioral Inhibition
• Ill-health

11. Gifted Students
• Anxiety
• Social Phobia
• Higher Stress Levels
• Behavioral Inhibition
• Ill-health

12. Evidence to the
Contrary…
Bracken & Brown, 2006
Cross, Cassady, Dixon, & Adams, 2008
Grobman, 2006
Martin, Burns, & Schonlau, 2009
Norman, Ramsay, Martray, & Roberts, 1999
Reynolds & Bradley, 1983
Richards, Encel, & Shute, 2003
Zeidner & Shani-Zinovich, 2011

16. Catalyst for…
Advanced
Achievement
&
Creative
Productivity

17. Characteris-cs
of
People
with
High
Sensory
Sensi-vity
• Sense
of
being
different
• Need
to
take
frequent
breaks
during
busy
days
• Conscious
arrangement
of
lives
to
reduce
s-mula-on
&
unwanted
surprise

18. Characteris-cs
of
People
with
High
Sensory
Sensi-vity
• Sense
that
difficul-es
stemmed
from
fear
of
failure
due
to
overarousal
– While
being
observed
– Feeling
judged
– During
compe--on

19. Why address sensory sensitivity?

20. Why address sensory sensitivity?
• To reduce stressors
• To positively enhance the experience of
the highly sensitive gifted individual
• To be responsive to unique needs
• To promote healthy working environments
• To increase the sustainability of focus and
effort in productive endeavors

21. Unlocking
Emergent
Talent
More
Than
Ability
is
Required:
Psychosocial Issues and Skills Needed for Success
The Important Role of Non-Cognitive Factors in High Achievement

22. Does sensory sensitivity
predict anxiety?
Are there differences
between groups on
measures of sensory
sensitivity and anxiety?

23. Sample
• Summer Enrichment Programs = 4
• West Coast and East Coast
• n = 198
• Grades 3 through 13
• Ages 8-18

24. Data Gathered
Instruments Demographics
• Revised Children’s • Age
Manifest Anxiety Scale
• Grade
(RCMAS-2)
(Reynolds & Richmond, 2008) • Gender
• Ethnic Background
• Highly Sensitive
Person’s Scale
(HSPS)
(Aron & Aron, 1997)

25. Data Gathered
RCMAS-2 HSPS
• Total Anxiety (TOT) • Ease of Excitation
• Physiological Anxiety (EOE)
(PHY)
• Aesthetic
• Worry (WOR) Sensitivity (AES)
• Social Anxiety (SOC)
• Low Sensory
Threshold (LST)
• Inconsistent
Responding
• Defensiveness

26. RCMAS-2
Represents all of the measures as a
Total Anxiety TOT
combined score.
Physiological Addresses somatic concerns
PHY
Anxiety (e.g. sleep difficulties, nausea, fatigue)
Obsessive concerns. High score suggests
one may be afraid, nervous, or in some
Worry WOR
manner oversensitive to environmental
pressures.
Social Anxiety SOC Anxiety in social and performance situations.

27. HSPS
Ease of Becoming mentally overwhelmed by external
EOE
Excitation and internal demands.
Low Sensory Unpleasant sensory arousal to external
LST
Threshold stimuli.
Aesthetic
AES Aesthetic awareness
Sensitivity

28. Get My Geek On…
• Checked distribution
• Checked correlations
– Moderate and significant
• Checked HSPS model fit using
CFA

29. Get My Geek On…
• Checked distribution
• Checked correlations
– Moderate and significant
• Checked HSPS model fit using
CFA

30. Correlations
PSY WOR SOC EOE AES LST
PSY 1
WOR .66 1
SOC .58 .76 1
EOE .52 .60 .47 1
AES .25 .34 .27 .54 1
LST .47 .47 .36 .58 .42 1

32. Anxiety Moderately Problematic

33. Extremely Problematic

34. Regression Analysis
• Total Anxiety (TOT) as Dependent
• Controlled for race, age, & gender
– Not significant contributors
• Ease of Excitation
– Significant (p = .001)
– 37% of the variance

35. Regression Analysis
• Low Sensory Threshold
– Significant (p ≤ .001)
– Additional 3% of the variance
• Aesthetic Sensitivity
– Not significant

36. 1: Week-Long Residential

37. Group Gifted
Description Identification
• n = 49 • Identified by school
• Grades 3-14 testing
• Ages 8-18 • Private testing
• 32 Males • Characteristics of
• 16 Females gifted students as
identified by parents

38. Goals of Program 1
• Provide opportunity for gifted youth to:
– Spend time with others who share their
characteristics and interests
– Interact with adults who understand them
• Allow gifted youth to:
– Be themselves
– Engage in interesting activities
– Connect with others

39. 2: Elementary Choice
Regional School District and University
Teacher Preparation Program Partnership

40. Group Gifted
Description Identification
• n = 60 • Identified by District
• Grades 5-6 • Screening Indicators:
• Ages 9-11 • Teacher
recommendations
• 32 Males • Parent referrals
• 28 Females • Standardized test
scores
• Identified in another
district
• Work samples

41. Goals of Program 2
• Mentor and train teachers to serve
gifted students in educational settings
• Provide gifted elementary students with
academically rigorous enrichment
learning opportunities
• Allow students to choose
enrichment opportunity
based on interest

42. 3: Middle School Choice
Regional School District and University
Teacher Preparation Program Partnership

43. Group Gifted
Description Identification
• n = 41 • Identified by District
• Grades 7-9 • Screening Indicators:
• Ages 11-13 • Teacher
recommendations
• 19 Males • Parent referrals
• 22 Females • Standardized test
scores
• Identified in another
district
• Work samples

44. Goals of Program 3
• Mentor and train teachers to serve
gifted students in educational settings
• Provide gifted middle school students
with academically rigorous enrichment
learning opportunities
• Allow students to choose
enrichment opportunity
based on interest

45. 4: STEM Focus
For Students from Economically Deprived
and Diverse Communities

46. Diverse Student Attributes
• Perform poorly in • Excel in math &
math & science science
• Rarely take • Need additional
advanced courses support to enhance
required to attend skills and interests in
college STEM
• Have low
literacy rates

47. Goals of Program 4
• Motivate underrepresented students’
interests in learning by engaging them
in real-world, hands on, field
experiences.
• Utilize technologies and books to help
enhance students’ literacy skills.
• Spark interest in STEM

48. Ethnic Diversity
White 41 44 30 0
Asian 1 6 6 0
Black / African
2 7 3 40
American
Hispanic / Latino /
1 1 1 1
Latina
American Indian /
0 0 1 2
Alaska Native
Other 3 2 2 3

49. Ethnic Diversity
White 86% 73% 70% 0
Asian 2% 10% 14% 0
Black / African
4% 12% 7% 87%
American
Hispanic / Latino /
2% 2% 2% 2%
Latina
American Indian /
0 0 2% 4%
Alaska Native
Other 6% 3% 5% 7%

50. Ethnic Diversity
White 86% 73% 70% 0
Asian 2% 10% 14% 0
Black / African
4% 12% 7% 87%
American
Hispanic / Latino /
2% 2% 2% 2%
Latina
American Indian /
0 0 2% 4%
Alaska Native
Other 6% 3% 5% 7%

51. Group Comparisons
• Multivariate Analysis
– Bonferroni adjustment
• Main Effects
– Statistically significant differences
between groups on Anxiety sub-
scales (PSY, WOR, & SOC)
– Not so on Sensory Sensitivity

52. Physiological .319 -2.12 -2.48 0
Anxiety
Worry 2.17 -.48 -.62 0
Social Anxiety 2.41 -.57 -.56 0
Ease of Excitation .50 -.74 -.52 0
Low Sensory 1.55 -.21 -.44 0
Threshold
Aesthetic 2.367 .85 .11 0
Sensitivity

53. What can we do to
support those who have
heightened sensory
sensitivities or suffer
from anxiety?

59. Support Autonomy
• Consider Individualized
Learning Opportunities
• Encourage Them to
Pursue OWN Interests
• Highlight Uniqueness
without Comparison

61. • Explicitly
teach
and
prac-ce
breathing
techniques
• Focus
on
exhaling
• Sigh…
• Remember
to
breath
in
through
the
nose!

62. Mindfulness:
Practice of Being Present
• Pick a location
• Choose a seat

63. Mindfulness:
Practice of Being Present
• Posture
– Relaxed and Upright
– A string?
– A tree?

64. Mindfulness:
Practice of Being Present
• Wandering Mind? Bring it back.
• Watch the breath
– Baby Bear Attention
– Not “making” it happen but “letting” it happen

65. Mindfulness:
Practice of Being Present
• Witness Thoughts
• Let Go –
not of the thoughts,
but rather the judgment
• Seeking acceptance of what is

66. Mindfulness:
Practice of Being Present
Practice Daily
10-15 20-30 45-60
Minutes Minutes Minutes

68. Sensory
Threshold
Con-nuum
Sensi-za-on
Habitua-on

69. Someone Has
Soiled the Air!
Offensive
S-muli
• Loud
or
sudden
noises
• Strong
odors
– Molds
– Perfumes
• Rough
textures
or
fabrics
– Clothing
tags
• Sharp
edges
– Angular
furniture

70. Avoid Perfume and Fragrant Lotion

71. Rugs and Fabric Wall Art Reduce Noise

72. Sharp Edges Activate the Amygdala
…the part of the brain that registers threat

73. Offensive
S-muli
• Visual
overload
– Certain
color
satura-on
and
hue
– Manmade
materials
– Unorganized
space
– Low
ceilings
• Bright
Light
– Glare
– Fluorescent
ligh-ng

74. • A
controlled
color
vocabulary
is
essen-al
in
crea-ng
a
sense
of
place
• Low
screeners
perform
beaer
in
blue
work
spaces
• Feelings
of
emo-onal
control
are
stronger
in
monochroma-c
spaces
than
in
vibrant
colorful
spaces
• Mean
blood
pressure
readings
9%
lower
than
white
classroom

75. Provide a Cohesive Color Palette

76. White was rejected…

77. Color: Red Hue
• Workers in red offices reported more
feelings of dysphoria than workers in
blue offices
• More confusion and tension reported
• Lower performance for low screeners

81. Great for some students…

82. Visual Order

83. Avoid hanging items from the Ceiling
Ceiling height is ranked among top 3 architectural
details that influence psychological well being.

84. Both Well-Lit and Dimly-Lit
Notice the use of natural materials...

85. Glare Reduction with Visual Access

86. Brief
Interac-ons
with
Nature
• Increase
Cogni-ve
Control
• Reduce
Hos-lity,
Aggression,
and
Violence
• Assist
in
Recovery
from
Mental
Fa-gue

88. Indoor Gardens…

89. Privacy provides the opportunity for…
Retreat, Reflection, and Relaxation

90. The opportunity for recovery when one
becomes overstimulated by environment

91. As simple as a quiet corner…

92. Technology in Students’ Hands
Empowers students to feel more in control.

93. Thank You!