AD ALTA
JOURNAL OF INTERDISCIPLINARY RESEARCH
examination. In this table, mainly children identified as gifted
are in the table area with the largest number of free associations.
Based on this identification and comparison, we divided the
respondents into potentially gifted children (hereinafter PGC)
and ungifted children (UC). Based on this division, we likewise
present an analysis of free associations and their comparison.
Graph 2: All Free Associations of Pre-School Children with the
Phenomenon of Success
In Graph 2 we can see the percentage of individual free
associations in the given groups. The category with no answer or
“don't know” is the most represented in the UC group (87%),
free associations in this group are only in two other categories –
in the category of the importance of success, the free association
“to win” was represented by 9%, and in the category of reasons
for success, the free association “to be good at something” by
only 4%, even though it is a category mentioned solely by this
group of children. Free associations of PGC are represented in
all other categories, which is the majority, and in the category of
no answer or “don't know”, their representation is only 38%.
Table 1: Comparison of Free Associations of Pre-School
Children with the Phenomenon of Success
Category
PGC
UC
n
%
n
%
Children total
16
23
Total number of free associations with respect
to the number of children
28
175
23
100
Total number of free associations
28
100
23
100
No answer or “don’t know”
6
21
20
87
Number of free associations (without
repetitions)
15
54
3
13
In Table 1 we can also notice that both the UC and the PGC
stated the same number of free associations as the number of
children in the group, but out of this total number of free
associations, up to 87% are in the category with no answer or
“don't know”. Out of the total number of free associations, the
UC reached only 13% in the number of free associations without
repetition. Compared to the previous group, the PGC stated a
higher number of free associations by up to 75%. Out of the total
number of free associations (which we further perceive as 100%
of the listed free associations in both groups), 21% were
classified as unanswered or “don't know”. The number of free
associations without repetition was also 41% higher in this group
compared to the UC.
Based on Graphs 1, 2, and Table 1 above, we note that the
cognitive component of PGC’s preconceptions on the
phenomenon of success is at a higher level than in UC. The PGC
group reached a higher number and a wider spectrum of free
associations, while a large proportion of members of the UC
group could not state any association.
5.2 Evaluation of the Interviews on the Phenomenon of
Success
In this part, mainly the cognitive and structural, but also the
affective component of children's preconceptions about the
phenomenon of success were examined. In the qualitative
content analysis of the interview, we created several semantic
categories based on the authentic children’s statements through
open coding. We researched and analyzed the statements that the
children of pre-primary education said to answer several
questions aimed at identifying individual components of a
preconception. The questions and semantic categories are listed
in Table 2 below.
Table 2: Semantic Categories on the Phenomenon of Success in
Kindergartens
Component of
the
preconception
Question
Created semantic
categories
Cognitive
What is success?
What does it mean to be
successful?
Victory
General above-
average skills
Naïve understanding
No opinion
Structural
Why do we (people, children, or
you) have success?
What would happen if no one
was ever successful again?
What would happen if success
did not exist?
Self-development
Achieving victory
Psychological
importance
Naïve understanding
No opinion
Affective
Do you like success?
How do you feel when you are
successful?
Why do you like success?
What would you like to be
successful in?
Positive attitude
Other
Children's statements on questions aimed at identifying the
cognitive component of preconceptions were classified into the
following semantic categories:
victory (statements which expressed a clear idea, activity,
or a status achieved);
general above-average skills (statements were more
general, not as clear as in the previous category);
naïve understanding of the nature of the phenomenon
(statements in which the idea was not entirely clear or
focused on only one activity);
no opinion (statements in which the participant answered
“don't know” or did not say anything).
When asked “What is success?” with the complementary
question “What does it mean to be successful?”, the participants
had different ideas. Some saw this phenomenon as achieving
victory and winning an award in a competition, (Child 16; 6 y/o)
“...that you win a prize” or (Child 20; 6 y/o) “...well, that
success, such as these medals”. They also perceived it as a
motivation to win the competition, such as (Child 21; 6 y/o)
“...that you have to add a little to that success. For example, if
you run and speed up a little, you can also win a medal.” or as a
reward for the work done (Child 31; 5 y/o) “...that if we do
something, I get a reward for that work.” Another category
included statements, which were a little more general. The
children understood the essence of the phenomenon of success as
good abilities and skills, but only at the general level – (Child 2;
5 y/o) “...that he is good at something”, (Child 32; 6 y/o) “...that
you can do everything” or (Child 22; 7 y/o) “...that you are fast.”
The children also had more naive ideas about the phenomenon of
success. This category includes statements in which children
perceived success as not being afraid of anything and anyone,
such as (Child 14; 5 y/o) “...that he is not afraid of anything”, or
that a successful individual has a lot of energy (Child 3; 5 y/o)
“...to have a lot of energy and to be strong” and so on. The last
category is “no opinion” and consists of spontaneous answers
like “don’t know” or no comment on the questions. In this case,
it is the most represented category.
For comparison of individual statements, we proceeded with the
scoring of statements, based on which we ranked all participants
- 59 -