that gifted children demonstrate better adjustment than their average peers when measured on a variety of factors (Baker, 1995; Freeman, 1979, 1983; Jacobs, 1971; Kaiser, Berndt & Stanley, 1987; Neihart, 1991; Ramaseshan, 1957; Scholwinski & Reynolds, 1985; Terman, 1925, 1959). For example, in Terman's (1925, 1935, 1947) longitudinal research he and his associates found that people of high ability exhibited a lower incidence of mental illness and fewer adjustment problems than average. Freeman (1983) found no differences in rates of emotional deviance when she compared 70 high ability children with two matched control groups. Beer (1991), in fact, found that gifted children are generally better adjusted than their peers of average and below average intelligence. Beer believes that gifted students overall are characterised by mental flexibility, emotional resilience and an ability to think positively, which may account for the better emotional adjustment. There are some criticisms concerning the validity of the research reporting gifted children as better adjusted than their non-gifted peers. Several researchers cite sampling shortcomings in many of these studies (Freeman, 1994; Gallagher, 1990; McCallister, Nash & Meckstroth, 1996; Olszewski-Kubilius, Kulieke & Krasney, 1988). Gallagher (1990) identifies sampling errors in the Terman study, which he believes was heavily biased by educational and economic factors. He suggests that these factors would more likely create an environment conducive to the superior social acceptance and emotional status of gifted individuals. McCallister, Nash and Meckstroth (1996) contend that 'research studies' show a mostly positive picture of gifted children, but reports based on