An ideal definition of giftedness should be optimally specific and operational. It should be optimal in the sense that it is not too general or too specific. It should not be too general because there are differences between mathematical giftedness and musical giftedness, and further differences between those two and verbal giftedness. There are, in short, clear-cut-domain differences. The mathematical, musical, and verbal domains are just examples; there are numerous others in which an individual can excel. Yet a useful definition of giftedness should be general enough to capture critical commonalities. There must be commonality or else we should probably not refer to these individuals all the same way, as “gifted.” The theory described in this chapter suggests that all expressions of giftedness share the potential for creative work. The gifted child may have domain-specific knowledge and be motivated to invest in only one particular domain; but whichever domain it is, the gifted individual will have the capacity for original work. Creative potential is one of the most critical commonalities among the various domains of giftedness.

The other requirement for the ideal definition – that it is operational – implies that reliable judgments can be made about gifted individuals. It implies that giftedness can be measured, quantified, and predicted. Without this requirement, a definition would be untenable and potentially unfair. One objective of this chapter is to demonstrate how creative giftedness can be operationalized such that it can be reliably assessed.