Unearthing the Forgotten Gems

Exploring Piechowski's work from the 1980s

Note: This is a long post. If it’s truncated in your email, click here to view it in a browser.

When I envisioned writing posts about Dr. Michael M. Piechowski’s work decade by decade, I knew what pieces I wanted to discuss. But I didn’t realize how nice it would be to revisit these articles, chapters, and monographs. I’ve enjoyed the process of reading and pulling highlights to share with you.

In my first post about Michael’s work, I stopped with his 1979 chapter, Developmental Potential. That means today, I’ll start with his work in the 1980s.¹

The Logical and the Empirical Form of Feeling (1981)

It’s been several years now, but at some point, I asked Michael which of his works was his favorite. It surprised me to learn it was a paper he published in the Journal of Aesthetic Education called “The Logical and the Empirical Form of Feeling.”²

Considering Michael’s expertise in the theory of positive disintegration, it never occurred to me that his favorite paper wasn’t about the theory. The paper starts with a review of Susanne K. Langer's theory of art as an objective presentation of human feelings. Langer emphasized that works of art are expressive symbols of human feeling, embodying a logical form of feeling. Michael also discussed Manfred Clynes’s work on experimentally obtained forms of feeling, which align with Langer's concept.

Clynes's research, primarily in music, reveals that emotions have distinct dynamic forms, which he terms “essentic forms.” These forms express distinct qualities of experience. Clynes's findings demonstrated the existence of universal, stable forms of feeling across individuals and cultures. These essentic forms are instrumental in the emotional expression and recognition in art.

From the first section, The Logical Form of Feeling:

“According to Susanne Langer, art articulates human feeling and renders an objective presentation of it. By “feeling” she means all aspects of human mentality ranging from emotions, the sense of balance, the sense of time, to the formation of images, concepts, symbols, and logical thought: “Feeling includes the sensibility of very low animals and the whole realm of human awareness and thought, the sense of absurdity, the sense of justice, the perception of meaning, as well as emotion and sensation.” A work of art embodies and portrays the artist's idea of vital experience... According to Langer, feeling is presented in art always as an organic form, because only living organisms can feel… A work of art is successful to the degree that it has the quality of “livingness.” The artist in creating his work so constructs a pattern of tensions that it produces that quality and thus attains organic or “living” form.” (Piechowski, 1981, pp. 31-32)

Michael described Clynes’s research on experimentally obtained forms of feeling using sentics. Clynes’s work revealed significant aspects of the nature of feeling, contributing to the understanding of expression as a function of its spatial and dynamic form. Michael wrote about Clynes’s concept of essentic forms, which are precise, biologically determined dynamic forms underlying the expression of distinct qualities of experience.

From The Empirical Form of Feeling:

"If one looks at the phenomena of experience more closely, one soon discovers that words can only be a rough guide to the actual qualities of experience. The onset and decay, repression and changes of intensity of feeling with time, and many of its shades and combinations cannot be exactly represented by word. Music, however, using specific expressive dynamic forms, permits a more precise communication of many subtleties of qualities," writes Clynes. Here, then, is another statement to the effect that music is an analogue of emotive life precisely because it does a better job than language, and it can do a better job precisely because it is made of dynamic forms.

Playing music, thinking music, and observing expressive gestures of conductors led Clynes to the discovery of a way to capture these dynamic forms.” (Piechowski, 1981, p. 36)

Here’s a description of “essentic forms”:

“Essentic forms are the precise, biologically determined dynamic forms that underlie the expression of distinct qualities of experience. Qualities are the irreducible elements of experience. The inner state of the organism felt as a distinct quality is called a state of emotion or a sentic state. Such a state and its motor expression form one biological unit. Sentic states and the essentic forms that govern them have a number of properties which flow from the biological design of the generation, transmission, and recognition of qualities of experience that can be expressed through the motor system. (There also exist qualities that cannot be so expressed, e.g., jealousy, guilt.)” (pp. 36-37)

The paper aligns Langer’s concept of the logical form of feeling with Clynes’s empirical findings on essentic forms. This alignment illustrates the interplay between theory and empirical evidence in understanding the expression of emotion in art and music.

Clynes’s concept of the “inner pulse” of music, a distinctive quality differentiating composers and styles, is highlighted as an extension of the logical form of feeling.

“What, then, are we listening to in music and what are we listening for? Are we listening for specific emotions, for articulation of experience, or do we expect to be brought in touch with a particular inner pulse? Certainly all of that. When we like a composer, we tend to like all of his works rather than just one; and when we dislike another, we tend to shun all his works, not just some. So it is the inner pulse of the composer that makes us feel an affinity, or lack of it, for his music. Probably, then, our own inner pulse is energized by those composers with whom we feel the greatest affinity. We are presented an opportunity for inner expansion when we get to know and appreciate other composers. Thus we are on the threshold of discovering how the infinite possibilities of individual variation and expression are created, while sharing unmistakably clear and precise universal forms.” (p. 49)

It’s a deep paper, and I’ve only scratched the surface of it in this post. Michael’s ability to bridge theorists and ideas is on display here in a way that’s similar to his work bringing Dąbrowski’s theory together with other theories and models. In his final concluding point, he says, “The terms of Langer's theory of art and Clynes's sentic theory show perfect agreement. It is one of the rare occurrences of a match between an independently developed theory and empirical findings that validate it.”

I recommend reading “The Logical and the Empirical Form of Feeling” for an example of Michael doing some of his best thinking on subjects of great interest to him during his first years at Northwestern.

Measuring Levels of Emotional Development (1981)

This paper by David F. Gage, Philip A. Morse, and Michael M. Piechowski introduces a method of assessing Dąbrowski’s levels of development called the “Definition Response Instrument” or DRI.³ The study aimed to develop methods for assessing developmental levels based on the theory of positive disintegration, which posits distinct levels of emotional and personality development not tied to specific chronological ages. The authors wanted to create more efficient and economical assessment methods than the existing autobiographical and clinical approaches used by Dąbrowski.

Lately, it seems like I’m constantly sharing excerpts from Michael’s 2008 chapter for insights into his work. I’m going to do it again now because his retrospective thoughts from that piece provide helpful context:

Research depends on instruments specific to its purpose. Assessing developmental level from autobiographical material is an extremely time-consuming process. Furthermore, Levels I and II are difficult to assess, because most of the dynamisms are at higher levels. In addition, Level I is defined by a total absence of any developmental dynamisms, and the absence of something is difficult to quantify.

David Gage decided to explore new avenues. Multilevel dynamisms, he concluded, could be viewed as themes that are expressed at every level of development: moments of feeling inadequate and unworthy, moments of frustration and anger toward oneself, dealing with questions that cause conflict and doubt within oneself, and so on. Of Gage’s three new methods, their validities thoroughly investigated, Definition Response Instrument (DRI) was used in subsequent studies. It consists of six questions corresponding to themes represented by six multilevel dynamisms (Gage, Morse, & Piechowski, 1981). (Piechowski, 2008, pp. 72-73)

A few months ago, Michael reread this paper and expressed his disappointment that it had been forgotten. It represents a significant effort in operationalizing Dąbrowski's theory of positive disintegration by developing and validating methods to assess developmental levels. The study highlights the complexities and challenges in quantifying and assessing psychological constructs that are not readily observable or measurable.

Fortunately, Nancy Miller elaborated on this work by creating the Miller Assessment Coding System (MACS). Other researchers have used the DRI and MACS in their research on Dąbrowski’s levels of development.

Personal Growth: An Empirical Study Using Jungian and Dabrowskian Measures (1983)

This monograph⁴ is based on first author Katherine Ziegler Lysy’s dissertation study. She was Michael’s graduate student at the University of Illinois, and I mentioned her work in our post with extended show notes for Episode 48.

Lysy & Piechowski focused on the empirical study of personal growth using the lenses of Jung's theory of individuation and Dabrowski's theory of positive disintegration. The study tested these theories on graduate students and early career professionals in counseling psychology and other fields to explore the nature of personal growth and individual development.

They aimed to understand psychological development in counselors and others whose work fosters personal growth in clients. The study explored the influence of a therapist's own inner work and growth on their effectiveness, as well as the relevance of Jung's and Dabrowski's theories in understanding individual differences in psychological growth​.

The study involved 20 subjects in the counseling group and 22 in the non-counseling group, who came from various academic disciplines. Instruments used included the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI) for Jungian type assessment, a revised 41-item version of the Overexcitability Questionnaire (OEQ) for measuring Dabrowski's overexcitabilities, and the Definition Response Instrument (DRI) to assess developmental level​​.

Here’s an overview of the significant findings:

No Significant Difference in Personal Growth: Counseling psychologists did not exhibit more personal growth compared with individuals from other fields. There was no appreciable difference between the two groups of subjects.

Correlation Between Intuition and Developmental Level: A strong correlation was found between a preference for intuition and developmental level.

The Role of Overexcitabilities in Development: Emotional and intellectual overexcitabilities accounted for nearly half the variance in determining developmental level. And all five overexcitabilities correlated with developmental level, which called into question the idea that sensual and psychomotor OEs hinder development.

Two Types of Personal Growth: The study introduced two types of personal growth: “conserving” and “transforming.” Transforming growth aligns closely with the essence of Jung's and Dabrowski's conceptions of personality evolution, whereas conserving growth relates more to counseling and psychotherapy​​.

Transforming growth involves a fundamental change or evolution in the individual's personality structure. This type of growth is not just about improving what is already there but transforming it into something qualitatively different. It often involves significant inner work, leading to profound changes in how individuals perceive themselves and the world. This could involve a radical reevaluation of one's values, beliefs, and life goals. Transforming growth is often driven by deeper, more existential questions and can lead to a reorientation of one's entire being.

Conserving growth involves working with and maintaining the existing personality structure rather than personal evolution. This type of growth is characterized by efforts to preserve and strengthen the individual's psyche. This might include developing coping mechanisms, refining existing skills, and resolving conflicts within the existing framework of the individual's personality. It's about stabilizing and solidifying the personality rather than radically changing it. While conserving growth focuses on maintaining and enhancing the existing self, transforming growth is about a fundamental evolution of the self. This transformation often requires navigating complex and challenging psychological processes, leading to a higher level of personal development.

This paper includes a quote I appreciate about Dabrowski’s theory:

“The main idea of Dabrowski’s theory is this: It is emotional life that empowers and guides an individual toward a higher level, because it is passionate involvement that makes us capable of empathy, understanding, caring, and finding a goal beyond self that gives our lives meaning and direction.” (Lysy & Piechowski, 1983, p. 273)

Three Studies on Overexcitability

I won’t go into these three papers in-depth, but they must be mentioned as foundations of the overexcitability research.

Piechowski & Colangelo (1984)

Co-authored with his friend Nick Colangelo (mentioned in Interesting Quotes, Vol. 14), “Developmental Potential of the Gifted” was published in Gifted Child Quarterly.⁵ The focus was an exploration of the nature of giftedness and talent, particularly exploring the developmental potential of gifted individuals.

Following up on Michael’s chapter from 1979, they presented a model based on the five types of overexcitability as parallel dimensions of mental functioning: psychomotor, sensual, intellectual, imaginational, and emotional. Samples of participants included gifted adolescents from Iowa, intellectually gifted adults, artists, and graduate students. The 21-item OEQ was used in this study, and I have the data they collected in my archive.

They found significant differences in the overexcitability profiles among the different groups. Gifted adults had higher scores in intellectual (T) and emotional (E) overexcitabilities compared to non-gifted adults. Younger gifted individuals had lower scores in sensual (S) and intellectual (T) overexcitabilities but were similar to adult gifted individuals in imaginational (M) and emotional (E) overexcitabilities.

Piechowski & Cunningham (1985)

Michael’s co-author in this paper, “Patterns of Overexcitability in a Group of Artists,” published in The Journal of Creative Behavior, was Keith Cunningham. Cunningham was one of Michael’s students at Northwestern, and his master’s thesis was the basis for the article.

The study involved thirteen subjects, both men and women, with diverse educational backgrounds and a serious involvement in artistic or creative work. The subjects were chosen as strategic cases to explore new directions in the investigation of creativity​​. There were significant differences in imaginational and emotional overexcitabilities between artists and intellectually gifted individuals. Artists showed higher levels in both these areas, commonly associated with creative potential​.

Three distinct patterns of overexcitability were identified among the artists:

Pattern A: Rich and balanced interaction among all five overexcitabilities.

Pattern B: Dominance of emotional (E) overexcitability, affecting the expression of other overexcitabilities.

Pattern C: Lower emotional (E) overexcitability with higher psychomotor (P) and sensual (P). There was less interaction among the different overexcitabilities, leading to a more polarized and restless experience​​.

This study provided valuable insights into the psychological makeup of artists, highlighting the role of overexcitabilities in their creative expression and personal development.

Piechowski, Silverman, & Falk (1985)

“Comparison of Intellectually and Artistically Gifted on Five Dimensions of Mental Functioning” was written with co-authors Linda K. Silverman and R. Frank Falk and published in Perceptual and Motor Skills.

The study examined two talented groups (artists and intellectually gifted) and one comparison group (the graduate students from various disciplines discussed in Lysy & Piechowski above), focusing on the five types of overexcitability. Artists showed significantly higher overexcitabilities across all dimensions than graduate students, particularly in emotional (E) and imaginational (M) areas. The intellectually gifted group showed higher emotional (E), imaginational (M), and intellectual (T) overexcitabilities compared to graduate students.

From the conclusion: “The nature of talent, its particular tone and direction of development must be seen as an interplay of imagination, intellectual acumen, and richness of feeling. The model of developmental potential enables us also to look into the interaction of the intellectual and emotional dimensions for the source of unrelenting self-evaluation and striving for perfection which are the mark of a truly compelling talent.”

The Concept of Developmental Potential (1986)

This paper from Roeper Review is one that I read multiple times when I was first getting to know Michael’s work.⁶ The paper follows up on his 1979 chapter in putting forth the overexcitabilities as a way of identifying and nurturing giftedness:

“Intelligence tests offer no theoretical models for development of talent. The concept of developmental potential offered in this paper broadens the conception of giftedness by addressing the personality correlates of high ability. This model also suggests a method of identifying individuals with high potential beyond the traditional IQ tests, and binds the goals of their education to self-actualization and advanced moral development, rather than merely to productivity in adult life.” (Piechowski, 1986, p. 190)

Remember that this work from the 1980s led to research from others in the 1990s exploring these ideas and hypotheses. When Michael wrote this paper, the open-ended OEQ was the only instrument to assess overexcitability. We talked with Frank Falk in Episode 5 about Researching Overexcitability, and I think that conversation would pair well with this post.

Much of how Michael introduced OEs in this paper is familiar from his earlier work.

These five dimensions may be thought of as channels of information flow and as modes of experiencing (Piechowski, 1979). They can be wide open, narrow, or barely present. Dabrowski called them "forms of psychic overexcitability" to underline the enhancement and intensification of mental activity, much beyond the ordinary. Overexcitabilities contribute to the individual's psychological development, and so their strength is taken as a measure of developmental potential. (Piechowski, 1986, p. 191)

Note that in his description of developmental potential here, Michael didn’t mention the dynamisms. Years later, in 2003, he brought them back into his descriptions of DP as “the capacity for inner transformation.”

Between 1979 and publishing this paper in 1986, Michael had the opportunity to see firsthand the impact of introducing Dabrowski’s theory to audiences in the gifted community. The following paragraph describes how powerful these concepts were back then, and from our work on Positive Disintegration, we can say they still provide essential mirroring for the gifted community.

“When gifted people, or their parents, are introduced to these concepts there is often an instant recognition and a reaction of relief. It helps to find out that someone else studied and made sense of a manner of feeling and acting that is often at odds with the cool norm and expectations of the herd. It helps for once to feel legitimate in one's extraordinary reactions. It helps to learn that one does not have to be dead or famous to be allowed what one cannot help experiencing. The stronger these overexcitabilities the less welcome they are among peers and teachers. Such children feel different, apart from others, guilty and embarrassed for being different. Criticized or teased for what they cannot help, they feel there is something wrong with them. Sometimes they learn to disguise it, sometimes they seek refuge in fantastic worlds of their own creation, sometimes they try to "normalize" it and suffer in consequence the agonies of those who deny their own potential (Maslow, 1971).” (Piechowski, 1986, p. 191)

Unlike the other articles I’ve written about in this post, describing studies about overexcitability or assessing levels of development, this paper reads like a synthesis of what Michael had learned from working with the theory since 1967. He introduced the OEQ as an instrument for studying overexcitability and shared recent findings. He wrote about developmental potential as “potential for self-actualization and moral vigor.” You may recall this excerpt from Interesting Quotes, Vol. 9:

“In formulating the concept of developmental potential, Dabrowski laid particular stress on intellectual, emotional, and imaginational OEs. He saw them as necessary to personal growth characterized by moral questioning, existential concerns and self-judgment. In this type of development the individual engages in the work of inner psychic transformation. The effort of will to overcome one's lower propensities and to follow one's ideals is deliberate and extends over most of a person's life. It does not mean, of course, that the effort is necessarily steady and the progress uniformly upward. What it does mean is that the person does not give up the search even though he or she falls, slips back, yields to discouragement and self-doubt, but takes it up again and again. This type of development, the more intense and sustained it is, produces highly moral individuals and spiritual leaders.” (Piechowski, 1986, p. 193)

He shared work done by his graduate students, some of whom I’ve already mentioned (e.g., Lysy, Robert) and others whose work is mentioned here for the first time. For instance, Tom Brennan’s dissertation study exploring “developmental and individual differences among self-actualizing people.” They published a paper together in the Journal of Humanistic Psychology in 1991.⁷

The final section of the paper includes material that would later provide the foundation for his book Mellow Out. From the data he collected with Nick Colangelo, conducted over two years, Michael described characteristics of intense emotional growth in gifted adolescents:

1. Awareness of growing and changing, awareness of different possibilities of developmental paths open to them. These youngsters think of different directions that they can take in life; they give the impression of running mental experiments on the possibilities ahead of them and the different outcomes to which their choices might lead. They are aware of psychological changes in themselves.

2. Awareness of feelings and conscious attention to them, interest in others as persons and empathy toward them. They show distinct interest in their own emotions and those of others. Their interest in others as persons extends to all ages.

3. Feelings of unreality are present occasionally, marking periods of particularly intense emotional growth. At times they find themselves in a daze or as if in a dream feeling quite apart from even the closest family. But this endows them with new perspectives; they travel far in inner spaces gaining new outlooks on others and on themselves.

4. Inner dialogue and self-judgment, at times quite severe. These youngsters monitor themselves closely. Their conscience is sensitive and fitted with a spur to self-correction—the opposite of the average adolescent lacking in self-judgment.

5. Searching or problem-finding, asking questions which are basic, philosophical, existential. Self-scrutiny, questioning, and the search for truth go together. Somehow these youngsters are already interested not only in objective truth but in inner truth as well.

6. Awareness of one's real self and that it is hidden from others. They realize that their self-knowledge is quite different from the way others know them. (Piechowski, 1986, pp. 195-196)

Michael published a chapter in 1989 following this paper that included these characteristics.

Developmental Potential and the Growth of the Self (1989)

The chapter “Developmental Potential and the Growth of the Self” was published in the book Patterns of Influence on Gifted Learners, edited by Joyce VanTassel-Baska and Paula Olszewski-Kubilius, and expands on the theme of personal growth in gifted adolescents.⁸

Here, Michael talks about two types of development, “which may or may not be combined.” The first type is talent development in its broad sense, and the second is:

“Personal growth guided by powerful ideals. It is characterized by moral questioning, existential concerns, and methodical self-judgment that guides the individual in the work of inner psychic transformation. This type of development, especially when intense and sustained, produces self-actualizing growth of the kind observed in spiritual leaders and other individuals of high moral character (Piechowski, 1986). The study of emotional growth in adolescents can help us to identify better the potential for this type of development, which in turn will lead us to better ways of nurturing the growth of self. In the terms of the paradigm presented here, the growth of self is a process by which a person finds an inner direction to his or her life and deliberately takes up the work of inner transformation.” (Piechowski, 1989, p. 89)

Next, he wrote about his findings from studying patterns of maturation, the data he had collected from gifted adolescents from two studies with participants who followed up two years later.

Pattern A followed the rational-altruistic type outlined by Peck & Havighurst (1960): “Adolescents in this category seemed to mature predictably, in keeping with the demands of school and career as well as their active service to the community” (p. 91).

He called pattern B introspective-emotional growth, and the adolescents in this category endorsed at least four of the six characteristics I listed above from the 1986 paper, now in abbreviated form:

1. Awareness of growing up and changing; awareness of different growth possibilities or paths that are open

2. Awareness of feelings and conscious attention to them; interest in others and empathy toward them

3. Feelings of unreality present occasionally, marking periods of particularly intense emotional growth

4. Inner dialogue and self-judgment, at times quite severe

5. Searching or problem-finding; asking questions that are basic, philosophical, existential

6. Awareness of one's real self (p. 93)

He provided case material in his discussion of these two patterns and brought them to life. Here’s one example:

Feelings of unreality are the inevitable product of great intensity of feeling, of feeling "different" and experiencing a rapid shift in perspective.

Sometimes when I am just standing there I kind of go into a little daze and am sort of unaware of where I am. I look at the people and things around me and think it's all unreal. I wonder why I'm me, why God created an earth. Sometimes I just feel like everything around me including myself is just part of a dream. [female, age 14] (p. 95)

We can recognize an experience of derealization in that example, commonly seen in periods of disintegration.

This chapter has many great insights into the experience of intensity in gifted adolescents and feels as relevant now as it was in 1989. Not all gifted children experience emotional intensity that leads to positive disintegration, but the ones who do can benefit from the framework of overexcitabilities as a non-pathologizing way of viewing and understanding their differences.

I’m reaching the limit for post length, and I want to say that there are papers I’ve left out of this post. Michael is always reminding me to be a judicious selector, and I’ve tried to do that here.

Stay tuned for a post about Michael’s work from the 1990s, which probably won’t be out until the first week of January. The holidays have taken a greater toll on my time and attention than expected, and I’ve adjusted my expectations and timetable accordingly.

1. In 1978, Michael left a visiting professor position at the University of Illinois and started working as an assistant professor of education at Northwestern University. In 1985, he left Northwestern and moved north to work at Northland College in Ashland, Wisconsin.

2. Piechowski, M.M. (1981). The logical and the empirical form of feeling. Journal of Aesthetic Education, 15(1), 31-53. https://doi.org/10.2307/3332208

3. Gage, D.F., Morse, P.A., & Piechowski, M.M. (1981). Measuring levels of emotional development. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 103, 129-152.

4. Lysy, K.Z., & Piechowski, M.M. (1983). Personal growth: An empirical study using Jungian and Dabrowskian measures. Genetic Psychology Monographs, 108, 267-320.

5. Piechowski, M.M., & Colangelo, N. (1984). Developmental potential of the gifted. Gifted Child Quarterly, 28(2), 80-88. https://doi.org/10.1177/001698628402800

6. Piechowski, M.M. (1986) The concept of developmental potential. Roeper Review, 8(3), 190-197. https://doi.org/10.1080/02783198609552971

7. Brennan, T.P., & Piechowski, M.M. (1991). A developmental framework for self-actualization: Evidence from case studies. Journal of Humanistic Psychology, 31(3), 43-64. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022167891313008

8. Piechowski, M.M. (1989). Developmental potential and the growth of the self. In J. VanTassel-Baska & P. Olszewski-Kubilius (Eds.) Patterns of Influence on Gifted Learners: The home, the school, and the self (pp. 87-101). Teacher’s College Press.