Exceptional performers play a major role in driving innovation and tackling some of the world’s most urgent challenges. Because of this, societies have a strong stake in understanding how top-level talent develops. A new review published in the journal Science argues that many long standing approaches to gifted education and talent development rest on flawed assumptions. For the first time, an international and interdisciplinary research team has brought together evidence on how world-class performers emerge in science, classical music, chess, and sports.
For decades, research on giftedness and expertise has followed a familiar model. Outstanding achievement was thought to depend on strong early performance, such as excelling in school subjects, sports, or concerts, combined with specific abilities like intelligence, physical coordination, or musical talent. These traits were believed to need years of intense, discipline-focused training to produce elite results. As a result, many talent programs concentrate on identifying the top young performers early and pushing them to specialize quickly.
According to new findings led by Arne Güllich, professor of sports science at RPTU University Kaiserslautern-Landau, this approach may not be the most effective way to nurture future high achievers.
Why Earlier Research Missed the Full Picture
Until recently, most studies of giftedness focused on young or sub-elite performers. These groups included school and college students, youth athletes, young chess players, and musicians training at conservatories. However, evidence drawn from adult world-class athletes has begun to challenge conclusions based on these earlier samples.
“Traditional research into giftedness and expertise did not sufficiently consider the question of how world-class performers at peak performance age developed in their early years,” Arne Güllich explains. The goal of the new Review was to address this gap by examining how elite performers actually progressed over time.
To do this, Güllich worked with an international research team that included Michael Barth, assistant professor of sports economics at the University of Innsbruck, D. Zach Hambrick, professor of psychology at Michigan State University, and Brooke N. Macnamara, professor of psychology at Purdue University. Their findings are now published in Science.
Pooling Evidence Across Fields
The researchers reexamined large datasets from many previous studies, analyzing the developmental histories of 34,839 top-level performers from around the world. The group included Nobel Prize winners in the sciences, Olympic medalists, elite chess players, and leading classical music composers. This effort made it possible, for the first time, to compare how world-class performers develop across very different disciplines.
Early Stars Are Rarely Future Legends
One of the most striking conclusions is that elite performers follow a developmental path that differs from long-held assumptions. “And a common pattern emerges across the different disciplines,” Güllich notes.
First, individuals who stand out as the best at a young age are usually not the same people who become the best later in life. Second, those who eventually reached the highest levels tended to improve gradually during their early years and were not top performers within their age group. Third, future world-class achievers typically did not focus on a single discipline early on. Instead, they explored a range of activities, such as different academic subjects, musical genres, sports, or professions (e.g., different subjects of study, genres of music, sports, or professions).
How Variety Builds Stronger Performers
The researchers propose three ideas that may help explain these patterns. “We propose three explanatory hypotheses for discussion,” says Güllich.
The search-and-match hypothesis suggests that exposure to multiple disciplines increases the likelihood of eventually finding the best personal fit. The enhanced-learning-capital hypothesis proposes that learning in diverse areas strengthens overall learning capacity, making it easier to continue improving later at the highest level within a chosen field. The limited-risks hypothesis argues that engaging in multiple disciplines reduces the chance of setbacks such as burnout, unhealthy work-rest imbalances, loss of motivation, or physical injury in psychomotor disciplines (sports, music).
Arne Güllich summarizes the combined effect of these factors: “Those who find an optimal discipline for themselves, develop enhanced potential for long-term learning, and have reduced risks of career-hampering factors, have improved chances of developing world-class performance.”
Encouraging Breadth Instead of Early Specialization
Based on these findings, Güllich offers clear guidance on how young talent should be supported. The evidence suggests avoiding early specialization in a single field. Instead, young people should be encouraged and given opportunities to explore several areas of interest and receive support in two or three disciplines.
These areas do not need to be closely related. Combinations like language and mathematics, or geography and philosophy, can be equally valuable. Albert Einstein provides a famous example — one of the most important physicists, who was also deeply engaged with music and played the violin from an early age.
Implications for Policy and Practice
The authors argue that these insights should inform changes in how talent development programs are designed. Policymakers and program leaders can move toward approaches grounded in evidence rather than tradition.
As Güllich concludes, “This may enhance opportunities for the development of world-class performers — in science, sports, music, and other fields.”