Three approaches to the study of infant temperament

doi:10.1016/0273-2297(85)90012-7

Developmental Review

Volume 5, Issue 3, September 1985, Pages 237-260

https://doi.org/10.1016/0273-2297(85)90012-7 Get rights and content

Abstract

In temperament research, the sensitive quantification of individual differences is critical, and biases affecting temperament measures differ somewhat from those affecting normative studies of development. In this paper, we attempt to specify major biases and strengths of the three methods most widely used in the assessment of infant temperament: parent report, home observation, and laboratory observation. We also describe an ongoing research program in order to illustrate how potential biases may be negotiated. We conclude that choice of temperament measure or measures depends upon (a) the purpose of the assessment, (b) knowledge of empirical relations among methods, and (c) evaluations of the seriousness of potential measurement biases.

References (64)

G. Bohlin et al.
Dimensions of infant behavior
Infant Behavior and Development
(1981)
W.B. Carey
Some pitfalls in infant temperament
Infant Behavior and Development
(1983)
S. Crockenberg et al.
Infant temperament ratings: a function of infants, or mothers, or both?
Infant Behavior and Development
(1983)
B. Hagekull et al.
Validity of parental reports
Infant Behavior and Development
(1984)
G.A. Richardson et al.
Subject loss in infancy research: How biasing is it?
Infant Behavior and Development
(1983)
J.G. Adair
The Hawthorne effect: A reconsideration of the methodological artifact
Journal of Applied Psychology
(1984)
G.W. Allport
Traits revisited
American Psychologist
(1966)
J.E. Bates
The concept of difficult temperament
Merrill-Palmer Quarterly
(1980)
J.E. Bates
Issues in the assessment of difficult temperament: A reply to Thomas, Chess and Korn
Merrill-Palmer Quarterly
(1983)
J.E. Bates et al.
Objective and subjective components in mothers' perceptions of their children from age 6 months to 3 years
Merrill-Palmer Quarterly
(1984)

J.E. Bates et al.

Measurement of infant difficultness

Child Development

(1979)

E. Brunswik

Representative design and probabilistic theory in a functional psychology

Psychological Review

(1955)

A.H. Buss et al.

R.B. Cairns et al.

How to assess personality and social patterns: Observations or ratings?

D.T. Campbell et al.

S. Campbell

Mother-infant interactions as a function of maternal ratings of temperament

Child Psychiatry and Human Development

(1979)

J.J. Campos et al.

Socioemotional development

W.B. Carey

A simplified method for measuring infant temperament

Journal of Pediatrics

(1970)

W.B. Carey et al.

Revision of the Infant Temperament Questionnaire

Pediatrics

(1978)

S. Chess et al.

The importance of non-motivational behavior patterns, in psychiatric diagnosis and treatment

Psychiatric Quarterly

(1959)

D. Derryberry et al.

Emotion, attention and temperament

J.F. Dunn et al.

Interaction between young siblings: Associations with the interactions between mother and first-born

Developmental Psychology

(1981)

W.O. Eaton

Measuring activity level with actometers: Reliability, validity and arm length

Child Development

(1983)

S.K. Escalona

D. MacPhee

What do ratings of temperament really measure?

J.L. Fuller et al.

C. Garcia Coll et al.

Behavioral inhibition in young children

Child Development

(1984)

H.H. Goldsmith et al.

Toward a theory of infant temperament

H.H. Goldsmith et al.

Genetic influences on individual differences in emotionality

H.H. Goldsmith et al.

The objective measurement of temperament: Lab-tab and video-tab

J.A. Gray

Cited by (113)

Temperament in individuals with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A systematic review
2021, Clinical Psychology Review
Citation Excerpt :
These have been shown to be associated with particular brain areas/networks (Whittle et al., 2006) and to have at least some distinct genetic underpinnings (Saudino, 2005). Furthermore, these constructs are largely covered by measures based on the four temperament models proposed by Rothbart (Rothbart & Goldsmith, 1985), Thomas and Chess (1968), Buss and Plomin (1975, 1984), and Cloninger (1986, 1987). They align closely with the domains shown by Karalunas et al. (2014) to be useful in parsing heterogeneity in ADHD, and map well onto the key domains of function identified by the National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) Research Domain Criteria (RDoC) initiative (Insel et al., 2013; for a discussion, see Chetcuti et al., 2019), which is increasingly being adopted as a framework for describing clinical phenomenology.
The study of temperament in Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) has the potential to provide insight regarding variability in the onset, nature, and course of both core and co-morbid symptoms. The aim of this systematic review was to integrate existing findings concerning temperament in the context of ASD. Searches of Medline, PsychInfo and Scopus databases identified 64 relevant studies. As a group, children and adolescents with ASD appear to be temperamentally different from both typically developing and other clinical non-ASD groups, characterized by higher negative affectivity, lower surgency, and lower effortful control at a higher-order level. Consistent with research on typically developing children, correlational findings and emerging longitudinal evidence suggests that lower effortful control and higher negative affect are associated with increased internalizing and externalizing problems in ASD samples. Longitudinal studies suggest there may be temperamental differences between high familial risk infants who do and do not develop ASD from as early as 6-months of age. Limitations of existing research are highlighted, and possible directions for future research to capitalize on the potential afforded through the study of temperament in relation to ASD are discussed.
The Infant Behavior Questionnaire – Revised: psychometric properties at 2 weeks, 3, 6 and 12 months of life
2021, Early Human Development
Temperament characteristics are key elements for infants' development. The Infant Behavior Questionnaire – Revised (IBQ-R) is one of the most used measures to assess temperament in infants aged between 3 and 12 months. Its reliability and factor structure have not yet been examined in infants younger than 3 months.
To analyze the reliability of the IBQ-R at 2 weeks and the IBQ-R factor structure from 2 weeks to 12 months of life.
A longitudinal repeated measures design was used. Three hundred mothers completed the IBQ-R when their infants were 2 weeks, and 3, 6 and 12 months.
At 2 weeks the proportion of “non-applicable” responses was higher in duration of orienting, high intensity pleasure, approach and smiling and laughter scales. The Cronbach's alpha for the IBQ-R dimensions ranged between 0.62 and 0.63 and the McDonald's omega ranged between 0.67 and 0.80, all dimensions exhibited a mean-scale correlation above 0.15, and more than half of the scales revealed a scale-dimension correlation higher than 0.30. The same factor structure was found at 2 weeks, and at 3, 6, and 12 months: surgency/extraversion, p < 0.001, negative affectivity, p < 0.001, and orienting regulation, p = 0.007.
The IBQ-R may be applied in the first weeks of life and its factor structure remains stable when applied across different ages throughout infancy.
The relationship between parental behavior and infant regulation: A systematic review
2020, Developmental Review
The formation of early regulatory behavior during the first years is an important developmental task and predictive for self-regulatory abilities in later life. Although parental behavior is thought to be highly influential in this developmental trajectory, associations between infant regulatory behavior and parental behavior have been diverse. The current paper systematically reviews the empirical research on the relationship between behavioral indicators of infant regulation–temperamental characteristics, sleeping, crying, feeding–and parental behavior during the first two years of life. After screening 4254 articles obtained from Web of Science and PsycINFO, 107 studies were included in the systematic review. The studies fell short of integrating negative parental behavior, paternal variables and further demographic information into the research and did not reveal consistent findings. However, the studies indicated a positive relationship between parental behavior and infant regulation with differences according to age and measurement method. It appears that the use of semi-structured methods to measure infant regulation is most appropriate during the first year of life, whereas the use of structured measures is more advisable during the second year of life. In contrast, parental reports measuring infant regulation failed to show significant findings with parenting behavior at any given time. The association was more powerful when infant regulation was predicted by parental behavior than vice versa. However, the number of studies regarding the latter direction was limited. This review, thus, underlines the importance of using different measurement methods according to age, and discusses the ways to improve future research.
Intentional action processing across the transition to crawling: Does the experience of self-locomotion impact infants’ understanding of intentional actions?
2020, Infant Behavior and Development
Citation Excerpt :
A final factor to consider in explaining the discrepancy between the current findings and those reported in Brandone (2015) is the prior study’s reliance on parent reports. Parent-report measures are widely used in infancy research based on both their ease of implementation and the rich information available to parents about infants’ everyday behavior (e.g., Rothbart & Goldsmith, 1985). However, parent-report measures have limitations.
Motor developmental milestones in infancy, such as the transition to self-locomotion, have cascading implications for infants’ social and cognitive development. The current studies aimed to add to this literature by exploring whether and how crawling experience impacts a key social-cognitive milestone achieved in infancy: the development of intentional action understanding. Study 1 used a cross-sectional, age-held-constant design to examine whether locomotor (n = 36) and prelocomotor (n = 36) infants differ in their ability to process a failed intentional reaching action. Study 2 (n = 124) further probed this question by assessing how variability in locomotor infants’ experience maps onto variability in their failed intentional action understanding. Both studies also assessed infants’ tendency to engage in triadic interactions to shed light on whether self-locomotion impacts intentional action understanding directly or indirectly via changes in infants’ interactions with social partners. Altogether, results showed no evidence for the role of self-locomotion in the development of intentional action understanding. Locomotor and prelocomotor infants did not differ in their failed action understanding or levels of triadic engagement (Study 1) and individual differences in days of crawling experience, propensity to crawl during play, and maximum crawling speed failed to predict infants’ intentional action understanding or triadic engagement (Study 2). Explanations for these null findings and alternative influences on the development of intentional action understanding are considered.
Personality in the age of industryStructure, heritability, and correlates of personality in middle childhood from the perspective of parents, teachers, and children
2017, Journal of Research in Personality
Middle childhood is a crucial juncture in the lifespan where children work toward achieving a sense of competence foundational for future development. However, middle childhood has historically been underrepresented in the personality literature. The current study provides a comprehensive examination of personality in middle childhood using a large (N = 2510), longitudinal sample of 10- to 12-year-old twins. The structure, heritability, and correlates of personality in this period were investigated using personality ratings of parents, teachers, and children. Results showed that personality in middle childhood has a coherent structure, is heritable, and is relevant for developmentally salient outcomes such as externalizing behavior, substance use, and academic engagement. Results emphasize the importance of investigating personality in middle childhood across multiple informants.
Toddler emotional states, temperamental traits, and their interactionAssociations with mothers’ and fathers’ parenting
2017, Journal of Research in Personality
Citation Excerpt :
In addition, parenting and child emotion expression were measured in a single setting (an unstructured home observation). Given the wide variability in parent and child behavior across different assessment contexts (Miller et al., 2002) and the biases inherent in relying solely on home observations (see Rothbart & Goldsmith, 1985), future studies should examine state-by-trait interactions across multiple settings. Finally, home observers assessed only the valence (positive versus negative) of child emotion expressions and were not asked to identify discrete emotional categories.
We investigated the degree to which toddlers’ observed emotional states, toddlers’ temperamental traits, and their interaction accounted for variance in mothers’ and fathers’ parenting. Main effects of two emotional states (positive emotion and negative emotion), three temperamental traits (negative affectivity, effortful control, and surgency) as well as state-by-trait interactions, were examined in relation to parental sensitivity, positive affect, and negative affect. The hypothesis that toddlers’ temperamental traits would moderate the association between their observed emotional states and parenting was partially supported. Significant state-by-trait interactions were found in models predicting the probability that mothers and fathers expressed negative affect toward their toddlers. For parental sensitivity and positive affect, only main effects of temperament and/or emotion expression accounted for variance in parenting.

View all citing articles on Scopus

View full text

Three approaches to the study of infant temperament

Abstract

Infant Behavior and Development

Infant Behavior and Development

Infant Behavior and Development

Infant Behavior and Development

Infant Behavior and Development

The Hawthorne effect: A reconsideration of the methodological artifact

Journal of Applied Psychology

Traits revisited

American Psychologist

The concept of difficult temperament

Merrill-Palmer Quarterly

Issues in the assessment of difficult temperament: A reply to Thomas, Chess and Korn

Merrill-Palmer Quarterly

Objective and subjective components in mothers' perceptions of their children from age 6 months to 3 years

Merrill-Palmer Quarterly

Measurement of infant difficultness

Child Development

Representative design and probabilistic theory in a functional psychology

Psychological Review

How to assess personality and social patterns: Observations or ratings?

Mother-infant interactions as a function of maternal ratings of temperament

Child Psychiatry and Human Development

Socioemotional development

A simplified method for measuring infant temperament

Journal of Pediatrics

Revision of the Infant Temperament Questionnaire

Pediatrics

The importance of non-motivational behavior patterns, in psychiatric diagnosis and treatment

Psychiatric Quarterly

Emotion, attention and temperament

Interaction between young siblings: Associations with the interactions between mother and first-born

Developmental Psychology

Measuring activity level with actometers: Reliability, validity and arm length

Child Development

What do ratings of temperament really measure?

Behavioral inhibition in young children

Child Development

Toward a theory of infant temperament

Genetic influences on individual differences in emotionality

The objective measurement of temperament: Lab-tab and video-tab