Psychological Assessment © 2011 American Psychological Association 2011, Vol. 23, No. 2, 337–353 1040-3590/11/$12.00 DOI: 10.1037/a0021746 Deriving Childhood Temperament Measures From Emotion-Eliciting Behavioral Episodes: Scale Construction and Initial Validation Jeffrey R. Gagne and Carol A. Van Hulle Nazan Aksan University of Wisconsin—Madison Koc University Marilyn J. Essex and H. Hill Goldsmith University of Wisconsin—Madison The authors describe the development and initial validation of a home-based version of the Laboratory Temperament Assessment Battery (Lab-TAB), which was designed to assess childhood temperament broadly. with a comprehensive series of emotion-eliciting behavioral episodes. This article provides researchers with general guidelines for assessing specific behaviors using the Lab-TAB and for forming behavioral publishers. composites that correspond to commonly researched temperament dimensions. We used mother ratings and independent postvisit observer ratings to provide validity evidence in a community sample of allied 4.5-year-old children. 12 Lab-TAB behavioral episodes were employed, yielding 24 within-episode disseminated its temperament components that collapsed into 9 higher level composites (Anger, Sadness, Fear, Shyness, be of Positive Expression, Approach, Active Engagement, Persistence, and Inhibitory Control). These dimen- to one sions of temperament are similar to those found in questionnaire-based assessments. Correlations among not or is the 9 composites were low to moderate, suggesting relative independence. As expected, agreement between Lab-TAB measures and postvisit observer ratings was stronger than agreement between the and Lab-TAB and mother questionnaire. However, for Active Engagement and Shyness, mother ratings did user predict child behavior in the Lab-TAB quite well. Findings demonstrate the feasibility of emotion- Association eliciting temperament assessment methodologies, suggest appropriate methods for data aggregation into trait-level constructs and set some expectations for associations between Lab-TAB dimensions and the degree of cross-method convergence between the Lab-TAB and other commonly used temperament individual assessments. the Psychological of Keywords: temperament, children, behavioral assessment, scale construction, Laboratory Temperament use Assessment Battery (Lab-TAB) American personal the the by Temperament traits are conceptualized as behavioral and emo- tive, and social complexity than personality traits, and to include for tional dimensions that develop early in childhood and collectively self-regulatory as well as reactive components (Buss & Plomin, form the basis for later personality (Goldsmith et al., 1987). 1975, 1984; Goldsmith et al., 1987; Rothbart, 1989; Rothbart & solely Childhood temperament is often assumed—and to a degree has Bates, 1998; Thomas & Chess, 1977). Research on childhood copyrighted been demonstrated—to reflect biological individuality, to remain temperament intersects with several subdisciplines in psychology, is relatively stable across development, to have less cognitive, affec- including personality, developmental, clinical, and behavioral neu- intended is roscience (Gagne, Vendlinski, & Goldsmith, 2009). The connec- tions between early temperament traits and later personality and document article psychopathology have been intensely studied over the last decade This article was published Online First April 11, 2011. This (Caspi, Roberts, & Shiner, 2005; Goldsmith, Lemery, & Essex, This Jeffrey R. Gagne, Carol A. Van Hulle, and H. Hill Goldsmith, Depart- ment of Psychology, University of Wisconsin—Madison; Nazan Aksan, 2004). However, unlike personality research, which typically em- Department of Psychology, Koc University; Marilyn J. Essex, Department ploys interview and questionnaire methods, temperament research of Psychiatry, University of Wisconsin—Madison. has historically been rooted in observational and laboratory-based Nazan Aksan is now at Department of Psychology, University of Iowa. assessment techniques. This research was supported in part by National Institute of Mental Although even prehistoric humans probably invoked the con- Health and Health Emotions Research Institute, University of Wisconsin— cept of temperament in dealing with one another, the Greek phy- Madison, Grants R01-MH044340 and P50-MH052354. The project de- sician Galen (129–199 CE) is generally credited with creating the scribed was also supported by National Institute of Mental Health Award first influential, systematic account of how aspects of temperament Number T32-MH018931 (Program Director: R. J. Davidson). We also corresponded with specific personality profiles and diseases. At acknowledge support from National Institutes of Health Grants R37- MH050560, P30-HD03352, and P50-MH084051. the turn of the 20th century, the Russian physiologist Pavlov Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Jeffrey R. studied “transmarginal inhibition” in canines. Pavlov and his fol- Gagne, Department of Psychology, University of Wisconsin—Madison, lowers observed reactive and regulatory aspects of the canine 1202 West Johnson Street, Madison, WI 53706-1611. E-mail: nervous system, phenomena that overlap with current conceptual- [email protected] izations of temperament. In the early 20th century, the German 337 338 GAGNE, VAN HULLE, AKSAN, ESSEX, AND GOLDSMITH psychiatrist Kretschmer believed that body type was related to mies and factor structures of temperament dimensions have orig- temperament and that the extremes of thinness and obesity were inated from these questionnaire-based methods. Even when factor- differentially related to distinct psychiatric disorders. In the late analytic methods are used to determine dimensionality, the 1940s and 1950s, Escalona employed detailed and intensive ob- resulting structures reflected the temperament theory that informed servational methods to examine individual differences in person- item-generation (Kohnstamm et al., 1998). ality development in a sample of healthy infants (Escalona & Most studies use parental rating scales as the primary means of Leitch, 1952). Although she focused on psychoanalytic concep- assessing temperament, typically without direct observation as a tions of personality and did not explicitly use the term tempera- check on the validity of the questionnaire measures. Unfortunately, ment in her work, Escalona’s observations of early emerging using parent ratings as the sole basis for assessment of child patterns of emotions and behavioral repertoires laid some of the temperament introduces the potential for several biases. Specifi- groundwork for contemporary temperament research. Although cally, parent ratings of temperament in studies with siblings often conceptions and theories changed over time, these early theorists show contrast effects whereby the parent exaggerates differences all emphasized an observational quality to the study of tempera- between siblings or assimilation effects whereby the parent exag- ment. gerates similarities between siblings. Parent-rated temperament Thomas and Chess began the classic New York Longitudinal often evinces higher age-to-age stability than lab-based ratings, broadly. Study (NYLS; Thomas, Chess, & Birch, 1968) of infant temper- suggesting that parent expectations about child behavior may ament in the early 1950s; they used ratings of nine temperament contribute to this stability (Saudino, 2003a). However, it is also publishers. dimensions based on parent interviews and, later, questionnaires. possible that lab ratings are not as reliable or valid as parent ratings Children with high or low ratings on these dimensions were or that the two types of assessment tap different aspects of behav- allied disseminated its considered at risk for poor psychological adjustment. This ap- ior. Another criticism of parent ratings include the possibility of be of proach to conceptualizing temperament as a dimensional construct “halo effects” or “cries for help,” in which case the parents’ to one had a significant impact on temperament theory and research in the affective relationship with the child biases reports of temperament. not or latter half of the 20th century. The original Thomas and Chess Yet another criticism is that parents lack knowledge of the typical is (Thomas, Chess, & Birch, 1968) temperament dimensions were level and range of behavior of large, representative comparison and activity, regularity, initial reaction, adaptability, intensity, mood, groups of same-age children and are thus unable to accurately user distractibility, persistence/attention span, and sensitivity. Cur- scale their own children’s behavior (see Mangelsdorf, Schoppe, & Association rently, the most commonly examined temperament dimensions are Buur, 2000, for further discussion of this issue). activity level, anger/frustration, behavioral inhibition/fear, effort- A special issue in Infant Behavior and Development (2003) individual ful control, and positive affect (Gagne et al., 2009). Although these focused on this important topic of parents as informants about the the dimensions are not representative of any single theoretical frame- temperament of their own children (Goldsmith & Hewitt, 2003; Psychological of work regarding the structure of temperament, researchers have Hwang & Rothbart, 2003; Saudino, 2003a, 2003b; Seifer, 2003). use reached some consensus about the importance of these widely These researchers also indicated that some parent assessments