- Email: [email protected]
Early temperament as a predictor of later personality
Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 127–132
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Early temperament as a predictor of later personality Helena R. Slobodskaya a,b,⁎, Elena A. Kozlova a a b
Institute of Physiology and Basic Medicine, Timakova str., 4, Novosibirsk 630117, Russia Novosibirsk State University, Pirogova str., 2, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 24 March 2016 Received in revised form 29 April 2016 Accepted 30 April 2016 Available online xxxx Keywords: Temperament Personality Development Childhood Infancy Toddlerhood Follow-up
a b s t r a c t This study examined developmental relationships between early temperamental dimensions and later personality traits using the Infant Behavior Questionnaire-Revised (IBQ-R), the Early Childhood Behavior Questionnaire (ECBQ) and the Inventory of Child Individual Differences-Short version (ICID-S) in a community sample of 98 children who had participated in a study of early temperament and who provided follow-up data on average seven years later. Analyses revealed a number of significant associations between higher- and lower-order dimensions of early temperament and later personality. Regulatory Capacity in infancy and Effortful Control in toddlerhood were related to personality domain of Conscientiousness, largely due to the contribution of early temperament trait of Low Intensity Pleasure. The findings showed considerable heterotypic continuity of individual differences, both within-domain and cross-domain, and highlighted the predictive effect of early regulatory traits. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction There is a growing consensus that temperamental characteristics that appear in the first years of life form a basis for later personality (Caspi & Shiner, 2006; Rothbart, 2007; Shiner & DeYoung, 2013). The psychobiological model developed by Rothbart and colleagues (Rothbart, 2007; Rothbart & Derryberry, 1981) has become one of the most influential models of temperament. According to this model, temperament is conceptualized as constitutional differences in reactivity and self-regulation, influenced by heredity, maturation and experience. Reactivity refers to arousability of affect and motor activity, whereas self-regulation refers to processes such as behavioral inhibition and attentional control serving to modulate reactivity (Rothbart & Bates, 1998). Factor-analytic studies of temperament as measured by questionnaires provided evidence that these individual differences are organized hierarchically, the three-factor structure of temperament, including Positive Affectivity/Surgency, Negative Affectivity, and Regulatory Capacity/Effortful Control, was recognizable in each specific age group from infancy through adolescence (Rothbart, 2007; Shiner et al., 2012). The content of the factors is largely similar across ages; the inclusion and exclusion of traits reflects, for the most part, change in the behavioral repertoire across the lifespan (Putnam, Ellis, & Rothbart, 2001). For example, a Positive Affectivity/Surgency factor includes traits of ⁎ Corresponding author at: Institute of Physiology and Basic Medicine, Timakova str., 4, Novosibirsk 630117, Russia. E-mail address: [email protected] (H.R. Slobodskaya).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.04.094 0191-8869/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Activity, High Intensity Pleasure and Approach/Positive Anticipation across infancy and childhood; Vocal Reactivity trait reflecting spontaneous babbling defines this factor only during infancy, whereas in toddlerhood, this factor additionally includes Impulsivity and Sociability. In both infants and older children, a Regulatory Capacity/Effortful Control factor includes traits of Low-intensity Pleasure and Duration of Orienting/Attention Focusing. Soothability, reflecting reduction of distress when soothing techniques are used, defines this factor only in infants; in older children, this factor also includes traits reflecting an ability to inhibit actions and to shift attention at will, Inhibitory Control and Attentional Shifting (Putnam, Rothbart, & Gartstein, 2008; Putnam et al., 2001). In personality research, large-scale studies of systematic individual differences in thinking, feeling, and behaving have demonstrated the robustness of the five-factor model of personality across cultures and age groups from early childhood to adulthood (Caspi & Shiner, 2006; McCrae et al., 2005). Each of the Big Five subsumes a number of lower-order traits. Extraversion includes Activity Level, Positive Emotions and Sociability; Neuroticism encompasses a variety of negative emotions, including Fear and Anger/Irritability; Conscientiousness includes traits measuring orderliness, task persistence and achievement motivation; Agreeableness involves differences in prosocial tendencies, antagonism and willfulness; and Openness includes traits measuring perceptual, esthetic and intellectual interests (Caspi & Shiner, 2006; Halverson et al., 2003). Although temperament and personality research traditions were largely independent for many years, in the current thinking temperament and personality traits are more alike than different (Caspi &
128
H.R. Slobodskaya, E.A. Kozlova / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 127–132
Shiner, 2006; Shiner et al., 2012; Tackett, Kushner, De Fruyt, & Mervielde, 2013). Both are biologically based and develop over the life span under the influence of genes and environment. Thus, the main distinction between temperament and personality is that temperament usually refers to individual differences that appear in infancy and early childhood, while personality typically refers to individual differences that develop later in life (Shiner & DeYoung, 2013). This suggests that early temperament may play an important role in predicting later personality. Research has highlighted the conceptual links between three higherorder childhood temperament traits of Positive Affectivity/Surgency, Negative Affectivity and Regulatory Capacity/Effortful Control and the Big Five personality traits of Extraversion, Neuroticism and Conscientiousness, respectively. All major traits comprising the Surgency domain in early childhood (Positive emotions, especially highly intensive, Sociability, Activity and Approach) have been found to predict later Extraversion (Caspi & Shiner, 2006). Two lower-order traits comprising the Negative Affectivity domain, Fear and Irritability/Anger, are related to Neuroticism. Early Fearfulness also predicted low Extraversion in adulthood (Caspi et al., 2003), whereas Irritability/Anger is also linked to Disagreeableness and low Conscientiousness (Lamb, Chuang, Wessels, Broberg, & Hwang, 2002; Shiner & DeYoung, 2013). Effortful Control and its lower-order components (Attention, Inhibitory Control, Low Intensity Pleasure) are consistently related to personality domain of Conscientiousness (De Pauw, Mervielde, & Van Leeuwen, 2009; Halverson et al., 2003; Shiner & DeYoung, 2013; Tackett et al., 2013). Selfregulatory processes encompassed by Effortful Control are also related to the personality domain of Agreeableness that reflects the regulation of emotions and behavior in interpersonal contexts (Caspi & Shiner, 2006). However, empirical evidence on the links between child temperament and personality is scarce; most findings are derived from crosssectional samples or focused on a predictive role of a few specific traits. Because measures assessing the psychobiological hierarchical model of temperament in infancy and toddlerhood have been developed in the last decade or so (Gartstein & Rothbart, 2003; Putnam, Gartstein, & Rothbart, 2006), little is known about early temperamental antecedents of personality traits. The present study was designed to address the developmental relationships between temperamental dimensions in infancy and toddlerhood and personality traits in later childhood, considering both higher- and lower-order levels of the hierarchical structure of individual differences. We hypothesized that higher-order dimensions and fine-grained components of early temperament would be associated with conceptually related personality traits in later childhood.
2. Method 2.1. Sample and procedures This study is based on a subsample drawn from a study of early temperament that began in Novosibirsk, Russia, in 2001. Participants represent a community sample of children and their parents from urban and rural areas of Western Siberia and nearby regions, most living in Novosibirsk, Russia's third largest city. Parents were approached via childcare centers and in person, including home visits; all study members provided informed consent for participation in the study. Depending on the child's age, parents were asked to complete the Russian versions of the Infant Behavior Questionnaire-Revised (IBQ-R, Gartstein & Rothbart, 2003) or the Early Childhood Behavior Questionnaire (ECBQ, Putnam et al., 2006) along with a brief demographic questionnaire. The total sample of 563 children was recruited; 353 parents (92% mothers) completed the IBQ-R, 345 parents (90% mothers) completed the ECBQ, of these 135 parents completed both IBQ-R and ECBQ with an interval of approximately 15 months. The results of the cross-
sectional study of early temperament have been published elsewhere (Slobodskaya, Gartstein, Nakagawa, & Putnam, 2013). At the time of the follow-up, contact details were available for 65% of the total sample and we were able to locate and approach 133 participants of the initial study. Of those, 74% completed the Inventory of Child Individual Differences-Short version (ICID-S; Slobodskaya & Zupančič, 2010) and provided sociodemographic information. The follow-up sample included 98 children (55% girls); 45 were initially assessed with the IBQ-R when they were, on average, 7.1 months of age (SD = 2.9); 27 of them were later assessed with ECBQ; and 53 participants were recruited in early childhood and were initially assessed with the ECBQ. As a result, the ECBQ sample is consisted of 80 children assessed when they were, on average, 23.8 months of age (SD = 6.5). At the time of ICID-S assessment children were, on average, 7.8 years of age (SD = 2.1); the average time interval between the IBQ-R and the ICID-S assessment was 8.4 years (SD = 1.5), the average interval between the ECBQ and the ICID-S assessment was 6.6 years (SD = 2.0). These follow-up participants were representative of the original sample of 563 children in terms of demographics; compared with the rest of the sample they did not differ on most temperament traits, but scored higher on the IBQ-R Soothability and ECBQ Impulsivity, Sociability and Perceptual Sensitivity. However, there were no significant differences between the participants and those 133 children whose parents were approached but did not participate, both on the IBQ-R and ECBQ. The participating families were socio-economically diverse, 74% of the children lived with both biological parents, 20% with a single mother and the rest with other carers. For education, 5% of the mothers and 17% of the fathers had ten years of schooling or less, 26% of the mothers and 29% of the fathers had college education, 69% of the mothers and 54% of the fathers had university education. For occupation, the parents ranged from unskilled to professional workers, 22% of the mothers and 7% of the fathers were unemployed. Most data came from mothers (89%), 3% of children were rated by fathers, the rest were rated by other caregivers. 2.2. Measures 2.2.1. Temperament 2.2.1.1. Infant Behavior Questionnaire-Revised (IBQ-R; Gartstein & Rothbart, 2003). This 191-item parent-report instrument yields 14 lower-order scales that form three higher-order factors: Positive Affectivity/Surgency, made up of Activity Level, Approach, High Intensity Pleasure, Perceptual Sensitivity, Smiling/Laughter and Vocal Reactivity; Negative Emotionality, including Distress to Limitations, Fear, Sadness and reversed Falling Reactivity; and Regulation, including Duration of Orienting, Cuddliness/Affiliation, Low Intensity Pleasure and Soothability. The Russian version has been validated, supporting good reliability of the scales (Gartstein, Slobodskaya, & Kinsht, 2003) and the invariance of the three-factor structure in Russian and US samples (Gartstein, Knyazev, & Slobodskaya, 2005). In the present study alphas for IBQ-R scales ranged from .75 to .92 with a mean of .86. 2.2.1.2. Early Childhood Behavior Questionnaire (ECBQ, Putnam et al., 2006). This 201-item parent-report instrument yields 18 lower-order scales that form three higher-order factors: Surgency, made up of Activity Level, High-intensity Pleasure, Impulsivity, Positive Anticipation, and Sociability; Negative Affectivity, including Discomfort, Fear, Sadness, Frustration, Motor Activation, Perceptual Sensitivity, Shyness, and reversed Soothability; and Effortful Control, containing Attention Focusing, Attention Shifting, Cuddliness, Inhibitory Control and Low Intensity Pleasure. The Russian version has been validated, supporting good reliability of the scales and similarity of three higher-order factors (Kolmagorova, Slobodskaya, & Gartstein, 2008). In the present study alphas for lower-order scales ranged from .71 to .91 with a mean of .81.
H.R. Slobodskaya, E.A. Kozlova / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 127–132
2.2.2. Personality The Inventory of Child Individual Differences-Short version (ICID-S, Slobodskaya & Zupančič, 2010) is an age and culture neutral instrument for assessing child personality in terms of the five factor model. The ICID-S for parents was developed from the full instrument (Halverson et al., 2003); it includes 62 items measuring 15 lower-order traits that form the Big Five factors. The present analyses included only four of them: Extraversion, comprising Activity, Positive Emotions and Sociable; Neuroticism, containing Fearful, Shy and Negative Affect; Conscientiousness, comprising Achievement, Organized, Compliant, and reversed Distractible; and Disagreeableness, comprising Antagonism, Strong Willed, and reversed Considerate. Openness and two lowerorder traits comprising this factor, Open to Experience and Intelligent, were not included in the analyses because this domain has not been found to be conceptually related to temperament (Shiner & DeYoung, 2013). The Russian version of the ICID-S has been validated, supporting good reliability of the scales and the invariance of the five-factor structure in two gender and four age groups (Knyazev, Zupančič, & Slobodskaya, 2008). In the present study alphas for ICID-S scales ranged from .69 to .86 with a mean of .79.
129
3.1.2. Toddler temperament and later personality Tables 1 and 2 present the prospective associations between toddler temperament measured by the ECBQ and personality measured by the ICID-S, on average, 6.6 years later. In the Positive Affectivity domain (Table 1), higher-order trait was linked to later Activity, toddler Activity was related to later Activity and Negative Affect, Positive Anticipation was negatively related to later Shyness, and toddler Sociability was positively related to later Activity and (marginally) Sociability and negatively related to Neuroticism, Shyness and Fearfulness. In the Negative Affectivity domain, lower-order trait of Frustration was linked to later Negative Affect. In the Regulatory domain (Table 2), higher-order trait of Effortful Control was positively related to later Conscientiousness and all lower-order traits from this domain; Low Intensity Pleasure showed similar showed similar pattern of relationships with the Conscientiousness domain and was marginally associated with later Agreeableness and (negatively) with Strong Willed. Lower-order trait of Attention Focusing was linked to later Achievement and Organized, whereas toddler Attention Shifting was positively related to Conscientiousness and Organized and negatively related to Distractible. Inhibitory Control was linked to later Conscientiousness and lower-order traits of Achievement and Compliant. Cuddliness was negatively related to the Agreeableness domain.
3. Results 3.2. Models predicting later personality from early temperament 3.1. Correlations between early temperament and later personality 3.1.1. Infant temperament and childhood personality Tables S1–S2 in the Supplementary material present the prospective correlations of IBQ-R scales with ICID-S scales. Although infant subsample was small (N = 45), there were noteworthy longitudinal relationships between temperament traits measured in the first year of life and personality traits measured, on average, 8.4 years later. In the Positive Affectivity domain, Smiling/Laughter was positively related to later Activity and negatively related to Neuroticism and lower-order traits of Fearful and Shy. Vocal Reactivity was negatively related to later Neuroticism and lower-order trait of Fearful; Approach was also negatively related to later Fearfulness. In the Negative Affectivity domain, Falling Reactivity was negatively related to later Positive Emotions. A Regulatory Capacity higher-order trait was related to later Organized, whereas lower-order trait of Low Intensity Pleasure was related to later Conscientiousness and lower-order traits of Organized, Distractible and Considerate.
We examined the contribution of early temperament to later personality with path analyses models using AMOS.17 software (Arbuckle, 2008). Path analyses were conducted on a total follow-up sample of 98 children, 45 of whom were initially assessed with the IBQ-R and the rest were initially assessed with the ECBQ; all of them were reassessed with the ICID-S, on average, 6.9 years later. Model 1 tested the prospective associations between the three higher-order traits of early temperament and subsequent personality traits of Extraversion, Neuroticism, Conscientiousness and Disagreeableness. Model 2 tested the prospective associations between eleven lower-order traits of early temperament that appear in both the IBQ-R and ECBQ, namely Activity, High Intensity Pleasure, Approach/Positive Anticipation, Perceptual Sensitivity, Frustration/Distress to Limitations, Fear, Sadness, Soothability, Cuddliness, Attention Focusing/Duration of Orienting and Low Intensity Pleasure, and subsequent lower-order personality traits. Correlated error was allowed within temperament and within personality but not between temperament and personality traits. Final models,
Table 1 Prospective correlations of ECBQ scales with ICID-S scales in the Affectivity domains. ECBQ scales
ICID-S scales Extraversion
Positive Affectivity Activity Level High Intensity Pleasure Impulsivity Positive Anticipation Sociability Negative Affectivity Discomfort Fear Frustration Motor Activation Perceptual Sensitivity Sadness Shyness Soothability Note. N = 80. † p b .10. ⁎ p b .05. ⁎⁎ p b .01.
.14 .14 .02 .05 .12 .18 .13 .02 .11 .12 .17 .03 .11 −.01 −.06
Activity .29⁎ .23⁎ .16 .17 .21† .31⁎⁎ .17 .05 .15 .12 .19† .14 .08 .00 −.04
Positive Emotions
Sociable
Neuroticism
Fear
Shy
Negative Affect
−.14 .04 −.18 −.16 −.13 −.11 −.04 −.04 .02 −.02 .06 −.17 .02 −.04 −.02
.15 .03 .04 .08 .18 .19† .15 .02 .08 .15 .14 .09 .15 .00 −.08
−.04 .18 .06 .00 −.10 −.23⁎ .08 .12 .05 .08 .09 −.02 .00 .09 −.04
−.04 .13 .04 −.00 −.09 −.19† .06 .17 −.02 .06 .13 −.09 .04 .06 −.01
−.20† −.03 −.10 −.14 −.24⁎ −.22⁎
.15 .30⁎⁎ .19† .13 .08 −.12 .16 .09 .16 .25⁎
−.05 .02 −.04 −.14 −.09 −.07 −.03 .10 −.06
.15 .10 −.01 .04 −.02
130
H.R. Slobodskaya, E.A. Kozlova / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 127–132
Table 2 Prospective correlations of ECBQ scales with ICID-S scales in the Regulatory domain. ECBQ scales
Effortful Control Attention Focusing Attention Shifting Cuddliness Inhibitory Control Low Intensity Pleasure
ICID-S scales C
Achievement
Organized
Compliant
Distractible
DA
Antagonism
Strong Willed
Considerate
.33⁎⁎ .20† .25⁎ −.02 .26⁎ .32⁎⁎
.33⁎⁎ .23⁎ .20† .02 .26⁎ .28⁎
.31⁎⁎ .25⁎ .28⁎ −.02 .19† .26⁎
.26⁎ .10 .08 .04 .26⁎ .26⁎
−.22⁎ −.09 −.27⁎ .12 −.18 −.31⁎⁎
−.07 −.11 −.08 .25⁎ −.07 −.22†
−.01 −.03 −.07 .21† −.03 −.13
−.07 −.15 −.08 .22⁎ −.05 −.20†
.08 .07 .01 −.14 .09 .17
Note. N = 80. C—Conscientiousness, DA—Disagreeableness. † p b .10. ⁎ p b .05. ⁎⁎ p b .01.
with all non-significant paths removed, were then fitted to the data. We also tested if the effect of early temperament was conditional upon the child's age at the first assessment and time interval between the two assessments. Because both sets of variables, temperament and personality traits, have the common biological bases of individual differences in emotion and behavior, the relationship magnitude was evaluated by multiple correlation coefficient; using the correlation squared may underestimate the effect size (Ozer, 1985). The final Model 1 (Fig. 1) fitted data very well, with χ2 = 3.46, df = 4, p = .48; CFI = 1.000; RMSEA = .000; child's age and time interval did not make a significant contribution. The results of path analyses showed that early Negative Affectivity was positively associated with later Neuroticism, while early Regulatory Capacity/Effortful Control significantly contributed to the prediction of three higher-order traits, Conscientiousness, Extraversion and Neuroticism. Overall, early temperament accounted for 20 to 30% of the variance in Conscientiousness, Extraversion and Neuroticism. The final Model 2 (Fig. 2) also showed good fit to the data, with χ2 = 55.30, df = 44, p = .12; CFI = 0.962; RMSEA = .051; child's age and time interval did not make a significant contribution to the prediction of personality. The results of path analyses showed that Positive Affectivity trait of Approach predicted later traits of Sociability and Fear; two other Positive Affectivity traits, High Intensity Pleasure and Activity, predicted later traits of Strong Willed and Distractible, respectively. Early Regulatory Capacity/Effortful Control trait of Low Intensity Pleasure contributed to the prediction of the three traits from the Conscientiousness domain, Distractible, Achievement and Organized. Another regulatory trait, Attention, predicted later traits of Organized, Negative Affect and Fear. Overall, early temperament explained from 37% of the variance for Distractibility to 18% of the variance for Strong Willed.
toddlerhood with personality dimensions in the preschool and school years. To our knowledge, this is the first longitudinal study of early temperament as a predictor of childhood personality. The findings partially supported the hypothesized relationships between conceptually related temperament and personality traits. Regulatory capacity in infancy and emerging Effortful Control in toddlerhood were significantly associated with personality domain of Conscientiousness assessed, on average, 7– 8 years later; these links were found both at the higher- and lowerorder levels. Results of path analyses confirmed the unique contribution of early Regulatory Capacity/Effortful Control to the development of Conscientiousness and highlighted the key role of Low Intensity Pleasure trait that encompasses enjoyment of low intensity activities or stimuli (Gartstein & Rothbart, 2003; Putnam et al., 2006). This is consistent with the particularly salient contribution of Low-Intensity Pleasure to the stability of the regulatory factor from infancy to preschool years (Putnam et al., 2008). Our results also indicated that early capacity for effortful attention predicted later personality trait of Organization. It is important to note that although the link between early self-regulation and later personality trait of Conscientiousness has been suggested by the accumulated body of evidence (Eisenberg, Duckworth, Spinrad, & Valiente, 2014), this is the first time this link has been demonstrated empirically. Homotypic continuity was less marked for Positive and Negative Affectivity. Activity Level in toddlers was linked to personality trait of Activity assessed, on average, 6–7 years later, while an association between toddler and later childhood Sociability was only marginally significant. In the Negative Affectivity domain, Frustration in toddlers was linked to lower-order personality trait of Negative Affect in later childhood that encompasses tendencies to be irritable, moody, angry
4. Discussion The findings of this study provide empirical evidence on the developmental relationships of temperamental traits in infancy and
Fig. 1. Path analysis of the relationship between early temperament and later personality higher-order traits. Significant (p b 0.05) regression weights with standard errors in brackets are presented as straight lines; significant (p b 0.05) correlation is presented as a curved line.
Fig. 2. Path analysis of the relationship between early temperament and later personality lower-order traits. Significant (p b 0.05) regression weights with standard errors in brackets are presented as straight lines; significant (p b 0.05) correlations are presented as curved lines.
H.R. Slobodskaya, E.A. Kozlova / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 127–132
and quick tempered in interpersonal situations (Halverson et al., 2003). Results of path analyses confirmed the predictive relationship between early Negative Affectivity and later Neuroticism. It is noteworthy that this association was found only in the path model where interrelations among personality traits were accounted for. However, there were no significant associations between early Positive Affectivity/Surgency and later Extraversion, and between equivalent temperament and personality traits of Fear and Shyness. By contrast, the findings showed considerable heterotypic continuity of individual differences, both within-domain and cross-domain. This is consistent with results from cross-sectional studies of temperament-personality links in childhood and adolescence (De Pauw et al., 2009; Halverson et al., 2003; Tackett et al., 2013) and from longitudinal studies of temperament from infancy to toddlerhood and middle childhood (Carranza, González-Salinas, & Ato, 2013; Komsi et al., 2006; Putnam et al., 2008). One possible explanation for predominantly heterotypic continuity of individual differences in the first years of life is that children go through numerous rapid transitions in this period (Kagan, 1969, as cited by Caspi & Shiner, 2006). Methodological problems may also play a role when scales with the same name actually measure different constructs and vice versa (Caspi & Shiner, 2006; Halverson et al., 2003). Although recent research has showed that temperament and personality traits are essentially the same dimensions, the measures used in this study emerged from different backgrounds and differed markedly in their design. In contrast to the “top-down” theory-driven approach to the construction of temperament questionnaires (Putnam et al., 2001), the ICID was constructed in a “bottom-up” way and provides natural descriptions of children worded in the folk language. Still, early temperament traits showed heterotypic relations with later personality traits that were meaningful, such as links between early motor activity and later distractibility and between early approach and later Sociability and low Fear. It is noteworthy that the heterotypic relations between early temperament and later personality traits showed the predictive effect of regulatory traits. Attentional control in infancy and toddlerhood predicted lower levels of Fear and Negative Affect in later childhood, and early Effortful Control was negatively associated with later Neuroticism, in line with cross-sectional findings (Rothbart, 2007; Tackett et al., 2013). Positive association between early Effortful Control and later Extraversion is less clear. The role of early regulatory traits in the development of personality needs further research attention, along with the interactive effects involving affective and regulatory domains. Several limitations of this study deserve comment. Firstly, the sample was not large enough to detect associations that might have been detected with larger samples. For this reason, we used an unadjusted alpha level and the risk of Type I errors was increased. Therefore, the correlational findings are preliminary and far from being complete. Secondly, the design was less than optimal, time interval between the initial assessment and the follow-up varied greatly, both infant and toddler temperament data were not available from all of the participants. Thirdly, this study has considered only four personality domains at two levels of the hierarchical structure; future research should examine personality more fully. Fourthly, because the data relied on questionnaire measures, the findings might be partly due to shared method variance. Although evidence has provided support for the validity of parental reports, a particularly important step is to obtain measures from different sources. Finally, because the development of personality appears to be influenced by culture, future studies should include measures of proximal environment and parenting practices to further investigate environmental pathways. Bearing these limitations in mind, this study has provided important empirical evidence on the developmental relationships of temperamental traits in infancy and toddlerhood with later personality dimensions. The findings demonstrated the role of early regulatory traits in the development of Conscientiousness and other personality traits and highlighted the contribution of Low Intensity Pleasure. These results
131
may have wide implications for the pathways of personality development. Future research may enhance our understanding of developmental processes underlying the continuity of individual differences from infancy through childhood, adolescence and into adulthood. Acknowledgments The work on this manuscript was supported by grants from the Russian Foundation for Humanities # 14-06-00139 (follow-up data collection), Russian Scientific Foundation # 16-18-00003 (data analysis) and Russian Foundation for Basic Research # 16-06-00022 (manuscript preparation). Appendix A. Supplementary data Supplementary data to this article can be found online at http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.04.094. References Arbuckle, J. L. (2008). Amos 17.0 user's guide. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc. Carranza, J. A., González-Salinas, C., & Ato, E. (2013). A longitudinal study of temperament continuity through IBQ, TBAQ and CBQ. Infant Behav. Dev., 36, 749–761. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2013.08.002. Caspi, A., & Shiner, R. L. (2006). Personality development. In W. Damon & R. Lerner (Series Eds.) & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (6th edition, pp. 300–365). New York: Wiley. Caspi, A., Harrington, H., Milne, B., Amell, J. W., Theodore, R. F., & Moffitt, T. E. (2003). Children's behavioral styles at age 3 are linked to their adult personality traits at age 26. J. Pers., 71, 495–513. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.7104001. De Pauw, S. S. W., Mervielde, I., & Van Leeuwen, K. G. (2009). How are traits related to problem behavior in preschoolers? Similarities and contrasts between temperament and personality. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol., 37, 309–325. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s10802-008-9290-0. Eisenberg, N., Duckworth, A. L., Spinrad, T. L., & Valiente, C. (2014). Conscientiousness: origins in childhood? Developmental Psychology, 50, 1331–1349. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1037/a0030977. Gartstein, M. A., & Rothbart, M. K. (2003). Studying infant temperament via a revision of the infant behavior questionnaire. J. Infant Behav. Dev., 26, 64–86. Gartstein, M. A., Slobodskaya, H. R., & Kinsht, I. A. (2003). Cross-cultural differences in temperament in the first year of life: United States of America (U.S.) and Russia. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 27, 316–328. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1080/01650250244000344. Gartstein, M. A., Knyazev, G. G., & Slobodskaya, H. R. (2005). Cross-cultural differences in the structure of infant temperament: United States of America (U.S.) and Russia. Infant Behav. Dev., 28, 54–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01650250244000344. Halverson, C. F., Havill, V. L., Deal, J., Baker, S. R., Victor, J., Pavlopoulos, V., ... Wen, L. (2003). Personality structure as derived from parental ratings of free descriptions of children: the Inventory of Child Individual Differences. Journal of Personality, 71, 995–1026. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.7106005. Knyazev, G. G., Zupančič, M., & Slobodskaya, H. R. (2008). Child personality in Slovenia and Russia. Structure and mean level of traits in parent and self-ratings. J. CrossCult. Psychol., 39, 317–334. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022108314542. Kolmagorova, А. V., Slobodskaya, H. R., & Gartstein, M. A. (2008). A Russian adaptation of the Early Childhood Behavior Questionnaire (ECBQ) for measuring temperament. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal, 29, 82–97 (In Russian). Komsi, N., Räikkönen, K., Pesonen, A. K., Heinonen, K., Keskivaara, P., Järvenpää, A. L., & Strandberg, T. E. (2006). Continuity of temperament from infancy to middle childhood. Infant Behav. Dev., 29, 494–508. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2006.05.002. Lamb, M. E., Chuang, S. S., Wessels, H., Broberg, A. G., & Hwang, C. P. (2002). Emergence and construct validations of the big five factors in early childhood: a longitudinal analysis of their ontogeny in Sweden. Child Dev., 73, 1517–1524. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1111/1467-8624.00487. McCrae, R. R., Terracciano, A., & 79 Members of the Personality Profiles of Cultures Project (2005). Personality profiles of cultures: aggregate personality traits. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., 89, 407–425. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.3.407. Ozer, D. J. (1985). Correlation and the coefficient of determination. Psychol. Bull., 97, 307–315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.97.2.307. Putnam, S. P., Ellis, L. K., & Rothbart, M. K. (2001). The structure of temperament from infancy through adolescence. In A. Eliasz, & A. Angleitner (Eds.), Advances/proceedings in research on temperament (pp. 165–182). Germany: Pabst Scientist Publisher. Putnam, S. P., Gartstein, M. A., & Rothbart, M. K. (2006). Measurement of fine-grained aspects of toddler temperament: the Early Childhood Behavior Questionnaire. Infant Behavior and Development, 29, 386–401. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2006.01. 004. Putnam, S. P., Rothbart, M. K., & Gartstein, M. A. (2008). Homotypic and heterotypic continuity of fine-grained temperament during infancy, toddlerhood, and early childhood. Infant Child Dev., 17, 387–405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ICD.582. Rothbart, M. K. (2007). Temperament, development and personality. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. , 16, 207–212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00505.x.
132
H.R. Slobodskaya, E.A. Kozlova / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 127–132
Rothbart, M. K., & Bates, J. E. (1998). Temperament. In W. Damon (Series Ed.) & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology: (Vol. 3), Social, emotional, and personality development (5th Ed., pp. 105–176). New York: Wiley. Rothbart, M. K., & Derryberry, D. (1981). Development of individual differences in temperament. In M. E. Lamb, & A. L. Brown (Eds.), Advances in developmental psychology. 1. (pp. 37–86). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Shiner, R. L., & DeYoung, C. G. (2013). The structure of temperament and personality traits: a developmental perspective. In P. Zelazo (Ed.), Oxford handbook of developmental psychology (pp. 113–141). New York: Oxford University Press. Shiner, R. L., Buss, K. A., McClowry, S. G., Putnam, S. P., Saudino, K. J., & Zentner, M. (2012). What is temperament now? Assessing progress in temperament research on the twenty-fifth anniversary of Goldsmith et al. (1987). Child Dev. Perspect., 6, 436–444. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2012.00254.x.
Slobodskaya, H. R., & Zupančič, M. (2010). Development and validation of the Inventory of Child Individual Differences—Short version in two Slavic countries. Studia Psychologica, 52, 23–39. Slobodskaya, H. R., Gartstein, M. A., Nakagawa, A., & Putnam, S. P. (2013). Early temperament in Japan, the United States and Russia: do cross-cultural differences decrease with age? J. Cross-Cult. Psychol., 44, 438–460. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0022022112453316. Tackett, J. L., Kushner, S. C., De Fruyt, F., & Mervielde, I. (2013). Delineating personality traits in childhood and adolescence: associations across measures, temperament, and behavioral problems. Assessment, 20, 738–751. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 10731911135096861073191113509686.
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Personality and Individual Differences journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid
Early temperament as a predictor of later personality Helena R. Slobodskaya a,b,⁎, Elena A. Kozlova a a b
Institute of Physiology and Basic Medicine, Timakova str., 4, Novosibirsk 630117, Russia Novosibirsk State University, Pirogova str., 2, Novosibirsk 630090, Russia
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history: Received 24 March 2016 Received in revised form 29 April 2016 Accepted 30 April 2016 Available online xxxx Keywords: Temperament Personality Development Childhood Infancy Toddlerhood Follow-up
a b s t r a c t This study examined developmental relationships between early temperamental dimensions and later personality traits using the Infant Behavior Questionnaire-Revised (IBQ-R), the Early Childhood Behavior Questionnaire (ECBQ) and the Inventory of Child Individual Differences-Short version (ICID-S) in a community sample of 98 children who had participated in a study of early temperament and who provided follow-up data on average seven years later. Analyses revealed a number of significant associations between higher- and lower-order dimensions of early temperament and later personality. Regulatory Capacity in infancy and Effortful Control in toddlerhood were related to personality domain of Conscientiousness, largely due to the contribution of early temperament trait of Low Intensity Pleasure. The findings showed considerable heterotypic continuity of individual differences, both within-domain and cross-domain, and highlighted the predictive effect of early regulatory traits. © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction There is a growing consensus that temperamental characteristics that appear in the first years of life form a basis for later personality (Caspi & Shiner, 2006; Rothbart, 2007; Shiner & DeYoung, 2013). The psychobiological model developed by Rothbart and colleagues (Rothbart, 2007; Rothbart & Derryberry, 1981) has become one of the most influential models of temperament. According to this model, temperament is conceptualized as constitutional differences in reactivity and self-regulation, influenced by heredity, maturation and experience. Reactivity refers to arousability of affect and motor activity, whereas self-regulation refers to processes such as behavioral inhibition and attentional control serving to modulate reactivity (Rothbart & Bates, 1998). Factor-analytic studies of temperament as measured by questionnaires provided evidence that these individual differences are organized hierarchically, the three-factor structure of temperament, including Positive Affectivity/Surgency, Negative Affectivity, and Regulatory Capacity/Effortful Control, was recognizable in each specific age group from infancy through adolescence (Rothbart, 2007; Shiner et al., 2012). The content of the factors is largely similar across ages; the inclusion and exclusion of traits reflects, for the most part, change in the behavioral repertoire across the lifespan (Putnam, Ellis, & Rothbart, 2001). For example, a Positive Affectivity/Surgency factor includes traits of ⁎ Corresponding author at: Institute of Physiology and Basic Medicine, Timakova str., 4, Novosibirsk 630117, Russia. E-mail address: [email protected] (H.R. Slobodskaya).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.04.094 0191-8869/© 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Activity, High Intensity Pleasure and Approach/Positive Anticipation across infancy and childhood; Vocal Reactivity trait reflecting spontaneous babbling defines this factor only during infancy, whereas in toddlerhood, this factor additionally includes Impulsivity and Sociability. In both infants and older children, a Regulatory Capacity/Effortful Control factor includes traits of Low-intensity Pleasure and Duration of Orienting/Attention Focusing. Soothability, reflecting reduction of distress when soothing techniques are used, defines this factor only in infants; in older children, this factor also includes traits reflecting an ability to inhibit actions and to shift attention at will, Inhibitory Control and Attentional Shifting (Putnam, Rothbart, & Gartstein, 2008; Putnam et al., 2001). In personality research, large-scale studies of systematic individual differences in thinking, feeling, and behaving have demonstrated the robustness of the five-factor model of personality across cultures and age groups from early childhood to adulthood (Caspi & Shiner, 2006; McCrae et al., 2005). Each of the Big Five subsumes a number of lower-order traits. Extraversion includes Activity Level, Positive Emotions and Sociability; Neuroticism encompasses a variety of negative emotions, including Fear and Anger/Irritability; Conscientiousness includes traits measuring orderliness, task persistence and achievement motivation; Agreeableness involves differences in prosocial tendencies, antagonism and willfulness; and Openness includes traits measuring perceptual, esthetic and intellectual interests (Caspi & Shiner, 2006; Halverson et al., 2003). Although temperament and personality research traditions were largely independent for many years, in the current thinking temperament and personality traits are more alike than different (Caspi &
128
H.R. Slobodskaya, E.A. Kozlova / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 127–132
Shiner, 2006; Shiner et al., 2012; Tackett, Kushner, De Fruyt, & Mervielde, 2013). Both are biologically based and develop over the life span under the influence of genes and environment. Thus, the main distinction between temperament and personality is that temperament usually refers to individual differences that appear in infancy and early childhood, while personality typically refers to individual differences that develop later in life (Shiner & DeYoung, 2013). This suggests that early temperament may play an important role in predicting later personality. Research has highlighted the conceptual links between three higherorder childhood temperament traits of Positive Affectivity/Surgency, Negative Affectivity and Regulatory Capacity/Effortful Control and the Big Five personality traits of Extraversion, Neuroticism and Conscientiousness, respectively. All major traits comprising the Surgency domain in early childhood (Positive emotions, especially highly intensive, Sociability, Activity and Approach) have been found to predict later Extraversion (Caspi & Shiner, 2006). Two lower-order traits comprising the Negative Affectivity domain, Fear and Irritability/Anger, are related to Neuroticism. Early Fearfulness also predicted low Extraversion in adulthood (Caspi et al., 2003), whereas Irritability/Anger is also linked to Disagreeableness and low Conscientiousness (Lamb, Chuang, Wessels, Broberg, & Hwang, 2002; Shiner & DeYoung, 2013). Effortful Control and its lower-order components (Attention, Inhibitory Control, Low Intensity Pleasure) are consistently related to personality domain of Conscientiousness (De Pauw, Mervielde, & Van Leeuwen, 2009; Halverson et al., 2003; Shiner & DeYoung, 2013; Tackett et al., 2013). Selfregulatory processes encompassed by Effortful Control are also related to the personality domain of Agreeableness that reflects the regulation of emotions and behavior in interpersonal contexts (Caspi & Shiner, 2006). However, empirical evidence on the links between child temperament and personality is scarce; most findings are derived from crosssectional samples or focused on a predictive role of a few specific traits. Because measures assessing the psychobiological hierarchical model of temperament in infancy and toddlerhood have been developed in the last decade or so (Gartstein & Rothbart, 2003; Putnam, Gartstein, & Rothbart, 2006), little is known about early temperamental antecedents of personality traits. The present study was designed to address the developmental relationships between temperamental dimensions in infancy and toddlerhood and personality traits in later childhood, considering both higher- and lower-order levels of the hierarchical structure of individual differences. We hypothesized that higher-order dimensions and fine-grained components of early temperament would be associated with conceptually related personality traits in later childhood.
2. Method 2.1. Sample and procedures This study is based on a subsample drawn from a study of early temperament that began in Novosibirsk, Russia, in 2001. Participants represent a community sample of children and their parents from urban and rural areas of Western Siberia and nearby regions, most living in Novosibirsk, Russia's third largest city. Parents were approached via childcare centers and in person, including home visits; all study members provided informed consent for participation in the study. Depending on the child's age, parents were asked to complete the Russian versions of the Infant Behavior Questionnaire-Revised (IBQ-R, Gartstein & Rothbart, 2003) or the Early Childhood Behavior Questionnaire (ECBQ, Putnam et al., 2006) along with a brief demographic questionnaire. The total sample of 563 children was recruited; 353 parents (92% mothers) completed the IBQ-R, 345 parents (90% mothers) completed the ECBQ, of these 135 parents completed both IBQ-R and ECBQ with an interval of approximately 15 months. The results of the cross-
sectional study of early temperament have been published elsewhere (Slobodskaya, Gartstein, Nakagawa, & Putnam, 2013). At the time of the follow-up, contact details were available for 65% of the total sample and we were able to locate and approach 133 participants of the initial study. Of those, 74% completed the Inventory of Child Individual Differences-Short version (ICID-S; Slobodskaya & Zupančič, 2010) and provided sociodemographic information. The follow-up sample included 98 children (55% girls); 45 were initially assessed with the IBQ-R when they were, on average, 7.1 months of age (SD = 2.9); 27 of them were later assessed with ECBQ; and 53 participants were recruited in early childhood and were initially assessed with the ECBQ. As a result, the ECBQ sample is consisted of 80 children assessed when they were, on average, 23.8 months of age (SD = 6.5). At the time of ICID-S assessment children were, on average, 7.8 years of age (SD = 2.1); the average time interval between the IBQ-R and the ICID-S assessment was 8.4 years (SD = 1.5), the average interval between the ECBQ and the ICID-S assessment was 6.6 years (SD = 2.0). These follow-up participants were representative of the original sample of 563 children in terms of demographics; compared with the rest of the sample they did not differ on most temperament traits, but scored higher on the IBQ-R Soothability and ECBQ Impulsivity, Sociability and Perceptual Sensitivity. However, there were no significant differences between the participants and those 133 children whose parents were approached but did not participate, both on the IBQ-R and ECBQ. The participating families were socio-economically diverse, 74% of the children lived with both biological parents, 20% with a single mother and the rest with other carers. For education, 5% of the mothers and 17% of the fathers had ten years of schooling or less, 26% of the mothers and 29% of the fathers had college education, 69% of the mothers and 54% of the fathers had university education. For occupation, the parents ranged from unskilled to professional workers, 22% of the mothers and 7% of the fathers were unemployed. Most data came from mothers (89%), 3% of children were rated by fathers, the rest were rated by other caregivers. 2.2. Measures 2.2.1. Temperament 2.2.1.1. Infant Behavior Questionnaire-Revised (IBQ-R; Gartstein & Rothbart, 2003). This 191-item parent-report instrument yields 14 lower-order scales that form three higher-order factors: Positive Affectivity/Surgency, made up of Activity Level, Approach, High Intensity Pleasure, Perceptual Sensitivity, Smiling/Laughter and Vocal Reactivity; Negative Emotionality, including Distress to Limitations, Fear, Sadness and reversed Falling Reactivity; and Regulation, including Duration of Orienting, Cuddliness/Affiliation, Low Intensity Pleasure and Soothability. The Russian version has been validated, supporting good reliability of the scales (Gartstein, Slobodskaya, & Kinsht, 2003) and the invariance of the three-factor structure in Russian and US samples (Gartstein, Knyazev, & Slobodskaya, 2005). In the present study alphas for IBQ-R scales ranged from .75 to .92 with a mean of .86. 2.2.1.2. Early Childhood Behavior Questionnaire (ECBQ, Putnam et al., 2006). This 201-item parent-report instrument yields 18 lower-order scales that form three higher-order factors: Surgency, made up of Activity Level, High-intensity Pleasure, Impulsivity, Positive Anticipation, and Sociability; Negative Affectivity, including Discomfort, Fear, Sadness, Frustration, Motor Activation, Perceptual Sensitivity, Shyness, and reversed Soothability; and Effortful Control, containing Attention Focusing, Attention Shifting, Cuddliness, Inhibitory Control and Low Intensity Pleasure. The Russian version has been validated, supporting good reliability of the scales and similarity of three higher-order factors (Kolmagorova, Slobodskaya, & Gartstein, 2008). In the present study alphas for lower-order scales ranged from .71 to .91 with a mean of .81.
H.R. Slobodskaya, E.A. Kozlova / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 127–132
2.2.2. Personality The Inventory of Child Individual Differences-Short version (ICID-S, Slobodskaya & Zupančič, 2010) is an age and culture neutral instrument for assessing child personality in terms of the five factor model. The ICID-S for parents was developed from the full instrument (Halverson et al., 2003); it includes 62 items measuring 15 lower-order traits that form the Big Five factors. The present analyses included only four of them: Extraversion, comprising Activity, Positive Emotions and Sociable; Neuroticism, containing Fearful, Shy and Negative Affect; Conscientiousness, comprising Achievement, Organized, Compliant, and reversed Distractible; and Disagreeableness, comprising Antagonism, Strong Willed, and reversed Considerate. Openness and two lowerorder traits comprising this factor, Open to Experience and Intelligent, were not included in the analyses because this domain has not been found to be conceptually related to temperament (Shiner & DeYoung, 2013). The Russian version of the ICID-S has been validated, supporting good reliability of the scales and the invariance of the five-factor structure in two gender and four age groups (Knyazev, Zupančič, & Slobodskaya, 2008). In the present study alphas for ICID-S scales ranged from .69 to .86 with a mean of .79.
129
3.1.2. Toddler temperament and later personality Tables 1 and 2 present the prospective associations between toddler temperament measured by the ECBQ and personality measured by the ICID-S, on average, 6.6 years later. In the Positive Affectivity domain (Table 1), higher-order trait was linked to later Activity, toddler Activity was related to later Activity and Negative Affect, Positive Anticipation was negatively related to later Shyness, and toddler Sociability was positively related to later Activity and (marginally) Sociability and negatively related to Neuroticism, Shyness and Fearfulness. In the Negative Affectivity domain, lower-order trait of Frustration was linked to later Negative Affect. In the Regulatory domain (Table 2), higher-order trait of Effortful Control was positively related to later Conscientiousness and all lower-order traits from this domain; Low Intensity Pleasure showed similar showed similar pattern of relationships with the Conscientiousness domain and was marginally associated with later Agreeableness and (negatively) with Strong Willed. Lower-order trait of Attention Focusing was linked to later Achievement and Organized, whereas toddler Attention Shifting was positively related to Conscientiousness and Organized and negatively related to Distractible. Inhibitory Control was linked to later Conscientiousness and lower-order traits of Achievement and Compliant. Cuddliness was negatively related to the Agreeableness domain.
3. Results 3.2. Models predicting later personality from early temperament 3.1. Correlations between early temperament and later personality 3.1.1. Infant temperament and childhood personality Tables S1–S2 in the Supplementary material present the prospective correlations of IBQ-R scales with ICID-S scales. Although infant subsample was small (N = 45), there were noteworthy longitudinal relationships between temperament traits measured in the first year of life and personality traits measured, on average, 8.4 years later. In the Positive Affectivity domain, Smiling/Laughter was positively related to later Activity and negatively related to Neuroticism and lower-order traits of Fearful and Shy. Vocal Reactivity was negatively related to later Neuroticism and lower-order trait of Fearful; Approach was also negatively related to later Fearfulness. In the Negative Affectivity domain, Falling Reactivity was negatively related to later Positive Emotions. A Regulatory Capacity higher-order trait was related to later Organized, whereas lower-order trait of Low Intensity Pleasure was related to later Conscientiousness and lower-order traits of Organized, Distractible and Considerate.
We examined the contribution of early temperament to later personality with path analyses models using AMOS.17 software (Arbuckle, 2008). Path analyses were conducted on a total follow-up sample of 98 children, 45 of whom were initially assessed with the IBQ-R and the rest were initially assessed with the ECBQ; all of them were reassessed with the ICID-S, on average, 6.9 years later. Model 1 tested the prospective associations between the three higher-order traits of early temperament and subsequent personality traits of Extraversion, Neuroticism, Conscientiousness and Disagreeableness. Model 2 tested the prospective associations between eleven lower-order traits of early temperament that appear in both the IBQ-R and ECBQ, namely Activity, High Intensity Pleasure, Approach/Positive Anticipation, Perceptual Sensitivity, Frustration/Distress to Limitations, Fear, Sadness, Soothability, Cuddliness, Attention Focusing/Duration of Orienting and Low Intensity Pleasure, and subsequent lower-order personality traits. Correlated error was allowed within temperament and within personality but not between temperament and personality traits. Final models,
Table 1 Prospective correlations of ECBQ scales with ICID-S scales in the Affectivity domains. ECBQ scales
ICID-S scales Extraversion
Positive Affectivity Activity Level High Intensity Pleasure Impulsivity Positive Anticipation Sociability Negative Affectivity Discomfort Fear Frustration Motor Activation Perceptual Sensitivity Sadness Shyness Soothability Note. N = 80. † p b .10. ⁎ p b .05. ⁎⁎ p b .01.
.14 .14 .02 .05 .12 .18 .13 .02 .11 .12 .17 .03 .11 −.01 −.06
Activity .29⁎ .23⁎ .16 .17 .21† .31⁎⁎ .17 .05 .15 .12 .19† .14 .08 .00 −.04
Positive Emotions
Sociable
Neuroticism
Fear
Shy
Negative Affect
−.14 .04 −.18 −.16 −.13 −.11 −.04 −.04 .02 −.02 .06 −.17 .02 −.04 −.02
.15 .03 .04 .08 .18 .19† .15 .02 .08 .15 .14 .09 .15 .00 −.08
−.04 .18 .06 .00 −.10 −.23⁎ .08 .12 .05 .08 .09 −.02 .00 .09 −.04
−.04 .13 .04 −.00 −.09 −.19† .06 .17 −.02 .06 .13 −.09 .04 .06 −.01
−.20† −.03 −.10 −.14 −.24⁎ −.22⁎
.15 .30⁎⁎ .19† .13 .08 −.12 .16 .09 .16 .25⁎
−.05 .02 −.04 −.14 −.09 −.07 −.03 .10 −.06
.15 .10 −.01 .04 −.02
130
H.R. Slobodskaya, E.A. Kozlova / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 127–132
Table 2 Prospective correlations of ECBQ scales with ICID-S scales in the Regulatory domain. ECBQ scales
Effortful Control Attention Focusing Attention Shifting Cuddliness Inhibitory Control Low Intensity Pleasure
ICID-S scales C
Achievement
Organized
Compliant
Distractible
DA
Antagonism
Strong Willed
Considerate
.33⁎⁎ .20† .25⁎ −.02 .26⁎ .32⁎⁎
.33⁎⁎ .23⁎ .20† .02 .26⁎ .28⁎
.31⁎⁎ .25⁎ .28⁎ −.02 .19† .26⁎
.26⁎ .10 .08 .04 .26⁎ .26⁎
−.22⁎ −.09 −.27⁎ .12 −.18 −.31⁎⁎
−.07 −.11 −.08 .25⁎ −.07 −.22†
−.01 −.03 −.07 .21† −.03 −.13
−.07 −.15 −.08 .22⁎ −.05 −.20†
.08 .07 .01 −.14 .09 .17
Note. N = 80. C—Conscientiousness, DA—Disagreeableness. † p b .10. ⁎ p b .05. ⁎⁎ p b .01.
with all non-significant paths removed, were then fitted to the data. We also tested if the effect of early temperament was conditional upon the child's age at the first assessment and time interval between the two assessments. Because both sets of variables, temperament and personality traits, have the common biological bases of individual differences in emotion and behavior, the relationship magnitude was evaluated by multiple correlation coefficient; using the correlation squared may underestimate the effect size (Ozer, 1985). The final Model 1 (Fig. 1) fitted data very well, with χ2 = 3.46, df = 4, p = .48; CFI = 1.000; RMSEA = .000; child's age and time interval did not make a significant contribution. The results of path analyses showed that early Negative Affectivity was positively associated with later Neuroticism, while early Regulatory Capacity/Effortful Control significantly contributed to the prediction of three higher-order traits, Conscientiousness, Extraversion and Neuroticism. Overall, early temperament accounted for 20 to 30% of the variance in Conscientiousness, Extraversion and Neuroticism. The final Model 2 (Fig. 2) also showed good fit to the data, with χ2 = 55.30, df = 44, p = .12; CFI = 0.962; RMSEA = .051; child's age and time interval did not make a significant contribution to the prediction of personality. The results of path analyses showed that Positive Affectivity trait of Approach predicted later traits of Sociability and Fear; two other Positive Affectivity traits, High Intensity Pleasure and Activity, predicted later traits of Strong Willed and Distractible, respectively. Early Regulatory Capacity/Effortful Control trait of Low Intensity Pleasure contributed to the prediction of the three traits from the Conscientiousness domain, Distractible, Achievement and Organized. Another regulatory trait, Attention, predicted later traits of Organized, Negative Affect and Fear. Overall, early temperament explained from 37% of the variance for Distractibility to 18% of the variance for Strong Willed.
toddlerhood with personality dimensions in the preschool and school years. To our knowledge, this is the first longitudinal study of early temperament as a predictor of childhood personality. The findings partially supported the hypothesized relationships between conceptually related temperament and personality traits. Regulatory capacity in infancy and emerging Effortful Control in toddlerhood were significantly associated with personality domain of Conscientiousness assessed, on average, 7– 8 years later; these links were found both at the higher- and lowerorder levels. Results of path analyses confirmed the unique contribution of early Regulatory Capacity/Effortful Control to the development of Conscientiousness and highlighted the key role of Low Intensity Pleasure trait that encompasses enjoyment of low intensity activities or stimuli (Gartstein & Rothbart, 2003; Putnam et al., 2006). This is consistent with the particularly salient contribution of Low-Intensity Pleasure to the stability of the regulatory factor from infancy to preschool years (Putnam et al., 2008). Our results also indicated that early capacity for effortful attention predicted later personality trait of Organization. It is important to note that although the link between early self-regulation and later personality trait of Conscientiousness has been suggested by the accumulated body of evidence (Eisenberg, Duckworth, Spinrad, & Valiente, 2014), this is the first time this link has been demonstrated empirically. Homotypic continuity was less marked for Positive and Negative Affectivity. Activity Level in toddlers was linked to personality trait of Activity assessed, on average, 6–7 years later, while an association between toddler and later childhood Sociability was only marginally significant. In the Negative Affectivity domain, Frustration in toddlers was linked to lower-order personality trait of Negative Affect in later childhood that encompasses tendencies to be irritable, moody, angry
4. Discussion The findings of this study provide empirical evidence on the developmental relationships of temperamental traits in infancy and
Fig. 1. Path analysis of the relationship between early temperament and later personality higher-order traits. Significant (p b 0.05) regression weights with standard errors in brackets are presented as straight lines; significant (p b 0.05) correlation is presented as a curved line.
Fig. 2. Path analysis of the relationship between early temperament and later personality lower-order traits. Significant (p b 0.05) regression weights with standard errors in brackets are presented as straight lines; significant (p b 0.05) correlations are presented as curved lines.
H.R. Slobodskaya, E.A. Kozlova / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 127–132
and quick tempered in interpersonal situations (Halverson et al., 2003). Results of path analyses confirmed the predictive relationship between early Negative Affectivity and later Neuroticism. It is noteworthy that this association was found only in the path model where interrelations among personality traits were accounted for. However, there were no significant associations between early Positive Affectivity/Surgency and later Extraversion, and between equivalent temperament and personality traits of Fear and Shyness. By contrast, the findings showed considerable heterotypic continuity of individual differences, both within-domain and cross-domain. This is consistent with results from cross-sectional studies of temperament-personality links in childhood and adolescence (De Pauw et al., 2009; Halverson et al., 2003; Tackett et al., 2013) and from longitudinal studies of temperament from infancy to toddlerhood and middle childhood (Carranza, González-Salinas, & Ato, 2013; Komsi et al., 2006; Putnam et al., 2008). One possible explanation for predominantly heterotypic continuity of individual differences in the first years of life is that children go through numerous rapid transitions in this period (Kagan, 1969, as cited by Caspi & Shiner, 2006). Methodological problems may also play a role when scales with the same name actually measure different constructs and vice versa (Caspi & Shiner, 2006; Halverson et al., 2003). Although recent research has showed that temperament and personality traits are essentially the same dimensions, the measures used in this study emerged from different backgrounds and differed markedly in their design. In contrast to the “top-down” theory-driven approach to the construction of temperament questionnaires (Putnam et al., 2001), the ICID was constructed in a “bottom-up” way and provides natural descriptions of children worded in the folk language. Still, early temperament traits showed heterotypic relations with later personality traits that were meaningful, such as links between early motor activity and later distractibility and between early approach and later Sociability and low Fear. It is noteworthy that the heterotypic relations between early temperament and later personality traits showed the predictive effect of regulatory traits. Attentional control in infancy and toddlerhood predicted lower levels of Fear and Negative Affect in later childhood, and early Effortful Control was negatively associated with later Neuroticism, in line with cross-sectional findings (Rothbart, 2007; Tackett et al., 2013). Positive association between early Effortful Control and later Extraversion is less clear. The role of early regulatory traits in the development of personality needs further research attention, along with the interactive effects involving affective and regulatory domains. Several limitations of this study deserve comment. Firstly, the sample was not large enough to detect associations that might have been detected with larger samples. For this reason, we used an unadjusted alpha level and the risk of Type I errors was increased. Therefore, the correlational findings are preliminary and far from being complete. Secondly, the design was less than optimal, time interval between the initial assessment and the follow-up varied greatly, both infant and toddler temperament data were not available from all of the participants. Thirdly, this study has considered only four personality domains at two levels of the hierarchical structure; future research should examine personality more fully. Fourthly, because the data relied on questionnaire measures, the findings might be partly due to shared method variance. Although evidence has provided support for the validity of parental reports, a particularly important step is to obtain measures from different sources. Finally, because the development of personality appears to be influenced by culture, future studies should include measures of proximal environment and parenting practices to further investigate environmental pathways. Bearing these limitations in mind, this study has provided important empirical evidence on the developmental relationships of temperamental traits in infancy and toddlerhood with later personality dimensions. The findings demonstrated the role of early regulatory traits in the development of Conscientiousness and other personality traits and highlighted the contribution of Low Intensity Pleasure. These results
131
may have wide implications for the pathways of personality development. Future research may enhance our understanding of developmental processes underlying the continuity of individual differences from infancy through childhood, adolescence and into adulthood. Acknowledgments The work on this manuscript was supported by grants from the Russian Foundation for Humanities # 14-06-00139 (follow-up data collection), Russian Scientific Foundation # 16-18-00003 (data analysis) and Russian Foundation for Basic Research # 16-06-00022 (manuscript preparation). Appendix A. Supplementary data Supplementary data to this article can be found online at http://dx. doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2016.04.094. References Arbuckle, J. L. (2008). Amos 17.0 user's guide. Chicago, IL: SPSS Inc. Carranza, J. A., González-Salinas, C., & Ato, E. (2013). A longitudinal study of temperament continuity through IBQ, TBAQ and CBQ. Infant Behav. Dev., 36, 749–761. http://dx.doi. org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2013.08.002. Caspi, A., & Shiner, R. L. (2006). Personality development. In W. Damon & R. Lerner (Series Eds.) & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (6th edition, pp. 300–365). New York: Wiley. Caspi, A., Harrington, H., Milne, B., Amell, J. W., Theodore, R. F., & Moffitt, T. E. (2003). Children's behavioral styles at age 3 are linked to their adult personality traits at age 26. J. Pers., 71, 495–513. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.7104001. De Pauw, S. S. W., Mervielde, I., & Van Leeuwen, K. G. (2009). How are traits related to problem behavior in preschoolers? Similarities and contrasts between temperament and personality. J. Abnorm. Child Psychol., 37, 309–325. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/ s10802-008-9290-0. Eisenberg, N., Duckworth, A. L., Spinrad, T. L., & Valiente, C. (2014). Conscientiousness: origins in childhood? Developmental Psychology, 50, 1331–1349. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1037/a0030977. Gartstein, M. A., & Rothbart, M. K. (2003). Studying infant temperament via a revision of the infant behavior questionnaire. J. Infant Behav. Dev., 26, 64–86. Gartstein, M. A., Slobodskaya, H. R., & Kinsht, I. A. (2003). Cross-cultural differences in temperament in the first year of life: United States of America (U.S.) and Russia. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 27, 316–328. http://dx.doi.org/10. 1080/01650250244000344. Gartstein, M. A., Knyazev, G. G., & Slobodskaya, H. R. (2005). Cross-cultural differences in the structure of infant temperament: United States of America (U.S.) and Russia. Infant Behav. Dev., 28, 54–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01650250244000344. Halverson, C. F., Havill, V. L., Deal, J., Baker, S. R., Victor, J., Pavlopoulos, V., ... Wen, L. (2003). Personality structure as derived from parental ratings of free descriptions of children: the Inventory of Child Individual Differences. Journal of Personality, 71, 995–1026. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1467-6494.7106005. Knyazev, G. G., Zupančič, M., & Slobodskaya, H. R. (2008). Child personality in Slovenia and Russia. Structure and mean level of traits in parent and self-ratings. J. CrossCult. Psychol., 39, 317–334. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022022108314542. Kolmagorova, А. V., Slobodskaya, H. R., & Gartstein, M. A. (2008). A Russian adaptation of the Early Childhood Behavior Questionnaire (ECBQ) for measuring temperament. Psikhologicheskii Zhurnal, 29, 82–97 (In Russian). Komsi, N., Räikkönen, K., Pesonen, A. K., Heinonen, K., Keskivaara, P., Järvenpää, A. L., & Strandberg, T. E. (2006). Continuity of temperament from infancy to middle childhood. Infant Behav. Dev., 29, 494–508. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2006.05.002. Lamb, M. E., Chuang, S. S., Wessels, H., Broberg, A. G., & Hwang, C. P. (2002). Emergence and construct validations of the big five factors in early childhood: a longitudinal analysis of their ontogeny in Sweden. Child Dev., 73, 1517–1524. http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1111/1467-8624.00487. McCrae, R. R., Terracciano, A., & 79 Members of the Personality Profiles of Cultures Project (2005). Personality profiles of cultures: aggregate personality traits. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol., 89, 407–425. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.89.3.407. Ozer, D. J. (1985). Correlation and the coefficient of determination. Psychol. Bull., 97, 307–315. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.97.2.307. Putnam, S. P., Ellis, L. K., & Rothbart, M. K. (2001). The structure of temperament from infancy through adolescence. In A. Eliasz, & A. Angleitner (Eds.), Advances/proceedings in research on temperament (pp. 165–182). Germany: Pabst Scientist Publisher. Putnam, S. P., Gartstein, M. A., & Rothbart, M. K. (2006). Measurement of fine-grained aspects of toddler temperament: the Early Childhood Behavior Questionnaire. Infant Behavior and Development, 29, 386–401. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2006.01. 004. Putnam, S. P., Rothbart, M. K., & Gartstein, M. A. (2008). Homotypic and heterotypic continuity of fine-grained temperament during infancy, toddlerhood, and early childhood. Infant Child Dev., 17, 387–405. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ICD.582. Rothbart, M. K. (2007). Temperament, development and personality. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. , 16, 207–212. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00505.x.
132
H.R. Slobodskaya, E.A. Kozlova / Personality and Individual Differences 99 (2016) 127–132
Rothbart, M. K., & Bates, J. E. (1998). Temperament. In W. Damon (Series Ed.) & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology: (Vol. 3), Social, emotional, and personality development (5th Ed., pp. 105–176). New York: Wiley. Rothbart, M. K., & Derryberry, D. (1981). Development of individual differences in temperament. In M. E. Lamb, & A. L. Brown (Eds.), Advances in developmental psychology. 1. (pp. 37–86). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Shiner, R. L., & DeYoung, C. G. (2013). The structure of temperament and personality traits: a developmental perspective. In P. Zelazo (Ed.), Oxford handbook of developmental psychology (pp. 113–141). New York: Oxford University Press. Shiner, R. L., Buss, K. A., McClowry, S. G., Putnam, S. P., Saudino, K. J., & Zentner, M. (2012). What is temperament now? Assessing progress in temperament research on the twenty-fifth anniversary of Goldsmith et al. (1987). Child Dev. Perspect., 6, 436–444. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2012.00254.x.
Slobodskaya, H. R., & Zupančič, M. (2010). Development and validation of the Inventory of Child Individual Differences—Short version in two Slavic countries. Studia Psychologica, 52, 23–39. Slobodskaya, H. R., Gartstein, M. A., Nakagawa, A., & Putnam, S. P. (2013). Early temperament in Japan, the United States and Russia: do cross-cultural differences decrease with age? J. Cross-Cult. Psychol., 44, 438–460. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 0022022112453316. Tackett, J. L., Kushner, S. C., De Fruyt, F., & Mervielde, I. (2013). Delineating personality traits in childhood and adolescence: associations across measures, temperament, and behavioral problems. Assessment, 20, 738–751. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/ 10731911135096861073191113509686.