Relations Between Adolescent Ratings of Rothbart's Temperament Questionnaire and the HEXACO Personality Inventory
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conventionally, individual differences have been assessed using temperament measures for infants and children, and personality measures for adults. We chose to explore both temperament and personality to see whether a convergence exists specifically during adolescence. A sample of 225 adolescents completed Rothbart's Early Adolescent Temperament Questionnaire-Revised (EATQ-R), a 4-factor temperament scale, and the HEXACO Personality Inventory-Revised (HEXACO PI-R), a 6-factor personality scale. As hypothesized, we found significant relations between the 2 measures. However, there were some important differences between the 2 measures regarding Honesty-Humility, Openness, and Frustration that highlight the unique contributions of both instruments to understanding and measuring adolescent individual differences. As there is a relatively scant history of measuring temperament or personality in adolescence, it is sometimes difficult for researchers to decide which instrument is most appropriate. The results reported here suggest that either the EATQ-R or the HEXACO PI-R could be appropriate, depending on the specific research questions being asked.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.007 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it