Are we assessing temperament appropriately? The Emotionality Activity Sociability and Impulsivity (EASI) Temperament Scale: A systematic psychometric review.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Researchers have dedicated decades to the study of temperament; nevertheless, a single definition has yet to be outlined and several theories with varying numbers of traits continue to coexist (Conture, Kelly, & Walden, 2013). Researchers generally agree that temperament contributes to individual differences, with a common thread among the many definitions of temperament being that traits remain consistent across situations and moderately stable over time (Conture et al., 2013). Given the variability in conceptualizations of temperament, various measures, both self- and parent-report, have been developed; for example, the Emotionality Activity Sociability and Impulsivity Scale-III (EASI-III; Buss & Plomin, 1975); Colorado Childhood Temperament Inventory (CCTI; Rowe & Plomin, 1977); Revised Infant Temperament Questionnaire (RITQ; Carey & McDevitt, 1978); Dimensions of Temperament Survey (Lerner, Palermo, Spiro, & Nesselroade, 1982); Toddler Temperament Questionnaire (TTQ; Fullard, McDevitt, & Carey, 1984); Children's Behaviour Questionnaire (Rothbart, Ahadi, Hershey, & Fisher, 2001); Infant Behaviour Questionnaire-Revised (IBQ-R; Gartstein & Rothbart, 2003). However, in this article we have chosen to focus on one of the most widely used parent-rated measures of temperament: the Emotionality, Activity, Sociability, and Impulsivity Scale (EASI; Buss, Plomin, & Willerman, 1973) and its iteration, the Emotionality, Activity, Sociability, and Shyness Temperament Survey (EAS; Buss & Plomin, 1984). Although several existing measures of temperament are appropriate for adults (i.e., EASI-III), infants (RITQ and IBQ-R), or young children (TTQ), the EASI and EAS are of the few measures of temperament designed specifically for children (originally ages 1-9 years). The EASI is an often-used measure of child temperament in the area of childhood preoperative anxiety research (e.g., Finley, Stewart, Buffett-Jerrott, Wright, & Millington, 2006; Fortier, Del Rosario, Martin, & Kain, 2010; Kain, Mayes, Caldwell-Andrews, Karas, & McClain, 2006; Kain et al., 1998; Kain, Mayes, Weisman, & Hofstadter, 2000; Wright, Stewart, & Finley, 2013), although the psychometric properties have not always been acceptable (noted specifically by Finley et al., 2006 and Wright, Wright et al., 2013). The measure (and its iteration) continues to be used without modification and has not been reviewed systematically.Development of EASI and EASEASIThe EASI was developed as a parent-rated measure of child temperament; however, there are parallel teacher-report and self- report versions as well (Buss & Plomin, 1984). The EASI is comprised of 20 parent-rated items, with five items on each of the four temperament subscales. Each item is rated on a scale of 1 (low) to 5 (high). After reverse-scoring one item from each scale, scores are summed and divided by five, resulting in four subscales (Emotionality, Activity, Sociability, and Impulsivity) with a possible score range of 5 to 25 (Buss & Plomin, 1975). Emotionality varies from an almost stoic lack of reaction to intense or out of control emotional reactions. Examples of high emotionality in children are extreme crying, tantrums, difficulty being soothed, and a low threshold for aversive stimuli (Buss & Plomin, 1975; Goldsmith et al., 1987). Activity refers to total energy output (Buss & Plomin, 1975). Individuals vary from lethargy to almost hypomanic energetic Spelling: behaviour (Goldsmith et al., 1987). The active person is typically busy and in a hurry (Buss & Plomin, 1975). Sociability is defined as the preference for being with others rather than being alone. Sociable individuals seek to share activities, receive attention from others, and engage in social interaction (Goldsmith et al., 1987). Impulsivity involves the tendency to respond quickly rather than inhibiting one's response or planning before acting (Buss & Plomin, 1975). …
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.015 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".