Maternal Sensitivity: Evidence of Stability across Time,Contexts, and Measurement Instruments

Although maternal sensitivity is widely understood as having a direct impact on the quality of the mother–child relationship, empirical evidence supporting this has been inconsistent, possibly because of varied definitions of the construct and limitations of measurements. The Maternal Behavior Q‐Set (MBQS) appears to be a promising measure of sensitivity, showing associations with attachment security (r = .60) higher than those reported (r = .24) in a highly‐regarded meta‐analysis of other sensitivity measures. The present study aimed to further establish the validity and utility of the MBQS by exploring its consistency with a contingency‐based measure of sensitivity, while also seeking evidence of stability across contexts and times. Seventy‐two mothers and their 10‐month‐olds participated in a procedure that included two episodes of Floor Play and Reunions following maternal differential treatment. Mothers were scored on contingent responsivity and warmth. At 12 months, the dyads underwent the Strange Situation Procedure where sensitivity was assessed using a 72‐item version of the MBQS. The findings revealed the stability of maternal sensitivity across times, contexts, and measures. However, linkages applied only to 10‐month scores from reunion, not play, episodes, supporting Pederson and Moran's (1995) assertion that high‐demand circumstances reveal more meaningful differences in maternal sensitivity. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.     

A revised version of the psychoticism scale

In view of certain psychometric deficiencies of the original Psychoticism scale, an attempt was made to improve the scale by adding new items. It was attempted to increase the internal reliability of the scale, improve the shape of the distribution and increase the mean and variance score. Two different studies are discussed. Reliabilities are now somewhat improved, distributions are closer to normal and mean scores are higher than on the old scale. Four new short 12-item scales for the measurement of P, E, N and L are also given.     

Genetic and Environmental Contributions to Individual Differences: The Three Major Dimensions of Personality

ABSTRACT This article deals with the contribution of genetic and environmental factors to individual differences in the three major dimensions of personality (Psychoticism, Extraversion, and Neuroticism) Twin studies indicate, and family studies confirm within limits, the strong genetic determination of these and many other personality factors, additive genetic variance accounting for roughly half the total phenotypic variance On the environmental side, shared family environment plays little or no part, all environmental effects being within-family Assortative mating, important in the formation of social attitudes, has little impact on personality Dominance may be important for Extraversion Epistasis (emergenesis) may account for the comparative low values of dizygotic (DZ) twins' correlations Evidence for differential heritability of traits is present, but not very strong It is concluded that behavioral genetics forms a vital part of the psychological understanding of the causes of individual differences in personality     

Prediction of coherence in adolescence: Gender differences in social skills, personality, and family climate

The gender differences for personality structure, family climate, and social skills among adolescents were investigated in relation to their sense of coherence. The sample consisted of 742 adolescents (371 males and 371 females). The instruments included the Sense of Coherence scale, and the Hebrew adaptations for the Social Skills Checklist, the Family Environment Scale, and the Junior Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. Significant differences were found between the two groups' perceptions of family climate: The male adolescents viewed their families as more encouraging of every aspect of personal growth within a more controlled family system. The female adolescents were found as having higher levels of social competence. Regarding personality structure, the males reported higher Psychoticism scores, and the girls higher Neuroticism, Extraversion, and Lie scores. No significant differences were found between genders on the sense of coherence scores, yet multiple regression analysis revealed that gender, Neuroticism, social skills, and two aspects of family climate (Relationship and Personal Growth) added significantly to the explanation of the variance, in addition to the interactions of gender with Relationship and Personal Growth, and of Neuroticism with Relationship, Extraversion, and Psychoticism. These results were discussed within the construct of sex-role differences.     

A cross-cultural comparison of personality: English and Austrian children

The Junior Eysenck Personality Questionnaire was given to 457 boys and 431 girls in Austria. Factor comparisons indicated that the dimensions of psychoticism, extraversion, neuroticism, and social desirability were identical in Austria and in England. Minimal item changes were required to produce a viable Austrian scoring key with satisfactorily high reliabilities for all dimensions except in the case of P for girls, which was somewhat weaker. Austrian norms indicated that boys score higher than girls on P and E but lower on N and L. Direct cross-cultural comparisons revealed few marked personality differences between Austrian and English children, there being a slight tendency for the former to score higher on psychoticism, extraversion and the lie scale but slightly lower on neuroticism.     

The assessment of personality factors across 25 countries

The means for each scale score from the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire were compared individually and conjointly across 25 countries. Comparisons were carried out using coded difference scores, Pearson correlations, Euclidean distances, cluster analyses and non-metric multidimensional scaling. It was possible to compare the personality (as defined by the scale scores on E, N, P and L) of each country with all other countries, culminating in a one-dimensional non-metric scale of distances for both the male and female data from each country. The assumptions underlying the rationale of the measures used and the comparisons undertaken are briefly discussed.