In 1982 Hubert, Wachs, Peters-Martin, and Gandour published a review on the psychometric adequacy of various paper-and-pencil measures used to assess temperament. This review documented a number of problems with available instruments, including inconsistent stability, low interparent agreement and questionable construct, and concurrent and predictive validity. In spite of the pessimistic
... [Show full abstract] conclusions of this review, plus the equally pessimistic conclusions of more recent reviews involving such issues as the definition of temperament (Crockenberg, 1986; Bornstein, Gaughran, & Homel, 1986), research on temperament continues at an “exponential” pace (Bates, 1986). Given that this continued interest involves efforts to generate new measures of temperament, as well as to revise old measures, an updated review of the psychometric adequacy of temperament questionnaires seems in order. Specifically, our concern was whether the psychometric problems documented by Hubert et al. in 1982 have continued to exist.