Goldsmith H H, Buss A H, Plomin R, Rothbart M K, Thomas A, Chess S, Hinde R A, McCall R B
Child Dev. 1987 Apr;58(2):505-29.
4 current approaches to understanding temperament are discussed in the roundtable. In an introductory overview, Goldsmith outlines some of the major convergences and divergences in the understanding of this concept. Theorists representing 4 positions--Goldsmith, Buss and Plomin, Rothbart, and Thomas and Chess--outline their views by responding to each of 6 questions: How do you define temperament and explain the boundaries of the concept? What are the elements of temperatment? How does the construct of temperament permit you to approach issues or organize data in ways that are possible only if this construct is invoked? How does temperament develop? To what extent do you consider temperament to be a personological versus a relational or an interactional construct? and How does your approach deal with issues of temperamental "difficulty"? In 2 commentaries on the theorists' answers, Hinde highlights differences among their positions and indicates issues that current theories of temperament must take into consideration, and McCall draws on common aspects to propose a synthesizing definition that draws on all 4 approaches.
圆桌会议讨论了当前理解气质的四种方法。在一个介绍性概述中,戈德史密斯概述了在理解这个概念方面的一些主要趋同点和分歧点。代表四种立场的理论家——戈德史密斯、巴斯和普洛明、罗斯巴特以及托马斯和切斯——通过回答六个问题来阐述他们的观点:你如何定义气质并解释该概念的边界?气质的要素有哪些?气质的结构如何使你能够以只有调用这个结构才可能的方式处理问题或组织数据?气质是如何发展的?你在多大程度上认为气质是一种人格学结构,而不是一种关系性或互动性结构?以及你的方法如何处理气质“困难”问题?在对理论家答案的两篇评论中,欣德强调了他们立场之间的差异,并指出了当前气质理论必须考虑的问题,而麦考尔利用共同方面提出了一个综合定义,该定义借鉴了所有四种方法。