Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 525–529

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Personality and Individual Differences

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/paid

Relations among behavioral inhibition, Big Five personality factors, and anxiety
disorder symptoms in non-clinical children
Peter Muris a,*, Arjan E.R. Bos a, Birgit Mayer a, Roos Verkade a, Viviane Thewissen b, Vincenzo Dell’Avvento b
a
Institute of Psychology, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Burgemeester Oudlaan 50, Suite T13-37, P.O. Box 1738, 3000 DR Rotterdam, The Netherlands
b
Open University, Valkenburgerweg 177, P.O. Box 2960, 6401 DL Heerlen, The Netherlands

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This study examined relationships between behavioral inhibition, Big Five personality factors, and anxi-
Received 15 September 2008 ety disorder symptoms in non-clinical children aged 9–12 years (N = 226), using children’s self-report
Received in revised form 4 November 2008 and parent-report data. Results indicated that behavioral inhibition is best characterized by low extraver-
Accepted 3 December 2008
sion with a tinge of neuroticism. Further, behavioral inhibition was clearly associated with anxiety symp-
Available online 4 January 2009
toms, even when controlling for the influence of Big Five personality factors (including neuroticism).
These results indicate that although behavioral inhibition partly overlaps with basic personality factors,
Keywords:
this temperament characteristic remains an important predictive variable of anxiety pathology in youths.
Behavioral inhibition to the unfamiliar
Neuroticism
Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Extraversion
Anxiety disorder symptoms
Children

1. Introduction
‘Behavioral inhibition to the unfamiliar’ can be regarded as a
temperamental typology that is characterized by the tendency of
children and adolescents to be unusually shy and to react with fear
and withdrawal in novel, unknown, or challenging situations (Ka-
gan, 1994).1 Approximately 10% of young children clearly exhibit
the signs of behavioral inhibition, and continue to display these
characteristics during later childhood, adolescence, and adulthood
(Kagan & Snidman, 2004). From a psychopathology perspective,
behavioral inhibition is of interest because various studies have
demonstrated that this temperament feature is associated with the
development of anxiety symptoms (see for a review: Fox, Hender-
son, Marshall, Nichols, & Ghera, 2005). For example, longitudinal re-
search by Biederman and colleagues (1993) has shown that
behaviorally inhibited preschool children were more likely to devel-
op serious anxiety problems during a 3-year follow-up period as
compared to non-inhibited control children. Not only social phobia,
but also separation anxiety disorder and multiple anxiety disorders
were significantly more prevalent among children with behavioral
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: muris@fsw.eur.nl (P. Muris).
1
Note that Kagan’s (1994) concept of behavioral inhibition refers to an observable
temperament variable involving shyness, fearfulness, and withdrawal from novel
situations. This is somewhat different from Gray’s (1991) construct of behavioral
inhibition, which pertains to a biologically-based personality factor reflecting
individual differences in sensitivity to signals of danger and punishment.
inhibition. In view of these and other research findings, it is not sur-
prising that contemporary models on the etiology of childhood anx-
iety disorders include behavioral inhibition as an important factor
increasing children’s vulnerability to develop such emotional prob-
lems (Muris, 2007).
Some authors have argued that behavioral inhibition is the ob-
servable manifestation of the fundamental personality trait of neu-
roticism (e.g., Craske, 1997), which can be defined as the enduring
tendency to experience negative emotional states (Matthews,
Deary, & Whiteman, 2003). Indeed individuals who score high on
neuroticism tend to respond more intensely to environmental
stressors and often are self-conscious and shy, thereby exhibiting
some of the classical signs of behavioral inhibition. Another basic
personality trait that has been associated with behavioral inhibi-
tion is extraversion. More precisely, individuals who score low on
extraversion engage less in social activities, are less assertive, and
prefer to observe situations before they participate (Matthews
et al., 2003), which of course strongly resembles the behavioral
pattern that is so typical for behavioral inhibition. Thus, the tem-
peramental typology of behavioral inhibition essentially seems to
reflect a mixture of the personality traits of (high) neuroticism
and (low) extraversion. So far, the empirical evidence for this no-
tion is sparse and primarily coming from research in adult popula-
tions (Muris, Rassin, Franken, & Leemreis, 2007; Shatz, 2005).
Moreover, because behavioral inhibition has rarely been inves-
tigated in combination with neuroticism and extraversion, it re-
mains unclear whether this temperament characteristic accounts
for unique variance in anxiety symptoms beyond these basic

0191-8869/$ - see front matter Ó 2008 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.paid.2008.12.003
526 P. Muris et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 525–529
personality traits. This is particularly relevant given the fact that
some authors (e.g., Eysenck, 1967) have proposed that individual
differences in vulnerability to anxiety are grounded on a combina-
tion of high neuroticism and low extraversion (see also Craske,
2003).
With these issues in mind, the current study was conducted.
Non-clinical children aged 9–12 years completed self-report scales
for measuring behavioral inhibition, Big Five personality traits
(including neuroticism and extraversion), and anxiety disorder
symptoms. In this way, it became possible to investigate (a) corre-
lations among behavioral inhibition, personality traits, and anxiety
disorder symptoms, (b) to what extent neuroticism, extraversion,
and other personality traits account for unique variance in behav-
ioral inhibition, and (c) whether behavioral inhibition accounts for
unique variance in anxiety disorder symptoms after controlling for
Big Five personality traits. As parents2 filled out similar question-
naires to assess levels of behavioral inhibition, personality factors,
and anxiety symptoms in their children, it became also possible to
examine the same research issues from the parents’ perspective.
2. Method
2.1. Participants
Parents of 377 schoolchildren of three primary schools in the
neighborhood of Rotterdam, the Netherlands, were approached by
mail. In the letter, parents received information about the study
and were asked to give their consent about their child’s participa-
tion. In addition, they were invited to complete parent versions of
the questionnaires (see below) and to return materials in a sealed
envelope. Two-hundred-and-fifty parents (66.3%) responded posi-
tively to the mailing. Children of these parents were asked to com-
plete child versions of the questionnaires. This was done in
classroom sessions during which a research assistant and the tea-
cher were always present in order to ensure confidential and inde-
pendent responding. Eventually, due to missing data and children
being absent during the assessment session, data of 226 children
(109 boys and 117 girls) and parents (155 mothers, 16 fathers, 39
both parents, and 16 other caretakers) were collected. These chil-
dren had a mean age of 10.54 years (SD = 1.05, range 9–12 years)
and more than 85% of them were from original Dutch descent.
2.2. Questionnaires
The Behavioral Inhibition Questionnaire (BIQ; Bishop, Spence, &
McDonald, 2003) is a 30-item measure for assessing behavioral
inhibition in various domains: social novelty (e.g., ‘‘I am shy when
first meeting new children”), situational novelty (e.g., ‘‘I approach
new situations or activities very hesitantly”), and physical chal-
lenges (e.g., ‘‘I happily explore new play equipment” [reverse
item]). Items are scored on a 6-point scale ranging from 1 = hardly
ever to 6 = almost always. After recoding reverse items, a total score
can be computed (range 30–180), with higher scores being indica-
tive of higher levels of behavioral inhibition. The reliability and
validity of the BIQ are satisfactory (Bishop et al., 2003; Edwards,
2007), and this is also true for the Dutch version of the scale (Bro-
eren & Muris, submitted for publication).
The Big Five Questionnaire for Children (BFQ-C; Barbaranelli,
Caprara, Rabasca, & Pastorelli, 2003) is a 65-item questionnaire
for measuring the five basic factors of personality (i.e., the Big Five)
in children and adolescents: (1) extraversion which refers to as-
pects such as activity, enthusiasm, assertiveness, and self-confi-
2
The terms ‘parent’ and ‘parents’ not only refer to children’s biological parents but
also to other caretakers (e.g., stepparents, grandparents, foster parents).
dence, (2) agreeableness which reflects concern and sensitivity
towards others and their needs, (3) conscientiousness which has
to do with dependability, orderliness, precision, and the fulfilling
of commitments, (4) neuroticism which pertains to a proneness to
experience feelings of anxiety, depression, discontent, and anger,
and (5) intellect/openness which is concerned with intellectual
functioning, creativity, imagination, and social and cultural inter-
est. Items have to be scored on a 5-point Likert scale ranging from
1 = almost never to 5 = almost always. Individual item scores are
combined to yield a total score for each of the five factors. Clear
support has been found for the psychometric qualities of the
BFQ-C in children and adolescents from various countries (Barbara-
nelli, Fida, Paciello, Di Giunta, & Caprara, 2008; Barbaranelli et al.,
2003; Del Barrio, Carrasco, & Holgado, 2006; Muris, Meesters, &
Diederen, 2005).
The revised version of the Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emo-
tional Disorders (SCARED-R; Muris, Merckelbach, Schmidt, & Mayer,
1999) is an extension of the original SCARED (Birmaher et al., 1999)
and measures symptoms of the entire spectrum of anxiety disor-
ders that according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorders (American Psychiatric American Psychiatric
Association, 2000) may occur in children and adolescents. Thus,
the scale consists of 69 items measuring symptoms of separation
anxiety disorder (e.g., ‘‘I don’t like being away from my family”),
generalized anxiety disorder (e.g., ‘‘I worry about things working
out for me”), panic disorder (e.g., ‘‘When frightened, my heart beats
fast”), obsessive–compulsive disorder (e.g., ‘‘I have thoughts that
frighten me”), traumatic stress disorder (e.g., ‘‘I have frightening
dreams about a very aversive event”), social phobia (e.g., ‘‘I am
shy with people I don’t know well”), specific phobia (e.g., ‘‘I am
afraid of the dentist”), and school phobia (e.g., ‘‘I am scared to go
to school”). Children and adolescents have to indicate how fre-
quently they experience each symptom on a 3-point scale: 0 = al-
most never, 1 = sometimes, or 2 = often. In the present study, a
SCARED-R total score was obtained by summing across all items,
with higher scores reflecting higher levels of anxiety symptoms.
Previous studies have shown that the SCARED-R possesses ade-
quate reliability and validity (e.g., Muris, Dreessen, Bögels, Weckx,
& Van Melick, 2004; Muris et al., 1999).
The parent versions of the BIQ, BFQ-C, and the SCARED-R are
identical to the questionnaires completed by the children, except
that instructions and items are rephrased in terms of the care-
giver’s perspective.
3. Results
3.1. General statistics
Before discussing the main results of the present study, a num-
ber of general findings should be discussed. First, all questionnaires
were reliable in terms of internal consistency, with Cronbach’s al-
phas varying between .75 and .93. Further, significant sex differ-
ences were found for a number of variables. More specifically,
girls rated themselves as more behaviorally inhibited [means being
95.84, SD = 22.41 vs. 88.38, SD = 22.19; t(224) = 2.51, p < .05] and
anxious [means being 29.38, SD = 17.34 vs. 22.23, SD = 14.62;
t(224) = 3.34, p < .01] than boys. Second, parents rated girls as
more agreeable [means being 37.74, SD = 4.71 vs. 35.83,
SD = 4.72; t(224) = 3.04, p < .01] and conscientious [means being
34.46, SD = 6.12 vs. 31.59, SD = 5.46; t(224) = 3.72, p < .001],
whereas they rated boys as more neurotic [means being 20.76,
SD = 4.79 vs. 19.14, SD = 4.78; t(224) = 2.55, p < .05]. In the light
of these differences, it was decided to control for sex in all further
analyses. Third and finally, correlations between scores on child
and parent questionnaires were all moderate but statistically sig-
 P. Muris et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 525–529 527

Table 1 sion analyses were carried out (which controlled for sex by
Means (standard deviations), reliability coefficients, and child–parent agreement for entering this variable on step 1). By and large the analysis per-
various questionnaires.
formed on the child- and parent-report data yielded comparable
Children Parents Child–parent results. As can be seen in Table 3, extraversion clearly was the
M (SD) a M (SD) a r strongest predictor of an inhibited temperament: as expected,
BIQ
beta values were negative, indicating that lower levels of extraver-
Total score 92.24 (22.56)a .89 83.61 (21.50)b .93 .53* sion were associated with higher levels of behavioral inhibition.
BFQ-C Further, neuroticism also consistently made a small but unique
Extraversion 33.66 (5.48)a .78 35.14 (5.16)b .79 .40* contribution to behavioral inhibition: the positive betas pointed
Agreeableness 35.62 (5.87)a .86 36.81 (4.80)b .83 .37*
out that higher levels of this personality factor were associated
Conscientiousness 34.25 (6.01)a .82 33.08 (5.97)a .85 .43*
Neuroticism 21.42 (4.95)a .75 19.92 (4.84)b .80 .40* with higher levels of behavioral inhibition. The regression models
Intellect/openness 31.78 (5.91)a .75 33.21 (6.53)b .84 .50* suggested that conscientiousness was positively linked to behav-
SCARED-R ioral inhibition, which was not in line with results of the correla-
Total score 25.93 (16.45)a .93 17.14 (11.84)b .91 .38*
tional analysis showing non-significant, negative relations
Note: N = 226. BIQ, Behavioral Inhibition Questionnaire; BFQ-C, Big Five Question- between this personality factor and behavioral inhibition scores
naire for Children; SCARED-R, Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disor- (see Table 2). Obviously, these findings emerged when controlling
ders-Revised. Means with different subscripts differ at p < .05/7. for the shared variance among various personality factors. Contri-
*
p < .001.
butions of other personality traits were also less clear-cut: that is,
openness/intellect was negatively linked to behavioral inhibition
in the case of child-report data, whereas agreeableness was nega-
nificant (rs between .37 and .53, ps < .001). Paired t-tests revealed
tively related to this temperament trait in the case of parent-re-
that children rated themselves as more behaviorally inhibited
port data. Together personality factors accounted for 49% (child-
[t(225) = 6.05, p < .001], neurotic [t(225) = 4.18, p < .001], and anx-
report) to 52% (parent-report) of the variance in behavioral inhibi-
ious [t(225) = 8.17, p < .001] than parents did, whereas parents
tion scores.
rated their children as more extraverted [t(225) = 3.82, p < .001],
agreeable [t(225) = 2.95, p < .01], and intellectual/open
[t(225) = 3.44, p < .01] than children did themselves (see Table 1). 3.4. Predicting anxiety symptoms from behavioral inhibition and
personality factors
3.2. Correlations among behavioral inhibition, personality factors, and
anxiety Hierarchical regression analyses were conducted in which chil-
dren’s anxiety disorder symptoms were predicted from sex (step
Partial correlations (controlling for sex) among BIQ, BFQ-C, and 1), Big Five personality factors (step 2), and behavioral inhibition
SCARED-R scores are displayed in Table 2. For child- and parent-re- (step 3). Overall the results indicated that between 37% (parent-re-
port data, a highly similar pattern of correlations was found. To be- port) and 47% (child-report) of the variance in SCARED-R scores
gin with, behavioral inhibition was negatively associated with could be explained by the predictor variables (see Table 4). The
extraversion, agreeableness, and intellect/openness (rs between analysis of the child-report data showed that sex accounted for a
.27 and .66), whereas small but positive links were observed with significant proportion of the variance in SCARED-R scores on step
neuroticism (rs being .20 and .18 for child- and parent-report, 1: the positive beta indicated that girls (which were coded as 2) re-
respectively). Further, a substantial positive correlation was found ported higher anxiety levels than boys (which were coded as 1). On
between behavioral inhibition and anxiety disorder symptoms as step 2, neuroticism and extraversion accounted for unique propor-
indexed by the SCARED-R (rs being .49 and .48 for child and par- tions of the variance in SCARED-R scores: betas were respectively
ent-report, respectively). Finally, the Big Five personality factor of positive and negative, which means that higher levels of neuroti-
neuroticism was also clearly and positively related to anxiety disor- cism and lower levels of extraversion were associated with higher
der symptoms (rs being .54 and .38 for child- and parent-report, levels of anxiety symptoms. Most importantly, on step 3, behav-
respectively), whereas small but significant negative correlations ioral inhibition was found to explain an additional, significant pro-
were observed between extraversion, agreeableness, and intellect/ portion of the variance in SCARED-R scores: the positive beta
openness (only parent-report) and such symptoms (see Table 2). indicated that higher levels of this temperament characteristic
were linked to higher levels of anxiety symptoms.
3.3. Predicting behavioral inhibition from personality factors The analysis of the parent-report data confirmed that behav-
ioral inhibition and neuroticism made significant and independent
To examine unique contributions of various Big Five personal- positive contributions to children’s anxiety symptoms. In both
ity factors to behavioral inhibition as measured by the BIQ, regres- cases, the direction of the beta value was positive, again indicating

Table 2
Correlations (corrected for sex) among questionnaires for measuring behavioral inhibition, Big Five personality factors, and anxiety disorder symptoms. Correlations among child
scales are shown below the diagonal, whereas correlations among parent scales are displayed above the diagonal.

(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)

(1) BIQ total score .66** .46** .02 .18* .27** .48**
(2) BFQ-C extraversion .66** .49** .27** .07 .40** .19*
(3) BFQ-C agreeableness .31** .50** .32** .30** .32** .23**
(4) BFQ-C conscientiousness .17 .35** .58** .23** .45** .16
(5) BFQ-C neuroticism .20** .03 .21** .21** .03 .38**
(6) BFQ-C intellect/openness .44** .58** .50** .60** .09 .16
(7) SCARED-R total score .49** .25** .22** .14 .54** .22**

Note: N = 226. BIQ, Behavioral Inhibition Questionnaire; BFQ-C, Big Five Questionnaire for Children; SCARED-R, Screen for Child Anxiety Related Emotional Disorders-Revised.
*
p < .01.
**
p < .05/21.
528 P. Muris et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 525–529

Table 3 verted) children are likely to enjoy time spent on their own and
Main results of the regression analyses predicting behavioral inhibition from Big Five generally find less reward in meeting large groups of people. They
personality factors.
are not eager to take risks and prefer to observe situations before
B SE b DR 2 they participate. Although these are also features of behavioral
Child-report of behavioral inhibition inhibition (Kagan & Snidman, 2004), it is clear that inhibited chil-
Step 1 .03* dren avoid social and unknown situations out of tension and fear,
Sex 7.46 2.97 .17* whereas low extraverts choose solitary and innocuous activities by
Step 2 .49**
Extraversion 2.56 0.25 .62**
preference (Matthews et al., 2003). As such it makes sense that
Agreeableness 0.09 0.25 .02 neuroticism also made a small but significant, independent contri-
Conscientiousness 0.72 0.25 .19* bution to behavioral inhibition, as this personality factor may ac-
Neuroticism 0.96 0.22 .21** count for the negative motive of the shy and withdrawn behavior
Intellect/openness 0.72 0.26 .19*
as displayed by inhibited children.
Parent-report of behavioral inhibition The regression analyses indicated that about half of the total
Step 1 .00
variance in children’s behavioral inhibition scores could be ex-
Sex 0.70 2.11 .02
Step 2 52** plained by Big Five personality factors. This suggests that there
Extraversion 2.50 0.24 .60** might still be other individual difference variables involved. One
Agreeableness 0.82 0.26 .18* obvious candidate is ‘effortful control’, which refers to executive
Conscientiousness 0.98 0.20 .27** functioning-based processes that are thought to play an important
Neuroticism 0.63 0.23 .14*
role in the regulation of emotions (Rothbart, Ellis, & Posner, 2004).
Intellect/openness 0.29 0.19 .09
In keeping with this notion, a recent study by Muris and Dietvorst
Note: N = 226. (2006) has demonstrated that behaviorally inhibited children are
*
p < .05.
** also characterized by low levels of effortful control.
p < .001.
In line with previous research, the current study showed that
behavioral inhibition and neuroticism are clear correlates of chil-
dren’s anxiety disorder symptoms (Craske, 2003; Fox et al.,
Table 4
2005). Both variables appeared to account for a unique proportion
Main results of the regression analyses predicting children’s DSM-defined anxiety
disorder symptoms from behavioral inhibition and Big Five personality factors.
of the variance in such symptoms, which implies that they each
play a unique role in the pathogenesis of childhood anxiety. The
B SE b DR 2 fact that behavioral inhibition and personality factors only ac-
Child-report of anxiety disorder symptoms counted for up to 42% of the variance in children’s anxiety scores
Step 1 .05* is in agreement with the current multifactorial models which as-
Sex 7.15 2.14 .21*
Step 2 .34**
sume that this type of psychopathology may be the result of a wide
Extraversion 0.58 0.21 .19* range of vulnerability factors, including parent–child attachment,
Agreeableness 0.07 0.20 .02 fearful parenting, stressful life events, and specific learning experi-
Conscientiousness 0.35 0.20 .13 ences (Craske, 1997; Muris, 2007).
Neuroticism 1.76 0.18 .53**
Some less expected relations between Big Five personality fac-
Intellect/openness 0.33 0.21 .12
Step 3 .08** tors and behavioral inhibition were found. For example, the regres-
Behavioral inhibition 0.30 0.05 .41** sion analyses suggested that conscientiousness made a positive
Parent-report of anxiety disorder symptoms contribution to behavioral inhibition. Although this link makes
Step 1 .00 sense from a theoretical point-of-view – because conscientious-
Sex 1.03 1.52 .04 ness is associated with carefulness, which is also a clear sign of
Step 2 .18** behavioral inhibition – this finding only emerged after controlling
Extraversion 0.26 0.17 .11
Agreeableness 0.09 0.19 .04
for the shared variance among personality factors and therefore
Conscientiousness 0.03 0.15 .01 should be interpreted with caution.
Neuroticism 0.90 0.16 .37** The parent–child agreement for various measures was rather
Intellect/openness 0.18 0.13 .10 modest. Nevertheless, analyses of children’s self-report and par-
Step 3 .19**
ent-report data generally yielded highly similar results. Moreover,
Behavioral inhibition 0.35 0.04 .63**
when comparing parent–child correlations as obtained in the pres-
Note: N = 226. ent study with those reported in previous research on these child
*
p < .05.
**
measures (Barbaranelli et al., 2008; Edwards, 2007; Muris et al.,
p < .001.
2004), the conclusion seems warranted that the correspondence
between children and parents was not that bad.
Behavioral inhibition is a temperament typology referring to
that higher levels of neuroticism and behavioral inhibition were children’s tendency to react with shyness, fear, and withdrawal
associated with higher levels of anxiety disorders symptoms. to novelty, unfamiliarity, and strain. Surprisingly little research
has been conducted on the underlying personality factors of this
4. Discussion temperament characteristic. The current results seem to indicate
that behavioral inhibition essentially reflects a combination of
The present study investigated relationships among behavioral low extraversion with a spark of neuroticism. Nevertheless, the
inhibition, Big Five personality factors, and anxiety disorder symp- data indicated that behavioral inhibition still predicted children’s
toms in non-clinical children aged 9–12 years. In keeping with anxiety symptoms after controlling for other personality features
Shatz (2005) and Muris et al. (2007), this research demonstrates (including neuroticism). Admittedly, the present investigation suf-
that the temperament characteristic of behavioral inhibition is pre- fered from at least two important shortcomings. First, the study re-
dominantly characterized by low levels of the Big Five personality lied on a sample of non-clinical children. Second, a cross-sectional
factor of extraversion. This does not mean that behavioral inhibi- design was used, which does not make it possible to study cause-
tion merely reflects low extraversion. Low extraverted (i.e., intro- effect relations between, for example, behavioral inhibition and
 P. Muris et al. / Personality and Individual Differences 46 (2009) 525–529
personality factors on one hand and children’s anxiety symptoms
on the other. Future studies should further address the relations
among behavioral inhibition, personality factors, and anxiety dis-
order symptoms in high-risk samples and clinically referred
youths, preferably employing a longitudinal research set-up.
References
American Psychiatric Association (2000). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental
disorders, fourth edition-text revision. Washington, DC: Author.
Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V., Rabasca, A., & Pastorelli, C. (2003). A questionnaire
for measuring the Big Five in late childhood. Personality and Individual
Differences, 34, 645–664.
Barbaranelli, C., Fida, R., Paciello, M., Di Giunta, L., & Caprara, G. V. (2008). Assessing
personality in early adolescence through self-report and other-ratings: A
multitrait–multimethod analysis of the BFQ-C. Personality and Individual
Differences, 44, 876–886.
Biederman, J., Rosenbaum, J. F., Bolduc-Murphy, E. A., Faraone, S. V., Chaloff, J.,
Hirshfeld, D. R., et al. (1993). A 3-year follow-up of children with and without
behavioral inhibition. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent
Psychiatry, 32, 814–821.
Birmaher, B., Brent, D., Chiappetta, L., Bridge, J., Monga, S., & Baugher, M. (1999).
Psychometric properties of the screen for child anxiety related emotional
disorders (SCARED): A replication study. Journal of the American Academy of
Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 38, 1230–1236.
Bishop, G., Spence, S. H., & McDonald, C. (2003). Can parents and teachers provide a
reliable and valid report of behavioral inhibition? Child Development, 74,
1899–1917.
Broeren, S., & Muris, P. (submitted for publication). A psychometric evaluation of
the behavioral inhibition questionnaire in a non-clinical sample of Dutch
children and adolescents.
Craske, M. G. (1997). Fear and anxiety in children and adolescents. Bulletin of the
Menninger Clinic, 61(Suppl. A), A4–A36.
Craske, M. G. (2003). Origins of phobias and anxiety disorders. Why more women than
men? Oxford: Elsevier.
Del Barrio, V., Carrasco, M. A., & Holgado, F. P. (2006). Factor structure invariance in
the children’s Big Five questionnaire. European Journal of Psychological
Assessment, 22, 158–167.
529
Edwards, S. L. (2007). Temperament and environmental risk factors contributing to
anxiety symptoms in preschool-aged children. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis,
Australia: Macquarie University.
Eysenck, H. J. (1967). The biological basis of personality. Springfield, IL: Thomas.
Fox, N. A., Henderson, H. A., Marshall, P. J., Nichols, K. E., & Ghera, M. M. (2005).
Behavioral inhibition: Linking biology and behavior within a developmental
framework. Annual Review of Psychology, 56, 235–262.
Gray, J. A. (1991). Neural systems, emotion, and personality. In J. Madden (Ed.),
Neurobiology of learning, emotion, and affect (pp. 273–306). New York: Raven
Press.
Kagan, J. (1994). Galen’s prophecy. Temperament in human nature. New York: Basic
Books.
Kagan, J., & Snidman, N. (2004). The long shadow of temperament. Cambridge, MA:
The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.
Matthews, G., Deary, I. J., & Whiteman, M. C. (2003). Personality traits (2nd ed.).
Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Muris, P. (2007). Normal and abnormal fear and anxiety in children and adolescents.
Oxford: Elsevier.
Muris, P., & Dietvorst, R. (2006). Underlying personality characteristics of behavioral
inhibition in children. Child Psychiatry and Human Development, 36, 437–445.
Muris, P., Dreessen, L., Bögels, S. M., Weckx, M., & Van Melick, M. (2004). A
questionnaire for screening a broad range of DSM-defined anxiety disorder
symptoms in clinically referred children and adolescents. Journal of Child
Psychology and Psychiatry, 45, 813–820.
Muris, P., Meesters, C., & Diederen, R. (2005). Psychometric properties of the Big Five
questionnaire for children (BFQ-C) in a Dutch sample of young adolescents.
Personality and Individual Differences, 38, 1757–1769.
Muris, P., Merckelbach, H., Schmidt, H., & Mayer, B. (1999). The revised version of
the screen for child anxiety related emotional disorders (SCARED-R): Factor
structure in normal children. Personality and Individual Differences, 26, 99–112.
Muris, P., Rassin, E., Franken, I., & Leemreis, W. (2007). Psychometric properties of
the behavioural inhibition scale in young adults. Journal of Individual Differences,
28, 219–226.
Rothbart, M. K., Ellis, L. K., & Posner, M. I. (2004). Temperament and self-regulation.
In R. F. Baumeister & K. D. Vohs (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation. Research,
theory, and applications (pp. 357–370). New York: Guilford Press.
Shatz, S. M. (2005). The psychometric properties of the behavioral inhibition scale in
a college-aged sample. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 331–339.