 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
WEEK of JANUARY 20, 2003 |
|
Alexander Thomas and Stella Chess Study of Temperament and its Role in a Child’s Development by Sara Soll Sara Soll, Preschool 2s teacher and Director of Preschool Admissions, has been a dedicated educator for 27 years, 16 of which have been at BFS. She wrote the following paper as part of her requirements toward a master’s degree in Early Childhood Special Education at the Bank Street College of Education. Soll explains her interest in the topic of temperament: “Over the years I’ve worked with young children and have seen firsthand how children bring different personalities and temperaments into the classroom. My experience has shown me that the most successful approach is to help each child find his/her way by respecting and carefully considering who they are and how they learn.” She adds, “Understanding the child’s temperament can also help parents who are struggling to understand their children and their behavior.” All those who work with young children and their parents have the need to study and understand as much as possible about the children they work with. Over the years, different theories have provided answers to questions raised about children and development, ranging from a biological-maturational framework to an exclusively environmentalist viewpoint (nature vs. nurture). Thomas and Chess in the early 1950s began to explore the individual’s own intrinsic behavioral style and its significance to later development. In their clinical work they saw great variations in patterns or correlations between environmental influences such as parental attitudes and practices and the child’s psychological development (Thomas and Chess 1977, p.4). Often the cause of any child’s psychopathology was laid completely at the doorstep of the mother or parents. Chess and Thomas felt the influences could be better understood if the behavioral phenomena attributed to purposive-motivational factors were considered as nonmotivational behavioral styles. Through longitudinal studies begun in 1956, Thomas and Chess looked at individual differences in young children and the impact of these differences on the child’s psychological development. They used the term temperament to describe the behavioral phenomena being studied. Temperament is the way in which an individual behaves (the how), and differs from ability (the what) and motivation (the why). Environmental factors influence and modify temperaments’ expression and nature as development proceeds. Therefore temperament cannot be considered by itself. It is always in relationship to or interaction with the external environmental stresses and opportunities, as well as the individual’s abilities and motives. Thomas and Chess used temperament to refer to those stylistic characteristics evident in the early infancy period, for they found that “from birth onward, babies vary in their behavior and their reactions to stimuli from the outside. These differences we called differences in the child’s temperament.” (Thomas and Chess, 1987, p.13). This developmental process may show continuities and discontinuities and is a lifelong process. Data gathering over a substantial period of time required using parental reports of children’s behavior as a primary source. Detailed, factual descriptions of concrete, objective behaviors were sought, rather than interpretations, by asking nonjudgmental questions (“What kind of situations upset your child?” rather than “Does he get upset?”). Parents’ interpretations were noted as they do give clues to parental attitudes and thinking. A wide range of daily activities were looked at so data did not rely on a single or specific situation. Descriptions were linked to the environmental context at all times. As the child got older, behavior data was also obtained from teacher interviews, direct observation in the school setting, psychometric testing at ages 3, 6 and 9, academic achievement scores from school, and direct interviews with the child and parents separately at age 16-17 years. Other studies of temperament (Rothbart, Buss, and Plomin, Goldsmith and Campos) share points of consensus with Thomas and Chess as well as disagreement. They agree temperament refers to the issue of individual differences rather than species general characteristics, and there is an emphasis on the biological underpinnings. They tend to focus on infancy because the link between temperament and behavior is seen as more direct, becoming more complex as the child matures. The temperamental dimensions described reflect behavioral tendencies rather than definite behavioral acts. Activity level and emotionality are consensus choices, but other dimensions of temperament vary among the theorists. The continuity of these temperamental variables is questioned but all agree it is relative to other aspects of behavior. (Buss and Plomin 1993, Kagan, 1991, Rothbart 1980). Each approach suggests different boundaries for temperament in criteria of behavioral style, the relationship to emotional behavior and the relative stability of the traits. How much of an infant’s behavior is determined to be temperamental also differs in the various theories. All are sensitive to the dangers of overinclusive labeling of infants and children but there is disagreement about the terms to be used, the “difficult child” label in particular. This paper will focus on Thomas and Chess’ delineation of temperament as determined by their study. This classification has been confirmed by other studies in this country, a number of European countries and in Canada, Japan, India, Israel, Taiwan and Kenya, and therefore includes children with a wide range of cultural, national and social class backgrounds (Thomas and Chess, 1987, p.33). The implications and use of this scheme to teachers and other child care professionals are many. By making it clear that the different categories and patterns of temperament are all within the normal range of behavior, the inappropriate burden of responsibility adults may feel can be lifted by the awareness that the child’s functioning is influenced by temperament. This is especially helpful to parents dealing with difficult issues regarding their children. However this doesn’t negate the importance of other developmental influences and interactions. Nor does it mean that all temperamental attributes are always influential and important in the developmental process. Understanding that development occurs from the interaction between the child’s temperament and other attributes, environmental demands and expectations does not mean acceptance of any and all behavioral manifestations of the child’s temperament. Some characteristics will interfere with the child’s development as well and this must be considered. Thomas and Chess describe nine categories of temperament, using two criteria. The behavioral items used should be present in all children and their categorization should have a significant influence on the child’s psychological development. The nine categories of temperament according to Thomas and Chess are:
These categories were used to help define three temperamental constellations. The patterns were defined by qualitative analysis of the data and factor analysis. (Thomas and Chess, 1977, p.22) They were not found to be systematically related either to the parent’s method of child rearing or to the parent’s own personality style. One group of children, 40% of the sample, were categorized by regularity of biological functions, positive approach responses to most new stimuli, high adaptability to change and mild or moderately intense mood which is mostly positive. They develop regular sleep and feeding schedules, take to most new foods easily, are cheerful, smile at strangers, adapt easily to a new school, accept frustration with little fuss and accept new rules without trouble. Thomas and Chess called this the “Easy Child.” At the opposite end of the temperament spectrum, 10% of the sample were found to have irregularity of biological functions, negative withdrawal responses to many new stimuli, to be nonadaptable or slow to adapt to change. Mood expressions are intense and frequently negative. They showed irregular sleep and feeding schedules, a slow acceptance of many or most new foods, prolonged adjustment periods to new routines, people and situations. They have relatively frequent and loud periods of crying, and laughter is loud too. Frustration typically causes violent tantrums and they are difficult to handle. This group is called the “Difficult Child.” The third group, 15% of the sample, have a combination of negative responses of mild intensity to new stimuli and show a slow adaptability after repeated contact. In the first encounter a negative, mild response is shown and when given the opportunity to reexperience new situations over time, without pressure, they gradually come to show a quiet, positive interest and involvement. Whether positive or negative, their reactions are of mild intensity and they have less tendency to show irregularity of biological function. When upset or frustrated they are likely to withdraw from the situation quietly or with mild fussing. This is the “Slow-To-Warm-Up Child.” It is apparent not all children fit neatly into one of these three groups. Individual children show a wide range of varying and different combinations of these temperamental traits. In looking at specific temperamental traits, other factors that help shape development may affect their consistency. The course of any one attribute can vary from person to person. However the functional significance of temperamental traits is not determined by whether they are consistent or not over time. A trait may be very influential in a particular child-environment interaction but not especially important at a later age. Traits may assume an importance at an older age that they did not have earlier. The parent or child care professional should “consider the child’s individual pattern at a specific age and the degree to which environmental demands are consonant or dissonant with that temperament in fostering optimum development at that particular time.” (Thomas and Chess, 1977, p.29). The behavioral criteria for any temperamental trait changes over time as the child’s psychological functioning develops and evolves, so the problem is determining when dissimilar behavior over time reflects the same characteristic and when it is different. What remains consistent is the “definitional identity” (ibid., p.159) of the characteristic. By recognizing the patterns in a child’s development and behavior it is easier to work on solutions and understand what is occurring. The interaction between temperament, parent and child starts at birth and the influence on each other is continuous. It is a constantly evolving process of reciprocal interaction. The child’s temperament affects the parent depending on the latter’s personality, goals and expectations for the child. The socioeconomic opportunities and constraints are also a factor. The parent’s attitude, practices, judgments and feeling are shaped by the child’s specific style of response and adaptation. How the child is responded to affect’s their further interaction and adaptations. And so the cycle continues. The child moves towards more complex situations and experiences as peer relationships develop. Temperament plays a significant role in the dynamics of the child’s adaptation to these changes and developments. The members of the child’s peer group may vary in behavior from the familiar nuclear family unit, and from each other. Peer group standards of behavior may differ from the parents. School is a new, more complex set of demands and expectations that influence the child’s developmental process. Temperament’s influence on adjustment and growth is an important part of the elaborate, varied interactional process. Environments and expectations can be adapted and adjusted once we understand the child’s approach as determined in part by their temperament or “functional style” (Thomas and Chess, 1963, p.80). Considering all these elements and putting them together in a way that will allow a fuller understanding of the child, Thomas and Chess (1977) discuss the concept of “Goodness of Fit”. This results when the environment, expectations and demands are in accord with the child’s temperament, ability and other characteristics. Then optimal development in a progressive direction is possible. This is always considered in the context of the values and demands of the given culture and socioeconomic group. Poorness of fit occurs when the demands and expectations are excessive and not compatible with the child’s temperament, abilities and other characteristics so that distorted development and maladaptive functioning occurs. This is not meant to imply there should be an absence of stress and conflict which are inevitable in development for higher level functioning to occur. The stresses and conflicts need to match the child’s developing potentials and capacities, and not become excessive. As Thomas (1982) put it, “If treated with a combination of affection and fairness, of respect and patience, these very difficult [or other] characteristics may provide the basis for a healthy productive developmental course. The temperamentally difficult [or any] child with wise parents and teachers has a bright future.” (p.314). Wisdom comes from knowledge and understanding. The wisdom we acquire by understanding the temperamental process is a very useful and usable kind of wisdom. These concepts can be very helpful to parent and teacher as they work together to give the child support and a chance for optimal development in any given situation. By removing judgment and guilt, everyone gains as a problem can be clarified and solutions found in the most productive way possible. Thomas and Chess’ way of looking at children acknowledges that “growth and development are at all times the product of a constantly evolving interacting process between heredity and environment.” (Thomas and Chess, 1977, p.3). There is not one correct answer, and by understanding the individual child to the fullest, the possibilities are more meaningful and positive. REFERENCES Goldsmith, H.; Buss, A.; Plomin, R.; Klevjord, M.; Thomas, A.; Chess, S.; Hinde, R.; & McCall, R. (1987. Roundtable: What is temperament? Four approaches. Child Development, 58, 505-529. Kagan, J. (1982). The construct of difficult temperament: A reply to Thomas, Chess and Korn. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 28, 21-24. Mohar, C. (1984, September). How to be a good parent: Have a good child. Paper presented at the Families Alive Conference, Ogden, UT. Plomin, R. (1982). The difficult concept of temperament: A response to Thomas, Chess and Korn. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 28, 25-33. Rothbart, R. (1982). The concept of difficult temperament: A critical analysis of Thomas, Chess and Korn. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 28, 35-40. Thomas, A. (1982). The study of difficult temperament: A reply to Kagan, Rothbart, and Plomin. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 28, 313-315. Thomas, A., Chess, S. (1987). Know your child: An authoritative guide for today’s parents. New York : Basic Books, Inc. Thomas, A., Chess, S. (1987). Temperament and development. New York: Bruner/Mazel. Thomas, A., Chess, S., & Birch H. (1969). Behavioral individuality in early childhood. New York: New York University Press. Thomas, A., Chess, S., Birch, H., Hertzig, M., & Korn, S. (1971). Temperament and behavior disorders in children. New York : New York University Press |
||
|
home
| site map |
contact BFS
|
||
