The Thoughtful Parent: March 2009

Part 2 of Temperament Series

Part 2: The Role of Temperament in Parent-Child Interactions

In the previous post about temperament I reviewed some of the main theories and definitions of temperament that are common in child development research. It is important to remember that the categories described in these theories (e.g., “difficult,” “easy,” “slow to warm up”) are not meant to be labels in which children can be pigeon-holed for life. They are simply categories that help describe different combinations of characteristics or behavior patterns. Although there seems to be some genetic basis for temperament, this does not mean a child is destined to be one way or another. Many other factors come into play. A couple of factors that I’m discussing today are culture and parent-child interactions.

Although many concepts discussed in child development are culturally bound, this seems to be especially the case with temperament. What is defined as a “difficult” or “easy” temperament can vary dramatically by culture. Just think about it. We here in modern Western society may think of a fussy baby who cries a lot as having a “difficult” temperament, but in a less advantaged culture where famine or disease are common, such as baby would be considered “hardy” and more likely to survive these challenges. Thinking of temperament in this way gives it a whole new perspective.

Similarly, how parents respond to their child’s temperament can have a lot to do with their own culture-bound values, expectations and standards. For example, many of us who were raised in American culture value independence and self-reliance to a great degree. Given this, we may respond to a child who is “slow to warm up,” apprehensive about social interaction, or who needs more guidance much differently than a parent from a culture that values interdependence more highly.

Beyond cultural expectations, parents’ personal values and expectations for their child may also influence how they react to their child’s temperament. Researchers Thomas and Chess also examined this extensively in several long-term child development studies. They found that how parents reacted to their child’s temperament had a great deal to do with how the child’s behavior matched up with their own values and standards. For instance, they give the example of a “slow to warm up” child who is hesitant about making new friends. If parents view this behavior in a negative light as being overly timid or unfriendly, they may force the child to make new friends very quickly, to which the child may respond by being even more anxious. This has the possibility of establishing a difficult pattern of parent-child interaction. Other parents, with a less negative interpretation of their child’s behavior, might be more patient with the child and allow him/her to make friends on their own time. This type of response will most likely make for both a happier child and happier parents in this situation.

I offer these few thoughts on temperament as food for thought more than advice. There are a lot of great resources out there (some are listed below) that discuss how to deal with different temperaments. Personally, I think the important part of this research is to help us understand that parents have many different ways they can respond to their child’s temperament and which one they choose has a lot to do with their interpretation of their child’s behavior and how it fits with their own values and goals.

More resources:

Zero to Three on temperament

The Idea of Temperament

photo credit: http://www.flickr.com/photos/bytenik/128404371/

Labels: children, temperament

11 comments

The Ultimate Blog Party!

is week I'm participating in The Ultimate Blog Party sponsored by 5 Minutes for Mom. Although I'm new to the blogging world, this party seems like a great way to connect with others bloggers out there. They already have hundreds of participating blogs so check it out if you haven't already. On top of all that, they are also offering great prizes you can win! Personally, I would love to win any of them, but especially:

- #7 Ergo Baby Carrier

- #19 $50 gift card for Target

- #99 $25 gift card for Shutterfly

(can you tell I'm an expectant mom?)

Now, for a little introduction. I'm a wife and soon-to-be mom who wants to share what I learned through many years (some would say a few too many) of education in child development and family sciences so I started this blog, The Thoughtful Parent. There is so much interesting and informative child development research conducted in universities that never reaches the average parent and I wanted to change that. So look around at some of the posts and see what you think. I love comments and suggestions! I'm new to blogging but I hope this site will serve as a fun and useful resource.

Labels: blog party

0 comments

Food for Thought

This is an interesting post from a blogger on Psychology Today. I think it fits well with my previous post about children's play. It's definitely worth considering how children's worlds have changed in the last 20-30 years. It seems the idea of kids just playing together in the neighborhood, without an agenda from parents, is slipping away. Although I don't have children yet (one on the way), I'm glad to see kids still playing games and biking in my neighborhood without anyone calling the police.

Labels: children, play

0 comments

From the Headlines: Kids Overdiagnosed with Food Allergies

I'm sure many of you may have heard about this study that was recently publicized about children being misdiagnosed with food allergies. I'm not a nutrition expert, but I found these results pretty surprising. This study showed that as many as 50% of kids were misdiagnosed with food allergies. It turns out that they really could eat many of the foods they had previously been told they could not. What scientists are finding is that blood testing alone may not be the best tool for diagnosing food allergies and that other tests (what they call "food challenge" tests) may be more accurate. Imagine the relief in finding out that your child is not allergic to common foods like wheat, milk, or eggs.

Read the full article here.

1 comments

Temperament: A Two-Part Series

Part 1: What is Temperament and Where Does it Come From?

The word ‘temperament’ is heard a lot in any circle of parents, caregivers, or teachers discussing children. Most parents probably have a good sense of their child’s temperament. You often hear parents describe their child as someone who ‘needs some time to warm up’ or is ‘full of energy.’ But what does temperament really mean and where does it come from? Perhaps most importantly, how does temperament influence how parents and children interact? As I started writing this, I realized there was too much information to include in just one post so this is the first of a two-part series on temperament.

Today, Part 1: What is temperament and where does it come from?

Part 2: The role of temperament in parent-child interactions?

Although most people have a sense of what temperament is, the research on this topic is wide and varied. Some researchers have different definitions of what temperament is and what aspects of behavior should or should not be included in this construct. Here are some of the main ideas regarding temperament that have developed over the past 40 years or so.

In the 1960s and 70s researchers Alexander Thomas and Stella Chess conducted a classic study in which they outlined nine dimensions of temperament.

activity level—energy level of the child
approach-withdrawl—how child initial responds to a new setting
mood—child’s general tendency to be happy or unhappy
rhythmicity—how regular are the child’s physical/biological patterns (e.g., eating, sleeping)
persistence—child’s ability to stay with a difficult task
attention span—child’s ability to focus on one task for a length of time
adaptability—child’s ability to adjust to changes in routine
threshold—child’s ability to handle external stimuli (e.g., loud noises)
intensity—child’s tendency to emotionally react strongly or less strongly to events
distractibility—the degree to which a child is easily distracted from a task or activity

Based on these dimensions, Thomas and Chess characterized children into one of three categories of temperament: “difficult,” “easy,” and “slow to warm up.” In their study, 65% of children could be classified into one of these categories, so another category of “unable to classify” was created for the remaining 35%. Thomas and Chess found that in their initial study, 40% of the children fell into the “easy” category, 10% into the “difficult” category and 15% into the “slow to warm up” category. Later, these researchers stated that these classifications should be thought less as discrete categories but more of a continuum along which children fell. So a child is typically not clearly “difficult” or clearly “easy” but somewhere along the continuum from “difficult” to “easy.”

Other, more recent researchers have defined temperament somewhat differently. They focus more on two primary dimensions: 1) emotional or attentional reactivity and 2) self-regulation. So what do these mean? Reactivity focuses on the child’s responses to stimuli. This stimuli could either be external (e.g., a loud noise) or internal (e.g., feeling angry). Self-regulation refers to the child’s ability to manage his/her reactivity in various situations. Do these sound familiar? As you can see, the differences between these dimensions and those used by Thomas and Chess are very subtle and there seems to be a lot of overlap.

So this gives us a general understanding of what researchers mean when they use the term “temperament.” But where does temperament come from? Is it genetic or something learned as we experience life? Of course, in science there are rarely easy black-and-white answers to questions like this. Scientists are really just beginning to explore the possible biological components of temperament by using new brain imaging technology (see this video for an interesting look at this new research). Although most researchers agree that there is at least some genetic or biological basis for temperament, the role of the environment and life experience is also important. In reality, the expression of temperament is most likely a combination of both biological and environmental features, or what researchers call “gene-environment” interactions. This makes sense when you think about it. If you have a tendency to have a more inhibited temperament, this will influence the types of situations you expose yourself to due to the fact that you will not feel comfortable in every situation. This experience with the environment will then further shape your behavior and personality. This distinct interaction between genes and the environment is probably what ultimately makes each of us unique individuals.

Look for Part 2: The Role of Temperament in Parent-Child Interactions in an upcoming post.

Additional resources: Podcast on the temperament of babies

Sources: Temperament in Early Development

The Idea of Temperament

Goldsmith, H. H., Buss, A. H., Plomin, R., Rothbart, M. K., Thomas, A., Chess, S., Hinde, R. A., & McCall, R. B. (1987). Roundtable: What is temperament? Four approaches. Child Development, 58, 505-529.

Photo credit: D Sharon Pruitt

(http://www.flickr.com/photos/pinksherbet/3212080263/)

Labels: children, temperament

0 comments

TV Time for Babies

Recently, the topic of TV watching among babies has received quite a bit of media attention. On Tuesday, there was an interesting article in Time magazine about this. Although TV has been part of our lives for several decades now, surprisingly little research has considered the effects of TV watching on babies' development. The Time article discusses the handful of studies to examine this issue. One study followed over 800 children from birth to age 3 and recorded time spent watching TV (including DVDs) as reported by their moms. In the end, the study found that TV watching was associated with neither positive nor negative effects for babies' development (once factors like parents' education were accounted for).

Another recent study of babies' TV watching, however, found somewhat different results. In a study conducted at Seattle Children's Research Institute and the University of Washington, researchers found that for very young children (8-16 months), more than occasionally watching TV was associated with a slower development of language. For older toddlers (17-24 months), the study found neither positive nor negative associations with language development. This is somewhat surprising given the strong claims made by producers of TV and DVD programs designed for babies and marketed heavily to parents anxious to give their kids an educational advantage.

So with this conflicting research, what is a parent to do? Most researchers advise parents to carefully consider not only what types of programs your child watches, but for how long and why. Study author Dimitri Christakis stated in the Time article, "What I tell parent is 'Ask yourself why you're having your baby watch TV,' he continues, "If you absolutely need a break to take a shower or make dinner, then the risks are quite low. But if you are doing it because you think it's actually good for your child's brain, then you need to rethink that, because there is no evidence of benefit and certainly a risk of harm at high view levels."

More resources on TV watching for babies and children: