# data[].attributes.body
Personality is developed over time. However, distinct temperaments are seen at as young as newborn babies. Alexander Thomas and Stella Cress proposed three temperaments seen even in newborn babies. These temperaments are easy, difficult, and slow-to-warm.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Temperament is a child’s emotional and behavioral style of responding to the world, and researcher have found it is influenced by nine traits.

# data[].attributes.headline
What are the three temperaments described by Thomas and Cress?

# data[].attributes.subject
What are the three temperaments described by Thomas and Cress?

# data[].attributes.body
Easy - generally even temperament and not overly reactive to stimuli

Difficult - unstable temperament and highly reactive to stimuli

Slow-to-warm-up - this temperament is between easy and difficult and can be easily conceptualized as an infant who starts out with difficulty temperament but begins to exhibit an easier temperament over time

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Temperament is a child’s emotional and behavioral style of responding to the world, and researcher have found it is influenced by nine traits.

# data[].attributes.headline
What are the traits that make up the three main temperaments?

# data[].attributes.subject
What are the traits that make up the three main temperaments?

# data[].attributes.body
Activity - level of activity

Regularity - predictable patterns

Initial Reaction - how a child reacts to novel stimuli (new people, environments, or objects)

Adaptability - the ability to function in a changing environment

Intensity - the magnitude of emotional reactions

Mood - overall emotionality (positive or negative)

Distractibility - ability to pay attention

Persistence-Attention Span - ability to continue with an activity

Sensory Threshold - sensitivity to sensory stimuli

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Temperament is a child’s emotional and behavioral style of responding to the world, and researcher have found it is influenced by nine traits.

# data[].attributes.headline
Does your personality develop over time?

# data[].attributes.subject
Does your personality develop over time?

# data[].attributes.body
Personality develops over the lifespan. It is a consistent pattern of behavior and thinking that guides the individuals interaction with the world and others people. It is developed by a variety of factors such as biology, cultural, and personal determinants.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Personality refers to the enduring characteristics and behavior that comprise a person's unique adjustment to life, including major traits, interests, drives, values, self-concept, abilities, and emotional patterns. Various theories explain the structure and development of personality in different ways, but all agree that personality helps determine behavior.

The field of personality psychology studies the nature and definition of personality as well as its development, structure and trait constructs, dynamic processes, variations (with emphasis on enduring and stable individual differences), and maladaptive forms.

Adapted from the APA Dictionary of Psychology

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Personality refers to individual differences in patterns of thinking, feeling, and behaving. The study of personality focuses on individual differences in personality characteristics and how the parts of a person come together as a whole.

# data[].attributes.body
Biological Theory - sees personality an an expression of genetics and biological processes (Key Theorist - Hans Eysenck)

Behavioral Theory - focuses strictly on measurable behaviors and rejects the analysis of internal mental processes (Key Theorists - B. F. Skinner & John Watson)

Psychodynamic Theory - this model of personality attempts to explain personality through three levels of consciousness the id, ego, and the super ego (Key Theorist - Sigmund Freud)

Humanistic Theory - posited that humans had an innate goodness and concern for others (Key Theorist - Carl Rogers & Abraham Maslow)

Trait Theory or the O.C.E.A.N (Openness, conscientiousness, extroversion, agreeableness, neuroticism) - explains personality through five factors (Key Theorist - Hans Eysenck)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Theories of personality seek to explain how personality forms, how it changes, and the impact it has on behavior. In order to understand the personality theories in psychology, it is essential to understand some of the basics about personality.

What exactly is personality? Where does it come from? Does it change as we grow older? These are the sorts of questions that have long held the fascination of psychologists and which have inspired a number of different theories of personality.

Major Theories of Personality

Personality psychology is the focus of some of the best-known psychology theories by a number of famous thinkers including Sigmund Freud and Erik Erikson. Some of these theories attempt to tackle a specific area of personality while others attempt to explain personality much more broadly.

Biological Theories of Personality

Biological approaches suggest that genetics are responsible for personality. In the classic nature versus nurture debate, the biological theories of personality side with nature.

Research on heritability suggests that there is a link between genetics and personality traits. Twin studies are often used to investigate which traits might be linked to genetics versus those that might be linked to environmental variables. For example, researchers might look at differences and similarities in the personalities of twins reared together versus those who are raised apart.

One of the best known biological theorists was Hans Eysenck, who linked aspects of personality to biological processes.

Behavioral Theories of Personality

Behavioral theorists include B. F. Skinner and John B. Watson. Behavioral theories suggest that personality is a result of interaction between the individual and the environment. Behavioral theorists study observable and measurable behaviors, rejecting theories that take internal thoughts, moods, and feelings play a part as these cannot be measured.

According to behavioral theorists, conditioning (predictable behavioral responses) occurs through interactions with our environment which ultimately shapes our personalities.

Psychodynamic Theories of Personality

Psychodynamic theories of personality are heavily influenced by the work of Sigmund Freud and emphasize the influence of the unconscious mind and childhood experiences on personality. Psychodynamic theories include Sigmund Freud's psychosexual stage theory and Erik Erikson's stages of psychosocial development.

Freud believed the three components of personality were the id, ego, and superego. The id is responsible for needs and urges, while the superego regulates ideals and morals. The ego, in turn, moderates the demands of the id, superego, and reality.

Freud suggested that children progress through a series of stages in which the id's energy is focused on different erogenous zones.

Humanist Theories of Personality

Humanist theories emphasize the importance of free will and individual experience in the development of personality. Humanist theorists include Carl Rogers and Abraham Maslow.

Humanist theorists promote the concept of self-actualization, which is the innate need for personal growth and the ways that personal growth motivates behavior.

Trait Theories of Personality

The trait theory approach is one of the most prominent areas in personality psychology. According to these theories, personality is made up of a number of broad traits. A trait is a relatively stable characteristic that causes an individual to behave in certain ways. It is essentially the psychological "blueprint" that informs behavioral patterns.

Some of the best-known trait theories include Eysenck's three-dimension theory and the five-factor theory of personality.

Eysenck utilized personality questionnaires to collect data from participants and then employed a statistical technique known as factor analysis to analyze the results. Eysenck concluded that there were three major dimensions of personality: extroversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism.

Eysenck believed that these dimensions then combine in different ways to form an individual's unique personality. Later, Eysenck added the third dimension known as psychoticism, which related to things such as aggression, empathy, and sociability.

Later researchers suggested that there are five broad dimensions that make up a person's personality, often referred to as the Big 5 theory of personality.

Defining Personality

While personality is something that we talk about all the time ("He has such a great personality!" or "Her personality is perfect for this job!"), you might be surprised to learn that psychologists do not necessarily agree on a single definition of what exactly constitutes personality.

Researchers have found while some external factors can influence how certain traits are expressed, personality originates within the individual. While a few aspects of personality may change as we grow older, personality also tends to remain fairly consistent throughout life.

Because personality plays such an important role in human behavior, an entire branch of psychology is devoted to the study of this fascinating topic. Personality psychologists are interested in the unique characteristics of individuals, as well as similarities among groups of people.

Characteristics of Personality

In order to understand the psychology of personality, it is important to learn some of the key characteristics of how personality works.

Personality is organized and consistent. We tend to express certain aspects of our personality in different situations and our responses are generally stable.

Although personality is generally stable, it can be influenced by the environment. For example, while your personality might lead you to be shy in social situations, an emergency might lead you to take on a more outspoken and take-charge approach.

Personality causes behaviors to happen. You react to the people and objects in your environment based on your personality. From your personal preferences to your choice of a career, every aspect of your life is affected by your personality.

Investigating Theories of Personality

Now that you know a bit more about the basics of personality, it's time to take a closer look at how scientists actually study human personality. There are different techniques that are used in the study of personality. Each technique has its own strengths and weaknesses.

Experimental Methods

Experimental methods are those in which the researcher controls and manipulates the variables of interest and takes measures of the results. This is the most scientific form of research, but experimental research can be difficult when studying aspects of personality such as motivations, emotions, and drives.

These ideas are internal, abstract, and can be difficult to measure. The experimental method allows researchers to look at cause-and-effect relationships between different variables of interest.

Case Studies

Case studies and self-report methods involve the in-depth analysis of an individual as well as information provided by the individual. Case studies rely heavily on the interpretations of the observer, while self-report methods depend on the memory of the individual of interest.

Because of this, these methods tend to be highly subjective and it is difficult to generalize the findings to a larger population.

Clinical Research

Clinical research relies upon information gathered from clinical patients over the course of treatment. Many personality theories are based on this type of research, but because the research subjects are unique and exhibit abnormal behavior, this research tends to be highly subjective and difficult to generalize.

Key Terms in Theories of Personality

In addition to understanding some of the major theories of personality psychology, it is important to know more about some of the key terms and concepts that are central to these theories.

Classical Conditioning

Classical conditioning is a behavioral training technique that begins with a naturally occurring stimulus eliciting an automatic response. Then, a previously neutral stimulus is paired with the naturally occurring stimulus.

Eventually, the previously neutral stimulus comes to evoke the response without the presence of the naturally occurring stimulus. The two elements are then known as the conditioned stimulus and the conditioned response.

Operant Conditioning

Operant conditioning is a behavior training technique in which reinforcements or punishments are used to influence behavior. An association is made between a behavior and a consequence for that behavior.

Unconscious

In Freud's psychoanalytic theory of personality, the unconscious mind is a reservoir of feelings, thoughts, urges, and memories that are outside of our conscious awareness. Most of the contents of the unconscious are unacceptable or unpleasant, such as feelings of pain, anxiety, or conflict.

According to Freud's psychoanalytic theory of personality, the id is the personality component made up of unconscious psychic energy that works to satisfy basic urges, needs, and desires. The id operates based on the pleasure principle, which demands immediate gratification of needs.

According to Freud, the ego is the largely unconscious part of the personality that mediates the demands of the id, the superego, and reality. The ego prevents us from acting on our basic urges (created by the id) but also works to achieve a balance with our moral and idealistic standards (created by the superego).

The superego is the component of personality composed of our internalized ideals that we have acquired from our parents and from society. The superego works to suppress the urges of the id and tries to make the ego behave morally, rather than realistically.

Thinkers Behind Theories of Personality

Some of the most famous figures in the history of psychology left a lasting mark on the field of personality. In order to better understand the different theories of personality, it can be helpful to learn more about the lives, theories, and contributions to the psychology of these eminent psychologists.﻿﻿

Sigmund Freud

Sigmund Freud (1856-1939) was the founder of psychoanalytic theory. His theories emphasized the importance of the unconscious mind, childhood experiences, dreams, and symbolism. His theory of psychosexual development suggested that children progress through a series of stages during which libidinal energy is focused on different regions of the body.

His ideas are what as known as grand theories because they seek to explain virtually every aspect of human behavior. Some of Freud's ideas are considered outdated by modern psychologists, but he had a major influence on the course of psychology, and some concepts, such as the usefulness of talk therapy and the importance of the unconscious, are enduring.

Erik Erikson

Erik Erikson (1902-1994) was an ego psychologist trained by Anna Freud. His theory of psychosocial stages describes how personality develops throughout the lifespan. Like Freud, some aspects of Erikson's theory are considered outdated by contemporary researchers, but his eight-stage theory of development remains popular and influential.

B. F. Skinner (1904-1990) was a behaviorist best known for his research on operant conditioning and the discovery of schedules of reinforcement. Schedules of reinforcement influence how quickly a behavior is acquired and the strength of response.

The schedules described by Skinner are fixed-ratio schedules, fixed-variable schedules, variable-ratio schedules, and variable-interval schedules.

Sandra Bem (1944-2014) had an important influence in psychology and on our understanding of sex roles, gender, and sexuality. She developed her gender schema theory to explain how society and culture transmit ideas about sex and gender. Gender schemas, Bem suggested, were formed by things such as parenting, school, mass media, and other cultural influences.

Abraham Maslow

Abraham Maslow (1908-1970) was a humanist psychologist who developed the well-known hierarchy of needs. The hierarchy includes physiological needs, safety and security needs, love and affection needs, self-esteem needs, and self-actualizing needs.

Carl Rogers

Carl Rogers (1902-1987) was a humanist psychologist who believed that all people have an actualizing tendency - a drive to fulfill the individual potential that motivates behavior. Rogers called healthy individuals fully-functioning, describing these individuals as those who are open to experience, live in the moment, trust their own judgment, feel free, and are creative.

A Word From Verywell

Personality makes us who we are, so it is no wonder why it has been the source of such fascination in both science and in daily life. The various theories of personality that have been proposed by different psychologists have helped us gain a deeper and richer understanding of what makes each person unique.

By learning more about these theories, you can better understand how researchers have come to know the psychology of personality as well as consider questions that future research might explore.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Personality Theories in Psychology May Tell You About Yours

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Theories of personality seek to explain how personality develops and influences behavior. Learn about theories of personality in psychology and what they mean.

# data[].attributes.headline
What are examples of psychological tests for personality that do not use a theoretical basis?

# data[].attributes.subject
What are examples of psychological tests for personality that do not use a theoretical basis?

# data[].attributes.body
The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory 3 (MMPI-3) is not based on a theory but rather empirical keying. This means that questions were administered during test development and their meaning for future scoring was determined by what type of individuals agreed with given statements.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Definition/Introduction

The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) is the most common psychometric test devised to assess personality traits and psychopathology. This data can be used to draw conclusions about the test taker's psychopathy or to interpret psychological characteristics compared to the norm.[1] The most common treatment application of the test by providers functions in establishing or reevaluating care for an ambiguous clinical picture.[2] For psychiatric management, this aids in creating generalizable data relevant to a plethora of possible conditions.[1][2]

The MMPI was developed in the 1930s and published through the University of Minnesota in 1942 by Stuart Hathaway and Charley McKinley using visitors of patients at the University of Minnesota hospital as a base sample in both theorizing constructs of psychiatric illness and fielding the instrument. Testing is administered through 567 true or false items using a booklet with an accompanying answer sheet. The responses are then hand-scored and plotted on an X-Y graph, a separate version being used for male and female respondents.[3]

The X-axis is comprised of 14 scales. The first four 'content scales' judge validity of the test attempt and include:

? to represent the number of questions completed incorrectly, either with no attempt or both 'true' and 'false' selected

L for 'Lie' to represent an attempt by the respondent to misrepresent themselves in a more positive light

F or 'frequency' to gauge random response as well as the respondent's exaggeration or downplaying of symptoms

K to gauge 'defensiveness,' or evasion of stressful content

The 10 remaining scales known as 'clinical scales' are designed to measure for the presence of psychiatric syndromes, including:

The Y-axis statistically standardizes the grading received on each scale in a range of T-scores from 0 to 120. A mean score is 50, and 82% of respondents are considered to be the normal population falling between 30 and 70. A T-score greater than 70 indicates psychopathy in that category.

Issues of Concern

The existence of the MMPI has been concurrent with vast reforms in societal convention and increased understanding of behavioral health.[3] Likewise, the instrument has been adapted to reflect such changes. Overarching criticisms to the original test center on its disparity in addressing psychopathy in social and ethnic minorities.[1] This has been attributed to the original sample being a small group, mainly consisting of young rural Caucasian subjects from the Midwestern United States.[4] Studies have established biases in which misunderstanding or failure to culturally identify with the content of questions have led to underreporting or overreporting of mental illness.[5][1]

These shortcomings led to the release of the MMPI-2 by James N. Butcher, W. Grant Dahlstrom, John R. Graham, Auke Tellegen, and Beverly Kaemme in 1989.[6] This assessment retains the original total of 567 items with the same corresponding 14 scales with the original number of questions from the test.[6] Test items were revised based upon a larger and more diverse sample size of 2600 attuned to a 6th-grade reading level.[6] Gendered differences were replaced with a nongendered standardized scoring.[6] Despite further advancements, the MMPI-2 is still the most commonly administered version and has been translated into over 40 languages.[1]

In 2003, 9 restructured clinical or 'RC' scales were introduced as a prospective replacement for the original clinical scales.[1] These include:

The RC scales were devised to provide a streamlined interpretation and less overlap with an increased focus on the growth in understanding within psychiatry over the past 70 years. Combinations of high-scoring categories are more representative of distinct psychiatric constructs rather than the nebulous findings of the original clinical scales tying the patient to a specific diagnosis. Arguments also exist that this information is limited in that it categorizes the responder rather than providing data on an individual patient within a personalized spectrum of behavior.[1]

The RC scales have been incorporated into the most current form of the MMPI, which is known as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 Revised Form, or the MMPI-2-RF, which was released in 2008 by Yossef Ben-Porath and Auke Telleger of the University of Minnesota. The MMPI-2-RF is composed of 338 items measured by 51 scales broken into 9 validity scales, 3 higher-order scales, the 9 RC scales, 23 specific problem scales, 2 interest scales, and 5 revised personality psychopathy scales.[1]

The 9 validity scales assess incongruent answering or deceptive test-taking and include:

The 3 higher-order scales broadly categorize psychopathic presentation and include:

EID or 'emotional/internalizing dysfunction' - problems concerning mood and affect

THD or 'thought dysfunction' - problems concerning disorganization of thought

BXD or 'behavioral/external dysfunction' - problems concerning impulsive or inappropriate behavior

The problem scales highlight responses consistent with the presence of specific psychopathic and psychosomatic presentations and include:

The interest scales are designed to assess cognitive skills aptitude and learning preferences which include:

AES or aesthetic-literary interests - pursuits related to fine art

MEC or mechanical-physical interests - pursuits related to kinesthetic activities

The revised personality/psychopathology five scales are based on 107 distinct items and include:

AGG-r or 'aggressiveness-revised' - preference for excess and antagonism

PSYCH-r or 'psychoticism-revised' - preference for disconnection from reality

DISC-r or 'disconstraint-revised' - preference for impulsion and compulsion

NEGE-r or 'negative emotionality/neuroticism-revised' - preference for anxiety

INTR-r or 'introversion/low positive emotional-revised' - flat affect and timidity

It has been suggested that while the MMPI-2-RF has many additional metrics, the reduction in question number limits the amount of information about psychiatric diseases to about 60% of the original test. There has also been considerable debate over whether the new metrics are inaccurate in detecting psychopathy.[1] In separating genuine psychopathy from attempts to feign a diagnosis for personal incentive, some studies have noted the new validity scales to be overly sensitive to overreporting of symptoms to achieve a specific result. It has conversely been found that the L-r and K-r scales are particularly reliable at detecting underreporting of mental illness.[7][8] Overall, literature has been supportive of the MMPI-2-RF in identifying the accuracy of reporting psychiatric information in those who complete it.[1]

Clinical Significance

The MMPI maintains an enduring presence in the field of mental health, and its current adaption has been widely evaluated by the standard of modern behavioral health practices.[1] It continues to receive a widespread application as a threshold of determining the presence of psychopathy, as a means of constructing a differential diagnosis for mental health problems, and as a versatile test to achieve transferrable psychological data. These data points are themselves the indication of a category, and this gives behavioral health professionals a starting point to explore plausible diagnoses and initiate appropriate treatment. Completion may also offer therapeutic benefits to patients in reflecting upon their issues and improving personal understanding of their psychology.[3]

In addition to its predominant clinical application, an extensive body of research exists to assess the MMPI in all its versions for the use in criminology, population studies, and prediction of aptitude in a particular role. Several studies on the MMPI-2-RF have compared those with a criminal history to those who have undergone rehabilitation and found that high scores on externalizing scales were predictive of violent behavior.[9] The MMPI-2-RF has also been used as prescreening of applicants for law enforcement for obtaining baseline mental health or flagging for aggressive tendencies.[1][10] There has also been usage evaluating parenting suitability in custody battles over children, and in predicting the course of domestic disputes in couples.[11][12] Interpretations of the test have also been used to establish criminal intent in defendants.[1][9]

A major consensus of the MMPI in its current form is that increased accessibility for being tested improves retention without compromising outcomes. Prevailing criticisms of the original format were the extensive span of questioning and difficulty of paper administration for both completion and grading, with efforts to provide a more efficient medium well-documented since the 1980s.[13] When evaluating the use of tablet devices as compared to conventional forms of electronic administration using a home computer or laptop for taking the MMPI-RF-2, the difference in reliability of results between the two mediums was insignificant.[14] There have also been motions to use the MMPI-2-RF to assess psychopathy utilizing an algorithm using a high score on a higher-order scale and then tailoring the remaining assessment to similar questions to the indicated higher order.[15] To aid in administration to pediatric patients, an adolescent form exists known as the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent-Restructured Form (MMPI-A-RF).[16]

Clinical Pearls:

The completion of the MMPI holds value in determining care throughout a variety of treatment considerations. The test should be administered by a licensed psychotherapist, usually a psychiatrist or clinical psychologist, with informed consent obtained through discussion of the risks and benefits of completion. Analysis of the results by the psychotherapist interpreting scoring should be attached with a working diagnosis to assess for treatment response. The presence of conditions associated with high-scoring categories will ultimately guide the necessity for pharmacological or non-pharmacological treatment options. This will, in turn, outline the need for referral to appropriate mental healthcare, from continuing outpatient follow-up to institutionalization with fully-staffed nursing and rehabilitative care. Transfer of care should involve appropriate discussion of MMPI data correlated with a summary of interventions. High-scoring in concerning scales such as suicidality highlights an existing need for acute observation or placement. The validity of symptoms should also be corroborated to demonstrate whether a patient is malingering or suffering from organic disorders requiring medical management by a treatment team. The bio-ethical implications of the MMPI should also be identified if the patient is completing the test in concurrence or stipulation with legal charges, and they should be counseled on what findings might hold concerning criminality. The basis for the use of test data in determining adherence has also been documented in a sample consisting of 471 psychiatric patients, with externalizing scales predictive of whether a patient will be more likely to terminate treatment.[1] [Level 3] This illustrates the need for multi-level involvement in facilitating outreach and patient compliance.

Continuing Education / Review Questions

References

1.

2.

3.

4.

Carter JH. Racism's impact on mental health. J Natl Med Assoc. 1994 Jul;86(7):543-7. [ PMC free article: PMC2607595 ] [ PubMed: 8064907 ]

5.

Dennis PH. A comparative study of Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) scores of four apparently different black populations. J Natl Med Assoc. 1974 May;66(3):244-7 passim. [ PMC free article: PMC2609171 ] [ PubMed: 4151276 ]

6.

7.

8.

9.

10.

11.

12.

Fariña F, Redondo L, Seijo D, Novo M, Arce R. A meta-analytic review of the MMPI validity scales and indexes to detect defensiveness in custody evaluations. Int J Clin Health Psychol. 2017 May-Aug;17(2):128-138. [ PMC free article: PMC6220924 ] [ PubMed: 30487888 ]

13.

14.

15.

16.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) is the most common psychometric test devised to assess personality traits and psychopathology.

# data[].attributes.headline
What is a personality test what aligns with the Big 5 Theory/O.C.E.A.N Model of Personality?

# data[].attributes.subject
What is a personality test what aligns with the Big 5 Theory/O.C.E.A.N Model of Personality?

# data[].attributes.body
The Big Five Theory or the O.C.E.A.N model closely aligns with the Neuroticism Extroversion Openness (NEO-PI-R) test which assesses personality based on if a respondent agrees or disagrees with a list of statements and to what degree they agree or disagree.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
NEO PI-R DOMAINS AND FACETS

Each of the five domains of the NEO PI-R is represented by six specific scales that measure the facets of the domain.

Domains and facets measured by the NEO PI-R or NEO Personality Inventory-Revised.

The NEO PI-R is a concise measure of the five major domains of personality, as well as the six traits or facets that define each domain. Taken together, the five domain scales and 30 facet scales of the NEO PI-R facilitate a comprehensive and detailed assessment of normal adult personality. The NEO PI-R has useful applications in counselling, clinical psychology, psychiatry, behavioural medicine and health psychology, vocational counselling and industrial/organizational psychology, and educational and personality research.

Neuroticism (N) - refers to the chronic level of emotional adjustment and instability. High N identifies individuals who are prone to psychological distress.

Extraversion (E) - refers to the quantity and intensity of preferred interpersonal interactions, activity level, need for stimulation, and capacity for joy. High E identifies individuals who tend to be sociable, active, talkative, person oriented, optimistic, fun loving, and affectionate.

Openness to Experience (O) - refers to the active seeking and appreciation of experiences for their own sake. High O identifies individuals who are curious, imaginative, and willing to entertain novel ideas and unconventional values.

Agreeableness (A) - refers to the kinds of interactions an individual prefers along a continuum from compassion to antagonism. High A identifies individuals who tend to be soft-hearted, good natured, trusting, helpful, forgiving, and altruistic.

Conscientiousness (C) - assesses the degree of organization, persistence, control, motivation in goal-directed behaviour. High C identifies individuals who tend to be organized, reliable, hard-working, self-directed, punctual, scrupulous, ambitious, and persevering.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
NEO PI-R is a concise personality assessment test that measures the five major domains of an adult personality to assess their fit to your organization

# data[].attributes.headline
What is a personality test that aligns with the Psychodynamic Theory?

# data[].attributes.subject
What is a personality test that aligns with the Psychodynamic Theory?

# data[].attributes.body
Psychodynamic Theory closely aligns with the Rorschach test, a test that focuses on the unconscious materials made available through interpretation of images of ink blots.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Hermann Rorschach: From klecksography to psychiatry

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Hermann Rorschach was a Swiss psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, best known for developing a projective test known as the Rorschach inkblot test, a test designed to reflect unconscious parts of the personality that project into the visual stimuli…

# data[].attributes.body
AN EXTRA CHROMOSOME can affect a person’s entire genetic coding. Trisomy 21 (Down syndrome) results from an extra chromosome on the 21st chromosome. It is an example of how genetics can influence atypical behaviors in children.

# data[].attributes.body
ID

-unconscious level only

-instinct to survive

-instinct to destroy

Ego

-develops in infancy

-keeps check on ID

Superego

-where morality resides

-encourages social responsibility

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Psychoanalysis: A History of Freud’s Psychoanalytic Theory

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We explain the differences between psychoanalysis and psychotherapy.

# data[].attributes.headline
Erikson's Stages of Psychosocial Development

# data[].attributes.subject
Erikson's Stages of Psychosocial Development

# data[].attributes.body
Stage 1 – Infancy period: Trust vs. Mistrust

Stage 2 – Early Childhood period:

Stage 3 – Play Age period: Initiative vs. Guilt

Stage 4 – School Age period: Industry vs. Inferiority

Stage 5 – Adolescence period: Identity vs. Identity confusion

Stage 6 – Young Adulthood period: Intimacy vs. Isolation

Stage 7 – Adulthood period: Generativity vs. Stagnation/Self-absorption

Stage 8 – Old Age period: Integrity vs. Despair

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Definition/Introduction

Erikson's Stages of Psychosocial Development is a theory introduced in the 1950s by the psychologist and psychoanalyst Erik Erikson. It built upon Freud's theory of psychosexual development by drawing parallels in childhood stages while expanding it to include the influence of social dynamics as well as the extension of psychosocial development into adulthood.[1] It posits eight sequential stages of individual human development influenced by biological, psychological, and social factors throughout the lifespan. This bio-psychosocial approach has influenced several fields of study, including gerontology, personality development, identity formation, life cycle development, and more.[2][3]

Issues of Concern

Function

Stages arise as individuals grow and face new decisions and turning points during childhood, adolescence, and adulthood. Each stage is defined by two opposing psychological tendencies - one positive/syntactic and negative/dystonic. From this develops an ego virtue/strength or maldevelopment, respectively. If the virtue is adopted, it can help to resolve the current decision or conflict. It will also help subsequent stages of development and contribute to a stable foundation for core belief systems in relating to the self and the outer world.[3] The opposite is true with the adoption of the maldeveloped quality.

As an example, the ego identity crystallizes in stage 5, during adolescence. The two opposing qualities are ego identity and confusion/diffusion. Those who develop ego identity yield the virtue of fidelity, while the inability to do so - ego confusion - creates a quality of repudiation. With a stronger sense of ego identity, the interaction with the outer and inner world is of rejecting incongruent evaluations of self and a decreased level of anxiety, respectively.[4]

While adopting the syntonic attribute is clearly beneficial in this example, doing so should be done within reason. Extreme ego identity can become fanaticism, which can create unhealthy interactions with the self and others. One must navigate the two opposing values in each stage to find a balance, instead of only striving for the positive quality. Straying too far towards the positive tendency can be maladaptive, while leaning too far toward the negative can be malignant.[3]

Components

Some scholars have attempted to confine stages to specific ages, but Erikson did not initially define this. Instead, there are periods within childhood, adolescence, and adulthood. Each stage provides an example in which the positive attribute may be furthered.

Stages of Childhood

Stage 1 - Infancy period: Trust vs. Mistrust

Stage 2 - Early Childhood period: Autonomy vs. Shame, doubt

Stage 3 - Play Age period: Initiative vs. Guilt

Stage 4 - School Age period: Industry vs. Inferiority

Stage of Adolescence

Stage 5 - Adolescence period: Identity vs. Identity confusion

Virtue: Fidelity, Maldevelopment: Repudiation

Example: Individual weighs out their previous experiences, societal expectations, and their aspirations in establishing values and 'finding themselves.'

Stages of Adulthood

Stage 6 - Young Adulthood period: Intimacy vs. Isolation

Virtue: Love, Maldevelopment: Distantiation

Example: Individual forms close friendships or long-term partnership

Stage 7 - Adulthood period: Generativity vs. Stagnation/Self-absorption

Virtue: Care, Maldevelopment: Rejectivity

Example: Engagement with the next generation through parenting, coaching, or teaching

Stage 8 - Old Age period: Integrity vs. Despair

Virtue: Wisdom, Maldevelopment: Disdain

Example: Contemplation and acknowledgment of personal life accomplishments

A ninth stage was added by Erik Erikson's wife, Joan Erikson. It considers new challenges experienced with continued aging and incorporates aspects from all previous eight stages of psychosocial development.

The sequential layout of Erikson's Stages of Psychosocial Development might initially suggest that stage outcomes become fixed once the next stage is engaged. While there is a fixed sequence, resolution can be a life-long process, re-activated at various times depending on life events that affect the ego strength or maldeveloped belief pattern.[5] Resolution is not required to move on to the next stage. Additionally, with advancement to a new stage, preceding stages are questioned and must be reintegrated.[6] This is why his theory is sometimes referred to as an 'epigenetic principle.' Additional research suggests that the latter four stages are, to an extent, a repetition of previous stages.[7] As an example, the stage of intimacy can be considered a combination of autonomy and trust. Thus, the developmental stages and formation of identity is an ever-evolving process, as opposed to a rigid concrete system.

Clinical Significance

Several clinical tools and further research have emanated from and have undergone significant influence by Erikson's Stages of Development:

1. Studying Erikson's stages serve as a basis of treatment for different recovery stages of mental illness.[8] For example, the initial stage of trust vs. mistrust parallels the mental illness recovery stage concerning the acceptance of the mental illness and trusting the idea of recovery.

2. The Erikson Psychosocial Stage Inventory (EPSI) was based on Erikson's stages, and the modified version following it (MEPSI) is a reliable tool used to assess psychosocial development.[9][10]

3. A model of psychodynamic psychotherapy is based on the concept and staging of Erikson's theory.[3]

Nursing, Allied Health, and Interprofessional Team Interventions

Erikson's Stages of Psychosocial Development can be utilized by mental health providers when treating patients who are facing periods of adjustment or turning points in life. When taken in the appropriate context to social and cultural factors, it can be a means for the patient to augment awareness and understanding of themselves. While many stages focus on periods early in life, it can serve as a conceptual and possibly actionable guide for those later in life as well.[11] This area continues to be an active focus of research, as Erickson's developmental maturity in mid-life is studied alongside global cognitive and executive function, as well as emotional health.[12]

This research was supported (in whole or part) by HCA Healthcare and/or an HCA Healthcare affiliated entity. The views expressed in this publication represent those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official views of HCA Healthcare or any of its affiliated entities.

References

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Eriksons Stages of Psychosocial Development

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Erikson's Stages of Psychosocial Development is a theory introduced in the 1950s by the psychologist and psychoanalyst Erik Erikson. It built upon Freud's theory of psychosexual development by drawing parallels in childhood stages while expanding it to include the influence of social dynamics as well as the extension of psychosocial development into adulthood.[1] It posits eight sequential stages of individual human development influenced by biological, psychological, and social factors throughout the lifespan.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Boosts Confidence

2. Improves Communication

3. Increases Career Opportunities

4. Strengthens Relationships

5. Reduces Stress

6. Encourages Personal Growth

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What is Personality Development and Why is it Important?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Learn what is personality development, why it matters, and how it helps build confidence, improve communication, and create lasting personal growth.

# data[].attributes.body
Personality development is one of the most critical aspects of human development. It is a complex process that begins in our childhood and affects every aspect of our lives. All of us are unique individuals, with unique traits and talents. How we use these talents and how we develop our personalities is critical to our success and happiness in life.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Science of Personality Development: Unlocking the Potential of the Person Within

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Personality development is one of the most critical aspects of human development. It is a complex process that begins in our childhood and affects every aspect of our lives. All of us are unique individuals, with unique traits and talents. How we use these talents and how we develop our personalities is critical to our success and happiness in life. In this article, the science of personality development will be explored, with an emphasis on the principles and theories that explain how this proc

# data[].attributes.body
The gradual development of personality in terms of characteristic emotional responses or temperament, a recognizable style of life, personal roles and role behaviors, a set of values and goals, typical patterns of adjustment, characteristic interpersonal relations and sexual relationships, characteristic traits, and a relatively fixed self-image.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A trusted reference in the field of psychology, offering more than 25,000 clear and authoritative entries.

# data[].attributes.body
Examples of atypical development ages 14-21

# data[].attributes.body
A baby’s first year of life is a time of immense development and cerebral plasticity. Following today’s research and clinical observation, the period of the first year of life provides a new challenge inasmuch it is presently clear that it is possible to identify developmental anomalies in this window of time. Effecting early screening procedures could prove very useful

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Babies under 1 year with atypical development: Perspectives for preventive individuation and treatment

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A baby’s first year of life is a time of immense development and cerebral plasticity. Following today’s research and clinical observation, the period of the first year of life provides a new challenge inasmuch it is presently clear that it is…

# data[].attributes.body
Examples of atypical development in children ages 4-8

# data[].attributes.headline
Social Influences on Typical and Atypical Development Ted Talk

# data[].attributes.subject
Social Influences on Typical and Atypical Development Ted Talk

# data[].attributes.body
Typical and atypical development refers to age-appropriate developmental milestones that a child should reach as they grow, like walking by 18 months or mirroring facial expressions, especially when compared to other children their age. Major influencers of development include genetic and environmental factors, as well as social interactions. Social interactions can significantly influence brain development, cognitive skills, and mental health.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How Every Child Can Thrive by Five | Molly Wright | TED

# data[].attributes.body
Atypical development refers to when a child's development is significantly delayed or different from their peers.

This video explores how atypical development manifests through physical delays, cognitive dysfunction, and social-emotional challenges.

The video emphasizes the importance of recognizing signs of atypical development early to provide appropriate support for affected children.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
Contributors: Lisa RoundyInstructorLRInstructor: Lisa Roundy Show more

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Atypical Development in Children: Effects & Impacts on Learning - Video | Study.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Explore how atypical development affects children’s learning and behavior. Dive into the educational video and take the quiz to test your understanding.

# data[].attributes.body
If development is not on track, teachers should speak with parents and connect them with specialists who can help. Specialists will administer another type of assessment that is specially designed to diagnose developmental disabilities. Atypically developing children benefit from early intervention programs that can help them get back on track.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Image 5.8 Drinking Juice is licensed under CC by 1.0

Most children develop in a similar way. Even when cultural backgrounds, geographic locations, and personal characteristics vary, child development is generalizable. That does not mean, however, that all children are the same. Some children develop more quickly in cognitive areas, but more slowly in social areas. Some children develop more quickly in general than others, some more slowly. Children are living, breathing beings, and some variation is normal. When a child develops in the way that we expect, we refer to this as typical development. There is room for a good deal of variance in typical development. For instance, babies can speak their first words anywhere from 9 to 13 months, and children can write their own names anywhere from 3 to 5 years. This variance is healthy and normal.

Some variance is unusual, and that is referred to as atypical development. Atypical development can slow down growth in other areas of a child's life. If a child cannot speak any words by 15 or 16 months, it is considered atypical development. The ways and speed in which children grow is measured by tools called developmental assessments. The caring adults in a child's life benefit from knowing how the child is developing, where they are struggling, and what to expect next. Despite the name, developmental assessments are not complicated standardized tests that a child must complete. Instead, they are carried out by the teacher through observing the child at play or by playing small games and activities with the child. The teacher records the child's developmental milestones on the assessment and later shares it with the parents. If development is not on track, teachers should speak with parents and connect them with specialists who can help. Specialists will administer another type of assessment that is specially designed to diagnose developmental disabilities. Atypically developing children benefit from early intervention programs that can help them get back on track.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Most children develop in a similar way. Even when cultural backgrounds, geographic locations, and personal characteristics vary, child development is generalizable. That does not mean, however, that all children are the same. Some children develop more quickly in cognitive areas, but more slowly in social areas.

# data[].attributes.body
Atypical behaviors should be noted and carefully recorded. They may be isolated events that have little or no impact on later development. They might, however, be early warning signs of later and more significant problems. Patterns of atypical behavior can be useful in confirming areas of need.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.authors[].name
National Center for Learning Disabilities (NCLD)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Early Identification: Normal and Atypical Development

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Children's development usually follows a known and predictable course. The acquisition of certain skills and abilities is often used to gauge children's development. These skills and abilities are known as developmental milestones. Some children exhibit behaviors that fall outside of the normal, or expected, range of development.

# data[].attributes.body
We are born with a personality that is unique to us as individuals. Over the course of our lives our personalities change and they are shaped by factors like maturity, environments, and major life events. It's not the event itself that shapes us, but our perception of it.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Personality Development in Emerging Adulthood—How the Perception of Life Events and Mindset Affect Personality Trait Change

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Personality changes throughout the life course and change is often caused by environmental influences, such as critical life events. In the present study, we investigate personality trait development in emerging adulthood as a result of experiencing…

# data[].attributes.body
People with antisocial personality disorder or AsPD behave in ways that are against societal norms, like breaking the law, substance abuse, and/or negative or aggressive behavior. There have been few advancements in treating AsPD specifically; however, there are treatments that target the symptoms. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, Cognitive Analytic Therapy, and Dialectical Behavior Therapy are some of the many interventions used to focus on behaviors like anger and aggression.

# data[].attributes.body
The Big Five personality traits: conscientiousness, agreeableness, neuroticism, openness to experience, and extroversion are examined to indicate signs of abnormal personality development. Daily activities and the people we associate with affect how we experience life.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Big Five, Everyday Contexts and Activities, and Affective Experience

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Prior research shows that personality traits predict time spent with different people and frequency of engagement in different activities. Further, personality traits, company, and activity are related to the experience of affect. However, little…

# data[].attributes.headline
Identity Achievement vs Identity Diffusion

# data[].attributes.subject
Identity Achievement vs Identity Diffusion

# data[].attributes.body
Psychologist Erik Erikson notes the main psychological issue of the teenage years is knowing who you are and taking a secure knowing of self to build your future. He defines this as the identity achievement vs identity Diffusion. Similarly, the Dutch Self Concept examines individuals with borderline personality disorder as it relates to identity.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Forming a secure identity is one of the main psychological tasks of adolescence. During the turbulent teen years, you must come to grips with who you are, and project into the future as you think about your ideal career pursuits and commitments to an overall ideology that will guide your life. The psychoanalyst Erik Erikson defined "identity achievement vs. identity diffusion" as the primary psychosocial issue of the period. During this time, you explore alternatives until you arrive at a clear pathway. Forming one of the key theories of adolescence, Erikson's work has received considerable attention as researchers attempt to put his ideas to the empirical test.

As important as Erikson's work has become to researchers investigating the so-called "normal" pathways of adolescent development, it has yet to be applied to the disturbed identity processes that characterize borderline personality disorder. Yet, the theory would seem to have a great deal of potential for understanding the issues that face people with this disorder as they attempt to come to grips with their own self-definition after having arrived at adolescence with what are undoubtedly unique challenges. Annabel Bogaerts and colleagues (2018) of the University of Leuven proposed that Erikson's theoretical framework could indeed provide an understanding of identity in borderline personality disorder. Their research examined how well their "Dutch Self-concept and Identity Measure (SCIM)," designed to examine identity processes in teens and young adults in general, could be used to gain insight into how individuals with borderline personality disorder struggle with their own unique identity issues.

In addition to examining the SCIM's ability to understand the dimensions of identity in people with borderline personality disorder, the Dutch researchers looked specifically at what they call the "identity dimensions" of exploration and commitment. Although Erikson believed that the only way to arrive at a clear sense of identity was to evaluate alternatives, identity researchers have come to understand that you can have a clear sense of identity without ever giving thought to various options. If you take on entirely the views of your parents (or other strong figures in your life) and their belief systems and career plans for you, then you would have a firm identity but not one that is uniquely yours. Conversely, you could also be enmeshed in a constant struggle to clarify your goals and values, never reaching a clear resolution. Neither of these possibilities are actually allowed for in Erikson's theory. The "Dimensions of Identity Development Scale (DIDS)" includes, therefore, scales measuring "exploration in breadth" scale ("I think actively about different directions I might take in my life)," "Exploration in depth" ("I talk with other people about my plans for the future"), and "Identification with commitment" ("My plans for the future match my own true interests and values").

Bogaerts et al. administered the SCIM to 3 samples of emerging adults averaging about 25 years of age. Two of these samples were described as convenience samples, consisting of about 400 participants each. The third was selected specifically to include individuals who would be matched in with the larger population in terms of age, gender, and educational level and selected to participate by "master psychology students." These were the participants identified as most likely to have borderline personality disorder. Additionally, all three samples completed measures of depression and anxiety, and the third (clinical sample) a measure of borderline personality disorder.

The 25-item SCIM divides into 3 scales. You can test yourself on the items below by rating each from 1 (completely disagree) to 7 (completely agree), or just "I don't know":

1. I know what I believe or value

2. When someone describes me, I know if they are right or wrong

3. When I look at my childhood pictures I feel like there is a thread connecting my past to now

4. Sometimes I pick another person and try to be just like them, even when I'm alone

5. I know who I am

6. I change a lot depending on the situation

7. I have never really known what I believe or value

8. I feel like a puzzle and the pieces don't fit together

9. I am good

10. I imitate other people instead of being myself

11. I am so different with different people that I'm not sure which is the "real me"

12. I am broken

13. When I remember my childhood I feel connected to my younger self

14. I feel lost when I think about who I am

15. I always have a good sense about what is important to me

16. I am so similar to certain people that sometimes I feel like we are the same person

17. I am basically the same person that I've always been

18. I feel empty inside, like a person without a soul

19. My opinions can shift quickly from one extreme to another

20. I no longer know who I am

21. I am more capable when I am with others than when I am by myself

22. No one knows who I really am

23. I try to act the same as the people I'm with (interests, music, dress) and I change that all the time

24. I am only complete when I am with other people

25. The things that are most important to me change pretty often

Now, total your score within each of the three subscales as noted below:

Consolidated Identity: 1, 2, 3, 5, 9, 14, 15, 17

Disturbed Identity: 4, 6, 7, 10, 12, 16, 19, 21, 23, 24, 25

Lack of identity, 8, 13, 15, 18, 20, 22

The authors do not present mean scale scores for the three samples, but instead compared the three groups in terms of which items were most sensitive to scores on a measure of borderline personality disorder administered to participants. Using the data they present as a guide, the items least indicative of borderline personality disorder (i.e. Sample 3) were 14, 16, and 24, but all the rest fit the above scale organization in a way similar to that of the two other samples. The Consolidated Identity Scale was not as sensitive to borderline personality disorder scores as were the other two scales, indicating that the specific identity issues confronted by individuals with this disorder are most likely to involve either a disturbed or lack of identity.

Furthermore, across the 3 samples, individuals scoring high on the disturbed Identity scale were most likely to engage in what the authors call "ruminative exploration," in which the individual becomes preoccupied with identity issues. Individuals scoring high on this scale have "an abiding sense of incoherence and discontinuity" (p. 62). Of the three subscales, furthermore, Lack of Identity scores seemed to signify the greatest concern, as individuals scoring high on this scale reported "lower levels of adaptive identity dimensions, higher levels of ruminative exploration, and symptoms of anxiety, depression, and borderline personality disorder" (p. 63).

By looking at borderline personality disorder in terms of identity disturbance, the Belgian study helps to place the symptoms of what are seen as a distinct psychological entity in terms of a set of developmentally-based dimensions. Furthermore, by helping individuals to focus on the identity concerns central to this disorder, this study's findings can provide targeted areas of concern that individuals can work on to address, and confront, as they develop through their adult years. Knowing who you are is a central component of fulfillment, and if individuals with deep-seated identity issues can start to think about their identity as a developmental issue, they too can hope to move forward in their own exploration.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Identity in Borderline Personality Disorder: A New Approach

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Forming a secure identity is one of the main psychological tasks of adolescence. During the turbulent teen years, you must come to grips with who you are, and project into the future as you think about your ideal career pursuits and commitments to an overall ideology that will guide your life.

# data[].attributes.body
Two month old developmental markers can indicate typical and atypical development. At this age babies should be able to accomplish tracking, pull to sit, and maintaining a horizontal suspension. Identifying early motor movements and concerns can be beneficial to development.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
2 Month Typical & Atypical Development | Baby Motor Development Exam

# data[].attributes.headline
Jean Piaget's Four Stages of Cognitive Development

# data[].attributes.subject
Jean Piaget's Four Stages of Cognitive Development

# data[].attributes.body
1. Sensor motor (0 to 2 years)

-causality and object permanence

2. Pre-operational Stage (2 to 7 years)

-symbolic thought and language

3. Concrete Operational Stage (7 to 11 years)

-logical operations and inductive reasoning

4. Formal Operational Stage (12 -older)

-logical operations and abstractions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Definition/Introduction

In medieval society, childhood did not exist. Around seven years of age, they took the child as a little adult in the community with a similar expectation for a job, marriage, and legal consequences. We can give the crown for originating ideas of development to Charles Darwin, in recognition of his work on the origins of ethology (the scientific study of the evolutionary basis of behavior) and "A biographical sketch of an infant."

It wasn't until the 20 century that developmental theories came forth. When conceptualizing cognitive development, we cannot ignore the work of Jean Piaget. Piaget suggested that when young infants experience an event, they process new information by balancing between assimilation and accommodation. Assimilation is taking in new information and fitting into previously understood mental schemas while accommodation is adapting and revising the previously planned mental schema according to the novel information. Piaget divided child development into four stages. The first stage, Sensorimotor (ages 0 to 2 years of age), is the time when children master two phenomena: causality and object permanence. Infants use their senses and motor abilities to manipulate their surroundings and learn about the environment. They understand a cause-and-effect relationship like shaking a rattle may produce sound and may repeat it or how crying can make the parent(s) rush to give them attention. Soon with frontal lobe maturation and memory development, infants can make mental schemas and can imagine what may happen without physically causing an effect and thus plan out actions better (emergence of thought). Object permanence emerges around six months of age. It is the concept that objects continue to exist even when they are not presently visible. Then comes the "pre-operational" stage (2 to 7 years), when a child can use mental representations, symbolic thought, and language. The infant learns to imitate and pretend to play. He is egocentric, i.e., unable to perceive that people can think differently than him, and everything (good or bad) somehow links to him. This stage is followed by the "concrete operational stage" (7 to 11 years) when the child uses logical operations when solving problems, including mastery of conservation and inductive reasoning. Formal operational stage (12 years and up), suggests an adolescent can use logical operations with the ability to use abstractions. He can understand theories and hypothesize and comprehend abstract ideas like love and justice.

Some concerns to keep in mind when understanding child cognitive development and Piaget's stages, is poor generalizability of stages. For example, conservation may overlap between pre-operational and concrete operational stage as the child masters it in one task and not in another. Similarly, our understanding now is that a child masters the "Theory of Mind" by 4 to 5 years of age, much earlier than when Piaget suggested that egocentrism resolves.[1]

Stages of Cognitive development (problem-solving/Intelligence): The word intelligence derives from the Latin word "intelligere," which means to understand or perceive. Problem-solving and cognitive development progresses from the establishment of object permanence, causality, and symbolic thinking with concrete (hands-on learning) to abstract thinking and embedding of implicit (unconscious) to explicit memory development.

Newborn to 2 months: At birth, the optical focal length is approximately 10 inches. Infants seek stimuli actively, habituates to the familiar, and respond more actively when stimuli change. The initial responses are more reflexive, like sucking and grasping. He can fix and follow a slow horizontal arc and eventually will follow past the midline. He prefers a contrast, colors, and faces, understanding familiar from moderately novel stimuli. As he habituates to the caregiver's faces, he develops a preference. He will stare momentarily where an object has disappeared from (lack of object permanence). At this stage, he prefers high-pitched voices.

2 to 6 months: Infants engage in a purposeful sensory exploration of his body, staring at his hands and reaching and touching his body parts. Thus, building on to the concept of cause and effect and self-understanding. He appreciates sensation and changes outside of himself with less regularity. As he masters his motor abilities, something happens by chance, and then he repeats it. For example, touching a button may light up the toy, or crying can cause the appearance of the caregiver. He will anticipate routines at this age.

6 to 12 months: Object permanence emerges as the infant looks for objects. He will look for partially hidden objects first (6 months) and then completely hidden, for example, will uncover toys and engage in peek-a-boo (9 months). Separation anxiety and stranger anxiety emerge as he understands out of sight is not out of mind. As his motor abilities advance, he further explores using his senses by reaching, inspecting, holding, mouthing, and dropping objects. He can manipulate his environment, learning cause and effect by trial and error, like banging two blocks can produce a sound. Eventually, he builds a mental schema (as Piaget suggested) and learns to use objects functionally, for example, presses a button intentionally to open and reach inside a toy box.

12 to 18 months: Around this time, motor abilities make it easier for the child to walk and reach, grasp, and release. He can explore toys to make them work. Novel play skills emerge. He imitates gestures and sounds, and egocentric pretend play emerges. As object permanence and memory advance, he can find a toy after witnessing a series of displacements and tracks moving objects.

18 to 24 months: As memory and processing skills advance and frontal lobes mature, he can now imagine outcomes without so much physical manipulation, and new problem-solving strategies emerge without rehearsal. Thought emerges, and there is the ability to plan actions. Object permanence establishes completely, and he can search for an object by anticipating where it may be, without witnessing its displacement. At 18 months, symbolic play expands from self, and instead of pretending to eat himself, he may give the teddy bear a bottle and can imitate housework.

24 to 60 months (Preschool years): During this stage, magical and wishful thinking emerges; for example, the sun went home because it was tired. This ability may also give rise to apprehensions with fear of monsters, and having logical solutions may not be enough for reassurance. Perception will dominate logic and giving them an imaginary tool, like a monster spray, to help relieve that anxiety may be more helpful. Similarly, conservation and volume concept lacks, and what appears bigger or larger is more. For example, one cookie split into two may be equal to two cookies. At this stage, a child also has a poor concept of cause and may think he got sick because he misbehaved. He is egocentric in his approach and may look at situations from only his point of view, offering comfort from his stuffed toy to an upset loved one. At 36 months, he can understand simple time concepts, identifies shapes, compares two items (e.g., bigger), and counts to "3". Play becomes more comprehensive from simple scripts of feeding a baby doll to going to the park. At 48 months, he can count to four, identifies 4 colors and understands opposites. At 60 months, pre-literacy and numeracy skills further, and he can count to 10 accurately, recites "ABC's by rote, and recognizes a few letters. A child also develops hand preference at this age. During the ages of 4 to 5 years, play stories become yet more detailed and may include scenarios from imagination, including imaginary friends. Playing with some game rules and obedience to those rules also establishes during the pre-school years. Rules can be absolute.

Age 6 to 12 years: During early school years, scientific reasoning and understanding of physical laws of conservation, including weight and volume develop. A child can understand multiple points of view and can understand one perspective of a situation. They realize the rules of the game can change with mutual agreement. There is mastery of basic literacy skills of reading and numbers are mastered initially, and eventually, around third to fourth grade, emphasis shifts from learning to read to reading to learn, and from spellings to composition writing. All these stages need mastery of sustained attention and processing skills, receptive and expressive language, and memory development and recall. The limitation of this stage is an inability to comprehend abstract ideas and relying on logical answers.

Twelve and above (adolescence): During this age, teens can exercise logic in a systemic, scientific way. They can apply abstract thinking to solve algebraic problems and apply multiple logics simultaneously to reach a scientific solution. It is easier to use these concepts to schoolwork only earlier. Later in adolescence and adulthood, these can also apply to emotional and personal life problems. Magical thinking or following ideal guides decisions more than wisdom. Some may have more influence from religiosity/moral rules and absolute concepts of right and wrong. Questioning the prevalent code of conduct may cause anxiety or rebellion and eventually lead to the development of personal ethics. Side by side, social cognition, apart from self, also is developing and concepts of justice, patriarchy, politics, etc. establish. During late teens and early adulthood, thinking about the future, including ideas such as love, commitment, and career goals, become important.[2]

Issues of Concern

Pediatricians and primary care practitioners are in a prime position to monitor a child's growth and development in children and, in particular, a child's cognitive development. A lag may show a developmental disorder like attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder, learning disability, global developmental delay, developmental language disorder, developmental coordination disorder, mild intellectual disability, autism spectrum disorders, moderate-severe intellectual disability, cerebral palsy, fetal alcohol syndrome (FASD), vision impairment or deafness. The most well-known causes of intellectual disability are FASD, Down syndrome, fragile X, other genetic/chromosomal problems, lead, other toxins, and environmental influences such as poverty, malnutrition, abuse, and neglect. Prenatal causes of intellectual disability (ID) include infection, toxins and teratogens, congenital hypothyroidism, inborn errors of metabolism, and genetic abnormalities. Fetal alcohol syndrome is the most common preventable cause of ID. Down syndrome is the most common genetic cause, and Fragile X is the most common inherited cause. Thus for a workup for intellectual disability, first-tier tests recommended are chromosomal microarray and fragile X testing.

Clinical concerns can arise in the following areas, visual analysis, proprioception, motor control, memory storage and recall, attention span and sequencing, and deficits in receptive and/or expressive language. Early recognition leads to earlier diagnosis and intervention, which has shown promising results in improved cognition. Apart from what is best for children and families, it saves economic expenditure on disabilities later. Thus, not only surveillance but also active screening for developmental delays should be an integral part of medical practice.[3] Some commonly used measures are the Ages and stages questionnaire, Survey of well being of young children, etc. If surveillance and screening are concerning, a referral is necessary for early intervention instead of watchful waiting.

Intellectual disability is defined when there is a concern for both intellectual and adaptive functioning. Usually, on standardized measures, this means a score below two standard deviations to the mean, which is 100 for most measures. Standardized tests used to measure intellectual function include:

Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC),

Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence (WPPSI)

The standardized test for adaptive functioning include:

Learning disability should be suspected when the Intelligence score is within the average range, but there is a significant discrepancy when compared to achievement scores and/or when a child does not respond to evidence-based interventions. Evidence-based interventions include increasing instruction time and specialized instructions by trained personnel in the deficit areas.

Clinical Significance

Early intervention during the "critical period" in development has shown promising results.[4] Thus clinicians must take the lead to diagnose, treat, and establish resources for early intervention to provide optimal health opportunities to our children. The provision of early intervention services should be in two areas; biological risk/disabilities and environmental risk.

Pediatricians and primary care practitioners should know and understand The Individuals with Disabilities Act (IDEA) and other federal policies. Early intervention laws give entitlement to services from birth, through early intervention home-based service, the Individualized family service plan (IFSP) for birth to 3 years, and individualized education plans (IEP) for ages 3 to 21 years. The goal is to minimize or prevent disability by accommodating children with intellectual disabilities or changing the curriculum to the child's individualized needs. This plan should be based on an interprofessional assessment to understand the child's needs.

Thus, medical homes should establish a partnership with social workers and psychologists/psychiatrists for thorough evaluations, lawyers to explore legal support and advocacy for services, therapists, early intervention providers, and schools to plan individualized goals and monitor progress.

References

1.

Newcombe NS. Cognitive development: changing views of cognitive change. Wiley Interdiscip Rev Cogn Sci. 2013 Sep;4(5):479-491. [ PubMed: 26304241 ]

2.

Wilks T, Gerber RJ, Erdie-Lalena C. Developmental milestones: cognitive development. Pediatr Rev. 2010 Sep;31(9):364-7. [ PubMed: 20810700 ]

3.

Council on Children With Disabilities; Section on Developmental Behavioral Pediatrics; Bright Futures Steering Committee; Medical Home Initiatives for Children With Special Needs Project Advisory Committee. Identifying infants and young children with developmental disorders in the medical home: an algorithm for developmental surveillance and screening. Pediatrics. 2006 Jul;118(1):405-20. [ PubMed: 16818591 ]

4.

Alderman H, Behrman JR, Glewwe P, Fernald L, Walker S. Evidence of Impact of Interventions on Growth and Development during Early and Middle Childhood. In: Bundy DAP, Silva Nd, Horton S, Jamison DT, Patton GC, editors. Child and Adolescent Health and Development. 3rd ed. The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development / The World Bank; Washington (DC): Nov 20, 2017. [ PubMed: 30212122 ]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In medieval society, childhood did not exist. Around seven years of age, they took the child as a little adult in the community with a similar expectation for a job, marriage, and legal consequences.

# data[].attributes.headline
Question-2  What interventions might you use to address atypical personality development across the lifespan? (1)

# data[].attributes.subject
Question-2  What interventions might you use to address atypical personality development across the lifespan? (1)

# data[].attributes.body
Interventions for atypical personality development across the lifespan include early identification, psychotherapy, social skills training, and family-based approaches tailored to developmental stages. These strategies aim to promote adaptive functioning, emotional regulation, and resilient

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.alternative_text
Question-2  What interventions might you use to address atypical personality development across the lifespan?

# data[].attributes.headline
Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory (4)

# data[].attributes.subject
Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory (4)

# data[].attributes.body
Development is shaped by multiple environmental systems: microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem, and chronosystem.

# data[].attributes.headline
What might be some theories as to how normal and abnormal personality development occurs? (1)

# data[].attributes.subject
What might be some theories as to how normal and abnormal personality development occurs? (1)

# data[].attributes.body
Normal and abnormal personality development can be explained in the following theories: Normal Personality Development are: Piaget’s Cognitive Development Theory, Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory. Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory. Abnormal Personality Development Theories are: Biological and Genetic Models, Cognitive-Behavioral Theory, Attachment Theory, Sociocultural and Environmental Models, Developmental Psychopathology Perspective.

# data[].attributes.body
Emphasizes the role of social interaction and culture in cognitive development.

Zone of proximal development (ZPD) highlights the gap between what a child can do alone vs. with help.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sociocultural Theory: Examples and Applications

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sociocultural theory explains how social interaction and culture shape learning and cognitive development. Learn how Vygotsky’s theory works.

# data[].attributes.headline
Behavioral Genetis and Child Temperament

# data[].attributes.subject
Behavioral Genetis and Child Temperament

# data[].attributes.body
Behavioral genetics goes further than the nature vs nurture argument when you consider early links between temperament and behavior problems.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2005 Aug 22.

Abstract

Most temperament theories presume a biological basis to those behavioral tendencies thought to be temperamental in origin. Behavioral genetic methods can be used to test this assumption. Twin and adoption studies suggest that individual differences in infant and child temperament are genetically influenced. However, behavioral genetics has much more to offer to the study of temperament than simple heritability estimates. The present paper describes some recent findings from behavioral genetics research in temperament that go well beyond the basic nature-nurture question. These findings include the importance of nonshared environmental influences on temperament, genetic continuity and environmental change during development, links between temperament and behavior problems, and harnessing the power of molecular genetics to identify specific genes responsible for genetic influence on early temperament.

Keywords: genetic, shared environment, nonshared environment, heritability, temperament

Although there are many different theories of child temperament, most agree that temperament refers to stable, early appearing individual differences in behavioral tendencies that have a constitutional basis. Soon after birth, children show a great deal of variation in those behavioral dimensions considered to be temperamental (e.g., emotionality, activity level, attention/persistence, sociability, reactivity, etc.). For example, some children cry easily and intensely whereas others are more easy going; some are highly active and always on the go where others are more sedentary; some attend and persist in tasks for long periods of time where others' attention wanders quickly. It is these individual differences and the variations in between that are of interest to behavioral geneticists. That is, we are interested in understanding why children differ in their temperaments. Temperament theories suggest that such individual differences have a biological or constitutional foundation. This is an empirical question that can be answered using behavioral genetic methods.

After a brief review of behavioral genetic methodology, this paper will examine research exploring the etiology of individual differences in infant and child temperament. Behavioral genetics research, however, has much more to offer the study of temperament than estimates of genetic influence. To that end, this paper will also examine the nature of environmental influences on temperament; the etiology of continuity and change in temperament; links between temperament and behavior problems; and the merging of behavioral and molecular genetic techniques to identify specific genes that affect temperament.

Quantitative Behavioral Genetics Methods

A goal of behavioral genetic research is to estimate the extent to which genetic and environmental factors contribute to behavioral variability in the population under study. This involves decomposing the observed (i.e., phenotypic) variance of a trait into genetic and environmental variance components. Heritability ( h), the genetic effect size, is the proportion of phenotypic variance that can be attributed to genetic factors. The remaining variance is attributed to environmental factors which comprise all nonheritable influences including prenatal factors. Environmental variance can be further decomposed into shared and nonshared environmental influences. Shared environmental variance ( c) is familial resemblance that is not explained by genetic variance. Thus, shared environmental variance includes those environmental influences that are shared by family members and act to enhance familial similarity. Nonshared environmental variance ( e) is a residual variance that includes measurement error and environmental influences that are unique to each individual. These unique environmental influences operate to make members of the same family different from one another. Possible sources of nonshared environmental variance include differential parental treatment; extrafamilial relationships with friends, peers and teachers; and nonsystematic factors such as accidents or illness.

The two designs most frequently used to disentangle genetic and environmental sources of variance in infant and child temperament are the twin design and the adoptive/nonadoptive sibling design. The twin method involves comparing genetically identical (MZ) twins with fraternal (DZ) twins who share approximately 50% of their segregating genes. Genetic influences are implied when co-twin similarity covaries with the degree of genetic relatedness. Thus, according to the genetic hypothesis, MZ twins should be approximately twice as similar as DZ twins. DZ twin resemblance that exceeds that predicted by the genetic hypothesis (i.e., resemblance greater than one-half the MZ twin resemblance) suggests the presence of shared environmental influences. Because MZ twins share all of their genes, differences within pairs of identical twins can only be due to environmental influences that are unique to each individual (i.e., MZ twin differences indicate nonshared environmental influences). The adoptive/nonadoptive sibling design shares a similar logic, but compares the similarity of adoptive and nonadoptive sibling pairs. Genetic influences are implied when nonadoptive siblings who share approximately 50% of their segregating genes are more similar than adoptive siblings who are not genetically related. Shared environmental influences are suggested when genetically unrelated adoptive siblings resemble each other. (See Plomin, DeFries, McClearn & McGuffin for more information about behavioral genetics methods).

Behavioral Genetic Studies of Temperament

Although Thomas and Chess' theoretical perspective based on data from the New York Longitudinal Study (NYLS) is most common to the pediatric literature, no single theory dominates behavioral genetic studies of temperament. As indicated above, there are many different theories of temperament. These approaches differ in those behavioral dimensions that are considered to fall under the rubric of temperament, however, some dimensions, such as activity level and emotionality, appear in nearly all theories of temperament. (See Goldsmith et al. 1987 for a discussion of theoretical orientations to temperament).

Two measures that are frequently employed in behavioral genetic studies of temperament are the Colorado Child Temperament Inventory (CCTI) and the Infant Behavior Record (IBR). The CCTI is a questionnaire measure that is based on factor analyses of items designed to assess both Buss and Plomin's EAS (emotionality, activity, sociability) temperaments and the nine NYLS temperaments. The parent and teacher versions of the CCTI assess Emotionality (negative emotionality including distress, fear, and anger), Activity (the tempo, energy, and vigor with which the child behaves), Sociability (a preference to be with other people), Shyness (wariness with strangers), and Attention/Persistence (the tendency to attend and persist when working on tasks). The IBR is often used to provide an observational measure of infant temperament. This rating scale is typically completed by an examiner following administration of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development. The IBR consists of items evaluating broad dimensions of infant behavior, including interpersonal, affective, motivational, and sensory behavioral domains. Factor analyses of the IBR items yields three factors related to dimensions found in most systems of temperament: Activity (energy and body movement), Task Orientation (attention span and persistence), and Affect-Extraversion (positive emotionality and sociability), . The temperament dimensions assessed by these two measures are well-studied in behavioral genetics research, however, as will be seen below, a variety of other dimensions have also been explored.

Genetic Influences on Child Temperament

Twin studies using parent ratings, the most frequently employed measure of temperament in infancy and childhood, provide strong evidence of genetic influences on temperament. Such studies consistently find that MZ cotwins are more similar than DZ cotwins across a wide variety of temperament dimensions including emotionality, activity, shyness, sociability, attention/persistence, approach, adaptability, distress, positive affect and negative affect ⁻. Although estimates of heritability tend to differ from sample to sample, they generally fall within the range of .20 to .60, suggesting that genetic differences among individuals account for approximately 20% to 60% of the variability of temperament within a population. With few exceptions (e.g., soothability and rhythmicity, which show little genetic influence), there is no consistent pattern of differential heritability across dimensions.

Given that temperament is assumed to be biologically based, it is not surprising to find that parent-rated temperament is genetically influenced. What is surprising, however, is the unusual pattern of twin resemblances (as indexed by twin correlations) that frequently emerge when temperament is assessed by parent ratings. MZ correlations for parent-rated temperament dimensions are typically moderate; whereas DZ correlations are much lower than one half the MZ correlations as would be predicted from the simple genetic model. In fact, the DZ correlations are often near zero or even negative ⁻. The pattern of very low DZ correlations that emerges with parent ratings of temperament is significant because it implies that DZ twins are perceived as no more similar as two randomly-paired children, and in some instances are regarded as having opposing temperaments.

Also puzzling is the finding that although twin studies consistently yield evidence of a genetic influence on parent-rated temperament, adoption studies suggest little or no genetic influences on children's temperament as rated by their parents. For example, in the Colorado Adoption Project, (CAP), neither genetically related nonadoptive siblings nor genetically unrelated adoptive siblings displayed any resemblance on parent reports of temperament-a finding that replicated across early childhood, middle childhood, and early adolescence ⁻. Similarly, a combined twin and stepfamily study found significant genetic influences on each of the four EAS dimensions; however, heritability estimates were greater for twins than nontwins.

These puzzling outcomes do not arise when temperament is assessed via more objective measures such as tester and observer ratings or mechanical measures, , ⁻. Although less frequent than parent-rating studies of temperament, there are a handful of twin studies that have employed observational/behavioral measures of activity level, behavioral inhibition, shyness, fearfulness, affect/extraversion, and task orientation. As with parent ratings, these measures yield evidence of significant genetic influence (and a similar range of heritabilities, i.e., also from .20 to .60), but the problem of low DZ correlations does not emerge. For example, in the MacArthur Longitudinal Twin Study (MALTS) observational measures of affect/extraversion, activity, task orientation and shyness were obtained for over 200 twin pairs at 14, 20, 24, and 36 months of age. Averaging across age, the DZ correlations for all dimensions were positive and significantly different from zero (ranging from .19 to .63); and consistent with genetic expectations, the DZ twin correlations were approximately half that of the MZ twins. Interestingly, when parents rated the same twins on similar dimensions the DZ twin correlations were negative (ranging from −.06 to −.33). Thus, parents reported their DZ twins has having opposing temperaments, whereas when each twin was rated by a different observer, the twins displayed substantial similarity. Although it is possible that contextual differences explain the different outcomes between parent and observer ratings of temperament, this seems unlikely given that similar results have emerged from twin studies of activity level where parent ratings and mechanical measures of activity are based on the same 48-hour period,.

Similarly, evidence of genetic influences on temperament emerges from adoption studies when more objective measures of temperament are employed. In the CAP, teacher and tester ratings of temperament yielded correlations for nonadoptive siblings that were higher than when assessed via parent ratings; and consistent with a genetic hypothesis, nonadoptive siblings showed some resemblance in their temperaments, but adoptive siblings did not, . Moreover, adoption and twin studies of objectively-assessed temperament yield similar estimates of heritability.

The fact that the problems of very low DZ resemblance and higher heritability estimates in twin studies as compared to adoption studies occur only for parent-rating measures of temperament suggests that parent ratings are prone to contrast effects, , . Contrast effects refer to rater biases that exaggerate the differences between cotwins or nonadoptive siblings. Twin research suggests that some parent rating measures may be more subject to contrast effects than others. For example, very low DZ correlations tend to be particularly evident when parents are required to make global judgments (e.g., "always on the go") as opposed to specific judgments (e.g. "splashes when in the tub") about their children's behavior ⁻; however, even specific measures can yield low DZ correlations. There are also hints that the tendency to contrast siblings differs across temperament dimensions. Activity level, attention/persistence and shyness are dimensions that frequently show contrast effects; whereas parent ratings of more affective behavioral dimensions such as approach, fear, pleasure, smiling and laughter do not seem to show a pattern of low DZ or nonadoptive sibling similarity, .

Because contrast effects can overestimate heritability in twin designs and underestimate heritability in adoption designs, parent-rating measures that show a pattern of very low DZ or sibling correlations may be inadequate for obtaining precise estimates of heritability unless such biases are incorporated into the statistical analyses (e.g., sibling interaction models). Nonetheless, the greater similarity of MZ than DZ twins is consistent with the general hypothesis of a genetic influence. Moreover, conclusions regarding moderate genetic influences on individual differences in parent-rated temperament are buttressed by similar findings with more objective temperament measures. Thus, there can be little doubt that temperament is genetically influenced.

Environmental Influences on Child Temperament

The finding of moderate genetic influences on child temperament does not negate the importance of the environment. As indicated above, genetic factors account for between 20% and 60% of the phenotypic variance in personality, which means that the remaining 80% to 40% of the variance is attributed to environmental factors. Clearly, the environment is very important to temperament. However, behavioral genetics research suggests that the types of environments traditionally assumed to influence child behavior may not operate the way we think they do. Twin and adoption studies consistently find that shared family environment accounts for only a small portion of variance in most temperament dimensions, , , , , , . This is demonstrated in a study of infant temperament that found correlations for tester-rated temperament to be about .00 for genetically unrelated adoptive siblings-which provides a direct test of shared family environment-and .20 for genetically related nonadoptive siblings. In other words, growing up in the same family does not make family members resemble each other in temperaments. Family members are similar in temperaments primarily because of shared DNA.

If shared family environments do not substantially influence temperament, then what does? The answer lies within, not between, families. The environmental influences that are important to temperament are those factors that are not shared by members of the same family-that is, environmental influences that are unique to family members (i.e., nonshared environmental influences). The finding of significant and substantial nonshared environmental influences on temperament provides an important focus for researchers interested in environmental effects on temperament. Most research exploring environmental influences on temperament have considered between-family effects such as parenting style and family functioning (e.g., Eriksson & Pehrsson, Leve, Scaramella & Fagot). Behavioral genetics research suggests that instead of examining environmental factors that differ across families, it will be more profitable to focus on environmental factors that differ within families (e.g., differential parenting). Researchers need to consider why individuals within the same family differ so much with regard to temperament. This will involve studying more than one individual per family and exploring the association of experiential differences within a family with differences in temperament.

There are some exceptions to the general finding of no shared environmental influences on temperament. Several studies have found shared environmental influences on both parent and observer ratings of positive affect and related behaviors (e.g., smiling, interest in others) during infancy and early childhood, ⁻. Maternal personality and attachment security have been suggested as possible sources of shared environmental variance on positive affect. In addition, although not well-studied, rhythmicity and soothability have shown no genetic influence but substantial shared environmental influences each in at least one study, . These findings need to be replicated, but it is possible that, to some extent, the shared environmental influences on these two dimensions reflect parenting behaviors (e.g., scheduling of activities, methods of soothing). Finally, observational measures of shyness and mechanical measures of activity show some shared environmental variance, whereas parent ratings of the same behaviors do not, , , , . Again, these findings need to be replicated but they highlight the need for more observational research to assess the possible role of shared environment in personality development.

The Etiology of Continuity and Change in Temperament

Despite the abundance of evidence indicating that individual differences in temperament are genetically influenced, little is known about the role that genetic factors play in the development of temperament. The failure to consider genetic contributions to developmental change in temperament has likely resulted from the mistaken view that genetic factors are immutable and thus, contribute only to behavioral stability. However, genes are dynamic in nature, changing in the quantity and quality of their effects across time and therefore, can be sources of change as well as continuity in behavioral development. Behavioral genetics approaches developmental change in two ways. The first explores differential heritability across ages. This issue is important because the investigation of the etiology of individual differences over age may serve to identify points of causal transition. The second examines the role of genetic influences on continuity and change during development, and thus addresses the process by which developmental change takes place.

Differential heritability refers to developmental changes in the relative contribution of genetic influences to individual differences in temperament across age. That is, does the heritability of temperament change across age? Intuitively, one might posit that as a child matures and becomes more interactive with increasingly diverse environments, the role of genetic factors on temperament might wane. Empirical research does not support this notion. Many studies find no apparent change in heritability across age, , . Moreover, when developmental changes in genetic influences on temperament are apparent, it is in the direction of increased genetic variance, , . For example, in the Louisville Twin Study there was no evidence of a genetic effect on temperament during the neonatal period, but in infancy and early childhood temperament was moderately heritable, .

To the developmentalist, the measurement of within-person change is more interesting than cross-sectional age differences because the measurement of change is more informative about underlying processes. For the same reason, genetic influences on continuity and change are more interesting than the presence or absence of genetic influences at a single age. The question of differential heritability is essentially cross-sectional and does not address mechanisms of change. That is, for any temperament dimension, estimates of heritability may differ across age even though the same genes operate at each age. Similarly, the heritability of a temperament dimension may be similar across two ages, but the genes that operate at one age might differ from those that operate at the other. By using behavioral genetic methods within a longitudinal design we are able to determine the extent to which developmental change and continuity are due to genetic factors.

Longitudinal behavioral genetic studies of early temperament development are rare. One exception is the Louisville Twin Study which found that MZ twins demonstrated greater resemblance than DZ twins on age-to-age change profiles for observational measures of activity, affect/extraversion, and task orientation across 6 to 18 months and 12 to 24 months, emotional tone across 18 to 24 months, and surgency (related to extraversion) across 36 to 48 months of age, , . In other words, MZ twins were more similar than DZ twins in their patterns of change for these temperament dimensions. These results suggest that changes in temperament across infancy and early childhood are, in part, regulated by genetic influences.

Although the analysis of change profiles provides important information about genetic influences on developmental change, they do not reveal the extent to which the genetic effects that influence a trait are consistent from one age to another. This can be addressed by assessing genetic contributions to phenotypic continuity across age. Genetic influences on phenotypic continuity imply that there is some overlap between the genetic factors that affect a trait across age. Longitudinal model-fitting analyses of genetic contributions to phenotypic continuity permit the estimation of the extent to which genetic effects on a trait at one age overlap with genetic effects at another age and whether new genetic influences on the trait emerge across time. To date, most of what we know about the etiology of continuity and change in temperament in infancy and early childhood comes from the MALTS.

Observer ratings of activity, affect/extraversion, task orientation, shyness and behavioral inhibition at 14, 20, 24 and 36 months of age in over 200 twin pairs participating in MALTS yielded modest age-to-age stability correlations (i.e., ranging from .00 to .39), indicating that phenotypically, there is substantial change in these temperament dimensions over the second year of life, . Despite this, for most dimensions, genetic influences appear to be mediating whatever continuity exists. The age-to-age stability correlations for activity, affect/extraversion, and behavioral inhibition were almost entirely due to genetic factors. Shyness was an exception in that both genetic and shared environmental influences contributed to stability. Developmental change in observed temperament was primarily due to nonshared environmental influences; however, for activity, affect/extraversion, task orientation, and behavioral inhibition there was evidence of new genetic effects at different ages. Similarly, for shyness, new shared environmental influences emerged across age. Thus, with the exception of shyness, genetic factors appear to contribute to both continuity and change in temperament across age. A caveat is that in some instances, genetic change coincided with subtle changes in the item content of the measures used to assess temperament; consequently, developmental change was confounded with measurement differences. Nonetheless, these findings of genetic change would be consistent with earlier MALTS analyses that found significant genetic change on activity and sociability when assessed with the same parent-rating measure at 14 to 20 months of age.

Overall, the MALTS results are consistent with longitudinal twin studies of adult personality that find that personality change is largely due to nonshared environmental influences, and the stability of personality is due to genetic factors. This was unexpected because, in contrast to adulthood, infancy and early childhood is a period of rapid change and growth. That developmental change is primarily due to early nonshared environmental influences is particularly interesting. This means that changes in temperament are likely due to differences within the family environment, such as differential treatment, experiences or accidents. Identifying specific nonshared environmental factors that influence developmental change is an important goal for future temperament research.

Links Between Temperament and Behavior Problems

The significance of temperament lies, in part, in the assumption that early temperament shapes personality development and influences developmental outcomes. Child temperament has been seen as a possible precursor to behavior problems, . Indeed, the link between temperament in early childhood and later behavioral problems has been well documented. For example, dimensions associated with difficult temperament (e.g., emotionality, adaptability, approach/withdrawal, impulsivity) are predictive of both internalizing and externalizing problems ⁻, activity level predicts externalizing problems ⁻, and shyness and fearfulness predict internalizing problems, . Importantly, these associations do not appear to be an artifact due to similarity of items on measures used to assess both temperament and problem behavior, .

Although there is ample evidence of an association between temperament and behavior problems, the question of how the association arises has received little empirical attention. That is, what are the mechanisms that link temperament and behavior problems? Behavioral genetic research can address this question by exploring the extent to which temperament and behavior problems are influenced by common genetic and environmental factors. There have been many twin and adoption studies that indicate substantial genetic influence (i.e., heritiabilities in the range of .30 to .50) for externalizing, internalizing, and total behavior problems ⁻. Thus, given that both temperament and behavior problems are genetically influenced it is possible that they are associated because of common genetic factors.

The few studies that have examined sources of covariance between temperament and behavior problems suggest that the association is primarily due to common genetic influences. For example, in MALTS, emotionality at 14, 20, 24, and 36 months predicted internalizing, externalizing and total behavior problems at age 4 years, and shyness predicted internalizing across the same age intervals. There was considerable overlap in genetic effects on temperament and behavior problems. Moreover, it was these overlapping genetic effects that fully explained the phenotypic correlations between temperament and behavior problems. Similarly, in the CAP, emotionality in later childhood also predicted internalizing, externalizing and total behavior problems. Although there was some genetic variance unique to emotionality and behavior problems, there was also substantial genetic overlap between the two, and the phenotypic associations between teacher ratings of both and between teachers' ratings of emotionality and mothers' reports of problem behaviors were primarily due to genetic factors.

Other research has looked at more specific problem behaviors, but a similar pattern emerges. In a sample of twins spanning middle childhood to adolescence, emotionality significantly predicted anxious/depressed, attention, delinquent and aggressive behavior problems assessed two years later. The phenotypic correlations between emotionality and aggression and attention problems were due to common genetic factors. There were no significant shared environmental influences on any of the observed associations. Likewise, a study of fear and anxiety symptoms in early childhood found that despite only modest overlap in the genetic influences on fear and general anxiety, the phenotypic correlation between the two was almost entirely due to genetic factors. Interestingly, however, fear and separation anxiety were genetically distinct and correlated because of common shared and nonshared environmental influences. Thus, links between fear and general anxiety and fear and separation anxiety arise for different reasons.

Research examining genetic and environmental links between temperament and later behavior problems has significance for both genetics researchers and clinicians. A finding of substantial overlap in genetic influences on the two domains would provide empirical support for the possibility that certain behavior problems may be the extreme manifestation of specific temperament dimensions. On the other hand, in those cases where temperament and behavior problems are genetically distinct (e.g., fear and separation anxiety), it is important to uncover the specific environmental factors that link temperament to later problem behavior. Both outcomes have implications for intervention. Moreover, in both cases, molecular genetics findings on one domain may inform about genes operating (or not operating) on the other.

Finding Genes Associated With Temperament

Twin and adoption analyses provide strong evidence that genes influence individual differences in temperament, continuity and change in temperament and, at least in part, mediate the link between temperament and behavior problems. However, the genetic effects in these analyses are anonymous. That is, quantitative genetic designs indicate the magnitude of genetic influence, but do not identify specific genes responsible for heritability. One of the most exciting new directions for research on personality and temperament comes from recent advances in molecular genetic techniques that now make it possible to identify genes associated with complex phenotypes.

Complex behavioral traits are unlikely to result from the action of major genes segregating in a simple Mendelian fashion, but are expected to result from the action or co-action of a few (oligo) or many (poly) genes. Behavioral dimensions such as those included under the rubric of temperament are typically distributed continuously in general populations, show substantial environmental influence as well as genetic influence, and are likely to be influenced by many genes, each of varying effect. Genes of small and varying effect size, which contribute to quantitative traits, are referred to as quantitative trait loci (QTLs). The challenge for contemporary molecular geneticists is to use the power of modern molecular techniques and new high-density genetic maps to identify QTLs for complex traits like temperament dimensions that involve multiple-genetic and non-genetic factors. The goal of applying molecular genetic techniques to the study of behavior is not aimed at identifying the gene for a particular behavioral dimension, rather it is to identify many genes that each make a small contribution to variability in a particular trait.

Although the merging of molecular genetics and quantitative genetics is still in its infancy, researchers are beginning to identify genes associated with childhood behavioral dimensions and disorders (reviewed in Asherson & Curran). Perhaps most robust is the finding that the dopamine D4 receptor gene (DRD4) has been associated with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), accounting for approximately 2% of genetic variance (see Mill et al. for a review). This is of interest to temperament researchers because activity level, as a temperament dimension, has been associated with diagnoses of ADHD and hyperactive problem behaviors in both clinical and nonclinical samples ⁻, suggesting that hyperactivity may represent the extreme upper-end of the normal distribution of the temperament dimension of activity level. Consequently, genes associated with ADHD may also be associated with the temperament dimension of activity level.

Associations between genes and personality traits have also emerged, but are less well replicated (see Reif & Lesch). For example, a 48-base pair repeat in exon 3 of DRD4 has been associated with novelty seeking, and a serotonin transporter promoter polymorphism (5-HTTLPR) has been associated with neuroticism/anxiety; but these associations are questionable due to failures to replicate ⁻. More specific to child temperament, both the DRD4 and 5-HTTLPR polymorphisms have been associated with motor organization and negative emotionality (i.e., the tendency to fear, anger, and distress) in early infancy, . DRD4 was also associated with observed attention, interest, anger, and activity level; and 5-HTTLPR associated with stranger fearfulness and positive emotionality at 1 year of age in the same sample, . Other research has found an interactive effect between DRD4 and 5-HTTLPR and stranger fearfulness in 1-year-old infants. A recent attempt to explore the association of the DRD4 and 5-HTTLPR polymorphisms with shyness and aggression in toddlers has produced mixed results. Although neither polymorphism was associated with observed shyness, DRD4 was associated with mother-reported, but not observed, aggression. Similarly, DRD4 was associated with infant adaptability at 1 month, but not 5 months of age. These early temperament results should be viewed with caution until they have been replicated in a variety of samples. Nonetheless, they hint at the potential for the application of molecular genetic approaches to the study of temperament. This is a particularly exciting area of inquiry because the identification of specific genes for temperament will provide an important first step in understanding how genes influence temperament.

Conclusions

Nearly all temperament theories presume a biological basis to individual differences in early appearing, enduring behavioral tendencies considered to be temperamental. Consistent with these theories, most dimensions of temperament have demonstrated moderate genetic influences in twin and adoption studies. However, the finding of genetic influences on temperament is only a first step in the understanding of individual differences in early personality development. As illustrated in this paper, behavioral genetic methods can address a wide array of issues of relevance to child development. Researchers have begun to document the importance of environmental factors on temperament dimensions, track the developmental course of genetic and environmental contributions to temperament, address the issue of genetic and environmental overlap between temperament and problem behaviors, and relate specific genetic markers to temperament dimensions. These are just a sampling of the contributions that behavioral genetics has made to the understanding of temperament. Other research has looked at genetic and environmental contributions to the links between temperament and parenting, sibling or peer relationships, measure-specific and situational effects on temperament, and genotype-environment correlations between temperament and the child's environment - just to name a few. It is predicted that behavioral genetics research will make even greater contributions to our understanding of temperament as researchers continue to move beyond the basic heritability question.

Table 1.

Individual differences in temperament can be due to:

Definition

Examples

If important to the behavior under study:

Temperament Findings

1. Genes.
Segregating genes (i.e., genes that differ in a population).

Specific genes that have been associated with behaviors.

- result in behavioral similarities between genetically related individuals.

Account for approximately 20 to 60% of the variability in most temperament dimensions.

2. Shared environments. Also known as "common" environments or "between family" environmental variance.

Environmental influences that are shared by family members.

Neighborhoods; schools, parent education, family socioeconomic status, family religion, family vacations, pets, and household facilities (e.g., number of books in the home, swimming pool, piano, etc.)

- result in behavioral similarities between family members.

Little evidence of any shared environmental influences on temperament. Possible exceptions are positive affect, rhythmicity, soothability, shyness, and activity level.

3. Nonshared Environments. Also known as "unique" environments or "within family" environmental variance.

Environmental influences that are specific to an individual.

Friends, peers, teachers, birth order, differential parental treatment, accidents, illnesses, and (random) measurement error.

- result in behavioral differences between family members.

Environmental influences on temperament tend to be of the nonshared variety, accounting for the remaining 40 to 80% of the variance that is not explained by genes.

Footnotes

This work was supported in part by grant MH062375 from the National Institute of Mental Health.

References

3. Plomin, R., DeFries, J. C., McClearn, G. E., et al., (2001). Behavioral Genetics. (4th ed). Worth Publishing, NY.

30. Saudino, K. J., Thompson, L. A., & Gagne, J. R. (June, 2000). Genetic influences on activity level in adolescence: Do the same genetic effects operate on parent ratings, self ratings and mechanical measures? Paper presented at the 30th Annual Meeting of the Behavior Genetics Association, Burlington, VT.

37. Saudino, K. J., Wertz, A., Gagne, J. R., et al. (in press). Night and day: Are siblings as different in temperament as parents say they are? J Per Soc Psychol. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]

72. Saudino, K. J., Ronald, A., & Plomin, R. (in press). Etiology of Behavior Problems in 7-year-old Twins: Substantial Genetic Influence and Negligible Shared Environmental Influence for Parent Ratings and Ratings by Same and Different Teachers. J Abnorm Child Psychol. [DOI] [PubMed]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Behavioral Genetics and Child Temperament

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Most temperament theories presume a biological basis to those behavioral tendencies thought to be temperamental in origin. Behavioral genetic methods can be used to test this assumption. Twin and adoption studies suggest that individual differences ...

# data[].attributes.attachment_caption
The biological and genetic model of personality suggest that personality traits are rooted in our biology, with genetics playing a significant role in shaping our traits. For example, certain personality traits, such as agreeableness, conscientiousness, extraversion, neuroticism, and openness, are influenced by our genes.

# data[].attributes.headline
Sociocultural and Environmental Model (9) 

# data[].attributes.subject
Sociocultural and Environmental Model (9) 

# data[].attributes.body
The sociocultural and environmental model combines insights from psychology and ecology to explain how human behavior and development are shaped by social, cultural, and environmental contexts. This theory elaborates from Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory and Bronfenbrenner’s Social Ecological Model.

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.alternative_text
Sociocultural and Environmental Model (9)

# data[].attributes.body
CBT was developed in the 1960s by Aaron T. Beck, who observed that patients’ internal dialogues often contributed to emotional distress. His work built on earlier behavioral theories and added a cognitive dimension.

Cognitive Behavioral Theory explains how our thoughts, emotions, and behaviors are interconnected.

# data[].attributes.body
Focus on genetic predispositions, brain structure/function, and neurotransmitter imbalances.

Twin and family studies show heritability in disorders like antisocial and borderline personality disorder.

Abnormalities in the prefrontal cortex, amygdala, and serotonin/dopamine systems are linked to impulsivity and emotional dysregulation.

Biological and neurobiological models explain abnormal personality development as the result of genetic predispositions, brain structure and function, and neurochemical imbalances. These models emphasize the role of biology in shaping personality traits and disorders

# data[].attributes.body
Attachment theory was developed by John Bowlby, a British psychiatrist and psychoanalyst, and later expanded by Mary Ainsworth, a developmental psychologist.

Attachment theory explains how early relationships—especially between infants and caregivers—shape emotional development and influence behavior throughout life.

# data[].attributes.body
The developmental psychopathology perspective explores how psychological disorders emerge and evolve across a person’s lifespan, emphasizing the interplay between normal and abnormal development.

Developmental psychopathology approach combine insights from developmental psychology and clinical psychiatry to understand the origins, progression, and outcomes of mental health conditions.

# data[].attributes.headline
Why Early Identification of Atypical personality important? (2)

# data[].attributes.subject
Why Early Identification of Atypical personality important? (2)

# data[].attributes.body
Early identification of atypical development is crucial because it allows for timely interventions that can improve long-term outcomes, prevent developmental problems from worsening, and provide families with needed support and information. Identifying a child's needs early can lead to tailored strategies that help them achieve their potential and mitigate future struggles, even impacting societal costs

# data[].attributes.headline
 Atypical personality development across life span, psychotherapy (3)

# data[].attributes.subject
 Atypical personality development across life span, psychotherapy (3)

# data[].attributes.body
Psychotherapy provides a central framework for addressing atypical personality development, informed by developmental theory and empirical evidence, with interventions tailored to each life stage.

Psychotherapy integrates developmental, trait-based, and psychosocial frameworks which allows the therapists to tailor interventions to the unique challenges posed by deviations from normative personality trajectories.

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.alternative_text
Atypical personality development across life span, psychotherapy (3)

# data[].attributes.headline
Piaget’s Cognitive Development Theory (2)

# data[].attributes.subject
Piaget’s Cognitive Development Theory (2)

# data[].attributes.body
Describes how children construct knowledge through four stages: sensorimotor, preoperational, concrete operational, and formal operational.

Normal development involves progressing through these stages at expected ages

# data[].attributes.wish_content.attachment_props.alternative_text
Piaget’s Cognitive Development Theory (2)

# data[].attributes.headline
Atypical personality development across life span,  social skill training

# data[].attributes.subject
Atypical personality development across life span,  social skill training

# data[].attributes.body
Atypical personality development may involve deviations from typical trait trajectories, while social skills training (SST) offers structured methods to improve interpersonal functioning across age groups.

Social Skills Training (SST): Methods and Applications

Social skills training is a therapeutic approach designed to help individuals improve communication, empathy, and relationship-building. It's especially beneficial for those with atypical personality development or social difficulties.

🔧 Core SST Techniques:

Modeling: Demonstrating appropriate social behaviors for imitation.

Role-playing: Practicing scenarios like greetings, conflict resolution, or assertiveness.

Feedback and reinforcement: Providing constructive input and encouragement.

Cognitive restructuring: Challenging negative thoughts that hinder social interaction.

Homework assignments: Encouraging practice in real-life settings.

# data[].attributes.headline
Atypical personality development across life span, family-based approach. (5)

# data[].attributes.subject
Atypical personality development across life span, family-based approach. (5)

# data[].attributes.body
Families are central to shaping personality. A family-based approach emphasizes:

Attachment security: Responsive caregiving builds trust and emotional regulation.

Modeling behavior: Parents’ coping styles and interpersonal patterns influence children.

Communication and boundaries: Healthy dialogue and structure foster autonomy and empathy.

Intervention and support: Family therapy can address systemic issues and promote healing.