Temperament in Psychology: Scientific Definition and Scope
Temperament refers to relatively early-emerging individual differences in emotional, attentional, motivational, and behavioral reactivity and in the processes that regulate those reactions. In developmental psychology, it describes characteristic patterns in how readily a person responds to stimulation, what kinds of stimuli attract or distress them, how intensely they respond, how long responses persist, and how they manage attention and action. These patterns have biological contributions, develop through experience, and are expressed differently across ages and settings. A scientifically useful account of temperament therefore connects behavioral tendencies with developmental timing, environmental conditions, and the methods through which those tendencies are observed. Rothbart, 2007; Rothbart, Ahadi, and Evans, 2000.
Temperament is usually described as the early-developing foundation of personality. The word 'foundation' identifies developmental continuity, not a fixed blueprint. A child may characteristically approach unfamiliar activities, experience frustration intensely, or need time to adjust to unfamiliar people. Those tendencies influence experiences, elicit responses from others, and change as language, executive attention, self-understanding, and social expectations develop. Temperament is studied dimensionally: people differ by degree on characteristics that are distributed through the population. A particular score, or a familiar label such as 'sensitive' or 'slow to warm up,' represents a description to investigate in context rather than an identity or diagnosis. Goldsmith et al., 1987; Rothbart and Ahadi, 1994.
Reactivity and regulation
Reactivity is the manner and threshold of response to events, including novelty, potential threat, reward, frustration, sensory intensity, and social engagement. Its features include response latency, intensity, duration, recovery, and the patterns that distinguish one situation from another. Regulation involves attentional orienting, inhibition of a prepotent response, the capacity to shift behavior, and processes that modify arousal or emotional expression. Temperament research examines how these functions relate over development. For example, readily experienced frustration and increasingly effective inhibitory control can coexist in the same child; a description focusing on only one dimension would be incomplete. Rothbart and Posner, 2007.
A dimension, a state, and a behavior are different units of analysis
A temperamental disposition describes a tendency across repeated occasions. A temporary episode of fear, intense activity, or quiet attention is a state; a single observed action is one possible expression of that state. A child who appears cautious on their first day in a classroom might become animated once the environment feels familiar. That sequence is relevant evidence about adaptation but cannot independently determine the child's general level of inhibition. Scientific evaluation requires repeated observations, specified situations, a developmental reference group, and attention to the observer's perspective. Kopala-Sibley et al., 2018.
Historical Foundations of Temperament Research
The language of temperament has a long history, including the ancient four-humor classifications of sanguine, choleric, melancholic, and phlegmatic characters. Those historical types influenced later psychological vocabulary, but their proposed bodily explanations do not provide a contemporary empirical theory. Modern temperament science developed through systematic study of early behavior, structured observations, repeated assessment, and competing operational definitions. The field is best understood through the questions its scientific models ask: Which differences appear early? Which dimensions can be measured reliably? How do those patterns relate to later functioning? What changes when social context changes? Goldsmith et al., 1987.
The New York Longitudinal Study
Alexander Thomas and Stella Chess made early individual behavioral styles central to prospective developmental investigation. The New York Longitudinal Study followed children over time and articulated nine dimensions: activity level, rhythmicity, approach or withdrawal, adaptability, threshold of responsiveness, intensity of reaction, quality of mood, distractibility, and attention span or persistence. The dimensions addressed everyday functioning rather than clinical symptoms. Their work also emphasized that a child's temperament and the demands of an environment can fit well or poorly together; this insight became the influential concept of goodness of fit. Thomas and Chess, 1977; Chess and Thomas, 197760038-8).
The same tradition described groups conventionally called 'easy,' 'difficult,' and 'slow-to-warm-up.' These labels summarize some observed constellations in a historical cohort. They are not exhaustive biological types, and the term 'difficult' can obscure whose expectations and conditions produce a difficulty. Modern measurement studies have not uniformly recovered the proposed nine-dimensional structure; broad traits and narrower facets often show a different empirical organization. Accordingly, the enduring scientific contribution is the interactional, developmental program more than any rigid three-category classification. Goldsmith et al., 1987; Dyson et al., 2012.
From typologies to mechanisms
Subsequent theories moved toward emotional systems, motivational approach, physiological reactivity, and attentional control. Investigators proposed different boundaries for what counts as temperament, illustrating an important continuing disagreement: some definitions privilege inherited, early-visible tendencies, while others include the development of self-regulation as part of temperament itself. The classic roundtable by Goldsmith and colleagues documents this plurality explicitly. A reader can compare models scientifically by asking what they define, how they measure it, and what predictions their data support. Goldsmith et al., 1987.
Major Scientific Models of Temperament
Rothbart's psychobiological and developmental model
Mary Rothbart's approach defines temperament through constitutionally based individual differences in reactivity and self-regulation, influenced over time by heredity, maturation, and experience. Child assessments commonly organize temperament into three broad factors: negative affectivity, extraversion or surgency, and effortful control. Negative affectivity includes tendencies such as fear, frustration, sadness, and discomfort. Surgency includes approach, positive anticipation, energy, and enjoyment of relatively intense stimulation. Effortful control includes capacities to focus and shift attention and to inhibit or activate a response when the situation calls for it. These are broad statistical dimensions composed of distinguishable facets, not mutually exclusive categories of children. Rothbart, Ahadi, Hershey, and Fisher, 2001.
The model's developmental dimension is essential. In infancy, orienting and early soothing processes are especially salient; during toddlerhood and preschool, attention and voluntary control become increasingly integrated with language, learning, social interaction, and the emerging demands of organized tasks. A young infant's capacity to disengage attention from an intense stimulus is therefore not interchangeable with a school-age child's ability to resist a tempting action. Both are relevant to regulation, but their tasks and developmental meanings differ. Rothbart and Posner, 2007; Rothbart, 2007.
Effortful control is sometimes confused with obedience. Scientifically, it concerns mechanisms of attentional and behavioral regulation, not approval by an authority figure. Strong control may support persistence and flexible responding; its observable value depends on task demands, motivation, and the social circumstances in which a child uses it. Measures of this construct consequently examine multiple behaviors and should be interpreted with developmental and cultural awareness. Putnam and Rothbart, 2006.
Thomas and Chess: behavioral style and goodness of fit
The Thomas and Chess framework begins with regularities in the style of behavior: whether someone approaches novelty, how quickly they adjust, how intense their emotional responses are, and how persistently they pursue an activity. Their distinctive theoretical contribution is to regard later adjustment as a product of an ongoing relation between temperament and environmental expectations. The same initially hesitant child may encounter a setting that permits gradual familiarity or one that repeatedly demands immediate public engagement. These settings can generate quite different observable outcomes without requiring an immediate change in the child's original approach tendency. Thomas and Chess, 1977.
Goodness of fit is a conceptual and practical hypothesis, not a universal formula assigning one parenting technique to each child. Researchers must still establish how characteristics of adults, the child, and the wider environment influence one another. Contemporary evidence on temperament-by-parenting moderation supports some patterns and leaves others inconsistent. A meta-analysis of longitudinal samples reported that interaction findings varied by the sensitivity indicator used and by whether parenting was directly observed or reported through questionnaires. Slagt et al., 2016.
Buss and Plomin: emotionality, activity, and sociability
Arnold Buss and Robert Plomin emphasized early-emerging tendencies with a heritable component. Their EAS framework concentrates on emotionality, activity, and sociability, with shyness sometimes included as an additional assessed feature. Emotionality concerns the propensity for emotional arousal; activity concerns the pace and amount of movement or energy expenditure; sociability concerns preference for social contact. The model illustrates the usefulness of narrower and conceptually accessible dimensions, especially for studying variation in young children. It also illustrates the historical emphasis on genetic contributions that behavioral-genetic research now places within a more complex developmental framework. Buss and Plomin, 1984.
A model's dimensions should never be treated as a complete taxonomy simply because they are easy to remember. The EAS instruments have been studied in twin and informant designs, and parent comparisons can produce contrast effects in which one sibling is rated relative to another. The scientific question is whether dimensions are replicable, observable across methods, and useful for particular ages and purposes. Spinath and Angleitner, 199800097-X).
Kagan's behavioral inhibition research
Jerome Kagan's research program focused on consistent differences in response to unfamiliar people, objects, and situations. Children high in behavioral inhibition often show caution, restrained approach, or withdrawal under novelty. This dimension connects careful laboratory observation with longitudinal questions about continuity and the probability of later anxiety outcomes. Behavioral inhibition is a risk-related disposition, not an anxiety diagnosis, and its expression is sensitive to the kind of novelty, the child's age, and the conditions of observation. Clauss and Blackford, 2012; Sandstrom et al., 2020.
An important scientific distinction is between inhibition in an unfamiliar encounter and shyness as a broader experience or description of social reticence. The concepts overlap, but their measurement traditions and situations are not identical. Child behavior in a laboratory novelty task cannot on its own establish the full range of the child's social behavior at home, school, or with familiar friends.
Emotion-centered and integrative approaches
Other theoretical approaches place emotions, approach and avoidance motivation, and early arousal patterns at the center of temperament. They differ on whether regulation belongs to the temperament definition itself, whether temperamental dimensions must be heritable, and how to distinguish temperament from other early individual differences. Rather than combining all models into one unsupported master taxonomy, comparative research evaluates their predictions at corresponding levels: which emotional or attentional responses they identify, how their measures correspond, and how well they predict developmental outcomes. Goldsmith et al., 1987; Rothbart, Ahadi, and Evans, 2000.
Core Dimensions and Examples in Everyday Functioning
Negative emotionality and emotional recovery
People differ in the frequency, intensity, and duration of distress, fear, sadness, frustration, and the ease with which they recover. These differences matter for relationships and task engagement because they influence the events that receive attention and the responses that follow. High negative emotionality cannot be translated directly into a judgment about resilience or disorder: recovery processes, environmental demands, and access to support all shape observable adjustment. The same temperament score can correspond to different practical experiences across developmental periods. Rothbart, Ahadi, Hershey, and Fisher, 2001.
Surgency, approach, and reward-related behavior
Surgency covers positive anticipation, energetic engagement, approach toward novelty, and enjoyment of stimulating events. A highly approach-oriented child may actively investigate a new play area; another child may evaluate it before joining in. These differences express motivational style rather than overall intelligence, social worth, or competence. An approach tendency also varies with perceived safety, previous learning, fatigue, and whether the novelty involves people or objects.
Attention, inhibition, and effortful control
Regulation is visible in the ability to orient toward relevant stimuli, sustain attention, disengage from distractions, wait, and change responses when goals or rules change. Development in these abilities supports an increasingly complex behavioral repertoire. Observed effortful control is influenced by the demands and familiarity of an assessment, so simple task performance cannot be equated with the entirety of a person's regulatory tendencies. Rothbart and Posner, 2007; Putnam and Rothbart, 2006.
Activity level, sensory sensitivity, and adaptability
Activity level concerns characteristic motor vigor; sensitivity concerns responsiveness to relatively weak or intense stimulation; adaptability concerns behavioral change after an initial response to new circumstances. Their statistical association with broad factors varies by assessment and age. A child who reacts strongly to a noisy room may behave quite differently in a quiet setting, illustrating that sensitivity and context jointly influence the observed response. These features are part of an individualized description when supported by repeated evidence, rather than clues to a categorical identity. Thomas and Chess, 1977.
Temperament in Infancy and Toddlerhood
Infancy is a period of rapid changes in perceptual, motor, attentional, and emotional systems. Temperamental variation may be visible in activity, reactions to novelty, patterns of distress, soothing, and social attention. Nevertheless, an infant is developing the capacities needed to express these dimensions. A behavior recorded at four months and a behavior recorded at twelve months may have different functional meanings even when both are coded as approach, reactivity, or regulation. Developmental research therefore selects age-appropriate tasks, repeated observations, and constructs that acknowledge maturation. Rothbart, 2007.
What can early observations reveal?
Repeated and converging observations can provide evidence about distributions of emotional and attentional responses. They cannot establish in advance a complete adult personality or predict a single child's destiny. Early caregiving, health, opportunities for exploration, and interactions with adults affect observable behavior, and parents learn to interpret children's reactions through their own expectations. Temperament research is strongest when observer reports and structured behavioral tasks offer complementary views rather than being treated as interchangeable facts. Kopala-Sibley et al., 2018.
The emergence of self-regulation
Control of attention and behavior develops progressively. Soothing and orienting capacities are visible relatively early; deliberate inhibition and flexible attentional control become easier to evaluate in later childhood. Caregivers often support regulation through the arrangement of situations, co-regulation, routines, and responses that help children manage stimulation. Such processes help explain why early emotional reactivity cannot be interpreted apart from the changing resources a child gains over time. Rothbart and Posner, 2007.
Childhood, Adolescence, and Adult Temperament
During the preschool and school years, temperament is expressed through persistence, peer engagement, reactions to challenge, frustration tolerance, and adjustment to unfamiliar demands. Teachers and peers encounter children under conditions that differ from those observed at home, making multiple informants particularly valuable. In adolescence, increasingly independent social choices, biological maturation, and changing social roles interact with established dispositions. Temperament remains a useful developmental concept, while mature personality constructs increasingly describe complex tendencies involving goals, identity, values, and habitual interpretations. Rothbart, Ahadi, and Evans, 2000.
Continuity does not mean identical expression
The expression of a tendency changes when environments and capacities change. A cautious preschooler may later become an adult who prepares carefully before entering unfamiliar groups, while another person with similarly high early inhibition may acquire comfortable routines for social participation. Both illustrate possible pathways rather than a fixed mapping from child categories to adult outcomes. The scientific task is to distinguish continuity of relative individual differences from identical observable actions across age. Roberts and DelVecchio, 2000.
Adult temperament and personality
Adult research often uses constructs overlapping with temperament, such as emotional reactivity, approach motivation, and regulation. Broader personality models may incorporate related variance but organize it according to their own factor structures and assessment traditions. Early-emerging tendencies contribute to later personality through stable dispositions and accumulated experiences; reflective goals, self-concepts, roles, and acquired skills also shape adult functioning. Because temperament and personality overlap at different levels, treating them as identical terms loses developmental information. Rothbart, Ahadi, and Evans, 2000.
Temperament and Personality: The Developmental Relationship
Temperament describes early patterns in emotional and attentional functioning; personality is a broader organization of characteristic ways of thinking, feeling, relating, and pursuing goals across development. Some dimensions correspond conceptually, for example early negative affectivity and later tendencies toward negative emotional experience, or surgency and later extraverted behavior. Such conceptual correspondence is a hypothesis to test, not proof of one-to-one causal continuity. Assessment instruments, sampling procedures, and developmental meanings differ between early childhood and adulthood. Rothbart and Ahadi, 1994; Rothbart, Ahadi, and Evans, 2000.
A person's later personality develops through repeated interactions in which dispositions help shape which situations are encountered and how others respond. Environmental settings in turn foster or constrain behavioral repertoires. The same child's temperament can have different implications under different social expectations and opportunities; developmental continuity is therefore probabilistic and transactional. For a distinct discussion of a related adult trait, see Temperament and Neuroticism: Early Emotional Reactivity and Adult Personality.
Genetic Influences, Biology, and Environmental Contributions
Temperament has measurable genetic contributions. Twin and family studies generally find greater similarity in some temperament dimensions among relatives who share more genetic material, although the magnitude differs by dimension, age, population, measure, and analytic design. A review of child temperament genetics reported a substantial but variable contribution of genetic differences and highlighted the role of environmental experiences that siblings do not share in the same way. A later systematic meta-analysis across infancy synthesized twin evidence for psychological traits and milestones, reinforcing the importance of multiple genetic and environmental sources of variation. Saudino, 2005; infant twin-study meta-analysis, 2022.
What heritability actually means
A heritability estimate describes the proportion of observed variation attributable statistically to genetic differences in a particular population and set of conditions under the assumptions of a study design. It does not identify what fraction of one person's temperament is genetic; nor does it specify immutability, inevitability, or the outcome of changing an environment. Genetic and environmental effects can interact, and environmental conditions can influence which genetic differences become visible. In behavioral-genetic research, nonshared environmental estimates also include measurement error unless specifically modeled. Saudino, 2005; Lemery-Chalfant et al., 2013.
Biology is a network of developing systems
Neural, autonomic, endocrine, and attentional processes contribute to emotional response and regulation. Research on executive attention links regulatory abilities to developing brain networks, but findings about neural correlates do not make temperament reducible to one brain area, neurotransmitter, or gene. Biological systems operate through developmental interactions and context-sensitive dynamics. A hypothesis about a neural mechanism must be evaluated against actual behavior, longitudinal data, and replicable measurements before it supports individual prediction. Rothbart and Posner, 2007.
Children shape their environments too
Genetically influenced child behavior may elicit different reactions from adults, a process called evocative gene-environment correlation. For instance, a child's repeated cautiousness can change how adults introduce unfamiliar activities, while adult expectations may shape how the child subsequently approaches them. Meta-analytic twin research supports genetically influenced variation in parenting that is associated with child characteristics, although such designs have assumptions and do not by themselves identify specific causal pathways. Avinun and Knafo, 2014.
Stability and Change: What Longitudinal Evidence Shows
Temperament has a meaningful degree of stability, yet stability is neither absolute nor identical across traits and ages. Rank-order stability addresses whether individuals maintain relatively similar positions compared with others. Mean-level development addresses whether a group, on average, becomes more or less reactive, inhibited, or regulated with age. These two processes can occur simultaneously. A child might improve substantially in attentional control yet remain relatively less regulated than age peers; rank order and mean level convey different information. Roberts and DelVecchio, 2000.
A three-wave study using maternal reports from approximately 10,000 children in the Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children investigated temperament from ages three through six. It found meaningful longitudinal stability while showing that some child and maternal characteristics slightly moderated the strength of those associations. Large studies can estimate average patterns more precisely, but their results still reflect particular instruments, reporters, and populations. Bornstein et al., 2019.
A separate investigation combined laboratory observations and reports from mothers and fathers at age three and followed participants to approximately age twelve. The study found moderate stability in latent temperament constructs and stronger continuity when the same informant supplied measurements across occasions than when informants differed. Such findings show why agreement between observers and continuity across time should be analyzed as separate questions. Kopala-Sibley et al., 2018.
What makes long-term prediction difficult?
Infants and older children are assessed using different tasks; developing abilities alter the expression of reactivity; family and school environments change; and measures have error. Prediction from early behavior also depends on what outcome is being estimated. It is methodologically improper to interpret a population correlation as an exact forecast about one particular child. Sound longitudinal interpretation reports effect sizes when available, the follow-up interval, attrition, the roles of informants, and whether models account for changing circumstances.
Temperament and the Person-Environment Relationship
Temperament is expressed in situations, and situations repeatedly shape the conditions under which tendencies become visible. A highly energetic child may thrive in settings that allow frequent activity yet struggle in a prolonged sedentary task. A child who approaches unfamiliar people cautiously may participate confidently when a transition is gradual. Such examples illustrate a goodness-of-fit hypothesis, not a ranking of temperament types. Researchers must separate direct evidence about child behavior from judgments about what a family, classroom, or culture considers desirable. Thomas and Chess, 1977.
Parenting interactions and differential susceptibility
Differential susceptibility proposes that some children may be more responsive to both supportive and adverse environments. In a meta-analysis of longitudinal parenting-by-temperament studies, Slagt and colleagues found support for certain forms of differential susceptibility, especially for historically labeled difficult temperament, but little consistent moderation involving surgency or effortful control. The size and direction of associations varied by measurement approach. These findings support investigating person-environment interactions; they do not establish a universally applicable temperament-based parenting prescription. Slagt et al., 2016.
Family processes are reciprocal
Children enter relationships with dispositions, and relationships become experiences that can influence later development. A caregiver's adaptation to one child may differ from their response to another; siblings also experience distinct peer groups, illnesses, teachers, and opportunities. Correlations between parenting and adjustment consequently have several possible explanations, including child-to-parent effects, parent-to-child effects, and shared or correlated background influences. Research designs that repeatedly observe both children and environments offer stronger developmental explanations than a single one-time questionnaire. Lemery-Chalfant et al., 2013; Avinun and Knafo, 2014.
Temperament and Psychological Adjustment
Temperament dimensions can predict probabilities of later behavioral and emotional outcomes at the group level. Stronger early inhibition, for example, has been associated with increased later anxiety risk, particularly social anxiety. A prospective meta-analysis combining 27 studies and 20 unique samples found an association between childhood behavioral inhibition and subsequent anxiety; the strength differed across anxiety outcomes. Such evidence is relevant to developmental risk research but does not make behavioral inhibition equivalent to an anxiety disorder or determine what will happen to an individual child. Sandstrom et al., 2020.
Prospective systematic research on parent-rated infant temperament has also investigated later internalizing, externalizing, and neurodevelopmental outcomes. The existence of a predictive association does not demonstrate that temperament alone causes a disorder; instruments, family context, genetic overlap, developmental timing, and outcome definitions all matter. Infant temperament and later psychopathology systematic review and meta-analysis.
Normal-range variation and clinical thresholds
Children may be highly emotional, cautious, active, slow to adapt, or exceptionally persistent while remaining within normal developmental variation. A psychiatric diagnosis requires disorder-specific assessment of symptoms, duration, developmental appropriateness, distress or impairment, and alternative explanations according to applicable clinical standards. Temperament questionnaires are research or descriptive measures; they are not diagnostic tests simply because they correlate with symptoms. For the conceptual difference between normal traits and clinical disorders, see Personality Disorders vs Personality Traits: Clinical Differences.
Interpreting risk responsibly
Population findings are most helpful when they improve understanding of pathways and contextual needs without stigmatizing the people described. A statistical risk marker has imperfect sensitivity and specificity; it does not prove that a child will develop a condition. Research into behavioral inhibition and parenting has produced inconsistent evidence for several proposed moderating pathways, especially outside the populations most often studied. These limits should remain visible when translating the literature into discussions of childhood adjustment. Systematic review of parenting and inhibited temperament, 2024.
How Temperament Is Measured in Scientific Research
Questionnaires and caregiver reports
Age-specific parent-report instruments ask about observable behaviors across familiar contexts. The Infant Behavior Questionnaire and Children's Behavior Questionnaire traditions measure multiple facets of reactivity and regulation. Research on the Children's Behavior Questionnaire established a differentiated set of primary scales and a recurring broad-factor structure; shorter versions facilitate larger studies but necessarily reduce detail. Reports are valuable precisely because caregivers see many repeated occasions, yet their ratings reflect memory, expectations, opportunities for observation, and interpretations of the child. Rothbart, Ahadi, Hershey, and Fisher, 2001; Putnam and Rothbart, 2006.
Observations, laboratory tasks, and multiple informants
Laboratory approaches can standardize novelty, frustration, reward, waiting, attention, or unfamiliar social contact. Their advantage is controlled comparison of responses to the same task; their limitation is the narrow situation they sample. Teacher, parent, and child reports may reveal functioning in different settings but may also disagree. In longitudinal research, agreement among methods and stability within a method should be examined separately. Multi-method designs provide a more informative picture than a single measure treated as a definitive reading of personality. Kopala-Sibley et al., 2018.
Reliability, validity, and developmental comparability
A questionnaire may be internally consistent without predicting a relevant outcome; a laboratory task may reliably elicit behavior without sampling the wider range of a child's daily life. Construct validity requires evidence that an operational measure corresponds to the intended concept and distinguishes it from nearby concepts. Developmental comparisons require special care because what counts as effortful control or sociability at one age may be expressed differently at another. Even shortened instruments validated in particular populations cannot automatically be assumed equivalent across every linguistic, educational, and socioeconomic context. Putnam and Rothbart, 2006.
Cultural Context and the Limits of Generalization
Temperament is investigated internationally, but the interpretation of behavioral styles is embedded in cultural environments. Social norms influence how adults respond to quietness, high activity, expressiveness, independence, obedience, and the speed of adaptation to unfamiliar people. Differences in questionnaire averages across countries may reflect observed behaviors, caregiving routines, linguistic interpretations, sampling, and response styles. Researchers must evaluate measurement comparability before concluding that populations differ on a common underlying trait. Putnam et al., 2024.
The Global Temperament Project synthesized more than 83,000 parent reports across 59 nations and examined variation in broad dimensions across age groups. This unusually broad sample substantially extends the evidence base, yet parental reporting remains an important measurement feature; differences between national averages do not determine the temperament of any individual within a nation. A smaller comparison of US and Dutch fathers' reports also found differences in rated infant temperament, showing both the potential value and interpretive limits of cross-cultural comparison. Putnam et al., 2024; US-Dutch paternal report study.
Developmental norms and ethical language
Words used to classify a child can affect how adults interpret subsequent behavior. Labels such as 'difficult,' 'unmotivated,' or 'too sensitive' risk collapsing distinct processes into a value judgment. Scientific writing should describe the measured behavior, the age and situation in which it occurred, the person providing the observation, and the statistical uncertainty surrounding any inference. The goal of temperament research is explanatory clarity and better understanding of variability, not the assignment of permanent social roles.
Established Findings, Active Debates, and Research Limitations
Findings with substantial support
Repeated studies support the existence of measurable individual differences in early reactivity and regulation, meaningful though imperfect temporal consistency, genetic and environmental contributions, and associations between some temperament dimensions and later adjustment. The strongest generalizations are dimensional and probabilistic. Their confidence improves with systematic synthesis, longitudinal samples, independent observers, and measures suited to the developmental period. Rothbart, Ahadi, Hershey, and Fisher, 2001; Bornstein et al., 2019; Saudino, 2005.
Interpretations that depend on the model
The precise boundary between temperament and personality, the number of factors that best summarize temperament, and the relation between early regulation and later executive functioning remain theory- and measurement-dependent. Historic dimensions do not necessarily map cleanly onto contemporary broad factors. Neither genetic estimates nor statistical factor analysis alone settle whether a temperament dimension is biologically fundamental. The most productive comparisons specify the age, construct definition, instrument, and prediction of interest. Goldsmith et al., 1987; Dyson et al., 2012.
Evidence with important uncertainty
Specific biological pathways, individual-level predictive applications, universal cultural norms, and detailed theories of which child benefits most from a given parenting practice require stronger or more diverse causal evidence. Meta-analyses can establish reliable patterns of association while leaving causal identification limited. A long follow-up can support temporal ordering without eliminating every source of confounding. These are substantive design limits rather than reasons to ignore carefully replicated associations. Slagt et al., 2016; systematic review of parenting and inhibited temperament, 2024.
Practical Implications for Understanding Individual Differences
A scientifically informed view of temperament encourages accurate observation of the conditions under which people engage, withdraw, recover from emotion, and regulate action. In childhood settings, this means attending to the balance of novelty and familiarity, opportunities for movement, levels of stimulation, and changing capacities for deliberate regulation. In adult settings, it helps explain why people can differ in reactions and preferred contexts even when their behavior remains flexible and responsive to goals. These implications are principles for understanding variation rather than personalized treatment recommendations. Rothbart, 2007; Thomas and Chess, 1977.
Assessments become most useful when they ask what pattern appears repeatedly, in which contexts, with which consequences, and according to whose observation. A contextual description allows a cautious child to be understood through approach opportunities and adjustment, an energetic child through activity demands, and a strongly reactive child through both triggers and recovery resources. It also leaves room for development, because tendencies can remain recognizable while skills, environments, and behavior change.
Frequently Asked Questions About Temperament
Is temperament present at birth?
Some individual differences in reactivity are observable early, and biological variation contributes to their development. The full set of behaviors researchers call temperament emerges over time as attention, motor ability, emotional expression, and self-regulation mature. It is more accurate to investigate early-developing tendencies than to assume a complete adult-like temperament profile exists at birth. Rothbart, 2007.
Can temperament change?
Yes. Developmental capacities, repeated experiences, and environmental conditions can change the expression and even the relative levels of measured temperament dimensions. Longitudinal research also finds meaningful continuity in relative differences. Change and stability are compatible outcomes and must be specified by dimension and time interval. Bornstein et al., 2019; Kopala-Sibley et al., 2018.
Are there three or four basic temperaments?
The ancient four-humor types are historical concepts. Thomas and Chess proposed three familiar descriptive groupings, while contemporary research commonly evaluates continuous dimensions and factor structures rather than a fixed universal set of types. Rothbart's three broad factors are dimensions, not three mutually exclusive temperaments. Goldsmith et al., 1987; Rothbart, Ahadi, Hershey, and Fisher, 2001.
Is temperament the same as personality?
The constructs overlap, especially in emotional reactivity and approach motivation, but temperament is centered on early-emerging reactivity and regulation, whereas personality incorporates a wider range of adult characteristics and developmental acquisitions. Their relationship is a topic of empirical developmental research. Rothbart, Ahadi, and Evans, 2000.
Does a difficult temperament cause psychological disorders?
No causal conclusion follows from a historical type label. Certain specific dimensions, such as behavioral inhibition, are associated prospectively with some later difficulties in population studies, but most predictions are probabilistic and many other influences affect outcomes. Clinical diagnosis requires separate disorder-specific evaluation. Sandstrom et al., 2020.
How can researchers tell whether a child is highly inhibited?
They examine the child's responses to appropriate forms of novelty over repeated occasions, often combining structured observations and ratings by adults who encounter the child in different settings. The child's age, familiarity with the task, and variation between observers influence interpretation. Kopala-Sibley et al., 2018.
Related Articles
Cluster Personality Traits, Temperament and Individual Differences — the broader scientific synthesis of personality traits, developmental mechanisms, and individual differences.
Temperament and Neuroticism: Early Emotional Reactivity and Adult Personality — a focused account of a developmental bridge to an adult personality dimension.
Personality Disorders vs Personality Traits: Clinical Differences — the distinction between normal-range characteristics and clinical disorder.
Childhood Temperament: Dimensions, Stability and Everyday Behavior — Reviews childhood temperament dimensions, stability, behavior, and development across family and social contexts.
Effortful Control: Temperament, Attention and Self-Regulation — Defines voluntary attentional and behavioral regulation, developmental measurement, and links with adaptation.
Four Temperaments Theory: Historical Types and Modern Scientific Evidence — Examines sanguine, choleric, melancholic, and phlegmatic historical typology and its empirical status.
Shyness and Behavioral Inhibition: Differences and Psychological Research — Differentiates social reticence, temperamental inhibition, social anxiety risk, and situational factors.
References
Aaron, E. M., Caley, E., and Kiel, E. J. (2024). Parenting as a moderator of the relation between child inhibited temperament and anxiety in Western contexts: A systematic review. Clinical Child and Family Psychology Review, 27, 807–831. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10567-024-00492-5
Austerberry, C., Mateen, M., Fearon, P., and Ronald, A. (2022). Heritability of psychological traits and developmental milestones in infancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JAMA Network Open, 5, e2227887. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.27887
Avinun, R., and Knafo, A. (2014). Parenting as a reaction evoked by children's genotype: A meta-analysis of children-as-twins studies. Personality and Social Psychology Review. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23940232/
Bornstein, M. H., Hahn, C. S., Putnick, D. L., and Pearson, R. (2019). Stability of child temperament: Multiple moderation by child and mother characteristics. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 37, 51-67. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjdp.12253
Buss, A. H., and Plomin, R. (1984). Temperament: Early Developing Personality Traits. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. https://www.routledge.com/Temperament-PLE-Emotion-Early-Developing-Personality-Traits/Buss-Plomin/p/book/9781315745701
Chess, S., and Thomas, A. (1977). Temperamental individuality from childhood to adolescence. Journal of the American Academy of Child Psychiatry, 16, 218-226. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-7138(09)60038-8
Desmarais, E., et al. (2019). Cross-cultural differences in temperament: Comparing paternal ratings of US and Dutch infants. European Journal of Developmental Psychology, 16, 137–151. https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2017.1356713
Dyson, M. W., Olino, T. M., Durbin, C. E., Goldsmith, H. H., and Klein, D. N. (2012). The structure of temperament in preschoolers: A two-stage factor analytic approach. Emotion, 12, 44–57. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025023
Goldsmith, H. H., Buss, A. H., Plomin, R., Rothbart, M. K., Thomas, A., Chess, S., Hinde, R. A., and McCall, R. B. (1987). Roundtable: What is temperament? Four approaches. Child Development, 58, 505-529. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/3829791/
Kopala-Sibley, D. C., Olino, T., Durbin, E., Dyson, M. W., and Klein, D. N. (2018). The stability of temperament from early childhood to early adolescence: A multi-method, multi-informant examination. European Journal of Personality. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.2151
Kostyrka-Allchorne, K., Wass, S. V., and Sonuga-Barke, E. J. S. (2020). Research review: Do parent ratings of infant negative emotionality and self-regulation predict psychopathology in childhood and adolescence? A systematic review and meta-analysis of prospective longitudinal studies. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 61, 401–416. https://doi.org/10.1111/jcpp.13144
Lemery-Chalfant, K., et al. (2013). Childhood temperament: Passive gene-environment correlation, gene-environment interaction, and the hidden importance of the family environment. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3581153/
Putnam, S. P., and Rothbart, M. K. (2006). Development of short and very short forms of the Children's Behavior Questionnaire. Journal of Personality Assessment, 87, 102-112. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327752jpa8701_09
Putnam, S. P., Sehic, E., French, B. F., Gartstein, M. A., Lira Luttges, B., and Global Temperament Project collaborators. (2024). The Global Temperament Project: Parent-reported temperament in infants, toddlers, and children from 59 nations. Developmental Psychology, 60, 916-941. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001732
Roberts, B. W., and DelVecchio, W. F. (2000). The rank-order consistency of personality traits from childhood to old age: A quantitative review of longitudinal studies. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 3-25. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.1.3
Rothbart, M. K. (2007). Temperament. In Handbook of Child Psychology. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470147658.chpsy0303
Rothbart, M. K., and Ahadi, S. A. (1994). Temperament and the development of personality. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 103, 55-66. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/8040481/
Rothbart, M. K., Ahadi, S. A., and Evans, D. E. (2000). Temperament and personality: Origins and outcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 122-135. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10653510/
Rothbart, M. K., Ahadi, S. A., Hershey, K. L., and Fisher, P. (2001). Investigations of temperament at three to seven years: The Children's Behavior Questionnaire. Child Development, 72, 1394-1408. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-8624.00355
Rothbart, M. K., and Posner, M. I. (2007). Executive attention and effortful control: Linking temperament, brain networks, and genes. Child Development Perspectives. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1750-8606.2007.00002.x
Sandstrom, A., et al. (2020). Prospective association between childhood behavioral inhibition and anxiety: A meta-analysis. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31642030/
Saudino, K. J. (2005). Behavioral genetics and child temperament. Journal of Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1188235/
Slagt, M., Dubas, J. S., Dekovic, M., and van Aken, M. A. G. (2016). Differences in sensitivity to parenting depending on child temperament: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000061
Spinath, F. M., and Angleitner, A. (1998). Contrast effects in Buss and Plomin's EAS questionnaire: A behavioral-genetic study on early developing personality traits assessed through parental ratings. Personality and Individual Differences, 25, 947-963. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0191-8869(98)00097-X
Thomas, A., and Chess, S. (1977). Temperament and Development. Brunner/Mazel. https://books.google.com/books/about/Temperament_and_Development.html?id=f-pGAAAAMAAJ