14/09/2026
One of the most useful things I ever learned about children is this: They don't all experience the same world in the same way.
Some children seem to arrive earthside ready to join the party. Others need to watch from the sidelines for half an hour before they'll even consider taking off their shoes.
Some barely notice the scratchy tag in their shirt. Others can feel the microscopic crumb that has somehow made its way into their sock.
Some experience disappointment as a small bump in the road. Others experience it with their ENTIRE BODY.
This is temperament.
Long before children develop their beautifully complex personalities, we see relatively stable, biologically influenced differences in how they respond to their environment.
You can think of these as a kind of proto-personality: some of the early ingredients that, together with relationships, experiences, development and environment, contribute to the person a child becomes.
In their landmark researchers Alexander Thomas and Stella Chess described nine dimensions of temperament, including things like activity level, intensity, adaptability, persistence and approach or withdrawal.
Importantly, these aren't categories your child either "has" or "doesn't have".
A child can be highly adaptable but intensely emotional. Slow to approach but incredibly persistent. Highly sensitive but fairly predictable in their rhythms.
And no combination is inherently better than another.
What matters enormously is goodness of fit: how well a child's temperament fits with the expectations and environment around them.
Because sometimes the child we describe as "difficult" isn't actually difficult.
They might be a high-intensity, highly sensitive, slow-to-adapt child living in a world that keeps expecting them to be easy-going, flexible and unfazed.
Understanding temperament doesn't mean we stop guiding children. It means we get much better at understanding the child we're actually guiding.
Swipe through the nine traits đ
Comment and let me know, which one made you immediately think, "OH. That's my child"?
References: Thomas & Chess 1977