Are you extraversion or introversion person?

If you select YES more than NO you are EXTRAVERSION people. Extraversion people seperate 2 dimensions. First dimension is HIGH EXTRAVERSION PEOPLE. They are usually talkative,out going,likes meeting new people and going to new places,active,bored easily and hates routines. And second dimension is LOW EXTRAVERSION PEOPLE. They are usually quiet,withdrawn,prefers being alone or with a few friends to large crowds,prefers routines.

Introverts people work to decrease and avoid stimulation,extraverts work to increase and seek out stimulation.

Are you a talkative person?          YES.      NO.

Are you rather lively ?                    YES.      NO.

Can you usually let yourself go and enjoy yourself at a lively party?     YES.      NO.

Do you enjoy meeting new people?        YES.      NO.

Do you tend to keep in the background social occasions?                        YES.      NO.

Do you like going out a lot?                       YES.      NO.

Do you prefer reading to meeting people?                YES.      NO.

Do you have many friends?           YES.      NO.

Would you go yourself happy-go-lucky?     YES.      NO.

(Eysenck personality questionnaire)


Are there any relationship between self-esteem and cultural wish ?

We are thinking about “ value of ourselves” within differente causes. For example for better educational statu, occupation, the best partner in the marriage , to be best friend forever. What is affect on these factors? You ? Or not.

A lot of researchers apologize people  choose our values until now. 19 researchers who are living differente country research this topic with meta-analizes. And they found that we have self-esteem depend on envioremental factors.

Surprisingly little evidence exists for this assertion, and theories differ about whether individuals must personally endorse the value priorities involved.Cross-sectional and longitudinal analyses showed that participants generally derived feelings of self-esteem from all four bases, but especially from those that were most consistent with the value priorities of others in their cultural context. Multilevel analyses confirm that the bases of positive self-regard are sustained collectively: They are predictably moderated by culturally normative values but show little systematic variation with personally endorsed values.

And the end of we need to cultural desire for have a self esteem.

Psychology of the political leaders and the politicians

The political leaders vow a number of things. But many of them are not true. Know the ways to comprehend, which are right or wrong.All the leaders try to come to power. But everybody cannot come to power because of a number of aspects.

A leader may work improperly, which is not enough to acquire love from the citizens. Another reason, why all the leaders cannot come to power is their behavior and anger under various situations. Sometimes, the leader overreacts and behave in a way that they are going to accomplish everything, the citizens need. Though it is a good and expected attitude of a leader, but sometimes. This psychology is a signal that they are going to behave improperly after they comes to power.

Comprehending the attitude of the leaders

Our research at  proves that when the leaders behave in a way, where they display a combination of anger, violence and emotion, it is likely to show anger and violence. In another research it has been seen by the US department of Defense’s Minerva Initiative, that the leaders who speak in a violent way against the rivals and oppositions, by collecting the transcripts of the speech by the ideology leaders that they are more likely to harm the oppositions and will not be efficient enough to run the government. By comparing the transcripts with leaders who indulge themselves in some motivational task, instead of rallies, protests, a huge difference is observed in their psychology.

The difference in psychology also reveals a lot about, how they will work for the development of the citizens. Though, it is not possible to manage the anger of the politicians and leaders, care should be taken before considering their speech as the true one. 

Why Women Lie


Regardless of the fact that nobody enjoys being lied to, it seems that lying within all types of relationships is common, and is thereby often forgiven or overlooked. While it’s true that most of us are guilty of a little white lie now and again, relationships that are plagued with frequent lies can easily become hurtful and destructive.

Women often tell horror stories about how they’ve been lied to in past relationships, but the truth is that women are as guilty of lying as men, although perhaps for different reasons. And sometimes their lies are more personal and hurtful. Chris Rock hit the nail on the head when he declared that “men lie the most, women tell the biggest lies.” In any case, defining a lie and deciding how it should be dealt with often depends on what the basis for the lie is. 


While some lies have obvious causes and can therefore be dealt with in a straightforward way, other lies have much more elusive justifications that can make it difficult to know how to respond. 

Although there can sometimes seem to be a legitimate reason for lying, it is nonetheless an unhealthy and damaging habit. For this reason, it’s a good idea to reevaluate any relationship in which there’s been dishonesty. Read on for some of the most common reasons women feel the need to lie to you, and what you should do to get around it.

To find out how notorious liar Lindsay Lohan spent her last few hours of freedom before going to jail, visit our friends at 

She wants to spare your feelings

If there’s something about you that she doesn’t like, she may think that it’s preferable to keep you in the dark about it. Although this is a lie spoken with a generous heart, if she never tells you the things that bother her, she might start to resent you, which could spell the end of the relationship.

What you should do: Assess what the intention behind the lie was and how it reflects on her. Is she so insecure that she couldn’t come to you with the problem? Or is she just waiting for the right time to blow you off? If the lie is serious and affects the foundation of your relationship, then it’s time to cut the ties. If, however, it’s a minor problem in an otherwise solid structure, face the situation head-on and make it clear that lying is not an option in the future.

She wants to make herself look good

This type of lie is often told because it makes her seem more glamorous or successful. Although this might seem like a harmless attempt to make people like her, it can be a sign of a more devious personality.

What you should do: If she lied to you to try to impress you, you might feel flattered. On the other hand, this is a deliberate and mischievous lie, the sort that could denote an underhanded person. Be aware that she might tell lies about you to make you seem more glamorous to outsiders. Also, ask yourself what she might do to get ahead, and whether she’d leave you at the drop of a hat for somebody who is higher on the social ladder.

Is she trying to cover up her past?

She’s trying to hide her past

 Like the previous type of lie, this one is an attempt to wipe the slate clean, to start fresh with a new man. It could be because she’s ashamed of her past, but it could also be because she wants to forget it. This is often a lie to protect a sexual history that she thinks you’ll judge her for.

What you should do: A lie like this can be dangerous; if she’s lying about whom she’s been with, there’s a reason why, so be sure you know what you’re getting into. If she does come clean about her past, however, make sure that you’re sensitive in your reaction. After all, the fear of a negative reaction is exactly why she lied.

She’s protecting herself

If she’s trying to keep her distance from you, she might be afraid of making herself vulnerable. She probably believes that if you don’t know about the skeletons in her closet, it’ll be easier for her to walk away from you without getting hurt. This is a popular defense mechanism, but it can be very hard to relate to a person who’s caged herself off from you.

What you should do: If you think she’s worth the trouble, do your best to make her feel more comfortable so that she can open up. If she doesn’t crack after a while, however, furthering the relationship will be next to impossible and probably not worth your time.

She doesn’t want you to worry

If you’re concerned about that male coworker she’s been spending so much time with, she might lie about the time they spend together. This doesn’t mean that there’s anything going on; she’s just doing what she wants without having you fret about it. Or if you worry about her when she jogs outside at night, she might do it anyway and just not tell you. These are relatively well-meaning lies, but they are still quite damaging. When you finally find out the truth, you’ll likely have trouble trusting her.  

What you should do: Explain to her that lies are not the easy way out of tough situations. If she wants to do something and you’re stewing about it, maybe you need to trust her judgment a little more. On the other hand, if she’s just willing to white-lie her way through life, perhaps you should cut and run.

She doesn’t trust you

She may have information she considers sensitive and isn’t sure whether to tell you about it. If you don’t know each other very well yet, this could be a legitimate lie to protect others’ interests. As such, it should be seen as a relatively loyal gesture toward those she’s protecting. However, if you’re well into your relationship and she’s still hiding all sorts of information from you, she might have major trust issues.

What you should do: Confront her about her lack of trust. Is it founded on past experiences of you blabbing or is she just being paranoid? Be sure she knows that you think lying is out of bounds and that a lack of trust is not a solid basis for a relationship.

She might be manipulating or testing you…


She’s manipulative

Sometimes a liar justifies herself by saying that she only embellished the truth. Some people can win arguments and influence people just by emphasizing the right points — without really lying. On the other hand, she may lie outright in order to control the way you think or feel. If she tells white lies to win arguments or to twist you around her finger, you should watch out, because manipulation is a powerful tool.

What you should do: Seriously? Run. If you’ve caught her in a manipulative lie, she’s already trying to play you. This can only get worse.

She’s testing you

If she’s unsure of your temperament or intentions, she might try to test the waters. She could tell you a false story about a past relationship to see how you react. She might tell you her best friend thinks you’re cute to see if your eye wanders. This type of testing is meant to catch the bad guys before they get too close.

What you should do: Although it may be a defensive action, it is a sign of trouble ahead, as it is indicative of immature behavior. Telling you lies is not the way to get to know you, and a woman who does this is unlikely to be any more stable once you get closer to her.

She wants to keep the upper hand

She might withhold information to maintain a sense power over you. For instance, if a mutual friend tells her something important, she may keep it from you so that she has the inside scoop. Or she might just keep things from you to keep you at a disadvantage; that way, she can pick and choose what to tell you and when.

What you should do: Unless you have underlying domination fantasies, this is probably a problem you should deal with promptly. She’s found a way to keep you under her thumb, and as long as you allow it, you’ll stay there. Anyone who tries this kind of trick likely has control issues and will continue to dominate you. If this sounds unattractive to you, get out while you can.

liar, liar, pants on fire

What you want to keep in mind about lies is that they are, by definition, dishonest. A woman who is keeping things from you or just making things up has hidden motives. Chances are that anything you try to build with a liar will collapse in the end. If you find out a woman has lied to you, try to get her to ‘fess up, and then you can decide whether it’s something you can get past or if it’s time to throw in the towel.


Old adage 'sleep on it' is true — but only if it's a really difficult problem, study shows

 A new study from Lancaster University has found that sleeping on a problem really can help people to find a solution.The study, published online this week in the journal Memory & Cognition, tested whether sleep or time spent awake worked best in helping people find the solutions to a range of problem solving tasks.

Participants in the study — 27 men and 34 women — were asked to attempt easy and difficult verbal insight problems and, following a period of sleep, time spent wake, or no delay at all, the three groups of participants reattempted previously unsolved problems.

The sleep group solved a greater number of difficult problems than did the other groups, but no difference was found for easy problems.

The authors of the study — Ut Na Sio, Padraic Monaghan and Tom Ormerod all from the Centre for Research in Human Development and Learning at Lancaster's Department of Psychology — concluded that sleep facilitates problem solving but this has its primary effect for harder problems.

Professor Padraic Monaghan said: "We've known for years that sleep has a profound effect on our ability to be creative and find new solutions to problems. Our study shows that this sleep effect is greatest when the problems facing us are difficult. Sleep appears to help us solve problems by accessing information that is remote to the initial problem, that may not be initially brought to mind. Sleep has been proposed to 'spread activation' to the solution that is initially distant from our first attempts at the problem. The advice stemming from this and related research is to leave a problem aside if you're stuck, and get some sleep if it's a really difficult problem."


Journal Reference:

  1. Ut Na Sio, Padraic Monaghan, Tom Ormerod. Sleep on it, but only if it is difficult: Effects of sleep on problem solving. Memory & Cognition, 2012; DOI: 10.3758/s13421-012-0256-7

Playground peers can predict adult personalities

 Even on the playground, our friends know us better than we know ourselves. New research has revealed that your childhood peers from grade school may be able to best predict your success as an adult.

Lisa Serbin of the Department of Psychology at Concordia University and Alexa Martin-Storey, a recent Concordia graduate and a current post-doctoral student at the University of Texas — both members of the Concordia-based Centre for Research in Human Development — recently published a study online, which reveals that childhood peer evaluation of classmate personalities can more accurately predict adulthood success than self-evaluation at that age.

"This study, known as the Concordia Longitudinal Risk Project, was started in 1976 by my colleagues in the Department of Psychology, Alex Schwartzman and Jane Ledingham, who is now at the University of Ottawa," says Serbin. "Over two years, Montreal students in grades 1, 4 and 7 completed peer evaluations of their classmates and rated them in terms of aggression, likeability and social withdrawal. The students also did self-evaluations."

Over the next twenty years, these children were closely followed as researchers used the exhaustive longitudinal study to track their progress into adulthood. A follow-up survey was conducted between 1999 and 2003 with nearly 700 of the participants from the initial study. The survey included measurement of adult personality traits, such as levels of neuroticism, extroversion, openness, agreeableness and conscientiousness.

"We were able to compare peer and self-perceptions of the childhood behaviours to these adult personality factors," says Martin-Storey. "We found the evaluations from the group of peers were much more closely associated with eventual adult outcomes than were their own personality perceptions from childhood. This makes sense, since children are around their peers all day and behaviours like aggressiveness and likeability are extremely relevant in the school environment."

For example, children who perceived themselves as socially withdrawn exhibited less conscientiousness as adults. On the other hand, kids whose peers perceived them as socially withdrawn grew up to exhibit lower levels of extraversion, the latter being a more accurate association. Peer-perceived likeability also predicted a more accurate outcome, associating the personality trait with higher levels of agreeableness and conscientiousness, and lower levels of neuroticism than those who thought of themselves as likeable.

Overall, the findings supported the use of peer rather than self-ratings of childhood personalities in the prediction of adulthood success.

"Adult personality traits are associated with a lot of important life factors, such as health, mental health and occupational satisfaction," says Serbin. "The information from our study could be used to promote better longitudinal outcomes for children by helping kids and parents develop effective mechanisms for addressing aggressive or socially withdrawn behaviours and promoting more pro-social behaviour."

Benefits to early intervention in addressing brain abnormalities

Preemptive cognitive training — an early intervention to address neuropsychiatric deficiencies — can help the brain function normally later in life, a team of researchers has found through a series of experiments on laboratory rats. Their findings, which appear in the latest issue of the journal Neuron, hold promise for addressing a range of brain impairments in humans, including schizophrenia.

The study was conducted by researchers at New York University's Center for Neural Science, the State University of New York (SUNY) Downstate Medical Center, NYU Langone Medical Center, and the Nathan S. Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research.

Researchers have aimed to address human neuropsychiatric impairments, such as schizophrenia, through mental training — for example, executive function exercises that teach patients to focus their attention and selectively recall important information. Historically, these methods, collectively titled cognitive remediation, have been of limited value because they have been applied to patients whose conditions are too advanced to address.

However, early intervention, in principle, is a viable approach to treatment. This is because of two facts. One, our brains continue to develop and grow up until the age of about 20. Two, experience can have the powerful effect of tuning neural circuits. Taken together, it may be possible to use mental training to harness the young brain's developmental potential to compensate for abnormal neural circuits.

"This means you have a window to intervene prior to a neural system manifesting functional abnormality and becoming unchangeable," explained André Fenton, a professor at NYU's Center for Neural Science and one of the study's co-authors.

Fenton, who is also an associate professor of physiology and pharmacology at SUNY Downstate, added, "If you can detect an abnormality in the brain early enough, you can redirect the trajectory of development and train the younger brain to solve problems that will confront the adult brain."

But a question that has vexed researchers is what kind of training can yield dividends? This matter was the focus of the Neuron study.

The research team conducted its study on laboratory rats at two different stages of life — at adolescence, or 35 days old, which is the human equivalent of 13 years of age, and as young adults, or 60 days old, which is the human equivalent of just over 20 years, which is the typical onset of schizophrenia symptoms.

Through a series of experiments, the researchers examined the behavior and brain physiology of rats with normally functioning brains and those whose brains had been impaired by lesions, which model the effects of schizophrenia.

In the initial experiment, they used both normal rats and those whose brains had been impaired by lesions, so-called neonatal ventral hippocampus lesion (NVHL) rats, to model impaired cognitive control, one of the core executive function deficits in schizophrenia and other types of mental illness. The rats had to learn to properly navigate a small disk-shaped carousel in order to avoid stepping in an area that would result in a mild electric shock. On the rotating carousel, the rats were given two types of spatial cues — those that were stationary and necessary to use in order to avoid the area in which they'd receive the electric shock and those that were rotating and irrelevant to this avoidance. The test was designed to mimic the executive function challenges faced by those with schizophrenia — the inability to distinguish relevant and irrelevant information.

They first tested 60-day old rats. While the normal rats quickly learned to differentiate relevant from irrelevant cues, thereby avoiding the shock zone, the NVHL rats had difficulty doing so. However, with enough training or repetition, the adult NVHL rats eventually learned to avoid the shock zone, but they were again impaired if the task was changed so they had to avoid shock in a new part of the carousel. This experiment mimicked what is often seen with human schizophrenia patients — that cognitive remediation can improve cognition, but not generally. Improvements are typically limited to particular training tasks, which makes cognitive remediation of limited clinical utility.

In the next experiment, the researchers tested whether preemptive cognitive training, if it occurred early enough in life, would be beneficial in adulthood by diminishing the adult cognitive control impairment. They also made sure to evaluate whether the early cognitive remediation for a single task can help the adult NVHL rats complete other tasks instead of the benefits being limited to mastering the training task.

To test these matters, the researchers gave control and NVHL rats two kinds of experiences when they were adolescents — at 35 days old. Half the rats in each group received the training to use relevant and ignore irrelevant information to avoid shock in the rotating carousel. As adolescents, the NVHL rats were not impaired; they learned as well as the control group did. The other half of the rats was put on the carousel for the same amount of time, but they were never shocked and so not given an explicit cognitive challenge.

When the NVHL rats were 60 days old, the researchers gave all of them a variety of tasks beginning with a test in a T-shaped maze. The rats first had to learn to go to the left, rather than the right, in order to avoid a mild electric shock. All the rats initially performed well as there was no need for cognitive control. But when the shock was switched to the left, it required cognitive control to ignore the now irrelevant memories of going left. The results showed that the NVHL rats without the early cognitive training were impaired to switch to running to the newly safe portion of the maze. In contrast, all the other rats, including the NVHL rats that had been subject to preemptive cognitive training, switched more successfully than the NVHL rats that had no such training. The same pattern of results was seen in subsequent tests using the carousel task, confirming that the preemptive cognitive training in adolescence was generally beneficial into adulthood, overcoming the cognitively debilitating effects of the persistent brain damage that the NVHL rats sustained.

Not only did preemptive training in adolescence prevent the adult deficits in cognitive control, but when the researchers investigated electrical brain function they observed that the preemptive cognitive training had also corrected how the damaged brain was operating. The researchers recorded the oscillatory electrical activity in different parts of the brain and found that in normal rats that were doing the carousel task, the electrical fluctuations were strongly synchronized between the left and right hippocampi, a part of the brain that is crucial to memory and navigating space. Similarly, in the NVHL rats with preemptive cognitive training in adolescence, neural synchrony in the left and right hippocampi was as strong as the control rats during the control task. These findings indicate that the early cognitive intervention also allowed the brain to function normally during the cognitive challenge, despite the enduring brain damage.

"Our findings show that if you focus the young brain on gaining a certain kind of experience, then we can train it to solve certain types of problems that will confront the adult brain," explained Fenton. "But this must be done at a time when the brain is flexible in order to carve out pathways to gain competencies of a normal brain."

The study's other co-authors were: Heekyung Lee and Hsin-Yi Kao of SUNY Downstate Medical Center; Dino Dvorak of SUNY Downstate Medical Center and the Polytechnic Institute of NYU; Áine Duffy of the Nathan S. Kline Institute for Psychiatric Research; and Helen Scharfman of NYU Langone Medical Center.

The study was supported by a grant from the National Institute of Mental Health, part of the National Institutes of Health.

Journal Reference:

  1. Heekyung Lee, Dino Dvorak, Hsin-Yi Kao, Áine M. Duffy, Helen E. Scharfman, André A. Fenton. Early Cognitive Experience Prevents Adult Deficits in a Neurodevelopmental Schizophrenia Model. Neuron, 2012; 75 (4): 714 DOI: 10.1016/j.neuron.2012.06.016

Reciprocity an important component of prosocial behavior: Scorekeeping of past favors isn't, however, a factor

While exchanging favors with others, humans tend to think in terms of tit-for-tat, an assumption easily extended to other animals. As a result, reciprocity is often viewed as a cognitive feat requiring memory, perhaps even calculation. But what if the process is simpler, not only in other animals but in humans as well?

Researchers at the Yerkes National Primate Research Center, Emory University, have determined monkeys may gain the advantages of reciprocal exchange of favors without necessarily keeping precise track of past favors. Malini Suchak, a graduate student at Emory University, and Frans de Waal, PhD, director of the Living Links Center at Yerkes and C.H. Candler Professor of Psychology at Emory, led the study. Their findings will appear in an Early Online Edition of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences this week.

"Prosocial is defined as a motivation to assist others regardless of benefits for self, explained Suchak. "We used a prosocial choice test to study whether direct reciprocity could promote generosity among brown capuchin monkeys. We found one monkey willing to do another favors if the first monkey was the only one to choose, and we found the monkeys became even more prosocial if they could alternate and help each other. We did not find any evidence that the monkeys paid close attention to each other's past choices, so they were prosocial regardless of what their partner had just done," she continued.

Suchak and de Waal suggest the synchronization of the same actions in alternation creates a more positive attitude the same way humans who row a boat together or work toward a shared goal develop a more positive attitude about each other.

Another interesting finding according to the researchers is the capuchin monkeys were prosocial whether they were paired with a familiar partner from their own group {in-group} or a partner from a different social group {out-group}.

According to de Waal, "This research has several implications for better understanding human behavior. First, we observed an increase in prosocial behavior as a result of reciprocity, but the monkeys did not develop a contingency between their own and their partners' behaviors. Like humans, the capuchins may have understood the benefits of reciprocity and used this understanding to maximize their own benefits. Second, that the capuchins responded similarly to in-group and out-group partners has implications for the commonly held view that humans are unique in their ability to cooperate with strangers," de Waal explained.

According to the researchers, capuchin monkeys (Cebus apella) are ideal subjects for this type of study given the numerous observations of cooperative and prosocial behavior in the field, their sensitivity to other monkeys' efforts in coordination experiments, and their robust, spontaneous prosocial behavior in the prosocial choice test compared with, for example, chimpanzees, which seem more sensitive to methodological variables.

In this study, the researchers tested 12 brown capuchin monkeys in pairs on a prosocial choice task. The monkeys had the choice between a selfish token that benefited only them and a prosocial token that benefited themselves and a partner. By comparing each monkey's behavior with a familiar partner from the monkey's own group and a partner from a different social group, the researchers examined the influence of each monkey's relationship outside the experimental context on prosocial behavior. There was no difference between in-group and out-group pairs in any of the test conditions. To test the role of reciprocity, the researchers allowed the monkeys to take turns making choices and found this greatly increased prosocial behavior, but the researchers did not observe any tit-for-tat behavior. The researchers also tested whether the monkeys could overcome their aversion for inequity by creating a situation in which both individuals could provide each other with superior rewards, making reciprocity an even more attractive strategy. The monkeys did, but again without keeping track of each other's choices. Finally, through a series of control conditions, the researchers established the monkeys were responding to their partners' behaviors, rather than the rewards delivered by their partners, and that the monkeys understood the values of the tokens and were flexibly responding to changing conditions throughout the test sessions.

This research opens several avenues for future research, including further examining the emergence of reciprocity among humans without the cognition required for tit-for-tat and the tendency to cooperate with out-group partners.

Journal Reference:

  1. Malini Suchak and Frans B. M. de Waal. Monkeys benefit from reciprocity without the cognitive burden. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 2012; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.1213173109

When to worry about kids' temper tantrums

NewsPsychology (Aug. 29, 2012) — Temper tantrums in young children can be an early signal of mental health problems, but how does a parent or pediatrician know when disruptive behavior is typical or a sign of a serious problem?

New Northwestern Medicine research will give parents and professionals a new tool to know when to worry about young children’s misbehavior. Researchers have developed an easy-to-administer questionnaire specifically designed to distinguish the typical misbehavior of early childhood from more concerning misbehavior. This will enable early identification and treatment of emerging mental health problems, key to preventing young children struggling with their behavior from spiraling downward into chronic mental health problems. The new tool also will prevent rampant mislabeling and overtreatment of typical misbehavior.

Surprise Finding: Temper Tantrums Not Frequent

In a surprising key finding, the study also debunks the common belief temper tantrums are rampant among young children. Although temper tantrums among preschoolers are common, they are not particularly frequent, the research shows. Less than 10 percent of young children have a daily tantrum. That pattern is similar for girls and boys, poor and non-poor children and Hispanic, white and African-American children.

“That’s an ‘aha!’ moment, “said Lauren Wakschlag, professor and vice chair in the department of medical social sciences at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine and lead author of a paper, published August 29 in The Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry. “It gives a measurable indicator to tell us when tantrums are frequent enough that a child may be struggling. Perhaps for the first time, we have a tangible way to help parents, doctors and teachers know when the frequency and type of tantrums may be an indication of a deeper problem.”

Until recently, the only diagnostic tools available for preschool behavior problems were those geared to older children and teens with more severe, aggressive behavior. More recently, there has been emphasis on measures developed specifically for preschool children.

For the study, funded by the National Institute of Mental Health, researchers developed the new questionnaire, the Multidimensional Assessment of Preschool Disruptive Behavior (MAP-DB), to ask parents of almost 1,500 diverse preschoolers, age three to five, to answer questions about their child’s behavior. The questionnaire asked about the frequency, quality and severity of many temper tantrum behaviors and anger management skills over the past month.

The results allowed researchers to rate children along a continuum of behavior from typical to atypical, rather than focusing only on extreme behavior. Having a continuum will allow mental health professionals to intervene before there is a serious problem or watch and wait if a child is in the middle range. Early childhood is a critical period to identify a problem, because once negative problems become entrenched, they are harder to treat. This continuum also provides a barometer for determining when a child is improving on his/her own or through treatment.

“We have defined the small facets of temper tantrums as they are expressed in early childhood. This is key to our ability to tell the difference between a typical temper tantrum and one that is problematic,” Wakschlag said.

For example, the study found that a typical tantrum may occur when a child is tired or frustrated or during daily routines such as at bedtime, mealtime or getting dressed. An atypical tantrum may be one that occurs “out of the blue” or is so intense that a child becomes exhausted. While any of these behaviors may occur in some children from time to time, when these atypical forms of tantrums occur regularly, they become a red flag for concern.

This developmentally-based approach is in stark contrast to the commonly used Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), which does not provide age-specific markers for determining clinical significance.

For example, a symptom of behavior problems in DSM is defined as “often loses temper.”

“The definition of ‘often’ may vary substantially for younger and older children and depend on family stress levels and other mitigating factors,” Wakschlag said. “Since most preschool children tantrum, this vague criteria makes it exceptionally difficult for providers to determine when behavior is of clinical significance in early childhood.”

“There’s been a real danger of preschool children with normal misbehavior being mislabeled and over-treated with medication,” Wakschlag said. “On the other hand, pediatricians are hampered by the lack of standardized methods for determining when misbehavior reflects deeper problems and so may miss behaviors that are concerning. This is why it’s so crucial to have tools that precisely identify when worry is warranted in this age group.”

Linking Tantrums to Mental Health Problems, Social Functioning and Brain Reactivity in Early Childhood

To establish the clinical significance of these findings, Wakschlag, colleague Margaret Briggs-Gowan, from the University of Connecticut Health Center, and their collaborators are now examining how these tantrum patterns are linked to a range of mental health problems and problems in daily functioning such as getting along in school, with siblings and general social skills. In collaboration with Northwestern neuroscientist, Joel Voss, the study also is beginning to use brain-imaging techniques to uncover links between particular patterns of brain reactivity and these early problem behaviors.

Replicating Findings in Larger Sample

In addition, Wakschlag and colleagues are replicating their findings about the developmental pattern of misbehaviors in a second sample of 2,200 children, with the next step being disseminating the tool. The questionnaire is now 118 questions but researchers hope to use state-of-the-art measurement science to crunch it down to about 25 key questions. An ultimate goal of the research team is to widely disseminate the MAP-DB questionnaire in a brief computerized form for parents to fill out in pediatric waiting rooms, with the computer generating immediate feedback to pediatricians prior to the appointment.

Story Source:

The above story is reprinted from materials provided by Northwestern University, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.

Note: Materials may be edited for content and length. For further information, please contact the source cited above.

Journal Reference:

  1. Lauren S. Wakschlag, Seung W. Choi, Alice S. Carter, Heide Hullsiek, James Burns, Kimberly McCarthy, Ellen Leibenluft, Margaret J. Briggs-Gowan. Defining the developmental parameters of temper loss in early childhood: implications for developmental psychopathology. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 2012; DOI: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2012.02595.x

Kindergarten readiness: Are shy kids at an academic disadvantage?

Some parents worry about their kids not adapting to the school environment, particularly when the children are talkative and overactive. Yet, a new study shows that overly shy preschool children are at greater academic risk than their chatty and boisterous peers. (Credit: © zakharova ievgeniia / Fotolia)

— Parents of young children hope for a successful kindergarten experience that will set their youngsters on the right path of their educational journey. Some worry about their kids not adapting to the school environment, particularly when the children are talkative and overactive. Yet, a new study by the University of Miami (UM) shows that overly shy preschool children are at greater academic risk than their chatty and boisterous peers.

The study is one of the first to follow the social and academic progress of children throughout the preschool year. The report shows that children displaying shy and withdrawn behavior early in the preschool year started out with the lowest academic skills and showed the slowest gains in academic learning skills across the year. The findings are published online, in advance of print, by the Journal of School Psychology.

"Everybody wants their children to be ready for kindergarten, to know their ABCs and to be able to count, but they sometimes don't understand that having social-emotional readiness is equally important," says Rebecca J. Bulotsky-Shearer, assistant professor of psychology at UM College of Arts and Sciences (CAS) and principal investigator of the study.

Behavioral problems in the classroom arise when there is a gap between the child's developmental skills and the expectations of the school environment, according to the study. The findings suggest that children who are shy in the classroom have trouble engaging and learning.

"Preschool children who are very introverted tend to 'disappear within the classroom,'" says Elizabeth R. Bell, doctoral candidate in developmental psychology, at UM and co-author of the study. "It appears that while these children are not causing problems in the school, they are also not engaging in classroom activities and interactions, where almost all learning occurs during this age."

The results also raise the possibility that children who are loud and disruptive may be more likely to get the teacher's attention and benefit from specific educational strategies. "There are many classroom-based interventions for children that are disruptive and acting out in the classroom," says Bulotsky-Shearer. "I think the children who show an extreme amount of shyness and are withdrawn are most at risk of getting missed."

The researcher hopes the new findings encourage the development of appropriate classroom interventions tailored to the needs of different children, as well as appropriate training and professional development for teachers, to help them identify children who need help in specific areas. "This is especially important within early childhood programs such as Head Start, serving a diverse population of low-income children and families," says Bulotsky-Shearer.

The study analyzes information from 4, 417 prekindergarten children in the Head Start Program, ages 3 to 5, from a diverse population, living in a large urban district of the northeast. Six profile types were used to describe the preschoolers: 1.Well adjusted; 2. Adjusted with mild disengagement; 3.Moderately socially and academically disengaged; 4. Disruptive with peers; 5.Extremely socially and academically disruptive; 6.Extremely socially and academically disengaged.

The teachers assessed the emotional and behavioral characteristics, as well as the academic progress of each child, at three points in time during the preschool year. The findings show that older kids and girls tended to be better adjusted to the class, exhibited less behavioral problems, and had higher levels of social literacy, language and math skills.

The study is titled "Latent Profiles of Preschool Behavior within Learning, Peer, and Teacher Contexts: Identifying Subgroups of Children at Academic Risks across the Preschool Year." Ximena Dominguez, research social scientist, at SRI International is also a co-author of the study.


Journal Reference:

  1. Rebecca J. Bulotsky-Shearer, Elizabeth R. Bell, Ximena Domínguez. Latent profiles of problem behavior within learning, peer, and teacher contexts: Identifying subgroups of children at academic risk across the preschool year. Journal of School Psychology, 2012; DOI: 10.1016/j.jsp.2012.08.001