Definitions of temperament can be found in many books. I like the following one (from the textbook *Psychology*, edited by Tadeusz Tomaszewski, PWN, Warsaw 1975), namely:
Temperament is a set of formal and relatively stable behavioral traits that manifest themselves in the strength or speed of a response, as well as in the temporal parameters of that response.
It’s a neat definition, but as is often the case with such definitions, it requires careful reading to extract the most important points.
A set of formal characteristics
Formal, that is, relating to form rather than content; in other words, temperament does not constitute the content of behavior. It should be assumed that the manifestations (
) of temperament are evident in various behaviors regardless of their actual content. To simplify matters somewhat, one could say that a phlegmatic person cleans differently than a sanguine person (more on temperament types later).
Strength and reaction speed
In connection with the reaction described in the definition above, it is worth noting a parameter known as reactivity. A given stimulus can elicit reactions of varying intensity in different people. Reactivity can therefore be viewed as a measure of a person’s resilience (or sensitivity). People with high reactivity need much smaller stimuli to reach an optimal level of arousal. In contrast, people with low reactivity need relatively intense stimulation to reach a comparable level of arousal. I think everyone knows people who get stressed out by trivial matters and others who need a lot going on around them to feel truly happy.
In conclusion
Temperament can be considered one of the components of personality. However, these terms are not interchangeable (I mention this because I have sometimes observed an excessive degree of flexibility in this regard among some people).









