Humans use both language and actions to express themselves. Children often express with behavior what they cannot put into words, leaving adults to decode the message.

To increase successful detective work, adults must shift their focus from trying to stop a child’s behavior, to understanding the behavior. In short, they must seek to see the child behind the behavior.

To gather that meaning, adults must attune to the child’s thoughts, feelings, perceptions, sensations, needs, abilities, culture, and developmental level. Attuning may take time to develop since we tend to observe to fix or change, not to understand.

This diminishes the adults’ capacity to truly gather information; to truly see the child behind the behavior.

By tuning in to the child’s perspective, adults may become more effective in choosing strategies that prevent challenging behaviors, promote social and emotional skills, and meet children’s basic needs.

To see the child behind the behavior, let us consider the “brain reasons” for challenging behavior, then identify the “mind methods” for helping children develop appropriate responses.

Brain Development

Scientists describe brain development as happening in three parts: the brain stem, the limbic center and finally the cortex. Daniel Siegel likens this development to the construction of a house: the downstairs brain, which includes the brain stem and the limbic center, comes first; then, the upstairs brain, or the cortex, begins construction.

Scientists believe the upstairs of the “house” brain, the cortex, completes its development in the early thirties. Yes: human brains are not fully developed until the early thirties.

This means we are asking children to think, plan, reason, pay attention, control impulses, regulate movement, manage emotions, shift gears, delay gratification (e.g., wait, share, take turns, clean up), follow multiple step directions, and carry out additional complex cognitive functions without having the brain regions of the cortex necessary to do that reliably or consistently.

Because the upstairs brain lacks the capacity to meet these demands, the more developed regions of children’s brains, the downstairs, takes over. From this brain stem and limbic region, children enter fight, flight, freeze, or faint mode under stress, resulting in “stress-behavior” to get their needs met that may be physically or emotionally dangerous to the child, other children, and/or to adults.

Understanding behavior: three basic needs

All behavior, that of adults and children alike, stems from the drive to meet three basic needs: safety (physical AND emotional), satisfaction, and connection. Adults may have a hard time conceptualizing challenging behavior as an attempt for children to meet their needs; instead, they see the behavior as children trying to get what they want.

In this case, the adult tries to see the child behind the behavior but misattributes its function. As a result, the adult might punish a child’s behavior instead of understanding the behavior stems from the brain sensing basic needs under threat.

We learn to meet our needs in appropriate ways with guidance from adults and with further brain development.

The propensity for a child’s downstairs brain to sense what it perceives as danger and react to unmet needs with challenging behavior is, in essence, a bid for safety, satisfaction, and connection. When an adult punishes a child for attempting to meet their needs the quality of the relationship erodes.

The child may internalize a sense of not being seen, soothed, safe, or secure because adults do not seem to understand them.

An example

Consider for example, a classroom situation where four-year-old Liam asks five-year-old Jacob for a turn on the bike. Jacob yells, “No”! Liam pushes Jacob off the bike, jumps on it and rides away leaving a crying Jacob in his wake. The teacher arrives on the scene.

She tells Jacob to keep riding on the bike and begins to lecture Liam about not pushing others. Jacob peddles away as Liam hangs his head to receive the teacher’s words of admonishment.

Adults cannot condone pushing behavior. And yet, considering Liam’s behavior through the lens of the brain and the mind might lead to a different response from the teacher.

Connecting behavior with needs

From a brain perspective, Liam’s pushing might be seen as a bid for:

1) emotional safety: the physical act of pushing may be an attempt to help him regulate his anger or frustration he feels from not getting a turn,

2) satisfaction: his words didn’t get the desired outcome, so he pushes Jacob off the bike to attempt to satisfy his need for a turn on the bike, and

3) connection: when his words did not work, Liam shifted to physical action to try to get his needs met, to connect with Jacob regarding the sincerity of his request for a turn on the bike.

Of course, Liam’s brain needs help getting his needs met through appropriate behavior. This starts by having an adult attune to the child.

It is not just about getting a turn on the bike when you look through the lens of brain development; in this example, I am highlighting the link between a child’s desire to ride a bike and his overarching needs for safety, satisfaction, and connection. This is not how most adults consider these types of exchanges with children.

When we go deeper, we can be more understanding which will help our response be more helpful in the long term. With this, we strengthen our relationship with the child even amidst challenging behaviors.

Identifying children’s needs

Liam needs teaching: someone to help him resolve this conflict with Jacob. This includes guidance on how to identify, express, and manage his emotions. Instead of pulling Liam away to lecture him, the teacher might have guided the children through the four steps of conflict resolution.

The teacher facilitates the children sharing their perspectives:

1) What happened? 2) How does each feel (emotions), and 3) What solutions might we try?

The final step involves the adult acknowledging the children’s efforts to work through their conflict. This teaches children appropriate ways to get their needs met.

To learn self-regulation skills when their needs cannot be met. But first we must go beyond the superficial observation that he “wanted” the bike. Attuning to the child’s experience of unmet needs instead i.e.,, “I felt unsafe/dissatisfied/disconnected because I didn’t get a turn.”

If the adult fails to see the child behind the behavior, they may miss an opportunity to engage the child’s upstairs brain. To develop appropriate ways to get those needs met.

The child may lose trust in the security of their connection to the adult if the adult does not attune to the child’s perspective.

Function of Behavior

Adults looking to see the child behind the behavior attune to the function of the behavior.What might the child be trying to get, avoid, and/ or express emotionally in this moment? Function links to safety, satisfaction, and connection in the following way.

The child tries to get their safety, satisfaction, and connection needs or avoid having them not met and/or expressing their emotions about not getting their needs met.

In the example above with Liam and Jacob: what is Liam trying to get, avoid, or express with this behavior?

He is trying to get a turn on the bike.

Simultaneously, to avoid not getting a turning/having to wait.

Finally, he may be trying to express his anger or frustration at not getting a turn.

Attuning to the child to discover function

These are just initial hypotheses that must be further investigated to find out more about Liam’s perspective. To find out what the function is, we help Liam tell his story of what happened.

We attune to his perspective versus lecture him about what he did wrong.

Going deeper, consider that Liam may not have felt safe (emotionally), satisfied, or connected when Jacob told him no.

He may also have a history of not getting his needs met with Jacob, or at school, or in general. Please note: the larger context of how his safety, satisfaction, and connection needs get/do not get met is important.

The form of Liam’s behavior, pushing Jacob off the bike and riding away, must change. But no issue arises with the function(s) of his behavior: to attempt to get his needs met/avoid having them not met/expressing his emotions.

Separating form from function of behavior helps adults see the child behind the behavior. When adults interpersonally attune in this way, they consider the child from the inside out.

From here, they gather data to teach them what to do instead to get their needs and functions met.

Basic Drives

The brain helps us meet our basic needs through what Rick Hanson describes as three “operating systems” or drives: to avoid, approach, and/or attach.

Humans have the drive 1) to avoid harm to meet safety needs, 2) to approach rewards to meet satisfaction needs, and 3) to attach to others to meet connection needs.

Hanson describes the three basic needs and drives as loosely correlated with the three levels of the brain:

1) the brain stem correlates with the need for safety and the drive to avoid harm

2) the limbic center with the need for satisfaction and the drive to approach rewards

3) the cortex with the need for connection and the drive to attach.

Knowing about the brain helps you see the child behind the behavior. To understand that unconscious drives inform behavior. Not all behavior comes from conscious choice.

This can be helpful for adults since they often misinterpret a child’s behavior as willfully defiant or harmful in some way.

Drives in action

Let us revisit the example of Liam and Jacob through the lens of brain development, needs, and drives. We might hypothesize that Liam approached the reward of riding the bike by asking Jacob for a turn to meet his satisfaction needs using his upstairs brain. Jacob’s refusal triggered Liam’s brain stem and limbic center (the downstairs brain) to avoid the disruption of his emotional safety needs, i.e., anger or frustration.

Liam continued with his attempt to meet his satisfaction needs by approaching Jacob and pushing him off the bike. Finally, he tried to attach to Jacob by sending the message through his behavior that he had not met his connection needs. The brain striving to ensure that in the future their relationship would include Jacob complying with his requests. You can see the child behind the behavior better now, right?

Again, Liam needs guidance on how to deliver his message more adaptively. Clear. But hopefully you understand that when adults observe the form of the behavior only, we miss important data that could inform our responses.

Over time, we hope to teach children how to drive (i.e., avoid, approach, and/or attach) to meet their safety, satisfaction, and connection needs in appropriate ways. To obtain, avoid, and express themselves from their integrated brain (the downstairs and upstairs brain linked).

The challenge: sometimes the downstairs brain does the “driving.” And remember: the upstairs brain does not fully develop until the early thirties! As such, children need a lot of support, not shame, blame, or punishment, from those of us with fully developed brains to help them meet their needs in appropriate ways.

Telling them what they did wrong, shaming or blaming, does not teach them how to do things differently.

The Brain’s Settings and Zones

Rick Hanson describes two “settings” in the brain that determine how we approach, avoid, or attach to get our needs met. Our brain may drive our behavior from a reactive setting or a responsive setting depending upon which “zone” in the brain drives.

The reactive setting has two “zones”: the “Red Zone” and the “Blue Zone.” When the brain operates from this setting, we react without thinking. The downstairs brain drives the desire to get our needs met.

When the brain perceives warning or danger to our needs, the autonomic nervous system might activate. With this, we react from either the “Red Zone” or the “Blue Zone.”

Examining behavior through Zones and Settings

In the Red Zone, the sympathetic nervous system invokes fight or flight behaviors. From the “Blue Zone” we react with parasympathetic behaviors such as freezing, fainting, folding or fawning.

The behaviors from both zones happen without planning or thought. Outside of conscious awareness. Much as your heart beats without you telling it to.

The second setting, that of responsivity, activates when our brains fully integrate with both the downstairs and the upstairs brain connected. From this “Green Zone,” our social engagement part of our nervous system drives behavior.

We use upstairs brain skills such as reasoning, planning, emotional balance, and thoughtfulness to drive our goal of getting our needs met.

When we see the child behind the behavior through this lens, we begin to understand the brain must have perceived the threats to Liam’s his safety, satisfaction, and connection needs that triggered his reaction from the “Red Zone.”

The autonomic fight reaction of pushing Jacob.

Shifting zones and settings

Because Liam’s brain doesn’t develop fully until much later, he reacted from the downstairs brain. The “Red Zone” reacted to emergency signals that exceeded Liam’s window of tolerance.

In short, his brain could not stay regulated with the signals of warning it picked up.

If Liam had reacted from the “Blue Zone,” he may have slouched down, hung up his head and walked away. Maybe even retreating to a quiet corner of the playground to sit by himself.

He might have had trouble engaging with the children the rest of the day.

In the “Blue Zone” the brain detects the threat to be so great, that shutting down seems the only safe option. Adults may label such withdrawal behaviors as desirable because Liam isn’t causing anyone else a problem.

But Liam is experiencing a problem and now is left alone to manage it.

Liam did not get the chance to work through the conflict with Jacob; instead, he just gave up by walking away. “Blue Zone” reactions might be less obviously dangerous, but they can have deleterious consequences over time i.e., co-dependency, not standing up for oneself, always giving in, beliefs of worthlessness to name a few.

If Liam had felt less of a threat to his needs, he may have responded from the “Green Zone.” From an integrated brain, Liam would avoid, approach, and/or attach with socially engaging options He may seek out a teacher to help resolve the conflict, get a timer, find another bike, or tell Jacob he felt angry. 

Mind Methods

Now that you understand some of the “brain reasons” for behavior, let’s turn toward “mind methods” for helping children respond from the “Green Zone” to meet their needs.

Rick Hanson’s model for how the three levels of the developing brain link to basic needs and drives includes a fun way of considering this connection: to develop our brains in a healthy manner, we need to “Pet the Lizard,” “Feed the Mouse,” and “Hug the Monkey” inside our brains. Mind methods that meet safety needs help calm the brain stem (Pet the Lizard), meet satisfaction needs to regulate the limbic center (Feed the Mouse), and meet connection needs by strengthening the cortex (Hug the Monkey).

Practical Strategies

The figure on the next page has some practical strategies, or mind methods, for meeting the various needs to help develop the brain.

When adults help children “Pet the Lizard,” “Feed the Mouse,” and “Hug the Monkey,” they increase their ability to “drive” to get their needs met from an integrated brain (i.e., drive from the “Green Zone”).

Potential Outcomes and Benefits

Making a commitment to adopt an attuned approach of “Seeing the child behind the behavior” has many benefits (see Figure 2).

The benefits include meeting children’s safety, satisfaction, and connection needs, strengthening their brain development, fostering a sense of belonging and significance, activating and installing desired traits, and providing experiences that promote integration of the mind, brain, and relationships.

An important component of any work with children, of course, is adult self-reflection. Adults must engage intrapersonal attunement to tune inward, noticing their settings of responsivity versus reactivity, their drives, and methods for them to meet their safety, satisfaction, and connection needs throughout the day. This important parallel process promotes teachers’ capacity to implement these mind methods with fidelity. It is hard for children to feel safe, satisfied, and connected if the adults are driving from their “Red or Blue Zones”! Intrapersonal attunement in adults begets interpersonal attunement with children.

Step-By-Step Actions

Ready to adopt or strengthen your commitment to “See the child behind the behavior”?

As a first step, consider the following questions as you interact with children or after an interaction that left you feeling challenged. The questions serve as a guide for self-reflection, designed to help you begin and/or strengthen your ability to “See the child behind the behavior”:

• What is the child thinking, feeling, sensing, perceiving, and/or believing about himself and others (attune to the child’s perspective)?
• Does the child “feel” like his safety (physical and/or emotional), satisfaction, and connection needs are not being met (three basic needs)?
• Why is the child doing this: what is the function of the behavior (three functions)?
• How might this behavior be the child’s attempt to avoid harm, approach rewards, and/or attach to others (three drives)?
• What skills might the child be missing that could prevent this behavior (e.g., which upstairs brain skills need stronger connections with the downstairs brain)?
• What strategies do I have to Pet the Lizard, Feed the Mouse, and Hug the Monkey (practices that strengthen relationships and promote social and emotional skills)?
• How might I need to individualize these strategies for this child?
• What do I need to stay in the “Green Zone” (integrated or responsive brain)?

Over time, answers to questions such as these will help you develop a systematic plan for promoting social and emotional skills and prevent challenging behaviors.

For more about this important topic, please listen to my guest appearance on Pre-K Teach and Play’s podcast, Episode 27 entitled, “Seeing the Child Behind the Behavior” or follow me on Instagram and You Tube.