One of the oldest controversy in psychology is nature vs. nurture. The whole debate boils down to genetic inheritance or environmental factors when it comes to human development. Philosopher Plato believed that certain behaviors are inborn or in others words occur naturally regardless of environmental factors. Then there are other philosopher such as John Locke who believe that the mind begins as a blank slate. So everything we come in contact with helps shape who we are. As for today, most expects now believe that behavior and personality are influenced by both nature and nurture. Some examples of gene inheritance are the color of your eyes, straight or curly hair, the pigment in your skin and certain inherited diseases. Not all people with blond hair are the same person and not all people in a family have the same color hair or eyes. An example of environmental factor that affects who you are is how you were brought up by your parents. Another example of environmental factor that helps influence behavior is the way you speak, you learn tone, speak, and sound from the people around you as a child. (Knowlton, 2005)
Studies.
The first study I found on Nature vs. Nurture was the Swedish Twin study of child and adolescent development otherwise known as TCHAD. It was a longitudinal study about how genes and environment can contribute to development of health and behaviors. This study was one of the largest twin studies ever conducted. It gathered data from 2960 people, 1480 set of twins and their parents over 16 years. The last time any data was collected on the subject were in 2005 when the children reached the of 20. The whole focus of this study was to look at externalizing symptoms such as criminal behavior, ADHD , an...
... middle of paper ...
...transmission from parent to their child has little effect on their later cognitive ability. (Plomin, Fulker, Corely & Defries, 1997)
Both of these studies the researchers used infants and children to help with prove or disapprove the biggest controversy in psychology today. The major similarities between these two studies are they both used children, both study followed the children over a 20 year period and both used intensive surveying and questioning to find out the results. The major differences of these two studies were the first study used identical twins and the second study just used children who were going to be adopted. Then in the first study it was trying to prove if aggressive behavior and mental disorders were caused by nature or nurture, the second study wanted to prove that children who were adopted tend to act more like their adoptive parents.
...s may never agree on a conclusive degree to which both nature and nurture play roles in human development, but over the years, more improved studies have shown that both are crucial aspects. With all the knowledge we are gaining from these studies, it would be quite limiting to believe that a criminal and his actions are the sole result of heredity. Even in people who do not commit crimes, genes themselves are affected by the prenatal environment. Undoubtedly, the fetus experiences changes in environment, forcing possible changes in heredity and reactionary response. We are likely to never find the answer to how much or how little either, nature or nurture, impacts our lives, but at least we can agree that they both do, in fact, have major roles. Our development is not the culmination of heredity alone, but of a tangled web of experiences and genetics entwined.
On October 9, 1968, a set of twins were born, but separated at birth and ultimately, put up for adoption. The decision to separate the twins came from the adoption agency who wanted to conduct a nature versus nurture experiment; however, the experiment was conducted in secret. However, for unknown reasons, the experiment never developed to fruition. Unaware the child they adopted was a twin; both sets of parents raised a singular child. Thirty-five years later, one twin began a search for her biological mother through the adoption agency, only to find out that she was born a twin. Upon learning her identity, she reached out to her twin and they began the journey of getting to know one another by comparing characteristics that appeared similar such as temperament and mannerism. They even discovered that they both held positions as a film critic and enjoyed almost identical movies.
For this debate as you know already, I am totally on the Nurture side. I think kids are born and influenced by the environment. Even though some kids are born and are not influenced by their surroundings, that is usually a rare case. Like all of this, my personality has been changed as I have been just like identical twins have many differences. So with all of this to wrap it up, studies show that Nurture is more dominant and overpowers Nature. When you have children remember how they are raised will affect them in the long
In the well-received novel “Pudd’nhead Wilson,” Mark Twain skillfully addresses the ancient argument about the origin of one’s character and whether it’s derived from his nature or his surroundings. We can best see this battle between nature versus nurture by inspecting the plot lines that follow the characters Thomas a Becket Driscoll, Valet de Chambre, and Roxana the slave. Thomas was born into a wealthy white family while Roxy birthed Chambers into a life of slavery. It seemed as though each would have gone their separate ways into opposite walks of life, but Roxy secretly swapped the children, which destined each to their counterintuitive fates. Through their words and actions, Tom, Chambers, and Roxy have proven the idea that one’s behaviors and desires are a result of his upbringings and the environment he lives in rather than by his innate nature.
For this first analytical essay, I have decided to have a go at analyzing the Nature Vs. Nurture using my own viewpoint as a sibling. No doubt this is a topic that has been debated to mental death already, but I think it is something I will benefit from thinking about. Also, at the end of my main topic, I will quickly address a topic brushed on in the book.
Noted psychologist Jerome Kagan once said "Genes and family may determine the foundation of the house, but time and place determine its form" (Moore 165). The debate on nature versus nurture has been a mystery for years, constantly begging the question of whether human behavior, ideas, and feelings are innate or learned over time. Nature, or genetic influences, are formed before birth and finely-tuned through early experiences. Genes are viewed as long and complicated chains that are present throughout life and develop over time. Nature supporters believe that genes form a child's conscience and determine one's approach to life, contrasting with nature is the idea that children are born “blank slates,” only to be formed by experience, or nurture. Nurture is constituted of the influence of millions of complex environmental factors that form a child's character. Advocators of nature do not believe that character is predetermined by genes, but formed over time. Although often separated, nature and nurture work together in human development. The human conscience is neither innate from birth or entirely shaped through experience, instead, genetics and environmental influences combine to form human behaviorism, character, and personality traits that constantly change and develop throughout life.
Every human being is unique. Were we destined to be the way we are, or have we been made this way through our environment and experiences? Psychology has long been debating the issue of Nature versus Nurture. Characteristics such as hair and eye color are generally recognized to be controlled by genetics. Those on the Nature side (Nativists) claim that genetics control much more, including personality and character. Nurture backers (empiricists) will argue that a person’s environment and experiences determine those traits. So is it possible to prove which side is right? The latest findings suggest that the debate may not be that simple.
Someone can physically look like their parents, siblings or even ancestors from the third generation. When a baby is born, it is common to learn in a natural way. No one teaches a baby how to crawl or how to react when he and she is hungry. However, talents, qualities and personalities are developed through experiences. The environment in which people grew up can have a lasting effect or influence on the way they talk, behave and respond to things around. According to Steven Pinker, Behavioral genetics has shown that temperament emerges early in life and remains fairly constant throughout the life span, that much of the variation among people within a culture comes from differences in genes, and that in some cases particular genes can be tied to aspects of cognition, language, and personality (2). Researchers believe that the origin of behaviors occur in genes in the DNA or even animal instincts which this concept is known as nature of human behavior. Other researchers believe that people are they were they are because they are taught to do so. This concept is well known as nurture in human behavior. In society, there will always be the doubt between Do we born in this way or do we behave according to life experiences? I strongly believe that nurture plays an important role in the upbringing of a child and the decisions that one makes in the future. Firstly, humans learn from their environment and other’s behaviors. Secondly, culture is a huge remark in people’s life. Finally,
Undoubtedly, humans are unique and intricate creatures and their development is a complex process. It is this process that leads people to question, is a child’s development influenced by genetics or their environment? This long debate has been at the forefront of psychology for countless decades now and is better known as “Nature versus Nurture”. The continuous controversy over whether or not children develop their psychological attributes based on genetics (nature) or the way in which they have been raised (nurture) has occupied the minds of psychologists for years. Through thorough reading of experiments, studies, and discussions however, it is easy to be convinced that nurture does play a far more important in the development of a human than nature.
One of the most well-known debates in psychology is nature versus nurture. Nature is pre-determined traits, influenced by biological factors and genetics. Physical characteristics such as height, hair color, and eye color is all determined by the genetics we inherit. Nurture is the influence of environmental factors. Nature and nurture affects the physical, emotional, and social development of a child.
One of the hottest debates is and has been nature vs nurture for years, but what is the difference between the two? Nature is what people think of as already having and not being able to change it, in other words, pre-wiring (Sincero). Nurture is the influence of experiences and its environment of external factors (Sincero). Both nature and nurture play important roles in human development. Scientists and researchers are both trying to figure out which is the main cause in development because it is still unknown on which it is. The best position to side with is nature. Nature is also defined as genetic or hormone based behaviors (Agin). Regardless of the involvement in everyday life, or nurture, this argumentation centers around the effect genes have on human personalities. Although it is understandable on reasons to side with nurture, nature is the better stand in this controversy. Reasons to side with nature is because of genes and what genes hold. Genes is what
Development across the lifespan is one of the most interesting areas of psychology. The word development refers to human development which can be defined as “the scientific study of changes that occur in people as they age from conception until death.” (Ciccarelli, & White, 2009)Psychologists study this developmental change over time through several different methods. The book highlights three: Longitudinal design, cross-sectional design and cross-sequential design. Longitudinal design is a research design “in which one participant or group of participants is studied over a long period of time.” Cross sectional design differs from longitudinal design because cross-sectional designed research studies “several different age-groups of participants are studied at one particular time.” (Ciccarelli, & White)Cross-sequential designed research is a combination of the other two types; the cross-sequential research design studies participants by means of a cross-sequential design but they are also followed and assessed for a period of time no more than six years. A controversial topic associated with development across the lifespan is the theory of “Nature versus Nurture”. Nature versus nurture refers to the relationship between development and heredity and environmental factors. The answer lies on a spectrum between environmental factors and heredity. Psychologists on the environmental side are called empiricists. Empiricists believe that human development is fully influenced by a person’s environment. On the opposite side of the spectrum are the nativists. Nativists are psychologists that believe a person’s development is based completely on genetic factors. The facts are divided in relation to the two theor...
Nature vs nurture debate is an old argument, I believe that nature and nurture both work together. Your genes are something that you are born with but your experiences and how you were raised also make you the person you are today. Experiences and opportunities help you develop your personality. It also provides a valuable training ground for later life. Human culture, behavior, and personality are cause primarily by nature and nurture not nature or
In the study of child development, nature and nurture are two essential concepts that immensely influence future abilities and characteristics of developing children. Nature refers to the genetically obtained characteristics and abilities that influence development while nurture refers to the surrounding environmental conditions that influence development. Without one or the other, a child may not develop some important skills, such as communication and walking. The roles of physiological and psychological needs in a person’s life are also crucial for developing children. Humanistic psychologist, Abraham Maslow, suggested that humans don’t only aim towards survival, but also aim towards self-actualization (Rathus, P. 94).
Developmental Psychology is an area which studies how we as humans change over the period of our life span. The majority of the focus is broken into three categories: cognitive, physical and social change. The creation of who we are today comes down to the everlasting debate of nature versus nurture. This ongoing debate of what makes us who we are and which one is the driving force in development may be so simple that it’s complex. Rather than it being a conflict of nature “versus” nurture, it is very well possible both play an equal part in the development of us as humans. In the beginning, we start off as single cell in the form of a zygote. In that moment, where the DNA begin to form and the first seconds of life take place, the zygote is already experiencing interaction with the womb. In the process of determining why we are who are it is better to look more at the interactions of nature and nurture, analyzing how both have shaped us.