Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Effect of nurturing nature
Relationship of nature and nurture
Nurture of nature
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Effect of nurturing nature
The first study in “40 Studies That Changed Psychology” is about the left hemisphere and the right hemisphere of the brain.
The left side of the brain and the right side of the brain are separate. The left side of the brain deals with speech, writing, and logical thinking while the right side of the brain understand emotions, space, and abstract concepts. Both parts of the brain can work efficiently when separated but work more efficiently when they can communicate with each other.
Studies were done with cats, split-brain patients, and regular patients to determine the functions of each hemisphere and how the two hemispheres communicate. There were visual tests involving lights and pictures, tactile tests involving the touching
…show more content…
of objects and reporting what was felt, and combinations of the two where patients reached for the objects they were shown to each of their brains. The conclusion is that the left side and the right side of the brain can still work together, in ways, even if they are separate.
Because the left side of the brain controls speech, the right side of the brain cannot vocally express their understandings, even though they do actually understand. Also, split-brain patients function basically normally, with the exception of a few disabilities, and can even possibly take in more information than regular people. These finding makes people wonder if it would be beneficial for everyone to have the hemispheres of their brain’s separated.
This concept and these tests are extremely interesting to me. Though I don’t like the idea of experimenting with cats—or any animals for that matter—I like how complex the brain is, how two hemispheres control different things, and that split-brain patients could have higher IQ levels. It’s extremely interesting that even though the right hemisphere of the brain understands what it is seeing, it cannot communicate with the mouth.
The second study is about whether or not different environments effect brain
…show more content…
development. Researches want to know if the brain physically changes as it develops and which levels provide the greatest levels of development. People are skeptical about the concept, even though the results of experiments done with rats suggests that it does. Experiments were done with lab rats to show that brains are more complex with intelligent animals. In the experiments, rats were allowed to live in different environments for certain amounts of time. One environment was a basic cage with food, water, and several other rats. The second was basic needs but the rat was alone. The third was several rats living in a cage with food, water, and toys, and obstacles. The rats who lived in the third environment had brains that were heavier and thicker than the other rats. This is both important and controversial. It is important because it shows that better environments are better for brains. It is controversial because the experimentation has lead people to question the ethical standards of animal testing. This research was in ways helpful but it was also unnecessary.
It is common sense to assume that socialization, happiness, and more food and water is better for the brain than isolation and just enough sustenance to stay alive.
The third study was about one of phycology’s biggest debates; nature vs. nurture.
Nature vs. nurture has been one of psychology’s biggest debates for decades, maybe centuries. Many studies have shown that nature rules seventy percent of our behavior but people hate that idea, especially parents.
The biggest study that was done was by two men named Bouchard and Lykken, to see what the strongest influence of personality is, genetics or environment. They found thousands of twins with identical genetics, especially those who were separated at birth. They gave each twin over fifty surveys on anything about themselves and their upbringings that one could think of. The results showed that twins have similar personalities, even if they didn’t grow up together, even if they lived in completely different households, and not all twins who grew up together were completely identical in
personality. The research is extremely important, because now it’s being discussed that perhaps personality forms the environment instead of the environment forming personality. This is also important because parents need to understand that they can’t always control their children, which could bring peace to their minds. Also cloning is now being discussed as an option for immortal life, but is a controversial topic. The fourth study is about depth perception. A relatively newer psychological study is the study of depth perception. Are we automatically born with it or do we learn it over time, like walking or talking? The research shows that we learn it over time. A man called S.B. studied this by placing babies in the middle of a table that looks like it drops in the middle, because half of it is class and the other half is a pattern, creating a visual cliff of sorts. Baby animals were also placed on the table because they can stand up almost immediately after birth, so they didn’t have a chance to learn it so S.B could see if they were born with depth perception. With mothers standing on the other side of the cliff, most of the babies crawled over them, not taking notice on the drop. Some babies crossed the class with caution and only a couple babies refused to cross the glass, likely out of fear of falling. The baby animals however, all stayed away from the “cliff,” with the exception of the nocturnal animals. It appears as though humans develop depth perception over time and that animals are born with it. This research is extremely important for child safety and also developmental psychology, because it has lead people to wonder what else babies have to learn. What I don’t understand is why animals have depth perception almost immediately while humans don’t.
The author explains that in many businesses, abilities associated with the left side of the brain used to matter the most. These include lin...
The brain has four major lobes. The frontal lobe, the parietal lobe, the occipital lobe, and temporal lobe are responsible for all of the activities of the body, from seeing, hearing, tasting, to touching, moving, and even memory. After many years of debating, scientist presents what they called the localization issue, Garret explains how Fritsch and Hitzig studied dog with conforming observations, but the cases of Phineas Gage’s accident in 1848 and Paul Broca’s autopsy of a man brain in 1861 really grabbed the attention of an enthusiastic scientific community (Garret 2015 p.6)
The textbook mentioned how it is possible to live with one side of the brain (Lilienfeld et al., 2016). However, I was still a bit confused on this concept because I have always thought that you need both hemispheres working together to function properly. As I watched the TedTalk, I was further able to change my understanding of the concept that you can live with one hemisphere, you would just lose some functions associated with that hemisphere, as Jill explained (Taylor, 2008). Not only that, but from the textbook I never understood how you would feel without one of your hemispheres not functioning properly, I personally thought that you would lose some abilities and it would be difficult to survive. However, the TedTalk changed this understanding of mine because, like Jill, although she lost some functions, she lost all her stresses, and she felt peace, as she states, “So here I am in this space, and my job, and any stress related to my job - it was gone. And I felt lighter in my body. And imagine all of the relationships in the external world and any stressors related to any of those - they were gone. And I felt this sense of peacefulness” (Taylor, 2008). It gave her a whole new world and it never occurred to me that this could happen, so it really expanded on the knowledge obtained from the
The nature vs. nurture controversy is an age old question in the scientific and psychological world with both camps having evidence to support their theories. The controversy lies in which is more influential in the development of human beings. While there is no definitive answer for this, it is interesting to look at each of them separately.
“The term “nature versus nurture” is used to refer to a long-running scientific debate. The source of debate is the question of which has a greater influence on development: someone's innate characteristics provided by genetics, or someone's environment. In fact, the nature versus nurture debate has been largely termed obsolete by many researchers, because both innate characteristics and environment play a huge role in development, and they often intersect”. (Smith, 2010 p. 1)
Nowadays, it is widely known that the right and left hemisphere have different functions. The two hemispheres are equally important in a daily life basis. Nevertheless, in the 1960’s this was not common knowledge. Even though today the importance of the brain hemispheres is common knowledge, people don’t usually know to whom attribute this findings. One of the people who contributed to form a more defined picture about the brain hemispheres and their respective functions was Roger Wolcott Sperry, with the split brain research. Roger Sperry did more contributions than the split brain research, but this is his most important and revolutionary research in the psychological field. Thanks to the split brain research, Sperry proved that the two hemispheres of the brain are important, they work together and whatever side of the brain is more capable of doing the task is the hemisphere that takes the lead.
The Cerebral Hemispheres are very similar in appearance, but they differ significantly in their structure. One of the best known differences between the two structures is motor control; the right hemisphere controls the left half of the body and the left hemisphere controls the right half of the body. These motor control differences were discovered mainly through the examination of paralysis caused by stokes or other damage to a specific hemisphere.
Michael S. Gazzaniga was born in December 12, 1939 in Los Angeles, California. He got his B.A at Dartmouth College in 1961. As well as, he received his PHD. in Psycho-biology at California Institute of Technology. He worked under the guidance of Roger Sperry. Also, he conducts a research on a brain, which it makes people understand how does the brain work. In spite of, that he was under the guidance, he had a primary responsibility for the Split-brain research. It allows him to make some remarkable advances by examining patients and non-patients brain. Also, by using different methods to prove his point. For example, to clarify the hemisphere functions in the two brains that each have, he used right-handed and left-handed people. So, we can
Roger Sperry is one of the big Neurobiologists in the 1950’s. Sperry studied the relationship of the right and left hemispheres of the brain. In one of his experiments he flashed the word “Fork” in front of the patient. If the patient was asked to say the word he could not but if asked to right the word he would start to right the word “Fork”. This happed when the two brain hemispheres were disconnected from each other. At an another experiment he placed a toothbrush in the patients left hand and blind folded the patient and was asked to identify it they could not do it. But if placed in the right hand the patient would know right away what it was. That is just one of the types of study he did in his time.
significant role in determining our behavior and our well-being. “Through new genetic studies, clinical observation, and research on identical twins and. adopted children, we are becoming increasingly aware that many of the human.
Nurture is constituted by 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 behavior, character, and personality traits that constantly change and develop throughout life. The debate on nature versus nurture has existed for thousands of years.
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
A study in 1986 in Minnesota found that genetics play a larger role on personality then it was to be previously thought to be.
In the video "Powerful Stoke of Insight," Dr. Taylor share a personal story of how she experienced when she had a stoke years ago. She vividly illustrated the distinct functions of left hemisphere and right hemisphere. Since her stoke occurred in the left hemisphere, she had a hard time to process language during the tragic event happened. She was paralysis and could not understand any of the word from 911 telephone operator when she finally reached the phone. According to Dr. Taylor, "Our right human hemisphere is all about this present moment, [and] our left hemisphere thinks linearly and methodically." Due to the reason that her stoke damaged her left hemisphere, she could not think logically at the moment. This presentation thoroughly explain the concept of lateralization in biological psychology research method. I find it very interesting because I never learn that each hemisphere do in charge of different functions that affecting our
...re of the brain is just half of the brain so why is it the only half being explored in school? This failure to confront the other hemisphere causes weakening in the right hemisphere since the right hemisphere isn?t being exercised.