Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Gender differences in the brain psychology
Nature vs. nurture debate
Nature vs. nurture debate
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
War Against Boys: Fact or Fiction
One of the oldest debates in psychology is the nature versus nurture debate. Its roots extend far beyond the nineteenth century psychologists such as Freud and Skinner into the beginnings of scientific thought. Even Greek philosophers such as Aristotle and Plato addressed the issue of how personality is formed. Today, a relative consensus has been reached that nature and nurture work in tangent with one another; one can have many biological possibilities of which the environment determines the development. In any area involving gender however, this debate is still strong.
In the War Against Boys: How misguided feminism is harming our young men, Christina Hoff Sommers points out that some feminists still support the nurture side of the debate without acknowledging any possibility of a biological influence. Sommers insists on examining the growing number of studies indicating that gender differences are not all socialized but are biological sex differences, just as differences in physiology between the sexes are biologically based. However, in her efforts to show how misguided feminism has become in its search for gender equality, Sommers takes the other extreme of the debate and discounts any differences formed during socialization. Although literature for the biological explanation of gender construction is growing, one cannot discount the environmental influences as Sommers does.
A Biological Explanation
If there is one aspect of research in sex differences to which Sommers does justice, it is the research supporting the differing biology of males and females. She convincingly summarizes the evidence for the biological influence in a clear, concise manner.
First, she addresses the cognitive abilities with which a large difference has been shown to favor males or females. Males are on the whole superior to females in visuospatial abilities, especially mental rotation tasks (Halpern, 1992). In fact, Sommers doesn’t mention this, but the effect size found in this area of sex differences is one of the largest that psychologists study in any field with an effect size of d=0.9 (Halpern, 1992). While not the best at visuospatial skills, females are superior in their verbal skills especially “writing, retrieval from long-term memory, and verbal articulation tasks” (Halpern, 1992). These cognitive differences do not suppose a cause however. They could arise not from biology, but from socialization as the feminists argue.
To prove a biological cause is implicated, Sommers has to draw on research that connects biology such as hormones or structural differences to related behaviors and preferences.
When we discuss gender, the first thing that pops into our minds is the physical dissimilarities between men and women. For the longest time, I never realized that there are a diverse variety of issues involving gender, which are examined in the essay “Gender Blur” written by Deborah Blum. I now understand some of the factors involved, such as biological development, gender identification and behaviors, influences on aggression, and how testosterone affects behaviors and career choice.
...ignificant evidence for my research argument indicates that the nature of gender/sex consists of a wide consensus. The latter is significant to original sex differences in brain structure and the organized role through sex differential prenatal hormone exposures through the term used in the article as (the ‘hardwiring’ paradigm). The article is limited to scientific shortcoming that presents neuroscientific research on sex and gender for it lacks an analysis that goes beyond the observed results. The article is based on neuroscience studies and how it approached gender, yet the article suggests that gender should be examined through social, culture studies, ethnicity and race. This article will not form the foundation of my research but will be used a secondary material. The neuroscience evidences will be used to support my argument and will be used as an example.
Throughout the article, Pinker emphasizes his opposition’s flaws, in order to weaken and evoke doubt into the reader. Pinker disproves that genes are dependent on the environment, because researchers have continuously made the mistake of placing more weight on the environments role. He agrees however, that genes do not have the potential to directly control certain personality actions, “Two recent studies have indentified single genes that are respectively associated with violence and depression, but have also shown that their effects are manifested only with particular histories of stressful experience”(pinker 6). This is saying that in order for a gene to be expressed, they have to be triggered by the environment. In this example, Pinker uses statistical data to reinforce the invalid argument that genes are not necessar...
The nature vs. nurture controversy has been one of the oldest and most incessant debates throughout history. The disputation of this debate has generated numerous hypotheses, and explorations by various researchers, however, it has not been clearly determined as to whether a person is biologically determined or whether they are shaped by the environment. Nature’s theory holds that a person’s mental ability is sustained by what he or she is born with genetically. Conversely, the argument that a person’s environment plays a large role in his or her mental aptitude is nurture. Despite the numerous and overwhelming experiments that have been fulfilled by theorists who support the nature theory, I strongly believe that the environment around a person, on the other hand, is ever-changing and offers more opportunities for growth and variation.
Since the beginnings of psychology the debate of nature verses nurture has been going on. Certain psychologists take the position of the nature perspective. They argue that people are born with predispositions towards certain personalities, traits and other characteristics that help shape them into the people that they become later in life. Meanwhile multiple other psychologists argue the nurture perspective. They believe that people are born as a blank slate and their experiences over the course of life help shape their personalities, traits, and other characteristics.
Connell: Chapters 4 “Sex Differences & Gendered Bodies”: I found this entire chapter quite intriguing, but I really appreciate the way that Connell approaches the ways in which males and females differ and yet she also points out how there is no significant difference in brain anatomy and function between sexes. I found the statement by neuroscientist Lesley Rogers incredibly interesting, she states, “The brain does not choose neatly to be wither a female or a male type. In any aspect of brain function that we can measure there is considerable overlap between females and males” (p.52). This statement when paired with information about the affect social processes have on the body it is mind boggling to realize, as Connell states, “biology bends to the hurricane of social discipline” (p.55). It is unnerving to think that I am merely a product of my society. Not only has society shaped my beliefs, values, manners and religion, but it has also shaped my physical body? If I understand this correctly, it is incredibly disturbing.
Introduction The topic of gender differences must understandably be approached with caution in our modern world. Emotionally charged and fraught with ideas about political correctness, gender can be a difficult subject to address, particularly when discussed in correlation to behavior and social behavior. Throughout history, many people have strove to understand what makes men and women different. Until the modern era, this topic was generally left up to religious leaders and philosophers to discuss. However, with the acquisition of more specialized medical knowledge of human physiology and the advent of anthropology, we now know a great deal more about gender differences than at any other point in history.
Gender roles are a staple construct of human civilization, designating the behaviors and lifestyles that society expects out of its participants, with gender as the defining characteristic. Historically, females have been at the forefront of the conversation, with feminism regarded as the principal solution to the well-established issue of gender inequality. However, this is foolish. To truly mend the gender inequalities forged by thousands of years of human interaction, both genders have to be acknowledged. Both males and females are equally constrained by gender roles, however the effects of this constraint are in differing fields. There are studies showing that females are at a disadvantage economically, in the workplace, while other studies
Although, there is proof of cognitive and mental variations in the way that two genders process information. For example, women are shown to be more adept at verbal communication and comprehension while men tend to perform better in the visual-spatial category. On the topic of memory, studies show that women are more sensory and memory oriented. In one study at the University of Edinburgh, psychologist Stuart Ritchie and a team of researchers compared data from many different male and female subjects. As Micheal Price states, “Adjusting for age, on average, they found that women tended to have significantly thicker cortices than men. Thicker cortices have been associated with higher scores on a variety of cognitive and general intelligence tests. Meanwhile, men had higher brain volumes than women in every subcortical region they looked at, including the hippocampus (which plays broad roles in memory and spatial awareness), the amygdala (emotions, memory, and decision-making), striatum (learning, inhibition, and reward-processing), and thalamus (processing and relaying sensory information to other parts of the brain).” (Price 2017). So indeed there are differences, however the similarities between genders far outweigh the differences. McGraw-Hill Higher Education argues that “More equivocal are gender differences in activity level, dependency, timidity, exploratory activity, and vulnerability to stress. There are no gender differences in sociability, conformity, achievement, self-esteem, or verbal hostility (Child Psychology).” In turn proving many once believed facts such as “women and men communicate differently, it's biology” into preconceived
Gender is a broad, multicultural issue (Hooks, 2000). The term has traditionally been used to understand the differences between men and women. Scharf (1995) indicated that gender should also be used to identify individual differences among men and women (as cited in Stewart and McDermott, 2004, p. 436). Benjamin (1995) however, feels that there
Biological factors (sex) and gender are correlated, but gender may or may not be caused by biological factors. Cherlin proposes four models of how gender is created: the biosocial model, the socialization model, the interactionist model and the patriarchic model. Only the first model, the “biosocial” model, allows for heredity and biological factors to play a role in determining gender. This model is based on the idea that biologically, men and women are predisposed to act a certain way “on average,” but also, that social factors play a strong role in determining whether biological tendencies prevail. According to this theory, biological differences account for only about a quarter of behavioral gender differences while social influences account for the remaining portion. Socialized traits are stronger than biological traits, and can eliminate biological traits, but biological tendencies are still important because it is a challenge for socialized traits to subdue biological traits. A good example of this is outlined in Ke...
In “The Gender Blur: Where Does Biology End and Society Take Over?” Deborah Blum states that “gender roles of our culture reflect an underlying biology” (Blum 679). Maasik and Solomon argue that gender codes and behavior “are not the result of some sort of natural or biological destiny, but are instead politically motivated cultural constructions,” (620) raising the question whether gender behavior begins in culture or genetics. Although one may argue that gender roles begin in either nature or nurture, many believe that both culture and biology have an influence on the behavior.
The same concept was expressed by Edward O. Wilson (1992), father of sociobiology at Harvard University. According to him, females tend to be better equipped in characteristics like verbal and social skills, security needs and empathy than their counterpart. In the other, Males tend to be better in spatial ...
Sagan, D. (2000). Hormones Determine Gender Traits.Male/female roles: opposing viewpoints (pp. 42-43,46). San Diego, Calif.: Greenhaven Press.