Nature Vs Nurture

1. Some people have argued that the Johns Hopkins psychologist used this opportunity as an experiment to test his nurture theory of gender identity. What are the expected results of this experiment, assuming that the nurture theory is valid?

What determines who you are or what you will become? The debate between nature versus nurture is trying to figure this out. According to “Essentials of Psychology”, Jeffrey S. Nevid (2012) Nature versus nurture is the debate about how genetics and nature determine our behavior. In other words, have your attitude, behavior and health problems developed because of how you were raised or who you came from. It is a debate that has stumped psychologists for centuries. The study of twins, both identical and fraternal, have made it easier for psychologists to figure out this debate. So what is the answer to this age old debate; Nature or Nurture?

Nature or Nurture. Nature may be all of the genes and hereditary factors with which influence them to become who they are such as physical appearances and personality characteristics. Nurturing impacts people’s lives as well as how they are raised and all the environmental factors. In combination, these qualities can be the true identity of oneself. Many people may argue that nurture appears to a play huge factor in the two, but others may think otherwise. Not having both as a characteristic can have a negative effect on a person physically and mentally. The debate of nature versus nurture appears to be the oldest argument known to man, and it still remains to be unanswered. In the old-age argument nature versus nurture, nature may play a huge role in determining a person’s true identity.

Susan Evers and Sharon McKendrick, the famous identical twins from the movie The Parent Trap, were separated at a young age by their divorcing parents. Sharon grew up in Boston to a socialite mother while Susan grew up in California on her father’s ranch. Sharon had structure while Susan’s life was very laid back. They looked the same and liked many of the same things, yet their personalities were very different. What is responsible for these differences? Is it simply that they are two different people with different interests and preferences? Or did the environments that they grew up in play a part in making who they are? In the nature vs. nurture controversy, nature proclaims that our genetic make-up plays the primary role in human

The nature side of the argument is basically what we are born with, our heredity. The main idea of this is that we are born with predetermined traits that may or may not create psychopathic tendencies in us. Dr. Richard Davidson of the University of Wisconsin at Madison published a report in 2000 that compared brain scans of five

Nature vs nurture has been a long-standing debate in the fields of psychology, sociology biology and many others. Some believe how an individual behaves, copes, etc. is based solely on their genetic makeup. While others agree the way, an individual is raised effects how way certain genes are expressed thus changing the way these individuals behave and react. Anger is an emotion that all people experience at some time, for many reasons and the depth, or intensity of that anger can be influenced by nature and nurture. The purpose of this essay is not to make an argument for either side, but to show how nature and nature are important to human psychological development. Specifically, how the expression of anger or aggression is influenced by

Some believe that morality is an evolutionary anomaly, while some believe that morality is formed by the environment around you. Since the beginning of time, psychologists have argued over whether morality is formed and cultivated through nature or nurture. This psychological anomaly is why I am writing this paper. Ever since I have enrolled in, and taken, a psychology class during my junior year, I have questioned whether every little emotion and action is because of nature or nurture. No topic is more widely explored and researched than morality. It cannot be scientifically or psychologically proven or tested, making any claim highly controversial. This idea, of nature vs nurture, that I had previously researched my senior year of high

One of the most commonly used debates in the history of psychology is that of nature vs nurture. Does one's surroundings affect the person they become, or are they genetically programmed at birth to act as they do? Thanks to explanations from either side of this debate, an excuse for the crazed actions of an individual can be found in both their birth and their own personal upbringing.

The nature ( genes, biological and family factors ) versus nurture ( childhood, social and environmental factors ) debate is about the impact of an individual’s inborn characteristics as opposed to the experience from the surroundings they were brought up in, in deciding individual differences in physical and moral traits. The theory that people obtain all or most of their moral traits from social and environmental factors is also known as nurture.

In many social fields the discussion of nature vs. nurture is a common theme. However, in recent discussions it is being found to be too simplistic. This argument is being rejected for two claims, according to Brian Garvey, the stronger claim states that it is possible to attribute a trait wholly to the influence of genes or wholly to the influence of the environment (Garvey, 2005). While the weaker claim states that it is possible to talk of traits more or less under the control of genes or environment. Garvey explains that both of these claims are rejected, “because it makes no sense to talk of a trait as more the product of genes than of environment (Garvey, 2005).” Since the nature vs. nurture theory deals with the stronger of the two claims,

Language is seen as the way in which humans communicate, and the acquisition of language for most humans starts at a young age. Although the debate of Nature vs. Nurture in regards to behaviorist reinforcement principles or universal grammar is used to stratify how child language acquisition comes about, an old and strong theory proposed by Noam Chomsky suggests that the ability to acquire a language is a natural and inborn phenomenon. He changed the world’s perspective by questioning behaviorist Burrhus Frederic Skinner’s theory which at the time held the simplest explanation believed to be most credible.

The significance of nature and nurture pertaining to the personal development of humans is constantly in debate, but there is much more scientific evidence to support the significance of nature. Experiments and studies proving that gender identity, sexual preference, and the way people behave are exclusively decided through genetics and natural hormones. Nurture elements, such as the media, family, and peers have an insignificant effect on how a person identifies with a gender, has a sex preference, or behaves. The research speaks for itself- nature is more impactful on the personal development of people.

Growing up was an interesting time for me. I believe that both nature and nurture played a role in my development growing up. Nature is the influence genetic has on development. Nurture is the influence the environment around us has on our development (Levine & Munsch). The reason I think nature played a big role for me growing up is because in a lot of ways, I acted as my mother did.

A child is born with many traits, but the environment they grow up in effects that. No child is exactly born dishonest or kind. Parenting styles and their type of punishment play a role in a child’s social behavior. Urie Bronfenbrenner argued with his ecological-systems approach that a person is affected by the systems around them such as school, economic patterns, and peers. If a child has permissive parents the child may think that yelling or stealing from others is acceptable because their parents never enforced rules at home, and then they carry that with them as they grow up. In Kathleen Berger’s textbook “Developing Person Through Childhood and Adolescence Eighth Edition” a study showed that “boys who were mistreated by their parents

Aim: To calculate meta-analytic estimates of heritability in liability and shared an individual – specific environmental effects from the pooled twin data.