The Influences Of Intuitive Judgment Of People And Learning Essay

The nature vs nurture issue has been a controversial argument among psychologist for decades. This argument exposes two different views. One of them emphasizes that our personality depends solely on genetics (nature). On the other hand, the second view suggests that humans “develop through experience” (Myers 2013, SG 6) (nurture).

In determining a view of who man is and how he develops, it is important to look at the past, present, and future goals to determine how to best help the individual. In Behavioral Theory, a great emphasis is placed on “…understanding reinforcement contingencies operative in an individual’s past”, which then “makes it possible to implement different contingencies in the present and, thus, to change behavior” (Murdock, 2009). This can be very important because many times certain behaviors are learned from a very early age and it will be important of the individual to understand where that behavior stems from in order to make a change. Rational Emotive Behavior Theory “…postulates that humans are a product of both inherited influences and environmental teaching” (Murdock, 2009). This does place some of the human experience on being born a certain way and those things being harder to change. However, it does provide the balance that another portion of the

He also recognizes that character traits within a person can influence behavior, but does not believe traits alone can explain behavior and learning. Instead, Bandura expanded upon these theories and developed the concept of reciprocal determinism, which posits that the person, their environment, and behavior all influence one another. Bandura argued that personal factors affect behavior, which alters the environment, and that environment is not only a cause of behavior, but also an effect of behavior, and these all operate “as interlocking determinants of each other” (Bandura, 1978, p. 346). Therefore, if we are going to attempt to understand human behavior, all of these factors and their mutual influences must be recognized. (Cloninger, 2007, p.353).

Or are internal personal factors—a person’s “consciousness”—what really determine behavior? Most people would answer this question by asserting that both a person’s behavior and the internal personal factors combine to produce behavior. It seems though, that in reality the answer to this question involves a complex theory in psychology termed as “reciprocal determinism”. This theory was developed by famous psychologist, Albert Bandura, and gained great popularity with the publishing of his book, Social Foundations of Thought and Action in 1986. In one of his research articles, titled “The Self System in Reciprocal Determinism”, Bandura argues that psychological functioning involves a continuous reciprocal interaction between behavioral, cognitive and environmental influences (Bandura 1978). To better understand what this theory means, you just need to think about the role of culture in human society. It is common knowledge that culture influences an individual’s behavior, however culture itself is mostly, if not entirely of a person’s own making. This does not imply, however, that the relative influence of the three determining factors of psychological functioning is equal. Depending on the situation, an individual’s functioning might depend more on the immediate environment than the other determining factors (Bandura 1978). For example, the functioning of an individual in a situation where he has to swim in order to not drown is almost entirely dependent on an external factor. Therefore, evil behavior reflects a particular way of psychological functioning and is thus determined by the reciprocal relationship between behavior, cognitive and environmental

These researchers have concluded that there is a strong correlation between the environment and the social behaviors and mental behaviors of a human being in the future. The most critical of these time periods are the childhood of the child and the social groups that the person has been emerged around in the adolescent ages. One of the most widely used studies is the Twin Study where two twins with a very similar genetic makeup are raised in different environments to see how much change there is in their behavior. These twins almost share 100% of their genes however, it has been shown that the only behavior that has been affected is their personality. Yet the personality has been observed to be different by 54% compared between twins who are raised in different environments (DANIEL GOLEMAN 1986). Showing that nurture is a lot more in control of how one acts and how they are more influenced by their environment. It becomes dangerous when one’s environment can begin to affect their behavior, as they can stray for the worst and make situations like past serial killers come true. Personality being affected by the environment can not be prevented, however, the type of environment that will influence future personalities can be changed and made for the better. They can be improved upon to prevent any future serial killers from being

This hypothesis concentrates more on the sustaining perspective and how the way we were raised influences the sort of individual we get to be. I actually have forever been a firm believer that however you were raised incorporates a heap to try and do with the person you become.similar to what I had mentioned in the past dialog while being always exposed to such behavior, individuals in the circumstance, then begin to act with constant behavior they're exposed to; it's ordinary. once breaking down the mental development of an individual, social influences play one of the greatest parts once developing thought method and

The primitive argument of nature vs. nurture is essential because it depicts the complexity of what the behavioral framework is like. Nature, is inferred by biological factors. Parents may pass down genes which may carry personality traits down to their children. One risk factor includes being male as opposed to being female. It is not one who decide, but biological factors which introduce the notion of how society is more likely to label. In this situation, if one is born male and is young and a member of a minority group then, one is more likely to commit crimes (Miller et al., 10) according to social

An intuitive moral judgment is immediate judgment that requires no thinking or reflection. In other words, an intuitive moral judgment is simply a judgment we make with a minimum of thinking about it. An intuitive moral judgment is an automatic response to our understanding of a situation or an action. Many moral psychologists believe that moral intuitions are mainly based on our feelings rather than reasoning.

As a matter of fact, a common idea of what actually influences the personality of an adult at the beginning of his or her life has been swaying between different opinions and options - from behaviorism, social and environmental determinism to hereditarianism and fatalism. Despite the controversies do not subside and new and new arguments in the dispute appear almost permanently, the majority of professionals and early development experts agree that human personality is rather a result of the two factors working together.

What influences the behavior of people is a hugely interesting and debated question. While many had considered the role of genetics to be paramount, rapidly the cynosure has shifted towards the environment in which the are brought up in. The huge amount of research has shown that the behavioral tendencies are molded by the environment rather than genetics or by their own making, which clearly the argument supports.

Social cognitive learning theory suggest the people learn from their social environments. Prior to social cognitive theory psychologist tended to favor on directional causation. Bandura’s theory suggest learning and behavior is developed through a series of reciprocal interactions including persons, behavior, and environments. According to “Bandura in the video Bandura’s Social Cognitive Theory”, Triadic reciprocal causation is a term within social cognitive theory that describes self-development, adaptation, and change that occurs through an interplay of personal, behavioral, and environmental influences for example: people are producers of their environment not just products of it, people’s knowledge, their beliefs, values, and biological

Parsimony is often regarded as one of the cornerstones in the evaluation of psychological constructs and theories. Importantly, the condition of parsimony in itself presents a risk, potentially placing an unnecessary limitation, when a more complex explanation may better reflect the overall complex nature of the fundamental underlying concept that is under scrutiny (Epstein, 1984). Albert Bandura 's social cognitive theory and B. F. Skinner 's theory of radical behaviourism have provided two of the most influential contributions to psychology, and when examining Skinner and Bandura 's theories, this notion of parsimony becomes highly prevalent, as it is the most significant way in which the two theories differ. This stark contrast in parsimony arises from the methodological differences between the two theories in their treatment of the role of cognition. Skinner 's theory asserts a situationalist perspective of personality which is underpinned by the idea that all behaviour is purely deterministic and solely caused by the environment, thus by consequence any learning of new behaviours or personality occurs independently of the learner (Murphy, Maltby and Cloninger, 2010; Skinner, 1950). By contrast, Bandura (Murphy, Maltby and Cloninger; 2010, Bandura, 2001, 2006) proposes a dynamic perspective of personality which underpins the notion of reciprocal determinism, encompassing a complex and dynamic interaction between personal factors (namely cognition), behaviour and the

Albert Bandura is considered the developer of social learning theory, which is also known as social cognitive theory (Corey, 2013; Feist et al., 2013; Thoma et al., 2015). Badura’s theory, while based upon the principles of behaviorism, departs from the traditional behavioral model and leaves room for the exploration of unobservable mental states and their influence on behavior (Corey, 2013; Thoma et al., 2015). Social Cognitive theory bases its theory of learning on two types of learning processes: observational learning and enactive learning (Feist et al., 2013). In contrast to Skinner’s belief that reinforcement is required for learning, Bandura believes that learning is possible simply by observing the behavior of others; while reinforcement facilitates learning, it is not a necessary requirement (Feist et al., 2013). Enactive learning is learning through direct experience, and is similar to the concept of operant conditioning; people determine appropriate behaviors by evaluating their behavior and the potential consequences thereof (Feist et al., 2013). Where behavioral theory adopts the ABC approach to behavior, social cognitive theory uses a BPE approach known as Triadic Reciprocal Causation. In TRC, BPE stands for behavior, person variables, and environment (Feist et al., 2013). Within the TRC, the term person encompasses many variables including memory, judging, anticipation, gender, social position, physical attributes, and planning; the belief is that

The topic of nature vs nurture effects on personality has been an ongoing psychology debate for many years with the support of both sides being divided between different disciples of psychology. The Nature Theory is based on the principle that the DNA inherited from our parents, which begins with a fertilized egg and evolves into a person, not only determines what we look like, but also contributes to our personality, the emotional person we are, and the behaviors we develop. In contrast, the Nurture Theory is based on the principle that the environment a person is exposed to, such as family and social surroundings, influence the behavior and personality they develop. Years of studies show that neither theory is solely responsible for who an

Human behavior and the environment are interconnected, for an instant, we learn behaviors from family, peers and the environment around us. In 1600, English philosopher John Lock stated that the human brain starts out as a blank slate “His ideas that we are all born as a tabula rasa (blank slate) still dominate much social and political thinking today, although they are challenged by some neuropsychologists.” (SMITH, 2003) Albert Bandura concentration was on “social cognitive theory is at the core of his prominence. In this theory, cognition plays a central role in the regulation of and motivation for behavior. Its key concepts include vicarious learning, symbolic thought, outcome expectancies, self-efficacy, self-reflection,