DEBATES - NATURE vs NURTURE Flashcards
(14 cards)
define nature
the degree to which human behaviour is determined by genetics/biol
inherited/innate influences
influenec psychological and physical characteristics
historical view held by nativists
eg. straight/curly hair, height, eyecolour
define nurture
a result of learned or envi influences
influence of experience and envi
historical view held by empiricists
what is a pre-natal influence on a person
parental health(diet, exercise, alcohol, smoking)
what is a post-natal influence on a person
social conditons
edu
care
diet
what is the interactionist approach
nature and nurture cant be separated
research should focus on how they interact
investigate how much of a given behav is determined by genes and the envi
example 1 - how do nature and nurture interact in brain plasticity
(neural plasticity is how the brain re-organises itself throughout life)
brain structure (nature) changes AAR of life exp and learning (nurture)
eg. Maguire et al. (2000), LDN taxi drivers (more grey matter in posterior hippocampus compared to matched non-taxi driver ctrls)
example 2 - how do nature and nurture interact in the diathesis stress model of sz
attempts to explain how inherited and envi influences interact in the devel of mental illness
diathesis ( vuln - biol/genetic) + stress (trigger - biol/envi) –> mental disorder (sz)
positive correlation between y (L) stress (envi) and x (H) biol vuln
example 3 - interaction of inherited and envi influences in epigenetics
(epigenetics = change in gene expression caused by interaction w/ envi) eg. diet, stress
envi (life exp) can influence how genes are expressed (whether the genes are switched on or off)
eg. child may inherit a gene linked to MH but whether this gene is expressed could depennd on envi triggers, such as stress or trauma
life exp can leave genetic markers that influence dev of future generations
= supports interactionist approach as shows envi can influence biol
ways of trying to assess the relative importance of nature and nurture - heritability coefficient
heritability coefficient
(Plomin - 0.5, so 50/50 influence)
tool used to assess heredity
classifies the extent to which a behav is caused by genetics (nature)
eg. heritabilit and IQ
for IQ = 0.5, so envi and genes and equally important in determining intelligence
closer to 1 = the higher genetic component
ways of trying to assess the relative importance of nature and nurture - concordance rates
seperate diff by comparing MZ and DZ twins to find relative importance of genes and envi
if 100% genes = shared (MZ) + diff characteristics/personality = shows larger influence of envi (so genetic concordance = lower)
WHEREAS, if DZ twins (50%) = similar = shows genes have a larger influence (so genetic concordance = higher)
AO3: n/n debate: strength: potential benefits for society
(other use - sz)
recognises there are both biol and envi influences on behav which leads to fuller understanding of reasons for crime, devel and mental illness (sz)
the diathesis stress model = led to effective treatments for mental illnesses by addressing more than one influence on behaviour
eg. drugs for biol aspects and CBT for psychological aspects
tf, looking at interaction of inherited and envi influences has good applications
leads to effective treatments
AO3: n/n debate: limitation: difficulty measuring the relative contribution of n/n in interactionist exp
(other use - forensics)
diff research methods have tried to separate the contribution of n/n on behav
eg. twin/adoption studies and use of heritability coefficients
Plomin - theres a problem using the concept of niche picking in the devel of aggression in children
ppl create own nurture by actively selecting envi that are appropriate for their nature –> naturally aggressive child is comforted by envi which influences dev.
its a complex interaction so its argued it doesnt make sense to assess the relative influece of n/n
interactionist exp have limited validity as cant measure how n/n interact and work together
AO3: n/n debate: strength: adopting interactionist stance gives fuller understanding of an individuals behav
(other use - biol exp of offending)
helps to exp why several ppl w/ similar genetic predisposition to a certain behav may not show it
eg. criminals - if they have CDH13/MAOA = more likely to become criminals BUT just because a person has these genes, doesnt mean theyre a criminal - it could be that the biol. predisposition to agg + diff fam background contribute to offending behav
= important when assessing complex reasons for offending and whether someone can be held responsible
tf, interactionist exp have good app in criminal justice system
AO3: n/n debate: strength: interactionist exp are more meaningful than historical stances that focus on either nature or nurture
empiricist exp were limited in suggesting behav is only due to nurture (envi)
nativist exp were limited in suggesting behav is only due to nature (biol/genes)
research into epigenetics shows that interactionist exp are more appropriate as they show the complexity of the interaction between n/n and suggest eenvi factors = influence way genes = expressed
tf, exp that focus on the interaction of n/n have greater validity as they get closer to exp the complexity of human dev rather than historical views
