Nature vs nurture. Flashcards
Context.
- Question of whether characteristics, such as personality, intelligence etc. are caused by innate influences (nature) or are results of learning/environmental influences (nurture) has a long history in psychology.
- Recent research has been more concerned with explanations of how nature/nurture interact and influence each other.
What is nature?
- Nativism is term used to describe the stance that agrees with the nature side of debate.
- Introduced by Rene Descartes (1596-1650) who suggested the human soul, when born, is already equipped with an understanding of key concepts such as time.
- Formed the basis of the nativist POV that we are born with predispositions and pre-programmed behaviours.
- Support for the nativist viewpoint comes the field of biology and genetics, in particular twin and family studies.
What is nurture?
- Empiricism is opposing extreme viewpoint to nativism which says we are born without any innate mechanism and that all we become is due to our experiences.
- John Locke (1632-1704) argued that we are born a ‘taula rasa’ (blank slate), proposing that it’s our experience that leads to formation of the self.
- Supported by the learning approaches (behaviourism and social learning theory).
Nurture needs further clarification.
- Concept of nurture and environmental influences in psychology requires further clarifcation as ‘the environment’ is such a broad and all encompassing concept.
- Helpfully researcher, Lerner (1986) had identified different levels of the environment defined in pre-natal terms.
- Pre-natal: the mother’s physcial and psychology state during pregnancy.
- Post-natal: the social conditions the child grows up in and cultural and historic context that they are part of.
- Means nature/nurture question is impossible to answer because this suggest that an environmental influence in a child’s life begins as soon as it is born (perhaps even earlier).
- Nature and nurture are so closely intertwined that it makes little sense to separate the two (interactionist approach).
Heredity and the environment.
- No genetic cause of behaviour has been found so far, this means the extreme nature viewpoint is widely as too extremist.
- Are genes related to behaviours, key question for debate is the extent genetic affect behaviour and how much experience and learning account for what we do.
- Placing numerical value on contribution of nature/nurture is very difficult.
Heredity and the environment - Twin studies.
- e.g. twin studies very difficult to tell whether high concordance rates are more the result of shared genetics or shared upbringing. Concordance rates rarely 100%, means their environments also have influence.
- Core assumption of twin studies = only difference between MZ and DZ twins is their genetic similarity level.
- Furnham (1996) argued this assumption could cause errors: MZ twins look the same, it’s possible their parents treat them more similarly than DZ twins.
- Would mean the environment differs between the pairs of twins and therefore any difference in likelihood of behaviour occurring could be due to treatment from parents rather than genetic similarity.
The Interactionist approach.
- Take the stance somewhere between extreme nature and extreme nurture positions.
- Argues the true answer of nature/nurture debate is both genetics and environment play a part in behaviour.
- Genetics give us predisposition to certain behaviours, this genetic indication is moderated by environment, therefore creates nature/nurture.
- e.g. intelligence.
Diathesis-stress model.
- Suggests psychopathology is caused by biological/genetic vulnerability (the diathesis) which is only expressed when coupled with an environmental/biological trigger (the stressor).
- Tienari et al (2004) found in group of Finnish adoptees, those most likely to develop SZ has biological relatives with history of disorder (vulnerability) and had relationships with their adoptive families that were defined as ‘dysfunctional’ (the trigger).
Epigenetics.
- Is change in genetic activity without changing our genetic code.
- Caused by interaction with environment. When we smoke/are exposed to pollution, epigenetic marks are left on our DNA.
- These tell our bodies which genes to ignore and which to use and these can then be passed onto our children as well as their children. They are like bookmarks of the life experience of previous generations therefore affects us.
Limitation of nature/nurture.
P: There are implications for a strong commitment to one side of the debate or the other.
E: For example, nativists (nature) believe that human behaviours can be explained solely by genes. This belief has led to controversial
research in to how race and IQ are linked. Conversely, empiricists (nurture) would suggest that any behaviour can be changed by shaping the environment. In extreme terms, this could lead to a
society which controls and manipulates its citizens.
I&D: A strong commitment to either the nature or nurture position corresponds to a belief in hard determinism. This equates to biological determinism and environmental determinism
respectively.
C: Either one of these sides could lead to catastrophic implications in society.
Strength of nature/nurture.
P: Research attempting to tease out the influence of the environment is complicated by the fact even siblings raised within the same
family may not experience exactly the same upbringing.
E: For example, Plomin (1990) argues that individual differences mean that each sibling may experience life events differently, e.g.
parental divorce or neglect will affect each sibling in a different way.
C: This would explain the finding that even MZ twins reared together do not show perfect concordance rates which supports the view that
heredity and the environment cannot be meaningfully separated.
Strength of nature/nurture - research support for epigenetics.
P: There is evidence to support from research into epigenetics.
E: Scarr & McCartney (1983) put forward a theory of
gene-environment interaction. Passive interaction (parent’s genes
influence the way they treat their children – musically gifted parents are likely to play to their children). Evocative interaction (child’s genes influence and shape the environment in which they grow up – musically talent child will be picked for school concerts) & Active
interaction (child creates its own environment through the people and experiences it selects – child chooses musically talented friends).
C: This points to a complex and multi-layered relationship between nature and nurture.
