More handpicked essays just for you.
Do our personalities change over time essay
Importance of culture in psychology
Do our personalities change over time essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Do our personalities change over time essay
When I was a child, I was very shy and passive, so I didn’t’t like to speak in public. My mother seriously worried about my introverted character since she had talked with my teacher about the problem. After that, she enrolled me in speech class and when I came home, she asked me whether I presented in class or not. In the day when I expressed my opinions or asked something to my teacher, she praised me highly and her face looked so bright. As her praises reinforced me, I gradually overcame my shyness and I changed into an outgoing person. As many people have begun to pay attention to formation of personality, the debate over nature vs. nurture has raged for a long time and this issue is still controversial. However, as shown the experience above, I believe that people’s personalities are determined by their environment rather than by their genetics for the following reasons. One reason is that people’s personalities are not eternal and their personalities constantly change in their lives. Another reason is that people’s characters can be different according to their region w...
In a study conducted in 1983, researchers studied more than 350 pairs of twins in order to research if human personality traits were largely inherited or learned. Daniel Goleman, author of “Major Personality Study Finds that Traits are Mostly Inherited,” shares with his audience the parameters and results of this elaborate twin study. Goleman introduces his reader to Auke Tellegen, a psychologist and principal researcher on the long-term study, performed at the University of Minnesota, discovered that the human traits most strongly determined by heredity were leadership, obedience to authority, and even traditionalism. He would surely argue that heredity, more than influence of experience, is more responsible for development in human traits. Tellegen may have substantiating facts that nature is more predominant in a mere handful of traits, but what about the several other traits he failed to test? It is possible for a person who shows leadership and obedience during one part of their life to have an experience in which their obedience and leadership is thwarted. The study Tellegen conducted could not have been without environmental influence. Every single one of the participants, whether a twin or not, had environmental experiences separate from the others. Since every person experiences and responds to environmental stimuli differently, how can several prior years of experience be measured in order to present an unbiased result in this study? Unquestionably, it is impossible. Just as this particular study failed to take into consideration a persons’ prior experiences, it also failed to consider the probability of future environmental factors that could affect the traits Tellegen focused on in his study. Although difficu...
What makes us who we are? Does the answer lie in our genes, our environment, or in the way we are raised? For years, there has been an on-going debate between nature and nurture. T.H. White, author of The Once and Future King, explores the debate through many of the book’s characters. The issue clearly appears in the relationship of Queen Morgause and her sons, the Orkney brothers. The debate caused people to pick a side, to pick nature over nurture, or nurture over nature. However, it does not have to be one or the other. Nature and nurture work together to determine who we are.
The issue of whether or not criminal or aggressive behavior and violence is caused by biological or environmental factors has proven to be one that has caused a dispute for many years now. The biological or genetic factor of violent/criminal or aggressive behavior is certainly a much talked about topic. The idea that certain individuals could be predisposed to violence is something definitely deserving of doing research about. The nature vs. nurture topic has been a continuing debate for many aspects of human behavior, including aggression/violent behavior and criminal behavior. There have been many studies indicating that chemical relationships between hormones and the frontal lobe of the brain may play a key role in determining aggressive behavior as well as genetics, while other studies have explored environmental and social factors that have been said to control patterns in human aggression. Aggressive/violent behavior can’t be answered directly if it is caused by either nature or nurture; instead it is believed that both cause it.
In the well-received novel “Pudd’nhead Wilson,” Mark Twain skillfully addresses the ancient argument about the origin of one’s character and whether it’s derived from his nature or his surroundings. We can best see this battle between nature versus nurture by inspecting the plot lines that follow the characters Thomas a Becket Driscoll, Valet de Chambre, and Roxana the slave. Thomas was born into a wealthy white family while Roxy birthed Chambers into a life of slavery. It seemed as though each would have gone their separate ways into opposite walks of life, but Roxy secretly swapped the children, which destined each to their counterintuitive fates. Through their words and actions, Tom, Chambers, and Roxy have proven the idea that one’s behaviors and desires are a result of his upbringings and the environment he lives in rather than by his innate nature.
For this first analytical essay, I have decided to have a go at analyzing the Nature Vs. Nurture using my own viewpoint as a sibling. No doubt this is a topic that has been debated to mental death already, but I think it is something I will benefit from thinking about. Also, at the end of my main topic, I will quickly address a topic brushed on in the book.
The debate of nature vs. nurture continues today in the world of psychology. The effects of an individual’s genetics and the effects of their environment on their personality and actions is an age old debate that is still inconclusive. However, it is evident that both sides of the argument carry some form of the truth. It can be contended that the major characteristics of an individual are formed by their environment, more specifically, their past experiences. An individual’s past moulds and shapes their identity, if they do not make an effort to move on from it.
Albert Camus once said, “Man is the only creature who refuses to be what he is.” But what makes man what he is? Is it his sheer genetic makeup, or is it the way he was raised? The nature vs. nurture debate has raged on for centuries, but neither side has been able to prove their point indefinitely. Even today we see displays of the contrast between genetics and learned behaviors, some of which are athletics, intelligence, medical histories, etc. Every person is completely unique, a combination of genetic makeup and environment make an individual who they are.
“Personality is the combination of thoughts, emotions and behaviors that makes everyone unique. It 's the way people view, understand and relate to the outside world, as well as how they see themselves. Personality forms during childhood, shaped through an interaction of these factors: Genetics and Environment.” (Staff M. C., 2013) Genetics plays a major role in a person’s life because this has to deal with the person’s genes, DNA, and also traits. Each individual inherited two copies of genes, one from each parent. The type of genes passed down to a child can affect the lifestyle of that child if there are any possible disorders or diseases. The environment around us shapes who we are as an individual. Different environments gives off different behavioral skills. If there are any negative influences in the environment, such as violence in the home or community, this solely affects the way an individual is
The quote from the famous psychologist John B. Watson essentially sums up behaviourism. Behaviourism refers to the school of psychology founded by Watson, established on the fact that behaviours can be measured and observed (Watson, 1993). In behaviourism, there is a strong emphasis that the acquisition of learning, or permanent change in behaviour, is by external manifestation. Thus, any individual differences in behaviours observed was more likely due to experiences, and not by the working of genes. As the quote suggest, any individuals can be potentially trained to perform any tasks through the right conditioning. There are two major types of conditioning, classical and operant conditioning (Cacioppo & Freberg, 2012).
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 development, while nurture declares that our environment dictates our development.
The argument of nature vs. nurture is a long-standing one in the psychological and social worlds. It is the argument about whether we are ruled by our genes or our upbringing. It is my thought that neither is true. It is nature working with nurture which determines our personality and our lifestyle.
...theories of nature and nurture as a precursor of personality may enable an individual to obtain a clear perspective of its evolution. However, in the study of personality, it is very important to understand the different theoretical approaches within its realm. It is important for the same reason that not one person is the same and neither are personalities; and for the very same reason why personality theorist’ differ when describing the concept and nature of humanity.
The Biological approach to personality places emphasis on the genetic influences related to the development of an individual’s personality. Some may believe that children and their parents can have very similar personalities, for example a young boy having his father’s anger (Stelmack, 1990). Though this approach has often been questioned by psychologists, it is not disregarded all together. Some believe that genetics do have a role in an individual’s personality development; however environments, as well as personal experiences all work in forming personality.
Personality is the expression of a person’s traits according to ones feelings, mentality and behavior. It involves understanding individuals’ traits such as withdrawal and willpower and how various parts of an individual link together to form personality. Personality expresses itself from within an individual and is comparatively regular throughout in an individual’s life. Different people have different personalities dependent on factors such as environment and genetic composition. Our personality is dependent on the success or failure of our development in the eight stages of life. This is proposed by Erik Erikson. Success in the development stages lead to virtues while the failure leads to malignancies.
“We have been very conditioned by the cultures that we come from and are usually very identified with the particular gender that we happen to be a member of.” This quote by Andrew Cohen explains partially how gender identity develops, through the conditioning of our environments. The most influential factor of gender development, however, is still a very controversial issue. An analysis of the gender identification process reveals two main arguments in what factor most greatly contributes to gender development: biology differences (nature) or the environment (nurture).