Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Different ways environment can affect childrens development
Psychological factors underlying criminal behavior
Psychological factors underlying criminal behavior
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
How does a person become wicked? When a baby is first born, some people believe the baby is pure innocence, only to be contaminated by his or her environment. Others think heredity predetermines whether a baby is good or evil. Does the environment in which children grow modify their future, or is it within their genetics? As kids grow up, the effect that their environment has becomes obvious. These nurturing effects are evident in both Perry and Dick in the novel In Cold Blood by Truman Capote. Both of these men grew up in households that lacked appropriate parenting, which affected the development of each man. Considering how both Dick and Perry’s upbringings resulted in the creation of two murderers, children’s futures rely heavily on the nurturing from their childhood because this influences their thoughts and actions.
No matter what the genetic make-up of a child’s mind is, the environment surrounding a growing child is the key factor in mental development. Parents are responsible for raising their own children, but if this nurturing is not proper, the effects are costly. These effects are evident in Perry Smith. Perry grew up in a household full of inhumane conditions. These inappropriate surroundings were the main culprit in Perry’s dysfunctional mind. He was raised in a house full of alcohol, abuse, and loneliness. All of these conditions can severely cripple the mental development of a growing child. The most significant influence is suicidal thoughts. Researchers investigated the effects abuse has on children, and the Researchers concluded that “Among those whose parents were not substance abusers in the home, 2.6% had attempted suicide, while among those whose parents were substance abusers in the home, 7.0% had commit...
... middle of paper ...
... be corrupted by atrocious parenting and inappropriate environments, or be positively influenced by a proper upbringing of all aspects. The development and forthcoming of children’s lives depend vitally on the nurturing received by their environment, as seen in both Dick and Perry. Is a killer really predetermined at birth, or does the environment alter the mind resulting in the development of a murderer?
Works Cited
Capote, Truman. In Cold Blood. New York: Vintage Books, 1965. Print.
Clark, Robin E., and Judith Freeman Clark. "Effects on Adults Abused as Children." Health Reference Center. Facts On File, Inc. Web. 17 Mar. 2014.
“Nature and Nurture in Mental Development, VIII, 291-306” Science Progress 96.4 (2013): 430. Science In Context. Web. 10 Mar. 2014.
McLeod, S. A. (2007). “Nature Nurture in Psychology.” Simple Psychology, McLeod, S. A. (2007).
These two men, both coming from different backgrounds, joined together and carried out a terrible choice that rendered consequences far worse than they imagined. Living under abuse, Perry Smith never obtained the necessary integrity to be able to pause and consider how his actions might affect other people. He matured into a man who acts before he thinks, all due to the suffering he endured as a child. Exposed to a violent father who did not instill basic teachings of life, Smith knew nothing but anger and misconduct as a means of responding to the world. He knew no other life. Without exposure to proper behavior or responsible conduct, he turned into a monster capable of killing an entire family without a blink of remorse. In the heat of the moment, Perry Smith slaughtered the Clutter family and barely stopped to take a breath. What could drive a man to do this in such cold blood? The answer lies within his upbringing, and how his childhood experiences shaped him to become the murderer of a small family in Holcomb, Kansas. ¨The hypothesis of unconscious motivation explains why the murderers perceived innocuous and relatively unknown victims as provocative and thereby suitable targets for aggression.¨ (Capote 191). ¨But it is Dr. Statten´s contention that only the first murder matters psychologically, and that when
The two killers' childhoods were obviously dissimilar, and their differences bring to question the formation of a killer's mind. Is it childhood that affects the criminal mind's mentality? Smith's lack of companionship during his childhood led him to search for companionship in Hickock. Hickock took advantage of Smith's need by promoting Smith's fantasies. Hickock truly felt that Smith's fantasies were ludicrous, but he supported his fantasies because he needed Smith's aid to commit the murders.
The question of whether or not man is predetermined at birth to lead a life of crime is a question that has been debated for decades. Are serial killers born with the lust for murder, or are their desires developed through years of abuse and torment? Many believe it is impossible for an innocent child to be born with the capability to commit a horrible act such as murder. But at the same time, how could we have corrupted society so much as to turn an innocent child into a homicidal maniac? Forensic psychologists have picked apart the minds of serial killers to find an answer as to what forces them to commit such perverse acts. Their ultimate goal is to learn how to catch a serial killer before he commits his first crime.
The case of whether serial killers are born with the lust to kill or if they are truly victims of their environment has been a hot debated question by both psychologists and the FBI today. A serial killer is traditionally defined as one that kills 3 or more people at different times with “cooling off” periods in between kills. Both psychological abuse as a child and psychological disorders are to blame for the making of a killer. The nature vs. nurture debate is best applied to the mysterious behaviors and cases of serial killers and their upbringing and environment. Nature is the genetic and biological connections a person has, personality traits, and how genetic make-up all relates to a killer. Nurture is examining the upbringing and environment that a person is around that affects what a person becomes. In some cases however, the effects of only upbringing or only biological problems were the reasons certain serial killers committed crimes. Although there is no definitive answer to what plays the bigger role: nature or nurture, they both are contributing factors that make a serial killer. These deviants of society are afflicted with problems in either their upbringing or have psychological disorders, and are able to blend into our everyday lives with no apparent differences, yet they wreck havoc through their unremorseful killings.
Nature vs. nurture has been one of the oldest and most debated topics among psychologists over the years. This concept discusses whether a child is born into this world with their developmental work cut out for them or if a child is a “blank slate” and their experiences are what shape them into who they are. Over the years and plenty of research, psychologists have all mostly come to agree that it’s a little bit of both. Children are both born with some genetic predispositions while other aspects of the child’s development are strongly influenced by their surrounding environment. This plays into the criminal justice system when discussing where criminal behavior stems from. Is a criminal’s anti-social behavior just part of their DNA or is it a result of their upbringing? The answer to this question is not definite. Looking at research a strong argument can be made that criminals developed their anti-social patterns through the atmosphere in which they were raise, not their DNA.
Notwithstanding the basics of developmental psychology, human development is known for the controversial debate on nature and nurture. Researchers have not distinguished
Nurture versus nature has been a long-standing debate. Nature, also known as pro-heredity in this essay, is about what a person’s genetic predispositions are related to behavior and intentions. The Monoamine Oxidase A gene (MAO-A) has earned the nickname “warrior gene” because it has been linked to aggression in observational and survey-based studies (Johnson and Tingley). In an actual study, a man named Jim Fallon, who has studied the biological basis for behavior for nearly 20 years, discovered he had the particular variant, MAO-A, that diminishes the calming effects of serotonin. Not only did Fallon discover this, he also found out that “one of his direct great-grandfathers…was hanged for murdering his mother. That line… produced seven other murderers… Lizzy Borden… ‘Cousin Lizzy’… was accused… of killing her father and stepmother with an ax…” (Hagerty). This is surely due to the fact that this compulsion to killing was inherited down the family lines.
...s may never agree on a conclusive degree to which both nature and nurture play roles in human development, but over the years, more improved studies have shown that both are crucial aspects. With all the knowledge we are gaining from these studies, it would be quite limiting to believe that a criminal and his actions are the sole result of heredity. Even in people who do not commit crimes, genes themselves are affected by the prenatal environment. Undoubtedly, the fetus experiences changes in environment, forcing possible changes in heredity and reactionary response. We are likely to never find the answer to how much or how little either, nature or nurture, impacts our lives, but at least we can agree that they both do, in fact, have major roles. Our development is not the culmination of heredity alone, but of a tangled web of experiences and genetics entwined.
"Nature Plus Nurture." Read "" by Begley, Sharon. N.p., 13 Nov. 1995. Web. 08 Apr. 2014.
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 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).
The question of whether or not man is predetermined at birth to lead a life of crime is a question that has been debated for decades. Serial killers are made not born; it has been demonstrated that a man 's initial years are the most vital years. A youngster 's initial couple of years is a period of experimentation, a period to make sense of things for themselves, a period to set up the bits of the riddle. Like a newborn child, the mental health is reliant on its environment. A youthful youngster 's mind resembles a wipe; it gathers data through perception. The surroundings of a serial killer as a little child can enormously impact the way he or she will go about his or her life and his or her style of murdering. Certain experience, for example, youngster misuse, divorce, liquor misuse, tyke disregard, as well as medication misuse, can be negative to the advancement of a little child. Numerous serial killers were illegitimate kids. Due to their childhood and early backgrounds, serial killers swing to crazy murdering frenzies.
Wolfe, David A. Child Abuse: Implications for Child Development and Psychopathology. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1999. Print.
Undoubtedly, humans are unique and intricate creatures and their development is a complex process. It is this process that leads people to question, is a child’s development influenced by genetics or their environment? This long debate has been at the forefront of psychology for countless decades now and is better known as “Nature versus Nurture”. The continuous controversy over whether or not children develop their psychological attributes based on genetics (nature) or the way in which they have been raised (nurture) has occupied the minds of psychologists for years. Through thorough reading of experiments, studies, and discussions however, it is easy to be convinced that nurture does play a far more important in the development of a human than nature.
The distinction between nature versus nurture or even environment versus heredity leads to the question of: does the direct environment or the nature surrounding an adolescent directly influence acts of delinquency, later progressing further into more radical crimes such as murder or psychotic manifestation, or is it directly linked to the hereditary traits and genes passed down from that individual adolescent’s biological parents? To answer this question one must first understand the difference between nature, nurture, environment, and heredity. Nurture, broken down further into environment, is defined as various external or environmental factors one is exposed to which can be more specifically broken down into social and physical aspects. Nature, itself broken down into heredity, is defined as the genetics and the individual characteristics in one’s personality or even human nature.