Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Historical perspectives in psychology
Critique of social learning theory
Evolutionary Psychology Quizlet
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Historical perspectives in psychology
The nature-nurture debate is one of the oldest arguments in psychology, dating back to Greek philosophers Socrates, Plato, and Aristotle. While Socrates and Plato believed that knowledge is innate, Aristotle thought that knowledge is not preexisting and grows with experience. Even today, people ask whether nature (genetics/inherited characteristics) or nurture (environment and experiences) has a larger effect on one’s personality and behavior. Both nature and nurture have influenced everybody’s lives, including my own. Everything from the color of someone’s eyes to their temper can be explained by nature, nurture, or a combination of both. My genetics explain many of my traits and make me similar to my parents and the environments I have grown …show more content…
This most closely related to the behaviorist perspective of psychology that assumes that all behavior is learned from the environment and is only linked to observable behavior (McLeod). John Watson, a behaviorist, said that he could "train a baby randomly chosen in a group of 12 infants, to become any type of specialist Watson [wanted]" (Sincero). Parents, peers, and culture are all variables that can lead to different acquired characteristics. People's personalities and beliefs can vary widely from family to family and culture to culture. Albert Bandura's social learning theory shows how nurture can shape and alter behavior. "In his famous Bobo doll experiment [where children watched someone being violent towards a Bobo doll], Bandura demonstrated that children could learn aggressive behaviors simply by observing another person acting aggressively" (Cherry). In this case, nurture affected the children's behavior and caused them to be aggressive towards the doll. The environment that children (including myself) grow up in and their experiences can shape their personality. My parents moved from South Korea to Minnesota right before I was born. Before I entered high school, my family moved from state to state (on the eastern side of the U.S.) about every two years for my dad's work. This meant that I was living in new environments very often, forcing me to adapt to new apartments and schools. After moving for the …show more content…
My nature explains my overall school performance and my attention to detail and organization. My environment and life experiences have made me good at making friends and have impacted my interests. As a result of nature, I am similar to my parents, but my personality and behavior cannot be explained as a mixture of my parent's personalities. I think that nurture has had a larger impact on my life. Although I recognize that many of my traits are inherited, without my experiences and environments, I would be a very different
The nature versus nurture theory is a way to distinguish whether certain traits or characteristics of individuals are impacted more by biological means or environmental means. What the “nature” part signifies in the the theory is that we are more impacted by heredity and biological effects of our personality and what defines us as a person. What “nurture” signifies is that environmental factors have a more powerful impact on our lives and personality. As we mostly know, most things aren’t black and white, and so it’s hard ro determine which type of factors is more effective. Most people believe that it’s a blend of both nature and nurture that makes us who we are.
Have you ever wondered, or thought where you have got your personality from? The debate over nature versus nurture is whether people like identical twins, for example, are born and raised by genetics,(nature) and if they are born and raised by influences and influenced by the environment around them(nurture). The debate over nature versus nurture is very important and cannot be ignored. Identical twins are different in many ways. Studies have shown that nurture, is more dominant than nature. My personality has also changed in many ways as I have been raised. So as you can see I am on the nurture side by far.
Have you ever thought about whether the way you are is based on your genetic makeup? Do you believe our environment shapes us into who we are, instead? In the psychology debate of nature versus nurture, I believe that nurture plays a big role in who
The nature vs. nurture controversy is an age old question in the scientific and psychological world with both camps having evidence to support their theories. The controversy lies in which is more influential in the development of human beings. While there is no definitive answer for this, it is interesting to look at each of them separately.
In 1977, Psychologist Albert Bandura adopted the Social Learning Theory making it an influential and important theory. Bandura believed that direct reinforcement could not account for all types of learning capabilities. Bandura argued that individuals could learn new information and behavior by watching other individuals and the type of leanings can be explained by a wide variety of behaviors. This theory acknowledges that just because something has been learned, it does not mean that it will result in a change in behavior. However, the influence from others can cause a change in
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.
Since the beginnings of psychology the debate of nature verses nurture has been going on. Certain psychologists take the position of the nature perspective. They argue that people are born with predispositions towards certain personalities, traits and other characteristics that help shape them into the people that they become later in life. Meanwhile multiple other psychologists argue the nurture perspective. They believe that people are born as a blank slate and their experiences over the course of life help shape their personalities, traits, and other characteristics.
The central concepts following social psychology is that which dares to explain what makes people do what they do. Social psychology is the scientific analysis of how someone influences another’s thoughts, feelings, and behavior. Though considered to be a fairly young science, social psychology has endeavored to examine particular theories, concepts, and phenomenon that has shaped our society. As the centuries roll on, technology alongside social media, has evolved into something more sophisticated and has developed into a mechanism in which to entice and challenge social norms.
One of the hottest debates is and has been nature vs nurture for years, but what is the difference between the two? Nature is what people think of as already having and not being able to change it, in other words, pre-wiring (Sincero). Nurture is the influence of experiences and its environment of external factors (Sincero). Both nature and nurture play important roles in human development. Scientists and researchers are both trying to figure out which is the main cause in development because it is still unknown on which it is. The best position to side with is nature. Nature is also defined as genetic or hormone based behaviors (Agin). Regardless of the involvement in everyday life, or nurture, this argumentation centers around the effect genes have on human personalities. Although it is understandable on reasons to side with nurture, nature is the better stand in this controversy. Reasons to side with nature is because of genes and what genes hold. Genes is what
The ‘Nature versus Nurture’ argument can be traced back several millenniums ago. In 350 B.C., philosophers were asking the same question on human behaviour. Plato and Aristotle were two philosophers who each had diverse views on the matter. On the one hand, Plato believed that knowledge and behaviour were due to inherent factors, but environmental factors still played a role in the equation. Conversely, Aristotle had different views. He believed in the idea of “Tabula Rasa”- the Blank Slate theory supported the nurture side of the argument and put forward the view that everyone was born with a ‘Tabula Rasa’, Latin for ‘Blank Slate’. He proposed that “people learn and acquire ideas from external forces or the environment”. Was he right when he proposed that the mind is a blank slate and it is our experiences that write on these slates? This theory concluded that as humans, we are born with minds empty of ideas and at birth we have no knowledge or awareness of how we should behav...
The true impact of the way people have seen and learned is sometimes genetics or environmental (where we live). The impact of both is huge but the way of thinking is always changing. In Nurture Vs. Nature, nurture is our environment. Our ever changing environment is seen in violent video games where players think that people won’t actually die and will get back up, a possible solutions, and movies which could create copycat killers.
Nature and Nurture are both things that work together they aren’t just separate jobs. They each may do a bit of different things but all in all they both work together and they do things with each other and may also do some things alone.
One of the most well-known debates in psychology is nature versus nurture. Nature is pre-determined traits, influenced by biological factors and genetics. Physical characteristics such as height, hair color, and eye color is all determined by the genetics we inherit. Nurture is the influence of environmental factors. Nature and nurture affects the physical, emotional, and social development of a child.
There are so many theories that have come about over the years that try to explain why we have a certain personality. Many of these theories were based on the environment at the time and observations. Thinking about those other theories made me realize that many things we do are based on observation and the theory that I feel best suits my personality is the Social-Cognitive Learning Theory that was introduced by Albert Bandura. According to Bandura, the set of cognitive processes by which a person perceives, evaluates, and regulates his or her own behavior so that it is appropriate to the environment and effective in achieving goals (Friedman & Schustack, 2012, pg.236). This theory focuses on the way people learn by observing others and
Nature vs nurture debate is an old argument, I believe that nature and nurture both work together. Your genes are something that you are born with but your experiences and how you were raised also make you the person you are today. Experiences and opportunities help you develop your personality. It also provides a valuable training ground for later life. Human culture, behavior, and personality are cause primarily by nature and nurture not nature or