Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
How nature and nurture affects development
How nature and nurture affects development
Effect of nature and nurture
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: How nature and nurture affects development
I generally regard myself as a disorganized person. I believe this is an innate trait for me. As far as I can remember, I've always been disorganized. But throughout my life, I developed some ways to cope with it, especially after having some negative experiences. So what was the main factor that made me disorganized person? I strongly believe that it was a combination of both nature and nurture, but if I had to choose one, I would have to say that the genes that came from my father have a big impact on this trait.
My father is also a disorganized person. I am very similar to him in this regard. On the other hand, my mother is extremely organized. She's someone who tries to keep everything as organized as possible. Obviously, saying that one of my parents also shows this trait is not enough evidence to support this theory, but there's more.
The most important reason I believe the nature is the primary factor is my brother. He's four years younger than me and just like my mother, he's one of the most organized people I've seen in my life. He's my absolute opposite. But the fact is, we have been brought up in the same house, with the same parents. Most of the time, we even shared the same room. And our parents' behavior towards us was almost identical. As I was interacting constantly with my brother, one would think that either my or his behaviors should have been changed in one way or another. But it's not the case. Of course there could be some minor changes that I could not observe but in general, we always have been completely different in terms of being organized. This is the main reason that I believe heredity is the dominant factor.
The other reason is my parents' behavior toward us. I've read some theories c...
... middle of paper ...
...determine our faith. But they can create a predisposition towards a trait that gets triggered something in the environment. For example a child may have a genetic tendency towards shyness. And if faced with a domineering teacher, the child may become even more withdrawn. In my personal case, my genetic tendency was towards being disorganized, which was a result of the genes that came from my father. And I believe this tendency was dominant enough that even my parents' well-intentioned efforts to canalize me towards being organized did not work. Maybe that even backfired because of my adolescent emotions and parent-child conflicts. So, in a way, the same environmental factors that worked positively for my brother did not work for me. And this leads me to believe that nature played the most important role on this trait. Environment could only shape it to an extent.
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.
“The term “nature versus nurture” is used to refer to a long-running scientific debate. The source of debate is the question of which has a greater influence on development: someone's innate characteristics provided by genetics, or someone's environment. In fact, the nature versus nurture debate has been largely termed obsolete by many researchers, because both innate characteristics and environment play a huge role in development, and they often intersect”. (Smith, 2010 p. 1)
There are many theories about how an individuals’ personality develop or how different characteristics and traits are formed in people. Psychiatrist Alfred Adler was the first person to suggest that the order a person was born in had a profound effect on the development of his/her personality. He called his idea the Birth Order Theory. Adler’s work on this theory cover the oldest child, commonly referred to as the first-born, as well as, the middle, youngest, and only children. The work of other experts in the field have expanded on his theory to include multiplies (twins, triplets, etc.), step-siblings, siblings with disabilities, and siblings with more than a five years gap. So according to the Birth Order Theory, how does a person’s order of birth contribute to their personality, and what are the commonly shared characteristics in each birth position? Are there other factors that can contribute or influence an individual’s personality development in relation to the Birth Order Theory that needs to be considered? If so, than how accurate is the theory really? I will attempt to answer these question.
Today, realising that genes and environment cooperate and interact synergistically, traditional dichotomy of nature vs. nurture is commonly seen as a false dichotomy. Especially operant conditioning, i.e. the learning of the consequences of one's own behavior can lead to positive feedback loops between genetic predispositions and behavioral consequences that render the question as to cause and effect nonsensical. Positive feedback has the inherent tendency to exponentially amplify any initial small differences. For example, an at birth negligible difference between two brothers in a gene affecting IQ to a small percentage, may lead to one discovering a book the will spark his interest in reading, while the other never gets to see that book. One becomes an avid reader who loves intellectual challenges while the other never finds a real interest in books, but hangs out with his friends more often. Eventually, the reading brother may end up with highly different IQ scores in standardized tests, simply because the book loving brother has had more opportunities to train his brain. Had both brother received identical environmental input, their IQ scores would hardly differ.
nurture argument. Theorists have wondered how much of development is affected by genetics and the environment. Ultimately, nature and nurture intertwine to shape the lives of children. Nature may predispose children to certain behaviors if placed in specific environments, however the timing of the environmental exposure and the child’s natural tendencies also play a role. Theorists have also discussed the extent to which development is universal and how much of it is unique to individuals. There are consistencies that have been noted universally yet; theorists have observed variations in their competency in different tasks and way of life that may be contributed to genetics or the environment. Lastly, theorists debate about whether changes in development can be portrayed as qualitative where it involves dramatic changes or quantitative in which development is a steady progression. These debates have merits independently but require each other for a better understanding of child
As a mother, I am shocked and dismayed by the general acceptance of the myth of genetic determinism. One's environment, including people one interacts with, has an undeniable influence on how one develops. Nonetheless, many scientists disregard the impact of environment on one's intelligence. I do not deny that one's biology is a crucial part of one's identity. Inheritance of physical traits is obvious. Children often look "just like" their father or mother, or another relative. One's genes determine eye and hair color, height and body build. I believe, however, that what makes us human is not something that can be found in...
As I said, I do not believe birth order has very much to do with the personality of a person. If a last child grows up penniless and has a lousy home life, he will not act like a last child who has a rich family and a marvelous suburban home. However, multiple of the things that many people said about how birth order affects the personality do describe me. The one that relates to me the greatest is definitely the fact that I am easy going. I never really let anything get too serious and I let things go once they are in the past. Also as Jocelyn Voo claims the middle child is very social, I would have to agree with her. I would rather be out with my pals having a wonderful time than be stuck at home doing nothing. Another quality that describes be excellently is the middle child takes pleasure in having a great time. If there is chance I can have good time, I will take that chance and expect for the best.
..., which is the influence of nurture. The vast majority that makes us who we are is influenced by nature. We are who we are and genetics and biology make us a complete whole.
Scientists make a good point about genes but I believe physical aspects come through genetics, but that personality development is shaped based solely on how a person has been nurtured through their lives. All children are bad at one time in their lives; consider this, a 4 year old girl throws a book at her brother, and is punished she is put in the corner.
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.
Data that references to the development of conscientiousness is very slim. Psychologists consider that conscientiousness development begins when individuals are around the age of three. However, C.Halverson, V. Havill, J. Deal, S. Baker et al. (as cited in d. Mroczek et al., 2006, p.217) instead of calling their trait “conscientiousness”, most would reference to this personality trait by sub facets of conscientiousness i.e. attention (the ability to concentrate), self-control (the ability to control impulses), achievement motivation (tendencies to be cautious, planful, and behaviorally controlled), orderliness (the ability to be neat and organized), responsibility (the tendency to be reliable and dependable) (D. Mroczek, T. Little, A. Lang, 2006). Children who are low on conscientiousness at this age tend to be depicted as children who are impulsive, distractible, careless, unreliable, and irresponsible (D. Mroczek et al.,
Genes are complex by themselves, so their association to an attire brain’s development is not enough to be the only reason, but an environment cannot affect any different individual’s genes in the same way. I agree that the environment can affect an individual’s genes, but these genes also react in their own way. Personally, I believe that I was born with a certain way thinking, and the thinking has been adjusted in its own way based on my environment and experiences. For instance, as a child I always had a passion for working with babies and young children, at 8 years old I was blessed with a little sister, my experiences with her encouraged my natural passion and now I’m going to college to either be an early elementary school teacher, or a child psycologist. I feel like I genetically had this passion, and my experiences took it into the direction I’m heading now. If I had not originally had that passion, the experiences with my little sister probably would have not lead me to want to be a teacher, but also, if I did not have those experiences and I had the passion, I may have decided on another career path with that passion. Overall, I am extremely fascinated by how complex and amazing our brains are. Although I do not feel that we do now, or will ever, fully understand how the brain functions, I believe these theories are a great
In today’s society, one is constantly surrounded by individuals with different behaviors. Some will sacrifice his or her life for a complete stranger. However, there is some individuals who would take advantage of the weak and poor for his or her own personal gain. Now the question arises, what makes human beings behave the way they do? Being the topic of conflict of psychology for years, one usually turns to the nature verses nurture theory for the answer to that question. Some believes that a person is born with a certain personality, others believe it is an individual’s atmosphere that determines his or her attitude, and some even trusts the idea that it is a combination of genes and environment that dictates the conduct of an individual.
From perfectionist firstborns to demanding lastborn, we are affected by birth order. Our personality can be affected by birth order. Birth order effects personality but there are many other factors that make up a personality. I see it all over in the world today. My friend is a firstborn and he gets what he wants, but with force. My sister is a lastborn and she gets what she wants, but with whining and crying. Middle children are usually the best of the lot. That’s me. I am just perfect, I have most of the second born qualities but I have a lot of firstborn too.
...rstanding and because they have been exploited as labels that create bias, especially so in the realm of education. There are other perceptions by which the associations of religion and personality can be viewed that are growing in popularity. One such considers both personality and religion from the evolutionary angle. This small body of research that has developed primarily in the last decade explains that religion is a byproduct of mechanisms that evolved for other purposes and is expressed because of interactions in the environment and other cognitive processes (Kirkpatrick, 1999). Whether the pendulum of popular theory swings from trait based research and Western ideals to biologically based research encompassing a combination of philosophies, we can conclude only that questions about the association of religion and personality will become increasingly complex.