what is the relativecontribution of nature/nurture on human behaviour?
define nativism?
describes stance that agrees with nature side of debate
define nativists?
suggest we are born with pre-disposition & pre-programmed behaviours - innaate
nature side?
belief that behaviour is result of genes we inherit
heredity is more influentiral in determining behaviour
example of nature stance?
biological explanation for aggression suggests high levels of testosterone plays role in cause of aggression
research has shown that when micewere castrated & testosterone decreased aggression also decreased
when testosterone later reinjected aggression increases
shows aggression has biological basis so is on nativist side as it shows behaviour is predetermined by our hormones so environment doesnt play role
nurture side?
belief that behaviour is result of environmental (external) factors
assumes that environment & experience is more influential in behaviour
define empiricism?
opposing extreme viewpoint suggesting we are born without any innatemechanisms
instead all we become is due to our experiences
we are born as blank slates & what we experience defines us as a person
example of nurture stance?
learning approach to explaining phobias as it says environment causes our phobia due to associating frightening experience with stimulus & maintaining phobia through reinforcement
they claim that it has nothing to do with biology its purely down to environment
relative importance of herdity & environment in determing behaviour?
nature-nurture is an impossible question to answer
environmental influence in childs life begins as soon as child is borm
so they are closely intertwined - difficult to separate 2
twin studies?
one way of studying heredity
ocd - mz twins concordance rate is 87% whereas dz twins is 47%
behaviour is based on genetics as mz twins moregeneticallysimilar so more likely to suffer from ocd HOWEVER...
if it was purely down to genetics concordance rates for mz twins should be 100% showing that heredity & environment may affect behaviour
interactionist approach?
suggests both genetics & environment play part in behaviour
suggests person may be geneticallypredisposed to certain behaviour/trait however its moderated by environment - may not suffer from it until triggered by factor in environment
example of interactionist approach?
diathesis stress model - abnormality is caused by both biology & environment
sz - someone has geneticpredisposition by having PCM1 gene/neural correlates but this can lay dormant & never be expressed until stressor in environment such as family dysfunction triggers development of sz
evidence from gottesman - nature?
reviewed 40 twin studies & found 48% concordance for mz twins & 17% for dz twins for sz
suggests genetics do influence sz as those more geneticallysimilar are more likely to have sz compared to those less genetically similar.
nature side is influential approach to behaviour as concordance rates of twins is evidnece that shows genetics play huge role in behaviour rather than nurture
X problems with methodology?
most research to see whether nature/nurture is most important come from twin studies
problem is that it makes assumption that only difference between mz & dz twins is genetics
but parenting style differs for mz & dz twins - mz treated more similarly than dz as theyre identical
means difference between mz & dz twins concordance may not just be genetics & may be due to upbringing & environment.
cant be certain that behaviour is due to nature/nurture as both sides of argument may be needed not just 1
* practical application - nurture?
empiricists argue that all behaviour is learnt through environment & experiences - reinforcements
if this is case can help in real world in prisons
token economy so that prisoners are rewarded throughpositive reinforcement so theyre more likely to repeat good behaviour & be rehabilitates
nurture side influential approach to behaviour as its helped in real world so must be accurate
X better stance is appropriate?
nature side of debate - behaviour is purely due to biology & genetics
nuture side - all behaviour is learnt
but currently more popular & accurate stance is that behaviour is a result of both nature & nurture.
problem with nature/nurture debate is that interactionist approach may be more accurate as it takes into account both nature & nurture