Nature vs nurture !!

Question 1

Nature

Answer 1

Behaviour is a product of innate factors

Question 2

Nurture

Answer 2

Behaviour is a product of your environment

Question 3

Interactionist approach

Answer 3

The view that the processes of nature and nurture work together rather than in opposition.

Question 4

Evolutionary explanation (nature)

Answer 4

A behaviour that promotes survival and reproduction will be naturally selected.
e.g- Bowlby, proposed attachment was adaptive because it meant an infant was more likely to be protected, therefore more likley to survive.

Question 5

Behaviourism (nurture)

Answer 5

All behaviour can be explained in terms of experience alone.

e.g classical conditioning in terms of attachment.

Question 6

Social learning theory (nurture)

Answer 6

Bandura proposed behaviour is learned through vicarious reinforcement.
- But accepts biological factors play apart (aggression)

Question 7

Evaluation of natures interaction with nurture

Answer 7

.`

Question 8

Evaluation 1 (diathesis stress)

Answer 8

• Good for real world application.
• e.g used to explain phobias or schizophrenia.
• Research has shown those with genes that predispose a person to developing a disorder (nature), doesn’t necessarily lead to a disorder being developed.
• Thus the ‘stress’ part of the model is involved to trigger the disorder (nurture)

Question 9

Evaluation 2 (Nature affects nurture)

Answer 9

• Genes mat exert in a indirect effect in a number of ways
• e.g a child who is more aggressive might provoke a aggressive response from others. This response becomes a part of a childs development.
• Plomin et al (1977) called thjis the reactive gene. He also idebtified the passive gene: parents genes determine aspects of a childs behaviour.
• Scarr and Mcartney also identified: niche picking as a interaction of nature affecting nurture.

Question 10

Evaluation 3 (nurtures affect on nature)

Answer 10

• Life experiances shape our biology.
• e.g Maguire et al (2000): showed taxi drivers spatial memory was bigger than the control PPS.
• Blakemore and Cooper (1970)- Large collars restricting what they see, when it was taken off they still had a restricted view

Question 11

Evaluation 4 (the need for interactionist approach)

Answer 11

-this need is shown by twin studies
-e.g Nestadt et al (2010): Ocd Related twin studies.
MZ= 68% concordance rate
DZ= 31%
Highlighting strong genetic component
-Also highlight the role of nature as if it didnt contribute the rates would be 100% and 50%.