Summary of the Debate
|
Nature side of the debate
|
Nurture side of the debate
|
|
Don't worry that the clip says AQA - it is just as relevant to OCR
|
|
| comparing_the_debates.pptx |
Comparing the Debate with Other Debates
Free Will / Determinism
Determinism can be linked to nature because both focus on establishing cause and effect, particularly when investigating genetics. Nurture also tends to be deterministic as behaviourist research believes that factors in the environment can be isolated and understood to be directly causing behaviour.
Reductionism / Holism
The nature view is reductionist because it focuses on establishing cause and effect, particularly when investigating genetics. Nurture also tends to be reductionist as it suggests that upbringing and the environment directly cause behaviour, and this ignores the impact of personality.
Individual / Situational Explanations
Individual explanations often assume that behaviour is innate and that the nurture side of the debate is true. By using a situational explanation researchers assume that the environment determines behaviour and therefore the nurture side of the nature/nurture debate is favoured.
Usefulness
Taking the nature view is useful as it allows for nomothetic treatments to be designed. Taking the nurture view is useful in generating treatments which can be used by parents and schools.
Ethics
Taking the nature view has the danger of causing psychological harm due to the implications research may have such as suggesting genetic causes of behaviour which a person can do nothing about. Taking the nurture view may cause psychological harm as it may blame mental health / crime on a poor upbringing
Socially Sensitive Research
A lot of socially sensitive research is about the genetic basis of behaviour and so is the nature side of debate.
Psych as a Science
The nature view links with Psychology as a science because it wants behaviour to be predictable and uses a scientific approach to explain human behaviour.
Free Will / Determinism
Determinism can be linked to nature because both focus on establishing cause and effect, particularly when investigating genetics. Nurture also tends to be deterministic as behaviourist research believes that factors in the environment can be isolated and understood to be directly causing behaviour.
Reductionism / Holism
The nature view is reductionist because it focuses on establishing cause and effect, particularly when investigating genetics. Nurture also tends to be reductionist as it suggests that upbringing and the environment directly cause behaviour, and this ignores the impact of personality.
Individual / Situational Explanations
Individual explanations often assume that behaviour is innate and that the nurture side of the debate is true. By using a situational explanation researchers assume that the environment determines behaviour and therefore the nurture side of the nature/nurture debate is favoured.
Usefulness
Taking the nature view is useful as it allows for nomothetic treatments to be designed. Taking the nurture view is useful in generating treatments which can be used by parents and schools.
Ethics
Taking the nature view has the danger of causing psychological harm due to the implications research may have such as suggesting genetic causes of behaviour which a person can do nothing about. Taking the nurture view may cause psychological harm as it may blame mental health / crime on a poor upbringing
Socially Sensitive Research
A lot of socially sensitive research is about the genetic basis of behaviour and so is the nature side of debate.
Psych as a Science
The nature view links with Psychology as a science because it wants behaviour to be predictable and uses a scientific approach to explain human behaviour.
Discuss the Nature Nurture Debate. Support your answers with reference to Core Studies [15]
The nature / nurture debate discusses whether behaviour is governed by nature (e.g. brain structure and activity, biochemical and genetics) and by nurture (e.g. upbringing and experiences).
A strength of the nature view is that this has useful applications. Identifying behaviours that are inherited or specific to the individual can help us to intervene. Casey showed that specific regions of the brain influence the ability to delay gratification, which helps us consider how the brain activity can be enhanced to help people to put off till later a desired thing. Taking this view prevents people being blamed for their behaviour, so they are more likely to co-operate with any intervention designed to change it. However, this does deny the possibility of culpability – people are not seen as responsible for their own behaviour.
Consequently a weakness of the nature view is that discovering that certain behaviours are inherited (e.g. personality, IQ) may not be helpful. People will believe that these behaviours cannot be change through the environment. This restricts the useful applications. Knowing that brain activity leads to behaviour (Sperry) is not helpful as it may suggest that there is no point in trying to change yourself if it is pre-determined. This has implications on criminal behaviour. If your brain is causing the behaviour, can you be blamed / responsible for it?
Conversely, a strength of the nurture side is that there are more practical and useful applications. It has relevance to the majority of people and helps our understanding on how human behaviour can be changed in a positive way. Chaney showed that positive reinforcement will encourage children to be more compliant with their medication. This shows that it is easy to adjust behaviour, by adjusting the situation rather than the difficulty / impossibility of change a person’s biology. However, simplicity does not automatically guarantee effectiveness.
However, it is impossible to study nature / nurture separately as they always influence together. There is never a 100% rate of a certain behaviour being nurtured, therefore other factors must play a role. Bandura showed an increase in imitation of aggressive behaviour in children after observing the same sex role model, but this was not 100%, which suggests that for some children in was in their nature whether to be aggressive or not. The problem with this reductionism is that it will mean that any intervention based on just the nurture side will be only partially effective, and will not work for all people, so an interactionist approach should be taken.
In conclusion, whilst Psychology tries to take an interactionist approach, but is often limited to the nurture viewpoint, as this leads to more methods to change behaviour and intervene.
A strength of the nature view is that this has useful applications. Identifying behaviours that are inherited or specific to the individual can help us to intervene. Casey showed that specific regions of the brain influence the ability to delay gratification, which helps us consider how the brain activity can be enhanced to help people to put off till later a desired thing. Taking this view prevents people being blamed for their behaviour, so they are more likely to co-operate with any intervention designed to change it. However, this does deny the possibility of culpability – people are not seen as responsible for their own behaviour.
Consequently a weakness of the nature view is that discovering that certain behaviours are inherited (e.g. personality, IQ) may not be helpful. People will believe that these behaviours cannot be change through the environment. This restricts the useful applications. Knowing that brain activity leads to behaviour (Sperry) is not helpful as it may suggest that there is no point in trying to change yourself if it is pre-determined. This has implications on criminal behaviour. If your brain is causing the behaviour, can you be blamed / responsible for it?
Conversely, a strength of the nurture side is that there are more practical and useful applications. It has relevance to the majority of people and helps our understanding on how human behaviour can be changed in a positive way. Chaney showed that positive reinforcement will encourage children to be more compliant with their medication. This shows that it is easy to adjust behaviour, by adjusting the situation rather than the difficulty / impossibility of change a person’s biology. However, simplicity does not automatically guarantee effectiveness.
However, it is impossible to study nature / nurture separately as they always influence together. There is never a 100% rate of a certain behaviour being nurtured, therefore other factors must play a role. Bandura showed an increase in imitation of aggressive behaviour in children after observing the same sex role model, but this was not 100%, which suggests that for some children in was in their nature whether to be aggressive or not. The problem with this reductionism is that it will mean that any intervention based on just the nurture side will be only partially effective, and will not work for all people, so an interactionist approach should be taken.
In conclusion, whilst Psychology tries to take an interactionist approach, but is often limited to the nurture viewpoint, as this leads to more methods to change behaviour and intervene.
Discuss the strengths and limitations of using the nature / nurture debate to explain human behaviour (15 marks)
Point: the nature side of the debate says that behaviour caused by innate characteristics
Explanation: which means
Example: The results / conclusions from a Core / Key Study which shows this is
Conclusion: Saying that behaviour is innate matters because
Challenge: However
Point: A strength of having the nature view is that it can be evidenced by objective research
Explanation: which means
Example: The results / conclusions from a Core / Key Study which shows this is
Conclusion: Using scientific methodologies matters because
Challenge: However
Point: A weakness of having the nature view is that it is reductionist
Explanation: which means
Example: The results / conclusions from a Core / Key Study which shows this is
Conclusion: Being reductionist is a problem because
Challenge: However, we normally want reductionist explanations, so that we can easily / quickly change unwanted behaviours.
Point: the nurture side of the debate says that behaviour is determined by the environment
Explanation: which means
Example: The results / conclusions from a Core / Key Study which shows this is
Conclusion: Saying that behaviour is environmentally determined matters because
Challenge: However
Point: A strength of having the nurture view is that it generate many different interventions for behaviour
Explanation: which means
Example: The results / conclusions from a Core / Key Study which shows this is
Conclusion: Developing many interventions matters because it allows the research to be useful
Challenge: However
Point: A weakness of having the nurture view is that it is harder to establish cause and effect
Explanation: which means
Example: The results / conclusions from a Core / Key Study which shows this is
Conclusion: This is a problem as we want to be able to see the cause and effects, so that we can
Challenge: However,
Explanation: which means
Example: The results / conclusions from a Core / Key Study which shows this is
Conclusion: Saying that behaviour is innate matters because
Challenge: However
Point: A strength of having the nature view is that it can be evidenced by objective research
Explanation: which means
Example: The results / conclusions from a Core / Key Study which shows this is
Conclusion: Using scientific methodologies matters because
Challenge: However
Point: A weakness of having the nature view is that it is reductionist
Explanation: which means
Example: The results / conclusions from a Core / Key Study which shows this is
Conclusion: Being reductionist is a problem because
Challenge: However, we normally want reductionist explanations, so that we can easily / quickly change unwanted behaviours.
Point: the nurture side of the debate says that behaviour is determined by the environment
Explanation: which means
Example: The results / conclusions from a Core / Key Study which shows this is
Conclusion: Saying that behaviour is environmentally determined matters because
Challenge: However
Point: A strength of having the nurture view is that it generate many different interventions for behaviour
Explanation: which means
Example: The results / conclusions from a Core / Key Study which shows this is
Conclusion: Developing many interventions matters because it allows the research to be useful
Challenge: However
Point: A weakness of having the nurture view is that it is harder to establish cause and effect
Explanation: which means
Example: The results / conclusions from a Core / Key Study which shows this is
Conclusion: This is a problem as we want to be able to see the cause and effects, so that we can
Challenge: However,
