Nature Vs Nurture and Its Impact on a Person’s Life

If a student excels in education, is it because they were more genetically inclined to prevail in their studies, or is it due to them being in a more advantageous position? If a man kills someone was it because he was born with violent tendencies, or did he learn by observing the behaviour of those around him. Is a person’s personality predestined before birth, or is it the way they are treated and their experiences that shape the person they become? The concept of nature versus nurture comes down to whether genetics or the environment plays the most important factor in the outcome of someone’s life.

The nature versus nurture debate was introduced by Sir Frances Galton – a psychologist in the late 1800s. The nature argument is that genes are an unchangeable blueprint, in you from birth that decides everything about the person you are. Many characteristics are controlled by your genes. Including your blood type, eye colour and hair colour. The nurture argument is that our environment is what makes us, us. It refers to the environments effect on our characteristics. For example, a person’s weight. Furthermore, some diseases are caused by a person’s environment. For example, Type Two Diabetes and Coronary Heart Disease. However, scientists have found a way to study specific people to see if it is nature or nurture that affects us the most.

There have been many experiments done throughout the years – mostly through the study of animals. Researcher Michael Meany is an example of this as he studied a group of rats to determine whether having a more affectionate mother affected how they acted with their children when they were older. He concluded that rats that had more loving mothers showed to be more caring towards their children. Whereas rats that grew up with less friendly and loving mothers showed the same characteristics with their children.

The effect genetics and the environment have on our characteristics has also been researched using identical twins. As identical twins have identical DNA, then in theory they would also have identical characteristics. The study follows that any differences between a pair of identical twins could be due to the influence of the environment on their characteristics. These studies have showed that many characteristics are influenced by both genetics and the environment.

As recently as 2015, researcher Dr. Beben Benyamin and researchers from the University of Amsterdam analysed approximately every twin study that has taken place throughout the past 50 years. “When visiting the nature vs nurture debate, there is overwhelming evidence that both genetic and environmental factors can influence traits and diseases,” said Dr. Beben Benyamin. “On average, about 50 percent of individual differences are genetic and 50 percent are environmental. Nonetheless, there were still exceptions so this statement. As when they looked at bipolar disorder, it was found that around a drastic seventy percent genetic and only thirty percent environmental factors were the cause of the disorder.

Additionally, observations in a newer field of study suggest that both the nature and nurture sides are partly accurate. This field is called epigenetics and it has to do with how nature and nurture interact. Lifestyle and environmental influences such as exercise, nutrition, stress and smoking can affect and change our genes. These altered genes can be inherited by future generations. So, epigenetics is the examination of heritable changes in our genes that are caused by lifestyle choices.

As seen from the essay, having a simple conclusion from all the nature vs. nurture studies would be very pleasing. Unfortunately, it isn’t that simple. An article I read about the nature-nurture debate stated, “the best predictors of an adopted child’s personality or mental health are found in the biological parents”. This shows how genetics do play a massive role in the outcome of someone’s characteristics and traits. However, the same article later states, “no behavioural traits are completely inherited, so you can’t leave the environment out altogether, either.” So, this would suggest that both a person’s nature and their life experiences go hand in hand in shaping the person they become. 

Works Cited

1. Galton, F. (1874). English men of science: Their nature and nurture. Nature, 9(214), 24-28.
2. Plomin, R., DeFries, J. C., & Loehlin, J. C. (1977). Genotype–environment interaction and correlation in the analysis of human behavior. Psychological Bulletin, 84(2), 309-322.
3. Turkheimer, E. (2000). Three laws of behavior genetics and what they mean. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 9(5), 160-164.
4. Rutter, M. (2006). Genes and behavior: Nature–nurture interplay explained. Blackwell Publishing.
5. Caspi, A., McClay, J., Moffitt, T. E., Mill, J., Martin, J., Craig, I. W., ... & Poulton, R. (2002). Role of genotype in the cycle of violence in maltreated children. Science, 297(5582), 851-854.
6. Plomin, R., DeFries, J. C., Knopik, V. S., & Neiderhiser, J. M. (2016). Top 10 replicated findings from behavioral genetics. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(1), 3-23.
7. Benyamin, B., & Martin, N. G. (2015). The nature versus nurture debate: 50 years of twin research in psychiatry. Journal of the American Medical Association, 313(21), 2179-2180.
8. Meaney, M. J. (2001). Nature, nurture, and the disunity of knowledge. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 935(1), 50-61.
9. Bateson, P., Barker, D., Clutton-Brock, T., Deb, D., D'Udine, B., Foley, R. A., ... & Sultan, S. E. (2004). Developmental plasticity and human health. Nature, 430(6998), 419-421.
10. Feinberg, A. P. (2007). Phenotypic plasticity and the epigenetics of human disease. Nature, 447(7143), 433-440.