1b. Evaluation of nature-nurture debate

based on research support

What is the opening sentence for research support and therefore external validity?

One discussion point to consider is whether the nature or nurture side of the debate has more research support and therefore external validity.

What is the P for whether the nature or nurture side of the debate has more research support and therefore external validity?

P = One strength of the nature side of the debate, is that it is supported by research evidence.

What is the E for whether the nature or nurture side of the debate has more research support and therefore external validity?

E= Evolutionary psychologists argue that humans are biologically predisposed to learn stimuli that have posed a survival threat in our ancestral past eg.fas ofsnakes, spiders, heights and enclosed spaces are common across many cultures. According to the concept of preparedness, humans have evolved to learn associations between dangerous stimuli and fear more easily than others because this increased the chances ot survival and reproduction. The passing on of such fears may also be epigenetic, as can be seen in the Dias and Ressler study where rats appeared to inherit a fear of a certain smell that their parents had been conditioned to fear.

What is the C for whether the nature or nurture side of the debate has more research support and therefore external validity?

C= This suggests a plausible explanation of why some phobias are widespread and appear to be innate and provides evidence for the external validity of a nature based approach.

What is the P counterargument for whether the nature or nurture side of the debate has more research support and therefore external validity?

P= However, the nurture side of the debate is also supported by research

What is the E counterargument for whether the nature or nurture side of the debate has more research support and therefore external validity?

E= Mowrer's behavioural explanation proposes a two process model of how phobias are acquired through classical conditioning and maintained through operant conditioning and environmental experiences shaping behaviour, For example, a person may develop a phobia of dogs (a neutralised stimulus) after being bitten by one, which is associated with an unconditioned stimulus, leading to the dog (a now being conditioned stimulus) creating fear in its own (a now conditionedr respons, if they then avoid dogs to reduce their anxiety, this would negatively reinforce further avoidance behaviour and continue fear.

What is the C counterargument for whether the nature or nurture side of the debate has more research support and therefore external validity?

C= This explanation demonstrates how learned experiences in the environment can lead to phobias and provides evidence for the external validity of a nurture-based approach, demonstrating how behaviours develop from interactions between our biology and environmert.

What is the opening sentence for whether or not the nature or nurture side of the debate has more practical applicability?

Another discussion point to consider is whether or not the nature or nurture side of the debate has more practical applicability.

What is the P for whether or not the nature or nurture side of the debate has more practical applicability?

P= One strength of the nature side of the debate, is that it can be applied in the real-world treatment of OCD.

What is the E for whether or not the nature or nurture side of the debate has more practical applicability?

E= Selective Serotenin Reuptake Inhibitors (SSRISs) work by increasing the availability of serotonin, a mood-regulating neurotransmitter, in certain brain areas. Many people with OCD symptoms, experience a reduction in them after taking SSRIs, with Soomroet al highlighting in their review that 70% of patients taking them experience a reduction in symptoms; this indicates that abnormalities in neurotransmitter functioning may contribute to the disorder and that biological, innate factors influence behaviour

What is the C for whether or not the nature or nurture side of the debate has more practical applicability?

C= The success of SSRIs in treating OCD suggests that the underlying serotonin explanation is externally valid and strengthens the nature- based explanation of behaviour.

What is the P counterargument for whether or not the nature or nurture side of the debate has more practical applicability?

P= However, the nurture side of the debate is also relevant in explaining and treating OCD.

What is the E counterargument for whether or not the nature or nurture side of the debate has more practical applicability?

E= Ellis ABC model suggests that an activating event (A) can generate irrationalbeliefs (B) and lead to consequences (C), such as emotional/behavioural disruption, showing how learned beliefs and thought processes can influence behaviour. In CBT for OCD, therapists help individuals identify and challenge their irrational beliefs that contribute to their obsessive thoughts and compulsive actions, with around 60-70% of patients experiencing a decrease in symptom severity after treatment. This shows that behaviour can be altered through leamingaid changes in cognitien resulting from environmental interventions.

What is the C counterargument for whether or not the nature or nurture side of the debate has more practical applicability?

C= So, the success of CBT and the ABC model supports the nurture side of the debate, as it demonstrates that behaviour is shaped by experiences rather than being entirely determined by biological, nature-based factors.