Nature vs Nurture

Define the nature side of the debate

Nature suggests that behaviour is the result of genetics, hormones, brain structure, or other biological mechanisms.

Define the nurture side of the debate

Nurture argues that behaviour is shaped by our upbringing, culture, learning, and life experiences.

• You are made by your surroundings - e.g. parenting, peer pressure, education, trauma, etc.

Give examples that are close to the nature perspective

• Genetic explanation for OCD (psychopathology) - Theory suggests individuals may inherit vulnerability to OCD, possibly due to a faulty SERT gene affecting serotonin transport, leading to OCD symptoms.

• MOADA gene theory of aggression - This suggests the “warrior gene” variation in the MAOA gene, found in 1/3 of Western men, is linked to aggressive behaviour.

• Bowlby’s monotropic theory - The theory claims that for survival, babies are born with an innate need to form an attachment to a primary caregiver, the mother.

Give examples that are close to the nurture perspective

• Cupboard love theory - Babies develop an attachment to their mothers primarily because mothers provide food. Attachment is seen as a learned association between the mother and satisfaction of basic needs.

• Behaviour theories on Phobias - Phobias are acquired through associative learning; in traumatic experiences, a neutral stimulus becomes associated with fear.

• Ainsworth’s Attachment Styles - Suggests secure and insecure attachment styles develop from the mother’s sensitive responsiveness to the child’s needs.

What is the interactionist approach?

The interactionist approach is the view that both nature and nurture work together to shape human behaviour, rather than acting separately.
It recognises that biological and environmental factors interact and influence each other.

Give an example of interactionism

An example of interactionism is the diathesis-stress model

What is the diathesis-stress model in psychology, and how does it support the interactionist approach?

The diathesis-stress model explains behaviour as the result of an interaction between a genetic vulnerability (diathesis) and an environmental trigger (stress).
It supports the interactionist approach by showing that both nature and nurture are needed for certain behaviours or disorders to develop — one alone is not enough.

Example: A person may have a genetic risk for schizophrenia, but it only develops if they experience a traumatic event or drug use.

Evaluate the debate A03

A strength of the nature argument is that there is strong genetic evidence for psychological disorders. The MaTCH study, a meta-analysis of over 2,700 twin studies, involving over 14m twin pairs, found high concordance rates for mental disorders such as schizophrenia (0.76) and bipolar disorder (0.82), showing a significant hereditary component. This suggests that nature plays an important role in some behaviours, especially when concordance rates are consistently high across large samples. However, concordance rates never reach 100%, even in identical twins, which means that environmental influences must also contribute, supporting an interactionist view.

A limitation of the nature vs nurture debate is that it is often impossible to separate the effects of genetics and environment. The concept of constructivism suggests that people actively shape their own environment based on their innate characteristics. For example, a naturally aggressive child may choose to spend time with similarly aggressive peers, reinforcing their behaviour through experience. This is known as niche-picking and niche-building, and it shows that a person's environment is not entirely separate from their genetic tendencies. This supports the interactionist approach and highlights how difficult it is to judge the relative importance of nature or nurture, as the two constantly influence each other.

A strength of the debate is that some psychological approaches, such as the psychodynamic approach, support an interactionist view by recognising both nature and nurture. Freud believed that behaviour is influenced by innate biological drives (nature), such as aggression and sexual urges, but also shaped by early childhood experiences and family relationships (nurture). This shows that behaviour results from a complex mix of internal instincts and environmental influences, rather than being explained by just one factor.