genie case study nature vs nurture

• Bipolar Disorder
• Therapy Center
• When To See a Therapist
• Types of Therapy
• Best Online Therapy
• Best Couples Therapy
• Best Family Therapy
• Managing Stress
• Sleep and Dreaming
• Understanding Emotions
• Self-Improvement
• Healthy Relationships
• Student Resources
• Personality Types
• Guided Meditations
• Verywell Mind Insights
• 2024 Verywell Mind 25
• Mental Health in the Classroom
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Review Board
• Crisis Support

The Story of Genie Wiley

What her tragic story revealed about language and development

Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Rachel Goldman, PhD FTOS, is a licensed psychologist, clinical assistant professor, speaker, wellness expert specializing in eating behaviors, stress management, and health behavior change.

Emily is a board-certified science editor who has worked with top digital publishing brands like Voices for Biodiversity, Study.com, GoodTherapy, Vox, and Verywell.

Who Was Genie Wiley?

Why was the genie wiley case so famous, did genie learn to speak, ethical concerns.

While there have been a number of cases of feral children raised in social isolation with little or no human contact, few have captured public and scientific attention, like that of Genie Wiley.

Genie spent almost her entire childhood locked in a bedroom, isolated, and abused for over a decade. Her case was one of the first to put the critical period theory to the test. Could a child reared in utter deprivation and isolation develop language? Could a nurturing environment make up for a horrifying past?

In order to understand Genie's story, it is important to look at what is known about her early life, the discovery of the abuse she had endured, and the subsequent efforts to treat and study her.

Early Life (1957-1970)

Genie's life prior to her discovery was one of utter deprivation. She spent most of her days tied naked to a potty chair, only able to move her hands and feet. When she made noise, her father would beat her. The rare times her father did interact with her, it was to bark or growl. Genie Wiley's brother, who was five years older than Genie, also suffered abuse under their father.

Discovery and Study (1970-1975)

Genie's story came to light on November 4, 1970, in Los Angeles, California. A social worker discovered the 13-year old girl after her mother sought out services for her own health. The social worker soon discovered that the girl had been confined to a small room, and an investigation by authorities quickly revealed that the child had spent most of her life in this room, often tied to a potty chair.

A Genie Wiley documentary was made in 1997 called "Secrets of the Wild Child." In it, Susan Curtiss, PhD, a linguist and researcher who worked with Genie, explained that the name Genie was used in case files to protect the girl's identity and privacy.

The case name is Genie. This is not the person's real name, but when we think about what a genie is, a genie is a creature that comes out of a bottle or whatever but emerges into human society past childhood. We assume that it really isn't a creature that had a human childhood.

Both parents were charged with abuse , but Genie's father died by suicide the day before he was due to appear in court, leaving behind a note stating that "the world will never understand."

The story of Genie's case soon spread, drawing attention from both the public and the scientific community. The case was important, said psycholinguist and author Harlan Lane, PhD, because "our morality doesn’t allow us to conduct deprivation experiments with human beings; these unfortunate people are all we have to go on."

With so much interest in her case, the question became what should be done to help her. A team of psychologists and language experts began the process of rehabilitating Genie.

The National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH) provided funding for scientific research on Genie’s case. Psychologist David Rigler, PhD, was part of the "Genie team" and he explained the process.

I think everybody who came in contact with her was attracted to her. She had a quality of somehow connecting with people, which developed more and more but was present, really, from the start. She had a way of reaching out without saying anything, but just somehow by the kind of look in her eyes, and people wanted to do things for her.

Genie's rehabilitation team also included graduate student Susan Curtiss and psychologist James Kent. Upon her initial arrival at UCLA, Genie weighed just 59 pounds and moved with a strange "bunny walk." She often spat and was unable to straighten her arms and legs. Silent, incontinent, and unable to chew, she initially seemed only able to recognize her own name and the word "sorry."

After assessing Genie's emotional and cognitive abilities, Kent described her as "the most profoundly damaged child I've ever seen … Genie's life is a wasteland." Her silence and inability to use language made it difficult to assess her mental abilities, but on tests, she scored at about the level of a 1-year-old.

Genie Wiley's Rehabilitation and the Forbidden Experiment

She soon began to rapidly progress in specific areas, quickly learning how to use the toilet and dress herself. Over the next few months, she began to experience more developmental progress but remained poor in areas such as language. She enjoyed going out on day trips outside of the hospital and explored her new environment with an intensity that amazed her caregivers and strangers alike.

Curtiss suggested that Genie had a strong ability to communicate nonverbally , often receiving gifts from total strangers who seemed to understand the young girl's powerful need to explore the world around her.

Psychiatrist Jay Shurley, MD, helped assess Genie after she was first discovered, and he noted that since situations like hers were so rare, she quickly became the center of a battle between the researchers involved in her case. Arguments over the research and the course of her treatment soon erupted. Genie occasionally spent the night at the home of Jean Butler, one of her teachers.

After an outbreak of measles, Genie was quarantined at her teacher's home. Butler soon became protective and began restricting access to Genie. Other members of the team felt that Butler's goal was to become famous from the case, at one point claiming that Butler had called herself the next Anne Sullivan, the teacher famous for helping Helen Keller learn to communicate.  

Genie was partially treated like an asset and an opportunity for recognition, significantly interfering with their roles, and the researchers fought with each other for access to their perceived power source.

Eventually, Genie was removed from Butler's care and went to live in the home of psychologist David Rigler, where she remained for the next four years. Despite some difficulties, she appeared to do well in the Rigler household. She enjoyed listening to classical music on the piano and loved to draw, often finding it easier to communicate through drawing than through other methods.

After Genie was discovered, a group of researchers began the process of rehabilitation. However, this work also coincided with research to study her ability to acquire and use language. These two interests led to conflicts in her treatment and between the researchers and therapists working on her case.

State Custody (1975-Present)

NIMH withdrew funding in 1974, due to the lack of scientific findings. Linguist Susan Curtiss had found that while Genie could use words, she could not produce grammar. She could not arrange these words in a meaningful way, supporting the idea of a critical period in language development.

Rigler's research was disorganized and largely anecdotal. Without funds to continue the research and care for Genie, she was moved from the Riglers' care.

In 1975, Genie returned to live with her birth mother. When her mother found the task too difficult, Genie was moved through a series of foster homes, where she was often subjected to further abuse and neglect .

Genie’s situation continued to worsen. After spending a significant amount of time in foster homes, she returned to Children’s Hospital. Unfortunately, the progress that had occurred during her first stay had been severely compromised by the subsequent treatment she received in foster care. Genie was afraid to open her mouth and had regressed back into silence.

Genie’s birth mother then sued the Children’s Hospital of Los Angeles and the research team, charging them with excessive testing. While the lawsuit was eventually settled, it raised important questions about the treatment and care of Genie. Did the research interfere with the girl's therapeutic treatment?

Psychiatrist Jay Shurley visited her on her 27th and 29th birthdays and characterized her as largely silent, depressed , and chronically institutionalized. Little is known about Genie's present condition, although an anonymous individual hired a private investigator to track her down in 2000 and described her as happy. But this contrasts with other reports.

Genie Wiley Today

Today, Genie Wiley's whereabouts are unknown; though, if she is still living, she is presumed to be a ward of the state of California, living in an adult care home. As of 2024, Genie would be 66-67 years old.

Part of the reason why Genie's case fascinated psychologists and linguists so deeply was that it presented a unique opportunity to study a hotly contested debate about language development.

Essentially, it boils down to the age-old nature versus nurture debate. Does genetics or environment play a greater role in the development of language?

Nativists believe that the capacity for language is innate, while empiricists suggest that environmental variables play a key role. Nativist Noam Chomsky suggested that acquiring language could not be fully explained by learning alone.

Instead, Chomsky proposed that children are born with a language acquisition device (LAD), an innate ability to understand the principles of language. Once exposed to language, the LAD allows children to learn the language at a remarkable pace.

Critical Periods

Linguist Eric Lenneberg suggests that like many other human behaviors, the ability to acquire language is subject to critical periods. A critical period is a limited span of time during which an organism is sensitive to external stimuli and capable of acquiring certain skills.

According to Lenneberg, the critical period for language acquisition lasts until around age 12. After the onset of puberty, he argued, the organization of the brain becomes set and no longer able to learn and use language in a fully functional manner.

Genie's case presented researchers with a unique opportunity. If given an enriched learning environment, could she overcome her deprived childhood and learn language even though she had missed the critical period?

If Genie could learn language, it would suggest that the critical period hypothesis of language development was wrong. If she could not, it would indicate that Lenneberg's theory was correct.

Despite scoring at the level of a 1-year-old upon her initial assessment, Genie quickly began adding new words to her vocabulary. She started by learning single words and eventually began putting two words together much the way young children do. Curtiss began to feel that Genie would be fully capable of acquiring language.

After a year of treatment, Genie started putting three words together occasionally. In children going through normal language development, this stage is followed by what is known as a language explosion. Children rapidly acquire new words and begin putting them together in novel ways.

Unfortunately, this never happened for Genie. Her language abilities remained stuck at this stage and she appeared unable to apply grammatical rules and use language in a meaningful way. At this point, her progress leveled off and her acquisition of new language halted.

While Genie was able to learn some language after puberty, her inability to use grammar (which Chomsky suggests is what separates human language from animal communication) offers evidence for the critical period hypothesis.

Of course, Genie's case is not so simple. Not only did she miss the critical period for learning language, but she was also horrifically abused. She was malnourished and deprived of cognitive stimulation for most of her childhood.

Researchers were also never able to fully determine if Genie had any pre-existing cognitive deficits. As an infant, a pediatrician had identified her as having some type of mental delay. So researchers were left to wonder whether Genie had experienced cognitive deficits caused by her years of abuse or if she had been born with some degree of intellectual disability.

There are many ethical concerns surrounding Genie's story. Arguments among those in charge of Genie's care and rehabilitation reflect some of these concerns.

"If you want to do rigorous science, then Genie's interests are going to come second some of the time. If you only care about helping Genie, then you wouldn't do a lot of the scientific research," suggested psycholinguist Harlan Lane in the NOVA documentary focused on her life.

In Genie's case, some of the researchers held multiple roles of caretaker-teacher-researcher-housemate. which, by modern standards, we would deem unethical. For example, the Riglers benefitted financially by taking Genie in (David received a large grant and was released from certain duties at the children's hospital without loss of pay). Butler also played a role in removing Genie from the Riglers' home, filing multiple complaints against him.

While Genie's story may be studied for its implications in our understanding of language acquisition and development, it is also a case that will continue to be studied over its serious ethical issues.

"I think future generations are going to study Genie's case not only for what it can teach us about human development but also for what it can teach us about the rewards and the risks of conducting 'the forbidden experiment,'" Lane explained.

Bottom Line

Genie Wiley's story perhaps leaves us with more questions than answers. Though it was difficult for Genie to learn language, she was able to communicate through body language, music, and art once she was in a safe home environment. Unfortunately, we don't know what her progress could have been had adequate care not been taken away from her.

Ultimately, her case is so important for the psychology and research field because we must learn from this experience not to revictimize and exploit the very people we set out to help. This is an important lesson because Genie's original abuse by her parents was perpetuated by the neglect and abandonment she faced later in her life. We must always strive to maintain objectivity and consider the best interest of the subject before our own.

Frequently Asked Questions

Genie, now in her 60s, is believed to be living in an adult care facility in California. Efforts by journalists to learn more about her location and current condition have been rejected by authorities due to confidentiality rules. Curtiss has also reported attempting to contact Genie without success.

Along with her husband, Irene Wiley was charged with abuse, but these charges were eventually dropped. Irene was blind and reportedly mentally ill, so it is believed that Genie's father was the child's primary caretaker. Genie's father, Clark Wiley, also abused his wife and other children. Two of the couple's children died in infancy under suspicious circumstances.

Genie's story suggests that the acquisition of language has a critical period of development. Her case is complex, however, since it is unclear if her language deficits were due to deprivation or if there was an underlying mental disability that played a role. The severe abuse she experienced may have also affected her mental development and language acquisition.

Collection of research materials related to linguistic-psychological studies of Genie (pseudonym) (collection 800) . UCLA Library Special Collections, Charles E. Young Research Library, University of California, Los Angeles.

Schoneberger T. Three myths from the language acquisition literature . Anal Verbal Behav. 2010;26(1):107–131. doi:10.1007/bf03393086

APA Dictionary of Psychology. Language acquisition device . American Psychological Association.

Vanhove J. The critical period hypothesis in second language acquisition: A statistical critique and a reanalysis .  PLoS One . 2013;8(7):e69172. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0069172

Carroll R. Starved, tortured, forgotten: Genie, the feral child who left a mark on researchers . The Guardian .

James SD. Raised by a tyrant, suffering a sibling's abuse . ABC News .

  NOVA . The secret of the wild child [transcript]. PBS,

Pines M. The civilizing of Genie. In: Kasper LF, ed., Teaching English Through the Disciplines: Psychology . Whittier.

Rolls G.  Classic Case Studies in Psychology (2nd ed.). Hodder Arnold.

Rymer R. Genie: A Scientific Tragedy.  Harper-Collins.

By Kendra Cherry, MSEd Kendra Cherry, MS, is a psychosocial rehabilitation specialist, psychology educator, and author of the "Everything Psychology Book."

Genie – The Feral Child

What do you think of when you hear the words, “feral child?” You might have come across a feral cat or feral dog at a shelter, but feral children are not anywhere near as common. They seem to only exist in stories, like The Jungle Book or Tarzan. You might be surprised to learn that not all feral children are raised in the wilderness by wolves or gorillas. Some modern cases of feral children, like the case of Genie, are still alive today. Genie’s story is one of mental health, forbidden experiments, and the failures of society to protect people who have been left behind.

Who Is Genie?

Genie was a child who was born healthy, but raised in an environment with severe neglect and abuse. Due to this, she was unable to learn how to speak and function in society. Genie is used as an example of feral child syndrome and has been studied in developmental psychology. 

Feral children may grow up in the wilderness, completely abandoned by their parents. They may also grow up in a home, like Genie did. Genie, born Susan Wiley, was born in April 1957 to parents Clark and Dorothy Wiley. Dorothy was 90% blind, and had migrated to California from Oklahoma during the Dust Bowl. Clark was the son of a brother owner, who had been bounced around from foster home to foster home his whole life.

Genie was born at a healthy weight and height. She had a five-year-old brother with allegedly no developmental disabilities. In her infancy, Genie appeared fairly normal. She was, however, diagnosed with a congenital hip dislocation. The issue resulted in Genie wearing a splint through her infancy and delays in walking. At the time, Genie’s father Clark believed that his child had mental disabilities, along with physical. Many psychologists believe that Clark felt that he had to protect Genie, partially explaining his horrific behavior later in Genie’s life. Others believe that Clark was delusional, spurred by intense feelings of rage and grief after the death of Clark’s mother. At 20 months old, Genie’s family moved into Clark’s mother’s home, and Genie was shielded from the world for the next 12 years.

(Her childhood home is featured on this Reddit post .)

Severe Neglect and Abuse

This isolation is what made Genie a “feral child.” During the day, Clark strapped Genie to a child’s toilet with a diaper and DIY straightjacket. At night, Genie was confined to a crib, bound by wires.

She failed to develop language, partially because she never attended formal education, but also partially because her father would growl and bark at Genie like a dog. If Genie (or any member of the family) were to make any sort of noise or fuss, Clark would beat them with a plank. Although Genie’s mother claimed that Clark would feed Genie three square meals a day, these meals consisted of baby food. Clark would spoon-feed Genie, sometimes rubbing her face in the food.

Clark ran his household like a cult, and was extremely paranoid. He continued to threaten his wife, and only allowed his son to leave the house to go to school. When his son came back to the house, he had to identify himself in various ways to be let in. Clark would sit in the living room with his shotgun on his lap, sometimes falling asleep in front of the front door with said shotgun.

When Genie’s brother was 18, he ran away from home. That year, Genie and her mother were allowed out of the house after a huge fight with Clark. Genie’s mother brought Genie into what she thought was a state office to apply for disabilities. Her near-blindness led her to the state social services office. Upon seeing Genie, who was severely malnourished and had a strange “bunny walk” (with her hands poised at her chest like a bunny,) employees thought that the girl was 6 or 7 - she was almost 14. Genie was taken into protective care and her parents were arrested.

Clark committed suicide before he could go to court and face his crimes. All charges against Genie’s mother were dropped after she cited that the abuse she suffered from Clark prevented her from being able to care for Genie. Her case made national headlines, and because she was a minor, her true name was never used in stories. Instead of Susan Wiley, the “Wild Child” became known as “Genie.”

Studies on Language Acquisition

One distinct feature of feral children is that they never develop a first language. Genie could only understand a handful of words when she first examined at the Children’s Hospital Los Angeles. Her ability to speak was limited further. Eerily, the two phrases linguists recorded her saying were “no more” and “stop it.”

Genie became infamous not only because her case was one of the most horrific incidents of child abuse in modern history, but also because her situation was known to psychologists as a “forbidden experiment.” At the time that Genie was rescued from her parents, Noam Chomsky’s theory of innateness was popular in the linguistic psychology world. Chomsky believed that humans have an innate ability to acquire language. His theory of universal grammar appeared to support the idea that language is wired into our brains. Think nature, rather than nurture.

This theory can be supported to a degree, but experts could not prove universal grammar or innate language acquisition through experiments with children. Isolating one child from language for the sake of a psychological study, much less enough children to prove the theory, is highly unethical. Genie provided researchers a unique chance to look at the way that language is developed or stunted due to nature or nurture. From the moment that Genie was rescued, she was examined. An entire team of researchers visited her for years, sometimes on a daily basis. They monitored her brain activity, observing that she had an estimated mental age of a 5- to 8-year-old. Her linguistic development was that of a 1- or 2-year-old. She exhibited bizarre behaviors, some that could be explained by her childhood and others that appeared to have no explanation. Many questions, including that of whether she really had a mental disability like her father suggested, have gone unanswered.

This is partially due to the custody battles and ethical questions that went on throughout Genie’s later teenage years. The first “foster home” that Genie had was the home of her special education teacher, Jean Butler. Butler butted heads with the scientists who were observing Genie throughout her teenage years. Some questioned Butler’s intentions, even recalling Butler saying that Genie could make Butler “the next Anne Sullivan.” (Anne Sullivan is known for being Helen Keller’s teacher. Their story has been told in countless movies.)

David Rigler, the chief psychologist at Children’s Hospital Los Angeles, took custody of her next. He observed her behavior and worked with her for many years. During this time, she was able to learn some sign language and communicate through drawings. But her foster care with David Rigler ended at the age of 18. Throughout her teens, Genie had been in contact with her mother. At 18, she moved back in with her mother. Genie’s father was dead, but living with her mother was not the happy ending that anyone would have hoped for. Within a year, Genie’s mother sued many of the researchers involved in Genie’s case. She claimed that the researchers had crossed boundaries, breached confidentiality agreements, and overworked Genie. The next year, her mother forbade any of the research team from interacting with or studying Genie. But she also relinquished care of Genie, leaving her to be bounced around from foster home to foster home. When the researchers did try to reach out or find Genie, they were often disappointed to hear that she was not making the progress that she had been making as a teenager.

Where Is Genie Now?

Genie is only in her 60s now. She remains a ward of the state, and has not been in direct contact with the researchers that studied and took care of her after her rescue. Investigators who looked into her well-being reported back that she was happy, and although she didn’t use much verbal communication, she did take to sign language.

Still Many Questions to Be Answered

When Genie was rescued in the 1970s, researchers jumped at the opportunity to work with a “forbidden experiment.” Their passion for the research, and their eventual attachment and care for Genie, ultimately ended in unfinished work and estrangement from Genie. To this day, one researcher has repeatedly tried to make contact with her. Many researchers were drawn to Genie’s charisma, despite her being nonverbal and developmentally delayed due to severe childhood trauma.

What does Genie’s case say about innate language acquisition? It depends on who you ask. Some say that her case is evidence for innate language acquisitions . Others argue that the case supports the critical-period hypothesis, which argues that we can “tap into” our innate ability to acquire language, but only during a specific period of development.

Nature vs. Nurture

What about nature vs. nurture ? The jury is out on this one, too. Although the cruelty and trauma endured by Genie undoubtedly slowed her development, other research argues that her developmental disabilities were also due to her genetic makeup. If she did have mental and developmental disabilities, like her father believed as an infant, the impact of his cruelty would be a less prominent factor in her delays.

Genie is far from the only case of recent feral children, but is one of the most infamous. Her case also shows that issues of ethics and great debates in psychology are more blurry than they appear on paper.

Related posts:

• G. Stanley Hall Biography - Contributions To Psychology
• 47+ Social Problem Examples (Issues In Society)
• Beth Thomas - Child Of Rage
• Trust vs Mistrust (Psychosocial Stage 1 Examples)
• 37+ Instructional Strategies (Examples + Quizzes)

Reference this article:

About The Author

Free Personality Test

Free Memory Test

Free IQ Test

PracticalPie.com is a participant in the Amazon Associates Program. As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

Follow Us On:

Youtube Facebook Instagram X/Twitter

Psychology Resources

Developmental

Personality

Relationships

Psychologists

Serial Killers

Psychology Tests

Personality Quiz

Memory Test

Depression test

Type A/B Personality Test

© PracticalPsychology. All rights reserved

Privacy Policy | Terms of Use

• Request new password

You are here

The case of genie relating to developmental psychology.

• afeltrin's blog

Perfect Paragraphs

Each week, post your own Perfect Paragraph and comment on three Perfect Paragraphs . Suggest improvements. Don't just say "Looks good."

Recent comments

• Comments   5 years 1 week ago
• Feedback   5 years 1 week ago
• Descriptive words   5 years 1 week ago
• Sentences   5 years 1 week ago
• Suggestion   5 years 1 week ago

Blogs Updated This Week

• angelinamart
• cnwokemodoih
• cynthiaguzma
• danielnguyen
• ddoyleperkin
• nalexandroum
• rdigregorio

• Science & Math
• Sociology & Philosophy
• Law & Politics

Genie the Wild Child Analysis & Behavior

• Genie the Wild Child Analysis…

Developmental Issues

Genie is socially, cognitively and physically developmentally delayed.  Due to her severe isolation she has never learned to vocalize. Although she can visualize it is as if she has no sight due to the severe confinement she experienced. She displays physical oddities including walking like a bunny and spitting, due to her incapability to chew.

For these ten years of solitary internment, Genie lived a severely malnourished lifestyle. Improper meals were forced into her body prohibiting Genie from cognitive and physical growth. Abused and unloved, this tragic and strange case illustrates the extreme importance of critical and sensitive periods.

The critical and sensitive periods indicate the ideal time frame for language and motor development, after which further development becomes more difficult and effortful to acquire.  Genie was isolated for the first ten years of her life; these are the most crucial years for developing ‘normally’.

Nature and Nurture

Human beings need nurture in order to develop their full potential. Nature happens organically but nurture is how humans develop their personality, behaviour and intelligence. Humans are hardwired by nature and have the capability to develop fully but are restricted if proper nurture is not given. 

The time and attention that is essential for proper development was absent for most of Genies childhood. All humans are biologically given the capability to acquire a new language, but Genie, at 13 years of age, can barely utter or understand a word. This indicates that although certain cognitive and behavioral skills are hardwired (nature), they must be enriched through the practice of loving and caring nurture.

Can anything be done to Help Genie?

Genie requires human contact and schooling. She needs to have psychological counseling and occupational rehabilitation to learn how to do simple tasks, such as eating, walking and speaking. Genie missed her most sensitive periods for functional development. Fortunately, for Genie language and motor acquisition can still be learned but at a slower pace than most 13-year-olds.

There is hope that Genie will be able to function as a normal individual, but that day is somewhere down the road. The critical and sensitive periods indicate the ideal time frame for language and motor development, after which further development becomes more difficult and effortful to acquire. There is hope that Genie will be able to function as a normal individual, but that day is somewhere down the road.

Related Posts

• Essay Analysis Structure
• Plato’s Crito: Analysis
• ‘Love's Philosophy' by Percy Bysshe Shelley: Analysis
• Call of the Wild: Buck Character Analysis
• Call of the Wild: Summary & Analysis

Author:  William Anderson (Schoolworkhelper Editorial Team)

Tutor and Freelance Writer. Science Teacher and Lover of Essays. Article last reviewed: 2022 | St. Rosemary Institution © 2010-2024 | Creative Commons 4.0

Genie was never a ‘wild child’. A so-called ‘wild child’ is a child abandoned, separated from her/his parents or orphaned, then ‘brought up’ (i.e cared for and fed) by ‘wild animals’, the most prominent being dogs or wolves. Genie was purposefully neglected and abused by a domineering father. Genie was never ‘mentally retarded’ either. It is clear from details of her history that, had she spent her early years in a comparatively ‘normal’ household, she might have grown up to be a beautiful, clever and accomplished woman. The recordings we have of her clearly show her beauty and charisma. Unfortunately, she fell victim to something called ‘modern scientific psychology’ (whatever that is) and a domineering and vindictive mother. The world lost a really cool human being…

she was abused

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Post comment

Social Learning Theory Relation to Genie Wiley’s Case Report

Introduction, the contributions of nature and nurture, the application of the theory.

• Critical Period for Language Development

Ethical Issues in Research

What could have been done differently.

While research ethics are very sensitive in human development research (particularly in children), there has been significant progress in the research on language acquisition in children and the “window” of learning opportunity. Through the research, scientists have been enlightened further on the role of nature and nurture in child development. Cases such as Genie’s, and hundreds of other undocumented cases of feral children have helped psychologists, and scientists better understand the biological and emotional needs of humans at different stages of their development. Given the vast amount of information currently available on child development, it is compelling to view Bandura’s line of thought to be more accurate in Genie Wiley’s case. This report seeks to relate the social learning theory to Genie Wiley’s case and investigate the contributions of nature and nurture to some of her behaviors and social interactions.

Undoubtedly, nature and nurture had a tremendous, lifelong, and damaging impact on Genie’s development in all aspects. The total isolation from society and the absolute absence of active conversation deprived her of the opportunity to communicate with others and learn about the environment, thwarted her psychological progress, and inflicted irreparable physical harm. In particular, because of the adverse circumstances, her brain appeared to be impaired and decreased in size, which significantly restricted her cognitive abilities responsible for memorizing, logic, attention, and learning from experience (Christie and Weston, 2002, 0:25:25- 0:25:50). She also possessed exceedingly impulsive and unstable behavior and mood and was inclined to harm herself physically. As a result, Genie always experiences severe difficulties in interactions with other people, including peers, and the exploration of the surrounding world.

The social learning theory can be one of the effective approaches to explain Genie Wiley’s case. In essence, this theory states that young children, typically learn behaviors via imitation from other individuals, especially parents, relatives, and friend who serves as a role-model (Lumen Learning, 2017). Furthermore, Bandura, a founder of the hypothesis, supposes that media is also a powerful social influencer that can foster and cultivate particular behavioral patterns (Lumen Learning, 2017). Hence, since Genie was devoid of a healthy social environment and their biological and emotional needs were predominantly neglected by her parents until the age of 13, she did not have illustrative behavioral examples. For instance, the girl did not realize a need to learn a language, get food or other livelihoods, and converse with other individuals.

Urie Bronfenbrenner presented a model that brought all the influences of human development together. Unlike Piaget, Bronfenbrenner recognized the role played by culture and interactions in human development (Lumen Learning, 2017). Additionally, the individual’s social development is affected by microsystems, including parents and siblings, those in direct contact with the individual. The mesosystem, which consists of school, the individual’s family, and religion, also influence the behavioral development of an individual (Lumen Learning, 2017). Genie’s case agrees with Bronfenbrenner’s model in that after her seclusion from the normal environment, she was unable to learn the culture, language, trends, as well as her behavioral development.

Genie’s development under scientists Susan Curtiss and James Kent disapproved the theory that there is a critical period for language development in humans. Being thirteen and a half years old at the time of her rescue, Genie was well past the “window” of learning opportunities. For scientists, this was the case they had been seeking since Genie was just like a feral child who had never been taught to speak or associate with anyone (Christie and Weston, 2002, 0:20:49 – 0:20:54). Genie was not only learning necessary words about everything around her but also engaged with people and was interested in the surrounding world. Overall, as Curtiss stated, the girl managed to learn hundreds of new words and made impressive progress in her understanding of others (Christie and Weston, 2002, 0:24:07 – 0:25:15). However, at a point, Genie’s traumatic upbringing affected her learning, halting her progress in learning language and relating to her environment.

On the other hand, as it appeared later, Genie’s traumatic upbringing affected her learning, halting her progress in learning language and relating to her environment. Therefore, while Genie’s case disapproved of the theory to some extent, it also supported the theory when she could not make any further noticeable advancement in her language acquisition. According to modern scientific research, Genie had already reached her teenage age, and her brain being starved of stimulation, never developed enough capacity to learn a language (Christie and Weston, 2002, 0:26:02 – 0:26:22). Thus, although the hypothesis of the critical period for language development has been significantly questioned, it still makes sense and requires further, more in-depth examination.

Genie’s case serves as an excellent example of controversial ethical issues that frequently occur in research. In particular, because of the considerable number of people involved in her life, the local government assumed that such overactive social activity, especially the close attention of academic specialists, can harm her psychological state. As a result, they decided to limit the circle of her social interactions and settle her in one adult care home in Los Angeles (Christie and Weston, 2002, 0:28:26 – 0:28:35). Overall, this shows apparent contradictions between the scientific community’s strive to study particular issues and the public precautions and misunderstandings.

The errors that led to the deterioration of Genie’s mental condition are primarily connected with the government’s decisions. After being moved back to the house where she had been terribly abused by her mother Irene and then taken under the care of the local government, Genie’s chance to improve her condition deteriorated (Christie and Weston, 2002, 0:26:52- 0:27:08). She was barred from seeing the people who were central to her recovery, being moved from home to home. For her welfare and scientific progress, Genie should have been kept under the watch of the people who meant much to her cognitive improvement. Only the respective social and health experts and professionals can provide necessary, adequate, and qualified support for the rapid recovery and healthy development of Genie Wiley.

The paper has examined Genie Wiley’s case, including the contributions of nature and nurture to her development, through the prism of the social learning theory and Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems model. The total isolation from society and other privations to her psychological progress inflicted irreparable physical harm. Genie’s case correlates with Bandura’s theory and Bronfenbrenner’s model in that her seclusion from the healthy environment adversely affected her all abilities. Although the hypothesis of the critical period for Language Development has been almost disapproved, it still makes sense and requires further, more in-depth examination. Finally, Genie should stay with experts who can deliver qualified support for rapid recovery and socialization.

Christie, D. (Producer) & Weston, J (Director). (2002). Wild child: The story of feral children . Web.

Lumen Learning. (2017). Lifespan development . In N. Walker and F. Bobola (Eds.). Web.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2023, November 1). Social Learning Theory Relation to Genie Wiley’s Case. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-learning-theory-relation-to-genie-wileys-case/

"Social Learning Theory Relation to Genie Wiley’s Case." IvyPanda , 1 Nov. 2023, ivypanda.com/essays/social-learning-theory-relation-to-genie-wileys-case/.

IvyPanda . (2023) 'Social Learning Theory Relation to Genie Wiley’s Case'. 1 November.

IvyPanda . 2023. "Social Learning Theory Relation to Genie Wiley’s Case." November 1, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-learning-theory-relation-to-genie-wileys-case/.

1. IvyPanda . "Social Learning Theory Relation to Genie Wiley’s Case." November 1, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-learning-theory-relation-to-genie-wileys-case/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "Social Learning Theory Relation to Genie Wiley’s Case." November 1, 2023. https://ivypanda.com/essays/social-learning-theory-relation-to-genie-wileys-case/.

• Copyright and Patents: Kirtsaeng v. John Wiley & Sons
• Medgar Wiley Evers in the Civil Rights Movement
• Ethical Understandings and Critical Thinking in Education
• Parent-School Communication
• Coronavirus on Education: Technology as Means of Temporary Substitution
• Interventions for Patients Scoring High in Delirium Scale
• Art Integration and Cognitive Development

Studying Adolescent Psychology

The forbidden experiment.

• Feral Children. Provided by : Wikipedia. Located at : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feral_child . License : CC BY: Attribution

Privacy Policy

Nature vs. Nurture Debate In Psychology

Saul Mcleod, PhD

Editor-in-Chief for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MRes, PhD, University of Manchester

Saul Mcleod, PhD., is a qualified psychology teacher with over 18 years of experience in further and higher education. He has been published in peer-reviewed journals, including the Journal of Clinical Psychology.

Learn about our Editorial Process

Olivia Guy-Evans, MSc

Associate Editor for Simply Psychology

BSc (Hons) Psychology, MSc Psychology of Education

Olivia Guy-Evans is a writer and associate editor for Simply Psychology. She has previously worked in healthcare and educational sectors.

On This Page:

The nature vs. nurture debate in psychology concerns the relative importance of an individual’s innate qualities (nature) versus personal experiences (nurture) in determining or causing individual differences in physical and behavioral traits. While early theories favored one factor over the other, contemporary views recognize a complex interplay between genes and environment in shaping behavior and development.

Key Takeaways

• Nature is what we think of as pre-wiring and is influenced by genetic inheritance and other biological factors.
• Nurture is generally taken as the influence of external factors after conception, e.g., the product of exposure, life experiences, and learning on an individual.
• Behavioral genetics has enabled psychology to quantify the relative contribution of nature and nurture concerning specific psychological traits.
• Instead of defending extreme nativist or nurturist views, most psychological researchers are now interested in investigating how nature and nurture interact in a host of qualitatively different ways.
• For example, epigenetics is an emerging area of research that shows how environmental influences affect the expression of genes.

The nature-nurture debate is concerned with the relative contribution that both influences make to human behavior, such as personality, cognitive traits, temperament and psychopathology.

Examples of Nature vs. Nurture

Nature vs. nurture in child development.

In child development, the nature vs. nurture debate is evident in the study of language acquisition . Researchers like Chomsky (1957) argue that humans are born with an innate capacity for language (nature), known as universal grammar, suggesting that genetics play a significant role in language development.

Conversely, the behaviorist perspective, exemplified by Skinner (1957), emphasizes the role of environmental reinforcement and learning (nurture) in language acquisition.

Twin studies have provided valuable insights into this debate, demonstrating that identical twins raised apart may share linguistic similarities despite different environments, suggesting a strong genetic influence (Bouchard, 1979)

However, environmental factors, such as exposure to language-rich environments, also play a crucial role in language development, highlighting the intricate interplay between nature and nurture in child development.

Nature vs. Nurture in Personality Development

The nature vs. nurture debate in personality psychology centers on the origins of personality traits. Twin studies have shown that identical twins reared apart tend to have more similar personalities than fraternal twins, indicating a genetic component to personality (Bouchard, 1994).

However, environmental factors, such as parenting styles, cultural influences, and life experiences, also shape personality.

For example, research by Caspi et al. (2003) demonstrated that a particular gene (MAOA) can interact with childhood maltreatment to increase the risk of aggressive behavior in adulthood.

This highlights that genetic predispositions and environmental factors contribute to personality development, and their interaction is complex and multifaceted.

Nature vs. Nurture in Mental Illness Development

The nature vs. nurture debate in mental health explores the etiology of depression. Genetic studies have identified specific genes associated with an increased vulnerability to depression, indicating a genetic component (Sullivan et al., 2000).

However, environmental factors, such as adverse life events and chronic stress during childhood, also play a significant role in the development of depressive disorders (Dube et al.., 2002; Keller et al., 2007)

The diathesis-stress model posits that individuals inherit a genetic predisposition (diathesis) to a disorder, which is then activated or exacerbated by environmental stressors (Monroe & Simons, 1991).

This model illustrates how nature and nurture interact to influence mental health outcomes.

Nature vs. Nurture of Intelligence

The nature vs. nurture debate in intelligence examines the relative contributions of genetic and environmental factors to cognitive abilities.

Intelligence is highly heritable, with about 50% of variance in IQ attributed to genetic factors, based on studies of twins, adoptees, and families (Plomin & Spinath, 2004).

Heritability of intelligence increases with age, from about 20% in infancy to as high as 80% in adulthood, suggesting amplifying effects of genes over time.

However, environmental influences, such as access to quality education and stimulating environments, also significantly impact intelligence.

Shared environmental influences like family background are more influential in childhood, whereas non-shared experiences are more important later in life.

Research by Flynn (1987) showed that average IQ scores have increased over generations, suggesting that environmental improvements, known as the Flynn effect , can lead to substantial gains in cognitive abilities.

Molecular genetics provides tools to identify specific genes and understand their pathways and interactions. However, progress has been slow for complex traits like intelligence. Identified genes have small effect sizes (Plomin & Spinath, 2004).

Overall, intelligence results from complex interplay between genes and environment over development. Molecular genetics offers promise to clarify these mechanisms. The nature vs nurture debate is outdated – both play key roles.

Nativism (Extreme Nature Position)

It has long been known that certain physical characteristics are biologically determined by genetic inheritance.

Color of eyes, straight or curly hair, pigmentation of the skin, and certain diseases (such as Huntingdon’s chorea) are all a function of the genes we inherit.

These facts have led many to speculate as to whether psychological characteristics such as behavioral tendencies, personality attributes, and mental abilities are also “wired in” before we are even born.

Those who adopt an extreme hereditary position are known as nativists.  Their basic assumption is that the characteristics of the human species as a whole are a product of evolution and that individual differences are due to each person’s unique genetic code.

In general, the earlier a particular ability appears, the more likely it is to be under the influence of genetic factors. Estimates of genetic influence are called heritability.

Examples of extreme nature positions in psychology include Chomsky (1965), who proposed language is gained through the use of an innate language acquisition device. Another example of nature is Freud’s theory of aggression as being an innate drive (called Thanatos).

Characteristics and differences that are not observable at birth, but which emerge later in life, are regarded as the product of maturation. That is to say, we all have an inner “biological clock” which switches on (or off) types of behavior in a pre-programmed way.

The classic example of the way this affects our physical development are the bodily changes that occur in early adolescence at puberty.

However, nativists also argue that maturation governs the emergence of attachment in infancy , language acquisition , and even cognitive development .

Empiricism (Extreme Nurture Position)

At the other end of the spectrum are the environmentalists – also known as empiricists (not to be confused with the other empirical/scientific  approach ).

Their basic assumption is that at birth, the human mind is a tabula rasa (a blank slate) and that this is gradually “filled” as a result of experience (e.g., behaviorism ).

From this point of view, psychological characteristics and behavioral differences that emerge through infancy and childhood are the results of learning.  It is how you are brought up (nurture) that governs the psychologically significant aspects of child development and the concept of maturation applies only to the biological.

For example, Bandura’s (1977) social learning theory states that aggression is learned from the environment through observation and imitation. This is seen in his famous bobo doll experiment (Bandura, 1961).

Also, Skinner (1957) believed that language is learned from other people via behavior-shaping techniques.

Evidence for Nature

• Biological Approach
• Biology of Gender
• Medical Model

Freud (1905) stated that events in our childhood have a great influence on our adult lives, shaping our personality.

He thought that parenting is of primary importance to a child’s development , and the family as the most important feature of nurture was a common theme throughout twentieth-century psychology (which was dominated by environmentalists’ theories).

Behavioral Genetics

Researchers in the field of behavioral genetics study variation in behavior as it is affected by genes, which are the units of heredity passed down from parents to offspring.

“We now know that DNA differences are the major systematic source of psychological differences between us. Environmental effects are important but what we have learned in recent years is that they are mostly random – unsystematic and unstable – which means that we cannot do much about them.” Plomin (2018, xii)

Behavioral genetics has enabled psychology to quantify the relative contribution of nature and nurture with regard to specific psychological traits. One way to do this is to study relatives who share the same genes (nature) but a different environment (nurture). Adoption acts as a natural experiment which allows researchers to do this.

Empirical studies have consistently shown that adoptive children show greater resemblance to their biological parents, rather than their adoptive, or environmental parents (Plomin & DeFries, 1983; 1985).

Another way of studying heredity is by comparing the behavior of twins, who can either be identical (sharing the same genes) or non-identical (sharing 50% of genes). Like adoption studies, twin studies support the first rule of behavior genetics; that psychological traits are extremely heritable, about 50% on average.

The Twins in Early Development Study (TEDS) revealed correlations between twins on a range of behavioral traits, such as personality (empathy and hyperactivity) and components of reading such as phonetics (Haworth, Davis, Plomin, 2013; Oliver & Plomin, 2007; Trouton, Spinath, & Plomin, 2002).

Implications

Jenson (1969) found that the average I.Q. scores of black Americans were significantly lower than whites he went on to argue that genetic factors were mainly responsible – even going so far as to suggest that intelligence is 80% inherited.

The storm of controversy that developed around Jenson’s claims was not mainly due to logical and empirical weaknesses in his argument. It was more to do with the social and political implications that are often drawn from research that claims to demonstrate natural inequalities between social groups.

For many environmentalists, there is a barely disguised right-wing agenda behind the work of the behavioral geneticists.  In their view, part of the difference in the I.Q. scores of different ethnic groups are due to inbuilt biases in the methods of testing.

More fundamentally, they believe that differences in intellectual ability are a product of social inequalities in access to material resources and opportunities.  To put it simply children brought up in the ghetto tend to score lower on tests because they are denied the same life chances as more privileged members of society.

Now we can see why the nature-nurture debate has become such a hotly contested issue.  What begins as an attempt to understand the causes of behavioral differences often develops into a politically motivated dispute about distributive justice and power in society.

What’s more, this doesn’t only apply to the debate over I.Q.  It is equally relevant to the psychology of sex and gender , where the question of how much of the (alleged) differences in male and female behavior is due to biology and how much to culture is just as controversial.

Polygenic Inheritance

Rather than the presence or absence of single genes being the determining factor that accounts for psychological traits, behavioral genetics has demonstrated that multiple genes – often thousands, collectively contribute to specific behaviors.

Thus, psychological traits follow a polygenic mode of inheritance (as opposed to being determined by a single gene). Depression is a good example of a polygenic trait, which is thought to be influenced by around 1000 genes (Plomin, 2018).

This means a person with a lower number of these genes (under 500) would have a lower risk of experiencing depression than someone with a higher number.

The Nature of Nurture

Nurture assumes that correlations between environmental factors and psychological outcomes are caused environmentally. For example, how much parents read with their children and how well children learn to read appear to be related. Other examples include environmental stress and its effect on depression.

However, behavioral genetics argues that what look like environmental effects are to a large extent really a reflection of genetic differences (Plomin & Bergeman, 1991).

People select, modify and create environments correlated with their genetic disposition. This means that what sometimes appears to be an environmental influence (nurture) is a genetic influence (nature).

So, children that are genetically predisposed to be competent readers, will be happy to listen to their parents read them stories, and be more likely to encourage this interaction.

Interaction Effects

However, in recent years there has been a growing realization that the question of “how much” behavior is due to heredity and “how much” to the environment may itself be the wrong question.

Take intelligence as an example. Like almost all types of human behavior, it is a complex, many-sided phenomenon which reveals itself (or not!) in a great variety of ways.

The “how much” question assumes that psychological traits can all be expressed numerically and that the issue can be resolved in a quantitative manner.

Heritability statistics revealed by behavioral genetic studies have been criticized as meaningless, mainly because biologists have established that genes cannot influence development independently of environmental factors; genetic and nongenetic factors always cooperate to build traits. The reality is that nature and culture interact in a host of qualitatively different ways (Gottlieb, 2007; Johnston & Edwards, 2002).

Instead of defending extreme nativist or nurturist views, most psychological researchers are now interested in investigating how nature and nurture interact.

For example, in psychopathology , this means that both a genetic predisposition and an appropriate environmental trigger are required for a mental disorder to develop. For example, epigenetics state that environmental influences affect the expression of genes.

What is Epigenetics?

Epigenetics is the term used to describe inheritance by mechanisms other than through the DNA sequence of genes. For example, features of a person’s physical and social environment can effect which genes are switched-on, or “expressed”, rather than the DNA sequence of the genes themselves.

Stressors and memories can be passed through small RNA molecules to multiple generations of offspring in ways that meaningfully affect their behavior.

One such example is what is known as the Dutch Hunger Winter, during last year of the Second World War. What they found was that children who were in the womb during the famine experienced a life-long increase in their chances of developing various health problems compared to children conceived after the famine.

Epigenetic effects can sometimes be passed from one generation to the next, although the effects only seem to last for a few generations. There is some evidence that the effects of the Dutch Hunger Winter affected grandchildren of women who were pregnant during the famine.

Therefore, it makes more sense to say that the difference between two people’s behavior is mostly due to hereditary factors or mostly due to environmental factors.

This realization is especially important given the recent advances in genetics, such as polygenic testing.  The Human Genome Project, for example, has stimulated enormous interest in tracing types of behavior to particular strands of DNA located on specific chromosomes.

If these advances are not to be abused, then there will need to be a more general understanding of the fact that biology interacts with both the cultural context and the personal choices that people make about how they want to live their lives.

There is no neat and simple way of unraveling these qualitatively different and reciprocal influences on human behavior.

Epigenetics: Licking Rat Pups

Michael Meaney and his colleagues at McGill University in Montreal, Canada conducted the landmark epigenetic study on mother rats licking and grooming their pups.

This research found that the amount of licking and grooming received by rat pups during their early life could alter their epigenetic marks and influence their stress responses in adulthood.

Pups that received high levels of maternal care (i.e., more licking and grooming) had a reduced stress response compared to those that received low levels of maternal care.

Meaney’s work with rat maternal behavior and its epigenetic effects has provided significant insights into the understanding of early-life experiences, gene expression, and adult behavior.

It underscores the importance of the early-life environment and its long-term impacts on an individual’s mental health and stress resilience.

Epigenetics: The Agouti Mouse Study

Waterland and Jirtle’s 2003 study on the Agouti mouse is another foundational work in the field of epigenetics that demonstrated how nutritional factors during early development can result in epigenetic changes that have long-lasting effects on phenotype.

In this study, they focused on a specific gene in mice called the Agouti viable yellow (A^vy) gene. Mice with this gene can express a range of coat colors, from yellow to mottled to brown.

This variation in coat color is related to the methylation status of the A^vy gene: higher methylation is associated with the brown coat, and lower methylation with the yellow coat.

Importantly, the coat color is also associated with health outcomes, with yellow mice being more prone to obesity, diabetes, and tumorigenesis compared to brown mice.

Waterland and Jirtle set out to investigate whether maternal diet, specifically supplementation with methyl donors like folic acid, choline, betaine, and vitamin B12, during pregnancy could influence the methylation status of the A^vy gene in offspring.

Key findings from the study include:

Dietary Influence : When pregnant mice were fed a diet supplemented with methyl donors, their offspring had an increased likelihood of having the brown coat color. This indicated that the supplemented diet led to an increased methylation of the A^vy gene.

Health Outcomes : Along with the coat color change, these mice also had reduced risks of obesity and other health issues associated with the yellow phenotype.

Transgenerational Effects : The study showed that nutritional interventions could have effects that extend beyond the individual, affecting the phenotype of the offspring.

The implications of this research are profound. It highlights how maternal nutrition during critical developmental periods can have lasting effects on offspring through epigenetic modifications, potentially affecting health outcomes much later in life.

The study also offers insights into how dietary and environmental factors might contribute to disease susceptibility in humans.

Bandura, A. Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. (1961). Transmission of aggression through the imitation of aggressive models. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology , 63, 575-582

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory . Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Bouchard, T. J. (1994). Genes, Environment, and Personality. Science, 264 (5166), 1700-1701.

Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment. Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Loss . New York: Basic Books.

Caspi, A., Sugden, K., Moffitt, T. E., Taylor, A., Craig, I. W., Harrington, H., … & Poulton, R. (2003). Influence of life stress on depression: moderation by a polymorphism in the 5-HTT gene.  Science ,  301 (5631), 386-389.

Chomsky, N. (1957). Syntactic structures. Mouton de Gruyter.

Chomsky, N. (1965). Aspects of the theory of syntax . MIT Press.

Dube, S. R., Anda, R. F., Felitti, V. J., Edwards, V. J., & Croft, J. B. (2002). Adverse childhood experiences and personal alcohol abuse as an adult.  Addictive Behaviors ,  27 (5), 713-725.

Flynn, J. R. (1987). Massive IQ gains in 14 nations: What IQ tests really measure.  Psychological Bulletin ,  101 (2), 171.

Freud, S. (1905). Three essays on the theory of sexuality . Se, 7.

Galton, F. (1883). Inquiries into human faculty and its development . London: J.M. Dent & Co.

Gottlieb, G. (2007). Probabilistic epigenesis.   Developmental Science, 10 , 1–11.

Haworth, C. M., Davis, O. S., & Plomin, R. (2013). Twins Early Development Study (TEDS): a genetically sensitive investigation of cognitive and behavioral development from childhood to young adulthood . Twin Research and Human Genetics, 16(1) , 117-125.

Jensen, A. R. (1969). How much can we boost I.Q. and scholastic achievement? Harvard Educational Review, 33 , 1-123.

Johnston, T. D., & Edwards, L. (2002). Genes, interactions, and the development of behavior . Psychological Review , 109, 26–34.

Keller, M. C., Neale, M. C., & Kendler, K. S. (2007). Association of different adverse life events with distinct patterns of depressive symptoms.  American Journal of Psychiatry ,  164 (10), 1521-1529.

Monroe, S. M., & Simons, A. D. (1991). Diathesis-stress theories in the context of life stress research: implications for the depressive disorders.  Psychological Bulletin ,  110 (3), 406.

Oliver, B. R., & Plomin, R. (2007). Twins” Early Development Study (TEDS): A multivariate, longitudinal genetic investigation of language, cognition and behavior problems from childhood through adolescence . Twin Research and Human Genetics, 10(1) , 96-105.

Petrill, S. A., Plomin, R., Berg, S., Johansson, B., Pedersen, N. L., Ahern, F., & McClearn, G. E. (1998). The genetic and environmental relationship between general and specific cognitive abilities in twins age 80 and older.  Psychological Science ,  9 (3), 183-189.

Plomin, R., & Petrill, S. A. (1997). Genetics and intelligence: What’s new?.  Intelligence ,  24 (1), 53-77.

Plomin, R. (2018). Blueprint: How DNA makes us who we are . MIT Press.

Plomin, R., & Bergeman, C. S. (1991). The nature of nurture: Genetic influence on “environmental” measures. behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14(3) , 373-386.

Plomin, R., & DeFries, J. C. (1983). The Colorado adoption project. Child Development , 276-289.

Plomin, R., & DeFries, J. C. (1985). The origins of individual differences in infancy; the Colorado adoption project. Science, 230 , 1369-1371.

Plomin, R., & Spinath, F. M. (2004). Intelligence: genetics, genes, and genomics.  Journal of personality and social psychology ,  86 (1), 112.

Plomin, R., & Von Stumm, S. (2018). The new genetics of intelligence.  Nature Reviews Genetics ,  19 (3), 148-159.

Skinner, B. F. (1957). Verbal behavior . Acton, MA: Copley Publishing Group.

Sullivan, P. F., Neale, M. C., & Kendler, K. S. (2000). Genetic epidemiology of major depression: review and meta-analysis.  American Journal of Psychiatry ,  157 (10), 1552-1562.

Szyf, M., Weaver, I. C., Champagne, F. A., Diorio, J., & Meaney, M. J. (2005). Maternal programming of steroid receptor expression and phenotype through DNA methylation in the rat .  Frontiers in neuroendocrinology ,  26 (3-4), 139-162.

Trouton, A., Spinath, F. M., & Plomin, R. (2002). Twins early development study (TEDS): a multivariate, longitudinal genetic investigation of language, cognition and behavior problems in childhood . Twin Research and Human Genetics, 5(5) , 444-448.

Waterland, R. A., & Jirtle, R. L. (2003). Transposable elements: targets for early nutritional effects on epigenetic gene regulation . Molecular and cellular biology, 23 (15), 5293-5300.

Further Information

• Genetic & Environmental Influences on Human Psychological Differences

Evidence for Nurture

• Classical Conditioning
• Little Albert Experiment
• Operant Conditioning
• Behaviorism
• Social Learning Theory
• Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory
• Social Roles
• Attachment Styles
• The Hidden Links Between Mental Disorders
• Visual Cliff Experiment
• Behavioral Genetics, Genetics, and Epigenetics
• Epigenetics
• Is Epigenetics Inherited?
• Physiological Psychology
• Bowlby’s Maternal Deprivation Hypothesis
• So is it nature not nurture after all?

Evidence for an Interaction

• Genes, Interactions, and the Development of Behavior
• Agouti Mouse Study
• Biological Psychology

What does nature refer to in the nature vs. nurture debate?

In the nature vs. nurture debate, “nature” refers to the influence of genetics, innate qualities, and biological factors on human development, behavior, and traits. It emphasizes the role of hereditary factors in shaping who we are.

What does nurture refer to in the nature vs. nurture debate?

In the nature vs. nurture debate, “nurture” refers to the influence of the environment, upbringing, experiences, and social factors on human development, behavior, and traits. It emphasizes the role of external factors in shaping who we are.

Why is it important to determine the contribution of heredity (nature) and environment (nurture) in human development?

Determining the contribution of heredity and environment in human development is crucial for understanding the complex interplay between genetic factors and environmental influences. It helps identify the relative significance of each factor, informing interventions, policies, and strategies to optimize human potential and address developmental challenges.

Nature-Nurture Debate

• Living reference work entry
• First Online: 02 February 2018
• Cite this living reference work entry

• Christian Montag 3 , 4 &
• Elisabeth Hahn 5  

577 Accesses

3 Citations

Epigenome , Gene by environment , Intelligence , Molecular genetics , Nature , Nurture , Personality

Introduction

Among the earliest testimonials of human civilization is a deep intuition that some aspects of human behavior originate in our genetic makeup, while others feel like the result of upbringing or exercise. A central question posed by both ancient philosophers such as Aristotle and modern researchers in the twenty-first century deals with the impact of nature and nurture on human characteristics such as personality or intelligence. While Aristotle questioned how resemblances between parents and their offspring can be explained (Henry 2006 ), Sir Francis Galton ( 1869 ) as one of the first scientists already dealt in his famous work Hereditary Genius with the genetics of intelligence.

The nature versus nurture debate represents one of the oldest issues in the research of human behavior dealing with the question whether inherited traits or life experiences (e.g., upbringing)...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Arslan, R. C., & Penke, L. (2015). Zeroing in on the genetics of intelligence. Journal of Intelligence, 3 (2), 41–45.

Article   Google Scholar  

Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., Van IJzendoorn, M. H., Pijlman, F. T., Mesman, J., & Juffer, F. (2008). Experimental evidence for differential susceptibility: Dopamine D4 receptor polymorphism (DRD4 VNTR) moderates intervention effects on toddlers’ externalizing behavior in a randomized controlled trial. Developmental Psychology, 44 (1), 293–300.

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Caspi, A., Sugden, K., Moffitt, T. E., Taylor, A., Craig, I. W., Harrington, H., et al. (2003). Influence of life stress on depression: Moderation by a polymorphism in the 5-HTT gene. Science, 301 (5631), 386–389.

Galton, F. (1876). The history of twins, as a criterion of the relative powers of nature and nurture. The Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 5 , 391–406.

Galton, F. (1869). Hereditary genius: An inquiry into its laws and consequences . New York: Macmillan.

Book   Google Scholar  

Gillham, N. W. (2001). Sir Francis Galton and the birth of eugenics. Annual review of genetics, 35 (1), 83–101.

Haas, B. W., Filkowski, M. M., Cochran, R. N., Denison, L., Ishak, A., Nishitani, S., & Smith, A. K. (2016). Epigenetic modification of OXT and human sociability. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 113 (27), E3816–E3823.

Hahn, E., & Spinath, F. M. (2017). Quantitative behavior genetics of internet addiction. In Internet addiction (pp. 125–140). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Henry, D. (2006). Aristotle on the mechanism of inheritance. Journal of the History of Biology, 39 (3), 425–455.

Jang, K. L., Livesley, W. J., & Vemon, P. A. (1996). Heritability of the big five personality dimensions and their facets: A twin study. Journal of Personality, 64 (3), 577–592.

Karg, K., Burmeister, M., Shedden, K., & Sen, S. (2011). The serotonin transporter promoter variant (5-HTTLPR), stress, and depression meta-analysis revisited: Evidence of genetic moderation. Archives of General Psychiatry, 68 (5), 444–454.

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Knopik, V. S., Neiderhiser, J. M., DeFries, J. C., & Plomin, R. (2016). Behavioral genetics . New York: Worth.

Google Scholar  

Langbehn, D. R., Brinkman, R. R., Falush, D., Paulsen, J. S., & Hayden, M. R. (2004). A new model for prediction of the age of onset and penetrance for Huntington’s disease based on CAG length. Clinical Genetics, 65 (4), 267–277.

Meaney, M. J. (2001). Nature, nurture, and the disunity of knowledge. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 935 (1), 50–61.

Meaney, M. J. (2010). Epigenetics and the biological definition of gene × environment interactions. Child Development, 81 (1), 41–79.

Mitchell, C., Notterman, D., Brooks-Gunn, J., Hobcraft, J., Garfinkel, I., Jaeger, K., et al. (2011). Role of mother’s genes and environment in postpartum depression. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108 (20), 8189–8193.

Montag, C., & Reuter, M. (2014). Disentangling the molecular genetic basis of personality: From monoamines to neuropeptides. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews, 43 , 228–239.

Montag, C., Jurkiewicz, M., & Reuter, M. (2012). The role of the catechol-O-methyltransferase (COMT) gene in personality and related psychopathological disorders. CNS & Neurological Disorders-Drug Targets (Formerly Current Drug Targets-CNS & Neurological Disorders), 11 (3), 236–250.

Montag, C., Hall, J., Plieger, T., Felten, A., Markett, S., Melchers, M., & Reuter, M. (2015). The DRD3 Ser9Gly polymorphism, Machiavellianism, and its link to schizotypal personality. Journal of Neuroscience, Psychology, & Economics, 8 (1), 48–57.

Montag, C., Hahn, E., Reuter, M., Spinath, F. M., Davis, K., & Panksepp, J. (2016). The role of nature and nurture for individual differences in primary emotional systems: Evidence from a twin study. PloS One, 11 (3), e0151405.

Plieger, T., Felten, A., Melchers, M., Markett, S., Montag, C., & Reuter, M. (2018). Association between a functional polymorphism on the dopamine-β-hydroxylase gene and reward dependence in two independent samples. Personality and Individual Differences,121 , 218–222.

Polderman, T. J., Benyamin, B., De Leeuw, C. A., Sullivan, P. F., Van Bochoven, A., Visscher, P. M., & Posthuma, D. (2015). Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies. Nature Genetics, 47 (7), 702–709.

Purcell, S. (2002). Variance components models for gene–environment interaction in twin analysis. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 5 (6), 554–571.

Reiss, D., Leve, L. D., & Neiderhiser, J. M. (2013). How genes and the social environment moderate each other. American Journal of Public Health, 103 (S1), S111–S121.

Riemann, R., Angleitner, A., & Strelau, J. (1997). Genetic and environmental influences on personality: A study of twins reared together using the self-and peer report NEO-FFI scales. Journal of Personality, 65 (3), 449–475.

Risch, N., Herrell, R., Lehner, T., Liang, K. Y., Eaves, L., Hoh, J., et al. (2009). Interaction between the serotonin transporter gene (5-HTTLPR), stressful life events, and risk of depression: A meta-analysis. Jama, 301 (23), 2462–2471.

Toyokawa, S., Uddin, M., Koenen, K. C., & Galea, S. (2012). How does the social environment ‘get into the mind’? Epigenetics at the intersection of social and psychiatric epidemiology. Social Science & Medicine, 74 (1), 67–74.

VanTassel-Baska, J. (2005). Gifted programs and services: What are the nonnegotiables? Theory Into Practice, 44 (2), 90–97.

Youngson, N. A., & Whitelaw, E. (2008). Transgenerational epigenetic effects. Annual Review of Genomics and Human Genetics, 9 , 233–257.

Zhang, T. Y., & Meaney, M. J. (2010). Epigenetics and the environmental regulation of the genome and its function. Annual Review of Psychology, 61 , 439–466.

Download references

Acknowledgment

The position of Christian Montag is funded by a Heisenberg grant awarded to him by the German Research Foundation (DFG, MO2363/3-2).

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Institute of Psychology and Education, Ulm University, Ulm, Germany

Christian Montag

Key Laboratory for NeuroInformation/Center for Information in Medicine, School of Life Science and Technology, University of Electronic Science and Technology of China, Chengdu, China

Department of Psychology, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany

Elisabeth Hahn

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Christian Montag .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Oakland University, Rochester, USA

Virgil Zeigler-Hill

Todd K. Shackelford

Section Editor information

Department of Educational Sciences, University of Genoa, Genoa, Italy

Patrizia Velotti

Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Montag, C., Hahn, E. (2018). Nature-Nurture Debate. In: Zeigler-Hill, V., Shackelford, T. (eds) Encyclopedia of Personality and Individual Differences. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_822-1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-28099-8_822-1

Received : 09 August 2017

Accepted : 18 December 2017

Published : 02 February 2018

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-319-28099-8

Online ISBN : 978-3-319-28099-8

eBook Packages : Springer Reference Behavioral Science and Psychology Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Business, Economics and Social Sciences

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

• Call to +1 844 889-9952

Skinner and Chomsky on Nature vs. Nurture

Introduction, cognitive development, nature and nature debates and the case, chomsky’s theory, skinner’s theory.

Today, much information about improving child development exists, but most discussions focus on the differences between nature and nurture. Childhood is a critical period because many biological, emotional, and psychological changes occur, affecting human abilities and skills. There are theories to support and oppose both positions in the nature-nurture debate. In this paper, attention will be paid to the peculiarities of cognitive development, addressing Genie’s case, a feral child isolated during the first 13,7 years of her life. The impact of inborn qualities and the environment on cognition and socialization cannot be ignored, and there are two efficient theories to indicate both positions. Burrhus Frederic Skinner proposes the theory of operant conditioning that explains environmental (nurture) influences, and Noam Chomsky introduces the theory of language acquisition as a part of universal grammar to underline biological (nature) influences. The connection between language and cognition determines the quality of child development, proving the worth of the chosen theories. The analysis of the nurture and nature characteristics through Skinner’s and Chomsky’s ideas allows understanding of the specifics of cognitive development in Genie’s example.

The development of cognitive skills in children is a critical topic in psychology and health care. People want to improve individual abilities, enhance critical thinking, remember information, use experiences, and strengthen communication. Children have to develop their cognitive skills in terms of thinking, reasoning, and understanding, and the first several years of life represent a serious period with multiple changes (MAL-ED Network Investigators, 2018). It is important for parents and other caregivers not to miss a moment when children need some help and support and to take a step in their progress and combine thought processes. Many factors predetermine cognitive development, including family status, parental education, and methods of cooperation (Yang et al., 2021). If professional recommendations and guidelines are followed, mental and physical changes are impossible to stop. However, when parental neglect or other challenges occur, certain cognitive problems interrupt the development process in childhood, and additional help and investigations may be required.

Child development is a complex concept in psychology, and multiple discussions are raised to prove the importance of nature and nurture. On the one hand, theorists and scientists believe that genetic predisposition plays an important role in cognitive development because this biological makeup defines human abilities (Sravanti, 2017). On the other hand, there is a thought that the physical environment, meaning nurture, also identifies the level of stability in child development (Sravanti, 2017). Both arguments are strong enough to discuss their connection and impact on human relationships and interactions. Gene expression cannot be neglected because it is something people are not able to control. At the same time, the environment affects people in a variety of ways, showing what is desirable, forbidden, or unwanted. Sometimes, nurture questions natural characteristics, and modifying the environment is necessary to support children and contribute to their cognitive development (Sravanti, 2017; Yang et al., 2021). Naturalists and environmentalists analyze cognitive development in childhood, and their theories reveal the role of internal and external factors.

Genie’s case should be mentioned to learn the relationship between nature and nurture in cognitive development. In the 1970s, the world was shocked by the existence of a wild (feral) child who lived in Los Angeles. The girl was a victim of domestic abuse, suffering from parent neglect during her first 13 years. Not many facts could be found about the true reasons for her father kept the child in the dark, closed room for such a long period. Still, it was known that neither communication nor cooperation was done with Genie, which negatively affected her cognitive, psychological, and physical skills. When the girl was rescued, many professionals were involved in her rehabilitation processes, including physicians, linguists, psychologists, and social workers. Her vocabulary was weak, and she did not understand most things and people’s requests. Little is known about her progress, but her language development and communication have significantly improved.

Cognitive development may depend on human biology, and implementing a naturalistic theory is a solid argument in this perspective. In the middle of the 1900s, Chomsky introduced his theory of language acquisition, according to which children have an inborn quality of being biologically encoded with a universal grammar (Sobecks, 2020). It means that the child’s brain has certain language-learning mechanisms, and this skill is not obtained with time but remains present since birth. The idea of innateness underlines the importance of being biologically determined to learn and understand the world. The core element of this theory is a language acquisition device (LAD) that is a normal part of human development to explain the child’s predisposition to learn languages (Sobecks, 2020). Still, it does not mean that a child born in a particular country, e.g., the United States, is born with some specifics of American English. Chomsky says about common language principles with the LAD, meaning some qualities are inborn and serve as biological evidence (Sobecks, 2020). This approach supports the impact of nature on a child’s cognitive development and the possibility to speak words and create sentences with time.

In Genie’s case, the girl did not get a chance to develop her language and cognitive skills in childhood. However, Chomsky’s theory proves that it is possible to use the LAD and restore the innate ability to learn the language (Sobecks, 2020). Nativists like Chomsky believe in inborn language capacity, which explains why it was possible for specialists to work with Genie and develop her cognition to the best possible extent. Genetics plays an important role in understanding what a person can or cannot do, and language development is a skill that should not be defined through the prism of learning alone. Although a critical period of acquiring language was missed in Genie’s situation, the fact that she was born with the LAD exists. Thus, attention to her biological factors helped the experts to achieve positive outcomes and improve the quality of the girl’s life with time.

The criticism of naturalistic theories was introduced by many behaviorists who specified the role of the environment in the cognitive development of children. There are many examples of how external factors define human decisions and abilities, and the work of Skinner focuses on such conditions. This theorist opposes certain mental processes and genetic predispositions but investigates observable behaviors that show what individuals can or cannot do. Skinner’s theory of operant conditioning introduces a method of learning through punishment and reward to demonstrate how an understanding of consequences affects human behavior (Overskeid, 2018). From Skinner’s point of view, a child develops cognitive or other abilities through learning the consequences and repetitions. Behavioral changes results are related to stimuli adults introduce to children, which means that the environment is crucial in the child’s cognitive development. Although environmental determination is not the only reason to explain behavior, prediction and control are vital in children’s growth (Overskeid, 2018). In other words, when a child experiences positive or negative emotions related to a specific event, cognitive abilities are developed or diminished respectfully.

The case of Genie proves the effectiveness of Skinner’s theory from some points. For example, the father punishes the child for making sounds or disobedience and rewards for silence and order. As a result, the girl did not speak, was calm, and moved slowly not to attract someone’s attention. Behaviorists might not reject the impact of genetics, but the environment is the factor that prevails over all biological issues. Each inborn quality could be changed, improved, or even removed under certain conditions. Genie’s life was unfavorable for her cognitive development, and the changes offered by other people, who were not her family members, were enough to prove how critical the impact of the environment was.

It is hard or even impossible to take one particular side in the debate about nature vs. nurture in child development. The arguments introduced by Skinner for behaviorism and Chomsky for naturalism are both valid and can be approved through the prism of Genie’s case about child abuse in childhood. Heritability explains differences in people and proves how some skills may be inborn. The environment also plays an important role in cognitive development because children learn how to behave, think, make decisions, and use sources. Their critical thinking abilities, language mechanisms, and cooperation depend not only on the people or subjects around them but on genetics. Chomsky and Skinner have strong and clear points in the nature-nurture debate. This project serves as a good example of how the environment can affect genetic predisposition to enhance or challenge cognitive development in childhood.

MAL-ED Network Investigators. (2018). Early childhood cognitive development is affected by interactions among illness, diet, enteropathogens and the home environment: Findings from the MAL-ED birth cohort study. BMJ Global Health, 3 (4). Web.

Overskeid, G. (2018). Do we need the environment to explain operant behavior? Frontiers in Psychology, 9 . Web.

Sobecks, B. (2020). Language acquisition device and the origin of language. Brain Matters, 2 (1), 9-11.

Sravanti, L. (2017). Nurture nature . Indian Journal of Psychiatry, 59 (3), 385. Web.

Yang, Q., Yang, J., Zheng, L., Song, W., & Yi, L. (2021). Impact of home parenting environment on cognitive and psychomotor development in children under 5 years old: A meta-analysis . Frontiers in Pediatrics, 9 . Web.

Cite this paper

Select style

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

PsychologyWriting. (2023, September 18). Skinner and Chomsky on Nature vs. Nurture. https://psychologywriting.com/skinner-and-chomsky-on-nature-vs-nurture/

"Skinner and Chomsky on Nature vs. Nurture." PsychologyWriting , 18 Sept. 2023, psychologywriting.com/skinner-and-chomsky-on-nature-vs-nurture/.

PsychologyWriting . (2023) 'Skinner and Chomsky on Nature vs. Nurture'. 18 September.

PsychologyWriting . 2023. "Skinner and Chomsky on Nature vs. Nurture." September 18, 2023. https://psychologywriting.com/skinner-and-chomsky-on-nature-vs-nurture/.

1. PsychologyWriting . "Skinner and Chomsky on Nature vs. Nurture." September 18, 2023. https://psychologywriting.com/skinner-and-chomsky-on-nature-vs-nurture/.

Bibliography

PsychologyWriting . "Skinner and Chomsky on Nature vs. Nurture." September 18, 2023. https://psychologywriting.com/skinner-and-chomsky-on-nature-vs-nurture/.

• Type 2 Diabetes
• Heart Disease
• Digestive Health
• Multiple Sclerosis
• Diet & Nutrition
• Supplements
• Health Insurance
• Public Health
• Patient Rights
• Caregivers & Loved Ones
• End of Life Concerns
• Health News
• Thyroid Test Analyzer
• Doctor Discussion Guides
• Hemoglobin A1c Test Analyzer
• Lipid Test Analyzer
• Complete Blood Count (CBC) Analyzer
• What to Buy
• Editorial Process
• Meet Our Medical Expert Board

What Are Nature vs. Nurture Examples?

How is nature defined, how is nurture defined, the nature vs. nurture debate, nature vs. nurture examples, what is empiricism (extreme nurture position), contemporary views of nature vs. nurture.

Nature vs. nurture is an age-old debate about whether genetics (nature) plays a bigger role in determining a person's characteristics than lived experience and environmental factors (nurture). The term "nature vs. nature" was coined by English naturalist Charles Darwin's younger half-cousin, anthropologist Francis Galton, around 1875.

In psychology, the extreme nature position (nativism) proposes that intelligence and personality traits are inherited and determined only by genetics.

On the opposite end of the spectrum, the extreme nurture position (empiricism) asserts that the mind is a blank slate at birth; external factors like education and upbringing determine who someone becomes in adulthood and how their mind works. Both of these extreme positions have shortcomings and are antiquated.

This article explores the difference between nature and nurture. It gives nature vs. nurture examples and explains why outdated views of nativism and empiricism don't jibe with contemporary views. 

Thanasis Zovoilis / Getty Images

In the context of nature vs. nurture, "nature" refers to genetics and heritable factors that are passed down to children from their biological parents.

Genes and hereditary factors determine many aspects of someone’s physical appearance and other individual characteristics, such as a genetically inherited predisposition for certain personality traits.

Scientists estimate that 20% to 60% percent of temperament is determined by genetics and that many (possibly thousands) of common gene variations combine to influence individual characteristics of temperament.

However, the impact of gene-environment (or nature-nurture) interactions on someone's traits is interwoven. Environmental factors also play a role in temperament by influencing gene activity. For example, in children raised in an adverse environment (such as child abuse or violence), genes that increase the risk of impulsive temperamental characteristics may be activated (turned on).

Trying to measure "nature vs. nurture" scientifically is challenging. It's impossible to know precisely where the influence of genes and environment begin or end.

How Are Inherited Traits Measured?

“Heritability”   describes the influence that genes have on human characteristics and traits. It's measured on a scale of 0.0 to 1.0. Very strong heritable traits like someone's eye color are ranked a 1.0.

Traits that have nothing to do with genetics, like speaking with a regional accent ranks a zero. Most human characteristics score between a 0.30 and 0.60 on the heritability scale, which reflects a blend of genetics (nature) and environmental (nurture) factors.

Thousands of years ago, ancient Greek philosophers like Plato believed that "innate knowledge" is present in our minds at birth. Every parent knows that babies are born with innate characteristics. Anecdotally, it may seem like a kid's "Big 5" personality traits (agreeableness, conscientiousness, extraversion, neuroticism, and openness) were predetermined before birth.

What is the "Big 5" personality traits

The Big 5 personality traits is a theory that describes the five basic dimensions of personality. It was developed in 1949 by D. W. Fiske and later expanded upon by other researchers and is used as a framework to study people's behavior.

From a "nature" perspective, the fact that every child has innate traits at birth supports Plato's philosophical ideas about innatism. However, personality isn't set in stone. Environmental "nurture" factors can change someone's predominant personality traits over time. For example, exposure to the chemical lead during childhood may alter personality.

In 2014, a meta-analysis of genetic and environmental influences on personality development across the human lifespan found that people change with age. Personality traits are relatively stable during early childhood but often change dramatically during adolescence and young adulthood.

It's impossible to know exactly how much "nurture" changes personality as people get older. In 2019, a study of how stable personality traits are from age 16 to 66 found that people's Big 5 traits are both stable and malleable (able to be molded). During the 50-year span from high school to retirement, some traits like agreeableness and conscientiousness tend to increase, while others appear to be set in stone.

Nurture refers to all of the external or environmental factors that affect human development such as how someone is raised, socioeconomic status, early childhood experiences, education, and daily habits.

Although the word "nurture" may conjure up images of babies and young children being cared for by loving parents, environmental factors and life experiences have an impact on our psychological and physical well-being across the human life span. In adulthood, "nurturing" oneself by making healthy lifestyle choices can offset certain genetic predispositions.

For example, a May 2022 study found that people with a high genetic risk of developing the brain disorder Alzheimer's disease can lower their odds of developing dementia (a group of symptoms that affect memory, thinking, and social abilities enough to affect daily life) by adopting these seven healthy habits in midlife:

• Staying active
• Healthy eating
• Losing weight
• Not smoking
• Reducing blood sugar
• Controlling cholesterol
• Maintaining healthy blood pressure

The nature vs. nurture debate centers around whether individual differences in behavioral traits and personality are caused primarily by nature or nurture. Early philosophers believed the genetic traits passed from parents to their children influence individual differences and traits. Other well-known philosophers believed the mind begins as a blank slate and that everything we are is determined by our experiences.

While early theories favored one factor over the other, experts today recognize there is a complex interaction between genetics and the environment and that both nature and nurture play a critical role in shaping who we are.

Eye color and skin pigmentation are examples of "nature" because they are present at birth and determined by inherited genes. Developmental delays due to toxins (such as exposure to lead as a child or exposure to drugs in utero) are examples of "nurture" because the environment can negatively impact learning and intelligence.

In Child Development

The nature vs. nurture debate in child development is apparent when studying language development. Nature theorists believe genetics plays a significant role in language development and that children are born with an instinctive ability that allows them to both learn and produce language.

Nurture theorists would argue that language develops by listening and imitating adults and other children.

In addition, nurture theorists believe people learn by observing the behavior of others. For example, contemporary psychologist Albert Bandura's social learning theory suggests that aggression is learned through observation and imitation.

In Psychology

In psychology, the nature vs. nurture beliefs vary depending on the branch of psychology.

• Biopsychology:  Researchers analyze how the brain, neurotransmitters, and other aspects of our biology influence our behaviors, thoughts, and feelings. emphasizing the role of nature.
• Social psychology: Researchers study how external factors such as peer pressure and social media influence behaviors, emphasizing the importance of nurture.
• Behaviorism: This theory of learning is based on the idea that our actions are shaped by our interactions with our environment.

In Personality Development

Whether nature or nurture plays a bigger role in personality development depends on different personality development theories.

• Behavioral theories: Our personality is a result of the interactions we have with our environment, such as parenting styles, cultural influences, and life experiences.
• Biological theories: Personality is mostly inherited which is demonstrated by a study in the 1990s that concluded identical twins reared apart tend to have more similar personalities than fraternal twins.
• Psychodynamic theories: Personality development involves both genetic predispositions and environmental factors and their interaction is complex.

In Mental Illness

Both nature and nurture can contribute to mental illness development.

For example, at least five mental health disorders are associated with some type of genetic component ( autism ,  attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) ,  bipolar disorder , major depression, and  schizophrenia ).

Other explanations for mental illness are environmental, such as:

• Being exposed to drugs or alcohol in utero 
• Witnessing a traumatic event, leading to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD)
• Adverse life events and chronic stress during childhood

In Mental Health Therapy

Mental health treatment can involve both nature and nurture. For example, a therapist may explore life experiences that may have contributed to mental illness development (nurture) as well as family history of mental illness (nature).

At the same time, research indicates that a person's genetic makeup may impact how their body responds to antidepressants. Taking this into consideration is important for finding the right treatment for each individual.

 What Is Nativism (Extreme Nature Position)?

Innatism emphasizes nature's role in shaping our minds and personality traits before birth. Nativism takes this one step further and proposes that all of people's mental and physical characteristics are inherited and predetermined at birth.

In its extreme form, concepts of nativism gave way to the early 20th century's racially-biased eugenics movement. Thankfully, "selective breeding," which is the idea that only certain people should reproduce in order to create chosen characteristics in offspring, and eugenics, arranged breeding, lost momentum during World War II. At that time, the Nazis' ethnic cleansing (killing people based on their ethnic or religious associations) atrocities were exposed.

Philosopher John Locke's tabula rasa theory from 1689 directly opposes the idea that we are born with innate knowledge. "Tabula rasa" means "blank slate" and implies that our minds do not have innate knowledge at birth.

Locke was an empiricist who believed that all the knowledge we gain in life comes from sensory experiences (using their senses to understand the world), education, and day-to-day encounters after being born.

Today, looking at nature vs. nature in black-and-white terms is considered a misguided dichotomy (two-part system). There are so many shades of gray where nature and nurture overlap. It's impossible to tease out how inherited traits and learned behaviors shape someone's unique characteristics or influence how their mind works.

The influences of nature and nurture in psychology are impossible to unravel. For example, imagine someone growing up in a household with an alcoholic parent who has frequent rage attacks. If that child goes on to develop a substance use disorder and has trouble with emotion regulation in adulthood, it's impossible to know precisely how much genetics (nature) or adverse childhood experiences (nurture) affected that individual's personality traits or issues with alcoholism.

Epigenetics Blurs the Line Between Nature and Nurture

"Epigenetics " means "on top of" genetics. It refers to external factors and experiences that turn genes "on" or "off." Epigenetic mechanisms alter DNA's physical structure in utero (in the womb) and across the human lifespan.

Epigenetics blurs the line between nature and nurture because it says that even after birth, our genetic material isn't set in stone; environmental factors can modify genes during one's lifetime. For example, cannabis exposure during critical windows of development can increase someone's risk of neuropsychiatric disease via epigenetic mechanisms.

Nature vs. nurture is a framework used to examine how genetics (nature) and environmental factors (nurture) influence human development and personality traits.

However, nature vs. nurture isn't a black-and-white issue; there are many shades of gray where the influence of nature and nurture overlap. It's impossible to disentangle how nature and nurture overlap; they are inextricably intertwined. In most cases, nature and nurture combine to make us who we are. 

Waller JC. Commentary: the birth of the twin study--a commentary on francis galton’s “the history of twins.”   International Journal of Epidemiology . 2012;41(4):913-917. doi:10.1093/ije/dys100

The New York Times. " Major Personality Study Finds That Traits Are Mostly Inherited ."

Medline Plus. Is temperament determined by genetics?

Feldman MW, Ramachandran S. Missing compared to what? Revisiting heritability, genes and culture .  Phil Trans R Soc B . 2018;373(1743):20170064. doi:10.1098/rstb.2017.0064

Winch C. Innatism, concept formation, concept mastery and formal education: innatism, concept formation and formal education .  Journal of Philosophy of Education . 2015;49(4):539-556. doi:10.1111/1467-9752.12121

Briley DA, Tucker-Drob EM. Genetic and environmental continuity in personality development: A meta-analysis .  Psychological Bulletin . 2014;140(5):1303-1331. doi:10.1037/a0037091

Damian RI, Spengler M, Sutu A, Roberts BW. Sixteen going on sixty-six: A longitudinal study of personality stability and change across 50 years .  Journal of Personality and Social Psychology . 2019;117(3):674-695. doi:10.1037/pspp0000210

Tin A, Bressler J, Simino J, et al. Genetic risk, midlife life’s simple 7, and incident dementia in the atherosclerosis risk in communities study .  Neurology . Published online May 25, 2022. doi:10.1212/WNL.0000000000200520 

Levitt M. Perceptions of nature, nurture and behaviour .  Life Sci Soc Policy . 2013;9(1):13. doi:10.1186/2195-7819-9-13

Ross EJ, Graham DL, Money KM, Stanwood GD. Developmental consequences of fetal exposure to drugs: what we know and what we still must learn . Neuropsychopharmacology. 2015 Jan;40(1):61-87. doi: 10.1038/npp.2014.14

World Health Organization. Lead poisoning .

Bandura, A., Ross, D., & Ross, S. A. Transmission of aggression through imitation of aggressive models .  The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1961; 63 (3), 575–582 doi:10.1037/h0045925

Krapfl JE.  Behaviorism and society .  Behav Anal.  2016;39(1):123-9. doi:10.1007/s40614-016-0063-8

Bouchard TJ Jr, Lykken DT, McGue M, Segal NL, Tellegen A. Sources of human psychological differences: the Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart . Science. 1990 Oct 12;250(4978):223-8. doi: 10.1126/science.2218526

National Institutes of Health.  Common genetic factors found in 5 mental disorders .

Franke HA. Toxic Stress: Effects, Prevention and Treatment . Children (Basel). 2014 Nov 3;1(3):390-402. doi: 10.3390/children1030390

Pain O, Hodgson K, Trubetskoy V, et al.  Identifying the common genetic basis of antidepressant response .  Biol Psychiatry Global Open Sci . 2022;2(2):115-126. doi:10.1016/j.bpsgos.2021.07.008

National Human Genome Research Institute. Eugenics and Scientific Racism .

OLL. The Works of John Locke in Nine Volumes .

Toraño EG, García MG, Fernández-Morera JL, Niño-García P, Fernández AF. The impact of external factors on the epigenome:  in utero  and over lifetime .  BioMed Research International . 2016;2016:1-17. doi:10.1155/2016/2568635

Smith A, Kaufman F, Sandy MS, Cardenas A. Cannabis exposure during critical windows of development: epigenetic and molecular pathways implicated in neuropsychiatric disease .  Curr Envir Health Rpt . 2020;7(3):325-342. doi:10.1007/s40572-020-00275-4

By Christopher Bergland Bergland is a retired ultra-endurance athlete turned medical writer and science reporter. He is based in Massachusetts.

What makes us? Nature or nurture? The DNA debate comes back to life

An extraordinary new documentary about identical triplets who were separated at birth has reignited the debate over the dominance of DNA in controlling our behaviour and the way we live our lives

R obert Shafran’s first inkling that his life would soon be turned on its head occurred on his first day at college in upstate New York in 1980. His fellow students greeted him like a long-lost friend. “Guys slapped me on the back, girls hugged and kissed me,” he recalls. Yet Robert had never set foot inside Sullivan County Community College until that day.

Another student, Eddy Galland, who had studied at the college the previous year, was the cause of the confusion, it transpired. Eddy was his spitting image, said classmates. Robert was intrigued and went to Eddy’s home to confront him.

“As I reached out to knock on the door, it opened – and there I am,” says Robert, recalling his first meeting with Eddy in the forthcoming documentary Three Identical Strangers .

The two young men had the same facial features, the same heavy build, the same dark complexions, the same mops of black curly hair – and the same birthday: 12 July 1961. They were identical twins, a fact swiftly confirmed from hospital records. Each knew he had been adopted but neither was aware he had a twin. Their story made headlines across the US.

One reader – David Kellman, a student at a different college – was particularly interested. Robert and Eddy also looked astonishingly like him. So he contacted Eddy’s adoptive mother, who was stunned to come across, in only a few weeks, two young men who were identical in appearance to her son. “My God, they are coming out of the woodwork,” she complained.

Eddy, Robert and David were adopted by different families when they were babies. They possessed the same complements of genes and, as young adults, they were indistinguishable. They were the same person trebled, as one commentator put it.

The story behind the triplets’ separation and subsequent reuniting forms the dark core of Three Identical Strangers, which emerges as a tale of grotesque medical manipulation that today would have led to prosecutions for malpractice. It is also a poignant tale of lives reunited. But most importantly of all, the documentary is a timely illustration of the unexpected ways that genes and life events interact to shape us.

And that is crucial – for once again genetics is back in the news. On one hand, scientists are launching new onslaughts in the battle over the influence of nature versus nurture in human affairs. At the same time, there has been the attempted hijacking, by the far right, of the findings of modern genetics to support their own extreme views.

In these circumstances, this month’s release of Three Identical Strangers , which won a special award for documentary storytelling at the Sundance film festival this year, could not have been more opportune, said medical historian Professor Nathaniel Comfort, of Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore. “The film is particularly well-timed, when genetic essentialism is on the rise and divisiveness and polarisation is sweeping the globe,” he said.

The vital point that affects the current nature-nurture debate and which is outlined in Three Identical Strangers is the seemingly intense impact of genetic influences on Eddy, Robert and David. When they were reunited, they not only looked like doppelgangers, they displayed an uncanny number of shared habits. All liked the same films, smoked the same cigarettes (Marlboros) and had been wrestlers at college. Yet their childhoods had been very different. Robert’s parents were prosperous, Eddy had grown up in a middle-class suburb, and David’s parents lived in working-class Queens.

Only their close genetic heritage could explain their powerful similarities, it was argued – a notion that the brothers milked to its limit. They appeared on TV, answering questions in unison; became celebrities on the New York club scene; had cameo roles in Madonna’s 1985 film Desperately Seeking Susan ; and eventually opened their own restaurant, called Triplets.

But slowly Eddy, Robert and David’s story changed trajectory. The boys began to look less and less like each other. Their physiques changed as they aged. Then their restaurant business broke up. They veered down separate paths, and without spoiling the plot of this remarkable and powerful film, they ended up by having very different outcomes in life.

The varied fates of the triplets suggest other important, non-genetic forces must also have been involved in determining how their lives unravelled. Hence the interest that the film has stirred among nature-nurture protagonists. As a study of identical siblings raised apart, it shines remarkable light on the interaction of genes and environmental factors on human upbringing.

And while the triplets’ story did suggest at first that DNA looks like an overwhelmingly powerful determinant of human destiny, by the film’s finale, that assumption looks strained and unlikely. Nurture is certainly involved in the story of Robert, Eddy and David.

This implication is supported by the work of Professor Tim Spector, head of twin research at King’s College London. His studies have uncovered many examples of identical twins who have been raised together and whose early life experiences were also very similar, but who still evolved into very different people. Identical sisters – raised by parents who treated them as two versions of the same person and gave them the same clothes and hairstyles – nevertheless ended up with very different personalities and careers. In some cases, one suffered from serious depression while the other was unaffected. Yet they shared exactly the same genes and exactly the same upbringing. Some critical environmental influences in later life must surely be involved.

Spector believes these influences are triggered by epigenetic changes in which major life events – diet, illnesses, drugs, smoking and other factors – can produce temporary alterations in the behaviour of one twin’s genes but not the other’s, and have major health and behavioural consequences. “There appears to be no similarity in age at death between identical twins, for example,” said Spector. “In addition, our work shows there is only a 30% chance that if one identical twin gets heart disease the other one will as well, while the chance of getting rheumatoid arthritis is only 15%. Yet these twins share so many other features – the same height, hair and build.”

Until recently the study of twins – or triplets – was the only direct method available to scientists who were seeking to separate the influences of our environments and our genes. And seemingly the most promising type of this research is that involving the study of identical twins who are separated at birth and raised by different sets of adoptive parents. These siblings have the same sets of genes but have different backgrounds and so should be invaluable for prising apart the influences of nature and nurture. And many biologists have indeed used such studies to make striking claims for the overwhelming influence of genes on our behaviour.

But there are only a relatively limited number of sets of identical twins reared apart that are known to scientists, and most live in the US or Europe. This means results will be limited to relatively small data sets and are skewed by cultural influences, a point emphasised by Comfort.

“If you look at all the twin studies that have been carried out over the years and ask how many involved sub-Saharan African twins who were reared apart, you know what the answer will be. Absolutely none,” he said. “And this is true of the vast majority of DNA sequencing surveys that have recently been carried out. They are nearly all done using people of European ancestry as their subjects. That has to have major consequences for influencing results.”

In addition, geneticist Steve Jones of University College London questioned the inferences that could be drawn from studies of identical twins in the first place. “Identical twins, from the very start of their existences, live very different lives, sharing cramped wombs in which single children normally come to term. Again that will skew results, but genetic determinists ignore that.”

On the other hand, new techniques for studying the influences of genes have recently been developed, and these do not require the participation of twins. They are known as genome-wide association study (GWAS) and they employ thousands – sometimes hundreds of thousands – of subjects to delineate traits and determine whether they have high genetic components. Used in the proper way, they can provide powerful insights in genetic influences, Comfort acknowledged. “I don’t think you can ignore some of the science they are producing, although one should be careful of interpretation.”

A good example of the work of these analyses was provided by a study of 4,000 students in England and Wales. It concluded that the type of school – selective, grammar or comprehensive – that a child attended had little influence in their scholarly performance in later years, but that their genetic makeup did play a part. This was not a matter of one or two genes having major influences, however, but hundreds of them, each having a small impact on academic achievement but combining to have significant influences.

The study’s take-home message was outlined by its senior author, Professor Robert Plomin of King’s College London, who said that the research showed selective schools were simply not adding value to children’s education. “They take the kids that do the best at school and show they do the best at school. It’s an entirely self-fulfilling prophecy,” he said in an interview in the Guardian .

By contrast, the influence of genes on achievement was important, he added. As a result, Plomin proposed that genetic testing of children should one day be used to predict academic potential. “It will probably happen,” he claimed.

In denigrating the usefulness of private schools, Plomin gets brownie points from the left. But his call for gene testing of children has raised their ire. Plomin is unrepentant. “We now know that DNA differences are the major systematic source of psychological differences between us. Environmental effects are important but what we have learned in recent years is that they are mostly random – unsystematic and unstable – which means that we cannot do much about them,” he writes in his recent book Blueprint: How DNA Makes Us Who We Are .

The book is uncompromising in its insistence on the importance of the influence of DNA in determining our lives. It has been heatedly attacked – and warmly praised – since its publication last month, and is seen by many as the most significant act in the recent reawakening of the old nature-nurture battle.

This re-emergence is also reflected in the uptake of genetic tests by neo-Nazi groups – particularly those in the US – who seek to use them to “prove” their white European ancestry (frequently with disappointing results, it should be noted). At the same time “alt-right” groups are celebrating their genetic “purity” by publicly swilling milk, which they believe is the nutritionally perfect white drink that only westerners can digest because they possess a genetic mutation, known as lactase persistence, that others lack.

Yet these beliefs – that genes are the primary driver of human nature – are simply not borne out by studies, as the US writer Carl Zimmer makes clear in his recent book, She Has Her Mother’s Laugh: The Powers, Perversions and Potential of Heredity , which has been shortlisted for the Baillie Gifford prize.

Consider the issue of IQ, Zimmer said. “While identical twins often end up with similar scores, sometimes they don’t. Equally, if you get average scores on intelligence tests, it is still entirely possible your children may turn out to be geniuses. And if you are a genius, you should be smart enough to recognise your children may not follow suit.”

The problems for those trying to separate environmental issues from those triggered by our genes are highlighted by Jones. “The trouble is that people look at the nature-nurture debate like a cake and assume you can have a slice of environment and then a slice of genetic factors. You can’t. They are baked together and cannot be separated without finding some way to unbake your cake.”

The crucial point is that by concentrating on the role of just one influence, our DNA, in controlling our behaviour and in determining our life stories, we risk ignoring the influence of free will and the role that humans have in determining their own affairs.

And this is why the release of Three Identical Strangers was important, said Comfort. It suggested that outcomes in life could be very varied despite common genetic heritages – and that was to be welcomed. “We need stories that say that ‘environments matter’, that ‘people matter’, and that ‘experience matters’. For if they don’t, what’s the use of living?”

‘We were treated like lab rats’

Three Identical Strangers took British director Tim Wardle five years to complete. The documentary follows the outcome of a sinister American experiment in which the triplets, Robert, Eddy and David, were deliberately separated from each other at birth and assigned to three different families. One was affluent, the second middle-class, and the third came from a working-class area of New York.

The adoptions were carried out as part of a secret study designed by child psychoanalyst Peter Neubauer, who wanted to uncover the influences of genes and the environment in children’s upbringing. Each family was told nothing of the other identical siblings who were involved in the experiment; nor were they informed about the nature of the follow-up studies that Neubauer set in motion in order to keep tabs on his subjects.

The adoption of the boys was arranged by the now defunct Louise Wise Adoption Agency in New York, which was set up primarily to serve the city’s Jewish community, an involvement that was highlighted by the US journal Science earlier this year.

“The irony of a Jewish researcher and a Jewish adoption agency conducting a twin study after the atrocities waged against Jewish people in Nazi Germany is clear, and was perhaps the reason that Neubauer never published [the results of] the study.”

Several other sets of identical siblings were separated and used in the experiment. Many remain bitter about their fates, arguing that had been treated like lab rats and were the victims of actions that amounted to “Nazi shit”.

Neubauer died in 2006 after he had sealed his data in vaults at Yale University, with orders that they remain there until 2066. During the making of Three Identical Strangers , Wardle and his subjects attempted to gain access to their files, but were able to see only heavily edited versions of Neubauer’s study.

Three Identical Strangers is released in the UK on 30 November

• The Observer

Most viewed

• Free Samples
• Premium Essays
• Editing Services Editing Proofreading Rewriting
• Extra Tools Essay Topic Generator Thesis Generator Citation Generator GPA Calculator Study Guides Donate Paper
• Essay Writing Help
• About Us About Us Testimonials FAQ
• Studentshare
• Genie and Nature Vs. Nurture

Genie and Nature Vs. Nurture - Essay Example

• Subject: Psychology
• Type: Essay
• Level: Masters
• Pages: 2 (500 words)
• Downloads: 21
• Author: addison68

Extract of sample "Genie and Nature Vs. Nurture"

Genie and Nature Vs. Nurture There have only been a handful of “feral children” stories in the 20th and 21st centuries. Perhaps one of the most famous cases involved a young girl by the name of Genie. According to the article entitled “Wild Child Speechless After Tortured Life,” Genie was a severely abused 14 year old girl discovered by social workers and taken to a hospital where she was observed and treated for many years(James, 2008).Writer Susan Donaldson James states that at the time of her discovery “Genie was the size of an 8-year-old with the language and motor skills of a baby, speaking only a few words…”(James, 2008).

Genie’s case has been of particular importance to the medical community, especially in how it impacts the nature vs. nurture debate. The nature vs. nurture debate has been dividing the scientific community for many decades. According to an article entitled “Nature VS. Nurture,” this argument is boiled down to the question of which element has more of an impact on a human’s overall growth and development. The author of the article, Shady Guirguis, states “nature, referring to heredity, and the nurture, referring to the environment, are two very reasonable explanations to why we are the people we are today”(Guirguis, 2004).

In Genie’s case, doctors were trying to figure out if Genie was so underdeveloped because of the abuse she suffered or if it she was always going to be underdeveloped due to birth defects. Over the ensuing years, Genie has experienced progress and regression. According to James, Genie was able to acquire some language during her time in the hospital, but once the funding dried up, Genie experience a lot of bouncing around in foster homes and hospitals, and she has largely been “abandoned”(James, 2008).

Ultimately, Genie’s story was a very important case study because it afforded doctors the chance to study the nature vs. nurture debate up close. Even with the extensive care that Genie received for several years after her discovery, she still only acquired minimal language abilities and skills(James, 2008). I think this case proved that there is a specific window of time where a child can be taught language and other important skills and Genie missed that window due to the severe abuse that she suffered.

Although Genie may have had some mental issues from birth, they were heavily exacerbated from her abusive environment. Genie’s case suggests that nurture plays a much larger part in development that doctor’s initially may have thought. If she had been removed from her environment within her first few years of life, I think that she might have been able to recover better than she ultimately did. While nature played a definite role in her initial limitations, there is no doubt that the isolation and abuse was the ultimate culprit for her overall developmental issues.

In the end, Genie’s case represents a tragic reality which has served the medical community in aiding the continuing debate over nature vs. nurture. Some people point to Genie’s overall stagnation in skill acquisition as proof of the prevalence of nature in development, but this is not accurate in Genie’s case. According to Guirguis, nature had more to do with genetics and biological aspects, while nature is more to do with behavior which is impacted by outside stimuli(Guirguis, 2004).

In looking at Genie’s overall case, it is clear that she lacked the outside stimuli that she needed to become a healthy member of society and the starvation of that stimulus simply took too much of a toll on her overall well-being. ReferencesGuirguis, S. (2004, April 26). Nature vs Nurture. The Nuclear Engineering Department At UC Berkeley. Retrieved September 6, 2011, from http://www.nuc.berkeley.edu/courses/classes/NE-24%20Olander/Equalitarinism_vs_Hereditarinism.htmJames, S. D. (2008, May 7).

Wild Child Speechless After Tortured Life - ABC News. ABCNews.com. Retrieved September 6, 2011, from http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=4804490&page=1

• Cited: 6 times
• Copy Citation Citation is copied Copy Citation Citation is copied Copy Citation Citation is copied

CHECK THESE SAMPLES OF Genie and Nature Vs. Nurture

Lotte reiniger, the adventures of prince achmed(1926, germany 65 min), contribution of nature/nurture to drug and alcohol abuse, nature versus nurture, nature vs. nurture in intelligence, the nature nurture, opinion on nature vs nurture, major issues in nature vs nurture, homosexuality - nature versus nurture.

• TERMS & CONDITIONS
• PRIVACY POLICY
• COOKIES POLICY

Snapsolve any problem by taking a picture. Try it in the Numerade app?

Case Study- Genie

Thursday, september 22, 2011, nature vs. nurture, 15 comments:.

I think that nature will have the biggest has the biggest effect on a person. I feel this way because, we can not change the nature. But the way we are treated or nurtured change change day by day.

I think that Nature has the biggest effect in a child. This is because nurture can win over what is given to you by one's parents.

muahahahaha

I think that nature would be the biggest influence in your life, because although nurture affects you when your growing up, nature causes the biggest effect on what you become. So nature takes over nurture...

I believe that nurture has a bigger effect on a child than nature does. I think that children are who they are by the way they are exposed to things. If they are around certain things, they are bound to be or try to act a way that they have been modeled of. It's what they see, that they learn to be.

i think that nurture has the biggest effect on a child because it all depends and how you get treated like that determines how you become.

I Think it nature has the biggest effect on a child.. because there parent can be smart person so they can give there genes to the child.

I think nature is the biggest effect on a child. I say this because you can't help or change what is given to you by your parents. I do believe that nurture has an effect but nature plays a bigger role.

nature most definitely has the greatest effect on children cause it just does. Nature effects what you do and it influences our children. Nature wins!

I think that nature has the biggest effect on a child because it all depends on what you have from your parents and what was passed down to you.

I also think that nature has the biggest impact on a persons life i agree that nurture can have an impact on your life but nature is with you from the start of your life.

I believe that nature has the biggest effect on a child. I believe it to be this way because no matter what you do... you are going to have parents; a mother that physically gives birth to you. You cannot help the personality traits given to you by your biological parents. I also believe that nurture has an effect, but I think nature has a bigger role.

I think that nurture outweighs the effects of nature on a child because even though children are similar to their parents both hereditary and genetically, generally how they grew up in their environment influences who they will be as an individual. What you learn as a child is what you'll grow up to be. For example, things such as values, beliefs, religion, & attitude are learned and practiced throughout one's life span. They are not genetic.

I personally think that it is a little of both. i say this because nurture is how your environment is which could play a big part in how you do certain things. for example if you grow up in an environment where your father hits your mother most likely the kid is going to think its okay to do this or that it is normal. nature is the things you inherit from you parent such as looks or smarts which could help you become civilized human being

Effects on a child I believe can be based on both nature and nurture. Parents might have been raised up not doing certain learning activities or activities that could affect the way they grow up, so therefore they wont pass on learning activities to their children since they were deprived of them as a child. Or the parents may have grown up in a bad household and end up to act the same way throughout life. Nurture shows the traits the child will receive, like tallness or facial features etc. Nature is based on the environment they grow up in. I think nature and nurture even out in the way they effect children.