While it is true that both genetics and environment effect human development with many traditional lenses siding with one or the other as the heavy weight or concluding them to be equal players, I think that neurosciece and epigenetics offer a new view that shows environment plays the larger role.
Much research in the fields of psychology, human development and health sciences have focused on external behaviors to try and determine casual relationships. This has provided us clues as to the significant impact of both nature and nurture in human development.
Peering inside the brain and body as done in the fields of neuroscience and epigenetics gives us a clearer picture as to the greater impact of environment (nurture) over genetics (nature). More specifically, how environment shapes the brain and, therefore, behavior, while also determining genetic expression.
Brain plasticity, as researched in neuroscience, shows how the brain is shaped and altered by the environment. Starting in utero, the developing brain (and body) is shaped by external factors. There exists a mountain of research in this area that can easily be found by doing a simple online search.
This plasticity continues throughout the lifetime of any and all individuals. There are key developmental stages that offer greater plasticity such as from birth to around 3 years of age and again in adolescence up to age 25. In both these stages there is a proliferation of neuronal connection and synaptic pruning.
This neural connection and pruning process occurs in response to the experiences of the individual. The popular term "neurons that fire together wire together" refers to the process of synaptic strengthening in which individual neurons become linked together to create synaptic pathways. Those synaptic pathways that are not used are pruned - the neuronal connections along that pathway wither away. This occurs in response to external experiences – another words it is shaped through learning. For example, the more you play the guitar the stronger the neural connections and synaptic pathways in the brain become that allow you to learn this skill and become more proficient at it with practice.
While genetics may provide some innate ability for you to easily learn this or any other skill, it is the act of repeatedly doing so that determines whether this skill becomes a part of your behavioral repertoire.
Epigentics also reveals that genes are likewise turned on and off and even altered by external factors experienced by the individual ( check this link for greater detail https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3020789/).
Like, brain plasticity, epigenetic modification occurs throughout the lifespan with different life stages having a greater impact on certain areas of development. Gene expression is affected from a variety of experiences from diet to stress and even thought (learn more at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29043603).
By choosing what we experience and spend time learning, and also understanding how other environmental factors such as pollutants and even our patterns of thinking may negatively impact our health and development, we can take steps to reduce harm and maximize benefit across our lifespan. Essentially, we can shape who we become.
There are many who take the position of siding with nature as being the primary way that a student learns, as this has been predetermined and has an abundance of science that is behind this finding. On the other hand, nature is where others stand because nature shares that students are a product of their environment and one would argue that students learn more through direct experience. Nature vs Nurture is an incredibly debated topic that many still do not have a definitive answer for. There are many components to understanding which side reveals the most regarding student learning.
I would like to share what has been found in terms of where researchers are currently standing. Instead of it being cut and dry, researchers are taking it a step further in looking at heredity and genes. Heritability is dependent on the direct environment. If everyone is in the same environment, heritability of traits should be expected to be higher. Alternatively, if the environment is different, the heritability estimate should be expected to be lower. If there are different environments, there will be more of a change within them. This can be seen as a change in varying environments not only in the same geological area, but amongst other countries as well (Brookman-Byrne, 2018).
There has been a shift in research of nature vs. nurture, and this has been towards understanding genetics. The argument is that processes that are completed biologically are controlled by inherited genes and epi-genetics also plays a part in this as well. This argument goes on to say that it is not a question of nature vs. nurture, rather, it is everything that is involved to create a specific way of learning for students (Sah, et al., 2018). This is certainly a new revelation that will take much more research before pinpointing what exactly is involved. It is a shift in focus that will take some time to reveal, but when it is it will be the answer that we all have been waiting for so that we can understand what truly makes a student learn in the best way. It is understood that there is still a lot to be determined in relation to nature vs. nurture and how this affects student learning. We do not know which component the greatest determining factor is, but we do know that there are many different ideas still yet to be considered in relation to student learning. With the new-found direction of looking more into hereditability and genetics, researchers are taking a step back from looking at nature or nurture and considering the collective makeup of students. Understanding all aspects is crucial to revealing what exact combination the student learns in. Therefore, if I had to argue between genetics and environment, I would lean more toward genetics being more of a determinant. Although, as mentioned, there is still a significant amount of research to be completed. I hope this helps!
What you choose to answer this question is up to you, but there is compelling evidence that nature and nurture are not in opposition to each other. For example, as the blog from Psychology Today (see the link below) explains, twin studies suggest that many variables, such as intelligence and anxiety levels, are influenced by both genetics and the environment, in a roughly fifty-fifty split.
As the blog post explains, scientists believe that one's genes and environment have complicated interactions with each other. One's genes can affect the way one interacts with the environment. Also, one's environment can affect the expression of one's genes. For example, a person can have a genetic tendency towards depression, and that might affect the person's friendships or relationships by making others less likely to want to be around that person. In turn, this can affect the person's depression, worsening an already existing condition. Another example is one's intelligence. If one has potential but lives in a poor environment in which there is little interaction with books or learning, it would be difficult to bring out that potential. Therefore, there is a constant interaction between genetics and the environment. Perhaps there are other examples you can think of in which genetics and the environment interact or in which one is more important than the other.
https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/abcs-child-psychiatry/201710/nature-versus-nurture-where-we-are-in-2017
No comments:
Post a Comment