Are Human Intelligence Centers Instinctive or Learned - Research Paper Example

Intelligence is Innate: Evaluate this claim referring to relevant research. Much of the debate regarding human intelligence centers on these very intriguing questions: Is it instinctive or learned? Is it genetic or environmental? The question of the extent to which heredity or environment determine human intelligence is far from being settled. It is truly a complex attempt to explain of whether or not genetic differences or the environmental inequalities cause two people to receive different cores on intelligence tests (Fischer, 1973). As a question may stress the complexity; do intelligent people learn to do well in schools and other learning institutions or are they born that way? The reason for the intensity of the argument may be that many people assume something inborn will determine the intellectual capacity of a person whereas something learned is harder to retain and live on. Investigating the roots of human intelligence is never an easy task for scientists and psychologists alike (Fischer, 1973). Whenever they investigate a particular case, they are more likely to find that the issue is not that simple. Inherited factors and environmental conditions always act together in complicated ways. Asking whether heredity or environment is responsible for intelligence turns out to be like asking what makes a cake rise, baking powder or heat- the obvious reason would be, the interaction of the two is responsible (Herrnstein, 1971; Gormly, 1993). The nature-nurture argument of human behavior and intelligence has been an issue that has been raised for the past centuries (Erikson, 1950). Perhaps it was Sir Francis Galton, (cousin of Charles Darwin) the first to acknowledge the importance of nature in the modern era when he published a book in 1869 entitled Hereditary Genius that found out that success ran in the families of 1,000 eminent politicians, religious leaders, artist, and scholars and concluded that heredity was the cause (Galton, 1869). But then, most psychologists have equally emphasized the importance of the environmental influence in the human intelligence, contradicting the claim that it is innate. The tone was set by John Watson (1930) the father of Behaviorism, who wrote: “give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and on my own specified world, to bring them up in and I’ll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become any type of specialist I might select- doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant,-chief, and yes, even beggar man and thief, regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations, and race of his ancestors” (Watson, 1930: 104). These statements from a famous psychologist indeed support the view that human intelligence is not innate, rather, acquired. Watson’s view now seems a bit extreme as recent studies that directly looked for evidence of genetic influence on intelligence have been conducted. The studies particularly focused on three general areas of human intellectual functioning: cognitive abilities or intelligence quotient, mental illness, and personality (Gerst, 1971). Each of these areas is controversial but the argument over IQ has been particularly large and long. Studies on twins have also been conducted in an attempt to find out whether intelligence is inherited. The differences were noted from both identical twins (developed from a single fertilized egg or monozygotic cell) and fraternal twins (twins developed from two fertilized egg or dizygotic cell). Obviously, twins who grew up in the same house share the same general environment while identical twins who also grew up together also share the same genes aside from the shared environment. Considering this fact, it could probably mean that genes are important for that trait if identical twins proved to be more alike on a specific trait than fraternal twins do (Meyer & Dusek, 1979). To stress the importance of inheritance, it is best to take a quick glance at the example of twins’ studies that have been done on the inheritance of mental disease. Schizophrenia is said to be the most common form of serious mental illness and affects about 1percent of the world population. Studies have also shown that if one twin becomes schizophrenic, the other twin is three to six times more likely to become schizophrenic if he is an identical twin rather than a fraternal twin (Holden, 1980).). Thus, schizophrenia is at least partly genetic although it is also clear that in many cases, identical twins develop schizophrenia while the other does not. Given this proposition, environmental factors are also important aspect to be considered in evaluating the proposition that intelligence is innate and not acquired. A study conducted by Plomin et.al (2006) suggests that children increasingly resemble their parents in cognitive abilities from infancy through adolescence. In a 20-year longitudinal adoption study of 245 adopted children and their biological and adoptive parents as well as 245 matched non adaptive parents and offspring, it was found out that adopted children resemble their adoptive parents slightly in early childhood but not at all in middle childhood or adolescence and that during childhood and adolescence, adopted children become more like their biological parents, and to same degree as children and parents in control families. The findings suggests that within this population, genes that stably affect cognitive abilities in adulthood do not at all come into play until adolescence and that environmental factors that contribute to cognitive development are not correlated with parents' cognitive ability (Plomin, 2006). This study, however, contradicts the previous proposition that human intelligence is the result of experience and environmental factors and is by nature acquired through genetic make-up. There are several other ways the nature-nurture prove to be complex in defining human intelligence. In a few cases, identical twins are separated by birth due to adoption or foster care. Studies on such cases show the effects of the same genes among the twins in different environments. Even when they are separated and of no recognition of each other and was brought by different families, they still show similar qualities and the level of cognitive functioning is almost the same (Terman, 1983). Although such cases are relatively rare, still, they are extremely important from a scientific point of view given the fact that it is also possible to see whether adoptive children resemble more closely to their biological parents level of cognitive abilities (suggesting the importance of genes and intelligence being inherently innate) or adoptive parents (emphasizing the influence of environment and contradicting the view that intelligence is innate). Although many such studies are going on, the nature-nurture, innate-acquired question continued to be controversial; up until people gain a more sophisticated understanding of how genetic influences and heredity and environmental factors interact to produce behavior and affect intellectual level of functioning (Gormy, 1993). For example, a study of identical twins that were separated at birth and was reared in different environment purports that that despite very different social, cultural and economic backgrounds, the twins shared many common behaviors and level of cognitive functioning. The study, conducted by the psychologists at the University of Minnesota in the 1980’s suggested that heredity and a person’s genetic make-up may continually contribute to human intelligence despite the environment to where he or she was brought up (Gormly, 1993). According to Plomin & Petrill (1997), family, twin, and adoption studies during the past 75 years consistently converge on the conclusion that genetic influence on individual differences in intelligence is significant and substantial, hence, the notion that intelligence runs in the families. In the study, it was shown that the average correlation for IQ scores of biological parents and offspring and for sibling living together is about .45. Further, adoption and twin studies are as they postulated are seemingly experiments of nature that can disentangle genetic and environmental sources of familial resemblance; the extent that family resemblance is attributable to heredity, genetically related individuals adopted apart should be similar even though they do not share the same family environment (genetically related family members living together should be more similar than adoptive family members who are not genetically related and identical twins, who are genetically identical, should be more similar than fraternal twins) who are only half as similar genetically, and this should be the case whether the twins are reared together or adopted apart (Plomin & Petrill, 1997). Many researchers however believed that differences in human intelligence can be explained by considering heredity or his/her genetic make-up as well as experience that was brought along by environmental factors when a person is growing up (Brown, 1973). Contrary to popular belief though, the influence of genes on cognitive functioning does not mean that nothing can be done to improve a person’s intelligence quotient. Although, it is true that it is difficult and undesirable to change the genetic code of a person, it is possible however to alter the environment to which the genes operate (Davis, 1951). Gray, (1992) wrote in one of his articles, that implicit in the concept of innate behavior is the idea that behavior is somehow present in either a latent or coded form in the genes. He said that in most extreme form, the point of view that says genes do contain behavior such that genes contain a blueprint for behavior or a programme for behavior is obviously wrong. These are considered, however, a pre-formationist rather than epigenetic because they assign only a secondary role to these developmental processes of "expressing" or "translating" the underlying blueprint or programme. According to numerous developmental researchers, this view results in a pseudo-explanatory account of the way in which behavior actually develops and that when asked to explain how innate behavior develops proponents of innate behavior merely reassert that the trait is innate. Perhaps it is so for the reason that actual development of so-called innate behaviors is not studied, analyzed nor explained- their existence is simply taken as given (Gray, 1992). This response would satisfy many of the criteria often and to classify behavior as innate- species specific, adaptive, present at birth and appears to develop without the possibility of prior learning. The controversy over IQ includes the socio-economic status of an individual (Agin, 2009). Experiences brought along with the difference in economic standing have been found to have effects an influence on a person’s level of intelligence. A study conducted by Davis (1951), found out that questions pertaining to usual life experiences mattered in testing for an IQ score. For example, the following question was set as a test of reasoning ability: a symphony is to a composer as a book is to what? (Choices include paper, sculptor, author, musician, man). He found out that that 81 percent of children from well-off families, but only 51 percent of children from lower class families, answered this correctly. But when he rephrased the question in less “highbrow” terms, (using everyday words and common experiences), the gap between socio-economic status was closed (example of question asked: A baker goes with bread, a carpenter goes with what: a saw, a house, a spoon, a nail, a man). Fifty percent of the children from both income groups were then able to answer the question correctly (Davis, 1951). Therefore, it was proven that socio-economic background and everyday life experiences portrays an important role in shaping human intelligence (first question measured experience in middle class society as well as reasoning while the second question measured reasoning alone). In addition, there is also mounting evidence that children from poor families do not try as hard as children from middle class on intelligence tests for the reason that the test itself makes them uncomfortable (Cronbach, 1970). Usually, these children see tests as punishments or as situations intended to make them look bad as their scores would usually be lower than those of others. More often that not, most of these children rush through a test, choosing responses almost at random- just to get it over with. In contrary however, middle class children tend to see test as otherwise. They see it as an opportunity to prove themselves and to win praise. They tend to work more slowly, making fewer wild guesses and eventually score higher as compared to lower class children- thus the differences among these groups reflect motivational factors as well as intelligence (Agin, 2009; Loehlin, Lindzey, Gardner, & Spuhler, 1975). Given the above mentioned studies and researches, it is quite a challenge to really put a definite definition of human intelligence. One cannot simply say that intelligence in innate because if it is, then it could mean that regardless of one’s situation in life and regardless of his or her experiences, if he or she has the “intelligent genes” so to speak, he or she can truly do better than others in intelligence tests because he or she is born intelligent. On the other hand, as suggested by studies and researches, environmental factors are not solely determinants of human intelligence for the reason that genetic influences also play a major role in human development and if these genes are weak, then, regardless of the advantaged environment, cognitive functioning is still influenced at any level. Therefore, it may be objected that intelligence is only partly innate; that it is also partly acquired or achieved. References: 1. Agin, Dan. (November 02, 2009). More Than Genes II: Why Is the Fetus So Vulnerable to the Environment? Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com. 2. Agin, Dan. (November 16, 2009) More Than Genes IV: Culture, Poverty, and Fetal Destruction. Retrieved from http://www.psychologytoday.com. 3. Brown, Roger. (1973). A first language: the early stages. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. 4. Cronbach, Lee J. (1970). Essentials of psychological testing. 3rd ed. New York: Harper & Row. 5. Davis, A. (1951). Socio-economic influences upon children’s learning. Understanding the child, Vol. 20 pp. 10-16. 6. Elkind, D., and Weiner, I.B. (1978). Development of the child. New York: Wiley. 7. Erikson, Erik. (1950). Childhood and society. New York: Norton. 8. Fischer, Kurt W. (1973) Piaget’s theory of learning and cognitive development. Chicago: Markham. 9. Galton, Sir Francis. (1869). Hereditary Genius: an inquiry into its laws and consequences. London: Macmillan. 10. Gray, R.D. (1992). Death of the gene: Developmental systems strike back. In Trees of Life, P. Griffiths (ed.), pages 165-209. 11. Gerst, M.S. (1971). Symbolic coding processes in observational learning. Journal of personality and social psychology, Vol. 19 pp. 9-17. 12. Gormly, Ann V. (1993). Understanding Psychology. New York. Random House. 13. Herrnstein, Richard. (1971). IQ. Atlantic Journal, Vol. 228 pp. 43-64. 14. Holden, C. (1980). Identical twins reared apart. Science Journal, Vol. 207 pp. 1323-1328. 15. Loehlin, John C., Lindzey, Gardner, and Spuhler, J.N. (1975). Race differences in intelligence. San Francisco: Freeman. 16. Meyer, W.J., and Dusek, J.B. (1979). Child psychology: a developmental perspective. Lexington MA: Heath. 17. Plomin, Robert & Stephen Petrill A. (1997). Genetics and Intelligence: What’s New? Institute of Psychiatry, London. 18. Terman, Lewis M. (1983). Measuring intelligence. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. 19. Watson, John B. (1930). Behaviorism (revised edition). University of Chicago Press 20. Plomin, R., Fulker D.W., Corley R., & DeFries J.C. (2006). Nature, nurture, and cognitive development from 1 to 16 years: A parent-offspring adoption study. Social, genetic and developmental psychiatry research centre. Pp 1-4. Institute of Psychiatry: London, United Kingdom. Read More