How Nature and Nurture Contribute to Development - Assignment Example

HD Question What is the relative contribution of nature versus nurture to development over the human life span? Discuss how the affects of nature and nurture are consistent, fluctuate, or linearly increase/decrease across developmental periods (e.g., infancy, adolescence, adulthood). In other words, substantiate your understanding of how nature and nurture contribute to development. Nature refers to an individual’s genetic (or inherited) characteristics that shape his/or her development over the individual’s lifespan, whereas nurture is the environment one is brought up in that has an influence on one’s development and maturity. (McDevitt et al., 2007). I believe that it takes genes (nature) + environment (nurture) to work together to develop the human skills. Many development theorists considered nature and nurture as two separate aspects, where it was generally accepted that the relative contribution of nature linearly declined with age while the contribution of nurture slowly inclined across the developmental periods. Recently, some revolutionary theories in the field of developmental science have brought evidence that can overturn the conventional theory. Many revolutionary theories acknowledge the importance of human nature in the process of development just like the continuous contribution of nurture, though the level of influence may fluctuate at different points in one’s lifetime. Nature and nurture are inseparable and both factors contribute equally in human development, but in two different ways. Dempster (1992) evaluated developmental changes in working memory capacity across the human life span. His research showed that the capacity of working memory underwent ups and downs from preborn to the age of two. Then, working memory linearly progressed higher between the age of two and five. That capacity became stable until the age of twelve, and then it again increased when participants were in late adolescence. Afterwards, the capacity of working memory gradually declined at the age of twenty and continuously showed ups and downs within similar range. The contribution of nurture (learning environment in this study) demonstrated reverse modes from the contribution of nature (Dempster, 1992). Belsky et al. (2009) raised an interesting point about nature versus nurture debate in their study. When evaluating various studies of brain plasticity in early childhood, the authors proposed that plasticity was not merely a function of nature, but more likely, it was a function of both nature and nurture (Boyce et al., 2005) when a mother’s experience during her pregnancy impacted on her child’s genetics and development. They proved the point that there was a correlation between maternal stress during pregnancy and infant’s temperament (Belsky et al., 2009, Huizink et al., 2002). The researchers also pointed out that maternal anxiety during prenatal period could lead a child’s higher level of cortisol at the age of ten (Belskey et al., 2009, O’Conner et al., 2005). Based on the given study, it can be argued that a child’s development is not quite systematically influenced by either his/her nature or the environment. That established linear regression model can work only after a child is born. The study showed that nature and nurture are inseparable across developmental periods (ten-months of waiting period in a mother’s womb, infancy, toddler, early and late childhood). Belsky et al. (2009) also noted the contribution of nature (which is given by a mother’s nurture) might fluctuates over the human life span, depends on how infants were exposed during their mothers’ pregnancy and how they shaped their experiences during the critical period. The important issue here is that parenting (or parental influences) can be considered as both nature and nurture. It makes researchers hard to define which function of the two comes first and because of that reason, nature versus nurture debate still continues (Collins et al., 2000). In my view, an individual’s nature and nurture both influence each other and his/her personality reflects both. Two people brought up under similar conditions exhibit different behaviors just like another two individuals, who behave similarly despite being brought up in different conditions. There is a considerable amount of literature to provide various views as discussed above, but the fact is that both nature and nurture play an equal role in the development of an individual and always work side by side. There is an equality between the two terms in the development of an individual’s personality. (HD Question 2) Researchers have known for some time that the zero-to-five age is a critical period of development; there are now researchers who consider adolescence also to be a critical period of development. Do you agree that adolescence is a second critical period? Why, why not? Before getting into an in-depth analysis of a child’s development in the various phases of life, it is customary to define the critical period. (Columbo, 1982: 261 cited in Han, 2004, p. 57) also defined the term as “a time during the life span of an organism in which the organism may be affected by some exogenous influence to an extent beyond that observed at other times”. Besides the early childhood, adolescence can also be considered as a critical period of development. Several scholars have argued that children go through certain critical stages which serve to enhance their learning abilities. According to the significance of a critical period presented by (McDevitt et al., 2007), critical periods are so special that if the children fail to develop the appropriate skills in those particular time periods for learning, they are not able to make up the deficiency later. In regards to cognitive and social development, that theory has been widely accepted for years. Studies have shown that children have certain period to work on language. If they miss the period, the children most likely may never learn it adequately. (Lenneberg, 1967). The term has frequently been used in domain of early childhood (McDevitt et al., 2007), but recently, there has been a massive increase in cognitive science concentrating on the associations between critical period and adolescents. An individual certainly experiences a critical period of development in the adolescence as well. This was also found by Grimshaw et al. (1998) who supported the hypothesis that the critical period of first-language acquisition does occur in adolescence even if an individual missed his/or her first chance during childhood and the conclusions drawn rendered the hypothesis correct. By conducting a single-subject design, the authors evaluated a participant’s development of cognitive processes. The participant missed the critical period of his early childhood because he had a hearing loss from his birth. When the subject was in early and middle adolescence, he was diagnosed and received various assessments and verbal productions from educational professionals. The results showed that the participant made a dramatic progress in language development because maturation and environmental stimulation highly impacted on his learning (Grimshaw et al., 1998). The researchers also noted that neural and cognitive structures subsequently change over time, so the development of cognitive processes can create second critical period in adolescence. The participant’s linguistic skills were greatly improved but obviously could not be exactly as polished as those of the ones that had benefited from the critical period of their early childhood, otherwise it would be irrational to call the early childhood as a critical period for the development of learning skills in an individual. Although the study lacked on generalizability of the hypothesis, their work of how individuals’ brain and language development were likely to be occurred made an interesting argument of adolescent development. Steinberg (2005) also wrote in favor of the existence of a critical period in the adolescence. By evaluating brain development in adolescence, the author confirmed what Grimshaw et al. (1998) mentioned earlier: the continued maturation of brain activities till adolescence can reorganize inhibitory control and emotion regulation in adolescence. The study showed that adolescents in the study made quite progress in reasoning, information processing, and problem-solving skills. Given the fact that such a brain development can lead adolescents into both developmental turmoil and regulatory competency, (Steinberg, 2005) supported that adolescent can be defined as critical period for both normal and abnormal parts of development. Shaw et al. (2006) also found a critical moment of adolescents when investigating the relationship between IQ and brain connections. They argued that high IQ was related more to rapid thickening of brain during childhood, perhaps longer window? than what the researchers originally hypothesized. The study also showed that great thinning of cortical thickness occurred during adolescence. Their results indicated the following aspects: Superior intelligence skill was peaked around the age of 11-13. Moderately high intelligence skill was peaked around the age of 9, whereas average intelligence skill was peaked around the age of 4 (Shaw et al., 2006). Since adolescence is related to puberty and the study showed that superior skills peaked at the start of teenage or puberty, it indirectly speaks in favor of the existence of a critical period in the adolescence. Also, the function of human brain must not be overlooked. After birth, neurons in brain take at least ten to eighteen years to develop (McDevitt et al, 2007), and that is the duration in which an individual reaches puberty. Also, considering the fact that adolescents tend to use their forebrain more than hindbrain, emotion regulation and complex thinking can be maximized during that time. In the structure of human brain, forebrain involves in the most complex activity whereas hindbrain and midbrain control the basic function (McDevitt et al., 2007, Paus, 2005). Adolescence can be thought of as the critical period of high-order thinking. In language acquisition and neuroscience, it is shown that crucial brain development can be done during adolescence and the development can highly impact on people. Various experiences in human life continuously influence on brain. That function leads newron circuit to re-assign brain activities when critical period begins. Adolescents’ awareness of self can also be considered as a cause of critical period along with brain development. The changes of genetic and brain function must be counted toward a part of human development. The integration of brain science mentioned here is to provide an objective validity of second critical period in the human lifespan. In light of the rationale provided above, adolescent period can be considered as a second cue for increasing potential for better learning. References Belsky, J., & Pluess, M. (2009). The nature (and nurture ?) of plasticity in early human development. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 4 (4), 345-351. Boyce, W.T., & Ellis, B.J. (2005). Biological sensitivity to context: I. An evolutionary- developmental theory of the origins and functions of stress reactivity. Development and Psychopathology, 17, 271-301. Collins, W.A., Maccoby, E.E., Steinberg, L., Hetherington, E.M., & Bornstein, M.H. (2000). Contemporary research on parenting: The case for nature and nurture. American Psychologst, 55 (2), 218-232. Dempster, F.N. (1992). The rise and fall of the inhibitory mechanism: Toward a unified theory of cognition development and aging. Developmental Review, 12 (1), 45-75. Han, Z. (2004). Fossilization in adult second language acquisition. UK: Archetype-IT Ltd. Print. Huizink, A.C., de Media, P.G., Mulder, E.J. Visser, G.H., & Buitelaar, J.K. (2002). Psychological measures of prenatal stress as predictors of infant temperament. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 41, 1078-1085. McDevitt, T.M., & Ormrod, J.E. (2007). Child Development and Education, 3rd edition. Columbus, Ohio: Person Merrill Prentice Hall. O’Connor, T.G., Ben-Shlomo, Y., Heron, J., Golding, J., Adams, D., & Glover, V. (2005). Prenatal anxiety predicts individual differences in cortisol in pre-adolescent children. Biological Psychiatry, 58, 211-217. References Grimshaw, G.M., Adelstein, A., Bryden, M.P., & MacKinnon, G.E. (1998). First-language acquisition in adolescence: Evidence for a critical period for verbal language development. Brain and Language, 63, 237-255. Lenneberg, E.H. (1967). Biological Foundations of Langauge. New York: Wiley. Paus, T. (2005). Mapping brain maturation and cognitive development during adolescence. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 9 (2), 60-68. Shaw, P., Greenstein, D., Lerch, J., Clasen, L., Lenroot, R., Gogtay, N., Evans, A., Rapoport, J., & Geidd, J. (2006). Intellectual ability and cortical development in children and adolescents. Nature, 44, 676-679. Steinberg, L. (2005). Cognitive and affective development in adolescence. TRENDS in Cognitive Sciences, 9 (2), 69-74. Read More

They proved the point that there was a correlation between maternal stress during pregnancy and infant’s temperament (Belsky et al., 2009, Huizink et al., 2002). The researchers also pointed out that maternal anxiety during prenatal period could lead a child’s higher level of cortisol at the age of ten (Belskey et al., 2009, O’Conner et al., 2005). Based on the given study, it can be argued that a child’s development is not quite systematically influenced by either his/her nature or the environment.

That established linear regression model can work only after a child is born. The study showed that nature and nurture are inseparable across developmental periods (ten-months of waiting period in a mother’s womb, infancy, toddler, early and late childhood). Belsky et al. (2009) also noted the contribution of nature (which is given by a mother’s nurture) might fluctuates over the human life span, depends on how infants were exposed during their mothers’ pregnancy and how they shaped their experiences during the critical period.

The important issue here is that parenting (or parental influences) can be considered as both nature and nurture. It makes researchers hard to define which function of the two comes first and because of that reason, nature versus nurture debate still continues (Collins et al., 2000). In my view, an individual’s nature and nurture both influence each other and his/her personality reflects both. Two people brought up under similar conditions exhibit different behaviors just like another two individuals, who behave similarly despite being brought up in different conditions.

There is a considerable amount of literature to provide various views as discussed above, but the fact is that both nature and nurture play an equal role in the development of an individual and always work side by side. There is an equality between the two terms in the development of an individual’s personality. (HD Question 2) Researchers have known for some time that the zero-to-five age is a critical period of development; there are now researchers who consider adolescence also to be a critical period of development.

Do you agree that adolescence is a second critical period? Why, why not? Before getting into an in-depth analysis of a child’s development in the various phases of life, it is customary to define the critical period. (Columbo, 1982: 261 cited in Han, 2004, p. 57) also defined the term as “a time during the life span of an organism in which the organism may be affected by some exogenous influence to an extent beyond that observed at other times”. Besides the early childhood, adolescence can also be considered as a critical period of development.

Several scholars have argued that children go through certain critical stages which serve to enhance their learning abilities. According to the significance of a critical period presented by (McDevitt et al., 2007), critical periods are so special that if the children fail to develop the appropriate skills in those particular time periods for learning, they are not able to make up the deficiency later. In regards to cognitive and social development, that theory has been widely accepted for years.

Studies have shown that children have certain period to work on language. If they miss the period, the children most likely may never learn it adequately. (Lenneberg, 1967). The term has frequently been used in domain of early childhood (McDevitt et al., 2007), but recently, there has been a massive increase in cognitive science concentrating on the associations between critical period and adolescents. An individual certainly experiences a critical period of development in the adolescence as well.

This was also found by Grimshaw et al. (1998) who supported the hypothesis that the critical period of first-language acquisition does occur in adolescence even if an individual missed his/or her first chance during childhood and the conclusions drawn rendered the hypothesis correct.

Read More