The ongoing debate between ‘Nature’ and ‘Nurture’ in psychology revolves around the arguments for and against innate and learned behavior. Psychologists have conducted extensive research on behavior patterns from birth, leading to a discussion on whether humans are born with certain skills necessary for survival or if they acquire their behavioral traits through “nurture”. Nativists argue that individuals possess innate abilities crucial for survival, while Empiricists contend that most, if not all, behavioral characteristics are acquired through external influences.
In this context, it is important to provide balanced information regarding both sides of the argument. Nativists emphasize that humans possess inherent qualities essential for their well-being. They believe that certain behaviors are genetically predetermined and do not require external input or learning. For example, infants instinctively know how to suckle for nourishment soon after birth without any prior experience or instruction. This supports the idea that some behaviors are hardwired into human biology.
On the other hand, Empiricists assert that humans primarily acquire their behavioral traits through environmental factors and experiences. They argue that individuals learn various skills throughout their lives as a result of interactions with their surroundings. For instance, language acquisition is seen as an acquired behavior influenced by exposure to verbal communication in early childhood.
Both perspectives have valid points supported by numerous studies. Nativist research often focuses on biological determinants such as genetics and evolutionary adaptations to explain specific behaviors observed in humans and animals alike. Conversely, Empiricist studies examine socialization processes and cultural influences on behavior formation.
However, it is crucial to consider the complexity of human behavior when evaluating these opposing viewpoints. While certain behaviors may be more prone to genetic influence or environmental conditioning individually, most psychologists agree that a combination of nature and nurture contributes to overall human development.
Some behaviors are innate, unlearned, and instinctive. From birth, we exhibit instinctive motions such as swallowing when there is food in our mouth and coughing to clear our windpipe. These quick and automatic reactions are known as reflexes. For instance, babies instinctively close their eyes when they feel air on their face and produce saliva to aid swallowing. These behaviors are not taught but are known by nature. The purpose of these instinctive behaviors is protection. Swallowing keeps our mouths empty and facilitates feeding, while coughing prevents choking. Blinking protects our eyes from harm. In addition to these basic reflexes, newborns also have primitive reflexes. An example of this is the “rooting reflex.” If you gently touch the corner of a newborn’s mouth and pull their cheek, they will turn their tongue, mouth, and even their whole head toward the stimulated side and try to suck your finger.
In spite of being an inherent behavior, sucking and swallowing can be influenced by learning. According to Cohen (1967), babies who initially displayed restlessness and cried for a feed became more proficient at identifying the nipple, ceasing their cries, and initiating sucking with practice. [ref1] Reflecting on my own experiences as well as those of my twin sister, I considered our shared period of breastfeeding. Both of us received encouragement to breastfeed, and since our daughters were born just a few months apart, we jointly went through this experience for a brief period.
Both my sister and niece struggled with breastfeeding for weeks, causing them significant distress. In contrast, my daughter and I had a seamless feeding experience right from the start, achieving success that lasted for several months. Eventually, it was revealed that my sister’s daughter suffered from colic—a condition characterized by frequent and prolonged crying or distress in an otherwise healthy baby without any identifiable cause.
Considering this information, it made me question whether my niece took longer to learn how to breastfeed due to her colic condition, or if the natural motion was present but hindered by it. In the past, nurture referred to the care provided by parents, with a mother’s role being crucial. Nowadays, it encompasses any environmental element, including family, peers, and media. An experimental study by BINNS (1965) supported this notion.
According to a study by Ahrens in 1954 [ref1], differences were observed in the reactions of babies less than 5 days old to sudden disturbance. Ahrens also noted that infants between the 2nd and 7th month of their lives would smile at anyone who approached and interacted with them, including a crude, oval shaped cardboard with black dots for eyes. Spitz conducted an investigation that further supported Ahrens’ statement, where he observed how a group of babies aged 0-20 days old to 6-12 months smiled and responded to strangers.
According to research, it was discovered that 98% of babies aged 2-6 months would happily smile at strangers, while only 3% of babies aged 6-12 months displayed the same behavior towards strangers. [ref1] Watson and other theorists rejected the idea that abilities, personalities, or behavior were influenced by inheritance or instinct. Instead, they believed that these factors were solely determined by learning experiences. This was explained by the concept of ‘stimulus-response’. [ref2] Later on, Skinner applied Watson’s principles to control both animal and human behavior in programmed learning and behavior modification.
Example:
An experiment involving a rat in a box pushing a lever to receive food serves as an illustration. Initially, the connection between pushing the lever and receiving food was not obvious, but the rat quickly learned it. [ref3] Similarly, as a teaching assistant at my local junior school, I encounter children with various behaviors. Among them, some are exceptionally disruptive in the classroom and are therefore placed on a reward system inspired by Skinner’s rat experiment. The classroom teacher assigns individual daily goals for these children.
The purpose of the reward system is to show children that improved behavior in the classroom is rewarding. Once they achieve their targets, the child will receive their reward. I noticed that most of these children responded positively after observing them. We often hear expressions like “it’s in her genes” or “she takes after her mother”! However, it can be easy to mix up learned behavior with genetics. Genes determine traits like hair and eye color, or if someone has freckles. But it would be unfair to attribute a child’s behavior solely to their genetic composition.
The text highlights that our survival as infants is dependent on our parents, particularly the mother, who provides us with nourishment and care. It acknowledges that we possess innate knowledge to meet our basic needs if someone offers the necessary support, such as breastfeeding. However, it also argues that all other abilities beyond infancy are acquired through learning. As we grow and develop, we constantly absorb information from our environment.
According to Stonebridge College’s Child Psychology reading material, our habits and thinking patterns are influenced by what we have been taught, told, or observed. It is unfortunate that the ability to remember and replay experiences can also lead to negative behaviors or emotions. However, there is hope for change through positive education and therapies like “the talking therapy”.
References
The reference for Child Development A First Course is provided on page 183 by Kathy Sylva & Ingrid Lunt. Another reference for the same book can be found on page 119.
