Nurture and Personality Development
Jada Milan
Yorkville University
PSYC 6123 Theories of Personality (20W-3O)
Dr. Melissa Moore
September 23, 2022
Introduction
Nature and Nurture were originally pitted against each other by psychologist
Francis Galton, the cousin of Charles Darwin (Cherry, 2019). Aristotle is also known for
questioning the origin of traits and behaviours, however he believed that intelligence
was gained through experience (McCartney & Tomcho, 2020). In contrast, Plato
suggested knowledge was innate (McCartney & Tomcho, 2020).
Behaviour and personality derived from genetic inheritance and biological factors
is described as nature, while external factors such as, experience, observation and
learning, are considered nurture (Zaky, 2015). Biological psychology focuses on the
influence of genetics, while behaviourism focuses on the influence of one’s surrounding
environment on behaviour (Zaky, 2015). Nativists take a stance that most of our
personality and behaviour is the result of inheritance (Zaky, 2015). While at the other
end, environmentalists or empiricists assume that at birth one is a blank slate and
personality is a result of experience and learning (Zaky, 2015).
Many psychologists today, understand that there is a complex relationship
between nature and nurture. Epigenetics are radically changing the way we think about
personality development. McCartney and Tomcho (2020) describe epigenetics as the
following:
Epigenetics involves an array of chemical markers and switches that play a role in
genetic activity, collectively called an individual’s epigenome. These markers and
switches are modified due to experiences (e.g., diet, behaviors, and
surroundings), and the edited epigenome can be passed down to future
generations. (p.3)
Environmental changes do not change DNA; however, they do influence the epigenetic
markers that inhibit or enable certain traits. McCartney and Tomcho (2020) suggest
that “epigenetics is nature and nurture” (p.3).
According to Smoller (2016) “Genes and stress are the two most widely
acknowledged contributors to psychopathology” (p.297). Stressful environments have
been connected to anxiety, depression, and traumatic stress disorders. Stress and
trauma during childhood are risk factors for anxiety disorders (AD) (Smoller, 2016).
Bandelow and Michaelis (2015) explain that most AD start in childhood, peak during
middle age and decrease with older age (p.331).
Nature vs. Nature is no longer a debate, given the advancements in the study of
genetics as well as psychology. AD are a result of both biological and environmental
factors. This paper will examine the role in which both these factors contribute to AD
and argue that nurture is significantly more influential.
Review of the nature argument
Twin studies have been the primary source of research conducted to determine
whether genetics or environment influence personality and behaviour. Identical twins,
monozygotic (MZ) typically share %100 of their DNA. If a trait is to be considered
heritable then both twins should exhibit the trait equally (Barlow, 2019). Non-identical,
dizygotic (DZ) twins share %50 of their DNA, on average. In order to determine whether
a trait is heritable or environmental, results of MZ pairs are compared to that of DZ pairs
(Shimada‐ Sugimoto, Otowa, & Hettema, 2015). If the similarity of MZ pairs is greater
than that of the DZ pairs, this is evidence for genetic influence (Shimada-Sugimoto,
et.al, 2015).
Studies have found that AD are %30 - %50 heritable (Rapee 2012). “A study of
over 20,000 people in the Danish population with a psychiatric record indicated an
individual with an anxiety disorder was 6.8 times more likely to have a first-degree
relative with another disorder” (Rapee, 2012, p.69). When looking at immediate families,
a child with one parent who has an AD was rated 2, whereas if both parents has
anxiety, the risk increased to 5 (Rapee, 2012, p.70). This suggests that there is a strong
correlation between genetics and AD. When one or both parents have anxiety, children
are at a higher risk of developing AD. Nebel-Schwalm and Davis (2013) speculate that
environmental influences are responsible for the specific disorder that develops in
people who have a general genetic predisposition to mental health disorders.
Behavioural genetics suggests that temperament is genetically influenced
(Kamran, 2016). “Behavioral geneticists claim that shared family environment has little if
any effect on most psychological traits; family resemblances are almost all attributable
to shared genes rather than shared environment” (Zaky, 2015, p.2). Conduct issues are
the one exception to this assumption (Zaky, 2015). If this is true, then siblings should
exhibit similarities in temperament. However, it’s difficult to determine the specific
genetic or environmental factors that contribute to personality. hanging in response to
the environment” (p.69).
Behavioural epigenetics is the study of environmental experiences that trigger
biological changes that modify genetic markers (Powledge, 2011). Researchers believe
that early childhood experience shape adult behaviour (Powledge, 2011). Through rat
studies, they have found that early experiences influence gene changes and disease
susceptibility (Powledge, 2011, p.590). These studies suggest that experience
contributes to AD through genetic changes. Zaky (2015) suggests that “genetic
predisposition and appropriate environmental triggers are required for a mental disorder
to develop” (p.1). Barlow (2019) explains that the nature vs. nurture debate is over, “we
are each bundles of genes, reacting and changing in response to the environment”
(p.69). Nature and nurture are not in opposition, they are intertwined, and both play a
role in the etiology of AD.
Review of the nurture argument
Psychologists such as Freud, speculated that parents are the most critical in
shaping children’s personality and behaviour (Barlow, 2019). Freud suggested that
worry ensues when a child’s needs are not met, and the pattern of needs not being met
causes anxiety (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Freud theorized that one is constantly in
search of balance, and tension is experience when the body is in a state of need
(Schultz & Schultz, 2017). This was called ‘instinct’, and he believed it to be an innate
characteristic of all human beings. Children are dependent on their parents to satisfy
their needs and reduce tension. If their needs are consistently neglected the
development of an AD may occur.
Alfred Adler theorized that all behaviour is motivated by feelings of inferiority
(Schultz & Schultz, 2017). He suggested that neglecting or spoiling children results in
an inferiority complex. Children who are spoiled may not know how to manage a
challenge or conflict later in life, which results in feelings of inferiority. Whereas children
who are neglected may experience feelings of worthlessness which also yields an
inferiority complex (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Adler found that these types of people
were unable to cope with life and were most likely to develop mental health issues. He
also believed that the mother was the most influential in shaping children's personality.
He described social interest as one’s innate ability to socialize with others, and mothers
could foster or neglect it (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). “Research using the SIS found that
those high in social interest reported less stress, depression, anxiety, and hostility than
those low in social interest” (Schultz & Schultz, 2017, p.126). Mothers who nurture
social interest will have children with high social interest that are less susceptible to AD.
Many psychologists have researched the influence of childhood experiences,
however Barlow (2019) suggests that how we remember our childhood also shapes us.
Childhood experiences are subjective, and this helps explains why twins exhibit different
characteristics later in life. “Different people interpret and respond to the same stimuli in
different ways” (Barlow, 2019, p.71). Why would twins respond differently to the same
stimuli? Their DNA may be identical; however, their environment may have had
variations. For example, parents may treat children differently, or one child may have
experienced a traumatic event. These experiences could influence one's genetic
markers, which is an example of epigenetics (Barlow, 2019). “Multiple other studies
confirm that the same family environments are either objectively different or
experienced differently by people in a way that is reliably accounted for (in part) by
genes” (Barlow, 2019, p.72). When exposed to the same stimuli, their response may
vary based on unique past experiences and their differing genetic markers.
Parenting styles are also considered important in determining personality. Adler
theorized birth-order and its impact on personality. The relationship between parents
and children as well as between siblings has been researched extensively. Only
children are more likely to be pampered by their parents, as they are the center of
attention (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). First-borns are typically high achievers with
attention to detail and are adaptive to change. Adler noted that parenting style changes
over time. With the first born, everything is new, and parents may be more neurotic
(Schultz & Schultz, 2017). For example, mothers may stress more easily since they are
navigating new territory. A second child is more work; however, parents may feel more
relaxed having experienced the first child (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). Even though the
environment is the same for each child, most siblings have varying personalities. Birth
order and the evolution of parenting styles is the reason behind this.
Clear stance with support for the chosen side, /25
Nature and nurture may be intertwined; however, nurture is more significant
because it can alter nature. As previously discussed, the environment and life
experiences can alter genetic markers. One’s life experiences are constantly shaping
personality and determine the likelihood of developing a mental illness.
Anxiety is a “chronic fear that persists in the absence of any direct threat –
common psychological correlate of stress” (Pinel et al., 2017, p.489). Anxiety is a
human response that evolved for protective means, however, persistent anxiety without
a present threat, can be debilitating (Nebel-Schwalm & Davis, 2013). AD is the most
common of all psychiatric disorders with estimates of 14-34 percent of people suffering
from an anxiety disorder in their life (Pinel et al., 2017). According to Smoller (2016)
“The role of stressful environments and the physiology of stress response systems have
been most closely linked to depressive, anxiety, and traumatic stress disorders” (p.297).
Parents are the first people who influence a child’s personality development.
Children observe and learn from their parent’s behaviour (Schultz & Schultz, 2017). An
example of this can be seen in Bandura's Bobo doll experiment. Bandura’s social
learning theory states that “aggression is learnt from the environment through
observation and imitation” (Zaky, 2015, p.3). Kamran (2016) suggests that peer
modeling, culture, media and technology also influence a child’s personality and
behaviours (p.107). How one responds to their environment, can determine vulnerability
for AD. Bourgeois and Brown (2015) explain that expressing negative emotions in
response to stress, is a sign of vulnerability for emotional disorders (p.531). Bourgeois
and Brown (2015) discuss how emotional vulnerability arises:
General psychological vulnerability that is the product of stressful childhood
experiences, such as harsh or unpredictable early environments (e.g.,
authoritarian or inconsistent parenting styles). This general psychological
vulnerability may manifest as a sense of unpredictability or lack of control over
life events and emotions. In the context of situational stressors, individuals with
both general vulnerabilities are more likely to develop emotional disorders.
(p.532)
Parenting style contributes to psychological vulnerability. Rapee (2012) suggests that
parental overprotection and control is associated with AD. They explain that
overprotection can lead to anxiety later in life, while childhood anxiety can lead to
parental overprotection (Rapee 2012). Perhaps this is why AD are observed crossgenerationally in family units.
Bourgeois and Brown (2015) also explain that “disorder-specific psychological
vulnerability develops through learning experiences that emphasize the potential danger
of certain situations, objects, or internal experiences (e.g., thoughts, memories, physical
sensations)” (p.532). Children learn that certain stimuli are dangerous, such as fire or
busy streets. However, parents may pass on fears that do not have a logical cause for
fear, such as spiders. Nebel-Schwalm and Davis (2013) explain that theories attempting
to explain the development of AD often focus on four pathways: direct learning, indirect
learning, biological preparedness pathway, and a non-associative pathway.
Direct learning, also known as classical conditioning, refers to fear that is
associated with a stimulus (Nebel-Schwalm & Davis, 2013). For example, someone is
bitten by a spider, then avoids spiders to avoid the fear they invoke, and a phobia
develops.
Observational learning is when a fear is learned through the observation of
others (Nebel-Schwalm & Davis, 2013). For example, a child witnesses their mother
scream at the sight of a mouse. Exposure to a mouse in the future, elicits the same fear
response observed in their mother.
Negative information transfer is “the idea that one can learn to be anxious by
hearing others talking negatively (or anxiously) about a subject” (Nebel-Schwalm &
Davis, 2013, p.5 ). This can be observed in overly cautious parenting for example, when
a parent makes a big fuss when their child falls and scrapes.
Biological preparedness refers to stimuli that risk our lives, such as heights. It
has been suggested that biological preparedness explains why certain phobias form
more easily than others (Nebel-Schwalm & Davis, 2013). An example of this can be
seen when observing how common the fear of spiders is, versus the fear of nonthreatening stimuli such as dolls. Nebel-Schwalm and Davis (2013) explain that
biological preparedness theory presumes that a conditioning event has occurred (p.6).
Finally, non-associative pathways occur when a direct event cannot be
determined as the cause of one’s fear and anxiety (Nebel-Schwalm & Davis, 2013). “For
example, researchers studying water phobia found that most people did not know how
the fear started” (Nebel-Schwalm & Davis, 2013, p.6).These four factors are dependent
on nurturement and can be used to explain the etiology of most AD.
Parents have the greatest influence in the development of personality. Parenting
style is detrimental to the resilience of a child later in life. Parents who overprotect are
preventing their children from developing coping mechanisms which results in children
who have a higher chance of experiencing anxiety later in life (Rapee, 2012). In
contrast, parents who neglect their children may result in feeling of worthlessness. Adler
explained that both ends of the spectrum can result in mental health issues later in life
(Schultz & Schutlz, 2017). Through the review of the nurture theory as well as the
backing research, there is no doubt that nurture has the most influence over personality
development.
Conclusion
Evidently there are many environmental factors that influence personality.
Nurture plays an appreciable role in the development of AD, through parenting, culture,
peers and life experiences. Theorists such as, Freud, Adler, and Bandura have all
emphasised the importance of social and environmental factors in the development of
personality. Heritability also plays a role in the predisposition to AD, and advancements
in the scientific field have shown that environmental factors influence changes in genetic
markers. Epigenetics is the amalgamation of nature and nurture. The age-old debate is
over, and a dialogue around the complex relationship between nature and nurture is
underway. This paper reviewed the significant role that nurture plays in the development
of personality and anxiety as a mental health disorder. Although nature and nurture are
closely related, it was argued that nurture plays a more significant role.
References
Barlow, F. K. (2019). Nature vs. nurture is nonsense: On the necessity of an integrated
genetic, social, developmental, and personality psychology. Australian Journal of
Psychology, 71(1), 68–79. https://doiorg.libraryservices.yorkvilleu.ca/10.1111/ajpy.12240
Bandelow, B., & Michaelis, S. (2015). Epidemiology of anxiety disorders in the 21st
century. Dialogues in clinical neuroscience, 17(3), 327.
Bourgeois, M., & Brown, T. (2015). Perceived Emotion Control Moderates the
Relationship Between Neuroticism and Generalized Anxiety Disorder. Cognitive
Therapy & Research, 39(4), 531–541. https://doiorg.libraryservices.yorkvilleu.ca/10.1007/s10608-015-9677-5
Kamran, F. (2016). Are Siblings Different as “Day and Night”? Parents’ Perceptions of
Nature vs. Nurture. Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 26(2), 95–115.
McCartney, J., & Tomcho, T. J. (2020). Teaching nature versus nurture: The
development and benefits of a seminar course. Scholarship of Teaching and
Learning in Psychology. https://doiorg.libraryservices.yorkvilleu.ca/10.1037/stl0000184
Pinel, J. P. J., & Barnes, S. (2017). Biopsychology. Pearson Education UK.
Powledge, T. M. (2011). Behavioral Epigenetics: How Nurture Shapes Nature.
BioScience, 61(8), 588–592. https://doiorg.libraryservices.yorkvilleu.ca/10.1525/bio.2011.61.8.4
Rapee, R. (2012). Family Factors in the Development and Management of Anxiety
Disorders. Clinical Child & Family Psychology Review, 15(1), 69–80. https://doiorg.libraryservices.yorkvilleu.ca/10.1007/s10567-011-0106-3
Schultz, D. P., & Schultz, S. E. (2017). Theories of personality (11th ed.). Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth.
Shimada‐ Sugimoto, M., Otowa, T., & Hettema, J. M. (2015). Genetics of anxiety
disorders: Genetic epidemiological and molecular studies in humans. Psychiatry
and clinical neurosciences, 69(7), 388-401.
Smoller, J. W. (2016). The genetics of stress-related disorders: PTSD, depression, and
anxiety disorders. Neuropsychopharmacology, 41(1), 297-319.
Zaky, E. A. (2015). Nature, nurture, and human behavior; an endless debate. Journal of
Child and Adolescent Behavior.