Interplay Of Genetic And Environmental Factors

The process of “how much” genetic versus environmental factors matter has recently been replaced by questions about the processes that may mediate the relationship between the genome and social/environmental phenomenon (Spinath and Bleidorn,2017) For many years there have been debates on nature versus nurture but in contrast, we will be looking at how these two aspects work in unison to bring about cognition. We will try to understand the real meaning of gene-environment interactions and discuss its roles and influences upon our daily cognitive processes. We will analyse its effects on character development and behavioural traits. We will later relate the interplay to the south African context, giving examples of where it has been evident in our society and overall link it to our field of studies

Nature alludes to all of the genes and hereditary factors that influence who we are. It refers to genes which we inherit due to biological transfer from parent to offspring which also determines our genotypes(genetic traits) and phenotype(physical attributes). Genetics basis its research on gene portions and their accompanying traits with its assumptions being that characteristics of humans are products of evolution and individual differences are as a result of unique genetic codes (Weiten.W, 2013). Naturist believed in the theory of biological determinism and linked all human processes of cognition or behaviour on it being as a result of genetic influences.

Theorists explained that biological makeup is intimately related to an individuals behaviour and cognition, later experiments were designed all questioning whether more genetically similar individuals are similar in their cognitive abilities(Tucker-Drob, Briley and Harden 2013)Galton (1869) coined the phrase nature versus nurture in reference to the heredity-environment issue, He went about studying family trees in his attempts to prove that intelligence is governed by heredity( Weiten.W, 2013) Galton(1869) later concluded that success runs in families because great intelligence is passed from generation to generation through genetic inheritance. William Stern (1914) developed from the original Binnet-Simon scale which tests a person’s mental capacity and went on designing Intelligence quotients(IQ). Results from intelligence testing with twins supported the idea that IQ is inherited to a certain degree( Plomin and Spinath, 2004)

We describe the nurture aspect in terms of the environment and its effects on cognitive development. John Locke(1690) used the term “tabula rasa” in the description of a baby, pointing to the idea that we are born as a blank slate and sensory experiences within the environment are what determine who we are and impacts on cognitive development. Research done with adoptive children was concluded as providing useful evidence about the impact of experiences. Results pointed out that adoptive kids display similarities in IQ to that of their foster parents, this attributed to the effects of foster parents in shaping the environment. (Weiten.W, 2013) Cognition is thought to develop as a result of experience-dependent neural connections and is known to depend on environmental quality and educational experiences. (Briley and Tucker-Drob , 2013)

Galton(1869) maintained that personality and ability depend almost entirely on genetic inheritance but today most psychologists agree that both are important( Weiten.W, 2013). Years of research has led to the realization that genetics and environmental influences are rarely independent and static. Instead they transact or interplay( Spinath and Bleidorn, 2017). These interactions show the mental processes which are involved in learning are partly attributed to inherited genes, which also result in our individual differences, and partly due to environmental influences and experiences. Broadening the understanding for variance in intelligence ( Bates, Lewis and Weiss.2013)

Varying models were proposed each accounting for the interdependence of nature and nurture. Firstly, we have the diathesis stress model which looks at genetic predisposition which is triggered by environmental factors and results in outcomes or behaviours which would have no genetic difference in the absence of factors(Spinath and Bleidorn,2017). This can be explained as development of responsive conduct, which could potentially promote or repress cognition, due to an environmental stimulation of an innate and inactive gene. Secondly, we have the bioecological model in which rich environmental support is posited to maximize genetic effects. According to Bates et al. (2013) .Results from research of genetics in intelligence differences indicated the association of an environment with better cognitive development is equal to an increase in genetic variances.

Save your time!
We can take care of your essay

• Proper editing and formatting
• Free revision, title page, and bibliography
• Flexible prices and money-back guarantee

Place Order

Environmentally structured opportunities and constraints look at social norms which presents structural constraints or control preventing outplay of certain unwanted behaviours induced by genetic propensities. This promotes cognition in the models impact on the human mind to analyse surroundings and react accordingly. The model of differential susceptibility states that social context can increase the effects of genetic differences by providing benefits to those who have favourable genetic endowment, therefore, they are predisposed to advantageous outcomes(Spinath et al.2013). This looks to genes which are predisposed to better conditions and influence cognition development. Tucker-Drob et al (2013) mentions the transactional model which predict that people in high opportunity context actively evoke to and select positive learning experiences on the basis of their genetic predisposition which in turn influences cognition. From all of this we can deduce that genes can influence the environment people live in either directly through behaviour of indirectly via selection. Environmental impact is mistakenly interpreted as purely social influence, although this social influence is actually codetermined by genetic influences( Spinath et al.2013)

Theorists argued that personality traits and abilities are governed entirely by Heredity or entirely by environment(Weiten.W,2013). Research has resulted in some individuals who still believe in either nature or nurture independently. Spinath et al.(2017) quoted to nature or nurture as predominating on an individuals successes and failure in life. Intelligence is mostly a matter of heredity as we know from studies of identical twins reared apart(Tucker-Drob et al. 2013). The power of biologically reductionist concepts are evident in the pervasiveness of “ability” grouping and tracking in schools based on presumably inborn and immutable talents and achievement potential(Stetsenko, 2017). Emphasis on one of the two assumptions in practices or studies would lead to inaccurate and bias results as done with IQ testing. IQ tests are believed to be a reliable measure of quantities such as intelligence and abilities. Tucker-Drob noted beliefs of naturist that were that programmes that seek to raise IQ are bound to be futile, this is an example which relates to the Apartheid era. Assumptions about fixed and inert biological basis for academic achievement, talent, the potential of learning and abilities relevant to schooling (Stetsenko, 2017) were established in psychological understanding in the rebuilding of the nation and its education system after apartheid. Sole belief in genetics would result in assessments which are prejudice and not accommodating for other racial groups. Gould(1996,p.60) concluded that deterministic argum3nts for ranking people according to a single scale of intelligence no matter how numerically sophisticated, have recorded little more than social prejudice (Stetsenko, 2017)

Theorists who believe more on the impact of the environment and assume that humans are born as blank slates and our environmental experiences shape our behaviour and cognitive developments are likely to also be biased in their assessments. John Watson asserted that personality and ability depend almost exclusively on individuals environment(Weiten.W, 2013). Spinath et al. (2017) states that social inequalities are due to the fact that individuals do not respond to social influences in the same contingent way. The is a conventional that life courses are strictly shaped by social institutions, culture and history but are products of individuals considered as active agents and decision makers (Spinath et al. 2017). An example would be a psychologist who is supportive environmentalists, these professionals would attribute any issues such as attention deficiency to environmental influence and would not consider it as being due to genetic interactions. They believe that even though some fail to appreciate its influence but our cultural heritage has a pervasive impact on our thoughts, feelings and behaviour(Weiten.W, 2013). Triandis (2000) emphasizes on cultures dual nature, existing both outside and inside people. Culture exists outside in that there are different customs or practices which could mould an individual and it lies inside in that everything that happens to these individuals is viewed through a cultural lens (Weiten.W, 2013)

The interplay between genetics and environmental influences on the development of individual differences in social inequalities have both genes and environment play a role in shaping an individuals behaviour and ultimately their future, health and personality(Spinath et al. 2017). Looking at this statement in the South African context we consider the use of social inequalities and genetic variance in the determination of mental ability. The complex history of equality as a political ideal and a dimension of social practices infused with struggles for power and access to resources (Anderson, 2007), the ties between educational equality and justice, its implications for protection from discrimination(Stetsenko, 2017), this points out to the inequalities in the education system. The frequently encountered poor performance of blacks on ability tests could simply be an artefact of the method of administering the test (Rushton and Skuy, 2000).

Researchers studied children consigned to understaffed orphanages and children raised in poverty and isolated. Researcher came up with hypothesis that if kids raised in substandard circumstances will generally experience a decline in IQ as they grow (Weiten.W, 2013) Rushton and Skuy indicated that historically in South Africa, Blacks and whites have differed markedly in culture, politics, history as well as socio-economic status. Children from disadvantages backgrounds typically have less access to enriching books and learning materials the fore they have lower interactions with both peers and adults from a different background. (Tucker-Drob et al. 2013)

Genetic endowment influences the experiences that people are exposed to and environment influences the degree to which genetics inclinations are realized(Weiten.W, 2013). This is why it is vital to consider how genetics and the environment work together for cognitive development. This idea should effected in South African education systems as a whole where it has been lacking.

References

1. Bates, T. C., Lewis, G. J., & Weiss, A. (2013). Childhood socioeconomic status amplifies genetic effects on adult intelligence. Psychological science, 24(10), 2111-2116. DOI: 10.1177/0956797613488394
2. Briley, D. A., & Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2013). Explaining the increasing heritability of cognitive ability across development: A meta-analysis of longitudinal twin and adoption studies. Psychological Science, 24(9), 1704-1713. DOI: 10.1177/0956797613478618
3. Rushton, J. P., & Skuy, M. (2000). Performance on Raven's Matrices by African and White university students in South Africa. Intelligence, 28(4), 251-265.
4. Spinath, F. M., & Bleidorn, W. (2017). The new look of behavioral genetics in social inequality: Gene‐environment interplay and life chances. Journal of personality. DOI: 10.1111/jopy.12268
5. Stetsenko, A. (2017). Putting the radical notion of equality in the service of disrupting inequality in education: Research findings and conceptual advances on the infinity of human potential. Review of Research in Education. DOI: 10.3102/0091732X16687524
6. Tucker-Drob, E. M., Briley, D. A., & Harden, K. P. (2013). Genetic and environmental influences on cognition across development and context, 22(5): 349–355.doi:10.1177/0963721413485087
7. Weiten.W(2013) Psychology: Themes and variations:(9th Ed). Belmont, CA: Cengage Learning.