Article
Nature and Nurture: Disentangling Perspectives
First Published: 13 May 2024
Abstract
The nature versus nurture debate which first began as a dichotomy has now evolved towards a unified whole. In the integrative wholistic view, nature and nurture are viewed as synergistic entities that determine outcomes at both the individual and collective domains of a person’s lived experience. When applied to behavior development, both the distinct and unified interpretations of the nature-nurture dynamic may find relevance in the overall discourse. Where prosocial behavior is symbolized by positive attitudes towards others, aggressive behaviors are characterized as negative tendencies that are detrimental to the individual and society (Kogan et al., 2011; Zhang et al., 2017). Consequently, prosocial behavior is linked to acceptance within peer group and aggressive behavior is associated with peer rejection (Bornstein & Lamb, 2015). In context of behavior development, each of these domains can be assayed from the nature-nurture perspective which itself can be applied in distinctly contrasting and unified approaches. If viewed from the lens of the nature-nurture dichotomy, is prosocial or aggressive behavior related to genetic expression or is it a function of environmental inputs? Consequently, if understood from the unified perspective, can prosocial or aggressive behavior be a function of both attributes? To this end, the purpose of this paper is to understand how distinct and unified theoretical understandings of the nature-nurture stance inform behavior and intervention so that treatment plans can be optimally applied to foster human growth.
Separated Understanding
From the lens of distinctive perspectives, those in the categorical camp of nature would suggest that there is a genetic basis for prosocial or aggressive behavior and those in the domain of nurture would suggest that there is an environmental basis for prosocial or aggressive behavior. Evidence of genetic influences on behavior comes from studies that have highlighted the role of the neurohormone oxytocin in expression of prosocial behaviors in humans. Oxytocin is known to assist facilitative inter-person exchanges that support care giving and empathy. Studies have reported that genetic variations in the single nucleotide polymorphism (SNP) oxytocin receptor (OXTR) gene rs53576 show that the A (minor) allele is associated with lower prosocial behavior (Rodrigues et al., 2009). It is also known that X-linked MAOA gene, which plays an important role in the degradation of central nervous system serotonin and norepinephrine further suggesting that serotonin (5-HT)- and dopamine related genes are linked with aggressive behaviors in adolescents (Zhang et al., 2017). Although behavior relates to genetic variability, it’s expressive spectrum is also defined by contexts that include more than a few determinants therefore contextual perspective is equally imperative to understanding its expression. From this perspective, environmental factors such as maltreatment, life adversity, and poor neighborhood are predictors of aggressive behavior (Zhang et al., 2017). If viewed solely from the perspective of genetic expression, prosocial and aggressive behavior is a function of the complex interactions between genes and biological and neural pathways that create intra individual changes. Hence pharmacological interventions which impact an individual’s neurobiological pathways would be an illustration of nature-oriented therapies. From the lens of nurture, intervention would include external therapy services targeted towards improving prosocial behaviors and reducing aggressive behaviors in an individual’s environment. Although nature and nurture can be separately applied in targeted treatments, studies have shown treatment to be most efficacious if interventions from both sets are combined thus leading the way for a more unified and interdependent understanding of both perspectives.
Unified Perspective
From the point of view of the unified theory of development both nature and nurture interdependently influence behavior through interactions between gene and environment (Sameroff, 2010). This interdependent interaction expresses itself through environmental triggers that activate gene based neurobiological pathways and result either in a prosocial expression or aggressive demonstration of behavior. The unified application of nature and nurture is best represented through intervention approaches that are directed at both the person and the environment. For instance, if a person’s aggressive behavior is linked with alcohol addiction, a combination of pharmacotherapy and cognitive behavioral therapy is known to provide best treatment outcomes (Ray at al., 2020). In other contexts, severity of presenting symptoms may determine the line of treatment utilized such as in treatment of Disruptive Behavior Disorder (DBD) where psychotherapy may be the standard of treatment but pharmacotherapy could also be prescribed for severe cases. Masi et al. (2017) demonstrated that a combination of both approaches showed greater improvement in aggressive behaviors and/or emotional dysregulation. This further suggests that interventions designed from the lens of the unified perspective demonstrate optimum treatment outcomes in individuals.
Conclusion
Although nature and nurture have specific and unified articulations on an individual within the environment, applying them in an integrative manner ensures a wholistic understanding of a person’s intra- and inter- individual influences. In the domain of behavior, an instance of the combined application of nature and nurture is best highlighted through intervention approaches that integrate pharmacotherapy with psychotherapy for treatment of aggressive behaviors. Therefore, as nature determines the genetic presence of certain traits within an individual it is nurture that triggers their contextual expression.
Bornstein, M. H., & Lamb, M. E. (Eds.). (2015). Developmental science: An advanced textbook. Psychology Press.
Kogan A., Saslow L. R., Impett E. A., Oveis C., Keltner D., & Saturn S. R. (2011). Thin-slicing study of the oxytocin receptor (OXTR) gene and the evaluation and expression of the prosocial disposition. PNAS 108 19189–19192. 10.1073/pnas.1112658108
Masi, G., Milone, A., Manfredi, A., Brovedani, P., & Pisano, S., & Muratori, P. (2016). Combined pharmacotherapy-multimodal psychotherapy in children with disruptive behavior disorders. Psychiatry Research, 238, 8-13.
Rodrigues S. M., Saslow L. R., Garcia N., John O. P., & Keltner D. (2009). Oxytocin receptor genetic variation relates to empathy and stress reactivity in humans. PNAS 106 21437–21441. 10.1073/pnas.0909579106
Zhang, Y., Ming, Q., Yi, J., Wang, X., Chai, Q., & Yao, S. (2017). Gene-Gene-Environment Interactions of Serotonin Transporter, Monoamine Oxidase A and Childhood Maltreatment Predict Aggressive Behavior in Chinese Adolescents. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience, 11(17), 1-10.