Nature vs. Nurture
After reading and watching these documentaries and tutorials along with the notes, they opened my eyes to a whole new world of debates and new studies that I was unaware of in my original position of the ongoing debate. I always chose the side that both nature and nurture play a role. Now, reading more into it, I have added to my conclusion and agree that nature plays a more important role that nurture ONLY until a certain stage of development.
The study that sold me on this new addition is the Jimmy and Johnny study performed by McGraw. McGraw did various experiments with the twin boys (Johnny and Jimmy). These experiments were aimed at the twin boys while they were in the "critical period". Early practice for several activities was the main basis for this experiment. The twin with the early training formed poor habits and was unable to develop the skill like the twin whose training was delayed. McGraw concluded that there are optimal periods during development when special training will assure the full acquisition of various motor skills.
. In the summation of the study written years later, a number of reasons why McGraw had trouble proving environmental influences were listed. These included the fact that the test did not study different levels of development and used primarily product scores (the number of times you can do something, nothing to do with how movement looks). She needed more qualitative measures. It also did not measure anything outside the physical domain such as personality, aggression, timidness and confidence. They also found out later on that the twins were not maternal twins, but fraternal twins. And finally in a report in LIFE magazine in the 70’s/80’s the parents indicated that they were giving Jimmy some extra attention at home similar to the enrichment Johnny was given at school.(Notes Module 5) . Although there are factors that show her study to be...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document