Nature Vs Nurture

Over the last decade, a debate in childhood development is taking place between nature and nurture. The underlying question of the debate is, whether nature or nurture is more important in determining child development. However, Rutter, Moffitt, and Caspi (2006) claimed that the issue is not nature versus nurture, but rather nature and nurture because both are important, which suggests that the way forward is to develop strategies that bring nature and nurture together to help us understand the development of complex traits. In fact, many psychologists have agreed upon that both nature and nurture do have an impact on childhood development (Moshman, Glover & Bruning, 1987). Over 90% of parents and teachers of young children believe that nature is as important as nurture in the development of a wide range of behavioral traits, including intelligence, learning disabilities, personality and mental illness (Walker & Plomin, 2005). In general, nature thinks of as influencing by genetic inheritance and other biological factors. Children inherit a combined trait from
As discussed by McDevitt and Ormrod (2007), many theorists saw nature and nurture as separate and rival factors from the past study. Some theorists believed that biological factors are ultimately responsible for growth. Other theorists assumed that children become whatever the environment shapes them to be. Increasingly, developmental theorists have come to realize that nature and nurture are both important and that they intermesh dynamically in the lives of children. On the other hand, much genetic research has examined the normal distribution of individual differences for a wide range of behavioral traits such as cognitive abilities and personality (Plomin et al., 2013). Genetic research has also addressed the low end of performance such as cognitive and learning disabilities, especially reading