An Explanation of Child development, Based on Genetic and Environmental Influences.

Authors Avatar

An Explanation of Child development, Based on Genetic and Environmental Influences.

The explanation of human behaviours has been a debatable subject for behaviourists and geneticists since always. Hence, many attempts to unscramble the effects of innate predispositions from their context in human development have been made (Plomin, DeFries, & McClearn, 1990). Unfortunately, only in recent years “behavioural genetic and developmental approaches make the potential for collaborative studies quite promising”(Reiss, 1993). Genetics is increasingly been used to explain developmental processes on psychological functioning-both normal and abnormal. Plomin (1994), argue that genetic research on behavioural dimensions and disorders not only indicates genetic influence in developmental psychopathology but also provides the best evidence for the importance of the nongenetic, environmental influence. In addition, Geary and Bjorklund (Child Development, 2000, p.57) argues: “Genes provide the instructions for guiding the development of the core phenotypes, such as body structure and social behaviours, of the species”.

However, as people are in a constant interaction with their environment, environmental factors such as culture, family and prenatal environments need to be examined in order to be able to estimate the genetic contributions to behavioural traits (Mandler, 2001).

Hence, for the purpose of this essay, both environmental and genetic factors and the interaction between the two will be discussed and critically evaluated in order to examine what can cause a child to develop an aggressive and anti-social behaviour. The child’s behaviour will be explored from two developmental perspectives: 1) the Mechanistic World View (behaviourism, embracing the social learning) and 2) the Natist view (embracing the genetic view). Further, the development of language will be analysed, as it clearly proves the interaction of nature-nurture in human development. Before proceeding to discussing the events this essay will begin with a definition of aggression and anti-social behaviour.

“Human aggression is any behaviour directed toward another individual or thing that is carried out with the proximate intent to cause harm”. (Bushman & Anderson 2001, Baron & Richardson 1994, Berkowitz 1993, Geen 2001).  Moreover, according to Coin and Dodge (1999), aggressive behaviour appears to be a universal characteristic of the human species and a typical factor of antisocial behaviour (M. Knapp, S. Scott, J. Davies, 1999). Thus, the definitions of aggressive and antisocial behaviour vary and are by nature culturally determined and influenced by the observation of the observer (Walters and Parke 1964, cited in Coie and Dodge, 1999, p. 782).

In terms of frequency of aggressive acts, Cairns (1979, cited in ibid, p. 780) argues that pre-schoolers are the most aggressive, with a steep reduction in frequency as children mature (Coie and Dodge, 1999, p.780).  The most dangerously aggressive period has been found to be within late adolescence and early adulthood (Coie and Dodge, 1999, p. 786). Family and twin studies suggest genetic links such as a difficult temperament (Plomin, 1983, cited in ibid.) aggressive relatives (DiLalla & Gottesman, 1989 cited in ibid.) neuropsychological deficits (e.g., attention deficit disorder) (Moffitt, 1993, cited in ibid.) and low IQ (West, 1982, cited in ibid.) etc.  Social learning theorists and the information-processing hypothesis state that aggressive behaviours are acquired through social interactions (see Dodge, 1986).

A prognostication of early aggressive behaviour appears to be the quality of the parent-child relationship and the interaction within contextual stressors (Coie and Dodge, 1999). Lemma (1998) argues that development is the product of a dynamic interaction between the individual and the environment, which includes the possibility the individual to experience a strong determining influence from the environment he co-creates with others. Therefore as the mother and father are the adults and presumably more aware of social constructs than is the child, their behaviour could encourage the child’s aggressive behaviour.

Moreover, a study by Cleveland & Harrington et. al. (2000), showed supported on the effect that family structures can have upon the children’s behavioural problems. The study applied behavioural genetic methodology to 4 groups: 1) 2-parents full siblings, 2) 2-parents half siblings, 3) mother-only full siblings, and 4) mother-only half siblings. The results showed that behavioural problems in children were based 81-94% in genetic influence for those children with 2-parents, full sibling and with the mother only half sibling. In contrast, shared environmental influences accounted for 67-88% in behavioural problems between the 2-parent, full sibling and mother-only full sibling groups.

Join now!

Therefore sometimes the parents, vocally expresses both their disapproval of the child’s behaviour, and their limited understanding of the possible causes. Hence, they look unaware of the influence that the social interaction can cause to their child, and how certain patterns of behaviour could be inherited through the cultural norms and values and shape the behaviour of human being. (Kamiloff-Smith, 1997, & Oatley-Jenkins, 1996). According to the behaviouristic theory, aggression is a moulded learned behaviour.  For example, a father may tell his son to beat up the school bully who is picking on him. As a result, the boy ...

This is a preview of the whole essay