Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.
The discussion of nature’s and nurture’s roles in determining people’s intelligence has been present for many years. Scholars implemented numerous studies to contribute to the debate. However, there is still no consensus among psychologists regarding the issue. In this piece, I will reflect on my relevant experience, elaborate on my types of intelligence by Gardner and Sternberg and contribute to the debate on environment vs. genes.
According to observations of my family and my own, I inherited good analytical abilities from my father and interpersonal intelligence from my mother. I think that nature has played a significant role in determining my intellectual capabilities. Based on my experiences with children in my life, I am inclined to say that nature determines a considerable percentage of a person’s intelligence if they come from lower socioeconomic status. For example, I have cousins whose parents could not provide quality tutors and other educational opportunities. They all seem to share similar intelligence levels. However, if a family has opportunities to offer conditions for intellectual growth, nature’s role becomes less significant.
While discussing intelligence matters, it is crucial to note that Western criteria for an intelligent person have been limited. Conventional IQ test measure only three of the eight intelligence types introduced by Howard Gardner’s multiple intelligences theory, which are “linguistic, logical-mathematical and spatial abilities” (Coon & O. Mitterer, 2014, pp. 343-344). Other intelligence types are more interesting: musical, bodily-kinesthetic, intrapersonal, interpersonal, and environmentalist (Coon & O. Mitterer, 2014, p. 343). From this list, I would score the highest in linguistic and intra-personal abilities. I am interested in learning languages, analyzing information, and communicating complicated ideas. Additionally, I self-reflect and enjoy interpreting and analyzing my emotions and behavioral patterns. Another psychologist who contributed to how people view intelligence is Robert J. Sternberg, who formulated three types of intelligence: practical, creative, and analytical. Within these alternative interpretations of intelligence, I exhibit the analytical type the most, as I am good at analyzing, identifying, and addressing problems. Gardner’s and Steinberg’s more inclusive types of intelligence should substitute IQ tests in the future.
Scholars have conducted many studies to contribute to the nature vs. nurture discussion. Even though their findings are insightful, there is still no consensus on the issue. For example, studies on twins reveal that identical twins who were separated and raised in different environments still have a high correlation coefficient. Therefore, researchers believe their DNA determines 50% of people’s intelligence. However, the twin study does not consider the period in the womb, which can be a reason for their similar intelligence (Coon & O. Mitterer, 2014, p. 344). Another study conducted among biological siblings who were separated and reared in different households revealed that parents’ level of education predicts their children’s intelligence better than their genes (Samarrai, 2022). As evident from the studies mentioned above, both nature and nurture determine people’s intelligence; however, there is no consensus on the extent to which these two factors influence.
I believe that environment, mainly how parents treat, teach, speak to, and spend time with their children, as well as their ability to provide educational opportunities, determines the intelligence of young adults. One more study was conducted in families with one biological and one non-biological child. It reveals that non-biological child’s cognitive abilities correlate with parents’ abilities as much as their biological child’s (Coon & O. Mitterer, 2014, p. 345). This study shows that non-biological children’s genes play an insignificant role compared to the effects of the environment in which they grew up. Thus, genes do not build cognitive skills; instead, “educated parents do something with their kid that makes them smarter” (Samarrai, 2022).
Even though there is no consensus on the nature vs. nurture debate if one has to choose, however, scholars agree that both genetic and environmental factors contribute to a person’s intelligence. It is also essential to remember that the studies mentioned above-used IQ similarities as evidence of correlations. Steinberg and Gardner proposed more inclusive forms of intelligence that should substitute IQ tests in future studies.
References
Coon, D., & O. Mitterer, J. (2014). Psychology: A journey (5th ed., pp. 342-345). Cengage Learning.
Samarrai, F. (2022). IQ of children in better-educated households is higher, study indicates. UVA Today.
Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?
We have qualified writers to help you.
We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.
You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)
NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.
NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.