Why nurture is solely responsible for human development
The Nature v Nurture debate has been one of the biggest debates in psychology for many decades. The purpose of this essay is to discuss why Nurture is solely responsible for human development with reference to the case of Genie. Genie was thirteen and a half when by chance was found by Social Services. Genie had spent the last thirteen and a half years in her bedroom tied to a potty chair through the day and at night she was to sleep in a crib made of wire and mesh. Her father allowed no human contact and did not like noise, if Genie was to make a noise he would beat her or bark at her like a dog. The second part of the essay is to look at how a multi-disciplinary team in 2013 could help Genie and how hopeful I would be that she could lead a normal life.
A humans development is the result of two processes, learning and maturation. Maturation being the result of biological changes through growth and learning being the environment and experiences through growth. (cited in Slater et al, 2003) Arnold Gesell viewed that maturation alone shaped motor development and no environmental factors would contribute to this development (cited in Slater et al 2003.)One of the first researchers to question Gesell's hypothesis was Myrtle McGraw(1945) she tested pairs of twins where one twin received more motor skills training than the other. The outcome was that the twin with more motor training had more motor skills than the other twin.(cited in Slater et al 2003). When Genie was found she could barely walk, the doctors said she had a "bunny walk" and her arms and hands held up in front of her. In Genies case study it mentioned that Genie was a normal child until 14 months old and this is when the abuse began, so it could be said that Genie had already started to walk, but because she was strapped to a potty chair all day and lack of nutrients this could be the cause of her "bunny walk". While physical development...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document