Nurture

Introduction. Debate continues on whether or not male homosexuality (MH) is a result of biological or cultural factors. The debate persists despite the fact that these two sides have different abilities to create a scientific environment to support their cause. Biological theorists produced evidence, however, that these are not always robust. On the other hand, social theorists, without direct evidence confirming their positions, criticize, with good argument, methods and results of the other side. The aim of this Controversy is to understand the reasons of both perspectives. Methods. Two scientists (R.B. and A.C.C.) with expertise in the area of biology of MH were asked to contribute their opinions. The nurture position is discussed by a third expert in sexology (J.B.). Main Outcome Measure. Expert opinion supported by the critical review of the currently available literature. Result. The role of the Controversy's editor (E.A.J.) is to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of both sides. The two experts of the biological issue answer with their data to the questions: "Is male homosexuality partly explainable by immunology?" and "How is male homosexuality a Darwinian paradox?", respectively. Genetic and immunological factors, birth order, and fertility of relatives are largely discussed. Finally, the expert sustaining the idea that culture and experiences are important determining factors in sexual orientation used a psychosocial and holistic perspective to explain his position. Conclusions. The JSM's readers should recognize that there are several biological factors in MH. However, these findings do not seem to be able to explain all cases of homosexuality. Some others may be due to particular environmental factors. The issue is complicated and multifactorial, suggesting that further research should be undertaken to produce the final answer to the question raised in this Controversy section. Jannini EA, Blanchard R, Camperio-Ciani A, and Bancroft J. Male homosexuality: Nature or culture? J Sex Med 2010;7:3245-3253.

Introduction. Debate continues on whether or not male homosexuality (MH) is a result of biological or cultural factors. The debate persists despite the fact that these two sides have different abilities to create a scientific environment to support their cause. Biological theorists produced evidence, however, that these are not always robust. On the other hand, social theorists, without direct evidence confirming their positions, criticize, with good argument, methods and results of the other side. The aim of this Controversy is to understand the reasons of both perspectives. Methods. Two scientists (R.B. and A.C.C.) with expertise in the area of biology of MH were asked to contribute their opinions. The nurture position is discussed by a third expert in sexology (J.B.). Main Outcome Measure. Expert opinion supported by the critical review of the currently available literature. Result. The role of the Controversy's editor (E.A.J.) is to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of both sides. The two experts of the biological issue answer with their data to the questions: "Is male homosexuality partly explainable by immunology?" and "How is male homosexuality a Darwinian paradox?", respectively. Genetic and immunological factors, birth order, and fertility of relatives are largely discussed. Finally, the expert sustaining the idea that culture and experiences are important determining factors in sexual orientation used a psychosocial and holistic perspective to explain his position. Conclusions. The JSM's readers should recognize that there are several biological factors in MH. However, these findings do not seem to be able to explain all cases of homosexuality. Some others may be due to particular environmental factors. The issue is complicated and multifactorial, suggesting that further research should be undertaken to produce the final answer to the question raised in this Controversy section. Jannini EA, Blanchard R, Camperio-Ciani A, and Bancroft J. Male homosexuality: Nature or culture? J Sex Med 2010;7:3245-3253.

Megjelent: In Vajda Zsuzsanna (szerk.) (2002) Az intelligencia és az IQ vita. Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, 51-81. Újramegjelenés: in Pléh Csaba és Boross Ottilia (szerk.) (2004) Bevezetés a pszichológiába. Osiris, Budapest; 134-163. Összefoglaló Öröklés (nature) és környezet (nurture) viszonya a viselkedéssel foglalkozó tudományok egyik legelcsépeltebb, mégis legkevésbé jól megválaszolt problémája. Általánosan elfogadott, hogy a környezet és a biológiai adottságok együttesen működnek közre a fejlődés hátterében, az "is" típusú válaszok azonban gyakran inkább elhomályosítják, mintsem megvilágítják a problémát, mivel megőrzik a kérdésfeltevés mögötti dichotóm sémákat. A tanulmány kritikailag elemzi azt a szemléletet, amely a fejlődést befolyásoló biológiai és környezeti tényezőket tömbszerűen dichotóm, egymástól független kettősségként fogja fel, és a pszichológia társtudományainak (etológia, viselkedésgenetika, evolúciótan) kulcsterületein sorra veszi azokat az érvrendszereket,

Family by nature is a social group of individuals who share similar attributions and characteristics. In the Victorian sense however, the definition of the family and its dynamics take on a drastic change. The Victorian family is defined less by its nature, its biological associations, and more by its nurture, its artificial means of cultivating similarities. The Industrial Revolution changed both the social landscape of public and private life into inverses of each other. Work now entered the home, turning the family from a real occurrence to an ideal expectation. A family is not of family members, but of a solitary union, each different from the next family. This social striation is otherwise known as classism which soon became the societal norm. Charles Dickens' novel Hard Times explores the function of the family in both terms of nature and nurture. There are three families this paper will put into contention: the Jupes, the Gradgrinds, and the Bounderbys. With their respective social backgrounds, each take on their own sense of nature and nurture in gradual and finite stages. The resilience of nature and the variance of nurture conflict within the three families of Hard Times but the nature of the traditional family remains unchanged in response to the nurturing of social expectations and individual determinations.

Although young Sikhs are regularly accused of not attending gurdwara and not being interested in Sikhism, many young Sikhs are now learning about Sikhism outside traditional religious institutions. Using data gathered as part of a research project studying the transmission of Sikhism among 18-30-yearold British Sikhs, this article explores how young Sikhs are learning about Sikhism in their pre-adult life stage. Examining the influences of the family and the school environment and the various methods used in gurdwaras, this article offers a retrospective look on the ways in which young Sikhs are nurtured and socialised into Sikhism, providing an understanding from the perspective of young Sikhs themselves about which methods actually work and why.

Introduction. Debate continues on whether or not male homosexuality (MH) is a result of biological or cultural factors. The debate persists despite the fact that these two sides have different abilities to create a scientific environment to support their cause. Biological theorists produced evidence, however, that these are not always robust. On the other hand, social theorists, without direct evidence confirming their positions, criticize, with good argument, methods and results of the other side. The aim of this Controversy is to understand the reasons of both perspectives. Methods. Two scientists (R.B. and A.C.C.) with expertise in the area of biology of MH were asked to contribute their opinions. The nurture position is discussed by a third expert in sexology (J.B.). Main Outcome Measure. Expert opinion supported by the critical review of the currently available literature. Result. The role of the Controversy's editor (E.A.J.) is to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of both sides. The two experts of the biological issue answer with their data to the questions: "Is male homosexuality partly explainable by immunology?" and "How is male homosexuality a Darwinian paradox?", respectively. Genetic and immunological factors, birth order, and fertility of relatives are largely discussed. Finally, the expert sustaining the idea that culture and experiences are important determining factors in sexual orientation used a psychosocial and holistic perspective to explain his position. Conclusions. The JSM's readers should recognize that there are several biological factors in MH. However, these findings do not seem to be able to explain all cases of homosexuality. Some others may be due to particular environmental factors. The issue is complicated and multifactorial, suggesting that further research should be undertaken to produce the final answer to the question raised in this Controversy section. Jannini EA, Blanchard R, Camperio-Ciani A, and Bancroft J. Male homosexuality: Nature or culture? J Sex Med 2010;7:3245-3253.

Resumen. En este documento se rebaten críticas hechas por Raventós y Jensen al artículo "Genética y comportamiento". Cuatro temas fueron seleccionados: 1) se determina que los antipsicóticos aparecieron veinte años después de la concepción hereditaria de la esquizofrenia; 2) se considera que la discusión es altamente pertinente, para nada bizantina o irrelevante, debido que persisten prácticas epistémicas riesgosas en los investigadores genético-conductuales; 3) aunque ninguna conducta humana está exenta de influencia constitucional, el enfoque biologicista se ha propasado al pretender explicar genéticamente casi todo, desconfirmando solapadamente la importancia de la historia personal; y, 4) se plantea que la investigación biológica sobrevalora el peso de las anomalías genéticas frente a la historia social, por lo que solo aparenta cautela. Se propone investigar genéticamente la esperanza con el objetivo de saturar a la humanidad con ese tipo de explicaciones, para alcanzar más rápido una convivencia basada en la tolerancia y el respeto.

The author investigates the clinical affinity between Klein and Winnicott (1935-46) asa way to historically situate Winnicott 's later criticism of Klein's 'temperamental' inability to understand the impact of the environment on the infant's development. By setting out Klein s theories at the time when Winnicott began supervision with her in 1935, a context is established for the analysis of an unpublished 1937 manuscript by Klein ('Notes on baby'). The author argues that this direct and extensive infant observation demonstrates Klein's sensitivity to the familial environment. While Winnicott as a paediatrician showed enthusiasm for Klein s ideas, he also demonstrated a difference of opinion in emphasising the maternal environment of provision after his wartime evacuation experiences with London children. The factors leading to their mutual distancing are outlined as follows: (1) the post-Controversial Discussion atmosphere of the British Psycho-Analytical Society in 1944. The new non-aligned psychoanalytic 'middle group' allowed Winnicott to take a pick and choose attitude towards available analytic theories; (2) Winnicott us new clinical practices and theory differed from Klein 's, leading to a widening gap between 1946 and 1951. Winnicott's new theory and practice simultaneously represented his technical marginalisation of Klein s emphasis on the direct analysis of the patient s destructiveness by the time he delivered the 'Transitional objects' paper in 1951.

Bowing to parents is a Buddhist home practice that links with the spread of religious-led attitudes across a notional border into the public sphere of young Buddhists’ lives. A quantitative study sought to map the attitudes corresponding with bowing to parents for teen self-identifying Buddhists in Britain. A variety of statements including those concerning personal well-being, discrimination, work, school, Religious Education, friends, family, substance use, collectivism, tradition and religion were rated for levels of agreement by 417 self-identifying Buddhists, aged between 13 and 20,  using postal and online surveys. The 56% who bowed to parents were found to have stronger public-sphere attitudes such as work ethic, resilience to intoxicant use, valuing study and Religious Education. In the private sphere, they were found to have a more positive attitude towards family and Buddhism. Additionally the study found the significance of bowing differed with age – being linked particularly with an increased subjective well-being in early teens and acceptance of hierarchy and parental influence in late teens. Also, the attitudes corresponding with bowing depended on religious style – bowing being linked with Asian values and feeling more religious for convert Buddhist teens, whereas for heritage Buddhist teens it was linked more with ingroup mentality. Unlike non-Buddhist adolescents, bowing to parents in Buddhists was linked with wanting to look after parents in old age. The article argues that bowing to parents has the cultural function of bringing religiously-led good into society, acting as a perpetuating structure, binding the Buddhist community together, facilitating mutual respect from adults and a sense of social hierarchy and as such deserves to be considered an aspect of Buddhist religiosity.

Previous research has recognized shrines in homes as sites of shared cultural memory with the function of contextualising religious narratives and bringing the sacred into the home. For Buddhists, shrines occupy a grey area between the cultural and the religious and have not been widely considered as indicators of religiosity. A quantitative study of 417 British teenagers self-identifying as Buddhists found that the 70% who had a home shrine were less likely to visit a Buddhist temple, but more likely to exhibit daily personal religious practice and to bow to parents. The attitude profile of those with shrines showed that these teenagers were generally happier at school, more collectivist, polarised regarding their identities, and strict about intoxicants. Heightened affective religiosity was linked with having a home shrine, particularly for female, late-teen, and heritage Buddhists. The article argues that, for these groups of Buddhists, a shrine represents a locus for shared memory, especially accessible to those of Sensing Psychological Types, but, for males, early teens, and converts, there is more a sense of shrines giving context to their Buddhist narratives.

Focus groups comprised of seventy-five self-identifying Buddhist teenagers in Britain were asked to discuss value domains that previous research has identified to be of special interest to Buddhists. These included personal well-being, the nature of faith, the law of karma, monasticism, meditation, home shrines, filial piety, generosity, not killing animals, and alcohol use. The findings suggest that some attitudes held by teenagers were conscious and intrinsically nurtured (“worldview”) while others involved social constructs (“ideologies”). The study finds that parents and the Sangha are mainly responsible for shaping “ideological” patterns in young Buddhists whereas informal nurture by “immersion” (possibly facilitated by caregivers) may be responsible for “worldview” patterns.

Using Kahneman and Tversky's life-death decision paradigm, Wang and colleagues (e.g.shown two characteristic phenomena regarding people's attitude to risk when the contextual group size is manipulated. In both positive and negative frames, people tend to take greater risks in life-death decisions as the contextual group size becomes smaller; this risk-seeking attitude is greater when framed positively than negatively. (This second characteristic often leads to the disappearance of the framing effect in small group contexts comprising of 6 or 60 people.) Their results could shed new light on the effect of contextual group size on people's risk choice. However these results are usually observed in laboratory experiments with university student samples. This study aims to examine the external validity of these results through different ways of experimentation and with a different sample base. The first characteristic was replicated in both a face-to-face interview with a randomly selected sample of the Japanese general public, and a web-based experiment with a non-student sample, but not the second.

Number of siblings has previously been found to adversely affect earned income. However, we still lack understanding of whether nature or nurture drives this effect. We examine in detail the effects of having different kinds of siblings and find that the number of siblings one grew up with has a strong negative effect on earnings, while the total number of siblings as such has no significant effect. We also find that number of full-siblings has a strong effect irrespective of having grown up together. Hence, both nature and nurture play a role.

Enteric neurons express oxytocin (OT); moreover, enteric neurons and enterocytes express developmentally regulated OT receptors (OTRs). Although OT (with secretin) opposes intestinal inflammation, physiological roles played by enteric OT/OTR signaling have not previously been determined. We tested hypotheses that OT/OTR signaling contributes to enteric nervous system (ENS)-related gastrointestinal (GI) physiology. GI functions and OT effects were compared in OTR-knockout (OTRKO) and wild-type (WT) mice. Stool mass and water content were greater in OTRKO mice than in WT. GI transit time in OTRKO animals was faster than in WT; OT inhibited in vitro generation of ENS-dependent colonic migrating motor complexes in WT but not in OTRKO mice. Myenteric neurons were hyperplastic in OTRKO animals, and mucosal exposure to cholera toxin (CTX) in vitro activated Fos in more myenteric neurons in OTRKO than WT than in WT mice; OT inhibited the CTX response in WT but not in OTRKO mice. Villi and c...

We are grateful to the commentators for taking the time to respond to our article. Too many interesting and important points have been raised for us to tackle them all in this response, and so in the below we have sought to draw out the major themes. These include problems with both the term 'ultimate causation' and the proximate-ultimate causation dichotomy more generally, clarification of the meaning of reciprocal causation, discussion of issues related to the nature of development and phenotypic plasticity and their roles in evolution, and consideration of the need for an extended evolutionary synthesis.

There are numerous offerings on the media landscape which deal with the topic of upbringing, whereby the quality and usefulness of these media varies greatly. In particular the portrayal of educational concepts on television is questionable because here the line separating reality from fiction is blurred. This paper discusses the possibility of using a new, converged media format in the development of educationally oriented games and summarizes a number of parameters for the creation of interactive, virtual environments, which serve educational purposes. The concept of Blended Nurture will be introduced, which combines computer-delivered content with live interaction and arranges it in the new format.

Number of siblings has previously been found to adversely affect earned income. However, we still lack understanding of whether nature or nurture drives this effect. We examine in detail the effects of having different kinds of siblings and find that the number of siblings one grew up with has a strong negative effect on earnings, while the total number of siblings as such has no significant effect. We also find that number of full-siblings has a strong effect irrespective of having grown up together. Hence, both nature and nurture play a role.

Introduction. Debate continues on whether or not male homosexuality (MH) is a result of biological or cultural factors. The debate persists despite the fact that these two sides have different abilities to create a scientific environment to support their cause. Biological theorists produced evidence, however, that these are not always robust. On the other hand, social theorists, without direct evidence confirming their positions, criticize, with good argument, methods and results of the other side. The aim of this Controversy is to understand the reasons of both perspectives. Methods. Two scientists (R.B. and A.C.C.) with expertise in the area of biology of MH were asked to contribute their opinions. The nurture position is discussed by a third expert in sexology (J.B.). Main Outcome Measure. Expert opinion supported by the critical review of the currently available literature. Result. The role of the Controversy's editor (E.A.J.) is to highlight the strengths and weaknesses of both sides. The two experts of the biological issue answer with their data to the questions: "Is male homosexuality partly explainable by immunology?" and "How is male homosexuality a Darwinian paradox?", respectively. Genetic and immunological factors, birth order, and fertility of relatives are largely discussed. Finally, the expert sustaining the idea that culture and experiences are important determining factors in sexual orientation used a psychosocial and holistic perspective to explain his position. Conclusions. The JSM's readers should recognize that there are several biological factors in MH. However, these findings do not seem to be able to explain all cases of homosexuality. Some others may be due to particular environmental factors. The issue is complicated and multifactorial, suggesting that further research should be undertaken to produce the final answer to the question raised in this Controversy section. Jannini EA, Blanchard R, Camperio-Ciani A, and Bancroft J. Male homosexuality: Nature or culture? J Sex Med 2010;7:3245-3253.

Number of siblings has previously been found to adversely affect earned income. However, we still lack understanding of whether nature or nurture drives this effect. We examine in detail the effects of having different kinds of siblings and find that the number of siblings one grew up with has a strong negative effect on earnings, while the total number of siblings as such has no significant effect. We also find that number of full-siblings has a strong effect irrespective of having grown up together. Hence, both nature and nurture play a role.

Enteric neurons express oxytocin (OT); moreover, enteric neurons and enterocytes express developmentally regulated OT receptors (OTRs). Although OT (with secretin) opposes intestinal inflammation, physiological roles played by enteric OT/OTR signaling have not previously been determined. We tested hypotheses that OT/OTR signaling contributes to enteric nervous system (ENS)-related gastrointestinal (GI) physiology. GI functions and OT effects were compared in OTR-knockout (OTRKO) and wild-type (WT) mice. Stool mass and water content were greater in OTRKO mice than in WT. GI transit time in OTRKO animals was faster than in WT; OT inhibited in vitro generation of ENS-dependent colonic migrating motor complexes in WT but not in OTRKO mice. Myenteric neurons were hyperplastic in OTRKO animals, and mucosal exposure to cholera toxin (CTX) in vitro activated Fos in more myenteric neurons in OTRKO than WT than in WT mice; OT inhibited the CTX response in WT but not in OTRKO mice. Villi and c...