The nature vs. nurture theory has been debated for many years. The debate is over how important genetics is to ones behavioral development versus the environment. Many scientists and psychologists have weighed in their opinions over the years, both citing case studies relevant to their points of view.Those who believe genetics are more responsible for behavior refer to instances where people
. exhibit behavior similar to their families, even if they were raised by people not related to them. Twins that were put up for adoption have often been used to substantiate this point of view. Researchers note that these people are frequently attracted to the same extracurricular activities as the twin they have never met. They also compare the behaviors of people to others in their family, showing similarities in addictions and other behaviors with a negative connotation.On the other side are researchers who believe that environment plays a stronger role in the behaviors a person chooses. They state that children learn to mimic the actions of those around them while their personality is developing. Those who believe that environment is the greater influence often cite instances where people exhibit behavior similar to that of their youth, even if the circumstances changed later in their lives. They also cite adoption cases where the children imitate the behaviors of their adopted families, including favored sports and hobbies.In more recent years, researchers have started to understand that both nature and nurture have an impact on how people behave. No longer do people believe that only one of these options is solely responsible for the choices individuals make. Genetics certainly play a part in the characteristics displayed by people but, there is undeniably an environmental component to their choices as well. Today, it is generally accepted by scientists and psychologists that both factors influence behavior.For more information, please see: http://ask.reference.com/related/nature+vs.+nurture+theory?o=102369
