Nature and Nurture Explanations of Human Behaviour

Last Updated on October 21, 2025 by Karl Thompson

The nature–nurture debate explores whether human behaviour is shaped more by biology (nature) or by society and culture (nurture).

• Nature explanations argue that behaviour is determined by genetics, instincts, and biological inheritance.
• Nurture explanations argue that behaviour results from socialisation, culture, and interaction with others.

While sociologists acknowledge biology plays a role in shaping human potential, they place far greater emphasis on nurture — the influence of society, culture, and learning — in explaining why humans behave as they do.

Nature Explanations of Behaviour

“Nature” explanations suggest that human behaviour is the product of innate biological or genetic factors.

Biologists and some psychologists argue that humans, as animals, are driven by instinctual behaviours. They study heredity to investigate whether traits like intelligence, aggression, or criminality can be inherited.

Key Points:

• Behaviour is viewed as pre-programmed or instinctive.
• Differences in behaviour are explained by genetic variation.
• Theories such as the idea of a “criminal gene” suggest that some people are biologically predisposed to crime or aggression.

Examples of Nature-Based Theories

• Sociobiology (E. O. Wilson) – behaviour such as altruism and aggression has evolutionary roots.
• Twin studies – show correlations in intelligence and personality between identical twins raised apart.
• Evolutionary psychology – traits that enhance survival and reproduction are more likely to persist.

However, sociologists criticise nature theories for biological determinism — the assumption that genes alone dictate behaviour — and for ignoring the influence of culture and learning.

Nurture explanations of behaviour

Nurture arguments focus on the way people are brought up and how their environment moulds their personality and behaviour. Sociologists argue that some people are brought up to be kind and caring, and others are brought up to display very different forms of behaviour.

An individual’s personality and identify are moulded and developed in response to their social environments and the people they meet. They are by taught others around them telling them what is right and wrong, including teachers, siblings and most importantly parents. This is why sociologists study the family and education (the two topics on the AS course) amongst other topics because it allows to investigate how these institutions effect human behaviour.

Nurture explanations: Key Ideas:

• People are shaped by environment, culture, and social interaction.
• Behaviour is learned through family, education, peers, media, and religion.
• Social expectations teach us what is considered right and wrong in different contexts.

For example, individuals raised in nurturing, supportive families tend to develop empathy and self-control, while those in neglectful or violent environments may learn aggression or antisocial behaviour.

Sociological Examples

• Functionalism: argues socialisation integrates individuals into society (Durkheim, Parsons).
• Feminism: explores how gender roles are learned through family, media, and education.
• Interactionism: highlights how identity and meaning are built through social interaction (Mead, Goffman).

Evidence for Nuture over Nature

We have two different ways of explaining human behaviour. One uses nature to explain behaviour, the other uses nurture. The question is, which is the best explanation?

If you explain human behaviour as being the same as animal behaviour, that means that humans would all behave in the same way. French cats behave in the same way as British cats. Do British people behave like French people? People in Britain do tend to behave in a similar way. They do similar things and wear certain types of clothing. Do all people all over the world behave in the same way? Sociologists tend to say ‘no’ and use two main types of evidence to prove the point:

• historical comparative evidence
• Anthropological (cross cultural) comparative evidence.

Historical Evidence for nurture theories…

If behaviour were biologically fixed, it would not change over time. Yet human behaviour and norms have changed dramatically — for example, gender roles have transformed in a single generation, while animal behaviour has barely changed in centuries.

🟣 Changing gender roles are strong evidence for nurture — culture and values evolve, influencing behaviour far faster than genetics could.

This suggests humans interact with their environments in a unique manner, both moulding and being moulded by it.

 

Anthropological Evidence for nurture theories…

If genes determined behaviour, all societies would be similar. Yet anthropologists show that what is “normal” varies greatly between cultures.

• In some societies, sharing and cooperation are valued; in others, competition is rewarded.
• Gender roles, child-rearing practices, and moral norms differ widely — proving that behaviour is socially constructed, not biologically fixed.

📸 Tribal and indigenous societies provide powerful evidence against nature-only explanations of behaviour.

 

Further evidence against nature theories

Case Study: The BBC “Born to Be Good?” Podcast

🎧 “I Should Be a Psychopath, But I’m Not?” – BBC Analysis (2011)

Genetic research suggested that a professor carried a pattern of genes associated with violence. However, he did not become a killer because his upbringing was positive — stable family life, education, and emotional support.

This example shows that nurture can override genetic predispositions, reinforcing the sociological emphasis on environment and socialisation.

Nature or Nurture: Conclusions

NOTE – the Nature Vs. Nurture debate is hotly debated topic. No side can claim to provide compelling evidence that entirely disputes the other i.e. neither side can completely disregard nature or nurture in explanation of human behaviour.

Signposting and Related Posts 

I usually teach this material as part of an introduction to sociology module.

Please click here to return to the homepage – ReviseSociology.com

---

🌐 External References

1. BBC (2011) “I Should Be a Psychopath, But I’m Not?” BBC Radio 4 Analysis
2. Wilson, E.O. (1975) Sociobiology: The New Synthesis. Harvard University Press.
3. Mead, M. (1935) Sex and Temperament in Three Primitive Societies.
4. Giddens, A. (2021) Sociology, 10th Edition, Polity Press.