Jayla Butler

Ms Graue

English 1201

10 March 2019

Annotated Bibliography

My research focuses on the human body and behavioral characteristics. I will be looking

at the nature versus nurture debate to answer the question: does nurture or nature affect a

person’s characteristics and personality and why? Why is there no defined answer for certain

traits?

F​rancis,Darlene and Daniela, Kaufer. "Beyond Nature versus Nurture." ​The Scientist​, 1 Oct.

2011,

https://www.the-scientist.com/reading-frames/beyond-nature-vs-nurture-41858.

Accessed 16 Feb 2019.

“Beyond Nature vs. Nurture,” by Darlene Francis and Daniela Kaufer, appeared in ​The

Scientist​ on October 1st in 2011; and, it is about researchers discovering that genes and

environments are deterministic. The article is about a psychologist’s response to a researcher

asking about the nature vs. nurture debate. Specifically, scientist have study stress in the

physiological response aspect and the cognitive focus aspect. Basically, the article argues that the

debate is fading away because through the years people have realized that both factors have

influence.

This article is credible because it is based off of a behavioral psychologist’s research, and

it has no biased. At the end of the article, it states, “​Darlene Francis is an assistant professor in
the University of California, Berkeley, School of Public Health–Division of Community Health

and Human Development. Daniela Kaufer is an associate professor in the Department of

Integrative Biology and the Helen Wills Neuroscience Institute at UC Berkeley. They collaborate

on studying how stress in early life can alter neurodevelopment. You can read Francis's and

Kaufer's essay from ​Future Science” (Francis and Kaufer). This shows that the article is

completely credible because it states that the authors are credible people in the area of subject.

This article supports my stance in my argument, and it will provide me with sustainable

evidence, which is why it is a good article to reference.

“Interview: Confidence ~ Nature or Nurture? (Jules Wyman with Tiffany Kay Part 4).”

Youtube,​ uploaded by Jules Wyman, 20 July 2016,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?reload=9&v=K4RQ2fYjh7I​. Accessed 1 March 2019.

The youtube video called “Confidence ~ Nature or Nurture?,” by Jules Wyman, was

uploaded on July 20th, 2016; and, Wyman is doing an interview covering confidence relating to

nature versus nurture. She argues that both factors contribute to having confidence, but lack of

confidence is caused by the absence of one of the factors. Although this source is somewhat

based off of personal opinion, the author has credibility because she is a confidence coach;

therefore, she is specialized in this area. This source will support my argument because it will

prove that professional coaches have used the answer to the debate to help others. Which will

show that the debate has been taken to the next step: trial and error to prove the argument wrong.

Morehouse, Andrea T., et al. "Nature vs. Nurture: Evidence for Social Learning of Conflict

Behaviour in Grizzly Bears." ​PLoS ONE​, vol. 11, no. 11, 2016, p. e0165425. ​Opposing

Viewpoints in Context,​
 http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A471866327/OVIC?u=dayt30401&sid=OVIC&xid=c

346bd8. Accessed 1 Mar. 2019.

“Nature vs. Nurture: Evidence for Social Learning of Conflict Behavior in Grizzly

Bears,” by Andrea Morehouse, was published November 16th, 2016; and, the article discusses

behavioral learning with the study of grizzly bears. An experiment is done on grizzly bears to

determine if behaviors are a result of inheritance, social learning, or associl learning. The source

has no bias in it and the author has experience in the field of study. This source was meant for

anyone researching behavioral patterns or grizzly bear occurrences. This source provides support

for my argument because it is an experiment that I would be able to refer back to as an example.

"Nature steals a march on nurture." ​London Evening Standard​ [London, England], 4 Oct.

2018, p. 42. ​Opposing Viewpoints in Context,​

http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A556868002/OVIC?u=dayt30401&sid=OVIC&xid=

67ea349b. Accessed 1 Mar. 2019.

“Nature steals a march on nurture,” by ​London Evening Standard​, was published on October 4th,

2018; and, it argues that nature has the most influence. This article explains that traits are mostly

due to inheritance by using quick explanation of studies done by looking at a large quantity of

peoples’ genome. This source is credible because there’s no bias, it is based off of facts, and the

author is credible. This source provides a new viewpoint of the argument by showing what the

opposing view looks like. I can use this article for points I need to refute in my counterclaim

paragraph.

Nesterick, Even. “Conversation: George Slavich on Human Social Genomics.” ​Behavioral

 Science​, 8 Aug. 2013,

http://behavioralscientist.org/conversation-george-slavich-and-human-social-genomics/.

Accessed 1Mar. 2019.

“Conversation: George Slavich on Human Social Genomics,” by Even Nesterick, was published

on August 8th, 2013; and, it is about a conversation about human social genomics. Even

Nesterick has a conversation with George Slavich, and they discuss how the social environment

can shape genetic expression. This source was meant for all readers who are interested in the

topic, and other psychologists who want to keep up to date with the nature vs. nurture debate.

Although a conversation can be viewed as being slightly bias, the statements made are based off

of hard facts and evidence.The people holding the conversation are also specialist in the area of

interest, which make them credible as well. The source provides a new stance point for my

argument, and hard facts that I could use to support my argument.

“TEDS – The Journey So Far.” ​Youtube,​ uploaded by kingscollegelondon, 27 April 2015,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-LaGbuQnBnQ.

“TEDS – The Journey So Far,” by kingscollegelondon, was published on April 27th, 2015; and,

the youtube video is about the study of twins and their early development. TED stands for​ twins

early development, and the twins characteristics are studied and compared to each other to

discover how the genes and environment shape development. This video is meant for anyone

with an interest in the area of study because it is available to the public. This video is credible

because it is a film about an organization, TED, and the publisher is also an organization. This

article will provide supportive information for my argument. This source will be very beneficial

to my study because of the statistics that it provides.

Chen, Yuyu, and Li, Hongbin. “​ Mother’s education and child health: Is there a nurturing

effect?”

Journal of Health Economics,​ 5th November 2008,

http://www.paper.edu.cn/scholar/showpdf/MUT2cNyINTQ0eQxeQh. Accessed 1 March

2019.

“Mother’s education and their child’s health: Is there a nurturing effect?,” by Chen Yuyu

and Hongbin Li, is an article that talks about an experiment done with adopted children. The

scientist analyze the child’s health in relation to the nurturing mother’s knowledge of health.

Chen Yuyu is a Professor of Economics at the Guanghua School of Management, Peking

University, and the director in Institute of Economic Policy Research of Peking University. The

second author is Hongbin Li, and he is the James Liang Director of the China Program at the

Stanford Center on Global Poverty and Development. The article was revised in April 2008,

accepted on 20th October 2000, and available on 5th November 2010. This study will explain the

reason for an adopted child’s nutritional status. The intended audience would be other scientist or

people who are truly interested in the topic because it does go into detail. The author is

discussing an experiment ,and uses it as support for most of his claims. The article has also been

revised before it was published, which makes it more credible. The article is definitely to educate

people. The authors want the people to know what scientists have found that has altered the

nature vs. nurture debate. There is no bias in the article because it was written off of an

experiment, not personal opinion. This source is suitable for my research over the nurture vs.

nature debate.