essay about human behavior

Psychology Discussion

Essay on human behaviour: top 5 essays | psychology.

ADVERTISEMENTS:

Here is an essay on ‘Human Behaviour’ for class 11 and 12. Find paragraphs, long and short essays on ‘Human Behaviour’ especially written for school and college students.

Essay on Human Behaviour

Essay Contents:

• Essay on the Controversies in the Study of Human Behaviour

1. Essay on the Introduction to Human Behaviour:

After all, Homo sapiens has a science all its own, namely anthropology, and the other “social sciences” are almost exclusively concerned with this one species too. Nevertheless, many animal behaviour researchers, undaunted by all these specialists, have made Homo sapiens one of their study species, a choice justified by the fact that theories and methods developed by students of nonhuman animals can often illuminate human affairs in ways that escape scientists whose training and focus is exclusively anthropocentric.

The continuity of anatomy, physiology, brain, and human behaviour between people and other animals clearly implies that nonhuman research can shed light on human nature. Medical researchers rely on this continuity, using “animal models” whenever human research would be premature, too intrusive, or too risky. The same is true in basic behavioural research.

Consider, for example, the study of hormonal influences on human behaviour. The “activating” effects of circulating steroid hormones on sexual motivation aggression, persistence, and other behavioural phenomena were first established in other species and only then investigated in human beings.

Similarly, non-human research on the “organizing” (developmental) effects of these same gonadal hormones has motivated and guided human research on the behavioural consequences of endocrine disorders. In a more recent example, discoveries concerning the role of androgens in mediating tradeoffs between mating effort and male parental effort in animals with biparental care have inspired studies of the same phenomena in human fathers.

The situation is similar, but much more richly developed, in behavioural neuroscience, where virtually everything now known about the human brain was discovered with crucial inspiration and support from experimental research on homologous structures and processes that serve similar perceptual and cognitive functions in other species.

The fact that Homo sapiens is a member of the animal kingdom also means that it is both possible and enlightening to include our species in comparative analysis. A famous example is the association between testis size and mating systems. If a female mates polyandrously, i.e., with more than one male, and if she does so within a sufficiently short interval, then the different males ejaculates must “compete” for the paternity of her offspring.

Thus, although human testes are smaller than those of the most promiscuous primates, they are nevertheless larger than would be expected under monogamy; this observation has substantially bolstered the notion that ancestral women were not strictly monogamous in their sexual behaviour and hence that selection may have equipped the human female with facultative inclinations to cuckold their primary partners by clandestine adultery, or maintain multiple simultaneous sexual relationships, or both.

These ideas, which run contrary to the previous notion that only males would be expected to possess adaptive tendencies to mate polygamously, have had substantial impact on recent research into women’s sexuality.

2. Essay on the Research of Human Behaviour:

Getting involved in human research appears to be an occupational hazard for animal behaviour researchers. In his 1973 Nobel Prize autobiography, Niko Tinbergen revealed that he had long harbored a “dormant desire to make ethology apply its methods to human behaviour,” a desire that he acted upon, late in his research career, by studying autistic children.

Others made the move earlier in their careers, with greater impact. The British ethologist Nicholas Blurton Jones, one of the founders of “human ethology” and now a major figure in hunter-gatherer studies, did his PhD work on threat displays in the great tit (Parus major) but then began almost immediately to study human children.

He writes: “I studied at Oxford with Niko Tinbergen [who] shared the Nobel Prize with Konrad Lorenz for their demonstration that human behaviour should be studied in the same way as any other feature of an animal – as a product of evolution by natural selection.”

Just as they had done in their studies of other animals, Blurton Jones, Eibl-Eibesfeldt, and others who had begun to call their field of research human ethology initially concentrated on categorizing overt motor patterns and counting how often each behavioural act was executed.

Indeed, other scientists without animal behaviour training were coming to similar views about the need for a more objective observational approach at about this time, and a few even turned to Darwin for inspiration. An interesting example is the work of Paul Ekman, an American psychologist who traveled to highland New Guinea and other remote places to prove that facial expressions of emotion and their interpretations by observers is cross- culturally universal rather than exhibiting arbitrary cultural variation from place to place, as many anthropologists had supposed.

This research program was akin to that of Eibl- Eibesfeldt in its questions, its theoretical foundations, and its results, but perhaps because Ekman was trained in psychology, he was less reluctant than the ethologist to use elicited verbal data as his test of universality.

Of course, one might say that the classical ethological approach has withered in nonhuman research too, with the ascendancy of behavioural ecology, but the hallmark of classical ethology, namely observational study of human behaviour in its natural context, has not been forsaken.

3. Essay on the Uniqueness of Human Behaviour:

Another reason why treating human beings as “just another animal” can be problematic is that in many ways we are very exceptional animals indeed. Although other creatures can learn from conspecifics and may even have local traditions, human cultural transmission and the diversity of practices that it has engendered are unique, and how we should approach the study of human behaviour from an evolutionary adaptationist perspective is therefore controversial.

One approach to the issue of cultural diversity is to attempt to make sense of the distinct practices of people in different parts of the world as representing facultative adaptation to the diversity in local ecological circumstances.

A nice example is provided by demonstrations that cross- cultural variation in the use of spices is partly to be understood as response to variation in local and foodstuff- specific rates at which unrefrigerated foods spoil and in the antimicrobial effectiveness of particular spices.

Presumably, such cultural adaptations are usually the product of an “evolutionary” process that does not entail cumulative change in gene pools but only in socially transmitted information and practices, although there are certainly some cases in which there has been gene-culture coevolution. The best-known example of the coevolution of human genes and human culture concerns the variable prevalence of genes that permit people to digest milk and milk products beyond early childhood.

In populations that lack dairying traditions, most adults are lactose-intolerant and suffer indigestion if they drink milk, because they no longer produce lactase, the enzyme that permits us to metabolize lactose. But in populations with a long history of dairying, genotypes that engender persistent lactase production into adulthood predominate, apparently as a result of natural selection favouring those able to derive nutrition from their herds.

Enlightening as such approaches may be, however, they can never make functional sense of every particular cultural phenomenon, for it is certain that a great deal of cultural variability is functionally arbitrary in its details, and at least a few culturally prescribed practices have disastrous fitness consequences.

A famous example, of such a disastrous cultural practice is the transmission of kuru, a fatal prion- induced brain disease akin to Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, among the Fore people of highland New Guinea. Like other prion-induced diseases, kuru is not easily transmitted under most circumstances, but as a result of funerary practices that included intimate handling of corpses and ritual cannibalism of parts of deceased kinsmen, the Fore suffered an epidemic resulting in high levels of mortality.

4. Essay on the Measurement of Human Behaviour

It is true that over the decades psychology has moved towards becoming a quantitative science which tries to introduce measurements with precision and accuracy comparable to measurements in exact sciences such as physics, chemistry, etc. There is no doubt that the acceptance of model of the exact sciences has contributed very much to the growth and development of scientific psychology.

It must be stated that modern psychologists have gone far ahead of other social and behavioural sciences. In fact other social sciences such as sociology and political science have tried to adopt the tools and techniques of psychology for their own research and study.

However, the particular problem of quantifying and measuring behaviour still has its own peculiarities. While we may accept the standards and norms of accuracy and prediction set by the exact sciences, nevertheless, psychologists have had and will have to develop their own approaches to measurement and quantification of behaviour because of the very nature and characteristics of human behaviour.

Some of the peculiarities of human behaviour are given below:

Firstly all types of human behaviour are not explicit or visible. Only some aspects of behaviour are capable of being measured with instruments and gadgets directly. Thus, the inner needs and motives are difficult to measure directly.

Secondly, the individuals themselves would not be willing or ready to reveal certain aspects of human behaviour such as inner conflicts, problems of adjustments etc.

Thirdly the psycho-analytic school demonstrated the importance of unconscious processes which are not open to the awareness of the behaving individuals themselves. Such aspects have to be mostly inferred or measured through indirect methods. Thus, we may broadly categories measurements in psychology into indirect and direct measures.

Early attempts at measurement in psychology were simple and direct and were concerned with those aspects of human behaviour that could be directly measured. Later, with the enthusiasm of psychologists to measure other aspects of human behaviour, indirect approaches were developed.

By and large, sensations, learning, remembering, perception and similar variables are measured through direct means whereas indirect measures are largely used in studying motivational, personality and attitudinal variables.

Most intelligence tests are direct measures of intelligence while all the projective tests are indirect measures. Direct measures have the advantage in that they are simpler or more objective and are easy to handle, whereas indirect measures, to a large extent, depend on the interpretation of the individual’s behaviour and inference based on certain guidelines.

Yet another point that may be borne in mind is that direct measures are largely independent of specific theories of behaviour or personality. In fact, psychologists with different theoretical approaches and biases employed the same direct measures.

Indirect measures are largely associated with specific theories. Thus, projective tests such as the Rorschach test and TAT rest on certain basic assumptions about human behaviour and personality. Therefore, it can be said that direct measures give us measures of behaviour as they occur, while indirect measures give us scores which are arrived at on the basis of inferences and interpretations based on particular theories. Indirect measures are based on particular rationales.

It is also possible to consider psychological measures as empirical measures and rational measures. Empirical measures are based on the occurrence of certain behavioural patterns and are statistically arrived at. They are not based on any theory. Logical measures are based on certain theories. The best instance of convergence of the two traditions is found in the construction of attitude scales.

Errors in Measurement of Human Behaviour:

It is apparent that there are many instances where behavioural measures can be contaminated by errors. The requisites of accuracy, validity and reliability were explained. Naturally, when a number of errors creep in, the characteristics are affected adversely.

Errors in psychological measures are of two types; systematic errors and random errors. Systematic errors are those which occur repeatedly and are constant. For example, if while measuring the intelligence of a person, we employ a test which is too easy, then the individual’s intelligence is overestimated. Such an error is called a systematic error.

On the other hand, even if we employ a proper test and measure the individual’s intelligence on different occasions it is possible that the measured IQ on these different occasions will not be the same. Such variations are occasional examples of random errors which result from factors such as the subject’s mood, motivation, skills of the tests, etc.

Whenever we measure human behaviour we should be aware of the presence of such errors. Systematic errors are avoided by a very careful choice and usage of the test.

Random errors are taken care of by making repeated measurements and taking the average of all these scores. Errors in measurement, therefore, result from the defects in the measuring tools, defects in the measuring conditions and also certain factors in the subject as well as the experimenter.

5. Essay on the Controversies in the Study of Human Behaviour:

There are a number of current controversies in the study of human behaviour from an evolutionary perspective, and most of them closely parallel ongoing controversies in animal behaviour more generally.

One perennial point of discussion is whether measures of reproductive success are essential for testing adaptationist hypotheses. Evolutionary anthropologists who reported that wealth and/or status is positively related to reproductive success in certain societies presented these correlations as testimony to the relevance of Darwinism for the human sciences, and this invited the rejoinder that a failure to find such a correlation in modern industrialized societies must then constitute evidence of Darwinism’s irrelevance.

Anthropologist Donald Symons then entered the fray with a forceful counterargument to the effect that measures of reproductive attainment are virtually useless for testing adaptationist hypotheses, which should instead be tested on the basis of “design” criteria.

These arguments are sometimes read as if the issue applies only to the cultural animal Homo sapiens but, as Thornhill has pointed out, the same debate can be found in the nonhuman literature, with writers like Wade and Reeve and Sherman arguing that fitness consequences provide the best test of adaptationist hypotheses, whereas Thornhill and Williams defend the opposing view.

A related point of contention concerns the characterization of the human behaviour “environment of evolutionary adaptedness” (EEA). This concept is often invoked in attempts to understand the prevalence of some unhealthy or otherwise unfit practice in the modern world, such as damaging levels of consumption of refined sugar or psychoactive drugs.

The point is simply that these substances did not exist in the selective environment that shaped the human adaptations they now exploit, and that this is why we lack defenses against their harmful effects.

Essentially the same point can be made about more benign modern novelties, such as effective contraceptive devices, telephones, and erotica- there is little reason to expect that we will use these inventions in ways that promote our fitness, since they have, in a sense, been designed to “parasitize” our adaptations, and there has not been sufficient time for natural selection to have crafted countermeasures to their effects.

The EEA concept has become controversial because several writers believe that it entails untestable assumptions about the past; presupposes that human evolution stopped in the Pleistocene; and is invoked in a pseudo-explanatory post-hoc fashion to dispose of puzzling failures of adaptation.

Yet it is surely not controversial that a world with novel chemical pollutants, televised violence, internet pornography, and exogenous opiates is very different from that in which the characteristic features of human psychophysiology evolved.

Once again, these debates about the utility of the EEA concept are read as if the issue were peculiar to the human case. But in fact, any adaptation in any species has its “environment of evolutionary adaptedness,” and the notion that some adaptations are tuned to aspects of past environments which no longer exist is as relevant to the behaviour of other animals as it is to our own.

Byers, for example, has argued that various aspects of the human behaviour of the pronghorn, a social ungulate of North American grasslands, can only be understood as adaptations to predators that are now extinct.

Similarly, Coss et al. have demonstrated that California ground squirrels from different populations, none of which presently live in sympatry with rattlesnakes, may or may not exhibit adaptive anti-predator responses to introduced snakes and that the difference reflects how many millennia have passed since the squirrel populations lost contact with the rattlesnakes.

Yet another issue of current controversy concerns the reasons why there is so much genetic diversity affecting behavioural diversity within human populations. Personality dimensions in which there are stable individual differences consistently prove to have heritabilities of around 0.5, which means that about half the variability among individuals in things like extroversion, shyness, and willingness to take risks can be attributed to differences in genotype.

The puzzle is why selection “tolerates” this variability- if selection works by weeding out suboptimal variants and thereby optimizing quantitative traits, how can all this heritable diversity persist? One possibility is that the diversity is a functionless byproduct of the fact that selection on many traits is weak relative to mutation pressure; in finite populations, not all attributes can be optimized by selection simultaneously.

Another possibility is that heritable diversity in personality represents the expression of formerly neutral, variants in evolutionary novel environments. Still another view, argued by Tooby and Cosmides, is that heritable personality diversity is indeed functionless “noise” but is nevertheless maintained by frequency-dependent selection favouring rare genotypes in a never-ending “arms race” with polymorphic rapidly evolving pathogen strains.

Finally, Wilson has defended the possibility that there is a substantial prevalence of adaptive behavioural polymorphisms maintained by selection on the behavioural phenotypes themselves.

The “evolutionarily stable” state in game-theory models of social behaviour is often a mix of different types. If most individuals are honest reciprocators, for example, this creates a niche for exploitative “cheaters” whose success is maximal when they are extremely rare and declines as they become more prevalent.

Once again, this is obviously an issue of relevance in other species as well as human beings, and it is not an easy issue to resolve. However, the right answer will influence how we should look at matters ranging from sexual selection to psychopathology. Gangestad has argued that there is an evolutionarily stable mix of women with distinct sexualities such that some are inclined to long-term monogamy and others are not.

Lalumière et al. present evidence that “psychopaths,” socially exploitative people who are lacking in empathy for others, are not suffering from pathology but are instead a discrete type of person that is maintained at low frequencies by selection. How such ideas will fare in the light of future theorizing and research is an open question.

Related Articles:

• Essay on Stress: Top 7 Essays | Human Behaviour | Psychology
• Essay on Motivation: Top 9 Essays | Human Behaviour | Psychology
• Essay on Attitude: Top 8 Essays | Human Behaviour | Psychology
• Essay on Parenting: Top 5 Essays | Human Behaviour | Psychology

Essay , Psychology , Human Behaviour , Essay on Human Behaviour

What is Human Behavior: A Deep Dive into Our Actions and Reactions

Often, I find myself intrigued by the complexities of human nature. Human behavior , a subject as vast as it is fascinating, has long been a topic that captivates my interest. It’s this intricate web of emotions, actions, and reactions that sets us apart from other species on our planet.

Now you might ask, “What exactly is human behavior?” Well, at its core, it’s how we act and interact with others and the world around us. It encompasses everything from our thoughts and feelings to our physical actions. From a simple smile to complex decision-making processes – all these are facets of human behavior.

There’s no denying that understanding human behavior can be quite challenging. After all, we’re not just talking about individual actions here but also societal norms and influences. Yet it’s this complexity that makes studying human behavior both essential and intriguing in equal measure.

Understanding Human Behavior: An Overview

Delving into the realm of human behavior, I’m amazed by its complexity and diversity. Simply put, human behavior refers to the array of every physical action and observable emotion associated with individuals. From conscious decisions like choosing what clothes to wear, to subconscious impulses like reaching for a snack when you’re bored – it’s all part of our complex behavioral patterns.

What fascinates me most about human behavior is how it’s influenced by a blend of both nature and nurture. On one hand, we’ve got genetic predispositions that shape aspects of our behavior. For instance, studies have shown that traits such as introversion or extraversion can be inherited! Here’s an interesting statistic:

On the other hand, there’s no denying the powerful role environment plays in molding our behaviors. Factors such as culture, upbringing, peer influence – they all leave indelible imprints on us.

Here are some key environmental factors affecting human behavior:

• Cultural norms
• Early childhood experiences
• Peer influences
• Socioeconomic status

But let’s not forget about individual differences either! Each person has unique life experiences resulting in different perceptions and responses to similar situations. That’s why even identical twins raised under same conditions might exhibit distinct behavioral patterns.

Now you’d think understanding human behavior would be as easy as piecing together these factors but it’s not quite so black-and-white. The human mind isn’t a static entity; it evolves over time through learning and experience. It’s an intricate maze where biological instincts intertwine with learned behaviors creating a fascinating tapestry called ‘Human Behavior’.

So when we talk about understanding human behavior, we’re really talking about understanding this dynamic interplay between biology and environment, between instinct and learning – each shaping us in their own unique ways. It’s a fascinating journey, one that I’m excited to continue exploring with you as we dive deeper into our subsequent sections.

The Role of Genetics in Human Behavior

I’ve always found it fascinating how much our genes can influence who we are. From the color of our eyes to our susceptibility to certain diseases, genetics play a huge role in human behavior.

Let’s take an example – identical twins. They share 100% of their genetic material, yet they’re not carbon copies of each other when it comes to personality or behavior. Studies suggest that about 50% of the variation in human behavior can be attributed to genetic factors. So while they might have the same hair color or similar facial features, one twin could be outgoing and adventurous while the other is introverted and cautious.

Here are some key points on how genetics influence human behavior:

• Genetic Predispositions : Some individuals are genetically predisposed towards certain behaviors. For instance, research indicates that there might be a “novelty-seeking” gene which makes people more inclined towards risky activities.
• Mental Health Disorders : Conditions like schizophrenia or bipolar disorder have been linked to specific genetic variants.
• Personality Traits : Traits such as extraversion or conscientiousness have been associated with particular genes.

But it’s important not to oversimplify these connections. Our behaviors aren’t dictated by our genes alone – environment also plays a critical role. Known as gene-environment interaction, this concept holds that your genes may make you more susceptible to certain influences, but your environment determines whether these potentialities will manifest.

For example, if you’ve got a genetic predisposition for alcoholism but grow up in an environment where alcohol isn’t prevalent or easily accessible, chances are you won’t develop an alcohol addiction.

So yes, while genetics do play a significant role in human behavior, it’s not the whole story. Understanding our genetic makeup can give us insights into why we behave as we do but remember, our environment and experiences are equally important players in shaping who we are.

Environmental Influences on Behavioral Patterns

The environment plays a significant role in shaping our behavior. It’s not just our genes that determine how we act, but also our surroundings. Both physical and social environments have profound effects on our behaviors , actions, and decisions.

Physical environments can directly impact human behaviors. For example, studies show that people living in urban areas are more likely to suffer from stress-related disorders than those residing in rural settings. This is due largely to factors such as noise pollution, overcrowding, and high crime rates prevalent in city life.

Our social environment too has its sway over us. We’re influenced heavily by the attitudes, behaviors, and beliefs of the people around us – this is referred to as ‘social influence’. The classic experiment by Solomon Asch on conformity provides an intriguing example here. In his study, individuals tended to agree with incorrect answers given by a group merely to fit in.

In addition to these broad categories:

• Cultural norms and societal expectations shape behavior significantly.
• Educational institutions mold student behavior through rules and discipline.
• Workplaces set standards for professional conduct influencing employee behavior.

It’s crucial then for us to acknowledge these environmental influences when studying human behavior. Understanding them not only helps interpret why people behave the way they do but also aids in creating healthier environments conducive for positive behavioral patterns.

Psychological Perspectives on Human Actions

Diving into the realm of human behavior, it’s essential to understand the psychological perspectives that shape our actions. These perspectives provide a framework for understanding why we act the way we do.

One major perspective is the cognitive approach. It’s rooted in the belief that our behavior is driven by internal mental processes. Think about when you’re solving a tough math problem – your mind runs through various equations and strategies before landing on an answer. This internal thought process directly influences your external behavior.

Another significant viewpoint is the biological perspective, which argues that our genetics and physiological makeup govern our actions. Ever noticed how certain traits run in families? Maybe you’ve inherited your father’s short temper or your mother’s meticulous nature. That’s biology at work!

Behaviorists, on the other hand, argue it’s all about learning from experience. They suggest that we act based on what we’ve previously learned from similar situations – essentially, past experiences shape current behaviors.

Then there’s the psychodynamic perspective, largely influenced by Sigmund Freud’s theories, which asserts that unconscious drives and instincts influence our actions more than anything else.

Let me also mention humanistic psychology – this perspective focuses on personal growth and self-fulfillment as key drivers of behavior.

Clearly, there are many ways to approach human behavior:

• The cognitive perspective looks at mental processes.
• The biological perspective focuses on genetic and physiological factors.
• Behaviorism emphasizes learning from experience.
• Psychodynamics looks at unconscious drives.
• Humanistic psychology prioritizes personal growth and self-fulfillment.

In reality, each of these perspectives offers valuable insights into why we behave as we do – they’re all pieces of a complex puzzle!

Cultural Factors Shaping Human Conduct

Culture plays a pivotal role in shaping our behaviors. It’s the invisible hand that sculpts our actions, reactions, and interactions. Every society has unique norms and values that serve as a guide for acceptable conduct. These cultural standards are absorbed from an early age, shaping how we perceive the world and behave within it.

Take communication styles as an example. In some cultures, directness is valued while other societies might prefer more indirect ways of expression. For instance, people in Germany are known for their straightforwardness – they say what they mean without beating around the bush. On the other hand, Japanese culture tends to value harmony and avoiding confrontation which often leads to more subtle methods of conveying messages.

Even our eating habits can be influenced by cultural factors! Some societies view food purely as sustenance while others consider meals a time for socializing and bonding with family or friends.

Rituals and traditions also have a strong impact on behavior patterns across different societies. In India, touching elders’ feet is seen as a sign of respect – it’s ingrained in their societal norms. Conversely, such an act would seem quite outlandish in Western cultures where personal space is highly valued.

• Germany : Direct communication
• Japan : Indirect communication
• India : Shows respect through physical gestures

Lastly, let’s not forget about cultural attitudes towards gender roles. They greatly influence how men and women behave within their communities: from attire choices to career aspirations. For example:

• In Saudi Arabia: Women were only recently allowed to drive vehicles.
• In Norway: Emphasis on gender equality results in more balanced participation across various sectors including politics and business.

Understanding these cultural factors gives us valuable insights into the diverse tapestry of human behavior. It’s fascinating to see how deeply our surroundings influence us, molding our actions in ways we often don’t even notice.

Human Behavior in Social Contexts

Diving headfirst into the world of human behavior, it’s critical to understand the role social contexts play. They’re not just backdrops; these contexts shape our actions and responses in profound ways.

Let’s take a look at conformity, for example. It’s one human behavior that prominently manifests itself in group settings. Conformity is when we adjust our behaviors or attitudes to align with a particular group norm. Remember high school? We’ve all experienced peer pressure at some point, haven’t we?

Social loafing provides another interesting angle on how our behavior changes in social situations. This concept refers to individuals exerting less effort when working within a group compared to working alone. Now that brings back memories of those dreaded group projects, doesn’t it?

Of course, I can’t forget about altruism – an act of helping others without expecting anything in return. Research shows many factors like empathy and moral reasoning influence altruistic behaviors.

But remember this: social context isn’t always about groups! Even one-on-one interactions significantly impact human behavior. For instance, attraction plays a huge role in how we behave around potential mates or friends.

• Attraction towards potential mates often leads us to display positive traits and hide negative ones.
• Similarly, interaction with friends frequently involves sharing interests and experiences.

So you see folks, human behavior is as much influenced by its environment as by internal factors like personality or emotions. Our actions are constantly shaped by the people around us – whether we’re part of a crowd or engaged in an intimate conversation.

Changing Behaviors: The Impact of Education and Therapy

It’s fascinating to observe how education and therapy can dramatically shift human behaviors. I’m sure you’ve heard the saying, “Knowledge is power.” Well, it turns out that this age-old adage has a solid basis in reality. When people learn new information or gain insights into their behavior patterns, they’re often empowered to make positive changes.

Take smoking cessation for instance. It’s been shown that educational interventions can significantly increase the likelihood of successful quit attempts. A study conducted by the American Lung Association found that smokers who received educational materials were 1.5 times more likely to stop smoking compared with those who didn’t receive any additional resources.

Another example is cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT), a type of psychotherapy that helps individuals understand and change thought patterns leading to harmful actions or emotions. Research shows CBT can effectively reduce symptoms of various mental health conditions including anxiety and depression.

• According to a review published in the Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, about half of individuals with varying types of anxiety disorders remained symptom-free after undergoing CBT.
• Similarly, in treating depression, data suggests that up to two-thirds of patients show significant improvement after engaging in CBT.

These examples illustrate just how powerful education and therapy can be when it comes to altering human behaviors.

However, it’s important not to overlook the role societal influences play in shaping our actions and attitudes as well – from family dynamics and cultural norms right down to economic factors. Undoubtedly, changing human behavior is complex but through education and therapeutic interventions we’re able hone-in on individual factors aiding us on our journey towards understanding—and ultimately influencing—human behavior better.

Conclusion: Decoding the Complexity of Human Behavior

Deciphering human behavior isn’t a walk in the park. Not only does it take years of study, but it also requires an understanding that people and their actions are multi-layered, complicated, and ever-changing.

To wrap things up, let’s acknowledge that we’ve barely scratched the surface when it comes to fully comprehending human behavior. However, I believe this article has given you a solid starting point. We’ve delved into various aspects such as biological influences, cultural impacts and psychological factors.

• Our genes don’t solely define us; our behaviors are shaped by both nature and nurture.
• The society we live in greatly affects our actions and choices.
• Our mental state plays a critical role in how we behave.

As we continue to unravel the intricate web of human conduct, one thing remains clear – there’s no one-size-fits-all explanation for why we do what we do. It’s this complexity that makes studying human behavior so fascinating yet challenging at the same time.

In conclusion, I’d say that while understanding every facet of human behavior might seem like an uphill battle now, with ongoing research and advancements in neuroscience coupled with psychology, I’m confident that we’re on track towards gaining deeper insights into the intricacies of mankind.

After all, unlocking these secrets not only benefits me or you but humanity as a whole. With knowledge comes power – power to change patterns for better decision making, fostering healthier relationships and creating societies where everyone feels understood and valued.

Related Posts

Cracking the Anxious-Avoidant Code

Attention Seeking Behavior: Decoding the Signs and Understanding its Roots

Motivation and What Really Drives Human Behavior

Our motivation is our most valuable commodity. Multiplied by action, its value fluctuates with how we invest our attention.

Why is it that we are all born with limitless potential, yet few people fulfill those possibilities?

Abraham Maslow

And what actually drives humans?

Some of our motives to act are biological, while others have personal and social origins. We are motivated to seek food, water, and sex, but our behavior is also influenced by social approval, acceptance, the need to achieve, and the motivation to take or to avoid risks, to name a few (Morsella, Bargh, & Gollwitzer, 2009).

This article introduces some of the core concepts in the science of motivation.

But before you continue, we thought you might like to download our three Goal Achievement Exercises for free . These detailed, science-based exercises will help you or your clients create actionable goals and master techniques to create lasting behavior change.

This Article Contains

Types of motivation, motivation and emotion, motivation and personality, motivation for change, happiness and human motivation, a take-home message, frequently asked questions.

Motivation can be experienced as internal. Biological variables originate in a person’s brain and nervous system and psychological variables that represent properties of a person’s mind – psychological needs.

External sources of motivation are often understood in terms of environmental variables, like incentives or goals. Our internal sources of motivation interact with external sources to direct behavior (Deckers, 2014).

It is never too late to be what you might have been.

George Eliot

Our evolutionary history also explains aspects of motivation and behavior, and our individual personal histories shape our motives and determine the utility of goals and incentives.

Drive Motivation

When the sympathetic nervous system produces epinephrine and norepinephrine, it creates energy for action. This may be why motivation is often conceptualized in terms of drives . Our bodies aim to return to equilibrium and strive toward a desired end-state, reducing or eliminating the drive (Reeve, 2018).

Needs are internal motives that energize, direct and sustain behavior. They generate strivings necessary for the maintenance of life, growth and wellbeing.

A hungry stomach will not allow its owner to forget it, whatever his cares and sorrows.

Homer, 800 B.C.

Physiological needs – hunger, thirst, sex, etc. – are the biological beginnings that eventually manifest themselves as psychological drives. These biological events become psychological motives. It is important to distinguish the physiological need from the psychological drive it creates because only the later has motivational properties.

The drive theory of motivation tells us that physiological needs originate in our bodies. As our physiological system attempts to maintain health, it creates psychological drive and motivates us to bring the system from deficiency toward homeostasis (Reeve, 2018).

If you want to know more about this topic, see our articles on Motivation Science and Theory of Motivation .

Goal Motivation

When talking about motivation, the topic of goals inevitably comes up. As a cognitive mental event, a goal is a “spring to action” that functions like a moving force that energizes and directs our behavior in purposeful ways and motivates people to behave differently (Ames & Ames, 1984).

Goals, like mindset, beliefs, expectations, and self-concept, are sources of internal motives. These cognitive sources of motivation unite and spring us into action.

Goals are generated by what is NOT, or in other words, a discrepancy between where we are and where we want to be. The saying “ If you don’t know where you’re going, any road will get you there ” describes the difference in motivated behavior between those who have goals and those who do not (Locke, 1996; Locke & Latham, 1990, 2002).

But it isn’t necessarily enlightening to simply formulate goals. As a motivational construct, goal setting translates into performance only when the goals are challenging, specific, and congruent with the self.

We exert more effort toward challenging goals (Locke & Latham, 1984, 1990, 2002), focus our attention to the extent of their specificity (Locke, Chah, Harrison, & Lustgarten, 1989), and draw energy from how those goals reflect our values (Sheldon & Elliot, 1999).

To learn more about making goals challenging, specific, and personal, check out our articles on The Science & Psychology of Goal Setting 101 and Goal-Setting: Templates & Worksheets for Achieving Goals .

Download 3 Free Goals Exercises (PDF)

These detailed, science-based exercises will help you or your clients create actionable goals and master techniques for lasting behavior change.

Download 3 Free Goals Pack (PDF)

By filling out your name and email address below.

• Email Address *
• Your Expertise * Your expertise Therapy Coaching Education Counseling Business Healthcare Other
• Email This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

The concept of motivation is closely related to emotion. Both of these words are derived from the same underlying Latin root movere which means “to move.”

Emotions are considered motivational states because they generate bursts of energy that get our attention and cause our reactions to significant events in our lives (Izard, 1993).

Emotions generate an impulse to cope with the circumstances at hand (Keltner & Gross, 1999).

Together with emotion, motivation is part of a core psychological phenomenon referred to as affect.

We feel these experiences, physiologically and emotionally, and they motivate and guide our behavior and decision making. Most importantly, they have a significant impact on our mental and physical health. See our article on the Importance and Benefits of Motivation .

Are we predisposed to be motivated in different ways?

Personality theory and research show that we are, in fact, motivated in different ways based on our personality traits. A high level of a particular trait will often make us act as the trait implies: We will be more open to experience, conscientious, extraverted, agreeable, and neurotic. We will be motivated by different incentives, goals, and activities but also choose to be in different situations.

The task of psychology is to determine what those situations and behaviors are.

The trait–environment correlation studies show that if we exhibit characteristics at one end of a personality dimension we will seek out, create, or modify situations differently than individuals at the other end of the spectrum would (Deckers, 2014).

In addition to each of the big five personality traits, our tendency to seek sensation plays a significant role in how willing we are to take risks to experience varied, novel, complex, and intense sensations and experiences (Deckers, 2014).

The cybernetic big five theory linked personality traits with the type of goals we choose, and showed that specific goals would motivate appropriate personality state behaviors that are effective for achieving that goal (Deckers, 2014). For example, although people with extraverted and introverted personality traits react similarly to stimuli designed to put them in a pleasant hedonic mood, those high in extraversion have greater sensitivity to rewards.

They react with greater energetic arousal in response to the pursuit of rewards and are more likely than introverts to seek social stimulation in a variety of situations (Deckers, 2014).

The channeling hypothesis examines how specific personality traits determine how we express motivation and how we may respond to our personal motivation drives. It proposes that (Deckers, 2014):

• Extraverts tend to enter high-impact careers to satisfy their power motive and are more likely than introverts to do volunteer work to fulfill their affiliation motive.
• Those who are high in neuroticism are easier to put in a bad mood, less satisfied with their relationships and careers, and more likely to choose to drink in solitude following negative social exchanges.
• Individuals high in conscientiousness earn higher grades and are more likely to engage in health-enhancing behaviors.
• Highly agreeable people were found more likely to help friends and siblings in distress.

The selection hypothesis suggests that frequently, a composite of trait levels will be associated with a particular behavior . Many of these studies produced some very interesting results, which showed that (Deckers, 2014):

• Students low in extraversion, agreeableness, and conscientiousness spend more time using the internet.
• Individuals high in openness to experience sought out contact with individuals from minority groups more and reported less prejudice than did individuals high in agreeableness.
• Happiness was associated with high levels of extraversion and agreeableness and low levels of neuroticism.

There are other personality factors that may affect motivation and what drives us toward our goals (Deckers, 2014):

• Those who are high in conscientiousness experience fewer stressors because of planning.
• Individuals high in agreeableness experience fewer interpersonal stressors because they are more cooperative.
• Those high in neuroticism experience more interpersonal stressors.
• Individuals high in conscientiousness, extraversion, and openness to experience cope through direct engagement with stressors.
• Those high in neuroticism cope through disengagement, such as escaping from a stressor or not thinking about it.
• Weight gain over people’s lifetimes is more significant when they are high in their neuroticism and extraversion, and low in their conscientiousness.
• Aspects of low agreeableness also contribute to weight gain.
• High-sensation seekers respond positively to risky events, drugs, and unusual experiences and are more likely to seek out and engage in risky sports, prefer unusual stimuli and situations, and experiment with things out of the ordinary.
• Low-sensation seekers respond negatively to risky events.
• Different components of sensation seeking are associated with a preference for nonsense humor or sexual humor.

Finally, personality traits of conscientiousness, openness, and extraversion have been positively associated with intrinsic motivation. Conscientiousness, extraversion, and neuroticism on the other hand have been positively related to extrinsic achievement motivation (Deckers, 2014).

Although agreeableness was found to be negatively associated with extrinsic achievement motivation, conscientiousness was anomalous, in that it was positively related to both intrinsic and extrinsic motivation. These results suggest that both forms of motivation may be more complicated than expected initially (Hart et al., 2007).

See our article on the Importance and Benefits of Motivation to learn more about what constitutes self-motivation and full self-determination.

The topic of motivation is frequently discussed in the context of change.

Many of us join a gym or a training program; others enter therapy or coaching because we desire change. But change is rarely a simple or a linear process. Part of the reason has to do with how difficult it is to find the motivation to engage in activities that are not intrinsically motivating.

When an activity is autotelic, or rewarding and interesting in its own right, we do it for the sheer enjoyment of it and motivation is hardly necessary (Csikszentmihalyi, 1990).

Some changes look negative on the surface but you will soon realize that space is being created in your life for something new to emerge.

Eckhart Tolle

More often than not, however, what we want to change requires self-control to abstain from behaviors that don’t serve us but are enjoyable. Not to mention that commitment is required to pursue these often challenging and unrewarding activities that move us in the direction of a valued outcome.

Deci and Ryan (1995), who studied autonomous self-regulation, suggested that we need to move away from extrinsically motivated action, (e.g., when we have to do something because we fear consequences), and toward introjected and even fully self-determined regulation, where we value the new behavior and align it with other aspects of our life.

See our blog post entitled What is Motivation to learn more about self-motivation.

“Stage-based” approaches to behavioral changes have proven to be particularly effective in increasing motivation toward the pursuit of difficult and non-intrinsically motivating goals as they allow for realistic expectations of progress (Zimmerman, Olsen, & Bosworth, 2000).

The Stages of Change model of Prochaska, et al. (DiClemente, & Prochaska, 1998), also known as the Trans-theoretical Model of Change (TMC), is one such approach commonly used in clinical settings. In this model, change is regarded as gradual, sequential, and controllable. Its real-world applications are seen in motivational interviewing techniques, a client-centered method of facilitating change.

Here motivation is increased together with readiness for change which is determined by our:

• Willingness to change.
• Confidence in making the desire changed.
• Actions taken to make the change.

See our article on Motivational Interviewing for an in-depth analysis of this model of change and its many applications.

The answer to that question depends both on how we define happiness and whom we ask.

Thanks to the rapidly growing research in positive psychology, the science behind what makes life worth living, we know a lot about what makes us happy and what leads to psychological wellbeing. There is also plenty of evidence that positive subjective experiences contribute to increased motivation.

From Barbara Fredrickson’s (2004) research on how positive emotions broaden our perception and increase positive affect and wellbeing to the research of Teresa Amabile and Steven Kramer (2011) that shows how happy employees are more productive, we can see how cultivating optimism and positive emotions can serve an adaptive role and be a distinct motivational factor.

Those who feel good or show positive affect are:

• more creative (Lyubomirsky et al., 2005),
• help others more (Feingold, 1983),
• persistent in the face of failure (Erez & Isen, 2002; Kavanagh, 1987),
• make decisions efficiently (Schwartz et al., 2002), and
• show high intrinsic motivation (Graef et al., 1983).

Studies show that short-term positive affect helps us be successful in many areas in our lives, including marriage, friendship, income, work, and health (Lyubomirsky, King, & Diener, 2005).

Model of the broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions Reprinted with permission of Guilford Press, Fredrickson, and Cohn (2008, Figure 48.1) [17]. Figure 2. Conceptual framework of the study.

The good life consists in deriving happiness by using your signature strengths every day in the main realms of living. The meaningful life adds one more component: using these same strengths to forward knowledge, power or goodness.

Martin Seligman

Martin Seligman (2002) argued that genuine happiness and life satisfaction have little to do with pleasure, and much to do with developing personal strengths and character. If cognition operates in the service of motivation (Vohs & Baumeister, 2011), then developing personal strengths and character should lead to increased motivation.

When talking about eudaimonia as a form of wellbeing, the recurring concepts include meaning, higher inspiration, connection, and mastery (David, Boniwell, & Ayers, 2014), all attributes related to cognitive mechanisms of motivation.

The best moments in our lives are not the passive, receptive, relaxing times…the best moments usually occur when a person’s body or mind is stretched to its limits in a voluntary effort to accomplish something difficult and worthwhile.

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi

These higher motives and their behavioral expressions can also be described as consequences of eudaimonia. According to Haidt (2000), elevating experiences can motivate virtuous behavior.

Seligman (2002) called it a higher pleasure, and Maslow (1973) described a eudemonic person as autonomous, accepting of self, positively relating to others, and possessing a sense of mastery in all of life’s domains (David, Boniwell, & Ayers, 2014). And as this description indicates, these individuals would be highly motivated.

Positive psychology looks at a person and asks, “What could be?” Most importantly, however, positive psychology brings attention to the proactive building of personal strengths and competencies, and these cannot be bad for motivation.

17 Tools To Increase Motivation and Goal Achievement

These 17 Motivation & Goal Achievement Exercises [PDF] contain all you need to help others set meaningful goals, increase self-drive, and experience greater accomplishment and life satisfaction.

Created by Experts. 100% Science-based.

Understanding the principles of motivation gives us the capacity to find workable solutions to real-world motivational problems. For what could ever be more important than empowering those around us toward more intentional action, goal attainment, optimal experience, full functioning, healthy development, and a resilient sense of self?

Studying and applying motivational science can also help us reverse or cope with impulsive urges, habitual experience, goal failure, counterproductive functioning, negative emotion, boredom, maladaptive or dysfunctional development, and fragile sense of self.

If the greatest victory is over self, should we not aspire to rise above our limitations?

Leave us your thoughts on this topic.

We hope you enjoyed reading this article. Don’t forget to download our three Goal Achievement Exercises for free .

According to Self-Determination Theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000), the three motivators of human behavior are:

• autonomy – the need to have control and choice over one’s actions,
• competence – the need to feel capable and effective, and
• relatedness – the need for social connection and interaction with others.

According to the Four-Drive Theory proposed by Paul R. Lawrence and Nitin Nohria, (2002) there are four basic human drives that motivate behavior, the drive to:

• comprehend, and

The four C’s of motivation are (Niemiec & Ryan, 2009);

• competence,
• confidence,
• connection, and

By fostering the four C’s, individuals are more likely to experience a sense of autonomy, relatedness, and competence, which are key components of intrinsic motivation.

• Amabile, T. M., & Kramer, S. J. (2011). The power of small wins. Harvard Business Review . Retrieved from https://hbr.org/2011/05/the-power-of-small-wins.
• Ames, C. (1984). Achievement attributions and self-instructions under competitive and individualistic goal structures. Journal of Educational Psychology, 76 (3), 478-487.
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience . Harper & Row.
• David, S. A., Boniwell, I., & Ayers, A. C. (2014). The Oxford Handbook of Happiness. Oxford, England: Oxford University Press.
• Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1995). Human autonomy: The basis for true self-esteem. In M. H. Kernis (Ed.), Efficacy, agency, and self-esteem (pp. 31–49). Plenum Press.
• Deckers, L. (2014). Motivation: Biological, psychological, and environmental (4th ed.) . Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
• DiClemente, C. C., & Prochaska, J. O. (1998). Toward a Comprehensive, Transtheoretical Model of Change: Stages of Change and Addictive Behaviors. In W.R. Miller & N. Heather (Eds.). Treating Addictive Behaviors , (2nd. Ed.). New York, NY: Plenum Press.
• Erez, A., & Isen, A. M. (2002). The influence of positive affect on the components of expectancy motivation. Journal of Applied Psychology , 87, 1055–1067.
• Feingold, A. (1983). Happiness, unselfishness, and popularity. Journal of Psychology , 115, 3–5.
• Fredrickson, B. L. (2004). The broaden-and-build theory of positive emotions. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B: Biological Sciences , 359(1449), 1367-1377.
• Graef, R., Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Gianinno, S. M. (1983). Measuring intrinsic motivation in everyday life. Leisure Studies , 2, 155–168.
• Haidt, J. (2000) The Positive emotion of elevation. Prevention & Treatment , Vol 3(1), Mar 2000, No Pagination Specified Article 3c.
• Hart, J. W., Stasson, M. F., Mahoney, J. M. & Story, P. (2007). The Big Five and Achievement Motivation: Exploring the Relationship Between Personality and a Two-Factor Model of Motivation. Individual Differences Research 2007 , Vol. 5, (No. 4), 267–274.
• Izard, C. E. (1993). Emotions . Irvington.
• Kavanagh, D. J. (1987). Mood, persistence, and success. Australian Journal of Psychology , 39, 307–318.
• Keltner, D., & Gross, J. J. (1999). Functional accounts of emotions. Cognition and Emotion, 13 (5), 467-480.
• Lawrence, P. R., & Nohria, N. (2002). Driven: How human nature shapes our choices . John Wiley & Sons.
• Locke, E. A. (1996). Motivation through conscious goal setting. Applied & Preventive Psychology , 5, 117-124.
• Locke, E., Chah, D., Harrison, S., & Lustgarten, N. (1989). Separating the effects of goal specificity from goal level. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes . 43, (2), 270-287.
• Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1984). Goal setting: A motivational technique that works! Prentice Hall.
• Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (1990). A theory of goal setting & task performance . Prentice-Hall.
• Locke, E. A., & Latham, G. P. (2002). Building a practically useful theory of goal setting and task motivation: A 35-year odyssey, American Psychologist , 57, 705-717.
• Lyubomirsky, S., King, L., & Diener, E. (2005). The Benefits of Frequent Positive Affect: Does Happiness Lead to Success? Psychological Bulletin, 131 (6), 803-855.
• Maslow A. H. (1973). Dominance, self-esteem, self-actualization: germinal papers of AH Maslow . Thomson Brooks/Cole.
• Morsella, E., Bargh, J. A., & Gollwitzer, P. M. (2009). Oxford Handbook of Human Action . New York, NY: Oxford University Press, USA.
• Niemiec, C. P., & Ryan, R. M. (2009). Autonomy, competence, and relatedness in the classroom: Applying self-determination theory to educational practice. Theory and Research in Education, 7(2) , 133-144.
• Reeve, J. (2015). Understanding motivation and emotion (6th ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
• Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1) , 68-78.
• Schwartz, B., Ward, A. H., Monterosso, J., Lyubomirsky, S., White, K., & Lehman, D. (2002). Maximizing versus satisficing: Happiness is a matter of choice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology , 83, 1178–1197.
• Seligman, M. E. (2002). Authentic Happiness: Using the new positive psychology to realize your potential for lasting fulfillment. Simon and Schuster.
• Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1999). Goal striving, need satisfaction, and longitudinal well-being: The self-concordance model. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(3) , 482-497.
• Vohs, K. D., & Baumeister, R. F. (Eds.). (2011). Handbook of self-regulation: Research, theory, and applications (2nd ed.). New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.
• Zimmerman, G. L., Olsen C. G., & Bosworth, M. F. (2000). A “Stages of Change” Approach to Helping Patients Change Behavior, American Family Physician. 61 , 1409-1416.

Share this article:

Article feedback

What our readers think.

Great teaching, super message 👏

Interesting read, but it appears to be the neurotypical point of view. As an autistic person, most of the article and information did not resonate with me.

Why would you assume that an article that doesn’t mention autism once would take into account the differences in motivation between people with and without autism? Pointless to even leave a comment like this.

How can those with high level of neuroticism find significant motivation to take actions towards realizing their potentials? How can they get more enjoyment from their achievements? Thanks.

Motive of Being (By definition)

I AM .ie ” THE CREATOR” therefore I .ie “ones self” thinks.  Ones conscious connects ones conscious self to ones unconscious self that’s why some humans have no idea why they do or don’t do something.  The process of quantum mechanics can be manipulated to bend the laws of physics in the physical world just as one’s conscious self can be manipulated by ones unconscious self.  This process can be observed in quantum dynamics, whereas the Effects sometimes comes before the Cause, and we are only aware of this because we observed the process, just as an police officers looking over a crime scene to find an motive to a crime.

Can it be really possible that one is given all tips and guides in counselling to achieve greater and greater wellbeing or wellness, but completely divorced of having any thought or concern or even attention to the plight or suffering of fellow humans living perhaps in the next slums or shanties or country sides.? Or as fellow human beings, one needs to be in some way socially caring and reaching out to others, as long as we fall short of creating an egalitarian and equal society. In some developing countries, some self styled gurus and counsellors promise to take people to the land of perfect happiness and wellbeing through all types of workshops and meditation methods etc but no word on their brotherly concern for other fellow humans. Aren’t people being taken for a ride?

Thank you for your heart- warming comment. I couldn’t agree with you more. I truly believe we are made in such a way that we can never get ” to the land of perfect happiness ” unless we take our less fortunate fellow brothers and sisters there with us.

Very nice happy family and other person

I WOULD LIKE TO TALK IF POSSIBLE. I teach gratitude courses, and I am also an active business consultant. I am presently writing essay for Brill publications on “Soulful Exemplar Leadership and Spiritual Motivation. I am most interested in Motivational Psychology, especially in the Pandemic chaos. I am doing webinars on this topic. I think all leadership is about the motivational leadership. I am very Aristotelian in my approach to motivational psychology A William McVey Ph.D. Holy Apostles College and Seminary 913 669-3934

Let us know your thoughts Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published.

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Related articles

Victor Vroom’s Expectancy Theory of Motivation

Motivation is vital to beginning and maintaining healthy behavior in the workplace, education, and beyond, and it drives us toward our desired outcomes (Zajda, 2023). [...]

SMART Goals, HARD Goals, PACT, or OKRs: What Works?

Goal setting is vital in business, education, and performance environments such as sports, yet it is also a key component of many coaching and counseling [...]

How to Assess and Improve Readiness for Change

Clients seeking professional help from a counselor or therapist are often aware they need to change yet may not be ready to begin their journey. [...]

Read other articles by their category

• Body & Brain (49)
• Coaching & Application (58)
• Compassion (25)
• Counseling (51)
• Emotional Intelligence (23)
• Gratitude (18)
• Grief & Bereavement (21)
• Happiness & SWB (40)
• Meaning & Values (26)
• Meditation (20)
• Mindfulness (44)
• Motivation & Goals (45)
• Optimism & Mindset (34)
• Positive CBT (30)
• Positive Communication (20)
• Positive Education (47)
• Positive Emotions (32)
• Positive Leadership (18)
• Positive Parenting (15)
• Positive Psychology (34)
• Positive Workplace (37)
• Productivity (17)
• Relationships (43)
• Resilience & Coping (37)
• Self Awareness (21)
• Self Esteem (38)
• Strengths & Virtues (32)
• Stress & Burnout Prevention (34)
• Theory & Books (46)
• Therapy Exercises (37)
• Types of Therapy (64)
• Comments This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

3 Goal Achievement Exercises Pack

Essay on Human Behaviour

Students are often asked to write an essay on Human Behaviour in their schools and colleges. And if you’re also looking for the same, we have created 100-word, 250-word, and 500-word essays on the topic.

Let’s take a look…

100 Words Essay on Human Behaviour

Understanding human behavior.

Human behavior is the way people act and react. It can be influenced by many things like feelings, the environment, or past experiences. For example, someone might be very happy at a party but sad if they lose a game.

Influences on Behavior

What we do is often shaped by where we are and who we are with. If we are with friends, we might act differently than when we are alone. Also, rules at home or school guide how we behave.

Learning from Others

We learn how to act by watching others. If a child sees a sibling sharing toys, they may learn to share too. This is called learning by example. It’s a big part of growing up.

Choices and Behavior

Every day, we make choices that show our behavior. Choosing to help someone or saying ‘thank you’ are ways we can show kindness. Our choices help shape our behavior.

Changing Behavior

People can change how they act. If someone learns that being angry doesn’t solve problems, they might try to stay calm next time. Changing behavior can be hard, but it is possible.

250 Words Essay on Human Behaviour

Human behavior is the way people act and think. It’s what we do every day, like talking, playing, and even sleeping. Scientists who study how the mind works say that many things shape our actions. These include how we grow up, the friends we have, and the rules we follow.

Why We Act Differently

Each person is unique, which means we don’t all behave the same way. Imagine you have a twin. Even if you look the same, you might like different foods or games. This is because our choices often depend on our own personal experiences and feelings.

We learn a lot by watching other people. For example, if you see someone getting a reward for being kind, you might start being kinder too. This is called learning by example. Parents, teachers, and friends can all be examples that we learn from.

Feelings and Behavior

Our feelings play a big part in how we act. If you are happy, you might smile or laugh. But if you’re sad, you might not want to play. Understanding our emotions can help us know why we act in certain ways.

Choices and Consequences

Every action has a result, which can be good or bad. If you study hard, you might get good grades. This shows that making good choices can lead to good things happening.

In conclusion, human behavior is a mix of many things, including our surroundings, learning, and feelings. By understanding why we do things, we can make better choices and understand others better too.

500 Words Essay on Human Behaviour

Human behavior is the way people act and think in different situations. It’s like a code that tells us what someone might do next. Everyone is unique, so their actions can be very different from one another. Scientists and psychologists study human behavior to learn why we do the things we do.

Why We Act the Way We Do

A big part of our behavior comes from our brains. Our thoughts and feelings can push us to act in certain ways. For example, if you feel happy, you might smile or laugh. If you are scared, you might run away or hide. Our families, friends, and even the places we live also shape our actions. They teach us what is okay to do and what is not.

From the time we are babies, we watch and copy others. This is how we learn to walk, talk, and eat. As we grow older, we keep learning by watching others. We learn good habits, like saying “please” and “thank you,” and sometimes bad habits too. This copying is a powerful way we learn behavior.

Choices and Decisions

Every day, we make choices. Some are small, like what to wear, and some are big, like whom to be friends with. When we make a choice, we think about the good and bad things that could happen. This thinking helps us decide what to do. Our choices can affect not just us, but also other people around us.

Feelings play a huge role in our actions. When we are happy, we may do kind things. When we are angry, we might do things we later wish we hadn’t. Understanding our feelings can help us control our actions better. It’s like having a remote control for our behavior.

Group Behavior

When we are in a group, we might act differently than when we are alone. This is because we want to fit in with the group. Sometimes, being part of a group can make us braver and do things we wouldn’t do by ourselves. Other times, we might do something just because everyone else is doing it, even if we know it’s wrong.

Change Over Time

As we get older, our behavior changes. A little child might throw toys when angry, but as they grow, they learn new ways to show they are upset. We all learn and change as we have more experiences. It’s like getting updates on a computer; we get better at handling different situations.

Human behavior is a big and interesting subject. It’s about why we do things, how we learn from others, and how we change over time. By understanding behavior, we can get along better with others and make good choices. It’s important for us to think about why we act the way we do, so we can be the best versions of ourselves.

That’s it! I hope the essay helped you.

If you’re looking for more, here are essays on other interesting topics:

• Essay on Human Cloning
• Essay on Human Body System
• Essay on How To Stay Healthy

Apart from these, you can look at all the essays by clicking here .

Happy studying!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

• View all journals
• Explore content
• About the journal
• Publish with us
• Sign up for alerts
• Published: 27 January 2022

The future of human behaviour research

• Janet M. Box-Steffensmeier 1 ,
• Jean Burgess 2 , 3 ,
• Maurizio Corbetta 4 , 5 ,
• Kate Crawford 6 , 7 , 8 ,
• Esther Duflo 9 ,
• Laurel Fogarty 10 ,
• Alison Gopnik 11 ,
• Sari Hanafi 12 ,
• Mario Herrero 13 ,
• Ying-yi Hong 14 ,
• Yasuko Kameyama 15 ,
• Tatia M. C. Lee 16 ,
• Gabriel M. Leung 17 , 18 ,
• Daniel S. Nagin 19 ,
• Anna C. Nobre 20 , 21 ,
• Merete Nordentoft 22 , 23 ,
• Aysu Okbay 24 ,
• Andrew Perfors 25 ,
• Laura M. Rival 26 ,
• Cassidy R. Sugimoto 27 ,
• Bertil Tungodden 28 &
• Claudia Wagner 29 , 30 , 31  

Nature Human Behaviour volume  6 ,  pages 15–24 ( 2022 ) Cite this article

61k Accesses

26 Citations

184 Altmetric

Metrics details

Human behaviour is complex and multifaceted, and is studied by a broad range of disciplines across the social and natural sciences. To mark our 5th anniversary, we asked leading scientists in some of the key disciplines that we cover to share their vision of the future of research in their disciplines. Our contributors underscore how important it is to broaden the scope of their disciplines to increase ecological validity and diversity of representation, in order to address pressing societal challenges that range from new technologies, modes of interaction and sociopolitical upheaval to disease, poverty, hunger, inequality and climate change. Taken together, these contributions highlight how achieving progress in each discipline will require incorporating insights and methods from others, breaking down disciplinary silos.

Genuine progress in understanding human behaviour can only be achieved through a multidisciplinary community effort. Five years after the launch of Nature Human Behaviour , twenty-two leading experts in some of the core disciplines within the journal’s scope share their views on pressing open questions and new directions in their disciplines. Their visions provide rich insight into the future of research on human behaviour.

Artificial intelligence

Kate Crawford

Much has changed in artificial intelligence since a small group of mathematicians and scientists gathered at Dartmouth in 1956 to brainstorm how machines could simulate cognition. Many of the domains that those men discussed — such as neural networks and natural language processing — remain core elements of the field today. But what they did not address was the far-reaching social, political, legal and ecological effects of building these systems into everyday life: it was outside their disciplinary view.

Since the mid-2000s, artificial intelligence (AI) has rapidly expanded as a field in academia and as an industry, and now a handful of powerful technology corporations deploy these systems at a planetary scale. There have been extraordinary technical innovations, from real-time language translation to predicting the 3D structures of proteins 1 , 2 . But the biggest challenges remain fundamentally social and political: how AI is widening power asymmetries and wealth inequality, and creating forms of harm that need to be prioritized, remedied and regulated.

The most urgent work facing the field today is to research and remediate the costs and consequences of AI. This requires a deeper sociotechnical approach that can contend with the complex effect of AI on societies and ecologies. Although there has been important work done on algorithmic fairness in recent years 3 , 4 , not enough has been done to address how training data fundamentally skew how AI models interpret the world from the outset. Second, we need to address the human costs of AI, which range from discrimination and misinformation to the widespread reliance on underpaid labourers (such as the crowd-workers who train AI systems for as little as US $2 per hour) 5 . Third, there must be a commitment to reversing the environmental costs of AI, including the exceptionally high energy consumption of the current large computational models, and the carbon footprint of building and operating modern tensor processing hardware 6 . Finally, we need strong regulatory and policy frameworks, expanding on the EU’s draft AI Act of 2021.

By building a more interdisciplinary and inclusive AI field, and developing a more rigorous account of the full impacts of AI, we give engineers and regulators alike the tools that they need to make these systems more sustainable, equitable and just.

Kate Crawford is Research Professor at the Annenberg School, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA; Senior Principal Researcher at Microsoft Research New York, New York, NY, USA; and the Inaugural Visiting Chair of AI and Justice at the École Normale Supérieure, Paris, France.

Anthropology

Laura M. Rival

The field of anthropology faces fundamental questions about its capacity to intervene more effectively in political debates. How can we use the knowledge that we already have to heal the imagined whole while keeping people in synchrony with each other and with the world they aspire to create for themselves and others?

The economic systems that sustain modern life have produced pernicious waste cultures. Globalization has accelerated planetary degradation and global warming through the continuous release of toxic waste. Every day, like millions of others, I dutifully clean and prepare my waste for recycling. I know it is no more than a transitory measure geared to grant manufacturers time to adjust and adapt. Reports that most waste will not be recycled, but dumped or burned, upset me deeply. How can anthropology remain a critical project in the face of such orchestrated cynicism, bad faith and indifference? How should anthropologists deploy their skills and bring a sense of shared responsibility to the task of replenishing the collective will?

To help to find answers to these questions, anthropologists need to radically rethink the ways in which we describe the processes and relations that tie communities to their environments. The extinction of experience (loss of direct contact with nature) that humankind currently suffers is massive, but not irreversible. New forms of storytelling have successfully challenged modernist myths, particularly their homophonic promises 7 . But there remain persistent challenges, such as the seductive and rampant power of one-size-fits-all progress, and the actions of elites, who thrive on emulation, and in doing so fuel run-away consumerism.

To combat these challenges, I simply reassert that ‘nature’ is far from having outlasted its historical utility. Anthropologists must join forces and reanimate their common exploration of the immense possibilities contained in human bodies and minds. No matter how overlooked or marginalized, these natural potentials hold the key to what keeps life going.

Laura M. Rival is Professor of Anthropology of Nature, Society and Development, ODID and SAME, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK .

Communication and media studies

Jean Burgess

The communication and media studies field has historically been animated by technological change. In the process, it has needed to navigate fundamental tensions: communication can be understood as both transmission (of information), and as (social) ritual 8 ; relatedly, media can be understood as both technology and as culture 9 .

The most important technological change over the past decade has been the ‘platformization’ 10 of the media environment. Large digital platforms owned by the world’s most powerful technology companies have come to have an outsized and transformative role in the transmission (distribution) of information, and in mediating social practices (whether major events or intimate daily routines). In response, digital methods have transformed the field. For example, advances in computational techniques enabled researchers to study patterns of communication on social media, leading to disciplinary trends such as the quantitative description of ‘hashtag publics’ in the mid-2010s 11 .

Platforms’ uses of data, algorithms and automation for personalization, content moderation and governance constitute a further major shift, giving rise to new methods (such as algorithmic audits) that go well beyond quantitative description 12 . But platform companies have had a patchy — at times hostile — relationship to independent research into their societal role, leading to data lockouts and even public attacks on researchers. It is important in the interests of public oversight and open science that we coordinate responses to such attempts to suppress research 13 , 14 .

As these processes of digital transformation continue, new connections between the humanities and technical disciplines will be necessary, giving rise to a new wave of methodological innovation. This next phase will also require more hybrid (qualitative and quantitative; computational and critical) methods 15 , not only to get around platform lockouts but also to ensure more careful attention is paid to how the new media technologies are used and experienced in everyday life. Here, innovative approaches such as the use of data donations can both aid the ‘platform observability’ 16 that is essential to accountability, and ensure that our research involves the perspectives of diverse audiences.

Jean Burgess is Professor of Digital Media at the School of Communication and Digital Media Research Centre (DMRC), Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland Australia; and Associate Director at the Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making and Society (ADM+S), Melbourne, Victoria, Australia .

Computational social science

Claudia Wagner

Computational social science has emerged as a discipline that leverages computational methods and new technologies to collect, model and analyse digital behavioural data in natural environments or in large-scale designed experiments, and combine them with other data sources (such as survey data).

While the community made critical progress in enhancing our understanding about empirical phenomena such as the spread of misinformation 17 and the role of algorithms in curating misinformation 18 , it has focused less on questions about the quality and accessibility of data, the validity, reliability and reusability of measurements, the potential consequences of measurements and the connection between data, measurement and theory.

I see the following opportunities to address these issues.

First, we need to establish privacy-preserving, shared data infrastructures that collect and triangulate survey data with scientifically motivated organic or designed observational data from diverse populations 19 . For example, longitudinal online panels in which participants allow researchers to track their web browsing behaviour and link these traces to their survey answers will not only facilitate substantive research on societal questions but also enable methodological research (for example, on the quality of different data sources and measurement models), and contribute to the reproducibility of computational social science research.

Second, best practices and scientific infrastructures are needed for supporting the development, evaluation and re-use of measurements and the critical reflection on potentially harmful consequences of measurements 20 . Social scientists have developed such best practices and infrastructural support for survey measurements to avoid using instruments for which the validity is unclear or even questionable, and to support the re-usability of survey scales. I believe that practices from survey methodology and other domains, such as the medical industry, can inform our thinking here.

Finally, the fusion of algorithmic and human behaviour invites us to rethink the various ways in which data, measurements and social theories can be connected 20 . For example, product recommendations that users receive are based on measurements of users’ interests and needs: however, users and measurements are not only influenced by those recommendations, but also influence them in turn. As a community we need to develop research designs and environments that help us to systematically enhance our understanding of those feedback loops.

Claudia Wagner is Head of Computational Social Science Department at GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, Köln, Germany; Professor for Applied Computational Social Sciences at RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany; and External Faculty Member of the Complexity Science Hub, Vienna, Austria .

Criminology

Daniel S. Nagin

Disciplinary silos in path-breaking science are disappearing. Criminology has had a longstanding tradition of interdisciplinarity, but mostly in the form of an uneasy truce of research from different disciplines appearing side-by-side in leading journals — a scholarly form of parallel play. In the future, this must change because the big unsolved challenges in criminology will require cooperation among all of the social and behavioural sciences.

These challenges include formally merging the macro-level themes emphasized by sociologists with the micro-, individual-level themes emphasized by psychologists and economists. Initial steps have been made by economists who apply game theory to model crime-relevant social interactions, but much remains to be done in building models that explain the formation and destruction of social trust, collective efficacy and norms, as they relate to legal definitions of criminal behaviour.

A second opportunity concerns the longstanding focus of criminology on crimes involving the physical taking of property and interpersonal physical violence. These crimes are still with us, but — as the daily news regularly reports — the internet has opened up broad new frontiers for crime that allow for thefts of property and identities at a distance, forms of extortion and human trafficking at a massive scale (often involving untraceable transactions using financial vehicles such as bitcoin) and interpersonal violence without physical contact. This is a new and largely unexplored frontier for criminological research that criminologists should dive into in collaboration with computer scientists who already are beginning to troll these virgin scholarly waters.

The final opportunity I will note also involves drawing from computer science, the primary home of what has come to be called machine learning. It is important that new generations of criminologists become proficient with machine learning methods and also collaborate with its creators. Machine learning and related statistical methods have wide applicability in both the traditional domains of criminological research and new frontiers. These include the use of prediction tools in criminal justice decision-making, which can aid in crime detection, and the prevention and measuring of crime both online and offline, but also have important implications for equity and fairness due to their consequential nature.

Daniel S. Nagin is Teresa and H. John Heinz III University Professor of Public Policy and Statistics at the Heinz College of Information Systems and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA .

Behavioural economics

Bertil Tungodden

Behavioural and experimental economics have transformed the field of economics by integrating irrationality and nonselfish motivation in the study of human behaviour and social interaction. A richer foundation of human behaviour has opened many new exciting research avenues, and I here highlight three that I find particularly promising.

Economists have typically assumed that preferences are fixed and stable, but a growing literature, combining field and laboratory experimental approaches, has provided novel evidence on how the social environment shapes our moral and selfish preferences. It has been shown that prosocial role models make people less selfish 21 , that early-childhood education affects the fairness views of children 22 and that grit can be fostered in the correct classroom environment 23 . Such insights are important for understanding how exposure to different institutions and socialization processes influence the intergenerational transmission of preferences, but much more work is needed to gain systematic and robust evidence on the malleability of the many dimensions that shape human behaviour.

The moral mind is an important determinant of human behaviour, but our understanding of the complexity of moral motivation is still in its infancy. A growing literature, using an impartial spectator design in which study participants make consequential choices for others, has shown that people often disagree on what is morally acceptable. An important example is how people differ in their view of what is a fair inequality, ranging from the libertarian fairness view to the strict egalitarian fairness view 24 , 25 . An exciting question for future research is whether such moral differences reflect a concern for other moral values, such as freedom, or irrational considerations.

A third exciting development in behavioural and experimental economics is the growing set of global studies on the foundations of human behaviour 26 , 27 . It speaks to the major concern in the social sciences that our evidence is unrepresentative and largely based on studies with samples from Western, educated, industrialized, rich and democratic societies 28 . The increased availability of infrastructure for implementing large-scale experimental data collections and methodological advances carry promise that behavioural and experimental economic research will broaden our understanding of the foundations of human behaviour in the coming years.

Bertil Tungodden is Professor and Scientific Director of the Centre of Excellence FAIR at NHH Norwegian School of Economics, Bergen, Norway .

Development economics

Esther Duflo

The past three decades have been a wonderful time for development economics. The number of scholars, the number of publications and the visibility of the work has dramatically increased. Development economists think about education, health, firm growth, mental health, climate, democratic rules and much more. No topic seems off limits!

This progress is intimately connected with the explosion of the use of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and, more generally, with the embrace of careful causal identification. RCTs have markedly transformed development economics and made it the field that it is today.

The past three decades (until the COVID-19 crisis) have also been very good for improving the circumstances of low-income people around the world: poverty rates have fallen; school enrolment has increased; and maternal and infant mortality has been halved. Although I would not dare imply that the two trends are causally related, one of the reasons for these improvements in the quality of life — even in countries where economic growth has been slow — is the greater focus on pragmatic solutions to the fundamental problems faced by people with few resources. In many countries, development economics researchers (particularly those working with RCTs) have been closely involved with policy-makers, helping them to develop, implement and test these solutions. In turn, this involvement has been a fertile ground for new questions, which have enriched the field.

I imagine future change will, once again, come from an unexpected place. One possible driver of innovation will come from this meeting between the requirements of policy and the intellectual ambition of researchers. This means that the new challenges of our planet must (and will) become the new challenges of development economics. Those challenges are, I believe, quite clear: rethinking social protection to be better prepared to face risks such as the COVID-19 pandemic; mitigating, but unfortunately also adapting to, climate changes; curbing pollution; and addressing gender, racial and ethnic inequality.

To address these critical issues, I believe the field will continue to rely on RCTs, but also start using more creatively (descriptively or in combination with RCTs) the huge amount of data that is increasingly available as governments, even in poor countries, digitize their operations. I cannot wait to be surprised by what comes next.

Esther Duflo is The Abdul Latif Jameel Professor of Poverty Alleviation and Development Economics at the Department of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge MA, USA; and cofounder and codirector of the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab (J-PAL) .

Political science

Janet M. Box-Steffensmeier

Political science remains one of the most pluralistic disciplines and we are on the move towards engaged pluralism. This takes us beyond mere tolerance to true, sincere engagement across methods, methodologies, theories and even disciplinary boundaries. Engaged pluralism means doing the hard work of understanding our own research from the multiple perspectives of others.

More data are being collected on human behaviour than ever before and our advances in methods better address the inherent interdependencies of the data across time, space and context. There are new ways to measure human behaviour via text, image and video. Data creation can even go back in time. All these advancements bode well for the potential to better understand and predict behaviour. This ‘data century’ and ‘golden age of methods’ also hold the promise to bridge, not divide, political science, provided that there is engaged methodological pluralism. Qualitative methods provide unique insights and perspectives when joined with quantitative methods, as does a broader conception of the methodologies underlying and launching our research.

I remain a strong proponent of leveraging dynamics and focusing on heterogeneity in our research questions to advance our disciplines. Doing so brings in an explicit perspective of comparison around similarity and difference. Our questions, hypotheses and theories are often made more compelling when considering the dynamics and heterogeneity that emerges when thinking about time and change.

Striving for a better understanding of gender, race and ethnicity is driving deeper and fuller understandings of central questions in the social sciences. The diversity of the research teams themselves across gender, sex, race, ethnicity, first-generation status, religion, ideology, partisanship and cultures also pushes advancement. One area that we need to better support is career diversity. Supporting careers in government, non-profit organizations and industry, as well as academia, for graduate students will enhance our disciplines and accelerate the production of knowledge that changes the world.

Engaged pluralism remains a foundational key to advancement in political science. Engaged pluralism supports critical diversity, equity and inclusion work, strengthens political scientists’ commitment to democratic principles, and encourages civic engagement more broadly. It is an exciting time to be a social scientist.

Janet M. Box-Steffensmeier is Vernal Riffe Professor of Political Science, Professor of Sociology (courtesy) and Distinguished University Professor at the Department of Political Science, Ohio State University, Columbus OH, USA; and immediate past President of the American Political Science Association .

Cognitive psychology

Andrew Perfors

Cognitive psychology excels at understanding questions whose problem-space is well-defined, with precisely specified theories that transparently map onto thoroughly explored experimental paradigms. That means there is a vast gulf between the current state of the art and the richness and complexity of cognition in the real world. The most exciting open questions are about how to bridge that gap without sacrificing rigour and precision. This requires at least three changes.

First, we must move beyond typical experiments. Stimuli must become less artificial, with a naturalistic structure and distribution. Similarly, tasks must become more ecologically valid: less isolated, with more uncertainty, embedded in natural situations and over different time-scales.

Second, we must move beyond considering individuals in isolation. We live in a rich social world and an environment that is heavily shaped by other humans. How we think, learn and act is deeply affected by how other people think and interact with us; cognitive science needs to engage with this more.

Third, we must move beyond the metaphor of humans as computers. Our cognition is deeply intertwined with our emotions, motivations and senses. These are more than just parameters in our minds; they have a complexity and logic of their own, and interact in nontrivial ways with each other and more typical cognitive domains such as learning, reasoning and acting.

How do we make progress on these steps? We need reliable real-world data that are comparable across people and situations, reflect the cognitive processes involved and are not changed by measurement. Technology may help us with this, but challenges surrounding privacy and data quality are huge. Our models and analytic approaches must also grow in complexity — commensurate with the growth in problem and data complexity — without becoming intractable or losing their explanatory power.

Success in this endeavour calls for a different kind of science that is not centred around individual laboratories or small stand-alone projects. The biggest advances will be achieved on the basis of large, rich, real-world datasets from different populations, created and analysed in collaborative teams that span multiple domains, fields and approaches. This requires incentive structures that reward team-focused, slower science and prioritize the systematic construction of reliable knowledge over splashy findings.

Andrew Perfors is Associate Professor and Deputy Director of the Complex Human Data Hub, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia .

Cultural and social psychology

Ying-yi Hong

I am writing this at an exceptional moment in human history. For two years, the world has faced the COVID-19 pandemic and there is no end in sight. Cultural and social psychology are uniquely equipped to understand the COVID-19 pandemic, specifically examining how people, communities and countries are dealing with this extreme global crisis — especially at a time when many parts of the world are already experiencing geopolitical upheaval.

During the pandemic, and across different nations and regions, a diverse set of strategies (and subsequent levels of effectiveness) were used to curb the spread of the disease. In the first year of the pandemic, research revealed that some cultural worldviews — such as collectivism (versus individualism) and tight (versus loose) norms — were positively associated with compliance with COVID-19 preventive measures as well as with fewer infections and deaths 29 , 30 . These worldview differences arguably stem from different perspectives on abiding to social norms and prioritizing the collective welfare over an individual’s autonomy and liberty. Although in the short term it seems that a collectivist or tight worldview has been advantageous, it is unclear whether this will remain the case in the long term. Cultural worldviews are ‘tools’ that individuals use to decipher the meaning of their environment, and are dynamic rather than static 31 . Future research can examine how cultural worldviews and global threats co-evolve.

The pandemic has also amplified the demarcation of national, political and other major social categories. On the one hand, identification with some groups (for example, national identity) was found to increase in-group care and thus a greater willingness to sacrifice personal autonomy to comply with COVID-19 measures 32 . On the other hand, identification with other groups (for example, political parties) widened the ideological divide between groups and drove opposing behaviours towards COVID-19 measures and health outcomes 33 . As we are facing climate change and other pressing global challenges, understanding the role of social identities and how they affect worldviews, cognition and behaviour will be vital. How can we foster more inclusive (versus exclusive) identities that can unite rather than divide people and nations?

Ying-yi Hong is Choh-Ming Li Professor of Management and Associate Dean (Research) at the Department of Management, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China .

Developmental psychology

Alison Gopnik

Developmental psychology is similar to the kind of book or band that, paradoxically, everyone agrees is underrated. On the one hand, children and the people who care for them are often undervalued and overlooked. On the other, since Piaget, developmental research has tackled some of the most profound philosophical questions about every kind of human behaviour. This will only continue into the future.

Psychologists increasingly recognize that the minds of children are not just a waystation or an incomplete version of adult minds. Instead, childhood is a distinct evolutionarily adaptive phase of an organism, with its own characteristic cognitions, emotions and motivations. These characteristics of childhood reflect a different agenda than those of the adult mind — a drive to explore rather than exploit. This drive comes with motivations such as curiosity, emotions such as wonder and surprise and remarkable cognitive learning capacities. A new flood of research on curiosity, for example, shows that children actively seek out the information that will help them to learn the most.

The example of curiosity also reflects the exciting prospects for interdisciplinary developmental science. Machine learning is increasingly using children’s learning as a model, and developmental psychologists are developing more precise models as a result. Curiosity-based AI can illuminate both human and machine intelligence. Collaborations with biology are also exciting: for example, in work on evolutionary ‘life history’ explanations of the effects of adverse experiences on later life, and new research on plasticity and sensitive periods in neuroscience. Finally, children are at the cutting edge of culture, and developmental psychologists increasingly conduct a much wider range of cross-cultural studies.

But perhaps the most important development is that policy-makers are finally starting to realize just how crucial children are to important social issues. Developmental science has shown that providing children with the care that they need can decrease poverty, inequality, disease and violence. But that care has been largely invisible to policy-makers and politicians. Understanding scientifically how caregiving works and how to support it more effectively will be the most important challenge for developmental psychology in the next century.

Alison Gopnik is Professor of Psychology and Affiliate Professor of Philosophy at the Department of Psychology, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA .

Science of science

Cassidy R. Sugimoto

Why study science? The goal of science is to advance knowledge to improve the human condition. It is, therefore, essential that we understand how science operates to maximize efficiency and social good. The metasciences are fields that are devoted to understanding the scientific enterprise. These fields are distinguished by differing epistemologies embedded in their names: the philosophy, history and sociology of science represent canonical metasciences that use theories and methods from their mother disciplines. The ‘science of science’ uses empirical approaches to understand the mechanisms of science. As mid-twentieth-century science historian Derek de Solla Price observed, science of science allows us to “turn the tools of science on science itself” 34 .

Contemporary questions in the science of science investigate, inter alia, catalysts of discovery and innovation, consequences of increased access to scientific information, role of teams in knowledge creation and the implications of social stratification on the scientific enterprise. Investigation of these issues require triangulation of data and integration across the metasciences, to generate robust theories, model on valid assumptions and interpret results appropriately. Community-owned infrastructure and collective venues for communication are essential to achieve these goals. The construction of large-scale science observatories, for example, would provide an opportunity to capture the rapidly expanding dataverse, collaborate and share data, and provide nimble translations of data into information for policy-makers and the scientific community.

The topical foci of the field are also undergoing rapid transformation. The expansion of datasets enables researchers to analyse a fuller population, rather than a narrow sample that favours particular communities. The field has moved from an elitist focus on ‘success’ and ‘impact’ to a more-inclusive and prosopographical perspective. Conversations have shifted from citations, impact factors and h -indices towards responsible indicators, diversity and broader impacts. Instead of asking ‘how can we predict the next Nobel prize winner?’, we can ask ‘what are the consequences of attrition in the scientific workforce?’. The turn towards contextualized measurements that use more inclusive datasets to understand the entire system of science places the science of science in a ripe position to inform policy and propel us towards a more innovative and equitable future.

Cassidy R. Sugimoto is Professor and Tom and Marie Patton School Chair, School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA .

Sari Hanafi

In the past few years, we have been living through times in which reasonable debate has become impossible. Demagogical times are driven by the vertiginous rise of populism and authoritarianism, which we saw in the triumph of Donald Trump in the USA and numerous other populist or authoritarian leaders in many places around the globe. There are some pressing tasks for sociology that can be, in brief, reduced to three.

First, fostering democracy and the democratization process requires disentangling the constitutive values that compose the liberal political project (personal liberty, equality, moral autonomy and multiculturalism) to address the question of social justice and to accommodate the surge in people’s religiosity in many parts in the globe.

Second, the struggle for the environment is inseparable from our choice of political economy, and from the nature of our desired economic system — and these connections between human beings and nature have never been as intimate as they are now. Past decades saw rapid growth that was based on assumptions of the long-term stability of the fixed costs of raw materials and energy. But this is no longer the case. More recently, financial speculation intensified and profits shrunk, generating distributional conflicts between workers, management, owners and tax authorities. The nature of our economic system is now in acute crisis.

The answer lies in a consciously slow-growing new economy that incorporates the biophysical foundations of economics into its functioning mechanisms. Society and nature cannot continue to be perceived each as differentiated into separate compartments. The spheres of nature, culture, politics, social, economy and religion are indeed traversed by common logics that allow a given society to be encompassed in its totality, exactly as Marcel Mauss 35 did. The logic of power and interests embodied in ‘ Homo economicus ’ prevents us from being able to see the potentiality of human beings to cultivate gift-giving practices as an anthropological foundation innate within social relationships.

Third, there are serious social effects of digitalized forms of labour and the trend of replacing labour with an automaton. Even if digital labour partially reduces the unemployment rate, the lack of social protection for digital labourers would have tremendous effects on future generations.

In brief, it is time to connect sociology to moral and political philosophy to address fundamentally post-COVID-19 challenges.

Sari Hanafi is Professor of Sociology at the American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon; and President of the International Sociological Association .

Environmental studies (climate change)

Yasuko Kameyama

Climate change has been discussed for more than 40 years as a multilateral issue that poses a great threat to humankind and ecosystems. Unfortunately, we are still talking about the same issue today. Why can’t we solve this problem, even though scientists pointed out its importance and urgency so many years ago?

These past years have been spent trying to prove the causal relationship between an increase in greenhouse gas concentrations, global temperature rise and various extreme weather events, as well as developing and disseminating technologies needed to reduce emissions. All of these tasks have been handled by experts in the field. At the same time, the general public invested little time in this movement, probably expecting that the problem would be solved by experts and policy-makers. But that has not been the case. No matter how much scientists have emphasized the crisis of climate change or how many clean energy technologies engineers have developed, society has resisted making the necessary changes. Now, the chances of keeping the temperature rise within 1.5 °C of pre-industrial levels — the goal necessary to minimize the effects of climate change — are diminishing.

We seem to finally be realizing the importance of social scientific knowledge. People need to take scientific information seriously for clean technology to be quickly diffused. Companies are more interested in investing in newer technology and product development when they know that their products will sell. Because environmental problems are caused by human activity, research on human behaviour is indispensable in solving these problems.

Reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) have not devoted many pages to the areas of human awareness and behaviour ( https://www.ipcc.ch/ ). The IPCC’s Third Working Group, which deals with mitigation measures, has partially spotlighted research on institutions, as well as on concepts such as fairness. People’s perception of climate change and the relationship between perception and behavioural change differ depending on the country, societal structure and culture. Additional studies in these areas are required and, for that purpose, more studies from regions such as Asia, Africa and South America, which are underrepresented in terms of the number of academic publications, are particularly needed.

Yasuko Kameyama is Director, Social Systems Division, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan .

Sustainability (food systems)

Mario Herrero

The food system is in dire straits. Food demand is unprecedented, while malnutrition in all its forms (obesity, undernutrition and micronutrient deficiencies) is rampant. Environmental degradation is pervasive and increasing, and if it continues, the comfort zone for humanity and ecosystems to thrive will be seriously compromised. From bruises and shapes to sell-by dates, we tend to find many reasons to exclude perfectly edible food from our plates, whereas in other cases not enough food reaches hungry mouths owing to farming methods, pests and lack of adequate storage. These types of inequalities are common and — together with inherent perverse incentives that maintain the status quo of how we produce, consume and waste increasingly cheap and processed food — they are launching us towards a disaster.

We are banking on a substantial transformation of the food system to solve this conundrum. Modifying food consumption and waste patterns are central to the plan for achieving healthier diets, while increasing the sustainability of our food system. This is also an attractive policy proposition, as it could lead to gains in several sectors. Noncommunicable diseases such as obesity, diabetes and heart disease could decline, while reducing the effects of climate change, deforestation, excessive water withdrawals and biodiversity loss, and their enormous associated — and largely unaccounted — costs.

Modifying our food consumption and waste patterns is very hard, and unfortunately we know very little about how to change them at scale. Yes, many pilots and small examples exist on pricing, procurement, food environments and others, but the evidence is scarce, and the magnitude of the change required demands an unprecedented transdisciplinary research agenda. The problem is at the centre of human agency and behaviour, embodying culture, habits, values, social status, economics and all aspects of agri-food systems. Certainly, one of the big research areas for the next decade if we are to reach the Sustainable Development Goals leaving no one behind.

Mario Herrero is Professor, Cornell Atkinson scholar and Nancy and Peter Meinig Family Investigator in the Life Sciences at the Department of Global Development, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and Cornell Atkinson Center for Sustainability, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA .

Cultural evolution

Laurel Fogarty

Humans are the ultimate ‘cultural animals’. We are innovative, pass our cultures to one another across generations and build vast self-constructed environments that reflect our cultural biases. We achieve things using our cultural capacities that are unimaginable for any other species on earth. And yet we have only begun to understand the dynamics of cultural change, the drivers of cultural complexity or the ways that we adapt culturally to changing environments. Scholars — anthropologists, archaeologists and sociologists — have long studied culture, aiming to describe and understand its staggering diversity. The relatively new field of cultural evolution has different aims, one of the most important of which is to understand the mechanics in the background — what general principles, if any, govern human cultural change?

Although the analogy of culture as an evolutionary process has been made since at least the time of Darwin 36 , 37 , cultural evolution as a robust field of study is much younger. From its beginnings with the pioneering work of Cavalli-Sforza & Feldman 38 , 39 , 40 and Boyd & Richerson 41 , 42 , the field of cultural evolution has been heavily theoretical. It has drawn on models from genetic evolution 40 , 43 , 44 , 45 , ecology 46 , 47 and epidemiology 40 , 48 , extending and adapting them to account for unique and important aspects of cultural transmission. Indeed, in its short life, the field of cultural evolution has largely been dominated by a growing body of theory that ensured that the fledgling field started out on solid foundations. Because it underpins and makes possible novel applications of cultural evolutionary ideas, theoretical cultural evolution’s continued development is not only crucial to the field’s growth but also represents some of its most exciting future work.

One of the most urgent tasks for cultural evolution researchers in the next five years is to develop, alongside its theoretical foundations, robust principles of application 49 , 50 , 51 . In other words, it is vital to develop our understanding of what we can — and, crucially, cannot — infer from different types of cultural data. Where do we draw those boundaries and how can we apply cultural evolutionary theory to cultural datasets in a principled way? The tandem development of robust theory and principled application has the potential to strengthen cultural evolution as a robust, useful and ground-breaking inferential science of human behaviour.

Laurel Fogarty is Senior Scientist at the Department of Human Behaviour, Ecology, and Culture, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany .

Over the past decade, research using molecular genetic data has confirmed one of the main conclusions of twin studies: all human behaviour is partly heritable 52 , 53 . Attempts at examining the link between genetics and behaviour have been met with concerns that the findings can be abused to justify discrimination — and there are good historical grounds for these concerns. However, these findings also show that ignoring the contribution of genes to variation in human behaviour could be detrimental to a complete understanding of social phenomena, given the complex ways that genes and environment interact.

Uncovering these complex pathways has become feasible only recently thanks to rapid technological progress reducing the costs of genotyping. Sample sizes in genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have risen from tens of thousands to millions in the past decade, reporting thousands of genetic variants associated with different behaviours 54 , 55 , 56 , 57 . New ways to use GWAS results have emerged, the most important one arguably being a method to aggregate the additive effects of many genetic variants into a ‘polygenic index’ (PGI) (also known as a ‘polygenic score’) that summarizes an individual’s genetic propensity towards a trait or behaviour 58 , 59 . Being aggregate measures, PGIs capture a much larger share of the variance in the trait of interest compared to individual genetic variants 60 . Thus, they have paved the way for follow-up studies with smaller sample sizes but deeper phenotyping compared to the original GWAS, allowing researchers to, for example, analyse the channels through which genes operate 61 , 62 , how they interact with the environment 63 , 64 , and account for confounding bias and boost statistical power by controlling for genetic effects 65 , 66 .

Useful as they are, PGIs and the GWAS that they are based on can suffer from confounding due to environmental factors that correlate with genotypes, such as population stratification, indirect effect from relatives or assortative mating 67 . Now that the availability of genetic data enables large-scale within-family GWAS, the next big thing in behaviour genetic research will be disentangling these sources 68 . While carrying the progress further, it is important that the field prioritizes moving away from its currently predominant Eurocentric bias by extending data collection and analyses to individuals of non-European ancestries, as the exclusion of non-European ancestries from genetic research has the potential to exacerbate health disparities 69 . Researchers should also be careful to communicate their findings clearly and responsibly to the public and guard against their misappropriation by attempts to fuel discriminatory action and discourse 70 .

Aysu Okbay is Assistant Professor at the Department of Economics, School of Business and Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands .

Cognitive neuroscience

Anna C. Nobre

Since the ‘decade of the brain’ in the 1990s, ingenuity in cognitive neuroscience has focused on measuring and analysing brain signals. Adapting tools from statistics, engineering, computer science, physics and other disciplines, we studied activity, states, connectivity, interactions, time courses and dynamics in brain regions and networks. Unexpected findings about the brain yielded important insights about the mind.

Now is a propitious time to upgrade the brain–mind duumvirate to a brain–mind–behaviour triumvirate. Brain and mind are embodied, and their workings are expressed through various effectors. Yet, experimental tasks typically use simple responses to capture complex psychological functions. Often, a button press — with its limited dimensions of latency and accuracy — measures anticipating, focusing, evaluating, choosing, reflecting or remembering. Researchers venturing beyond such simple responses are uncovering how the contents of mind can be studied using various continuous measures, such as pupil diameter, gaze shifts and movement trajectories.

Most tasks also restrict participants’ movements to ensure experimental control. However, we are learning that principles of cognition derived in artificial laboratory contexts can fail to generalize to natural behaviour. Virtual reality should prove a powerful methodology. Participants can behave naturally, and experimenters can control stimulation and obtain quality measures of gaze, hand and body movements. Noninvasive neurophysiology methods are becoming increasingly portable. Exciting immersive brain–mind–behaviour studies are just ahead.

The next necessary step is out of the academic bubble. Today the richest data on human behaviour belong to the information and technology industries. In our routines, we contribute data streams through telephones, keyboards, watches, vehicles and countless smart devices in the internet of things. These expose properties such as processing speed, fluency, attention, dexterity, navigation and social context. We supplement these by broadcasting feelings, attitudes and opinions through social media and other forums. The richness and scale of the resulting big data offer unprecedented opportunities for deriving predictive patterns that are relevant to understanding human cognition (and its disorders). The outcomes can then guide further hypothesis-driven experimentation. Cognitive neuroscience is intrinsically collaborative, combining a broad spectrum of disciplines to study the mind. Its challenge now is to move from a multidisciplinary to a multi-enterprise science.

Anna C. Nobre is Chair in Translational Cognitive Neuroscience at the Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, UK; and Director of Oxford Centre for Human Brain Activity, Wellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, UK .

Social and affective neuroscience

Tatia M. C. Lee

Social and affective neuroscience is a relatively new, but rapidly developing, field of neuroscience. Social and affective neuroscience research takes a multilevel approach to make sense of socioaffective processes, focusing on macro- (for example, social environments and structures), meso- (for example, social interactions) and micro (for example, socio-affective neural processes and perceptions)-level interactions. Because the products of these interactions are person-specific, the conventional application of group-averaged mechanisms to understand the brain in a socioemotional context has been reconsidered. Researchers turn to ecologically valid stimuli (for example, dynamic and virtual reality instead of static stimuli) and experimental settings (for example, real-time social interaction) 71 to address interindividual differences in social and affective responses. At the neural level, there has been a shift of research focus from local neural activations to large-scale synchronized interactions across neural networks. Network science contributes to the understanding of dynamic changes of neural processes that reflect the interactions and interconnection of neural structures that underpin social and affective processes.

We are living in an ever-changing socioaffective world, full of unexpected challenges. The ageing population and an increasing prevalence of depression are social phenomena on a global scale. Social isolation and loneliness caused by measures to tackle the current pandemic affect physical and psychological well-being of people from all walks of life. These global issues require timely research efforts to generate potential solutions. In this regard, social and affective neuroscience research using computational modelling, longitudinal research designs and multimodal data integration will create knowledge about the basis of adaptive and maladaptive social and affective neurobehavioural processes and responses 72 , 73 , 74 . Such knowledge offers important insights into the precise delineation of brain–symptom relationships, and hence the development of prediction models of cognitive and socioaffective functioning (for example, refs. 75 , 76 ). Therefore, screening tools for identifying potential vulnerabilities can be developed, and timely and precise interventions can be tailored to meet individual situations and needs. The translational application of social and affective neuroscience research to precision medicine (and policy) is experiencing unprecedented demand, and such demand is met with unprecedented clinical and research capabilities.

Tatia M. C. Lee is Chair Professor of Psychology at the State Key Laboratory of Brain and Cognitive Sciences and Laboratory of Neuropsychology and Human Neuroscience, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China .

Maurizio Corbetta

Focal brain disorders, including stroke, trauma and epilepsy, are the main causes of disability and loss of productivity in the world, and carry a cumulative cost in Europe of about € 500 billion per year 77 . The disease process affects a specific circuit in the brain by turning it off (as in stroke) or pathologically turning it on (as in epilepsy). The cause of the disabling symptoms is typically local circuit damage. However, there is now overwhelming evidence that symptoms reflect not only local pathology but also widespread (network) functional abnormalities. For instance, in stroke, an average lesion — the size of a golf ball — typically alters the activity of on average 25% of all brain connections. Furthermore, normalization of these abnormalities correlates with optimal recovery of function 78 , 79 .

One exciting treatment opportunity is ‘circuit-based’ stimulation: an ensemble of methods (optogenetic, photoacoustic, electrochemical, magnetic and electrical) that have the potential to normalize activity. Presently, this type of therapy is limited by numerous factors, including a lack of knowledge about the circuits, the difficulty of mapping these circuits in single patients and, most importantly, a principled understanding of where and how to stimulate to produce functional recovery.

A possible solution lies in a strategy (developed with G. Deco, M. Massimini and M. Sanchez-Vivez) that starts with an in-depth assessment of behaviour and physiological studies of brain activity to characterize the affected circuits and associated patterns of functional abnormalities. Such a multi-dimensional physiological map of a lesioned brain can be then fed to biologically realistic in silico models 80 . A model of a lesioned brain affords the opportunity to explore, in an exhaustive way, different kinds of stimulation to normalize faulty activity. Once a suitable protocol is found it can be exported first to animal models, and then to humans. Stimulation alone will not be enough. Pairing with behavioural training (rehabilitation) will stabilize learning and normalize connections.

The ability to interface therapy (stimulation, rehabilitation and drugs) with brain signals or other kinds of behavioural sensor offers another exciting opportunity, to open the ‘brain’s black box’. Most current treatments in neuroscience are given with no regard to their effect on the underlying brain signals or behaviour. Giving patients conscious access to their own brain signals may substantially enhance recovery, as the brain is now in the position to use its own powerful connections and learning mechanisms to cure itself.

Maurizio Corbetta is Professor and Chair of Neurology at the Department of Neuroscience and Director of the Padova Neuroscience Center (PNC), University of Padova, Italy; and Principal Investigator at the Venetian Institute of Molecular Medicine (VIMM), Padova, Italy .

Merete Nordentoft

Schizophrenia and related psychotic disorders are among the costliest and most debilitating disorders in terms of personal sufferings for those affected, for relatives and for society 81 . These disorders often require long-term treatment and, for a substantial proportion of the patients, the outcomes are poor. This has motivated efforts to prevent long-lasting illness by early intervention. The time around the onset of psychotic disorders is associated with an increased risk of suicide, of loss of affiliation with the labour market, and social isolation and exclusion. Therefore, prevention and treatment of first-episode psychosis will be a key challenge for the future.

There is now solid evidence proving that early intervention services can improve clinical outcomes 82 . This was first demonstrated in the large Danish OPUS trial, in which OPUS treatment — consisting of assertive outreach, case management and family involvement, provided by multidisciplinary teams over a two-year period — was shown to improve clinical outcomes 83 . Moreover, it was also cost-effective 84 . Although the positive effects on clinical outcomes were not sustainable after five and ten years, there was a long-lasting effect on use of supported housing facilities (indicating improved ability to live independently) 85 . Later trials proved that it is possible to maintain the positive clinical outcomes by extending the services to five years or by offering a stepped care model with continued intensive care for the patients who are most impaired 86 . However, even though both clinical and functional outcomes (such as labour market affiliation) can be improved by evidence-based treatments 82 , a large group of patients with first-episode psychosis still have psychotic symptoms after ten years. Thus, there is still an urgent need for identification of new and better options for treatment.

Most probably, some of the disease processes start long before first onset of a psychotic disorder. Thus, identifying disease mechanisms and possibilities for intervention before onset of psychosis will be extremely valuable. Evidence for effective preventive interventions is very limited, and the most burning question — of how to prevent psychosis — is still open.

The early intervention approach is also promising also for other disorders, including bipolar affective disorder, depression, anxiety, eating disorders, personality disorders, autism and attention-deficient hyperactivity disorder.

Merete Nordentoft is Clinical Professor at the Department of Clinical Medicine, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark; and Principal Investigator, CORE - Copenhagen Research Centre for Mental Health, Mental Health Centre Copenhagen, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark .

Epidemiology

Gabriel M. Leung

In a widely anthologized article from the business field of marketing, Levitt 87 pointed out that often industries failed to grow because they suffered from a limited market view. For example, Kodak went bust because it narrowly defined itself as a film camera company for still photography rather than one that should have been about imaging writ large. If it had had that strategic insight, it would have exploited and invested in digital technologies aggressively and perhaps gone down the rather more successful path of Fujifilm — or even developed into territory now cornered by Netflix.

The raison d’être of epidemiology has been to provide a set of robust scientific methods that underpin public health practice. In turn, the field of public health has expanded to fulfil the much-wider and more-intensive demands of protecting, maintaining and promoting the health of local and global populations, intergenerationally. At its broadest, the mission of public health should be to advance social justice towards a complete state of health.

Therefore, epidemiologists should continue to recruit and embrace relevant methodology sets that could answer public health questions, better and more efficiently. For instance, Davey Smith and Ebrahim 88 described how epidemiology adapted instrumental variable analysis that had been widely deployed in econometrics to fundamentally improve causal inference in observational epidemiology. Conversely, economists have not been shy in adopting the randomized controlled trial design to answer questions of development, and have recognized it with a Nobel prize 89 . COVID-19 has brought mathematical epidemiology or modelling to the fore. The foundations of the field borrowed heavily from population dynamics and ecological theory.

In future, classical epidemiology, which has mostly focused on studying how the exposome associates with the phenome, needs to take into simultaneous account the other layers of the multiomics universe — from the genome to the metabolome to the microbiome 90 . Another area requiring innovative thinking concerns how to harness big data to better understand human behaviour 91 . Finally, we must consider key questions that are amenable to epidemiologic investigation arising from the major global health challenges: climate change, harmful addictions and mental wellness. What new methodological tools do we need to answer these questions?

Epidemiologists must keep trying on new lenses that correct our own siloed myopia.

Gabriel M. Leung is Helen and Francis Zimmern Professor in Population Health at WHO Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control, School of Public Health, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong; Chief Scientific Officer at Laboratory of Data Discovery for Health, Hong Kong Science and Technology Park; and Dean of Medicine at the University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China .

Bahdanau, D., Cho, K. & Bengio, Y. Neural machine translation by jointly learning to align and translate. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1409.0473 (2014).

Jumper, J. et al. Nature 596 , 583–589 (2021).

Article   CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Dwork, C., Hardt, M., Pitassi, T., Reingold, O. & Zemel, R. Fairness through awareness. In Proc. 3rd Innovations in Theoretical Computer Science Conference , 214–226 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2012).

Chouldechova, A. & Roth, A. Commun. ACM 63 , 82–89 (2020).

Article   Google Scholar  

Hara, K. et al. A data-driven analysis of workers’ earnings on Amazon Mechanical Turk. In Proc. 2018 CHI Conf. on Human Factors in Computing Systems , 1–14 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2018).

Strubell, E., Ganesh, A. & McCallum, A. Energy and policy considerations for deep learning in NLP. Preprint at https://arxiv.org/abs/1906.02243 (2019).

Rival, L. Anthropol. Today 37 , 9–12 (2021).

Carey, J. W. Communication as Culture: Essays on Media and Society (Unwin Hyman, 1985).

Williams, R. Television: Technology and Cultural Form (Fontana, 1974).

Helmond, A. Soc. Media Soc . 1 , https://doi.org/10.1177/2056305115603080 (2015).

Rambukkana, N. (Ed.). Hashtag Publics: The Power and Politics of Discursive Networks (Peter Lang, 2015).

Burrell, J. Big Data Soc. 3 , 1–12 (2016).

Bruns, A. et al. Facebook shuts the gate after the horse has bolted, and hurts real research in the process. Internet Policy Review , https://go.nature.com/3IP2xYr (25 April 2018).

Article 19. EU: Stop platforms from suppressing public interest research. article.19.org , https://go.nature.com/3DTWgXT (13 September 2021).

Burgess, J. et al. Critical simulation as hybrid digital method for exploring the data operations and vernacular cultures of visual social media platforms. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.31235/osf.io/2cwsu (2021).

Rieder, B. & Hofmann, J. Internet Policy Review 9 , 1–28 (2020).

Vosoughi, S., Roy, D. & Aral, S. Science 359 , 1146–1151 (2018).

Article   CAS   PubMed   Google Scholar  

Hussein, E., Juneja, P. & Mitra, T. Measuring misinformation in video search platforms: an audit study on YouTube. In Proc. of the ACM on Human–Computer Interaction 4 (CSCW1) (eds. Lampe C. et al.) 1–27 (Association for Computing Machinery, 2020).

Lazer, D. M. J. et al. Science 369 , 1060–1062 (2020).

Wagner, C. et al. Nature 595 , 197–204 (2021).

Kosse, F., Deckers, T., Pinger, P., Schildberg-Hörisch, H. & Falk, A. J. Polit. Econ. 128 , 434–467 (2020).

Cappelen, A., List, J., Samek, A. & Tungodden, B. J. Polit. Econ. 128 , 2739–2758 (2020).

Article   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Alan, S., Boneva, T. & Ertac, S. Q. J. Econ. 134 , 1121–1162 (2019).

Google Scholar  

Almås, I., Cappelen, A. & Tungodden, B. J. Polit. Econ. 128 , 1753–1788 (2020).

Müller, D. & Renes, S. Soc. Choice Welfare 56 , 679–711 (2021).

Falk, A. et al. Q. J. Econ. 133 , 1645–1692 (2018).

Almås, I., Cappelen, A., Sørensen, E. Ø. & Tungodden, B. Global evidence on the selfish rich inequality hypothesis. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA (in the press).

Henrich, J., Root, H. & Henrich, J. The WEIRDest People in the World: How the West Became Psychologically Peculiar and Particularly Propserous (Farrar, Strauss, and Giroux, 2020).

Gelfand, M. J. et al. Lancet Planet. Health 5 , e135–e144 (2021).

Lu, J. G., Jin, P. & English, A. S. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 118 , e2021793118 (2021).

Hong, Y. Y., Morris, M. W., Chiu, C. Y. & Benet-Martínez, V. Am. Psychol. 55 , 709–720 (2000).

Chan, H.-W. et al. Polit. Psychol. 42 , 767–793 (2021).

Gollwitzer, A. et al. Nat. Hum. Behav. 4 , 1186–1197 (2020).

Article   PubMed   Google Scholar  

de Solla Price, D. Little Science, Big Science (Columbia Univ. Press, 1963).

Mauss, M. 1925. in Sociologie et Anthropologie (Réédition 1978) 143–275 (Presses Universitaires de France).

Darwin, C. The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex (Penguin 2004) (reprint of 2nd edn, 1879).

Mesoudi, A. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 114 , 7853–7860 (2017).

Cavalli-Sforza, L. & Feldman, M. W. Theor. Popul. Biol. 4 , 42–55 (1973).

Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. & Feldman, M. W. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 25 , 618–637 (1973).

CAS   PubMed   PubMed Central   Google Scholar  

Cavalli-Sforza, L. L. & Feldman, M. W. Cultural Transmission and Evolution (Princeton Univ. Press, 1981).

Richerson, P. J. & Boyd, R. J. Social Biological Syst. 1 , 127–154 (1978).

Boyd, R. & Richerson, P. J. Culture and the Evolutionary Process (Chicago Univ. Press, 1985).

Shennan, S. J. Camb. Archaeol. J. 11 , 5–16 (2001).

Strimling, P., Sjöstrand, J., Enquist, M. & Eriksson, K. Theor. Popul. Biol. 76 , 77–83 (2009).

Aoki, K., Lehmann, L. & Feldman, M. W. Theor. Popul. Biol. 79 , 192–202 (2011).

Kandler, A. & Laland, K. N. Theor. Popul. Biol. 76 , 59–67 (2009).

Laland, K. N. & O’Brien, M. J. Biol. Theory 6 , 191–202 (2011).

Richerson, P. J. & Boyd, R. Not By Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution (Univ. Chicago Press, 2005).

Kandler, A. & Powell, A. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 373 , 20170056 (2018).

Kandler, A., Wilder, B. & Fortunato, L. R. Soc. Open Sci. 4 , 170949 (2017).

McElreath, R. et al. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B 363 , 3515–3528 (2008).

Turkheimer, E. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 9 , 160–164 (2000).

Polderman, T. J. C. C. et al. Genet. 47 , 702–709 (2015).

CAS   Google Scholar  

Visscher, P. M. et al. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 101 , 5–22 (2017).

Karlsson Linnér, R. et al. Nat. Genet. 51 , 245–257 (2019).

Article   PubMed   CAS   Google Scholar  

Lee, J. J. et al. Nat. Genet. 50 , 1112–1121 (2018).

Liu, M. et al. Nat. Genet. 51 , 237–244 (2019).

Wray, N. R., Goddard, M. E. & Visscher, P. M. Genome Res. 17 , 1520–1528 (2007).

The International Schizophrenia Consortium. Nature 460 , 748–752 (2009).

Article   CAS   Google Scholar  

Becker, J. et al. Nat. Hum. Behav . (2021).

Belsky, D. W. et al. Psychol. Sci. 27 , 957–972 (2016).

Young, A. I., Benonisdottir, S., Przeworski, M. & Kong, A. Science 365 , 1396–1400 (2019).

Barcellos, S. H., Carvalho, L. S. & Turley, P. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115 , E9765–E9772 (2018).

Papageorge, N. W. & Thom, K. J. Eur. Econ. Assoc. 18 , 1351–1399 (2020).

DiPrete, T. A., Burik, C. A. P. & Koellinger, P. D. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 115 , E4970–E4979 (2018).

Rietveld, C. A. et al. Science 340 , 1467–1471 (2013).

Kong, A., Benonisdottir, S. & Young, A. I. Family analysis with Mendelian imputations. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.02.185181 (2020).

Howe, L. J. et al. Within-sibship GWAS improve estimates of direct genetic effects. Preprint at https://doi.org/10.1101/2021.03.05.433935 (2021).

Martin, A. R. et al. Nat. Genet. 51 , 584–591 (2019).

Nuffield Council on Bioethics. Genetics and Human Behaviour: The Ethical Context (Nuffield Council on Bioethics, 2002).

Redcay, E. & Schilbach, L. Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 20 , 495–505 (2019).

Roeckner, A. R., Oliver, K. I., Lebois, L. A. M., van Rooij, S. J. H. & Stevens, J. S. Transl. Psychiatry 11 , 508 (2021).

Sevgi, M., Diaconescu, A. O., Henco, L., Tittgemeyer, M. & Schilbach, L. Biol. Psychiatry 87 , 185–193 (2020).

Wittmann, M. K. et al. Neuron 91 , 482–493 (2016).

Gao, M. et al. Neuroimage 223 , 117290 (2020).

Lee, K. M., Ferreira-Santos, F. & Satpute, A. B. Neurosci. Biobehav. Rev. 131 , 211–228 (2021).

Olesen, J., Gustavsson, A., Svensson, M., Wittchen, H. U. & Jönsson, B. Eur. J. Neurol. 19 , 155–162 (2012).

Corbetta, M., Siegel, J. S. & Shulman, G. L. Cortex 107 , 229–237 (2018).

Griffis, J. C., Metcalf, N. V., Corbetta, M. & Shulman, G. L. Cell Rep. 28 , 2527–2540 (2019).

Deco, G. et al. J. Neurosci. 33 , 11239–11252 (2013).

Patel, V. et al. Lancet 392 , 1553–1598 (2018).

Correll, C. U. et al. JAMA Psychiatry 75 , 555–565 (2018).

Petersen, L. et al. Br. Med. J. 331 , 602 (2005).

Hastrup, L. H. et al. Br. J. Psychiatry 202 , 35–41 (2013).

Secher, R. G. et al. Schizophr. Bull. 41 , 617–626 (2015).

Albert, N. et al. Br. Med. J. 356 , i6681 (2017).

Levitt, T. Harv. Bus. Rev. 38 , 45–56 (1960).

Davey Smith, G. & Ebrahim, S. Int. J. Epidemiol. 32 , 1–22 (2003).

Callaway, E. ‘Randomistas’ who used controlled trials to fight poverty win economics Nobel. Nature, https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-03125-y (14 October 2019).

Topol, E. J. Cell 157 , 241–253 (2014).

Subrahmanian, V. S. & Kumar, S. Science 355 , 489 (2017).

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Political Science, Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA

School of Communication and Digital Media Research Centre (DMRC), Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia

Australian Research Council Centre of Excellence for Automated Decision-Making and Society (ADM+S), Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

Department of Neuroscience and Padova Neuroscience Center (PNC), University of Padova, Padova, Italy

Venetian Institute of Molecular Medicine (VIMM), Padova, Italy

Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, USA

Microsoft Research New York, New York, NY, USA

École Normale Supérieure, Paris, France

Department of Economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, USA

Department of Human Behavior, Ecology, and Culture, Max Planck Institute for Evolutionary Anthropology, Leipzig, Germany

Department of Psychology, University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA, USA

American University of Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon

Department of Global Development, College of Agriculture and Life Sciences and Cornell Atkinson Center for Sustainability, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA

Department of Management, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China

Center for Social and Environmental Systems Research, Social Systems Division, National Institute for Environmental Studies, Tsukuba, Japan

State Key Laboratory of Brain and Cognitive Sciences and Laboratory of Neuropsychology and Human Neuroscience, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China

WHO Collaborating Centre for Infectious Disease Epidemiology and Control, School of Public Health, LKS Faculty of Medicine, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China

Laboratory of Data Discovery for Health, Hong Kong Science and Technology Park, Hong Kong, Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, China

Heinz College of Information Systems and Public Policy, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA, USA

Department of Experimental Psychology, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

Oxford Centre for Human Brain Activity, Wellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, Department of Psychiatry, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

CORE - Copenhagen Research Centre for Mental Health, Mental Health Centre Copenhagen, Copenhagen University Hospital, Copenhagen, Denmark

Department of Clinical Medicine, Faculty of Health and Medical Sciences, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

Department of Economics, School of Business and Economics, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands

Complex Human Data Hub, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia

ODID and SAME, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

School of Public Policy, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA, USA

Centre of Excellence FAIR, NHH Norwegian School of Economics, Bergen, Norway

GESIS – Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, Köln, Germany

RWTH Aachen University, Aachen, Germany

Complexity Science Hub Vienna, Vienna, Austria

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Janet M. Box-Steffensmeier , Jean Burgess , Maurizio Corbetta , Kate Crawford , Esther Duflo , Laurel Fogarty , Alison Gopnik , Sari Hanafi , Mario Herrero , Ying-yi Hong , Yasuko Kameyama , Tatia M. C. Lee , Gabriel M. Leung , Daniel S. Nagin , Anna C. Nobre , Merete Nordentoft , Aysu Okbay , Andrew Perfors , Laura M. Rival , Cassidy R. Sugimoto , Bertil Tungodden or Claudia Wagner .

Ethics declarations

Competing interests.

The authors declare no competing interests.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article.

Box-Steffensmeier, J.M., Burgess, J., Corbetta, M. et al. The future of human behaviour research. Nat Hum Behav 6 , 15–24 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01275-6

Download citation

Published : 27 January 2022

Issue Date : January 2022

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-021-01275-6

Share this article

Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:

Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.

Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative

This article is cited by

Corporate social responsibility and individual behaviour.

• Herman Aguinis
• Deborah E. Rupp
• Ante Glavas

Nature Human Behaviour (2024)

Sustainable dietary choices improved by reflection before a nudge in an online experiment

• Sanchayan Banerjee
• Matteo M. Galizzi
• Susana Mourato

Nature Sustainability (2023)

Spatially Small-scale Approach-avoidance Behaviors Allow Learning-free Machine Inference of Object Preferences in Human Minds

• Tsung-Ren Huang
• Tzu-Chun Chen

International Journal of Social Robotics (2023)

Potential of quantum computing to effectively comprehend the complexity of brain

• Shyam R. Sihare

Applied Intelligence (2023)

Nature Human Behaviour turns five

Nature Human Behaviour (2022)

Quick links

• Explore articles by subject
• Guide to authors
• Editorial policies

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Human Behavior, Roles, and Processes

• Living reference work entry
• Later version available View entry history
• First Online: 08 March 2022
• Cite this living reference work entry

• Petra Badke-Schaub 4 &
• Harald Schaub 5  

41 Accesses

The development of products, services, and systems can be understood as one integrated effort of addressing psychological, social, technical, and organizational challenges that surround us. Engineering systems design is a human activity aiming at developing highly complex technical products and services. Of course, the challenge for human beings to deal with complexity is not new but the level of complexity has become exponentially higher in the last decades, therefore more complicated, and less manageable. The focus is not only on the user, but also on the designer and different stakeholders (like manager, software systems engineer, mechanical systems engineer, and many more) involved in the system design process. Understanding human behavior is important to conceive why people make certain decisions and why other people do not make decisions at all. Requirements, needs, and safety are guiding principles for the development process. The process of human-centered development makes it possible to describe the future user groups and activities and thus to develop products and systems that are as close as possible to the (future) needs of the users. The designers can fulfil their tasks in an interdisciplinary exchange with experts from different disciplines.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Human Behaviour, Roles, and Processes

Design perspectives, theories, and processes for engineering systems design.

Human Factors in Software Development Processes: Measuring System Quality

Anderson G et al (2019) Design thinking for program and project management. Independently published

Google Scholar  

Asfahl C, Rieske D (2018) Industrial safety and health management, 7th edn. Pearson, New York

Asimov I (1950) “Runaround”. I, Robot (The Isaac Asimov Collection ed.). Doubleday, New York City

Axelby G (1968) Concepts of engineering systems design. IEEE Trans 12:805–806

Badke-Schaub P, Frankenberger E (2003) Management Kritischer Situationen: Produktentwicklung erfolgreich gestalten [Critical situation management: Successfully shaping product development]. Springer, Berlin

Badke-Schaub P, Daalhuizen J, Roozenburg N (2011a) Towards a designer-centred methodology: descriptive considerations and prescriptive reflections. In: The future of design methodology. Springer, London, pp 181–197

Chapter   Google Scholar  

Badke-Schaub P, Hofinger G, Lauche K (2011b) Human factors: Psychologie sicheren Handelns in Risikobranchen [Human factors: psychology of safe action in risky industries], 2nd edn. Springer, Berlin

Bahr N (2014) System safety engineering and risk assessment: a practical approach, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Boca Raton

Bainbridge L (1983) Ironies of automation. Automatica 19(6):775–779

Article   Google Scholar  

Baxter K, Courage C, Caine K (2015) Understanding your users: a practical guide to user research methods, 2nd edn. Morgan Kaufmann, Waltham

Bednár R, Ljudvigová I (2020) Belbin team roles in a start-up team. SHS Web of Conferences

Belbin R (1993) Team roles at work. Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford

Belbin RM (2003) Management teams: why they succeed or fail, 2nd edn. Butterworth Heinemann, Oxford

Bergstrom J, Schall A (2014) Eye tracking in user experience design. Morgan Kaufmann

Birkhofer H (2011) The future of design methodology. Springer, London

Book   Google Scholar  

Brusa E, Calà A, Ferretto D (2019) Systems engineering and its application to industrial product development. Springer, Cham

Bullinger H, Jürgens H, Rohmert W Schmidtke H (2013) Handbuch der Ergonomie/Band 1 bis 5 einschliesslich aller Ergänzungslieferungen [Handbook of Ergonomics / Volumes 1 to 5 including all supplements], 2nd edn. Bundesamt für Wehrtechnik und Beschaffung

Carve R (2019) CE marking of machinery. Independently published

Cross N (2011) Design thinking: understanding how designers think and work. Bloomsbury Academic, London

Cross N (2021) Engineering design methods: strategies for product design, 5th edn. Wiley

Cross N, Dorst K, Roozenburg N (1992) Research in design thinking. Delft University Press, Deflt

Cross N, Christiaans H, Dorst K (1997) Analysing design activity. Wiley, Chichester

Departement of Defense (2012) MIL-STD-1472G, MIL-STD-882 system safety. Departement of Defense Standard Practise

Design-Society, Badke-Schaub P, Kleinsmann M (2019) Proceedings of the design society: international conference on engineering design (Responsible design for our future, 2019). Cambridge, Cambridge Universty Press

Dörner D (1997) The logic of failure: recognizing and avoiding error in complex situations. Basic Books, New York

Dörner D, Schaub H (1994) Errors in planning and decision making and the nature of human information processing. Appl Psychol 43(4):433–453

Dorst K (2015) Frame innovation: create new thinking by design. The MIT Press, Cambridge

Duchowski A (2017) Eye tracking methodology: theory and practice, 3rd edn. Springer, London

Book   MATH   Google Scholar  

Duffy A (1997) The design productivity debate. Springer, London

Ericson C (2015) Hazard analysis techniques for system safety, 2nd edn. Wiley, Hoboken

Directive 2006/42/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 May 2006 on machinery, and amending Directive 95/16/EC. http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2006/42/oj22.02.2022

FAT (1995) RAMSIS – a system for the survey and measurement of three-dimensional postures of people for the ergonomic design of operating and seating positions in cars. Report 123

Felekoglu B, Maier A, Moultrie J (2013) Interactions in new product development: how the nature of the NPD process influences interaction between teams and management. J Eng Technol Manag 30:384–401

Frankenberger E, Badke-Schaub P, Birkhofer H (1998) Designers: the key to successful product development. Springer, London

Frankenberger K, Mayer H, Reiter A, Schmidt M (2020) The digital transformer’s dilemma: how to energize your core business while building disruptive products and services. Wiley, Hoboken

Friedman K (2003) Theory construction in design research: criteria, approaches, and methods. Des Stud 24:507–522

Friend M, Kohn J (2018) Fundamentals of occupational safety and health, 7th edn. Bernan Press, Lanham

Ganster D, Rosen C (2013) Work stress and employee health: a multidisciplinary review. J Manag 39(5):1085–1122

Gawron V (2019) Human performance, workload, and situational awareness measures handbook, 3rd edn. CRC Press, Baco Raton

Goetsch D (2018) Occupational safety and health for technologists, engineers, and managers, 9th edn. Pearson, New York

Guastello S (2013) Human factors engineering and ergonomics: a systems approach, 2nd edn. CRC Press, Baco Raton

Guilford J (1968) The nature of human intelligence. Science 162(3857):990–991

Hartson R, Pyla P (2018) The UX book: agile UX design for a quality user experience, 2nd edn. Morgan Kaufmann, Amsterdam

Hutchison E (2018) Dimensions of human behavior: person and environment, 6th edn. Sage, Los Angeles

IEC International Electrotechnical Commission (2015) IEC 62366: medical devices – application of usability engineering to medical devices. International Electrotechnical Commission

ISO International Organization for Standardization (1999a) ISO 11064: ergonomic design of control centres. International Organization for Standardization

ISO International Organization for Standardization (1999b) ISO 13407: human-centred design processes for interactive systems (Withdrawn). International Organization for Standardization

ISO International Organization for Standardization (2016) ISO 6385: ergonomics principles in the design of work systems. International Organization for Standardization

ISO International Organization for Standardization (2017) ISO 10075: ergonomic principles related to mental workload. International Organization for Standardization

ISO International Organization for Standardization (2018) ISO 10006: quality management systems – guidelines for quality management in project. International Organization for Standardization

ISO International Organization for Standardization (2019) ISO 9241: ergonomics of human-system interaction. International Organization for Standardization

Jex S (1998) Stress and job performance: theory, research, and implications for managerial practice. Sage, London

Kahneman D (2011) Thinking, fast and slow. Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New York

Kahneman D, Slovic P, Tversky A (1982) Judgment under uncertainty: heuristics and biases. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge

Kan J, Gero J (2017) Quantitative methods for studying design protocols. Springer, Dordrecht

Konz S (2017) Work design: occupational ergonomics, 7th edn. CRC Press, Baco Raton

Kortum P (2016) Usability assessment: how to measure the usability of products, services, and systems (User’s guides to human factors and ergonomics methods). Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, Santa Monica

Kuang C, Fabricant R (2019) User friendly: how the hidden rules of design are changing the way we live, work, and play. MCD, New York

Leech J (2017) Psychology for designers: how to apply psychology to web design and the design process. Mrjoe Press

Lindemann U (2003) Human behaviour in design: individuals, teams, tools. Springer, Cham

Lorenz E (1963) Deterministic nonperiodic flow. J Atmos Sci 20(2):130–141

Article   MathSciNet   MATH   Google Scholar  

Mikulak R (2017) The basics of FMEA, 2nd edn. Productivity Press, New York

Molich R, Nielsen J (1990) Improving a human-computer dialogue. Commun ACM 33(3):338–348

Monat J, Gannon T (2017) Using systems thinking to solve real-world problems. College Publications, London

Nielsen J (1993) Usability engineering. Morgan Kaufmann, Amsterdam

Nielsen J, Mack R (1994) Usability inspection methods. Wiley, New York

Norman D (2002) The design of everyday things. Basic Books, Philadelphia

Norman D (2021) Nielsen Norman Group. [Online] Available at: https://www.nngroup.com/people/don-norman . Accessed 1 Dec 2020

Occupational Safety and Health Administration (1970) OSH Act of 1970. [Online]. Available at: https://www.osha.gov/laws-regs/oshact/toc . Accessed 10 Nov 2020

Oehmen J, Olechowski A, Kenley CR, Ben-Daya M (2014) Analysis of the effect of risk management practices on t he perfomance of new product development programs. Technovation:441–453

Okes D (2019) Root cause analysis: the core of problem solving and corrective action, 2nd edn. ASQ Quality Press, Milwaukee

Ostrom L, Wilhelmsen C (2019) Risk assessment: tools, techniques, and their applications, 2nd edn. Wiley, Hoboken

Owen D, Mary Davis M (2020) Products liability and safety, cases and materials, 8th edn. Foundation Press, St. Paul

Panero J, Zelnik M (1979) Human dimension & interior space: a source book of design reference standards. Watson-Guptill, New York

Petre M, Van Der Hoek A, Quach Y (2016) Software design decoded: 66 ways experts think. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

Pöppels E (2000) Limits of consciousness, 2nd edn. Island

Rausch A, Manfred Broy M (2007) Das V-Modell XT – Grundlagen, Erfahrungen und Werkzeuge [The V-Modell XT – basics, experiences and tools]. dpunkt.verlag, Heidelberg

Reason J (1991) Human error. Cambridge University Press, New York

Reason J (2013) A life in error: from little slips to big disaster. CRC Press, London

Ropohl G (2009) General technology. Carl Hanser Verlag, Munich

Salvendy G (2012) Handbook of human factors and ergonomics, 4th edn. Wiley

Sarsby A (2016) SWOT analysis. Spectaris Ltd, Oakland

Schaub H (2007) The importance of the characteristics of the task to understand team mental models. CoDesign 3(1):37–42

Schaub H (2020) Product and system ergonomics. In: Integrated design engineering. Springer, Cham, pp 269–286

Schlick C, Bruder R, Luczak H (2010) Industrial science, 3rd edn. Springer, Heidelberg

Sharon T (2012) It’s our research: getting stakeholder buy-in for user experience research projects. Morgan Kaufmann

Stuster J (2019) Task analysis: how to develop an understanding of work (Users’ guide to human factors and ergonomics). Human Factors and Ergonomics, Washington, DC

Sutherland J et al (2019) A scrum book: the spirit of the game. Pragmatic Bookshelf

Tillman B, Tillman P, Rose R, Woodson W (2016) Human factors and ergonomics design handbook, 3rd edn. McGraw-Hill Education, New York

Travis D (2019) Think like a UX researcher: how to observe users, influence design, and shape business strategy. CRC Press, Baco Raton

Tricker R (2020) CE conformity marking: and new approach directives. Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford

Trist E, Bamforth K (1951) Some social and psychological consequences of the long wall method of coal getting. Hum Relat 4:3–38

Ulrich K, Eppinger S (2019) Product design and development, 7th edn. McGraw-Hill Education, New York

Vajna S (2020) Integrated design engineering, 2nd edn. Springer, Zug

van de Sand F et al (2020) User experience is brand experience: the psychology behind successful digital products and services (Management for professionals). Springer, Cham

van Veen B, Ortt R, Badke-Schaub P (2019) Compensating for perceptual filters in weak signal assessments. Futures 108:1–11

Vermaas P, Kroes P, Light A, Moore S (2008) Philosophy and design. From engineering to architecture. Springer, Dordrecht

Vester F (2007) The art of interconnected thinking: tools and concepts for a new approach to tackling complexity. Mcb Verlag, Munich

Wirfs-Brock R, McKean A (2002) Object design: roles, responsibilities, and collaborations. Addison-Wesley Professional, Boston

Yablonski J (2020) Laws of UX: using psychology to design better products & services. O’Reilly Media, Beijing

Young I (2008) Mental models: aligning design strategy with human behavior. Rosenfeld Media, Brooklyn

Zimbardo P, Johnson R, McCann V (2013) Psychology: core concepts with DSM-5 update, 7th edn. Pearson, Boston

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Department of Design, Organisation and Strategy, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Netherlands

Petra Badke-Schaub

Safety & Security Academy IABG, Otto-Friedrich University, Bamberg, Ottobrunn, Germany

Harald Schaub

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Harald Schaub .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

Department of Technology, Management and Economics, DTU- Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby, Denmark

Josef Oehmen

Philosophy Department, Delft University of Technology, Delft, Zuid-Holland, The Netherlands

Pieter E. Vermaas

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Badke-Schaub, P., Schaub, H. (2021). Human Behavior, Roles, and Processes. In: Maier, A., Oehmen, J., Vermaas, P.E. (eds) Handbook of Engineering Systems Design. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46054-9_32-1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46054-9_32-1

Received : 30 July 2021

Accepted : 30 July 2021

Published : 08 March 2022

Publisher Name : Springer, Cham

Print ISBN : 978-3-030-46054-9

Online ISBN : 978-3-030-46054-9

eBook Packages : Springer Reference Engineering Reference Module Computer Science and Engineering

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Chapter history

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46054-9_32-3

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46054-9_32-2

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-46054-9_32-1

• Find a journal
• Track your research

Search Icon

Events See all →

Hands on history.

10:00 a.m. - 2:30 p.m.

Penn Museum, 3260 South St.

268th Commencement

Franklin Field

Vahe Sarkissian

World Cafe Live, 3025 Walnut St.

Wawa Welcome America Day

10:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.

Arts, Humanities, & Social Sciences

What predicts human behavior and how to change it

In the largest quantitative synthesis to date, dolores albarracín and her team dig through years of research on the science behind behavior change to determine the best ways to promote changes in behavior..

Pandemics, global warming, and rampant gun violence are all clear lessons in the need to move large groups of people to change their behavior. When a crisis hits, researchers, policymakers, health officials, and community leaders have to know how best to encourage people to change en masse and quickly. Each crisis leads to rehashing the same strategies, even those that have not worked in the past, due to the lack of definitive science of what interventions work across the board combined with well intended but erroneous intuitions.

To produce evidence on what determines and changes behavior, Dolores Albarracín and her colleagues from Penn’s Social Action Lab undertook a review of all of the available meta-analyses—a synthesis of the results from multiple studies—to determine what interventions work best when trying to change people’s behavior. What results is a new classification of predictors of behavior and a novel, empirical model for understanding the different ways to change behavior by targeting either individual or social/structural factors.

A new paper published in Nature Reviews Psychology reports that the strategies that people assume will work—like giving people accurate information or trying to change their beliefs—do not. At the same time, others like providing social support and tapping into individuals’ behavioral skills and habits as well as removing practical obstacles to behavior (e.g., providing health insurance to encourage health behaviors) can have more sizable impacts.

“Interventions targeting knowledge, general attitudes, beliefs, administrative and legal sanctions, and trustworthiness—these factors researchers and policymakers put so much weight on—are actually quite ineffective,” says Albarracín, the Alexandra Heyman Nash University Professor in the Annenberg School for Communication and director of the Science of Science Communication Division of the Annenberg Public Policy Center, who also has an appointment in Penn’s School of Arts & Sciences. “They have negligible effects.”

Unfortunately, many policies and reports are centered around goals like increasing vaccine confidence (an attitude) or curbing misinformation. Policymakers must look at evidence to determine what factors will return the investment, Albarracín says.

Co-author Javier Granados Samayoa, the Vartan Gregorian Postdoctoral Fellow at the Annenberg Public Policy Center , has noticed researchers’ tendency to target knowledge and beliefs when creating behavior change interventions.

“There’s something about it that seems so straightforward—you think and therefore you do. But what the literature suggests is that there are a lot of intervening processes that have to line up for people to actually act on those beliefs, so it’s not that easy,” he says.

Read more at Annenberg School for Communication.

Class of 2025 relishes time together at Hey Day

Picturing artistic pursuits

Hundreds of undergraduates take classes in the fine arts each semester, among them painting and drawing, ceramics and sculpture, printmaking and animation, photography and videography. The courses, through the School of Arts & Sciences and the Stuart Weitzman School of Design, give students the opportunity to immerse themselves in an art form in a collaborative way.

Campus & Community

Penn celebrates operation and benefits of largest solar power project in Pennsylvania

Solar production has begun at the Great Cove I and II facilities in central Pennsylvania, the equivalent of powering 70% of the electricity demand from Penn’s academic campus and health system in the Philadelphia area.

Education, Business, & Law

Investing in future teachers and educational leaders

The Empowerment Through Education Scholarship Program at Penn’s Graduate School of Education is helping to prepare and retain teachers and educational leaders.

‘The Illuminated Body’ fuses color, light, and sound

A new Arthur Ross Gallery exhibition of work by artist Barbara Earl Thomas features cut-paper portraits reminiscent of stained glass and an immersive installation constructed with intricately cut material lit from behind.

Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.

4 Human Behavior: Nature or Nurture?

Learning Objectives

After reading this chapter, you should be able to:

• Describe Galton’s contributions towards the Nature and Nurture theory.
• Differentiate between the influence of genes and environment, as well as a combination of both.
• Define and Describe Epigenetics.
• Explain the difference between Social Learning Theory and Genetic Inheritance Theory.
• Explain the findings of the Bobo doll experiment.
• Understand the Grizzly Bear article.
• Understand the Beyond Heritability: Twin Studies article.
• Understand key concepts and definitions pertaining to nature vs nurture.

Introduction: What Do We Mean By Nature Vs Nurture?

In this chapter it is discussed that nature vs nurture is the debate of whether we are a product of nature (genetics) or nurture (environment). There is evidence supporting both sides of the debate. By the end of this, you should be able to determine that both nature and nurture play a key role in humans and animal behaviour.

Memory Match

The memory match game allows you to identify keywords pertaining to nature and nurture. The goal is to click a card and match the word on the card, with another card that has the same word. Now that you know how to play, let’s see how many you can match!

When we refer to nature, we are talking about our genetics that we inherit from our parents.  A fairly recent study (Kamran, 2016) conducted in Pakistan suggests that the parallels drawn regarding the temperament of siblings are due to their genetics. The results of this study states that the genetic makeup of relatives of the family (even deceased) also influence how the child acts. These behaviours of the child are identifiable by the family members even though the deceased family member no longer is present.

Browse through Galton’s timeline and discover his story!

Pair the Pioneer

The following pioneers play a key role in what we know about nature and nurture today! The goal of the game is to pair the correct pioneer with the correct fact pertaining to the pioneer. If you place your mouse above the pioneer, there is a fun fact that has a clue to help. Be careful, there is a trick pioneer!

• Nature:  refers to all of the genes and hereditary factors that influence who we are- from our physical appearance to our personality characteristics (definition retrieved from verywellmind.com on November 17, 2019).
• Epigenetics : the study of heritable changes in gene function that do not involve changes in DNA sequence (definition retrieved from MerriamWebster.com on November 17, 2019)

When we refer to nurture, we are talking about all the environmental factors that influence us. Environmental factors include but aren’t limited to parenting style, birth order, peers, family size, culture, language, education, etc. The main argument for nurture is that the environment is what makes us who we are. Those who are on the extreme side of nurture are empiricists. They believe humans are born as blank slates and acquire all information from their environment with their 5 senses.

Behaviorism, established by John Watson, is the theory that all behavior is a result of stimulation from the environment or a consequence of the individual’s previous conditioning. Behaviorism is a school of psychology that is on the side of nurture.

A study in 2019 performed an experiment on Bonobos (a species of chimpanzee) to observe social learning. The results of the experiment found supporting evidence that Bonobos are able to learn from observing others of their species just like humans.

Albert Bandura’s Social Learning Theory states that people learn by observing, imitating, and modeling behavior. In 1961, Bandura’s famous Bobo doll experiment’s findings support the argument for nurture in that our environment influences our behavior.

Key Terms: 

• Nurture: Environmental factors that influence our growth and behaviour.
• Empiricism: The belief that people are born as a blank slate learn everything from their environment.

Nature or Nurture? Or Both?

Given what we have discussed so far, is it genes or environment that influences behaviour? It is actually both genetic and social influences that contributes to an individual’s behaviour. Below is a video that explains how both components contribute to an individual.

Now that you understand how genes and environment work together, is it possible for one component to influence an individual more than the other? Below is an article that explains how grizzly bears’ conflict behaviour may attribute to genetic inheritance or social learning… talk about beary bad behaviour!

 Beary Bad Behaviour

Grizzly bear den

Welcome to the Grizzly Bear den. Inside there are paws, click any paw to learn key concepts within the article! Don’t worry, the bears won’t bite!

A study done in Alberta, Canada analyzed the genetic and environmental relationship of grizzly bears, pertaining to their offspring’s conflict behaviour. The study predicts that aggression is determined genetically from either biological parents. If the cub’s conflict behaviour is inherited from the father’s genes, then necessary relocation of wildlife protection is necessary to avoid human-conflict interaction. If the cub’s behaviour is inherited from the mother’s genes, then relocation of female bears is much more difficult to do as there are legal wildlife implications.

The study genotyped 213 grizzly bears, most of which were males. The study described conflict-beahviour or “problem bear” as those that exemplified invasive or aggressive behaviour on private property, public property, or had an incident with an individual. The results of the study indicated that the offspring of the female parent displayed a negative interaction more so than the offspring from the male parent.

According to Morehouse et al., (2016), “ results support the social learning hypothesis, but not the genetic inheritance hypothesis as it relates to the acquisition of conflict behaviour. If human-bear conflict was an inherited behaviour, we would have expected to see a significant relationship between paternal conflict behaviour and offspring behaviour.  Social learning has the potential to perpetuate grizzly bear conflicts highlighting the importance of preventing initial conflicts, but also removing problem individuals once conflicts start” (p.7). 

 Beyond Heritability: Twin Studies

In this study, it talks about the general observations of 50 study samples regarding over 800,000 pairs of twins and how their behavior may have been impacted by genes or by their environment. Due to the ethical limitations of human experimentation, there can only be a conclusion that there are mild causal effects. Heritable estimations are quite frankly useless in these studies because the results purely depend on the environmental conditions of the study participants, and it only becomes applicable when all participants are in the same environment.

If a separated teen is brought up in a rich environment, their gene makeup has a higher likelihood of being a factor in their upbringing. If his or her counterpart twin, in contrast, is brought up in a poor environment, the influence of their genes will be insignificant because of a less nurturing surrounding. Another example is the first sexual encounter on separated twins; do their shared genetics influence them to take action around the same time? The answer is no, because such events are a result of the environmental influences of delinquency.

Psychologist Eric Turkheimer states that there are essentially Three Laws of Behaviour Genetics:

“First Law: All human behavioural traits are heritable.

Second Law: The effect of being raised in the same family is smaller than the effect of the genes.

Third Law: A substantial portion of the variation in complex human behavioural traits is not accounted for by the effects of genes or families.”

He explains that genes only make up ~50% of our behaviours while the rest is influenced by our environment.

“The omnipresence of genetic influences does not [mean] that behaviour is less psychological or more biologically determined”, but it’s the facilitation of the environmental conditions that allows people to bring out their full behaviouristic tendencies to light; and even then, our genes are only half the story.

The following video is a study that looked at the effects of nature and nurture on twins. In short, there are many coincidences that may seem that their actions come from genetic relations.

• To answer the question of whether we are a product of Nature or Nurture, we are both. We are a product of our genetics, and our environment. Through our genetics, we have a certain baseline personality, but that changes over time due to the influence of our surroundings: the people we hang out with and the overall level of nourishment in our growing environment.
•  In summary, based on several studies and research it can be concluded that human behaviour is both nature and nurture. In addition, evidence also supports that animal behaviour specifically (grizzly bears) is also due to nature and nurture. Many aspects of the nature vs. nurture theory argues that various behaviours in humans are based both on genetics and the environment of an individual. However, it is possible that one variable from the theory may contribute more of an effect on the individual.

Chapter References

ABC News (2018, Mar 10) 20/20 Mar 9 Part 2: Adopted twins were separated and then part of a secret study. Retrieved November 17, 2019, from https://youtu.be/0-2FFsuitO4

Benjamin, J. (2017, March 31). Cancer: Nature Vs. Nurture. Retrieved November 17, 2019, from https://marybird.org/blog/olol/cancer-nature-vs-nurture

Biography.com Editors. (2019, August 28). Charles Darwin Biography. Retrieved November 17, 2019, from https://www.biography.com/scientist/charles-darwin.

Cherry, K. (2019, July 1). The Age Old Debate of Nature vs. Nurture. Retrieved November 19, 2019, from https://www.verywellmind.com/what-is-nature-versus-nurture-2795392.

David L, “Social Learning Theory (Bandura),” in Learning Theories, February 7, 2019, https://www.learning-theories.com/social-learning-theory-bandura.html .

Det medisinke fakultet. (2016, January 26). Epigenetics: Nature vs nurture. Retrieved November 17, 2019, from https://youtu.be/k50yMwEOWGU

Everywhere Psychology. (2012, August 28). Bandura’s Bobo Doll Experiment. Retrieved November 19, 2019, from https://youtu.be/dmBqwWlJg8U .

FuseSchool-Global Education. (2019, August 27). Nature vs Nurture | Genetics | Biology | FuseSchool Retrieved November 18, 2019 from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EmctxRcmloc

Gervais, M. (2017, August 31). Dr. Albert Bandura – The Theory of Agency. Retrieved November 19, 2019, from https://art19.com/shows/minutes-on-mastery/episodes/a1cef11d-e32c-4f03-ba4a-262a91268f4c.

Johnson W, Turkheimer E, Gottesman II, Bouchard TJ Jr. Beyond Heritability: Twin Studies in Behavioral Research.  Curr Dir Psychol Sci . 2010;18(4):217–220. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8721.2009.01639.x

Kamran, F., PhD. (2016). Are siblings different as ‘day and night’? parents’ perceptions of nature vs. nurture.  Journal of Behavioural Sciences, 26 (2), 95-115. Retrieved from https://ezproxy.kpu.ca:2443/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.kpu.ca:2443/docview/1864042019?accountid=35875

Merriam-Webster. (2019). Retrieved November 17, 2019 from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/epigenetics

McLeod, S. A. (2016, Feb 05). Bandura – social learning theory . Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/bandura.html

McLeod, S. A. (2018, Dec 20). Nature vs nurture in psychology. Simply Psychology. https://www.simplypsychology.org/naturevsnurture.html

Miko, I.  (2008)  Gregor Mendel and the principles of inheritance.  Nature Education   1( 1 ) :134

Morehouse, A. T., Graves, T. A., Mikle, N., & Boyce, M. S. (2016). Nature vs. nurture: Evidence for social learning of conflict behaviour in grizzly bears. PLoS One, 11 (11) doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy.kpu.ca:2080/10.1371/journal.pone.0165425

Rose, H., & Rose, S. (2011). The legacies of francis galton. Lancet, the, 377 (9775), 1397-1397.doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60560-6

Shorland, G., Genty, E., Guéry, J.-P., & Zuberbühler, K. (2019). Social learning of arbitrary food preferences in bonobos. Behavioural Processes, 167. https://doi-org.ezproxy.kpu.ca:2443/10.1016/j.beproc.2019.103912

TED-Ed. (2013, March 12). How Mendel’s pea plants helped us understand genetics. Retrieved November 17, 2019, from https://youtu.be/Mehz7tCxjSE.

Thesaurus.Plus . (n.d.). Retrieved November 17, 2019, from https://thesaurus.plus/thesaurus.

Turkheimer, E. (2000). Three laws of behavior genetics and what they mean.  Current Directions in Psychological Science ,  9 (5), 160–164. https://doi-org.ezproxy.kpu.ca:2443/10.1111/1467-8721.00084

Winch, J. (2012, Mar 08). Genius with a finger on the pulse of discovery: Birmingham-born sir francis galton was a victorian genius. but today he would be thought a racist because of the controversial interest for which he is best remembered – eugenics. jessica winch reports. Birmingham Post. Retrieved from https://ezproxy.kpu.ca:2443/login?url=https://search-proquest-com.ezproxy.kpu.ca:2443/docview/926809806?accountid=35875

Wikipedia. (2019, November 16). Francis Galton. Retrieved November 17, 2019, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Francis_Galton.

Evolutionary Psychology: Exploring Big Questions Copyright © by kristie. All Rights Reserved.

Share This Book

Home — Essay Samples — Psychology — Human Behavior — The Psychological Perspective Of Human Behavior

The Psychological Perspective of Human Behavior

• Categories: Human Behavior

About this sample

Words: 698 |

Published: Nov 22, 2018

Words: 698 | Pages: 2 | 4 min read

Cite this Essay

Let us write you an essay from scratch

• 450+ experts on 30 subjects ready to help
• Custom essay delivered in as few as 3 hours

Get high-quality help

Dr Jacklynne

Verified writer

• Expert in: Psychology

+ 120 experts online

By clicking “Check Writers’ Offers”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy . We’ll occasionally send you promo and account related email

No need to pay just yet!

Related Essays

1 pages / 469 words

5 pages / 2303 words

2 pages / 1108 words

5 pages / 2133 words

Remember! This is just a sample.

You can get your custom paper by one of our expert writers.

121 writers online

Still can’t find what you need?

Browse our vast selection of original essay samples, each expertly formatted and styled

Related Essays on Human Behavior

Have you ever felt the need to be part of a group, to connect with others who share your values and beliefs? The innate human desire to belong is a powerful force that shapes our relationships, decisions, and sense of identity. [...]

Materialism in anthropology is a concept that has garnered significant attention and debate in recent years. While traditionally, anthropologists have focused on the study of culture, society, and human behavior, the importance [...]

One of the most significant and complex dimensions of human experience is personal relationships. Relationships, whether they are romantic or platonic, can be challenging and trying, but they can also be rewarding and [...]

Survival is a fundamental instinct that drives human behavior, shaping our decisions and actions in various aspects of life. The concept of survival often evokes notions of self-preservation and prioritizing one's own needs [...]

There are no selfless good deeds. All so-called “good deeds” are selfish. It is known as psychological egoism. The supporters of the various ethical, moral theories in our world may argue with those statements. A utilitarianist [...]

Motivation is a term that inherently linked with the factors that are drive and energizes the human behavior and other organisms. There are many meaningful approaches to motivation and One of them is popular as drive reduction [...]

Related Topics

By clicking “Send”, you agree to our Terms of service and Privacy statement . We will occasionally send you account related emails.

Where do you want us to send this sample?

By clicking “Continue”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy policy.

Be careful. This essay is not unique

This essay was donated by a student and is likely to have been used and submitted before

Download this Sample

Free samples may contain mistakes and not unique parts

Sorry, we could not paraphrase this essay. Our professional writers can rewrite it and get you a unique paper.

Please check your inbox.

We can write you a custom essay that will follow your exact instructions and meet the deadlines. Let's fix your grades together!

Get Your Personalized Essay in 3 Hours or Less!

We use cookies to personalyze your web-site experience. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy .

• Instructions Followed To The Letter
• Deadlines Met At Every Stage
• Unique And Plagiarism Free

Deciphering Human Behavior: the Pitfalls of Overlooking Context in Assessing Actions

This essay about the complexities of human behavior explores the dangers of oversimplification and the importance of considering context in understanding actions. Through real-life examples and critical analysis, it highlights how overlooking context can lead to misjudgments and perpetuate harmful stereotypes. From interpersonal relationships to the criminal justice system, the essay emphasizes the need for empathy, active listening, and systemic changes to promote fairness and justice in society.

How it works

In the intricate dance of human behavior, deciphering motives and intentions often feels akin to navigating a labyrinth without a map. Every action, every word spoken, is laden with layers of meaning, influenced by an array of factors ranging from personal history to societal norms. Yet, in our quest to understand, we frequently overlook the crucial element of context, inadvertently falling prey to the pitfalls that accompany such oversight.

Imagine a scenario: A woman hurriedly cuts in line at a grocery store, eliciting murmurs of disapproval from those around her.

At first glance, one might hastily label her as rude or inconsiderate. However, delve deeper, and the context begins to unveil a different narrative. Perhaps she is a single mother, juggling multiple jobs while struggling to provide for her family. Maybe her child is sick at home, and she’s racing against time to fetch medication before the pharmacy closes. Suddenly, her seemingly brash action takes on a different hue, colored by the complexities of her circumstances.

This illustration encapsulates the essence of the issue at hand: the danger of oversimplification in our interpretation of human behavior. Too often, we rely on surface-level observations and snap judgments, neglecting the rich tapestry of context that underpins every action. In doing so, we risk mischaracterizing individuals and perpetuating harmful stereotypes.

One of the primary pitfalls of overlooking context lies in the realm of interpersonal relationships. Consider the case of a heated argument between friends, sparked by a seemingly innocuous comment. Without considering the underlying dynamics of their friendship or the stressors each may be facing in their personal lives, it’s easy to attribute blame and escalate tensions further. However, by taking a step back and considering the broader context – perhaps one friend is undergoing significant stress at work, while the other is grappling with family issues – a more empathetic and constructive approach to resolving the conflict can emerge.

Moreover, the failure to account for context can have far-reaching implications in various domains, including academia, politics, and the criminal justice system. In research settings, for instance, overlooking contextual factors can lead to skewed conclusions and flawed methodologies. Similarly, in the political arena, policies devised without a nuanced understanding of the socioeconomic context risk exacerbating inequality and marginalization.

Perhaps most concerning are the ramifications within the criminal justice system, where the consequences of misinterpretation can be dire. Take, for example, the sentencing disparities that persist along racial lines. Studies have shown that black individuals are disproportionately subjected to harsher penalties for the same offenses as their white counterparts, a phenomenon exacerbated by the failure to consider the systemic factors that contribute to their circumstances.

In light of these pitfalls, it becomes imperative to adopt a more holistic approach to understanding human behavior – one that acknowledges the multifaceted nature of individuals and the myriad influences that shape their actions. This necessitates a willingness to suspend judgment, engage in active listening, and cultivate empathy.

Practically speaking, this entails fostering environments conducive to open dialogue and mutual understanding, whether in the context of interpersonal relationships, academic discourse, or policymaking. It involves actively seeking out diverse perspectives and challenging our own preconceived notions, recognizing that truth often lies at the intersection of multiple narratives.

Furthermore, it requires a reevaluation of existing structures and systems to ensure they account for the complexities of human behavior. This may involve implementing training programs to enhance cultural competency and empathy within institutions such as law enforcement and healthcare. It may also entail revisiting sentencing guidelines and parole procedures to mitigate biases and promote fairness in the criminal justice system.

Ultimately, deciphering human behavior is an inherently complex endeavor, fraught with challenges and uncertainties. Yet, by embracing the nuanced interplay of context and exercising empathy and understanding, we can navigate this terrain with greater clarity and compassion. In doing so, we not only enrich our understanding of ourselves and others but also cultivate a more just and equitable society.

Cite this page

Deciphering Human Behavior: The Pitfalls of Overlooking Context in Assessing Actions. (2024, May 12). Retrieved from https://papersowl.com/examples/deciphering-human-behavior-the-pitfalls-of-overlooking-context-in-assessing-actions/

"Deciphering Human Behavior: The Pitfalls of Overlooking Context in Assessing Actions." PapersOwl.com , 12 May 2024, https://papersowl.com/examples/deciphering-human-behavior-the-pitfalls-of-overlooking-context-in-assessing-actions/

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Deciphering Human Behavior: The Pitfalls of Overlooking Context in Assessing Actions . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/deciphering-human-behavior-the-pitfalls-of-overlooking-context-in-assessing-actions/ [Accessed: 19 May. 2024]

"Deciphering Human Behavior: The Pitfalls of Overlooking Context in Assessing Actions." PapersOwl.com, May 12, 2024. Accessed May 19, 2024. https://papersowl.com/examples/deciphering-human-behavior-the-pitfalls-of-overlooking-context-in-assessing-actions/

"Deciphering Human Behavior: The Pitfalls of Overlooking Context in Assessing Actions," PapersOwl.com , 12-May-2024. [Online]. Available: https://papersowl.com/examples/deciphering-human-behavior-the-pitfalls-of-overlooking-context-in-assessing-actions/. [Accessed: 19-May-2024]

PapersOwl.com. (2024). Deciphering Human Behavior: The Pitfalls of Overlooking Context in Assessing Actions . [Online]. Available at: https://papersowl.com/examples/deciphering-human-behavior-the-pitfalls-of-overlooking-context-in-assessing-actions/ [Accessed: 19-May-2024]

Don't let plagiarism ruin your grade

Hire a writer to get a unique paper crafted to your needs.

Our writers will help you fix any mistakes and get an A+!

Please check your inbox.

You can order an original essay written according to your instructions.

Trusted by over 1 million students worldwide

1. Tell Us Your Requirements

2. Pick your perfect writer

3. Get Your Paper and Pay

Hi! I'm Amy, your personal assistant!

Don't know where to start? Give me your paper requirements and I connect you to an academic expert.

short deadlines

100% Plagiarism-Free

Certified writers

• Share full article

Advertisement

Supported by

Guest Essay

In Medicine, the Morally Unthinkable Too Easily Comes to Seem Normal

By Carl Elliott

Dr. Elliott teaches medical ethics at the University of Minnesota. He is the author of the forthcoming book “The Occasional Human Sacrifice: Medical Experimentation and the Price of Saying No,” from which this essay is adapted.

Here is the way I remember it: The year is 1985, and a few medical students are gathered around an operating table where an anesthetized woman has been prepared for surgery. The attending physician, a gynecologist, asks the group: “Has everyone felt a cervix? Here’s your chance.” One after another, we take turns inserting two gloved fingers into the unconscious woman’s vagina.

Had the woman consented to a pelvic exam? Did she understand that when the lights went dim she would be treated like a clinical practice dummy, her genitalia palpated by a succession of untrained hands? I don’t know. Like most medical students, I just did as I was told.

Last month the Department of Health and Human Services issued new guidance requiring written informed consent for pelvic exams and other intimate procedures performed under anesthesia. Much of the force behind the new requirement came from distressed medical students who saw these pelvic exams as wrong and summoned the courage to speak out.

Whether the guidance will actually change clinical practice I don’t know. Medical traditions are notoriously difficult to uproot, and academic medicine does not easily tolerate ethical dissent. I doubt the medical profession can be trusted to reform itself.

What is it that leads a rare individual to say no to practices that are deceptive, exploitative or harmful when everyone else thinks they are fine? For a long time I assumed that saying no was mainly an issue of moral courage. The relevant question was: If you are a witness to wrongdoing, will you be brave enough to speak out?

But then I started talking to insiders who had blown the whistle on abusive medical research. Soon I realized that I had overlooked the importance of moral perception. Before you decide to speak out about wrongdoing, you have to recognize it for what it is.

This is not as simple as it seems. Part of what makes medical training so unsettling is how often you are thrust into situations in which you don’t really know how to behave. Nothing in your life up to that point has prepared you to dissect a cadaver, perform a rectal exam or deliver a baby. Never before have you seen a psychotic patient involuntarily sedated and strapped to a bed or a brain-dead body wheeled out of a hospital room to have its organs harvested for transplantation. Your initial reaction is often a combination of revulsion, anxiety and self-consciousness.

To embark on a career in medicine is like moving to a foreign country where you do not understand the customs, rituals, manners or language. Your main concern on arrival is how to fit in and avoid causing offense. This is true even if the local customs seem backward or cruel. What’s more, this particular country has an authoritarian government and a rigid status hierarchy where dissent is not just discouraged but also punished. Living happily in this country requires convincing yourself that whatever discomfort you feel comes from your own ignorance and lack of experience. Over time, you learn how to assimilate. You may even come to laugh at how naïve you were when you first arrived.

A rare few people hang onto that discomfort and learn from it. When Michael Wilkins and William Bronston started working at the Willowbrook State School in Staten Island as young doctors in the early 1970s, they found thousands of mentally disabled children condemned to the most horrific conditions imaginable: naked children rocking and moaning on concrete floors in puddles of their own urine; an overpowering stench of illness and filth; a research unit where children were deliberately infected with hepatitis A and B.

“It was truly an American concentration camp,” Dr. Bronston told me. Yet when he and Dr. Wilkins tried to enlist Willowbrook doctors and nurses to reform the institution, they were met with indifference or hostility. It seemed as if no one else on the medical staff could see what they saw. It was only when Dr. Wilkins went to a reporter and showed the world what was happening behind the Willowbrook walls that anything began to change.

When I asked Dr. Bronston how it was possible for doctors and nurses to work at Willowbrook without seeing it as a crime scene, he told me it began with the way the institution was structured and organized. “Medically secured, medically managed, doctor-validated,” he said. Medical professionals just accommodated themselves to the status quo. “You get with the program because that’s what you’re being hired to do,” he said.

One of the great mysteries of human behavior is how institutions create social worlds where unthinkable practices come to seem normal. This is as true of academic medical centers as it is of prisons and military units. When we are told about a horrific medical research scandal, we assume that we would see it just as the whistle-blower Peter Buxtun saw the Tuskegee syphilis study : an abuse so shocking that only a sociopath could fail to perceive it.

Yet it rarely happens this way. It took Mr. Buxtun seven years to convince others to see the abuses for what they were. It has taken other whistle-blowers even longer. Even when the outside world condemns a practice, medical institutions typically insist that the outsiders don’t really understand.

According to Irving Janis, a Yale psychologist who popularized the notion of groupthink, the forces of social conformity are especially powerful in organizations that are driven by a deep sense of moral purpose. If the aims of the organization are righteous, its members feel, it is wrong to put barriers in the way.

This observation helps explain why academic medicine not only defends researchers accused of wrongdoing but also sometimes rewards them. Many of the researchers responsible for the most notorious abuses in recent medical history — the Tuskegee syphilis study, the Willowbrook hepatitis studies, the Cincinnati radiation studies , the Holmesburg prison studies — were celebrated with professional accolades even after the abuses were first called out.

The culture of medicine is notoriously resistant to change. During the 1970s, it was thought that the solution to medical misconduct was formal education in ethics. Major academic medical centers began establishing bioethics centers and programs throughout the 1980s and ’90s, and today virtually every medical school in the country requires ethics training.

Yet it is debatable whether that training has had any effect. Many of the most egregious ethical abuses in recent decades have taken place in medical centers with prominent bioethics programs, such as the University of Pennsylvania , Duke University , Columbia University and Johns Hopkins University , as well as my own institution, the University of Minnesota .

One could be forgiven for concluding that the only way the culture of medicine will change is if changes are forced on it from the outside — by oversight bodies, legislators or litigators. For example, many states have responded to the controversy over pelvic exams by passing laws banning the practice unless the patient has explicitly given consent.

You may find it hard to understand how pelvic exams on unconscious women without their consent could seem like anything but a terrible invasion. Yet a central aim of medical training is to transform your sensibility. You are taught to steel yourself against your natural emotional reactions to death and disfigurement; to set aside your customary views about privacy and shame; to see the human body as a thing to be examined, tested and studied.

One danger of this transformation is that you will see your colleagues and superiors do horrible things and be afraid to speak up. But the more subtle danger is that you will no longer see what they are doing as horrible. You will just think: This is the way it is done.

Carl Elliott ( @FearLoathingBTX ) teaches medical ethics at the University of Minnesota. He is the author of the forthcoming book “The Occasional Human Sacrifice: Medical Experimentation and the Price of Saying No,” from which this essay is adapted.

The Times is committed to publishing a diversity of letters to the editor. We’d like to hear what you think about this or any of our articles. Here are some tips . And here’s our email: [email protected] .

Follow the New York Times Opinion section on Facebook , Instagram , TikTok , WhatsApp , X and Threads .

Microsoft Research Blog

Microsoft at chi 2024: innovations in human-centered design.

Published May 15, 2024

Share this page

• Share on Facebook
• Share on Twitter
• Share on LinkedIn
• Share on Reddit
• Subscribe to our RSS feed

The ways people engage with technology, through its design and functionality, determine its utility and acceptance in everyday use, setting the stage for widespread adoption. When computing tools and services respect the diversity of people’s experiences and abilities, technology is not only functional but also universally accessible. Human-computer interaction (HCI) plays a crucial role in this process, examining how technology integrates into our daily lives and exploring ways digital tools can be shaped to meet individual needs and enhance our interactions with the world.

The ACM CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems is a premier forum that brings together researchers and experts in the field, and Microsoft is honored to support CHI 2024 as a returning sponsor. We’re pleased to announce that 33 papers by Microsoft researchers and their collaborators have been accepted this year, with four winning the Best Paper Award and seven receiving honorable mentions.

This research aims to redefine how people work, collaborate, and play using technology, with a focus on design innovation to create more personalized, engaging, and effective interactions. Several projects emphasize customizing the user experience to better meet individual needs, such as exploring the potential of large language models (LLMs) to help reduce procrastination. Others investigate ways to boost realism in virtual and mixed reality environments, using touch to create a more immersive experience. There are also studies that address the challenges of understanding how people interact with technology. These include applying psychology and cognitive science to examine the use of generative AI and social media, with the goal of using the insights to guide future research and design directions. This post highlights these projects.

Spotlight: AI-POWERED EXPERIENCE

Microsoft research copilot experience

Discover more about research at Microsoft through our AI-powered experience

Best Paper Award recipients

DynaVis: Dynamically Synthesized UI Widgets for Visualization Editing   Priyan Vaithilingam, Elena L. Glassman, Jeevana Priya Inala , Chenglong Wang   GUIs used for editing visualizations can overwhelm users or limit their interactions. To address this, the authors introduce DynaVis, which combines natural language interfaces with dynamically synthesized UI widgets, enabling people to initiate and refine edits using natural language.  

Generative Echo Chamber? Effects of LLM-Powered Search Systems on Diverse Information Seeking   Nikhil Sharma, Q. Vera Liao , Ziang Xiao   Conversational search systems powered by LLMs potentially improve on traditional search methods, yet their influence on increasing selective exposure and fostering echo chambers remains underexplored. This research suggests that LLM-driven conversational search may enhance biased information querying, particularly when the LLM’s outputs reinforce user views, emphasizing significant implications for the development and regulation of these technologies.  

Piet: Facilitating Color Authoring for Motion Graphics Video   Xinyu Shi, Yinghou Wang, Yun Wang , Jian Zhao   Motion graphic (MG) videos use animated visuals and color to effectively communicate complex ideas, yet existing color authoring tools are lacking. This work introduces Piet, a tool prototype that offers an interactive palette and support for quick theme changes and controlled focus, significantly streamlining the color design process.

The Metacognitive Demands and Opportunities of Generative AI   Lev Tankelevitch , Viktor Kewenig, Auste Simkute, Ava Elizabeth Scott, Advait Sarkar , Abigail Sellen , Sean Rintel   Generative AI systems offer unprecedented opportunities for transforming professional and personal work, yet they present challenges around prompting, evaluating and relying on outputs, and optimizing workflows. This paper shows that metacognition—the psychological ability to monitor and control one’s thoughts and behavior—offers a valuable lens through which to understand and design for these usability challenges.  

Honorable Mentions

B ig or Small, It’s All in Your Head: Visuo-Haptic Illusion of Size-Change Using Finger-Repositioning Myung Jin Kim, Eyal Ofek, Michel Pahud , Mike J. Sinclair, Andrea Bianchi   This research introduces a fixed-sized VR controller that uses finger repositioning to create a visuo-haptic illusion of dynamic size changes in handheld virtual objects, allowing users to perceive virtual objects as significantly smaller or larger than the actual device. 

LLMR: Real-time Prompting of Interactive Worlds Using Large Language Models   Fernanda De La Torre, Cathy Mengying Fang, Han Huang, Andrzej Banburski-Fahey, Judith Amores , Jaron Lanier   Large Language Model for Mixed Reality (LLMR) is a framework for the real-time creation and modification of interactive mixed reality experiences using LLMs. It uses novel strategies to tackle difficult cases where ideal training data is scarce or where the design goal requires the synthesis of internal dynamics, intuitive analysis, or advanced interactivity. 

Observer Effect in Social Media Use   Koustuv Saha, Pranshu Gupta, Gloria Mark, Emre Kiciman , Munmun De Choudhury   This work investigates the observer effect in behavioral assessments on social media use. The observer effect is a phenomenon in which individuals alter their behavior due to awareness of being monitored. Conducted over an average of 82 months (about 7 years) retrospectively and five months prospectively using Facebook data, the study found that deviations in expected behavior and language post-enrollment in the study reflected individual psychological traits. The authors recommend ways to mitigate the observer effect in these scenarios.

Reading Between the Lines: Modeling User Behavior and Costs in AI-Assisted Programming   Hussein Mozannar, Gagan Bansal , Adam Fourney , Eric Horvitz   By investigating how developers use GitHub Copilot, the authors created CUPS, a taxonomy of programmer activities during system interaction. This approach not only elucidates interaction patterns and inefficiencies but can also drive more effective metrics and UI design for code-recommendation systems with the goal of improving programmer productivity. 

SharedNeRF: Leveraging Photorealistic and View-dependent Rendering for Real-time and Remote Collaboration   Mose Sakashita, Bala Kumaravel, Nicolai Marquardt , Andrew D. Wilson   SharedNeRF, a system for synchronous remote collaboration, utilizes neural radiance field (NeRF) technology to provide photorealistic, viewpoint-specific renderings that are seamlessly integrated with point clouds to capture dynamic movements and changes in a shared space. A preliminary study demonstrated its effectiveness, as participants used this high-fidelity, multi-perspective visualization to successfully complete a flower arrangement task. 

Understanding the Role of Large Language Models in Personalizing and Scaffolding Strategies to Combat Academic Procrastination   Ananya Bhattacharjee, Yuchen Zeng, Sarah Yi Xu, Dana Kulzhabayeva, Minyi Ma, Rachel Kornfield, Syed Ishtiaque Ahmed, Alex Mariakakis, Mary P. Czerwinski , Anastasia Kuzminykh, Michael Liut, Joseph Jay Williams   In this study, the authors explore the potential of LLMs for customizing academic procrastination interventions, employing a technology probe to generate personalized advice. Their findings emphasize the need for LLMs to offer structured, deadline-oriented advice and adaptive questioning techniques, providing key design insights for LLM-based tools while highlighting cautions against their use for therapeutic guidance.

Where Are We So Far? Understanding Data Storytelling Tools from the Perspective of Human-AI Collaboration   Haotian Li, Yun Wang , Huamin Qu This paper evaluates data storytelling tools using a dual framework to analyze the stages of the storytelling workflow—analysis, planning, implementation, communication—and the roles of humans and AI in each stage, such as creators, assistants, optimizers, and reviewers. The study identifies common collaboration patterns in existing tools, summarizes lessons from these patterns, and highlights future research opportunities for human-AI collaboration in data storytelling.

Learn more about our work and contributions to CHI 2024, including our full list of publications , on our conference webpage .

Related publications

Sharednerf: leveraging photorealistic and view-dependent rendering for real-time and remote collaboration, big or small, it’s all in your head: visuo-haptic illusion of size-change using finger-repositioning, llmr: real-time prompting of interactive worlds using large language models, reading between the lines: modeling user behavior and costs in ai-assisted programming, observer effect in social media use, where are we so far understanding data storytelling tools from the perspective of human-ai collaboration, the metacognitive demands and opportunities of generative ai, piet: facilitating color authoring for motion graphics video, dynavis: dynamically synthesized ui widgets for visualization editing, generative echo chamber effects of llm-powered search systems on diverse information seeking, understanding the role of large language models in personalizing and scaffolding strategies to combat academic procrastination, continue reading.

Research Focus: Week of May 13, 2024

Research Focus: Week of April 15, 2024

Research Focus: Week of March 18, 2024

Advancing human-centered AI: Updates on responsible AI research

Research areas.

Related events

• Microsoft at CHI 2024

Related labs

• Microsoft Research Lab - Asia
• Microsoft Research Lab - Cambridge
• Microsoft Research Lab - Redmond
• Microsoft Research Lab – Montréal
• AI Frontiers
• Follow on Twitter
• Like on Facebook
• Follow on LinkedIn
• Subscribe on Youtube
• Follow on Instagram

Share this page:

The Influence of Nature and Nurture on Human Behavior Research Paper

Introduction, historical background, debate in support of nature, interaction of nurture and nature, iq and personality debate.

According to (Moore, 2003), the issue of whether nature has more impact than nurture on ways in which human beings behave has been debated upon for quite some time, where each individual is found to support either of the two according to experience or perceptions. Nature concerns itself with the natural internal qualities possessed by human beings. On the other hand, nurture concerns itself with experiences that human beings have acquired from the environment in which they live. The debate involves how these two factors determine the behavioral as well as physical characteristics of human beings and ways in which they vary. The particular roles of nurture and nature are portrayed in various areas and stages of lives of human beings.

The debate on how nurture as well as nature contributes to behavior of human beings can be traced to historical times. From the nineteenth century to early the twentieth century, opinions were found to consider nature as the determinant of human behavior. This was mainly supported by scientific research on the role played by genes that are inherited by offsprings. Another study that supported nature is natural selection that was conducted by Charles Darwin. Galton wrote a book called “hereditary nature” where he argued that, those people who possessed various gifts were found to originate from parents or family backgrounds that had similar kinds of gifts. He supported his arguments by an analysis that he carried on concerning talents and various professions where he concluded that, they were inherited from particular parents who possessed such talents. He also argued that, character traits improve or get worse throughout generations depending on the traits of parents. However, after the First World War, more research was carried out on the issue of the roles of nurture as well as nature. This particular research challenged the views that were in support of nature as the sole determinant of human beings’ behavior and argued that nurture was a major contributing factor to ways in which human beings behaved (Moore, 2003).

According to (Bouchard, 1997), supporters of nurture argue that, the manner in which human beings behave is primarily determined by the environment in which they are brought up. This particular argument has been supported by several studies performed on the various types of temperaments possessed by children. For example, John Watson, an American psychologist performed an experiment on a young boy which showed that, phobia is as a result of classical conditioning. He argued that, if he was to be given some healthy infants, he would apply his own knowledge to equip them with skills of his choice and they would end up in different specializations regardless of their abilities, race, genetic characteristics and talents.

(Steele, 1981), found that the theory of nurture was also supported by Skinner, another psychologist, who performed experiments using pigeons. He took his time to train them on various dancing styles, which they imitated and after some time they could dance as directed. He also trained them on how to play tennis and twist their bodies to make figure eight which they did as well. These experiments made him to be considered as the founder of the science that deals with behavior. From experiments that he carried out on animals, he inferred that it’s possible to condition the behavior of human beings in a similar manner. This inference supported the fact that human behavior is a product of what is learnt through experience acquired in one’s surroundings.

Another study done by scientists, show that human beings acquire their humor through learning. Acquisition of humor is influenced by the type of culture that one grows up in or the kind of family set up that one is brought up in. For example, if one grows up in a family where people are jovial, peaceful and make a lot of jokes, then he/she will grow up a jovial person who is full of humor which will have been learnt from the environment surrounding him. A study of the behavior portrayed by identical twins show that, when brought up in different environments, they acquire very different behavioral traits showing that nurture plays a very big role in determining the type of traits acquired by human beings. (Bridgeman, 2003)

(Maroni, 2000), found that, the color of hair as well as that of eyes is determined by genes. Supporters of the theory of nature also argue that, traits such as aggression, sexual orientation and intelligence are determined by genes. Therefore, various types of genes have been studied so as to show how nature plays its role in determination of behavior. However, these arguments are feared to be used by some people as an excuse for their bad behavior. This is because; some people are found to argue that, since one or both of their parents or someone in their extended family was a criminal, he/she can do nothing to his/her criminal behavior because its inherited. Others argue that, since their parents are divorced, they too cannot escape it because; even if they marry they will have to divorce. This is a negative application of the transfer of genes through inheritance as people tend to stick to negative behavior since their parents had the same. Possession of the gene that makes people to become gay has also been used to explain the role of nature in its determination of behavior. Studies have shown that, genes determine the ways in which various people are oriented sexually. It is argued that, sexual behavior is usually encoded in one’s genes and that, one does not choose whether to become gay or not. Gay individuals are therefore believed to be naturally attracted to people of a similar sex which comes out without their knowledge and cannot be controlled.

However, debate suggests that, both nurture and nature play essential roles in determining the manner in which human beings behave. This is because; some behavior is usually engrained in human beings before birth, while others develop during interaction with their surrounding environment. Therefore, it is agreed that, the way in which genes are related to behavior greatly differs with the way in which causes are related to their consequential effects. This is because; one’s genes may give a probability of a certain behavior but does not guarantee or restrict someone to behave in that particular manner. This gives individuals an opportunity to decide what they want to become, where environment and their effort takes charge (Lindsay, 2000).

It has been found that, there exist minimal instances where behavior can be taken to be entirely caused by nurture or entirely as a result of nature. For example, a study on some “genetic” diseases like Huntington disease show that, there is a high percentage of possession of the gene that causes it as well as the disease which is similar to the percentage that shows a lack of both. However, the lives of those animals that already have this disease entirely depend on the level of care they get. That is, those that get quality animal husbandry live for a longer time than those that are not taken good cared of. Therefore, though nature causes Huntington’s disease, nurture takes control of the length of life that the sick animals will live. On the contrary, some characteristics of human beings are determined by nurture among them being someone’s native language. It is argued that, children have the ability to learn languages of their choice when they are provided with the necessary facilities to enable them learn. This means that, the language spoken by any individual is not in any case determined by genes or inherited but by the environment in which people leave. Therefore, nurture and nature work together in the determination of behavior in human beings.

Another example of their interaction is an experiment that was carried out by Pinker on the religion as well as language spoken by human beings. Results to his experiment showed that, one’s religion, language as well as political party is not determined by genes. However, on acquisition of the specific choices, characteristics that show temperaments and skills in the form of how well one can communicate in a certain language, how one behaves in his /her political party or the level of commitment to a certain religion are to some extent determined by one’s inherited genes (Lindsay, 2000).

Therefore, when characteristics of human beings’ behavior are caused by interactions of nurture and nature, the level of heritability can only be measured through variations that exist in a given population. But there are cases where scientists have been noticed to assume that, if a particular level of heritability is noticed in a certain trait, that trait has been purely determined by nature, not taking into account the possibility of nurture been involved in some way. However, this should not be case as both determinants play roles in determination of the traits acquired by human beings though their levels of association or involvement vary in different traits (Stuart, 1999).

This debate has attracted a wide range of arguments and suggestions where studies of twins who are identical and fraternal are used. Adopted children are also used for comparison purposes. Studies that support the role played by nature in determination human beings’ IQ argue that, the IQ of those twins who are identical has a high level of similarity even when the two are reared separately. Those supporting nature say that the high level of similarity is caused by their shared genes from the environment they were inside their mothers’ womb. Further studies show that, similarity of IQ diminishes as one moves from twins, to fraternal, to adopted children and finally to strangers. On the contrary, studies supporting nurture argue something different altogether. For example, James Flynn, a political scientist noticed that, the level of human beings’ IQ was accelerating with time. His arguments suggested that, the level of IQ is determined by environmental factors that children are exposed to as they grow up. These environmental factors include, diet, education and the level of IQ of those people with whom children interact with.

Flynn argued that, the complexity of visual images that people are exposed to through advertisements, computer games and posters increase their levels of IQ. Other environmental aspects that tend to affect IQ levels include infant malnutrition where those children who suffer malnutrition possess low levels of IQ as they lack enough energy to reason as well as other nutrients required in reasoning. The profession of parents also matters as it tends to motivate the child in one way or another if it happens to be good. Consequently, studies show that most children tend to follow the professions of their parents as children are likely to imitate their parents. This trend makes the IQ of those children to be determined by the profession and not genes acquired from parents. Another factor that may affect children’s level of IQ is the parental ambition as well as rigidity. A child whose parents are ambitious is likely to be exposed to issues that would in one way or another increase his/her IQ while rigid parents are likely to cause rigidity in their children resulting to lowering their IQ levels (Stuart, 1999).

The manner in which people behave is caused or determined by both nurture and nature. However, involvement of each of them varies depending on the kind of trait in question. Scientists have contributed to this particular debate by performing studies that are directed at differentiating roles played by nature and those played by nurture. Though it is not possible to give an exact estimation of their involvement, it can be concluded that, genes only determine one’s behavior up to a certain age where environment in which he/she is brought up takes over. (Becker, 2002)

• Becker B. (2002): Behavioral endocrinology : MIT Press pp33-38
• Bouchard C. (1997): Genetics of fitness and physical performance : Human Kinetics pp. 23-27
• Bridgeman B. (2003): Psychology and evolution : Sage Publications pp. 31-36
• Lindsay S. (2000): Adaptation and Learning : Wiley-Blackwell pp. 54-59
• Maroni G. (2000): Molecular and genetic analysis of human traits : Wiley-Blackwell pp. 13-16
• Moore D. (2003): The Fallacy of nature Vs Nurture : Henry Holt pp. 59-65
• Steele J. (1981): On the inheritance of acquired characters : University of Chicago Press pp. 19-24
• Stuart I. (1999): Key ideas in psychology : Jessica Kingsley publishers pp. 11-16
• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, November 18). The Influence of Nature and Nurture on Human Behavior. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-influence-of-nature-and-nurture-on-human-behavior/

"The Influence of Nature and Nurture on Human Behavior." IvyPanda , 18 Nov. 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/the-influence-of-nature-and-nurture-on-human-behavior/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'The Influence of Nature and Nurture on Human Behavior'. 18 November.

IvyPanda . 2021. "The Influence of Nature and Nurture on Human Behavior." November 18, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-influence-of-nature-and-nurture-on-human-behavior/.

1. IvyPanda . "The Influence of Nature and Nurture on Human Behavior." November 18, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-influence-of-nature-and-nurture-on-human-behavior/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "The Influence of Nature and Nurture on Human Behavior." November 18, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/the-influence-of-nature-and-nurture-on-human-behavior/.

• Nature and Nurture Problems in Early Years
• Nature v/s Nurture in Human behaviour development
• Nature vs. Nurture: Two Approaches to Intelligence
• The Nocebo Effect: Term Definition
• V Axes Diagnostic System and Cultural Issues
• TV Commercials and Their Psychological Impact
• Clinical Heath Psychology and Cardiovascular Disease
• Does Dark Weather Bring Dark Moods?