Here are some beliefs:
Early Childhood
A shift from a highly indulgent to a more authoritarian parental stance occurs as the child approaches school age, which is when it is believed that children develop isip, or thoughts. Particularly after the child is weaned, older brothers, sisters, relatives, and neighborhood children become substitutes for the mother's constant attention. Older children, regardless of their sex, are expected to help with household chores and to care for younger siblings. The younger child, in turn, must learn to conform to family expectations of respect for elders and obedience to authority, adults, parents, older siblings, and other substitute caregivers. The child is further expected to know the difference between good and bad behavior and is subject to various discipline practices (PAPEP, 1982).
Discipline in traditional Pilipino homes depends a great deal on appeals to duties and obligations of family members based on their respective roles.... Children are disciplined by spanking, hitting, scolding, embarrassment through teasing, or reprimanding for being walang hiya (shameless, thoughtless, or insensitive), bastos (crude), walang utang na loob (ungrateful), or for being a source of shame to the family. (Santos, 1983, p. 141). Traditionally, the mother is the chief disciplinarian because she typically spends more time with the children and therefore finds more occasions calling for punishment. The father tends to punish the children less frequently, in part because of their recognition of his absolute authority (Santos, 1983).
Among those behaviors that are more severely punished or condemned are sibling directed aggression, as well as hostility toward kinship group members. Teasing serves as a means of limit setting and controlling or suppressing anger and hostility; it also is an outlet for anger and an acceptable substitute for overt aggression and direct criticism. Children are encouraged to subordinate their personal interests and competitive behaviors for the sake of cooperation and maintaining family harmony and smooth interpersonal relationships. Modesty, politeness, respect, and patience are consistently encouraged in daily behavior (PAPEP, 1982).
Stricter parental authority and guidance thus foster mutual dependency and loyalty throughout the Pilipino child's transitional socialization experiences during the preschool period. In fact, earlier surveys conducted in the Philippines have indicated that "obedience to parents" is one of the highest ranked child rearing values, second only to "trust in God" (Church, 1986). Such expectations and corresponding practices condition the child to abide by the previously described traditional values (e.g., being socially sensitive and considerate; anticipating the needs of others; reciprocating when receiving a favor; using pleasant, correct, and euphemistic language; avoiding aggression, confrontation, discourtesy, shame, criticism, or embarrassment). As the child reaches school age, he or she has typically developed a strong sense of family responsibility and further understands the traditional rules and values that govern interpersonal relationships (Anderson, 1983).
Death
Traditional beliefs about death and dying among Filipinos are interrelated with the various religious orientations that were described in the previous section. The principal denominations that account for nearly 95% of the Philippine population are Catholicism, Protestantism, and Islam. Beliefs about death and dying correspond to each of these major religions that have been extensively detailed in theological literature.
Although the vast majority of native Filipinos are Roman Catholic, their funerary customs differ somewhat from those of the West. Essentially, the "grieving process" is less private and mournful. For example, it is not unusual for a passing traveler to be invited to a wake before the burial. Wakes are well attended, and the mood may be anything but somber. Expressions of fond remembrance are accompanied by eating, drinking, card games, and music. Such parties are repeated annually on All Saints' Day (November 1) when family and friends meet at the cemetery for an all night vigil. In rural areas, funeral processions pass through the streets, with family and friends following the hearse while passersby toss money (Harper and Fullerton, 1994.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
determines development, nature or nurture.
Both, but nurture would play a much greater role as it affects so many different parts, nurture affects your preference and approaches to learning, your interactions with people even your diet which in turn can reflect your mental/social/physical capabilities. Nature can however yield certain qualities, as say a mutant gene in a species proves to be helpful and beneficial then no amount of nurture could encourage future generations do mutate. ut all in all it is your environment that develops you and how you are nurtured in that environment.
Effects of Heredity and Environment on Intelligence
he correlation of .72 indicates that identical twins raised in different environments tend to have very similar IQ scores. In fact, these twins are more similar to each other than are fraternal twins raised in the same home.4
Adoption studies
Another way to separate the effects of heredity and environment is to compare adopted children with both their biological and adoptive parents. Adopted children tend to be similar to their biological parents in genetic makeup. Their environment, of course, more closely matches that of their adoptive parents. Researchers have found that adopted children’s IQ scores are more highly correlated with their biological parents’ IQs than with their adoptive parents’ IQs. In other words, in a group of people who place their infants up for adoption, those with the highest IQs tend to have offspring who, despite being raised by other people, also have the highest IQs. Furthermore, the IQ correlations between adopted children and their biological parents become stronger, and those between the children and their adoptive parents become weaker, as the children grow older, especially during late adolescence (Bouchard, 1997; McGue, Bouchard, Iacono, & Lykken, 1993; Plomin, Fulker, Corley, & DeFries, 1997; Plomin & Petrill, 1997). (If you find this last research result puzzling, we’ll offer an explanation shortly.)
Keep in mind that twin studies and adoption studies do not completely separate the effects of heredity and environment (W. A. Collins, Maccoby, Steinberg, Hetherington, & Bornstein, 2000; Wahlsten & Gottlieb, 1997). For example, adopted children have shared a common environment for at least 9 months—the 9 months of prenatal development—with their biological mothers. Likewise, monozygotic twins who are raised in separate homes have shared a common prenatal environment and often have similar, if not identical, postnatal environments as well. Furthermore, twin studies and adoption studies do not allow researchers to examine the ways in which heredity and environment might interact in their effects on measured intelligence. Any interactive effects are often added to the “heredity” side of the scoreboard (A. Collins et al., 2000; Turkheimer, 2000). Despite such glitches, twin and adoption studies point convincingly to a genetic component in intelligence (Bouchard, 1997; N. Brody, 1992; E. Hunt, 1997; Neisser, 1998a; Petrill & Wilkerson, 2000).
This is not to say that children are predestined to have an intelligence level similar to that of their biological parents. In fact, most children with high intelligence are conceived by parents of average intelligence rather than by parents with high IQ scores (Plomin & Petrill, 1997). Children’s genetic ancestry, then, is hardly a surefire predictor of what their own potential is likely to be. Environment also makes an appreciable difference, as we shall now see.
Adoption studies
Another way to separate the effects of heredity and environment is to compare adopted children with both their biological and adoptive parents. Adopted children tend to be similar to their biological parents in genetic makeup. Their environment, of course, more closely matches that of their adoptive parents. Researchers have found that adopted children’s IQ scores are more highly correlated with their biological parents’ IQs than with their adoptive parents’ IQs. In other words, in a group of people who place their infants up for adoption, those with the highest IQs tend to have offspring who, despite being raised by other people, also have the highest IQs. Furthermore, the IQ correlations between adopted children and their biological parents become stronger, and those between the children and their adoptive parents become weaker, as the children grow older, especially during late adolescence (Bouchard, 1997; McGue, Bouchard, Iacono, & Lykken, 1993; Plomin, Fulker, Corley, & DeFries, 1997; Plomin & Petrill, 1997). (If you find this last research result puzzling, we’ll offer an explanation shortly.)
Keep in mind that twin studies and adoption studies do not completely separate the effects of heredity and environment (W. A. Collins, Maccoby, Steinberg, Hetherington, & Bornstein, 2000; Wahlsten & Gottlieb, 1997). For example, adopted children have shared a common environment for at least 9 months—the 9 months of prenatal development—with their biological mothers. Likewise, monozygotic twins who are raised in separate homes have shared a common prenatal environment and often have similar, if not identical, postnatal environments as well. Furthermore, twin studies and adoption studies do not allow researchers to examine the ways in which heredity and environment might interact in their effects on measured intelligence. Any interactive effects are often added to the “heredity” side of the scoreboard (A. Collins et al., 2000; Turkheimer, 2000). Despite such glitches, twin and adoption studies point convincingly to a genetic component in intelligence (Bouchard, 1997; N. Brody, 1992; E. Hunt, 1997; Neisser, 1998a; Petrill & Wilkerson, 2000).
This is not to say that children are predestined to have an intelligence level similar to that of their biological parents. In fact, most children with high intelligence are conceived by parents of average intelligence rather than by parents with high IQ scores (Plomin & Petrill, 1997). Children’s genetic ancestry, then, is hardly a surefire predictor of what their own potential is likely to be. Environment also makes an appreciable difference, as we shall now see.
Effects of Heredity and Environment on Intelligence
Effects of Heredity and Environment on Intelligence
by T. M McDevitt|J. E. Ormrod
Source: Pearson Allyn Bacon Prentice Hall
Topics: Intelligence and Learning, Growing Your Child's Intelligence
Buy this book »
It is often difficult to separate the relative influences of heredity and environment on human characteristics. People who have similar genetic makeup (e.g., brothers and sisters, parents and their children) typically live in similar environments as well. So when we see similarities in IQ among members of the same family, it is hard to know whether those similarities are due to the genes or to the environments that family members share. Nevertheless, a significant body of research tells us that both heredity and environment affect intelligence.
Evidence for Hereditary Influences
Earlier we mentioned that measures of information processing speed correlate with IQ scores. Speed of processing depends on neurological efficiency and maturation, which are genetically controlled. From this standpoint, then, we have some support for a hereditary basis for intelligence (Perkins, 1995). The fact that children with certain genetic defects (e.g., Down syndrome) have, on average, significantly lower IQ scores than their nondisabled peers (Keogh & MacMillan, 1996) provides further evidence of heredity’s influence. But perhaps the most convincing evidence comes from twin studies and adoption studies.
Twin studies
Numerous studies have used monozygotic (identical) twins and dizygotic (fraternal) twins to get a sense of how strongly heredity affects IQ. Because monozygotic twins begin as a single fertilized egg which then separates, they are genetically equivalent human beings. In contrast, dizygotic twins are conceived as two separate fertilized eggs. They share about 50 percent of their genetic makeup, with the other 50 percent being unique to each twin. If identical twins have more similar IQ scores than fraternal twins, we can reasonably conclude that heredity influences intelligence.
Most twins are raised together by the same parent(s) and in the same home, and so they share similar environments as well as similar genes. Yet even when twins are raised separately (perhaps because they have been adopted and raised by different parents), they typically have similar IQ scores (Bouchard & McGue, 1981; N. Brody, 1992; Mackintosh, 1998; Plomin & Petrill, 1997). In a review of many twin studies, Bouchard and McGue (1981) found these average (median) correlations:
Correlations of Twins’ IQs:
Identical twins raised in the same home .86
Identical twins raised in different homes .72
Fraternal twins raised in the same home .60
by T. M McDevitt|J. E. Ormrod
Source: Pearson Allyn Bacon Prentice Hall
Topics: Intelligence and Learning, Growing Your Child's Intelligence
Buy this book »
It is often difficult to separate the relative influences of heredity and environment on human characteristics. People who have similar genetic makeup (e.g., brothers and sisters, parents and their children) typically live in similar environments as well. So when we see similarities in IQ among members of the same family, it is hard to know whether those similarities are due to the genes or to the environments that family members share. Nevertheless, a significant body of research tells us that both heredity and environment affect intelligence.
Evidence for Hereditary Influences
Earlier we mentioned that measures of information processing speed correlate with IQ scores. Speed of processing depends on neurological efficiency and maturation, which are genetically controlled. From this standpoint, then, we have some support for a hereditary basis for intelligence (Perkins, 1995). The fact that children with certain genetic defects (e.g., Down syndrome) have, on average, significantly lower IQ scores than their nondisabled peers (Keogh & MacMillan, 1996) provides further evidence of heredity’s influence. But perhaps the most convincing evidence comes from twin studies and adoption studies.
Twin studies
Numerous studies have used monozygotic (identical) twins and dizygotic (fraternal) twins to get a sense of how strongly heredity affects IQ. Because monozygotic twins begin as a single fertilized egg which then separates, they are genetically equivalent human beings. In contrast, dizygotic twins are conceived as two separate fertilized eggs. They share about 50 percent of their genetic makeup, with the other 50 percent being unique to each twin. If identical twins have more similar IQ scores than fraternal twins, we can reasonably conclude that heredity influences intelligence.
Most twins are raised together by the same parent(s) and in the same home, and so they share similar environments as well as similar genes. Yet even when twins are raised separately (perhaps because they have been adopted and raised by different parents), they typically have similar IQ scores (Bouchard & McGue, 1981; N. Brody, 1992; Mackintosh, 1998; Plomin & Petrill, 1997). In a review of many twin studies, Bouchard and McGue (1981) found these average (median) correlations:
Correlations of Twins’ IQs:
Identical twins raised in the same home .86
Identical twins raised in different homes .72
Fraternal twins raised in the same home .60
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
