Abstract
The nature-nurture controversy is reviewed from the nineteenth century to the present. This review indicates that the nature-nuture issue has been highly controversial in psychology and education for long, mainly because of the oversimplified, either-or polarism of partisan views. In recent times, however, the old issue appears increasingly archaic. Expanding, interdisciplinary theory and research reveal complex interrelationships and evolutionary cognitive adaptations, etc. that can finally put the nature-nurture controversy to rest. This review provides background for a response to Rushton's critique of Yee (1992) in this issue.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Allport, G. W. (1940). The psychologist's frame of reference.Psychol. Bull. 37: 1–28.
Anastasi, A. (1958). Heredity, environment, and the question “How?”Psychol. Rev. 65: 197–208.
Anastasi, A. (1972). The cultivation of diversity.Am. Psychol. 27: 1091–1099.
Barkow, J. (1989).Darwin, Sex, and Status: Biological Approaches to Mind and Culture, University of Toronto Press, Toronto.
Barkow, J., Cosmides, L., and Tooby, J. (1992).The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture, Oxford University Press, New York.
Boring, E. G. (1929). The psychology of controversy.Psychol. Rev. 36: 97–121.
Caporael, L. R., and Brewer, M. B. (eds.) (1991). Issues in evolutionary psychology.J. Soc. Issues 47(3): whole issue.
Chase, A. (1980).The Legacy of Malthus: The Social Costs of the New Scientific Racism, University of Illinois Press, Urban, IL.
Coons, D. J. (1992). Testing the limits of sense and science: American experimental psychologists combat spiritualism, 1880–1920.Am. Psychol. 47: 143–151.
Cosmides, L., and Tooby, J. Cognitive adaptations for social exchange. In Barkow, J., Cosmides, L., and Tooby, J. (eds.),The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 164–228.
Cronbach, L. J. (1957). The two disciplines of scientific psychology.Am. Psychol. 12: 671–684.
Garraty, J. A., and Gay, P. (eds.) (1972).The Columbia History of the World, Harper & Row, New York.
Kimble, G. A. (1992). Evolution of the nature-nurture issue in the history of psychology. In Plomin, R., and McClearn, G. E., (eds.),Nature, Nurture, and Psychology, American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., pp. 3–25.
Mann, C. C. (1994). Behavioral genetics in transition.Science 264: 1686–1689.
Plomin, R., and McClearn, G. E. (eds.) (1993).Nature, Nurture, and Psychology, American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C.
Plomin, R., and Rende, R. (1991). Human behavioral genetics.Ann. Rev. Psychol. 42: 161–190.
Reber, A. S. (1985).The Penguin Dictionary of Psychology, Viking Penguin, Harmondsworth, England.
Tooby, J., and Cosmides, L. (1992). The psychological foundations of culture. In Barkow, J. H., Cosmides, L., and Tooby, J. (eds.),The Adapted Mind: Evolutionary Psychology and the Generation of Culture, Oxford University Press, New York, pp. 19–136.
Wachs, T. D. (1993). The nature-nurture gap: What we have here is a failure to collaborate. In Plomin, R., and McClearn, G. E., (eds.),Nature, Nurture, and Psychology, American Psychological Association, Washington, D.C., pp. 375–391.
Wilson, E. O. (1975).Sociobiology: The New Synthesis, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Wilson, E. O. (1978).On Human Nature, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Yee, A. H. (1992). Asians as stereotypes and students: Misperceptions that persist.Educ. Psychol. Rev. 4: 95–132.
Yee, A. H., Fairchild, H., Weizman, F., and Wyatt, G. (1993). Addressing psychology's problems with race.Am. Psychol. 48(11): 1132–1140.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Yee, A.H. Evolution of the nature-nurture controversy: Response to J. Philippe Rushton. Educ Psychol Rev 7, 381–390 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02212309
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02212309