Current Perception of Nature vs.Nurture Debate among Students at the University of Medicine of Tirana
Marku E. et al. - Current Perception of Nature vs. Nurture Debate among Students at the University of Medicine of Tirana


Genetic factor
environmental factor
psycho-emotional stress

How to Cite

Marku, E., Miska, X., & Neçaj, L. (2024). Current Perception of Nature vs.Nurture Debate among Students at the University of Medicine of Tirana. Albanian Journal of Trauma and Emergency Surgery, 8(1), 1362-1365.


Introduction: One topic still debated in the scientific community and beyond is the influence of genetic or environmental factors on an individual's behavior. The essence of this debate lies in discussing the role and impact of genetic and environmental factors on an individual's behavior, known otherwise as the nature-nurture debate.

In a survey-type study, we sought to assess perceptions of the nature-nurture argument among first-year technical medical sciences students at the University of Tirana, Albania.

Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted using a survey-type questionnaire on a sample of 100 first-year medical university students at the Faculty of Medical Technical Sciences, University of Medicine in Tirana, in April 2023. The questionnaire was based on six specific questions underlying the potential impact of genetic (nature) and environmental factors (nurture) influencing certain types of behavior, such as personality, sexual orientation, and intelligence—or psycho-emotional stress.

Results: According to the analysis of the data collected on our sample of students, 84.9% of them perceive that acquired factors (nurture) influence more than innate factors (nature) in forming personality traits, whereas 15.1% perceive the opposite. After adjusting for potential confounders, environmental factors remained statistically significant compared with genetic factors (odds ratio 1.42, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.97). 

Conclusion: Genetic and sociological research has shown that genetics, life experiences, and environmental factors influence the expression of key traits in shaping behavior. In this study, we confirm the perception of this interaction among medical students. For some aspects of behavior, students are less likely to believe in genetic explanations and more likely to believe in environmental causes.
Marku E. et al. - Current Perception of Nature vs. Nurture Debate among Students at the University of Medicine of Tirana


Polderman, T. J. C. et al. Meta-analysis of the heritability of human traits based on fifty years of twin studies. Nat. Genet. 47, 702–709 (2015).

Levitt M. Perceptions of nature, nurture, and behavior Life Sciences, Society and Policy, A springer open journal, 9:13, 2013.

Powledge, TM. (2011). Behavioral Epigenetics: How nurture shapes nature. Biosciences 61: pp. 588–592.

Harris, JR. The nurture assumption. New York: Free Press; 1999.

Agrawal, A., Jacobson, K. C., Prescott, C. A., & Kendler, K. S. (2002). A twin study of sex differences in social support. Psychological Medicine, 32(7), 1155–1164.

Freese, J. The arrival of social science genomics. Contemp. Sociol. 47, 524–536 (2018).

Knopik, V. S., Neiderhiser, J. M., DeFries, J. C. & Plomin, R. Behavioral genetics. 7th edn., (Worth., New York, 2017).

Turkheimer, E. Three laws of behavior genetics and what they mean. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 9, 160–164 (2000).

Archita Makharia, Abhishek Nagarajan, Aakanksha Mishra, Sandeep Peddisetty, Deepak Chahal, and Yashpal Singh, Effect of environmental factors on intelligence quotient of children. National Library of Medicine, PubMed.

Pew Research Center, Psychological Stress and Social Media Use

Dodge KA, Pettit GS. A biopsychosocial model of the development of chronic conduct problems in adolescence. Developmental Psychology 2003; 39:349–371. [PubMed: 12661890].

Duncan, L. E., Pollastri, A. R. & Smoller, J. W. Mind the gap: why many geneticists and psychological scientists have discrepant views about gene-environment interaction (G×E) research. Am. Psychol. 69, 249–268 (2014).

Brodwin P. (2005). Genetic knowledge and collective identity. Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry 29(2): 139–43.

Belsky, D. W., and Israel, S. (2014). Integrating genetics and social science: genetic risk scores. Biodemo. Soc. Biol. 60, 137–155. doi: 10.1080/19485565.2014.94659

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.