What are the influences of heredity and horomones on human behavior?
954706
You know hormones have great effects on your own behavior. Have you ever been very afraid, or angry? We are quite certain the human behavior is probabilistically influenced by heredity. The only argument left among scientist is the proportion of the heredity of behavior.
941170
people/group who influence self concept,emotions,attitudes and behaviors of a person\n\nfamily,school,peer group, mass media,religion,work place, the state.
527038
It can definatly be genetic. If your parent(s) had one of these cases, it can be inherited, but also environmental factors contribute...stress levels can cause these chemical imbalances too. There are lots of things, if the traits are inherited, you can just be more at risk of developing these habits, and something can go on in your atmosphere that can set off these conditions.
234681
This is a large question, and the source of much controversy, conflict, anger, and hilarity for all of recorded history. Aristophanes' Lysistrata is merely one of the earliest in a long literary tradition exploring the question. James Thurber is only one of the most recent, and funniest, of those writing in English.\n\nOnly in the last few decades has there been any scientific evidence which even begins to explain why the so long observed differences exist. \n\nIt is clear that there are, on average, anatomic differences between female and male brains. For instance, in the connection between the two hemispheres. And imaging studies of working brains ('PET scans') have shown some apparently characteristic differences in the areas of the brain used by males and females when their brains are ostensibly doing the same thing. There is even enough of such evidence that there are now centers for the study of gender differences. \n\nFrom a behavioral viewpoint, the field of evolutionary psychology (or sociobiology) has produced a series of testable hypotheses about differences between female and male behavior. These are essentially unique in the field because they suggest experiments which can test them. Thus far, this approach has shown promise in accounting for some of the non-cultural non-religious behavior differences. Thus far, even such things as the clothing styles chosen when going to dance clubs have been accounted for to some extent by this approach. Much of this work is controversial amongst one or another group since it deals with issues (eg, sex, reproduction, mating behavior, ...) which are of great importance socially or religiously.\n\nThe most reasonable account of behavioral differences between the sexes is based on reproductive success. Males who behaved this way (or these ways) tended to have more descendants (more children who survived to have children themselves), and females who behaved that way (or those ways) also had more children who survived to have children of their own. Much of the reasoning on these matters is based in the fact that, in humans, females cannot have more than a small number of children, given the underlying biology. We humans are born far from able to cope with life, and require a long period of maturation before we can. We share some of this extended infancy with some other species (such as chimpanzees and orangutans) and, to some extent, they show similar sex linked behavioral differences. Males, on the other hand, are capable of having a great many children. But, because of the long term helpless infancy period, together with typical human female awkwardness during much of pregnancy, it seems likely that males who stayed with the female increased the chances that children (half of whose genes came from him) were more likely to survive to child-bearing age. This pattern may also account for male jealousy (only if the female is sexually exclusive can he be sure the child is his) and female interest in male resource control. If he's rich (however rich is measured in a society), he will likely be able to increase the chance that her children will survive to have children of their own. Some of these suggestions (hypotheses) are subject to test in humans and some other species; the evolutionary approach has illuminated some hitherto opaque behaviors.\n\nThese matters are very near to the center of much conflict in traditional (and some other not so traditional) societies, many of whose citizens are made uneasy by new and different behaviors and by research which either 'endorses' some of those behaviors or 'undermines' some of their existing or traditional behaviors. In fact, the science is still in its infancy, and those who claim it endorses this or that don't understand it, and those who fear the science would be better advised to concentrate on policy makers of various kinds who don't understand the nature of science, nor much of this emerging scien
553678
This is a difficult question, because first you have to pick a behavioral phenotype. One behavioral phenotype is "anxiety" measured by behavioral assays (plus maze or open field). \n\nOne thing that can effect "anxiety" responses on the above mentioned measures is a brief daily separation from the mother early in life. Another factor that could influence these is the  "gentling effect" of repeated handling by the experimenter. These two factors can lead to less "fearful" behavior by the mice when they are tested on the plus maze and open field.
866378
I'm not sure what your question is?\nChronic stress endured over a long time can have different kinds of affect on your body depending on your genetic make-up.\nShort term stress is o.k., since that is probably why your here right now.
125133
Genetic predisposition among other things.
1069382
I think you may be interested in reading an  article by a biopsychologist named Lawrence Harper. The article proposes a theory that suggests that experiences can be inherited through genetic means. The theory does not specifically address the notion of the inheritance of particular memories, but it may prove a useful avenue for pursuing your question.\n\nHere is the abstract from the article:\n\nCurrently, behavioral development is thought to result from the interplay among genetic inheritance, congenital characteristics, cultural contexts, and parental practices as they directly impact the individual. Evolutionary ecology points to another contributor,epigenetic inheritance, the transmission to offspring of parental phenotypic responses to environmental challenges—even when the young do not experience the challenges themselves. Genetic inheritance is not altered, gene expression is. Organismic pathways for such transmission\nexist. Maternal stress during the latter half of a daughter’s gestation may affect not only the daughter’s but also grand-offspring’s physical growth. The author argues that temperamental variation may be influenced in the same way. Implications for theory and research design are presented along with testable predictions.
578959
Scientific research has shown that there are genetic differences that have influence on homosexuality...but like any aspect of human behavior, the answers are more complex than a simple answer can give.  There's certainly social, familial, genetic, and other factors all working together that influence both straight and gay behavior.  Those who claim a simple answer like, "it's a choice" or "it's all genes" are both wrong.\n\nWhy does it matter, anyway?  That there are people who are homosexual, always have been and always will be, should be enough for "straights" to treat them just like any other human beings...
180760
hormones are molecules that act on cells to cause changes in cellular homeostasis.  Steroids are made from cholesterol (such as progesterone, testosterone).  Other horomones such as growth factors are proteins, others are small peptides such as insulin.
286266
Culture and society play a far more important role in shaping our personalities than genetics.\n\nLook at the change in women in the West over the last hundred years, from submissive, downtrodden chattel to emancipated, skilled leaders.  DNA wasn't responsible for that.
430234
mostly determined by the genotype and mode of inheritance. Sometimes it can be epigenetic. some rules like mandelian inheritance, random seggregation, imcomplete penetrance, codomminance and give different phenotypes
267487
There are only theories about what causes Bipolar D/O; however, there does appear to be a genetic-environmental interaction that occurs to "cause" these symptoms. Having blood-related relatives with severe mental health problems (e.g., schizophrenia, severe depression, bipolar d/o) increases the likelihood of some one in your family having Bipolar D/O, but then this disorder only occurs in about 1% of the population. Thus, the genetic component does not appear to be the be all end all of the story. There is some evidence that suggests the combination of a genetic predisposition combined with a high level of parental distress and inconsistency may lead to bipolar, but these are only correlations.
19468
I wish I could say I read Phillips answer, but I couldn't maintain focus. So, risking repeating elements of his analysis, I'm going to give this question a stab, but with a biological/evoluationary bent.\n\nEvolutionary arguments have been offered for male homosexuality. For example, Symons (1979) argues that homosexuality results from a meme that takes advantage of the inborn male propensity to find sexual variety interesting. Normally this propensity would be adaptive because it would encourage males to attempt sexual relations with many women, which would result in more offspring. But a meme could parasitize this propensity, redirecting sexual interest to non-adaptive objects, as in fetishism or homosexuality. \n\nEpigenetic arguments have been inspired by work on pre-natal hormones. Dîrner and his colleagues (cited in LeVay 1994) link stress during pregnancy to hormonal effects on the fetus that would lead to homosexuality. This could be part of a mother's adaptive reproductive strategy. That is, in times of stress, when it is difficult to raise children, it may be adaptive to have some homosexual children who could help their siblings raise offspring instead of having offspring of their own.\n\nMemic and epigenetic arguments may explain some aspects of homosexuality, such as the cultural variations in practices or identities, or specific behaviors of homosexuals (femininity for example). However, the biological studies of homosexuality, together with the extraordinary cross-cultural similarities of exclusive homosexuals (Whitam 1983) suggest that some aspects of homosexuality (e.g. orientation) are at least partly determined by genes.\n\nThe basic problem for genetic explanations of homosexuality is to account for how a gene that does not lead to offspring could survive the pressures of natural selection. One possibility is that a maladaptive gene for homosexuality might re-occur repeatedly in a population if it results from the frequent mutation of a gene that is normally adaptive. However, people with maladaptive genes rarely exceed 1% of the population, while male homosexuality apparently occurs much more frequently (Whitam and Mathy 1986; Gadpaille 1980; Diamond 1993). Another possibility is that a recessive gene for homosexuality might have advantages that allow it to pass on to future generations. For example, homosexuals could directly help their relatives (who share the recessive gene) raise more children. This "kin selection" hypothesis predicts more homosexuality in those societies where homosexuals could most help their relatives (for example, in endogamous societies where homosexuals would live nearby). Nevertheless, cross-cultural research shows that this is not the case (Werner 1979). Another possibility is that a homosexual gene itself, when combined with non-homosexual genes, may provide reproductive advantages. This latter scenario is sometimes known as the "heterozygous" hypothesis, although it is really about any type of gene combination (LeVay 1994; Sommer 1990). \n\nThe heterozygous argument suggests that homosexuality results from genes for submissive behavior. An animal possessing only submissive genes would fail to reproduce for lack of trying. But an animal possessing only genes for dominance would also fail to reproduce because it would get killed for taking too many risks. It is the "heterozygous" males, who would most likely pass on their genes. By the genetic laws of probability, this would leave every generation with a certain percentage of individuals at the extremes. For example, if each of a pair of chromosomes had only one "homosexual" locus with only two possible alleles (one for dominance and one for submissiveness) this would leave a heterozygous couple with 25% of their offspring homozygous for submissiveness, 50% heterozygous, and 25% homozygous for dominance. If, however, homosexuality were the result of the interaction of five ge
570128
This is my field. Much more is biologically determined than most people think. Different people have different behaviors largely due to having evolved in different environments. That is why there are geographical regions in which certain behaviors are more or less common. In regions where various migrants have mixed together in the same geographic region, high variety within a small area results. Many human behaviors are side-effects of psychological traits that evolved to produce unrelated behaviors.\n\nSome things that are biologically determined that are often thought to be culturally determined are: theism (belief in the existence of a god) (this is a side-effect of some of our ancestors serving a remote and powerful clan leader), belief in a universe with a beginning and an end (this is a side-effect of the crude mentality of dominance), domination of women (this facilitated the reproduction of a man over other men), inefficient rituals of homework and schoolwork that are forced upon pre-adults (some of our ancesotrs required their children to labor extra-hard, and punished the children that could not do so, so as to push the weak into a servile non-reproducing class), dominating pre-adults in general by constant monitoring and restricting information and pleasure (this is a side-effect of competition for dominance to produce more offspring), illegalizing abortion and suicide (these are side-effects of the general desire to make life more burdensome and punish the people that can not bear the burden, so as to push the weak into a servile non-reproducing class, which is ironic), parental permissive non-punishment of the aggressive behavior of their children (this served to facilitate the dominance of their children over others, though modernly it has spilled over to apply to children in general and even pets), and many other beliefs and behaviors.
1048700
Heredity is the genetic transmission of characteristics (bone structure, skin color, and mentality)\nVariation is the acts, processes, or deviations (education, wealth, and sense of reality)
922738
Heredity is the transmission of genetic information from parent to offspring. Genetics is the study of heredity.