Table of Contents
There is a relationship between hormones, sex and psychology, which influences human behavior. Hormonal secretions change the patterns of behavior as a transition between the irrational and rational stages. These secretions are also vital in defining the sex of an individual. Consequently, the sex defines the roles taken over by individuals. This study gives a summary of the reaction research on the personality theories that mark the transitions in human behavior depending on sex, hormones and psychology. Several stages in life mark changes to the human way of action and behavior. For instance, the Oedipus circle relates the boy child attraction to the mother while the girl child articulates well with the father. This is because of hormonal secretions that define intimacy, which acts in opposite sexes. The relationship between the biological influence and the personality theory has no documentation in my own view; there is not enough explanation to deviation from the norm. For instance, the way people acquire bad behavior. The essay also explains how hormones and cell secretions are responsible for certain functions in life. This depicts the sex and roles performed by individuals. The influence of hormones to behavioral changes done under this study is theoretical, hence, a perception is. This implies that the self-mind acts in a way that is not physical but contains results. It involved the survey of children at different ages and of different sexes. The children below the age of one year fall short of choices or options since their mind is not fully developed. However, according to Freberg (2009), as a child grows up, they tend to get attracted to the opposite sexe because of rational development of the mind. Conclusively, I think that there is the need for inclusion of biological study in the determinants of behavior in order to increase full understanding of the concept of personality theories.
Theories of Personality
The behavioral endocrinology depicts a close relationship between hormones, sex and psychology of human beings and animals. The determinants of behavior of human beings are psychological factors attributed to the characteristics inherited from the parents. Although genes define the characteristics of human beings and animals, there are often changes in the trend of these characteristics with age due to the type of hormonal secretion. For instance, the Oedipus complex, which associates attractiveness of the boy child to the mother and increased association of the girl child to the mother, is a framework of the opposite sex interactions. In my own view, children are born psychosexually neutral since the Oedipus complex does not show up at early stages in life. However, as hormonal secretion glands develop, the male starts to have sexual feelings for the female, which acts in competition with the father. This implies that they use their parents to learn behavior with suppressed feelings for same sexes; the boy competes with the father for the love of the mother (Freberg, 2009). Consequently, the girl develops opposite interactions because of intimate feelings for the father; this bonds the association more with the father than the mother.
According to Freberg (2009), chromosomal interactions influence the sex of a newborn. However, according to my personal view, the disparity in behavior shown by opposite sexes is hormonal. The male tend to have more of the steroids and protein hormones that define their external anatomy and differentiations (Freberg, 2009). I associate sex to the gender specification of an animal defining character as male or female, while psychology is the personal perception by means of brain. On the other hand, hormones are secretions that alter physiological processes like behavior (Freberg, 2009).
Theories of personality define the developmental stages in terms of the psychological perceptions of the human mind. For instance, the Freudian psychoanalytic perspective defines the main stages of development in relation to child growth. However, my view on this theory is that hormones effect the human development and complexity in thought. I relate this theory to the evolution theory, where the adaptive characteristic dominates while those, which are less adaptive, vanish. Freberg (2009) asserts that this leaves the human mind with the dominant characteristics. However, the environment influences these personalities in such a way that failure to perform some actions that define our character could suppress the trait and replace it with the behavior of proximity (Freberg, 2009).
This essay gives the reactions to biological research appertaining to the behavior shaped by the sex, hormones and psychology to define the personality of a human being in correlation with other animals.
Several developmental stages are marked with drastic changes in behavior. This is because of external forces of interaction, sex and psychosocial factors that make up the environment of growth. Studies from theories of personality show shift in the trend of behavior from an irrational mind to a rational one. However, the studies are too general in terms of human growth, falling short of depiction of bad character traits and their origin. A common believe is that people acquire characteristics from genes passed on from generation to generation, although physical characteristics like behavior depend on the environment, the sex and the psychological perspective. Sex is a factor underpinning behavior in that different sexes have different hormonal secretions that influence their way of life. I think that more research is essential in defining the disparity of behavior between individuals in order to come up with findings that can help define other important characteristics like how one remembers and learns new things, how people are motivated, for instance in career choice and how people select company whenever they are in a foreign environment. Not all of these happen naturally. There must be some kind of factors aiding these observations.
In the assessment of sex as a determinant factor of biological behavior, the research focused on a group of children of different ages. This included ten 1-year old with five males and five females, ten 3-year old with seven boys and three girls and five boys and five girls 12-month old. The selection was random without any basics on the background of the children during a specified two weeks analysis from each age group. The selected groups were taken for exhibition and choice between ten wall human portraits, five having pictures of masculine men while five had five beautiful women. The children were to view the pictures and their attractiveness to the monitored over some period was studied. Each child was to view the pictures for five minutes in the room alone for keen observation. The picture that destructed the child most was the favorite picture, although through assumption for efficient conclusion of results, each child had a three separate chance of viewing the pictures. There was consequent tabulation of results over a two weeks session for preferences then conclusions were determined from the attractiveness over age and sex.
Findings and Analysis
Four girls chosen aged five experienced an attraction from masculine pictures while five boys got the attention to feminine pictures. This shows that the rate of choice of feminine characteristics is inversely proportional to the sex at this age. Three boys and three girls at the age of one were closely attracted to the female pictures depicting a bias over choice of male pictures at this age group. Those below the age of one had attractions from almost all the pictures. This in the real sense explains the Oedipus complex that develops once one reaches the rational psychological stage.Want an expert to write a paper for you Talk to an operator now
This defines male attractiveness to male traits and female attractiveness to female traits. The age under one year falls short of choice since they do not have definite instincts within them to define a choice. This has a close relationship to the irrational stages in life, where there is low mind development level for self-recognition. However, as age advances, the psychological buffers generate into perceptions of distinction to give the human mind the characteristic behavior. This solely depends on the sex of the child. Psychologically, male have attractiveness to female traits while females have attractiveness to male traits. This research depicts the rational stages of development and the hormonal influence on the sexual disparity in the humans. As much as the children at the age below one year do not recognize the world around them. The influence of hormones is at the onset of rational age, where the child is able to recognize the world around them. They are also able to give sound judgment. This shows that hormone that define sex start influencing the child at later stages in life.
By clarification, the theories of personality attempt to give a rational relationship between physical and psychological development. They give a random assessment of human developmental stages, which I think does not distinguish individuals in terms of trait and sex. Although, naturally, every human being portends their own trait on my part, these theories are artificial and made up by the human mind. The theories are supported because they impart order to the universe, reducing instances of misunderstanding that could arise for explanation of accountability. However, they face abandonment when new concepts come in place. For instance, the interpretation from most of personality theories depends on the influence of nature, although nurture is the impetus for behavior. This is a more of a liberal ideology. This brings about a conflicting idea if the determiners of behavior should be the nature or nurture. In such a case, the Freudian theory accounts for development from the irrational mind to the rational mind without defining the source of criminal behavior.
From time immemorial, sex hormones take a cognitive role in explaining sex disparity in human beings and animals. Current study shows that females are better baby sitters than male especially at the young age, while they are not able to perform some kinds of work in comparison to their male counterparts. The hormones act as a system that shapes the role and functioning of the person. These roles turn out to be the attributes of a person, thus, defining the behavior. Existing behavioral endocrinology coupled with biological psychology show that sex hormones are essential in sex disparity, but I think that they lack theoretical information that could link the aid of hormones to gender parity in roles due to differences in sex. For instance, from the irrational age, male children like play things that correlate with their sex, while grownups take up roles that correlate with the gender. Also, children who have attained the rational age tend to like games associated with their gender, however, the opposite happens in the Oedipus complex.
I argue that the there is a need for more theorization of the function of biology in behavioral changes. In part, this could give the resultant explanation to some attributes like choice of friends and career, which happens across the hemisphere of life of human beings. Most of the already proven scientific researches give a perspective of behavioral changes within the social context, although this is a biological endeavor, which needs stipulation of feminist examination. This could provide a lead to the documentation of novel information on the changing roles in terms of behavior of the human being. In addition, the theoretical discussions fail to distinguish the role of biological practice in sex disparity. I tend to concur with most researchers of this valuable topic that it is difficult to create associations of the feminist characteristic in terms of biological studies. The sense of sex in individuals is easy if discussed using social studies then biological studies. However, real practical situations like the opposite sex attractions is more a psychological issue.
The psychological analysis of the human behavior is critical since it depicts the instincts created by the mind to affect some course of action. This develops within the rational stages in life. The general studies and research on the associations of psychology to behavior are inclined to good behavior. However, there is limited evidence of the source of bad behavior. For instance, the psychoanalytic theory tends to associate the way human beings behave to irrational or rational perspectives. I am convinced that the characteristics of mature people who act in a childish manner are still at the irrational stage; however, such people do not fit into the age limit studied by Freud. This leaves a gap for contemplation and judgment over the position of such minds. I also tend to think that there is a delay in secretion of maturity hormones in some human beings, which lead to delayed self-actualization. For example, some people have prolonged adolescence stages. This is due to delayed maturity hormones responsible for the transition.
In fact, if psychology affects the way that people behave, then there is a limited foundation for those who are insane. I am of the conviction that the psychology of such human beings is neither rational nor irrational. The communication between the neurons within the psychology of these minds has abnormities. They behave as neither children nor adults. For this case, I recommend study into their plight in order to clarify the position underlying their lifestyle and their behavior.
Critically, there is evidence of biological involvement in antisocial behavior, depending on the nature of the population. Such behavior falls into a victim of correctional facilities to avert the situation. Such manipulated behavior is a physical anomaly resulting from physical influences. There are also some incidences when such behavior is biological. For instance, forensic disorders might lead to delayed onset of characteristics that define the social well being of a person. In addition, minor malformations might lead one to be a social misfit.
The psychological disorders like attention deficiency, hyperactivity deficiency might also define the character and behavior in children. Study shows that most ADHD diagnosed children have a poor neurological coordination, which deters their attention and influence concentration and participation. In addition, this psychological arena requires research for the biological explanation of such behavior. For instance, when a child squirms, gets distracted often by any external stimuli, then there is a biological mishap. However, I agree with the Freudian ideology that these distractions do not depend on the rational or irrational stages in life. This implies that whether the child is at the rational or the irrational stage, they might fall victim of these psychological disorder.
Biological variables are in constant interactions in collaboration with psychological factors. My personal assessment shows that most studies have given very little about the interrelationships among biological contributions to the aspect of behavior. They also give premature foundations in drawing biological study to behavior. This study is responsive to the aspect of physical, psychological and sexual study.
Researchers should be able to handle and manipulate explanations for infamous yet valuable aspects of behavior like the antisocial behavior. I am of the suggestion that prediction of behavior should be in terms of known samples, which have no definite results. This would act as shift from the conventional variables like cause and effect. Perhaps such behavioral anomalies could find lasting solutions from evaluation of biological and social factors as determinants of behavior.
The application of hormones to curb erroneous behavior is underway. For instance, there are ant androgen agents that suppress sex drive for sexual offenders. Research shows that this mode of control of behavior is so far successful. However, this mode of behavioral control is only as effective as the consistent injections. It patents non-conformity to the norm once the patient ceases to use the ant androgen injections. The hormone also weakens the natural biological functioning, and secretion of this erotic hormone. This could lead to immunity of the system due to dependence. According to my view, the research in controlling the rate of sexual crime through this method is essentially biological, although it needs a precaution to lessen effects of immunity. In addition, after biological treatment, there are not enough guarantees that the victim will conform to the norm. Instinctively, if behavior is a product of both the social and biological interactions, then the medical treatments are a detriment to the factors responsible for a behavior. This mode of induced behavior undermines the importance of biological and social influences on behavior.
Coordination of neurons is also essential for defining the character and influencing the way people behave. The study of neurological indicators to behavior has good documentation with some researchers showing that the responses to the environment are perceptions but not inducements. However, there is little biological association between dreams and psychopathology. For instance, those under the influence of strong depressants like cocaine have high rates of impulsivity. The studies do not directly correlate the biological implications of how such people behave in the manner they act. Moreover, the influence of depressants in psychopathology links brain disorders with a depressed system without biological implications of such relationships. I am of the view that studies of irrational and rational stages of life stipulate the state of belonging to the depressant users. This could give lead to understanding of the behavior of the victims of these induced or artificial hallucinations.
Moreover, there are concrete foundations for behavioral disorders in the form of phenotype, which links genes to the behavior. For instance, the blueprint research associates traits on the inherited characteristics. However, there are mutations in the genetic system, which might be the source of change to a behavior. These forces might lead to influence of the nervous system, which might alter the psychological perception. This is rather a developmental change, which is essentially biological. In my view, the source of mutations and their impact on behavioral changes is a source of argument in terms of research in order to reduce controversy to the personality theory, since it is a deviation from the normal changes in the life cycles studied in the theories.
In conclusion, the biological studies to implicate behavioral changes is a tool for research that could help alleviate the controversy generated along the stages of life that work in the opposite direction to the stipulated theories of personality. Sex, psychology and hormones as the biological indicators of behavioral changes influence the behavioral implications. For instance, the Oedipus circle shows a close relationship of attractiveness to opposite sex. This is clear when boys tend to confine in their mother, while girls tend to be fond of their fathers. In addition, hormonal secretions influence the behavior in children, in that, males take up roles different from the females. Consequently, the psychological perceptions influence the way people act and think. The product of the thoughts of human beings give them character.
Most of the personality theories give information of study to the changes in trend from an irrational mind to the rational one. However, few give the biological implications of such behavior. I also agree that the studies do not give a clear explanation to deviation from the norm. For instance, there is not enough information leading to bad behavior. This is a cause for thought as critics of the personality theories. There is lack of biological association in terms of attributes leading to the theories of psychological development. This research has given a stipulation of the association between the ages, sex, psychology although it falls short of psychological implications. However, these psychological implications in children, whose psychology is not fully developed, fall short of distinctive choices when it comes to options. However, it is true that opposite sexual interactions depict the life of a child at the onset of rational stages of the mind. This is due to generation of hormones responsible for definition of sex. In addition, roles change with these secretions. For instance, the girl child takes up roles of the mother while the boy child takes up the roles of a mother. Therefore, I recommend such biological aspects to be included into the theories of personality in order to give explanation to deviation from the norm if any. This could reduce confusion to the normal trend, which has already had successful research.