Computer scientists are better equipped than biologists and physiologists to develop software that emulates human behavior. This is because individual human behavior has very little correlation to biology; it arises from social interactions and cultural influences. Any biologically-based attempt to construct behavior emulation software will fail dramatically. Only the finest programmers would have a chance at capturing the random patterns of human behavior in a mathematical formula.
I think computer engineers/ scientists would be more likely to design a system based on how people really are. They would design the system to perform and interact the way they see the world and interact within it, which would probably be more natural and human-like. I think if you allowed biologists/ physiologists or any other -ists whose primary role is to study and define how beings work, you will very likely get a system designed to reflect what "studies have shown", rather than what the reality is.
I personally think that computer engineers and scientists are better equipped to design computer systems that emulate human behavior. I personally think that with computer engineers are better equipped to design computer systems because it goes in dept about the computer and scientists are better equipped because it is looking at how the computer systems came about.
I think that the computer engineers and scientists would be better equipped to make these types of programs, simply because they know how to program computers better, so they will know how to make a computer with all of the programs needed to make it simulate a humans behavior patterns.
I believe that biologists are better equipped to design computer systems that emulate human behavior better than computer engineers. This is because biologists better understand how the human brain works more that computer engineers and scientists. Since it is extremely difficult to emulate human behavior, it would be a great challenge for even biologists to attempt this.