Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Behavior genetics has demonstrated that genetic variance is an important component of variation for all behavioral outcomes, but variation among families is not. These results have led some critics of behavior genetics to conclude that heritability is so ubiquitous as to have few consequences for scientific understanding of development, while some behavior genetic partisans have concluded that family environment is not an important cause of developmental outcomes. Both views are incorrect. Genotype is in fact a more systematic source of variability than environment, but for reasons that are methodological rather than substantive. Development is fundamentally nonlinear, interactive, and difficult to control experimentally. Twin studies offer a useful methodological shortcut, but do not show that genes are more fundamental than environments.

Keywords

genes environment development behavior genetics

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Goldsmith

(1993). Nature-nurture issues in the behavioral genetic context: Overcoming barriers to communication. In Plomin

McClearn

(Eds.), Nature, nurture and psychology (pp. 325–339. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.

Gottlieb

(1991). Experiential canalization of behavioral development: Theory. Developmental Psychology, 27, 4–13.

Gottlieb

(1992). Individual development and evolution. New York: Oxford University Press.

Gottlieb

(1995). Some conceptual deficiencies in “developmental” behavior genetics. Human Development, 38, 131–141.

Harris

J.R.

(1998). The nurture assumption: Why children turn out the way they do. New York: Free Press.

Lewontin

R.C.

(1974). The analysis of variance and the analysis of causes. American Journal of Human Genetics, 26, 400–411.

Meehl

P.E.

(1978). Theoretical risks and tabular asterisks: Sir Karl, Sir Ronald, and the slow progress of soft psychology. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 46, 806–834.

Plomin

Daniels

(1987). Why are children in the same family so different from one another? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 10, 1–60.

Rowe

D.C.

(1994). The limits of family influence: Genes, experience, and behavior. New York: Guilford Press.

10.

Scarr

(1992). Developmental theories for the 1990s: Development and individual differences. Child Development, 63, 1–19.

11.

Turkheimer

(1998). Heritability and biological explanation. Psychological Review, 105, 782–791.

12.

Turkheimer

Goldsmith

H.H.

Gottesman

I.I.

(1995). Commentary. Human Development, 38, 142–153.

13.

Turkheimer

Gottesman

I.I.

(1991). Is H² = 0 a null hypothesis anymore? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14, 410–411.

14.

Turkheimer

Gottesman

I.I.

(1996). Simulating the dynamics of genes and environment in development. Development and Psychopathology, 8, 667–677.

15.

Turkheimer

Waldron

M.C.

(2000). Nonshared environment: A theoretical, methodological, and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 78–108.

Three Laws of Behavior Genetics and What They Mean

Abstract

Keywords

Get full access to this article

References