Advertisement

Behavior Genetics

, Volume 37, Issue 2, pp 273–283 | Cite as

Genotype by Environment Interaction in Adolescents’ Cognitive Aptitude

  • K. Paige Harden
  • Eric Turkheimer
  • John C. Loehlin
Original Paper
First Online:

Abstract

In a replication of Turkheimer, Haley, Waldron, D’Onofrio, Gottesman II (2003, Socioeconomic status modifies heritability of IQ in young children. Psychological Science, 14:623-628), we investigate genotype–environment (G × E) interaction in the cognitive aptitude of 839 twin pairs who completed the National Merit Scholastic Qualifying Test in 1962. Shared environmental influences were stronger for adolescents from poorer homes, while genetic influences were stronger for adolescents from more affluent homes. No significant differences were found between parental income and parental education interaction effects. Results suggest that environmental differences between middle- to upper-class families influence the expression of genetic potential for intelligence, as has previously been suggested by Bronfenbrenner and Ceci’s (1994, Nature-nurture reconceptualized in developmental perspective: a bioecological model Psychological Review, 101:568-586) bioecological model.

Keywords

Gene-environment interaction Intelligence Socioeconomic status Cognitive aptitude 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

References

  1. Brofenbrenner U., Ceci SJ (1994) Nature-nurture reconceptualized in developmental perspective: a bioecological model. Psychol Rev 101:568–586CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Button TMM, Scourfield J, Martin N, Purcell S., McGuffin P (2005) Family dysfunction interacts with genes in the causation of antisocial symptoms. Behav Genet 35:115–120PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Guo G, Stearns E (2002) The social influences on the realization of genetic potential for intellectual development. Social Forces 80:881–910CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Jensen AR (1998) The g factor: the science of mental ability. Preager,Westport, CTGoogle Scholar
  5. Johnson W, Krueger RF (2005) Higher perceived life control decreases genetic variance in physical health: evidence from a national twin study. J Pers Soc Psychol 88:165–173PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Loehlin JC, Nichols RC (1976) Heredity, environment, and personality: a study of 850 sets of twins. University of Texas Press, Austin, TXGoogle Scholar
  7. Martin NG, Jardine R, Eaves LJ (1984) Is there only one set of genes for different abilities? A reanalysis of the National Merit Scholarship Qualifying Test (NMSQT) data. Behav Genet 14:355–370PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Muthén LK, Muthén BO (1998–2004) Mplus user’s guide 3rd edn. Muthén & Muthén, Los Angeles, CAGoogle Scholar
  9. Nichols RC, Bilbro WC (1966) The diagnosis of twin zygosity. Acta Genetica et Statistica Medica 16:265–275PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. Purcell S (2002) Variance components models for gene-environment interaction in twin analysis. Twin Res 5:554–771PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Rowe DC, Jacobson KE, van den Oord E. (1999) Genetic and environmental influences on vocabulary IQ: parental education level as a moderator. Child Dev 70:1151–1162PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Rowe DC, Vesterdal WJ, Rodgers JL (1999) Herrnstein’s syllogism: genetic and shared environmental influences on IQ, education, and income. Intelligence 26:405–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Scarr S (1992) Developmental theories for the 1990s: development and individual differences. Child Dev 63:1–19PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Scarr S. (1981) Race, social class, and individual differences in IQ: new studies of old issues. Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJGoogle Scholar
  15. Shanahan MJ, Hofer SM (2005) Social context in gene-environment interactions: retrospect and prospect. J Gerentol: SERIES B 60B:65–76Google Scholar
  16. Turkheimer E, Haley A, Waldron M, D’Onofrio BM, Gottesman II (2003) Socioeconomic status modifies heritability of IQ in young children. Psychol Sci 14:623–628PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Turkheimer E., Gottesman II (1991) Individual differences and the canalization of human behavior. Dev Psychol 27:18–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census. (1960) General population characteristics. U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C.Google Scholar
  19. van den Oord E, Rowe DC (1997) An examination of genotype–environment interactions for academic achievement in an U.S. longitudinal survey. Intelligence 25:205–219CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2006

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. Paige Harden
    • 1
  • Eric Turkheimer
    • 1
  • John C. Loehlin
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyUniversity of VirginiaCharlottesvilleUSA
  2. 2.University of TexasAustinUSA

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options