Behavior Genetics

, Volume 23, Issue 1, pp 21–27 | Cite as

A test of the equal-environment assumption in twin studies of psychiatric illness

  • Kenneth S. Kendler
  • Michael C. Neale
  • Ronald C. Kessler
  • Andrew C. Heath
  • Lindon J. Eaves
Article

Abstract

The traditional twin method is predicated on the equal-environment assumption (EEA)—that monozygotic (MZ) and dizygotic (DZ) twins are equally correlated in their exposure to environmental events of etiologic importance for the trait under study. In 1968, Scarr proposed a test of the EEA which examines the impact of phenotypic similarity in twins of perceived versus true zygosity. We apply this test for the EEA to five common psychiatric disorders (major depression, generalized anxiety disorder, phobia, bulimia, and alcoholism), as assessed by personal interview, in 1030 female-female twin pairs from the Virginia Twin Registry with known zygosity. We use a newly developed model-fitting approach which treats perceived zygosity as a form of specified familial environment. In 158 of the 1030 pairs (15.3%), one or both twins disagreed with the project-assigned zygosity. Model fitting provided no evidence for a significant influence of perceived zygosity on twin resemblance for any of the five disorders. Although limited in power, these results support the validity of the EEA in twin studies of psychiatric disorders.

Key Words

Twin studies equal-environment assumption psychiatric disorders depression alcoholism anxiety disorders 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Akaike, H. (1987). Factor analysis and AIC.Psychometrika 52:317–332.Google Scholar
  2. American Psychiatric Association (1980).Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 3rd ed., American Psychiatric Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  3. American Psychiatric Association (1987).Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, rev. 3rd ed., American Psychiatric Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
  4. Clifford, C. A., Hopper, J. L., Fulker, D., and Murray, R. M. (1984). A genetic and environmental analysis of a twin family study of alcohol use, anxiety, and depression.Genet. Epidemiol. 1:63–79.Google Scholar
  5. Goodman, R., and Stevenson, J. (1989). A twin study of hyperactivity. II. The aetiological role of genes, family relationships and perinatal adversity.J. Child. Psychol. Psychiat. 30:691–709.Google Scholar
  6. Heath, A. C., Jardine, R., and Martin, N. G. (1989). Interactive effects of genotype and social environment on alcohol consumption in female twins.J. Stud. Alcohol. 60:38–48.Google Scholar
  7. Kaprio, J., Koskenvuo, M., and Rose, R. J. (1990). Change in cohabitation and intrapair similarity of monozygotic (MZ) cotwins for alcohol use, extraversion, and neuroticism.Behav. Genet. 20:265–276.Google Scholar
  8. Kendler, K. S. (1983). Overview: A current perspective on twin studies of schizophrenia.Am. J. Psychiat. 140:1413–1425.Google Scholar
  9. Kendler, K. S., Heath, A. C., Martin, N. G., and Eaves, L. J. (1986). Symptoms of anxiety and depression in a volunteer twin population: The etiologic role of genetic and environmental factors.Arch. Gen. Psychiat. 43:213–221.Google Scholar
  10. Kendler, K. S., MacLean, C. J., Neale, M. C., Kessler, R. C., Heath, A. C., and Eaves, L. J. (1991). The genetic epidemiology of bulimia nervosa.Am. J. Psychiat. 148:1627–1637.Google Scholar
  11. Kendler, K. S., Neale, M. C., Kessler, R. C., Heath, A. C., and Eaves, L. J. (1992a). The genetic epidemiology of phobias in women: the inter-relationship of agoraphobia, social phobia, situational phobia and simple phobia.Arch. Gen. Psychiat. 49:273–281.Google Scholar
  12. Kendler, K. S., Neale, M. C., Kessler, R. C., Heath, A. C., and Eaves, L. J. (1992b). Generalized anxiety disorder in women: a population based twin study.Arch. Gen. Psychiat. 49:267–272.Google Scholar
  13. Kendler, K. S., Neale, M. C., Kessler, R. C., Heath, A. C., and Eaves, L. J. (1992c). A population based twin study of major depression in women: The impact of varying definitions of illness.Arch. Gen. Psychiat. 49:257–266.Google Scholar
  14. Kendler, K. S., Heath, A. C., Neale, M. C., Kessler, R. C., and Eaves, L. J. (1992d). A population-based twin study of alcoholism in women.JAMA 268:1877–1882.Google Scholar
  15. Loehlin, J. C., and Nichols, R. C. (1976).Heredity, Environment and Personality: A Study of 850 Sets of Twins, University of Texas Press, Austin.Google Scholar
  16. Lykken, D. T., McGue, M., Bouchard, T. J., and Tellegen, A. (1990). Does contact lead to similarity or similarity to contact?Behav. Genet. 20:547–561.Google Scholar
  17. Lytton, H. (1977). Do parents create, or respond to, differences in twins?Dev. Psychol. 13:456–459.Google Scholar
  18. Martin, N. G., Eaves, L. J., Heath, A. C., Jardine, R., Feingold, L., and Eysenck, H. J. (1986). Transmission of social attitudes.Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 83:4364–4368.Google Scholar
  19. Matheny, A. P., Jr. (1979). Appraisal of parental bias in twin studies: Ascribed zygosity and IQ differences in twins.Acta Genet. Med. Gemmellol. 28:155–160.Google Scholar
  20. Matheny, A. P., Jr., Wilson, R. S., and Dolan, A. B. (1976). Relations between twins' similarity of appearance and behavioral similarity: Testing an assumption.Behav. Genet. 6:343–351.Google Scholar
  21. Morris-Yates, A., Andrews, G., Howie, P., and Henderson, S. (1990). Twins: A test of the equal environments assumption.Acta Psychiat. Scand. 81:322–326.Google Scholar
  22. Munsinger, J., and Douglass, A., II (1976). The syntactic abilities of identical twins, fraternal twins, and their siblings.Child Dev. 47:40–50.Google Scholar
  23. Neale, M. C. (1991).Statistical Modelling with Mx, Department of Human Genetics, Medical College of Virginia, Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond.Google Scholar
  24. Plomin, R., Willerman, L., and Loehlin, J. C. (1976). Resemblance in appearance and the equal environments assumption in twin studies of personality traits.Behav. Genet. 6:43–52.Google Scholar
  25. Robins, L. N., and Helzer, J. E. (1985).Diagnostic Interview Schedule (DIS): Version III-A, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO.Google Scholar
  26. Rose, R. J., Kaprio, J., Williams, C. J., Viken, R., and Obremski, K. (1990). Social contact and sibling similarity: facts, issues, and red herrings.Behav. Genet. 20:763–778.Google Scholar
  27. Scarr, S. (1968). Environmental bias in twin studies.Eugen. Q. 15:34–40.Google Scholar
  28. Scarr, S., and Carter-Saltzman, L. (1979). Twin method: Defense of a critical assumption.Behav. Genet. 9:527–542.Google Scholar
  29. Spence, J. E., Corey, L. A., Nance, W. E., Marazita, M. L., Kendler, K. S., and Schieken, R. M. (1988). Molecular analysis of twin zygosity using VNTR DNA probes.Am. J. Hum. Genet. 43(3):A159.Google Scholar
  30. Spitzer, R. L., Williams, J. B., and Gibson, M. (1987).Structured Clinical Interview for DSM-III-R, Biometrics Research Department, New York State Psychiatric Institute, New York.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Publishing Corporation 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kenneth S. Kendler
    • 1
    • 2
  • Michael C. Neale
    • 2
  • Ronald C. Kessler
    • 3
  • Andrew C. Heath
    • 4
  • Lindon J. Eaves
    • 1
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Psychiatry, Medical College of Virginia/Virginia Commonwealth UniversityMCV StationRichmond
  2. 2.Department of Human GeneticsMedical College of Virginia/Virginia Commonwealth UniversityRichmond
  3. 3.Institute for Social ResearchUniversity of MichiganAnn Arbor
  4. 4.Department of PsychiatryWashington University School of MedicineSt. Louis

Personalised recommendations