Advertisement

Psychiatric Quarterly

, Volume 73, Issue 1, pp 71–82 | Cite as

Twin Studies in Psychiatry and Psychology: Science or Pseudoscience?

  • Jay Joseph
Article

Abstract

Twin studies are frequently cited in support of the influence of genetic factors for a wide range of psychiatric conditions and psychological trait differences. The most common method, known as the classical twin method, compares the concordance rates or correlations of reared-together identical (MZ) vs. reared-together same-sex fraternal (DZ) twins. However, drawing genetic inferences from MZ–DZ comparisons is problematic due to methodological problems and questionable assumptions. It is argued that the main theoretical assumption of the twin method—known as the “equal environment assumption”—is not tenable. The twin method is therefore of doubtful value as an indicator of genetic influences. Studies of reared-apart twins are discussed, and it is noted that these studies are also vulnerable to methodological problems and environmental confounds. It is concluded that there is little reason to believe that twin studies provide evidence in favor of genetic influences on psychiatric disorders and human behavioral differences.

twins twin method genetics psychiatry psychiatric genetics schizophrenia 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

REFERENCES

  1. 1.
    Myerson A: The Inheritance of Mental Diseases. Baltimore, Williams & Wilkins, 1925.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Kallmann F: The Genetics of Schizophrenia: A Study of Heredity and Reproduction in the Families of 1,087 Schizophrenics. New York, J. J. Augustin, 1938.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Faraone S, Tsuang, M: Methods in psychiatric genetics. In: Tsuang M, Tohen M, Zahner G, eds. Textbook in Psychiatric Epidemiology. New York: Wiley-Liss, 1995, pp. 81-134.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Galton F: The history of twins as a criterion of the relative powers of nature and nurture. Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 5:391-406, 1875.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Siemens H: Die Zwillingspathologie [Twin Pathology]. Berlin, Springer Verlag, 1924.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Jackson D: A critique of the literature on the genetics of schizophrenia. In: Jackson D, ed. The Etiology of Schizophrenia. New York, Basic Books, 1960, pp. 37-87.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Joseph J: Don Jackson's “A critique of the literature on the genetics of schizophrenia”-A reappraisal after 40 years. Genetic, Social, and General Psychology Monographs 127:27-57, 2001.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Joseph J: Not in their genes: A critical view of the genetics of attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder. Developmental Review 20:539-567, 2000.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bouchard T: Genetic and environmental influences on adult personality: Evaluating the evidence. In: Hettema J, Deary I, eds. Basic Issues in Personality. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1993, pp. 15-44.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gottesman I, Shields J: Schizophrenia and Genetics: A Twin Study Vantage Point. New York, Academic Press, 1972.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kendler K, Neale M, Kessler R, et al: Parental treatment and the equal environment assumption in twin studies of psychiatric illness. Psychological Medicine 24:579-590, 1994.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Morris-Yates A, Andrews G, Howie P, Henderson S: Twins: A test of the equal environments assumption. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 81:322-326, 1990.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rose R: Twin studies and psychosocial epidemiology. In: Tsuang M, Kendler K, Lyons M, eds. Genetic Issues in Psychosocial Epidemiology. New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press, 1991, pp. 12-32.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Scarr S: Environmental bias in twin studies. Eugenics Quarterly 15:34-40, 1968.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Scarr S, Carter-Saltzman L: Twin method: Defense of a critical assumption. Behavior Genetics 9:527-542, 1979.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kringlen E: Heredity and Environment in the Functional Psychoses: An Epidemiological-Clinical Study. Oslo, Universitetsforlaget, 1967.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Rosanoff A, Handy L, Plesset I, Brush S: The etiology of so-called schizophrenia psychoses. American Journal of Psychiatry 91:247-286, 1934.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Carey G, DiLalla D: Personality and psychopathology: Genetic perspectives. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 103:32-43, 1994.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Lyons M, Kendler K, Provet A, Tsuang M: The genetics of schizophrenia, In: Tsuang M, Kendler K, Lyons M, eds. Genetic Issues in Psychosocial Epidemiology. New Brunswick, NJ, Rutgers University Press, 1991, pp. 19-52.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kendler K: Overview: A current perspective on twin studies of schizophrenia. American Journal of Psychiatry 140:1413-1425, 1983.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Lytton H: Do parents create, or respond to, differences in twins? Developmental Psychology 13:456-459, 1977.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kendler K: The genetics of schizophrenia: A current perspective. In: Meltzer H, ed. Psychopharmacology: The Third Generation of Progress. New York, Raven Press, 1987, pp. 705-713.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Joseph J: The equal environment assumption of the classical twin method: A critical analysis. Journal of Mind and Behavior 19:325-358, 1998.Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Pam A, Kemker S, Ross C, Golden R: The “equal environment assumption” in MZ-DZ comparisons: An untenable premise of psychiatric genetics? Acta Geneticae Medicae et Gemellologiae 45:349-360, 1996.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Joseph J: The genetic theory of schizophrenia: A critical overview. Ethical Human Sciences and Services 1:119-145, 1999.Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Harris J: The Nurture Assumption: Why Children Turn Out the Way They Do. New York, The Free Press, 1998.Google Scholar
  27. 27.
    Segal N: Entwined Lives: Twins and What They Tell Us About Human Behavior. New York, Dutton, 1999.Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    Wright L: Twins: And What They Tell Us About Who We Are. New York, John Wiley & Sons, 1997.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    Wright W: Born That Way. New York, Alfred A. Knopf, 1998.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hearnshaw L: Cyril Burt: Psychologist. Ithaca, NY, Cornell University Press, 1979.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Bouchard T, Lykken D, McGue M, et al: Sources of human psychological differences: The Minnesota study of twins reared apart. Science 250:223-228, 1990.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Kamin L: The Science and Politics of IQ: Potomac, MD, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 1974.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    Farber S: Identical Twins Reared Apart: A Reanalysis. New York, Basic Books, 1981.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Dusek V: Bewitching science. Science for the People 19:19-22, 1987.Google Scholar
  35. 35.
    McGue M, Bouchard T: Adjustment of twin data for the effects of age and sex. Behavior Genetics 14:325-343, 1984.Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    Joseph J: Separated twins and the genetics of personality differences: A critique. American Journal of Psychology 114:1-30, 2001.Google Scholar
  37. 37.
    Rose R: Separated twins: Data and their limits. Science 215:959-960, 1982.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Human Sciences Press, Inc. 2002

Authors and Affiliations

  • Jay Joseph
    • 1
  1. 1.La Familia Counseling ServiceHayward

Personalised recommendations