Skip to main content

Genome Wide Association Studies of Behavior are Social Science

Part of the Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science book series (BSPS,volume 282)

Abstract

A recent series of papers in Nature Genetics described several combined Genome Wide Association Studies (GWAS) of height. Although height is a highly heritable trait that can be measured with near-perfect reliability, and the studies employed the latest SNP technology in massive samples numbering in the tens of thousands, only a handful of variants related to height were identified. The SNPs that were shown to be related to height collectively accounted for under 5% of the variation. The reasons for this surprising result are explored, focusing on the analogy between GWAS and the long-standing search for environmental causes of behavior, which I call EWAS, for Environment Wide Association Study. The problems of non-experimental causal inference faced by GWAS researchers were confronted long ago by mainstream social science, and were never fully overcome; they almost certainly cannot be fully overcome. Likewise, the statistical and methodological procedures that are employed in the genome project to control for multiple statistical tests and population stratification have been used in social science for decades. Understanding their successes and failures in that domain helps frame a reasonable set of expectations for the genomics of complex human characteristics.

Keywords

  • Propensity Score
  • Genome Wide Association Study
  • Delinquent Behavior
  • Population Stratification
  • Causal Process

These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    In which the required significance level, usually p<.05, is divided by the total number of tests to be conducted in the experiment.

  2. 2.

    The greatest proponent of such ideas was the great theoretical psychologist Paul Meehl. The interested reader is directed to his many papers on the subject, most especially, Meehl, 1978, which should be required reading for GWAS researchers.

  3. 3.

     A latent variable is a hypothetical process that cannot be observed directly, but which serves to explain relationships that can be observed among actual measurements. If one observes that many aspects of deprived environments—crime, poor schools, inadequate nutrition, unstimulating surroundings—tend to co-occur, the latent variable poverty can be invoked to explain why. The relevant statistical procedure is known as factor analysis. See MacCorquodale and Meehl (1948), or for an accessible statistical treatment, Loehlin (1992).

  4. 4.

    As was the case for within-family studies of the environment, however, the existence of within sib-pair genetic associations still do not prove a causal relationship between the gene and the outcome. There still might be uncontrolled confounds within pairs (one member might be sent to a Japanese school where chopstick use is encouraged, while the other goes to an American school). The within-pair association controls for a class of confounds that vary between sibling pairs, which is a big help but not a panacea for the shortcomings of non-experimental science.

References

  • Angrist, J. D., Imbens, G. W. & Rubin, D. B. (1996): ‘Identification of causal effects using instrumental variables’. Journal of the American Statistical Association 91: 444–455.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Bouchard, T. J., Lykken, D. T., McGue, M. Segal, N. L. & Tellegen, A. (1990): ‘Sources of human psychological differences: the Minnesota study of twins reared apart’. Science 250: 223–228.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Campbell, D. T., Stanley, J. C. & Gage, N. L. (1963): Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cardon, L. R. & Palmer, L. J. (2003): ‘Populations stratification and spurious allelic association’. The Lancet 361: 598–604.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Caspi, A., McClay, J., Moffitt, T. E., Mill, J., Martin, J., Craig, I. W., Taylor, A., Poulton, R. (2003): ‘Role of genotype in the cycle of violence in maltreated children’. Science 297: 851–854.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1994): ‘The world is round (p<.05)’. American Psychologist 49: 997–1003.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Dick, D.M., Johnson, J.K, Viken, R.J. & Rose, R.J. (2000): ‘Testing between-family Associations in within-family comparisons’. Psychological Science 11: 409–413.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Epstein, M. P., Allen, A. S., & Satten, G. A. (2007): ‘A simple and improved correction for population stratification in case-control studies’. The American Journal of Human Genetics 80: 921–930.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Fisher, R. A. (1918): ‘The correlation between relatives on the supposition of Mendelian inheritance’. Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh 52: 399–433.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gudbjartsson, D. F., Walters, D. F., Thorleifsson, H. S., Halldorsson, B. V., Zusmanovich, P. et al. (2008): ‘Many sequence variants affecting diversity of adult human height’. Nature Genetics 40: 609–615.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Hamer, D. & Sirota, L. (2000): ‘Beware the chopsticks gene’. Molecular Psychiatry 5: 11–13.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Harlow, L., Mulaik, S. A. & Steiger, J. H. (eds.) (1997): What If There Were No Significance Tests? Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hutchison, K. E., Stallings, M., McGeary, J. & Bryan, A. (2004): ‘Population stratification in the candidate gene study: Fatal threat or red herring?’ Psychological Bulletin 130: 66–79.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lawlor, D. A., Harbord, R. M., Sterne, J. A., Timpson, N. & Davey Smith, G. (2008): ‘Mendelian randomization: Using genes as instruments for making causal inferences in epidemiology’. Statistics in Medicine 27: 1133–1163.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Lettre, G., Jackson, A. U., Gieger, C., Schumacher, F. R., Berndt, S. I. et al. (2008): ‘Identification of ten loci associated with height highlights new biological pathways in human growth’. Nature Genetics 5: 584–591.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Loehlin, J. C. (1992): Latent Variable Models: An Introduction to Factor, Path, and Structural Analysis. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • MacCorquodale, K. & Meehl, P. E. (1948): ‘On a distinction between hypothetical constructs and intervening variables’. Psychological Review 55: 95–107.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Plaisance, K. S. (2006): Behavioral Genetics and the Environment: The Generation and Exportation of Scientific Claims, unpublished dissertation, University of Minnesota.

    Google Scholar 

  • Plomin, R. & Crabbe, J. (2000): ‘DNA’. Psychological Bulletin 126: 806–828.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Plomin, R. & Daniels, D. (1987): ‘Why are children in the same family so different from one another?’ Behavioral and Brain Sciences 10: 1–16.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Price, A.L., Patterson, N.J, Plenge, R.M., Weinblatt, M.E, Shadick, N.A. & Reich, D. (2006): ‘Principle components analysis corrects for stratification in genome-wide association studies’. Nature Genetics 38: 904–909.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Rodgers, J. L., Cleveland, H. H., van den Oord, E. & Rowe, D. C. (2000): ‘Resolving the debate over birth order, family size, and intelligence’. American Psychologist 55: 599–612.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenbaum, P. R, & Rubin, D. B. (1983): ‘The central role of the propensity score in observational studies for causal effects’. Biometrika 70: 41–55.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Rutter, M., Pickles, A., Murray, R,. & Eaves, L. (2001): ‘Testing hypotheses on specific environmental causal effects on behavior’. Psychological Bulletin 127: 291–324.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Schmidt, F. L. (1996): ‘Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for training of researchers’. Psychological Methods 1: 115–129.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Silventoinen et al. (2003): ‘Heritability of adult body height: A comparative study of twin cohorts in eight countries’. Twin Research and Human Genetics 6: 399–408.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Tabery, J. (2009): ‘Difference mechanisms: Explaining variation with mechanisms’. Biology & Philosophy 24: 645–664.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Turkheimer, E. (1998): ‘Heritability and biological explanation’. Psychological Review 105: 782–791.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Turkheimer, E. (2000): ‘Three laws of behavior genetics and what they mean’. Current Directions in Psychological Science 9: 160–164.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Turkheimer, E. (2004): ‘Spinach and ice cream: Why social science is so difficult’. In. L. DiLalla (ed.): Behavior Genetics Principles: Perspectives in Development, Personality, and Psychopathology. Washington, DC, US: American Psychological Association, pp. 161–189.

    Google Scholar 

  • Turkheimer, E. (2006): ‘Interaction and play’. PsycCRITIQUES 51: 43.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Turkheimer, E. & Waldron, M. C. (2000): ‘Nonshared environment: A theoretical, methodological and quantitative review’. Psychological Bulletin 126: 78–108.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Visscher, P. M. (2008): ‘Sizing up human height variation’. Nature Genetics 40: 489–490.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Weedon, M. N., Lango, H., Lindgren, C. M., Wallace, C., Evans, D. M. et al. (2008): ‘Genome-wide association analysis identifies 20 loci that influence adult height’. Nature Genetics 40: 575–583.

    CrossRef  Google Scholar 

  • Wimsatt, W. (1997): Transcripts from “modularity of animal form”. Proceedings of the evolvability of developmental mechanisms short course, http://celldynamics.org/evolvacourse/transcripts/BillWimsatt.html

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Eric Turkheimer .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

Copyright information

© 2012 Springer Science+Business Media B.V.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Turkheimer, E. (2012). Genome Wide Association Studies of Behavior are Social Science. In: Plaisance, K., Reydon, T. (eds) Philosophy of Behavioral Biology. Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol 282. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1951-4_3

Download citation