Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
PSYC
210:
The
nature
&
nurture
of
T&P,
Part
1
AJ
Shackman
12
March
2015
Lesson
1
T&P
Reect
Both
Nature
(Genes)
and
Nurture
(Environment/Experience)
Twin,
adopDon
and
family
studies
have
convincingly
shown
that
each
of
the
FFM
personality
dimensions
is
heritable,
with
heritability
esDmates
ranging
between
33%
and
65%
de
Moor
et
al.
Mol
Psychiatry
2012;
see
also
Bouchard
&
Loehlin
Behav
Gen
2001;
E.g.,
~45%
of
the
variance
in
N
and
E
is
heritable
(Vinkhuyzen
et
al
Transl
Psychiatry
2012),
similar
to
Pilia
et
al
PLOS
Gen
2006
and
Turkheimer
et
al
Ann
Rev
Psychol
2014
A
bit
more
than
half
the
variaDon
in
T&P
is
NURTURE
Therefore,
trait-like
individual
dierences
in
T&P
are
not
biological
desDny!
Lesson
1
T&P
Reect
Both
Nature
(Genes)
and
Nurture
(Environment/Experience)
Twin,
adopDon
and
family
studies
have
convincingly
shown
that
each
of
the
FFM
personality
dimensions
is
heritable,
with
heritability
esDmates
ranging
between
33%
and
65%
de
Moor
et
al.
Mol
Psychiatry
2012;
see
also
Bouchard
&
Loehlin
Behav
Gen
2001;
E.g.,
~45%
of
the
variance
in
N
and
E
is
heritable
(Vinkhuyzen
et
al
Transl
Psychiatry
2012),
similar
to
Pilia
et
al
PLOS
Gen
2006
and
Turkheimer
et
al
Ann
Rev
Psychol
2014
A
bit
more
than
half
the
variaDon
in
T&P
is
NURTURE
Therefore,
trait-like
individual
dierences
in
T&P
are
not
biological
desDny!
Lesson
1
T&P
Reect
Both
Nature
(Genes)
and
Nurture
(Environment/Experience)
Twin,
adopDon
and
family
studies
have
convincingly
shown
that
each
of
the
FFM
personality
dimensions
is
heritable,
with
heritability
esDmates
ranging
between
33%
and
65%
de
Moor
et
al.
Mol
Psychiatry
2012;
see
also
Bouchard
&
Loehlin
Behav
Gen
2001;
E.g.,
~45%
of
the
variance
in
N
and
E
is
heritable
(Vinkhuyzen
et
al
Transl
Psychiatry
2012),
similar
to
Pilia
et
al
PLOS
Gen
2006
and
Turkheimer
et
al
Ann
Rev
Psychol
2014
A
bit
more
than
half
the
variaDon
in
T&P
is
NURTURE
Therefore,
trait-like
individual
dierences
in
T&P
are
not
biological
desDny!
Larger Implica4on
Larger
Implica4on
Genes
(or
their
absence)
do
not
hard-wire
people
for
certain
behaviors.
There
is
no
gene
for
understanding
calculus
[or
extraversion
or
neuro7cism
or
self-control]
Specic
behaviors
are
[not
biologically]
hard-
wired.
M.I.T.
math
majors
arent
born
doing
.Its
not
just
genes
make
brain
make
behavior.
You
have
environment
and
experience
too.
Dobbs
NY
Times
2007;
Miller
PPS
2010
Larger
Implica4on
Genes
(or
their
absence)
do
not
hard-wire
people
for
certain
behaviors.
There
is
no
gene
for
understanding
calculus
[or
extraversion
or
neuro7cism
or
self-control]
Specic
behaviors
are
[not
biologically]
hard-
wired.
M.I.T.
math
majors
arent
born
doing
calculus.Its
not
just
genes
make
brain
make
behavior.
You
have
environment
and
experience
too.
Dobbs
NY
Times
2007;
Miller
PPS
2010
Lesson
2
Genes
(nature)
can
inuence
environments
(nurture)
Students What exactly is Dracos environment ? What are some likely key elements?
Lesson
2
Genes
(nature)
can
inuence
environments
(nurture)
Lesson
2
Genes
(nature)
can
inuence
environments
(nurture)
Lesson
2
Genes
(nature)
can
inuence
environments
(nurture)
Lesson
2
Genes
(nature)
can
inuence
environments
(nurture)
Many
measures
of
the
environment
are
geneDcally
determined
(heritable)
Same
genes
can
cause
both
environment
and
personality
(or
personality
via
environment)
e.g.,
Genes
for
NE/N
child-rearing/nurture,
peers
Lesson
2
Genes
(nature)
can
inuence
environments
(nurture)
Many
measures
of
the
environment
are
geneDcally
determined
(heritable)
Same
genes
can
cause
both
environment
and
personality
(or
personality
via
environment)
e.g.,
Genes
for
NE/N
child-rearing/nurture,
peers
e.g.,
Genes
for
NE/N
life-events,
such
as
divorce
T&P
accounts
for
>30%
of
the
heritable
inuence
on
divorce
risk
Stress
of
disintegraDng
relaDons
/
divorce
can
reinforce
N/NE
Lesson
3
Remember,
when
a
measure
of
the
environment
and
T&P
are
correlated,
2
causal
pathways
are
possible
T&P
Environment
e.g.,
childs
T&P
evokes
a
style
of
nurturing
-or-
Environment
T&P
e.g.,
chronic
stress
increases
N/NE
Lesson
3
Remember,
when
a
measure
of
the
environment
and
T&P
are
correlated,
2
causal
pathways
are
possible
T&P
Environment
e.g.,
childs
T&P
evokes
a
style
of
nurturing
-or-
Environment
T&P
e.g.,
chronic
stress
increases
N/NE
Lesson
3
Remember,
when
a
measure
of
the
environment
and
T&P
are
correlated,
2
causal
pathways
are
possible
T&P
Environment
e.g.,
childs
T&P
evokes
a
style
of
nurturing
-or-
Environment
T&P
e.g.,
chronic
stress
increases
N/NE
Lesson
4
Nature
is
not
staDc
Lesson
4
Nature
is
not
staDc
GeneDc
inuences
(heritability)
can
change
over
development
Individuals
gain
increased
instrumental
control
over
the
environment
(e.g.,
rouDne,
occupaDon,
spouse)
Over
Dme,
there
is
more
opportunity
for
biases
and
disposiDons
(T&P)
to
inuence;
cumulaDve
impact
Lesson
4
Nature
is
not
staDc
GeneDc
inuences
(heritability)
can
change
over
development
Individuals
gain
increased
instrumental
control
over
the
environment
(e.g.,
rouDne,
occupaDon,
spouse)
Over
Dme,
there
is
more
opportunity
for
biases
and
disposiDons
(T&P)
to
inuence;
cumulaDve
impact
hops://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability
hops://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability
hops://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability
hops://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritability
H2
usually
ignores
G-E
correlaDons
H2
usually
ignores
G-E
correlaDons
H2
usually
ignores
G-E
correlaDons
H2
usually
ignores
G-E
correlaDons
H2
usually
ignores
G-E
correlaDons
(focusing
on
addiDve
MEs)
the
genotype
and
the
phenotype
are
correlated
e.g.,
high
IQ
parents
providing
enriched
environment
for
ospring;
caole
fed
in
accord
with
milk
producDon)
HH Goldsmith
Bohom
line:
Heritability
is
complex
and
e s D m a t e s
o P e n
e n t a i l
s i m p l i f y i n g
assumpDons
that
may
be
wrong
4 common misconcepDons
#1
Heritability
is
the
%
of
a
phenotype
that
is
passed
on
to
the
next
genera4on.
Wrong!
E.g.,
~40%
of
the
variaDon
in
T&P
is
passed
on
no!
Students
Why
is
this
wrong?
#1
Heritability
is
the
%
of
a
phenotype
that
is
passed
on
to
the
next
genera4on.
Wrong!
E.g.,
~40%
of
the
variaDon
in
T&P
is
passed
on
no!
Genes
are
passed
on,
not
phenotypes/traits
#2
40%
of
Alexs
T&P
is
inherited
(nature)
and
60%
is
environmental
(nurture).
Wrong!
h2
reects
the
proporDon
of
variaDon
between
individuals
(Alex
vs.
Jee
vs.
Hannah)
in
a
Students
Why
is
this
wrong?
populaDon
that
is
inuenced
by
geneDc
factors.
h2
describes
the
populaDon
variaDon,
not
individuals
(Alex)
within
that
populaDon
#2
40%
of
Alexs
T&P
is
inherited
(nature)
and
60%
is
environmental
(nurture).
Wrong!
h2
reects
the
proporDon
of
variaDon
between
individuals
(Alex
vs.
Jee
vs.
Hannah)
in
a
populaDon
that
is
inuenced
by
geneDc
factors.
h2
describes
the
populaDon
variaDon,
not
individuals
(Alex)
within
that
populaDon
#3
#3
Life
Example:
Real
E.g.,
80%
of
the
variaDon
in
height
is
heritable,
yet
people
around
the
world
have
grown
much
taller
in
the
face
of
A
70
percent
heritability
esDmate
is
prehy
wild,
said
Dr.
Krasnegor
(NIH).
improved
nutriDon
and
medical
care
He
said
that
if
it
was
true,
it
shouldn't
maher
too
much
what
you
do
or
where
you
go
to
school.
Everything
would
fall
into
place.
NY
Times,
12
October
1990
#3
#3
#3
#3
#3
#3
#3
But
we
have
the
choice
to
refrain
from
drinking,
to
not
smoke,
and
even
to
have
a
prophylaDc
mastectomy,
even
if
it
runs
in
our
family
X
Xx
x
X
x
#3
#3
4
common
misconcepDons
High
heritability
implies
gene4c
determina4on
or
des4ny.
Wrong!
80%
is
misleading:
e.g.,
for
adult
human
height
h2
=
0.8
Pop
SD
=~7
cm
4
common
misconcepDons
High
heritability
implies
gene4c
determina4on
or
des4ny.
Wrong!
80%
is
misleading:
e.g.,
for
adult
human
height
h2
=
0.8
Pop
SD
=~7
cm
4 common misconcepDons
#4
#4
#4
Heritability
is
informa4ve
about
the
nature,
origins,
or
plas4city
of
mean
dierences
across
groups
or
4me.
Wrong!
Example
1:
USA
vs
The
Netherlands
1850:
US
white
men
were
~9
cm
taller
than
Dutch
males.
USA!
USA!
USA!
2000:
150
yrs
later,
US
white
men
were
taller
than
ever
before
but
are
now
about
~5
cm
shorter
than
Dutch
men.
Go
Orange!
#4
Heritability
is
informa4ve
about
the
nature,
origins,
or
plas4city
of
mean
dierences
across
groups
or
4me.
Wrong!
Example
1:
USA
vs
The
Netherlands
1850:
US
white
men
were
~9
cm
taller
than
Dutch
males.
USA!
USA!
USA!
2000:
150
yrs
later,
US
white
men
were
taller
than
ever
before
but
are
now
about
~5
cm
shorter
than
Dutch
men.
Go
Orange!
#4
Heritability
is
informa4ve
about
the
nature,
origins,
or
plas4city
of
mean
dierences
across
groups
or
4me.
Wrong!
Example
1:
USA
vs
The
Netherlands
1850:
US
white
men
were
~9
cm
taller
than
Dutch
males.
USA!
USA!
USA!
2000:
150
yrs
later,
US
white
men
were
taller
than
ever
before
but
are
now
about
~5
cm
shorter
than
Dutch
men.
Go
Orange!
#4
Heritability
is
informa4ve
about
the
nature,
origins,
or
plas4city
of
mean
dierences
across
groups
or
4me.
Wrong!
Example
2:
N
vs.
S
Korea
1930:
Individuals
from
the
northern
and
southern
parts
of
the
Korean
peninsula
were
of
equal
height
2000:
Following
70
years
of
dictatorial
mis-rule,
men
in
N
Korea
are
now
about
6
shorter
than
their
geneDcally
similar
counterparts
in
S
Korea
#4
Heritability
is
informa4ve
about
the
nature,
origins,
or
plas4city
of
mean
dierences
across
groups
or
4me.
Wrong!
Example
2:
N
vs.
S
Korea
1930:
Individuals
from
the
northern
and
southern
parts
of
the
Korean
peninsula
were
of
equal
height
2000:
Following
70
years
of
dictatorial
mis-rule,
men
in
N
Korea
are
now
about
6
shorter
than
their
geneDcally
similar
counterparts
in
S
Korea
#4
Heritability
is
informa4ve
about
the
nature,
origins,
or
plas4city
of
mean
dierences
across
groups
or
4me.
Wrong!
Example
2:
N
vs.
S
Korea
1930:
Individuals
from
the
northern
and
southern
parts
of
the
Korean
peninsula
were
of
equal
height
2000:
Following
70
years
of
dictatorial
mis-rule,
men
in
N
Korea
are
now
about
6
shorter
than
their
geneDcally
idenDcal
relaDves
in
S
Korea
#4
Heritability
is
informa4ve
about
the
nature,
origins,
or
plas4city
of
mean
dierences
across
groups
or
4me.
Wrong!
These
examples
reect
dierences
in
the
environment
(stress,
nutriDon,
healthcare)
Take
home:
High
heritability
should
not
deter
the
development
of
interven7ons
and
tells
us
li]le
or
nothing
about
the
biological
origins
or
mutability
of
group
(e.g.,
race)
dierences
in
a
phenotype
- Things
that
relaDves
share
(genes,
diet,
peers,
SES,
toxin
exposure)
are
important
for
eDology
- Genes
in
aggregate
have
important
roles
in
eDology
- FTA
studies
are
correlaDonal;
no
insight
into
underlying
molecular
or
neural
mechanisms
- Kendler
notes
that
because
Dx
(and
T&P
traits)
are
arDcial
categories
that
do
not
carve
nature
at
the
joints
(cf.
endo
lecture),
showing
heritability
of
The
Disorder
does
not
imply
a
coherent
or
unied
underlying
biological
cause
- Things
that
relaDves
share
(genes,
diet,
peers,
SES,
toxin
exposure,
dictators)
are
important
for
eDology
- Genes
in
aggregate
have
important
roles
in
eDology
- FTA
studies
are
correlaDonal;
no
insight
into
underlying
molecular
or
neural
mechanisms
- Kendler
notes
that
because
Dx
(and
T&P
traits)
are
arDcial
categories
that
do
not
carve
nature
at
the
joints
(cf.
endo
lecture),
showing
heritability
of
The
Disorder
or
The
Trait
does
not
imply
a
single
coherent
or
unied
underlying
biological
cause
- Things
that
relaDves
share
(genes,
diet,
peers,
SES,
toxin
exposure,
dictators)
are
important
for
eDology
- Genes
in
aggregate
have
important
roles
in
eDology
- But
FTA
studies
are
correlaDonal;
no
insight
into
underlying
molecular
or
neural
mechanisms
- Kendler
notes
that
because
diagnoses
(like
T&P
traits)
are
arDcial
categories
that
do
not
carve
nature
at
the
joints,
simply
showing
heritability
of
The
Disorder
or
The
Trait
does
not
imply
a
single
coherent
or
unied
underlying
biological
cause
2.
Genes
are
passed
down,
not
phenotypes.
Heritability
refers
to
the
%
of
between-individual
variaDon
predictable
from
pedigree,
not
the
%
of
a
trait
within
an
individual
that
is
nature
vs.
nurture.
3.
4. Things
that
relaDves
share
(genes,
diet,
peers,
SES,
toxin
exposure)
are
important
for
eDology
of
T&P
as
well
as
Dx
5. Recent
GWAS
have
shown
some
success,
recapitulaDng
what
we
believed
based
on
FTA
studies
6. Genes
in
aggregate
have
important
roles
in
eDology,
but
the
underlying
biological
mechanisms
remain
unclear
(both
in
terms
of
specic
geneDc
polymorphisms
and
parDcular
neural
systems)
7. Kendlers
metaphors:
The
Broken
Glass,
and,
The
Jet
Mechanic.
Long-term
prospects
for
understanding
strongly
depend
on
the
nature
of
the
mapping
from
gene
to
brain
to
phenotype,
which
is
unknown.
8. Switching
from
heterogeneous,
trait-like
superfactors
and
Dxs
to
simpler
endophenotypes
may
prove
helpful.
2.
Genes
are
passed
down,
not
phenotypes.
Heritability
refers
to
the
%
of
between-individual
variaDon
predictable
from
pedigree,
not
the
%
of
a
trait
within
an
individual
that
is
nature
vs.
nurture.
3.
4. Things
that
relaDves
share
(genes,
diet,
peers,
SES,
toxin
exposure)
are
important
for
eDology
of
T&P
as
well
as
Dx
5. Recent
GWAS
have
shown
some
success,
recapitulaDng
what
we
believed
based
on
FTA
studies
6. Genes
in
aggregate
have
important
roles
in
eDology,
but
the
underlying
biological
mechanisms
remain
unclear
(both
in
terms
of
specic
geneDc
polymorphisms
and
parDcular
neural
systems)
7. Kendlers
metaphors:
The
Broken
Glass,
and,
The
Jet
Mechanic.
Long-term
prospects
for
understanding
strongly
depend
on
the
nature
of
the
mapping
from
gene
to
brain
to
phenotype,
which
is
unknown.
8. Switching
from
heterogeneous,
trait-like
superfactors
and
Dxs
to
simpler
endophenotypes
may
prove
helpful.
2.
Genes
are
passed
down,
not
phenotypes.
Heritability
refers
to
the
%
of
between-individual
variaDon
predictable
from
pedigree,
not
the
%
of
a
trait
within
an
individual
that
is
nature
vs.
nurture.
3.
4. Things
that
relaDves
share
(genes,
diet,
peers,
SES,
toxin
exposure)
are
important
for
eDology
of
T&P
as
well
as
Dx
5. Recent
GWAS
have
shown
some
success,
recapitulaDng
what
we
believed
based
on
FTA
studies
6. Genes
in
aggregate
have
important
roles
in
eDology,
but
the
underlying
biological
mechanisms
remain
unclear
(both
in
terms
of
specic
geneDc
polymorphisms
and
parDcular
neural
systems)
7. Kendlers
metaphors:
The
Broken
Glass,
and,
The
Jet
Mechanic.
Long-term
prospects
for
understanding
strongly
depend
on
the
nature
of
the
mapping
from
gene
to
brain
to
phenotype,
which
is
unknown.
8. Switching
from
heterogeneous,
trait-like
superfactors
and
Dxs
to
simpler
endophenotypes
may
prove
helpful.
2.
Genes
are
passed
down,
not
phenotypes.
Heritability
refers
to
the
%
of
between-individual
variaDon
predictable
from
pedigree,
not
the
%
of
a
trait
within
an
individual
that
is
nature
vs.
nurture.
3.
4. Things
that
relaDves
share
(genes,
diet,
peers,
SES,
toxin
exposure)
are
important
for
eDology
of
T&P
as
well
as
Dx
5. Recent
GWAS
have
shown
some
success,
recapitulaDng
what
we
believed
based
on
FTA
studies
6. Genes
in
aggregate
have
important
roles
in
eDology,
but
the
underlying
biological
mechanisms
remain
unclear
(both
in
terms
of
specic
geneDc
polymorphisms
and
parDcular
neural
systems)
7. Kendlers
metaphors:
The
Broken
Glass,
and,
The
Jet
Mechanic.
Long-term
prospects
for
understanding
strongly
depend
on
the
nature
of
the
mapping
from
gene
to
brain
to
phenotype,
which
is
unknown.
8. Switching
from
heterogeneous,
trait-like
superfactors
and
Dxs
to
simpler
endophenotypes
may
prove
helpful.
2.
Genes
are
passed
down,
not
phenotypes.
Heritability
refers
to
the
%
of
between-individual
variaDon
predictable
from
pedigree,
not
the
%
of
a
trait
within
an
individual
that
is
nature
vs.
nurture.
3.
4. Things
that
relaDves
share
(genes,
diet,
peers,
SES,
toxin
exposure)
are
important
for
eDology
of
T&P
as
well
as
Dx
5. Genes
in
aggregate
have
important
roles
in
eDology,
but
the
underlying
biological
mechanisms
remain
unclear
(both
in
terms
of
specic
geneDc
polymorphisms
and
parDcular
neural
systems)
6. Kendlers
metaphors:
The
Broken
Glass,
and,
The
Jet
Mechanic.
Long-term
prospects
for
understanding
strongly
depend
on
the
nature
of
the
mapping
from
gene
to
brain
to
phenotype,
which
is
unknown.
7. Switching
from
heterogeneous,
trait-like
superfactors
and
Dxs
to
simpler
endophenotypes
may
prove
helpful.
2.
Genes
are
passed
down,
not
phenotypes.
Heritability
refers
to
the
%
of
between-individual
variaDon
predictable
from
pedigree,
not
the
%
of
a
trait
within
an
individual
that
is
nature
vs.
nurture.
3.
4. Things
that
relaDves
share
(genes,
diet,
peers,
SES,
toxin
exposure)
are
important
for
eDology
of
T&P
as
well
as
Dx
5. Genes
in
aggregate
have
important
roles
in
eDology,
but
the
underlying
biological
mechanisms
remain
unclear
(both
in
terms
of
specic
geneDc
polymorphisms
and
parDcular
neural
systems)
6. Switching
from
heterogeneous,
trait-like
superfactors
and
Dxs
to
simpler
intermediate
phenotypes
may
prove
helpful.
X
X
X
X
X
X
Time
Permiqng
OpDonal
Review
QuesDons
Kagans model of BI
0%
n
um
be
r
o
s
a
w
Sh
o
s a
n
um
be
r
o
f
p
a
f
i
m
ra
l
po
...
le
..
0%
Sh
o
A. Shows
a
number
of
parallels
with
N/NE
and
Grays
BIS,
reinforcing
the
idea
that
childhood
temperament
and
adult
personality
are
closely
related
B. Shows
a
number
of
important
dierences
from
N/NE
and
Grays
BIS,
reinforcing
the
idea
that
childhood
temperament
and
adult
personality
are
disDnct
kinds
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
Ar
e
m
or
Ar
e
e
lik
m
el
or
y
e
Ar
lik
to
de
e
el
sh
ve
y
y
a
to
l..
d
M
nd
e
ay
ve
sh
r et
ice lo..
ow
.
Sh
nt
in
ow
ele
va
th
a
te
...
R
d
>
Sh
l
L
p
ev
ow
el
at
h
s..
te
ei
.
rn
gh
o
te
f
f
ne
..
d
am .
Al
yg
l
o
da
f
t
..
he
ab
ov
e
Which is true
0%
Al
l
of
t
he
ab
..
ov
e
0%
re
cu
s
a
id
s
k
h
of
D
r.
S
Bo
t
ica
h
is
an
1
8
m
.o
.
g
i
oy
a
6
y.
o.
b
h
is
nn
a
0%
rl
0%
Ha
A. Hannah
is
a
6
y.o.
boy
B. Micah
is
an
18
m.o.
girl
C. Both
of
Dr.
Ss
kids
are
cute
as
all
get
out
D. All
of
the
above
0%
d
an
or
bi
Of
te
n
co
-m
go
ric
a
lly
d
d
sh
o.
..
iff
er
en
0%
Ca
te
A. Categorically
dierent
B. Ofen
co-morbid
and
show
a
number
of
other
similariDes,
in
terms
of
therapeuDc
response,
heritability,
and
do
on,
suggesDng
that
they
are
closely
related
to
one
another
and
form
a
spectrum
in
0%
0%
C
nd
B
a
nd
0%
A
a
0%
flu
en
Se
ce
le
N
ct
ive
/N
E
a
ly
in
...
flu
en
On
ce
ly
th
h
el
e
p
...
so
m
e
pa
tie
nt
s
0%
Te
nd
to
A. Tend
to
inuence
N/
NE
as
well
as
depression
B. SelecDvely
inuence
the
targeted
disorder
C. Only
help
some
paDents
D. A
and
C
E. B
and
C
0%
0%
su
bs
tra
te
s
(
Bo
t
e.
g.
,..
.
Ge
ne
s
0%
Ne
ur
al
A. Genes
B. Neural
substrates
(e.g.,
amygdala
hyper-reacDvity)
C. Both
nt
...
0%
r
t
he
re
te
ir e
d
fo
No
t
r e
qu
i
re
d
0%
Is
re
qu
ir e
d
fo
r
t
he
n
or
m
a.
..
0%
Is
re
qu
Elevated N/NE
xie
t..
.
am
on
g
an
Is
co
m
m
on
on
g
am
Is
co
m
m
on
0%
h
0%
d
ep
re
...
0%
Bo
t
A. Is
common
among
anxiety
paDents
B. Is
common
among
depression
paDents
C. Both
0%
ts
ct
e
ffe
c
in
ve
d
ist
Ha
Ex
er
t
s
im
ila
r
e
ffe
ct
s
o
n
o
n
..
.
...
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
0%
W
or
ry
Di
So
sr
es
c ia
s
l
r
et
ice
nc
e
Sh
yn
es
s
er
-re
ac
ala
tiv
da
e
a
pt
m
ive
yg
co
da
gn
la
iti
ve
co
...
0%
An
o
v
A. An
over-reacDve
amygdala
B. MaladapDve
cogniDve
coping
mechanisms
C. Worry
D. Disress
E. Social
reDcence
F. Shyness
The
administraDon
of
a
benzodiazepine
(anD-anxiety
medicaDon)
A. Causes
a
dose-
dependent
reducDon
in
amygdala
acDvaDon
B. Causes
a
dose-
dependent
increase
in
amygdala
acDvaDon
0%
d
o
es
a
Ca
us
Ca
us
es
a
d
o
se
-d
ep
en
d
se
-d
ep
en
d
en
t
en
t
...
...
0%
0%
su
ty
(
ffi
ci
he
igh
...
en
t..
.
0%
Bo
t
h,
n
ei
th
er
is
ili
ne
ra
b
Co
re
vu
l
g a
nd
e
xp
er
ie
nc
e
0%
Le
ar
ni
n
nt
he
ab
of
t
Al
l
o
f
t
im
e
h
i
di
od
...
Th
e
a
m
ou
ge
t
t
he
fo
en
ce
to
0%
ov
e
0%
n.
..
0%
Re
tic
Amygdala
damage
A. Increases
raDngs
of
trust
and
approachability
to
faces
that
are
normally
deemed
untrustworthy
B. Has
no
consequence
of
social
interacDons
or
social
cogniDon
0%
o
co
n
s
n
Ha
In
cr
ea
s
es
ra
t
in
gs
o
f
t
ru
s
se
qu
en
ce
o
f
s
o
t..
...
0%
N/NE
is
A. A
specic
risk
factor
for
anxiety
disorders
B. A
nonspecic
risk
factor
for
a
broad
range
of
psychiatric
disease
0%
ec
ifi
sp
A
no
n
A
sp
ec
ifi
c
ris
k
fa
c
c
r
i sk
fa
to
r
f
o
ct
o
r a
...
r
f
..
0%
0%
0%
n
ew
r e
...
tu
rn
ed
to
th
e
...
ick
ly
Is
u
na
b
le
to
cq
ui
re
e
ha
u
...
0%
th
o
fe
ar
in
s
n
w
Sh
o
Pi
ck
s
u
p
sn
ak
es
a
nd
sp
id
e.
..
0%
Qu
0%
No
Ye
s
0%
0%
lly
d
ist
ca
in
us
e
ct
0%
Ar
e
ca
te
m
m
on
co
Re
f le
ct
a
Ar
e
fu
nd
am
en
ta
lly
d
i
ffe
re
nt
0%
go
ric
a
A. Are
fundamentally
dierent
B. Reect
a
common
cause
C. Are
categorically
disDnct
The End
First,
GE
CorrelaDon
Text,
pages
318-325
3
types
of
G-E
correlaDon
are
generally
recognized
Genotype-Environment CorrelaDon
Genotype-Environment
CorrelaDon
EvocaDve
(ReacDve)
-
arises
because
an
individuals
social
environment
is
parDally
a
funcDon
of
how
others
(not
necessarily
family)
react
to
his/her
behavior
Genotype-Environment
CorrelaDon
vs.
vs.
A
principled
criDque
of
Behavior
GeneDcs
For
psychologists,
as
well
as
for
medical
researchers,
the
purpose
of
idenDfying
undesirable
predisposiDons
of
individuals
should
be
to
devise
more
eecDve
health-promoDng
intervenDons,
not
to
discourage
such
ahempts
on
the
supposiDon
that
these
predisposiDons
are
geneDcally
based
and
therefore
intractable.
D.
Baumrind
(1993)
hop://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/index.php?pid=52079
Eugenics
(Well-Born)
if
talented
men
were
mated
with
talented
women,
of
the
same
mental
and
physical
characters
as
themselves,
generaDon
afer
generaDon,
we
might
produce
a
highly-bred
human
race,
with
no
more
tendency
to
revert
to
meaner
ancestral
types
than
is
shown
by
our
long-established
breeds
of
race-horses
and
fox-hounds.
Galton
(1865;
p.
319)
Is Eugenics Dead?
prenatal
screening
rearing to
adulthood
outlawed in 1994
Extra Slides
Caspi (Duke)
Marriage
and
Religiosity
Confer
Resilience:
Individuals
at
geneDc
risk
for
developing
substance
abuse
were
less
likely
to
develop
drinking
problems
if
they
were
married
or
religious;
Gene*Marriage
also
found
for
MDD
Low
Parental
Monitoring
and
Substance-Abusing
Friends
Confer
Risk:
GeneDc
risk
for
developing
adolescent
substance
use
and
anDsocial
behavior
is
exaggerated
by
these
environments
Dick
summarizes
this
by
noDng
that
a
wide
variety
of
environmental
factors
can
(a)
trigger
or
Marriage
and
Religiosity
Confer
Resilience:
Individuals
at
geneDc
risk
for
developing
substance
abuse
were
less
likely
to
develop
drinking
problems
if
they
were
married
or
religious;
Gene*Marriage
also
found
for
MDD
Low
Parental
Monitoring
and
Substance-Abusing
Friends
Enhance
Risk:
GeneDc
risk
for
developing
adolescent
substance
use
and
anDsocial
behavior
is
exaggerated
by
these
environments
Dick
summarizes
this
by
noDng
that
a
wide
variety
of
environmental
factors
can
(a)
trigger
or
Marriage
and
Religiosity
Confer
Resilience:
Individuals
at
geneDc
risk
for
developing
substance
abuse
were
less
likely
to
develop
drinking
problems
if
they
were
married
or
religious;
Gene*Marriage
also
found
for
MDD
Low
Parental
Monitoring
and
Substance-Abusing
Friends
Enhance
Risk:
GeneDc
risk
for
developing
adolescent
substance
use
and
anDsocial
behavior
is
exaggerated
by
these
environments
Dick
summarizes
this
by
noDng
that
a
wide
variety
of
environmental
factors
can
(a)
trigger
a
geneDc
diathesis
(e.g.,
access
to
substances,
life
stress,
adversity)
(b)
compensate
for
or
regulate
the
expression
of
a
geneDc
predisposiDon
(e.g.,
social
norms)
(c)
enhance
or
accentuate
a
geneDc
predisposiDon
(e.g.,
delinquent
peers)
In
principle,
you
could
adopt
a
similar
approach
for
molecular
geneDcs
(e.g.,
5-HTTLPR)
The
phenotype
(T&P/Dx)
reects
the
cumulaDve
eect
of
all
the
genes;
traits
are
massively
polygenic
In
principle,
it
would
be
helpful
to
model
gene*gene
interacDons
or
develop
more
complex
addiDve
(many
main
eects)
proles
(high
on
this,
medium
on
that,
low
on
the
other
and
so
on)
In
pracDce,
this
is
challenging
given
the
combinatorial
complexity
Also,
prole
scores
that
combine
many
genes
eliminates
the
possibility
of
tesDng
specic
mechanisDc
hypotheses
in
animal
models,
back
to
black
box
of
aggregate
heritability
There
is
considerable
excitement
about
the
development
of
more
sophisDcated
analyDc
tools
(e.g.,
machine
learning
of
phenotypically
interesDng
gene
proles)
The
phenotype
(T&P/Dx)
reects
the
cumulaDve
eect
of
all
the
genes;
traits
are
massively
polygenic
In
principle,
it
would
be
helpful
to
model
gene*gene
interacDons
or
develop
more
complex
addiDve
(many
main
eects)
proles
(high
on
this,
medium
on
that,
low
on
the
other
and
so
on)
In
pracDce,
this
is
challenging
given
the
combinatorial
complexity
Also,
prole
scores
that
combine
many
genes
eliminates
the
possibility
of
tesDng
specic
mechanisDc
hypotheses
in
animal
models,
back
to
black
box
of
aggregate
heritability
There
is
considerable
excitement
about
the
development
of
more
sophisDcated
analyDc
tools
(e.g.,
machine
learning
of
phenotypically
interesDng
gene
proles)
EpigeneDc mechanisms involve changes to how readily transcripDon factor can access the DNA
EpigeneDc mechanisms involve changes to how readily transcripDon factor can access the DNA
EpigeneDc mechanisms involve changes to how readily transcripDon factor can access the DNA
Elegant
mechanisDc
work
in
rodents
by
Michael
Meaneys
group
demonstrates
that
one
aspect
of
the
early
environment
,
maternal
behavior
(x-fostered),
can
inuence
the
T&P
of
ospring
and
that
this
is
epigeneDc
dependent
This
is
exceedingly
hard
to
study
in
humans
because
epigeneDc
mechanisms
vary
across
the
brain
and
body,
so
measuring
epigeneDc
eects
in
blood
or
saliva
may
not
tell
you
very
much
about
the
amygdala
Lemery (ASU)
Jaee (Penn)
E.g.,
the
reason
children
who
are
spanked
or
smacked
are
more
aggressive
than
children
who
are
not
may
be
that
parents
and
kids
share
a
geneDc
risk
for
aggressive
behavior
(common
cause)
2.
EvocaDve
G-E
correlaDon
- e.g.,
a
child
who
is
predisposed
to
having
an
outgoing,
cheerful
T&P
is
more
likely
to
evoke
posiDve
aoenDon
from
others
than
a
child
who
is
predisposed
to
N/NE
-
E.g.,
Individuals
with
a
grumpy,
abrasive
temperament
(N/NE)
tend
to
evoke
unpleasant
responses
from
coworkers
and
others
than
cheerful,
friendly
individuals
3.
AcDve
G-E
correlaDon
- Individuals
acDvely
select
environments
- E.g.,
individuals
predisposed
to
high
E/PE
seeking
may
be
more
prone
to
aoend
parDes,
go
to
bars,
meet
new
people,
be
exposed
to
or
to
try
substances
of
abuse
E.g.,
the
reason
children
who
are
spanked
or
smacked
are
more
aggressive
than
children
who
are
not
may
be
that
parents
and
kids
share
a
geneDc
risk
for
aggressive
behavior
(common
cause)
2.
EvocaDve
G-E
correlaDon
- e.g.,
a
child
who
is
predisposed
to
having
an
outgoing,
cheerful
T&P
is
more
likely
to
evoke
posiDve
aoenDon
from
others
than
a
child
who
is
predisposed
to
N/NE
-
E.g.,
Individuals
with
a
grumpy,
abrasive
temperament
(N/NE)
tend
to
evoke
unpleasant
responses
from
coworkers
and
others
than
cheerful,
friendly
individuals
3.
AcDve
G-E
correlaDon
- Individuals
acDvely
select
environments
- E.g.,
individuals
predisposed
to
high
E/PE
seeking
may
be
more
prone
to
aoend
parDes,
go
to
bars,
meet
new
people,
be
exposed
to
or
to
try
substances
of
abuse
E.g.,
the
reason
children
who
are
spanked
or
smacked
are
more
aggressive
than
children
who
are
not
may
be
that
parents
and
kids
share
a
geneDc
risk
for
aggressive
behavior
(common
cause)
2.
EvocaDve
G-E
correlaDon
- e.g.,
a
child
who
is
predisposed
to
having
an
outgoing,
cheerful
T&P
is
more
likely
to
evoke
posiDve
aoenDon
from
others
than
a
child
who
is
predisposed
to
N/NE
-
E.g.,
Infant
behavioral
inhibiDon
evokes
parental
insensiDvity,
which
then
potenDates
maladapDve
parentchild
interacDons
over
Dme,
exacerbaDng
fear
of
novelty
3.
AcDve
G-E
correlaDon
- Individuals
acDvely
select
environments
- E.g.,
individuals
predisposed
to
high
E/PE
seeking
may
be
more
prone
to
aoend
parDes,
go
to
bars,
meet
new
people,
be
exposed
to
or
to
try
substances
of
abuse
E.g.,
the
reason
children
who
are
spanked
or
smacked
are
more
aggressive
than
children
who
are
not
may
be
that
parents
and
kids
share
a
geneDc
risk
for
aggressive
behavior
(common
cause)
2.
EvocaDve
G-E
correlaDon
- e.g.,
a
child
who
is
predisposed
to
having
an
outgoing,
cheerful
T&P
is
more
likely
to
evoke
posiDve
aoenDon
from
others
than
a
child
who
is
predisposed
to
N/NE
-
E.g.,
Infant
behavioral
inhibiDon
evokes
parental
insensiDvity,
which
then
potenDates
maladapDve
parentchild
interacDons
over
Dme,
exacerbaDng
fear
of
novelty
3.
AcDve
G-E
correlaDon
(Niche
Building)
- Individuals
acDvely
select
environments
-
E.g.,
individuals
predisposed
to
high
E/PE
seeking
may
be
more
prone
to
aoend
parDes,
go
to
bars,
meet
new
people,
be
exposed
to
delinquent
peers,
and
try
substances
of
abuse
Mostly
from
FTA
studies
demonstraDng
that
environmental
measures
are
heritable,
including
many
linked
to
psychopathology
e.g.,
marital
quality,
social
support,
parental
discipline/warmth,
family
environment,
peer
relaDonships,
negaDve
life
events
such
as
divorce
and
exposure
to
trauma
Environments
are
heritable
because
genotype
inuences
behaviors
that
evoke,
select,
and
modify
features
of
the
environment
-
Environments
less
amenable
to
behavioral
modicaDon
are
less
heritable,
e.g.,
the
death
of
a
loved
one,
losing
ones
home
in
a
natural
disaster
-
Than
those
that
depend
on
the
individuals
behavior,
e.g.,
divorce,
geng
red
Take
home:
GeneDc
risk
factors
do
not
necessarily
have
direct
eects
on
phenotypes
(T&P,
Dx),
but
can
work
indirectly
by
modifying
sensiDvity
to
environmental
risk
factors
(acDve
G-E)
or
by
inuencing
exposure
to
risk
(passive,
evocaDve
G-E)
Mostly
from
FTA
studies
demonstraDng
that
environmental
measures
are
heritable,
including
many
linked
to
psychopathology
e.g.,
marital
quality,
social
support,
parental
discipline/warmth,
family
environment,
peer
relaDonships,
negaDve
life
events
such
as
divorce
and
exposure
to
trauma
Environments
are
heritable
because
genotype
inuences
behaviors
that
evoke,
select,
and
modify
features
of
the
environment
-
Environments
less
amenable
to
behavioral
modicaDon
are
less
heritable,
e.g.,
the
death
of
a
loved
one,
losing
ones
home
in
a
natural
disaster
-
Than
those
that
depend
on
the
individuals
behavior,
e.g.,
divorce,
geng
red
Take
home:
GeneDc
risk
factors
do
not
necessarily
have
direct
eects
on
phenotypes
(T&P,
Dx),
but
can
work
indirectly
by
modifying
sensiDvity
to
environmental
risk
factors
(acDve
G-E)
or
by
inuencing
exposure
to
risk
(passive,
evocaDve
G-E)
Stop
Here;
Switch
to
Recap
PPT
TranslaDonal Promise
Sara
argues
that,
in
principle,
if
one
could
idenDfy
with
high
sensiDvity
and
specicity
at-risk
G-E
pairs
-
At-risk
kids
paired
with
risky
environments
(parental
style,
peers,
adversity,
abuse,
etc.)
You
could
target
them
for
precision
intervenDons
BEFORE
the
onset
of
cumulaDve
damage
-
in
eect,
she
argues
for
a
more
nuanced
extension
of
the
Moo
PNAS
strategy
-
instead
of
idenDfying
kids
with
low
C/SC
-
idenDfy
kids
with
low
C/SC
and
other
environmental
risk
factors
-
this
is
akin,
as
I
understand
it,
to
what
Andreas
lab
does
(ADHD
kid
+
parent
with
sub-opDmal
skill)
-
potenDally,
one
could
use
biomarkers
(gene
screens)
to
idenDfy
high-risk
parent-kid
dyads
- Things
that
relaDves
share
(genes,
diet,
peers,
SES,
toxin
exposure)
are
important
for
eDology
- Genes
in
aggregate
have
important
roles
in
eDology
- FTA
studies
are
correlaDonal;
no
insight
into
underlying
molecular
or
neural
mechanisms
- Kendler
notes
that
because
Dx
(and
T&P
traits)
are
arDcial
categories
that
do
not
carve
nature
at
the
joints
(cf.
endo
lecture),
showing
heritability
of
The
Disorder
does
not
imply
a
coherent
or
unied
underlying
biological
cause
- Things
that
relaDves
share
(genes,
diet,
peers,
SES,
toxin
exposure)
are
important
for
eDology
- Genes
in
aggregate
have
important
roles
in
eDology
- FTA
studies
are
correlaDonal;
no
insight
into
underlying
molecular
or
neural
mechanisms
- Kendler
notes
that
because
Dx
(and
T&P
traits)
are
arDcial
categories
that
do
not
carve
nature
at
the
joints
(cf.
endo
lecture),
showing
heritability
of
The
Disorder
or
The
Trait
does
not
imply
a
single
coherent
or
unied
underlying
biological
cause
- Things
that
relaDves
share
(genes,
diet,
peers,
SES,
toxin
exposure)
are
important
for
eDology
- Genes
in
aggregate
have
important
roles
in
eDology
- FTA
studies
are
correlaDonal;
no
insight
into
underlying
molecular
or
neural
mechanisms
- Kendler
notes
that
because
diagnoses
(like
T&P
traits)
are
arDcial
categories
that
do
not
carve
nature
at
the
joints
- Showing
heritability
of
The
Disorder
or
The
Trait
does
not
imply
a
single
coherent
or
unied
underlying
biological
cause