Relationships Between Self-Reported and Observed Parenting Behaviour, Adolescent Disordered Eating Attitudes and Behaviours, and the 5-HTTLPR Polymorphism: Data From the Australian Temperament Project.

Vanja Rozenblat,Eleanor Wertheim,Craig A Olsson,Isabel Krug,Primrose Letcher,Ross King,Joanne Ryan

doi:10.1002/erv.2530

Abstract

This study examined whether self-reported and observationally measured parental behaviours were associated with disordered eating, and investigated possible moderation by a serotonin-transporter polymorphism (5-HTTLPR). Study 1 included 650 adolescents from the Australian Temperament Project who completed the Eating Disorder Inventory-2 Drive for Thinness and Bulimia scales at 15/16years and were genotyped for 5-HTTLPR. Parents completed an Australian Temperament Project-devised measure of parental warmth and harsh punishment. Study 2 included a subgroup of 304 participants who also engaged in a video-recorded family interaction, with observed parental warmth and hostility coded by the Iowa Family Interaction Rating Scale. Greater self-reported parental warmth was associated with lower bulimia scores. Conversely, observationally measured parental warmth was associated with lower drive for thinness, but not bulimia. Self-reported parental harsh punishment was associated with bulimia only, with observed parental hostility associated with neither outcome. 5-HTTLPR genotype did not moderate the relationship between parent behaviours and adolescent disordered eating. Copyright © 2017 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and Eating Disorders Association.

Highlights

The biopsychosocial approach to eating disorder (ED) aetiology proposes that risk factors for EDs range from those relating to the individual, such as genes and psychological traits, to those that form part of the environment, including relationships with parents and peers, significant life events, exposure to the ‘thin ideal’, and numerous other factors (Culbert, Racine, & Klump, 2015; Stice, 2002; Trace, Baker, Penas-Lledo, & Bulik, 2013)
Keller (2014) argues collinearity functions to control for alternate explanations of any GxE interaction, the gene x environment interaction showed minimal change regardless of whether the additional contrast terms were included in the models
We adopted a multi-method assessment approach in two studies to investigate the relationship between parental behaviours and disordered eating attitudes and behaviours

Summary

Introduction

The biopsychosocial approach to eating disorder (ED) aetiology proposes that risk factors for EDs range from those relating to the individual, such as genes and psychological traits, to those that form part of the environment, including relationships with parents and peers, significant life events, exposure to the ‘thin ideal’, and numerous other factors (Culbert, Racine, & Klump, 2015; Stice, 2002; Trace, Baker, Penas-Lledo, & Bulik, 2013). GxE investigations across other fields increasingly support an alternative model, under which certain genetic factors conceptualised as conferring ‘risk’ may be better conceptualised as ‘plasticity’ factors, that are associated with better outcomes under positive or neutral environmental conditions (Belsky et al, 2009). Most GxE investigations in eating pathology have focussed on 5-HTTLPR, with a recent meta-analysis finding significant interactions between 5-HTTLPR and traumatic life events, as well as sexual and physical abuse, in predicting EDs and bulimia nervosa (BN), respectively (Rozenblat et al, 2017). No study in the ED field has examined GxE ‘risk’ from a plasticity perspective

Methods

Results

Conclusion