Human Behavior Genetics Research Articles

Susan Lindee, Moments of truth in genetic medicine, Baltimore, Johns Hopkins University Press, 2005, pp. xii, 270, £26.50, $40.00 (hardback 0-8018-8175-7).

Historians of medical genetics have long been preoccupied with the field's relationship to eugenics. That focus is certainly understandable given the manifest institutional, personal, and ideological entanglements of “reform eugenics” with medical genetics during the 1950s and 1960s, as well as continuing controversies concerning the eugenic content of such medical-genetic technologies as prenatal and pre-implantation genetic diagnosis. Lindee notes that research in the field has resulted in more diagnostic tests than it has effective treatments for disease and indeed claims that selective abortion following prenatal diagnosis remains the “primary intervention” associated with genetic medicine (p. 202). Thus even she can not entirely escape the eugenics issue. Nevertheless, the focus of her welcome new book is on aspects of the history of the field that have received much less attention from scholars, such as the central roles played by patient and parent advocacy groups in setting research agendas, financing studies, and providing critical information. Moments of truth is not a systematic history of genetic medicine but an analysis of five key developments occurring between 1955 and 1975—two decades during which human genetics was transformed from an institutional and intellectual backwater into a research frontier. Each case study explores a different facet of the field. Thus the routinization of newborn testing for phenylketonuria (PKU) following the 1960 development of a blood test suitable for hospital-based mass screening is used to investigate the rise of public health genetics, and Victor McKusick's studies of the Old Order Amish, the construction of human pedigrees and rise of mapping studies more generally. Similarly, early research on human chromosomes is used to elucidate how standardization has transformed concepts and practices in genetic medicine, the development of the “twin method”, a variety of issues in the rise of human behaviour genetics, and the history of research on familial dysautonomia, the role of social organization and technology in both creating and eliminating a genetic disease. Organizing the book around five quite disparate cases could have resulted in something of a hodgepodge. However, the studies are linked by several themes. Thus running through the discussion of each case are reflections on the question of how nearly all disease came to be understood as genetic disease. Lindee explores how this idea became crystallized during the 1960s and 1970s in texts, scientific and clinical practice, and public policy, and she considers what it meant and continues to mean for researchers, patients, and the public at large. In general, I found her arguments convincing, but I have a small quibble with the effort to fit the newborn screening case into this periodization. In the 1960s and 1970s, as Lindee herself notes, PKU was generally characterized as a treatable form of mental retardation, with genetics barely figuring in legislative and other debates surrounding screening, nor were many geneticists initially enthusiastic about efforts to mandate the test. It was only in the 1980s that PKU came to be commonly viewed as a success of genetic medicine, a reframing that in my view followed and served to validate the trend described in this book (a trend encapsulated by Abby Lippmann's term “geneticization”). A second theme uniting the individual cases concerns the varied types of work and workers involved in medical-genetic research. Thus Lindee argues that the production of scientific knowledge is a community project involving not just researchers, but also research subjects, patients and their families. She emphasizes that non-scientists have often functioned as active research collaborators, as crucial sources of knowledge and funds, and sometimes as validators of researchers' claims. Thus, in her account, scientific authority is more dispersed than it is often assumed to be and forms of labour not usually characterized as “scientific research” are shown to be integral to the enterprise and made visible. The resulting insight into the structure and organization of contemporary biomedicine is one of the chief contributions of this original and important new book.

Fine mapping of a region on chromosome 8p gives evidence for a QTL contributing to individual differences in an anxiety‐related personality trait: TPQ harm avoidance

The chromosome 8p region is of interest in human behavioral genetics since it harbors a susceptibility region not only for schizophrenia but also for anxiety-related personality traits such as harm avoidance and neuroticism. Towards verifying our preliminary linkage finding of a QTL for TPQ harm avoidance at chromosome 8p, we have now genotyped altogether 24 micro-satellite markers in 377 families. Using three methods (maximum likelihood binomial or MLB, MERLIN, and an associated one parameter model), we observed significant results (P values from 0.002 to 0.0004) for linkage to harm avoidance in this region. A peak multipoint LOD score of 2.76 (P value 0.0002) was obtained with the MLB method. The region-wide empirical P value was 0.002 [0.001-0.0046]. Although, the peak position varied somewhat according to the method (D8S1048 for MLB, D8S1463 for the two other methods), for three methods D8S1810 ( approximately 60 cM) is within 1-2 cM of the peak for harm avoidance. This marker is of particular interest since it is proximate (<0.5 cM) of the core haplotype that in several recent studies show significant association with schizophrenia near neuroregulin 1. Although association studies with microsatellite markers need to be interpreted cautiously, using the Haplotype Trend Regression test one marker, D8S499 ( approximately 60 cM), showed an empirical P value of 2 x 10(-5) for allele 3, which confers a decreased harm avoidance score. Altogether, the current linkage and association results suggest the possibility that the same locus near the neuroregulin 1 gene on chromosome 8p confers risk for both an anxiety-related personality trait as well as schizophrenia. We hypothesize that this common genetic factor may contribute to emotional liability during early development, which constitutes a predisposing factor for major psychosis.

A psicologia face aos novos progressos da genética humana

Os avanços da Genética contemporânea têm suscitado uma grande polêmica a respeito da gênese do homem e das possibilidades de agir sobre a biologia humana, repercutindo intensamente sobre os mais diversos ramos do conhecimento. Considerando a importância do tema, este texto pretende apresentar de forma sucinta os principais resultados de pesquisas sobre as bases genéticas do comportamento humano, com o foco voltado para a importância do profissional de Psicologia em questões relativas ao assunto.

Is there value in identifying individual genetic predispositions to violence?

In this article I want to ask what we should do, either collectively or individually, if we could identify by genetic and family profding the 12% of the male population likely to commit almost half the violent crime in our society. What if we could identify some individuals in that 12% not only at birth, but in utero, or before implantation? I will explain the source of these figures later; for now, I will use them only to provide a concrete example of the kind of predictive claims we can expect to be made with some frequency, and some scientific credibility, over the next generation. I will adopt an outlook that one commentator has called “pragmatic optimism,” but which could also be called technological optimism - the belief that a science or technology will achieve many or most of its advertised goals. My optimism will be directed towards human behavioral genetics, the source of predictions like the one I just offered; I will assume that this controversial discipline will achieve a substantial pan of its scientific ambition to identlfy genetic differences among individuals that help predict and possibly explain future behavior, psychological health, and cognitive skill. This optimism is very limited -it concerns the scientific success of behavioral genetics, not the social value of that success.

When Did Mozart Become a Mozart? Neurophysiological Insight Into Behavioral Genetics

The prevailing concept in modern cognitive neuroscience is that cognitive functions are performed predominantly at the network level, whereas the role of individual neurons is unlikely to extend beyond forming the simple basic elements of these networks. Within this conceptual framework, individuals of outstanding cognitive abilities appear as a result of a favorable configuration of the microarchitecture of the cognitive-implicated networks, whose final formation in ontogenesis may occur in a relatively random way. Here I suggest an alternative concept, which is based on neurological data and on data from human behavioral genetics. I hypothesize that cognitive functions are performed mainly at the intracellular, probably at the molecular level. Central to this hypothesis is the idea that the neurons forming the networks involved in cognitive processes are complex elements whose functions are not limited to generating electrical potentials and releasing neurotransmitters. According to this hypothesis, individuals of outstanding abilities are so due to a ‘lucky’ combination of specific genes that determine the intrinsic properties of neurons involved in cognitive functions of the brain.

Airbrushing heritability.

Airbrushing heritability.

Who should fund and control the direction of human behavior genetics? Review of Nuffield Council on Bioethics 2002 report, genetics and human behaviour: the ethical context.

In this (Nuffield Council on Bioethics 2002), the third in its series on ethics and related issues in genetics (see also Nuffield Council on Bioethics 1993 and Nuffield Council on Bioethics 1998), the Nuffield Council has focused on four'normal' behaviors; intelligence, personality, antisocial behavior and sexual orientation. This is a narrow range of behaviors and one where their discussion of the potential impact of predictive genetic testing is probably inappropriate. They also take an unduly narrow view of the purposes of behavior genetics in the 21st century. It is not simply to estimate heritability but to understand more about the structure of behavior and the processes which underlie it. Their narrow focus and their negative approach to the history and achievements of genetics is reflected in their less than positive support for future behavior genetic research. Behavior geneticists need to do more to publicize what their field has achieved in order to counter the very extensive antibehavior genetics initiatives which are almost unique in science. At the same time, organizations such as the Nuffield Council need to consider carefully the impact their deliberations may have on research funding.

The Human genome project and minority communities: ethical, social, and political dilemmas

Preface The Age of Biology and the Responsible Ancestor by Martha A. Krebs and Daniel Drell The Human Genome Project: Hereditary Diseases and Implications for Gene Therapy by Karen E. Nelson The Genetics of Human Behavior: Lessons from the Human Genome Project by Jonathan Beckwith The Human Genome Project and the African American Community: Race, Diversity, and American Science by Fatimah Jackson Scientific and Folk Ideas about Heredity by Jonathan M. Marks Social and Medical Implications of New Genetic Techniques by Robert F. Murray, Jr. Genetic Education to African American and Russian Immigrant Communities in Northwest Baltimore by Ilana Suez Mittman The Human Genome Project and Buddhism by Akey C. F. Hung Thoughts on the Human Genome Project and Maryland by Kathleen Kennedy Townsend The Human Genome Project: Reaching Minority Communities in Maryland, A Report of Results of the Conference Evaluation Study prepared by the Survey Research Center The Human Genome Project and Minority Communities: The Importance of Dialogue and Access to Information by Raymond A. Zilinskas and Peter J. Balint

Moving on from old dichotomies: beyond nature-nurture towards a lifeline perspective.

Genetics is increasingly being used to explain human behaviours, with growing enthusiasm for what could be termed 'genetic determinism', which an ultra-Darwinist approach seeks to apply to all aspects of the human condition. To consider the validity of the claims concerning the genetics of human behaviour and psychological distress. A critical review of the current assumptions about the relative contributions of genetics and the environment. Organisms are in constant interaction with their environment: that is, organisms select environments just as environments select organisms. Like organisms, environments evolve and are homeodynamic rather than homeostatic; both 'genome' and 'envirome' are abstractions from this continuous dialectic.

Investigation of Bioethics

Much controversy has been generated by research purporting to show connection between genes and intelligence as well as genes and antisocial behaviour such as alcoholism and criminality. This research raises not only issues about the relative contributions of genes and environment but also ethical questions about whether such research should be done at all and how the results might be used. The Nuffield Council on Bioethics, a UK based independent body set up to identify ethical questions raised by recent advances in biological and medical research, announced a major new enquiry to examine ethical, legal and social issues and problems that might arise from research into the genetics of human behaviour. There will be public consultations starting in March and a report will be issued in 2002. Previous reports from the Nuffield foundation council have covered such topics as genetically modified crops and mental disorders and genetics. (http://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/bioethics) RS

The quantitative and molecular genetics of human intelligence.

General cognitive ability or g as measured by IQ tests has been the most intensively studied trait in human behaviour genetics. Although there has been much debate about how best to describe and measure intelligence, this is addressed elsewhere in this volume and here I will assume that there is utility in the concept of general intelligence and review the data showing that, whatever it is, g is familial and influenced by genes. Next, I will briefly describe some of the main quantitative genetics models that have been used in trying to tease out the genetic and environmental sources of variation. Finally, I will outline current molecular genetic research aiming to locate and identify genes influencing human intelligence and try to predict the directions in which such research will lead.

Genetics of Human Behaviour

How an individual’s genes influence its behavior is an exciting and challenging study of genetics. The application of molecular biology technique to identify DNA sequences which is responsible for ...

Racism: a central problem for the Human Genome Diversity Project.

Before any scientific project involving human subjects is initiated in the United States, an institutional review board must examine the potential benefits and risks of that project. Evaluations that indicate significant risks can either be cited to put into effect greater precautions in the design of the project or to halt the endeavor altogether. The Human Genome Diversity Project (HGDP) is an undertaking of great scientific interest. Its primary purpose is to catalog the genetic similarities and differences among populations. It will provide detailed information about the frequency distribution of different markers in different groups and establish a genetic family tree relating the various population groups. Its findings will provide the peoples of the earth with a tremendous font of knowledge about their history, interconnections, and aspects of their cultures. This information will be broadly useful for those who study the history and geography of populations, to quote from the title of the book on this subject by Cavalli-Sforza, the leader of the project (Cavalli-Sforza, Menozzi, and Piazza, 1994). Scientists will use this information to trace the migration of groups and to establish the relationship among languages based on the genetic relationships among the groups that speak these languages. Those who study human population genetics will be provided with rich material for their research. Such a project reinforces our humanness by continuing the age-old quest for human self-knowledge. From that perspective, this project reflects some of the highest aspirations of our species and is a benefit to society. However, some of the proposed benefits of the HGDP are highly dubious. In his PLS article, David Resnik suggests that the HGDP will help particularly those indigenous populations being studied (1999:17). We question this claim. This benefit would presumably arise out of knowledge gained about the genetics of various diseases in different populations. But, the HGDP concentrates on genome-wide comparisons among population groups, in order to achieve its goals of understanding the histories of peoples and their migrations. This is not an efficient way to learn about the specifics of different disease patterns or etiologies among these groups and any such information would arise more by chance than by design. Rather, if a major goal were really to improve the health of ethnic minorities and Joseph S. Alper is Professor of Chemistry at the University of Massachusetts?Boston, Boston MA 02125, USA. His published papers have dealt with many aspects of the social implications of human genetics: human sociobiology, behavioral genetics, genetic discrimination, genetic screening and testing, and the applicability of the Americans with Disabilities Act to genetic conditions. Forthe past 15 years, he has been a member of the Boston-based Genetic Screening Study Group. Jon Beckwith, American Cancer Society Research Professor of Microbiology and Molecular Genetics at Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA 02115, USA, was a member of the Working Group on Ethical, Legal, and Social Implications of the Human Genome Project and a member of the Genetic Screening Study Group. His articles on social implications of genetics have appeared in journals such as BioScience, The Philosophical Forum, Cahiers de Psychologie Cognitive, Science and Engineering Ethics, Social Science and Medicine, Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics, and the American Journal of Human Genetics.

Genetics of human behaviour

Genetics of human behaviour

Genes, Behavior, and Developmental Emergentism: One Process, Indivisible?

The question of the influence of genes on behavior raises difficult philosophical and social issues. In this paper I delineate what I call the Developmentalist Challenge (DC) to assertions of genetic influence on behavior, and then examine the DC through an indepth analysis of the behavioral genetics of the nematode,C. elegans, with some briefer references to work onDrosophila.I argue that eight “rules” relating genes and behavior through environmentally-influenced and tangled neural nets capture the results of developmental and behavioral studies on the nematode. Some elements of the DC are found to be sound and others are criticized. The essay concludes by examining the relations of this study to Kitcher's antireductionist arguments and Bechtel and Richardson's decomposition and localization heuristics. Some implications for human behavioral genetics are also briefly considered.

Genetics of human behaviour

Ascribing human behaviour to the influence of genetic factors is a reductionist idea that inappropriately applies the explanations of physical science to the human social world. The result is that the designation of some behaviour as deviant is disguised as objective science. The high profile of genetic research means that we must be alert to the potential social consequences of this type of reasoning.

Conceptualizing genetic influences on early behavioral development.

The overarching goal of human behavioral genetics is to understand genetic influences on behavior while also considering the complementary influence of the environment. This paper highlights the explicit goals of behavioral genetics, including some that are particularly relevant to the study of human development, and some common misunderstandings concerning the field. Examples are given to illustrate specifically the degree of genetic influence in behaviors representing physical, cognitive and emotional development during infancy using the methodology of twin, adoption and parent-offspring designs. The effect sizes in the prediction of complex behaviors are typically modest, and thus there is ample room for multiple predictors from different domains. Moreover, there is a fundamental recognition that distal and proximal causes can be different in kind, and that factors that play a role in the origins of behavioral dispositions are different from those that elicit or maintain actual behavior.

Recent Developments in Human Behavioral Genetics: Past Accomplishments and Future Directions

The field of behavioral genetics has enormous potential to uncover both genetic and environmental influences on normal and deviant behavior. Behavioral-genetic methods are based on a solid foundation of theories and methods that successfully have delineated components of complex traits in plants and animals. New resources are now available to dissect the genetic component of these complex traits. As specific genes are identified, we can begin to explore how these interact with environmental factors in development. How we interpret such findings, how we ask new questions, how we celebrate the knowledge, and how we use or misuse this knowledge are all important considerations. These issues are pervasive in all areas of human research, and they are especially salient in human behavioral genetics.

Book Reviews

Book reviewed in this article:Heart Disease in Persons with Down Syndrome Edited by B Marino and S Puesohel BaltimpreAn Introduction To The Nature And Needs Of Students With Mild Disabilities: Mild Mental Retardation, Behavioral Disorders And Learning Disabilities By Carroll J Jones.Long Term Consequences Of Early Feeding. Nestlé Nutrition Workshop Series Volume 36 Edited by.John Boulton.Neuroimaging: A Window to the Neurological Foundations of Learning and Behavior in Children Edited by G Reid Lyon and.Judith M Rumsey BaltimoreSeizures And Epilepsy In Children: A Guide For Parents By John M. Freeman, MD, Eileen R G. Vining. MD and Diana J. Pillas Baltimore, MD.Search For The Tourette Syndrome And Human Behaviour Genetics By David E Comings Hope

Could nonshared environmental variance have evolved to assure diversification through randomness?

One of the more striking findings of modern human behavior genetics is the relatively small role for shared environmental experience and the large role for what is called nonshared, or nonfamilial variance. Much of this may be just evolved randomness. There are sound evolutionary reasons why the genotype should diversify by producing phenotypes that differ. Where there are several possible states of nature, an organism whose genotype produces phenotypes specialized for only one environment will go extinct when the environment changes. Diversification can be achieved by having a single genotype randomly produce different phenotypes. Biological models, supported by evidence from other species, show that substantial phenotypical randomness will often be desirable. Biological mechanisms exist for providing randomness. Canalization will be selected for when a single phenotype is optimal, but canalization will be selected against where diversification is desirable. General biological theory predicts this effect, and examples from other species illustrate it. Variability in personality, sexual strategy, and disease resistance could be selected for. Evolution could select for contrast effects by which siblings come to be different. Thus, much of the nonshared variance found by behavior geneticists may be merely revolved randomness.