Twin studies of political behavior: Untenable assumptions?

Perspectives on Politics

Volumn 6, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 785-791

  Beckwith, Jon ^a,b   Morris, Corey A ^b  

^a AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY   (United States)

^b HARVARD MEDICAL SCHOOL   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 56249120622     PISSN: 15375927     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S1537592708081917     Document Type: Review

References (30)

1. Ainslie, Ricardo C., Kelly M. Olmstead, and Daniel D. O'Loughlin. 1987. The early developmental context of twinship: Some limitations of the equal environments hypothesis. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 57 (1): 120-4.
2. Alford, John R., Carolyn L. Funk, and John R. Hibbing. 2005. Are political orientations genetically transmitted? American Political Science Review 99 (2): 153-68.
3. _. 2008. Beyond liberals and conservatives to political genotypes and phenotypes. Perspectives on Politics 6 (2): 321-28.
4. Beckwith, Jon. 2006. Wither human behavioral genetics? In Wrestling with Behavioral Genetics: Science, Ethics, and Public Conversation, ed. E. Parens, A. Chapman, and N. Press. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
5. Beckwith, Jon, Lisa Geller, and Sahotra Sarkar. 1991. "IQ and Heredity." [Letter to the Editor] Science 252 (5003): 191.
6. Bouchard, Thomas J., Jr., David T. Lykken, Matthew McGue, Nancy L. Segal, and Auke Tellegen. 1990. Sources of human psychological differences: The Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart. Science 250 (4978): 223-8.
7. Cronk, Nikole J., Wendy S. Slutske, Pamela A.F. Madden, Kathleen K. Bucholz, Wendy Reich, and Andrew Heath. 2002. Emotional and behavioral problems among female twins: An evaluation of the equal environments assumption. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychology 41 (7): 829-37.
8. Ehrlich, Paul, and Marcus W. Feldman. 2007. The fallacy of genetic reductionism. Dœdalus Spring: 5-12.
9. Eriksson, Marit, Finn Rasmussen, and Per Tynelius. 2006. Genetic factors in physical activity and the equal environment assumption - the Swedish Young Male Twin Study. Behavior Genetics 36 (2): 238-47.
10. Flynn, James R. 2007 What Is Intelligence? Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
11. Horwitz, Allan V., Tami M. Videon, Mark F. Schmitz, and Diane Davis. 2003a. Rethinking twins and environments: Possible sources for assumed genetic influences in twin research. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 44 (4): 111-29.
12. _. 2003b. Double vision: Reply to Freese and Powell. Journal of Health and Social Behavior 44 (2): 136-41.
13. Joseph, Jay. 1998. The equal environment assumption of the classical twin method: A critical analysis. Journal of Mind and Behavior 19 (3): 325-58.
14. _. 2004. The Gene Illusion. New York: Algora Publishing.
15. Kamin, Leon J., and Arthur S. Goldberger. 2002. Twin studies in behavioral research: A skeptical view. Theoretical Population Biology 61 (1): 83-95.
16. Kendler, Kenneth S., Michael C. Neale, Ronald C. Kessler, Andrew C. Heath, and Lindon J. Eaves. 1993. A test of the equal-environment assumption in twin studies of psychiatric illness. Behavior Genetics 23 (1): 21-7.
17. Morris, Corey, Aimee Shen, Khadija Pierce, and Jon Beckwith. 2007. Deconstructing violence. GeneWatch 20 (2): 3-9.
18. Morris-Yates, Allen, Gavin Andrews, P. Howie, and S. Henderson. 1990. Twins: A test of the equal environments assumption. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica 81 (4): 322-6.
19. Pam, Alvin, Susan S. Kemker, Colin A. Ross, and R. Golden. 1996. The "equal environments assumption" in MZ-DZ twin comparisons: An untenable premise of psychiatric genetics? Acta geneticae medicae et gemellologiae 45 (3): 349-60.
20. Plomin, Robert, Lee Willerman, and John C. Loehlin. 1976. Resemblance in appearance and the equal environments assumption in twin studies of personality traits. Behavior Genetics 6 (1): 43-52.
21. Prescott, Carol A., Ronald C. Johnson, and John J. McArdle. 1999. Chorion type as a possible influence on the results and interpretation of twin study data. Twin Research 2 (4): 244-9.
22. Richardson, Ken. 1998. The Origins of Human Potential. London: Routledge.
23. Rutter, Michael. 2002. Nature, nurture, and development: From evangelism through science towards policy and practice. Child Development 73 (1): 1-21.
24. Sampson, Robert J., Patrick Sharkey, and Stephen W. Raudenbush. 2008. Durable effects of concentrated disadvantage on verbal ability among African-American children. Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences 105 (3): 845-52.
25. Scarr, Sandra, and Louise Carter-Saltzman. 1979. Twin method: Defense of a critical assumption. Behavior Genetics 9 (6): 527-42.
26. Schaffner, Kenneth F. 2006. Behavior: Its nature and nurture. In Wrestling with Behavioral Genetics: Science, Ethics, and Public Conversation, ed. E. Parens, A. Chapman, and N. Press. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
27. Sober, Elliott. 2001. Separating nature and nurture. In Genetics and Criminal Behavior, ed. D.T. Wasserman and R. S. Wachbroit. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
28. Turkheimer, Eric. 2006. Mobiles: A gloomy view of research into complex human traits. In Wrestling with Behavioral Genetics: Science, Ethics, and Public Conversation, ed. E. Parens, A. Chapman, and N. Press. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
29. Turkheimer, Eric, Andreana Haley, Mary Waldron, Brian D'Onofrio, and Irving I. Gottesman. 2003. Socioeconomic status modifies heritability of IQ in young children. Psychological Science 14 (6): 623-8.
30. Xian, Hong, Jeffrey F. Scherrer, Seth A. Eisen, William R. True, Andrew C. Heath, Jack Goldberg, Michael J. Lyons, and Ming T. Tsuang. 2000. Self-reported zygosity and the equal-environments assumption for psychiatric disorders in the Vietnam Era Twin Registry. Behavior Genetics 30 (4): 303-10.