Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-t5tsf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T16:54:44.923Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Changes in heritability: Unpredictable and of limited use

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 September 2022

Stephen M. Downes Open the ORCID record for Stephen M. Downes [Opens in a new window]  and
Jonathan Michael Kaplan
Stephen M. Downes
Affiliation:
Department of Philosophy, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT 84112, USAs.downes@utah.eduhttps://philosophy.utah.edu/profile.php?unid=u0031428
Jonathan Michael Kaplan
Affiliation:
Philosophy Program, Oregon State University, Corvallis, OR 97331, USA. jonathan.kaplan@oregonstate.eduhttps://liberalarts.oregonstate.edu/users/jonathan-kaplan
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We argue that heritability estimates cannot be used to make informed judgments about the populations from which they are drawn. Furthermore, predicting changes in heritability from population changes is likely impossible, and of limited value. We add that the attempt to separate human environments into cultural and non-cultural components does not advance our understanding of the environmental multiplier effect.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 45 , 2022 , e159
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Beam, C. R., & Turkheimer, E. (2013). Phenotype–environment correlations in longitudinal twin models. Development and Psychopathology, 25(1), 7–16. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579412000867.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cooper, R. M., & Zubek, J. P. (1958). Effects of enriched and restricted early environments on the learning ability of bright and dull rats. Canadian Journal of Psychology/Revue Canadienne de Psychologie, 12(3), 159–164. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0083747.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crabbe, J. C., Wahlsten, D., & Dudek, B. C. (1999). Genetics of mouse behavior: Interactions with lab environment. Science (New York, N.Y.), 284, 1670–1672.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harden, K. P. (2021). “Reports of my death were greatly exaggerated”: Behavior genetics in the Postgenomic era. Annual Review of Psychology, 72(1), 37–60. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-052220-103822.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Laland, K. N., Oddling-Smee, J., & Feldman, M. W. (2000). Niche construction, biological evolution, and cultural change. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 23, 131–175.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewontin, R. C. (1974). Analysis of variance and analysis of causes. American Journal of Human Genetics, 26, 400–411.Google ScholarPubMed
Lewontin, R. C. (1983). The organism as the subject and object of evolution. Scientia; Rivista di Scienza, 118, 65–95.Google Scholar
Lewontin, R. C. (1992). Biology as ideology: The doctrine of DNA (1st U.S. ed). Harper Perennial.Google Scholar
Sauce, B., Bendrath, S., Herzfeld, M., Siegel, D., Style, C., Rab, S., … Matzel, L. D. (2018). The impact of environmental interventions among mouse siblings on the heritability and malleability of general cognitive ability. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 373(1756), 20170289. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2017.0289.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turkheimer, E. (2004). Spinach and Ice cream: Why social science is so difficult. In DiLalla, L. F. (Ed.), Behavior genetics principles: Perspectives in development, personality, and psychopathology (pp. 161–189). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10684-011.Google Scholar