Search results

Aaron Panofsky (2014), Misbehaving Science: Controversy and the Development of Behavior Genetics. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. 321 pp., $27.50 (Paperback), ISBN: 9780226058450. $89.00 (Hardcover), ISBN: 9780226058313.

AbstractIn this article we describe the design and implementation of a database for extended twin families. The database does not focus on probands or on index twins, as this approach becomes problematic when larger multigenerational families are included, when more than one set of multiples is present within a family, or when families turn out to be part of a larger pedigree. Instead, we present an alternative approach that uses a highly flexible notion of persons and relations. The relations among the subjects in the database have a one-to-many structure, are user-definable and extendible and support arbitrarily complicated pedigrees. Some additional characteristics of the database are highlighted, such as the storage of historical data, predefined expressions for advanced queries, output facilities for individuals and relations among individuals and an easy-to-use multi-step wizard for contacting participants. This solution presents a flexible approach to accommodate pedigrees of arbitrary size, multiple biological and nonbiological relationships among participants and dynamic changes in these relations that occur over time, which can be implemented for any type of multigenerational family study.

ObjectiveGroup identity is a central concept in many social science disciplines. We investigate why people identify with groups and show favoritism to in‐group members. We anticipate group identifications are substantially influenced by genes and social environments, likely working through stable personality traits.MethodsUsing twin study data from the National Survey of Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS I), we investigate the heritability of in‐group identification and favoritism, as well as the extent to which the genetic bases of these orientations are shared with genetic underpinnings of personality traits, primarily focusing on the "Big Five": openness to experience, conscientiousness, extraversion, agreeableness, and emotional stability/neuroticism.ResultsGroup identification is largely attributable to genetic factors. However, environments also affect group identification. The heritability of personality traits accounts for a modest portion of the genetic variation of group identification.ConclusionOur findings have implications for the study of collective action, identity politics, and the growing research program investigating social and political behavior genetics.

The last several decades have witnessed remarkable advances in neurobiological approaches, including evolutionary, neuropsychological, behavioral genetic, and physiological methods to explore individual differences in social and political phenomena. In this special issue, we seek to include these advances into the greater political psychology discourse through a series of articles focused on topics of enduring interest to political psychologists, such as candidate evaluation, voter turnout, race, and public preferences concerning social welfare policy.

ABSTRACTResearch reported up through and including the 1970s directly bearing upon the relationship between genetics and criminality is reviewed. Studies using four classes of research designs are considered: general pedigree (or family) studies, twin studies, karyotype studies, and adoption studies. Only the latter three offer solid evidence at least consistent with a partial genetic etiological hypothesis, and of these, only one type of karyotype study and the adoption studies appear to be on the verge of definitely settling the matter. Among the fairly definitive types of studies, most of the evidence is extremely supportive of the proposition that human variation in tendencies to commit criminal behavior is significantly affected by some genetic factors.

Political scientists are making increasing use of the methodologies of behavior genetics in an attempt to uncover whether or not political behavior is heritable, as well as the specific genotypes that might act as predisposing factors for—or predictors of—political "phenotypes." Noteworthy among the latter are a series of candidate gene association studies in which researchers claim to have discovered one or two common genetic variants that predict such behaviors as voting and political orientation. We critically examine the candidate gene association study methodology by considering, as a representative example, the recent study by Fowler and Dawes according to which "two genes predict voter turnout." In addition to demonstrating, on the basis of the data set employed by Fowler and Dawes, that two genes do not predict voter turnout, we consider a number of difficulties, both methodological and genetic, that beset the use of gene association studies, both candidate and genome-wide, in the social and behavioral sciences.

Abstract
In the following review article, we aim to summarize the current research progress in the field of evolutionary and behavior genetics studies on human religiousness and religious behavior. First, we provide a brief (and thus incomplete) overview of the historical discussions and explain the genetic basis of behavior in general and religious behavior in particular, from twin studies to molecular data analysis. In the second part of the paper, we discuss the potential evolutionary forces leading to human religiousness and human religious behavior, emphasizing the emergence of "axial age" and the so called "big gods" in the relatively recent history of humans.

From a biologist's perspective, social behavior includes any behavior that involves at least two actors. By this definition, social behavior can include aggregation in slime molds, the colony structure of the eusocial insects, or the coordinated efforts of humans across vast distances to successfully land on the moon. The diversity of this range of behavior shares one driving force: natural selection. While natural selection acts at the level of phenotype (e.g., morphology, metabolism, behavior) the ultimate unit of natural selection is the gene contained in DNA-the object of inheritance. The relationship between DNA and social behavior is uncovered in the field of sociogenomics, defined as the mechanistic study of genes, gene products, and gene × gene interaction networks supporting emergent social behaviors.