Cited by 441Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on BehaviorSchizophrenia research and treatmentGenetic Associations and Epidemiology

Association of the Dopamine D4 Receptor (DRD4) Gene and Approach-Related Personality Traits: Meta-Analysis and New Data

Munafò, Marcus R., Yalcin, Binnaz, Willis-Owen, Saffron A., Flint, Jonathan·2008·Biological Psychiatry

Abstract

Background Two variants in the dopamine D4 receptor (DRD4) gene have been reported to be associated with human approach-related traits such as novelty seeking and extraversion. However, the strength of evidence for this association remains uncertain.Methods We conducted a meta-analysis of published studies of the association between the DRD4 gene variable number of tandem repeats (VNTR) and C-521T polymorphisms and human approach-related personality traits, including novelty seeking, extraversion, and impulsivity, restricted to adult samples recruited from nonpsychiatric populations, and extended on this literature by attempting to confirm any evidence of association in a replication sample (n = 309) selected for extreme scores on the extraversion subscale of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire from a large (n = 40,090) population-based sample.Results Our initial meta-analysis supported the association of the DRD4 C-521T polymorphism, but not the VNTR polymorphism, with approach-related traits. This conclusion was qualified by evidence of significant publication bias and the failure to detect association in a replication sample comprising individuals at the extremes of the trait distribution. The association of the C-521T polymorphism observed in our initial meta-analysis was robust to the inclusion of these new data, but our revised meta-analysis indicated that the association was present for measures of novelty seeking and impulsivity but not for measures of extraversion.Conclusions The DRD4 gene may be associated with measures of novelty seeking and impulsivity but not extraversion. The association of the C-521T variant with these measures, if genuine, may account for up to 3% of phenotypic variance.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.biopsych.2007.04.006

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 95 · Cited by 441

Authors
Munafò, M. R., Yalcin, B., Willis-Owen, S. A., & Flint, J.
Affiliations
Centre for Human Genetics (GB)
Venue
Biological Psychiatry
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-01
Volume
63
Issue
2
Pages
197-206
ISSN
0006-3223 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2060185947
Cited by
441
References
95
Citations by year
2026: 6 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 17 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 64 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 32 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 17 · 2015: 37 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 33 · 2012: 29
FWCI
2.40
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Biological Psychiatry (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • HAL (publishedVersion)
  • Bristol Research (University of Bristol) (submittedVersion)
Funders
Wellcome Trust
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Schizophrenia research and treatment
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
Keywords
dopamine D4 receptor, DRD4 gene, variable number tandem repeats, novelty seeking, extraversion, impulsivity, genetic association, publication bias, Eysenck Personality Questionnaire
MeSH terms
Adult, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Personality, Polymorphism, Genetic, Meta-Analysis as Topic, Logistic Models, Databases, Bibliographic, Receptors, Dopamine D4

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review