Cited by 214Psychological Well-being and Life SatisfactionGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyNeurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior

Subjective well-being: genetic and environmental contributions to stability and change

NES, R. B., Røysamb, E., TAMBS, K., HARRIS, J. R., REICHBORN-KJENNERUD, T.·2006·Psychological Medicine

Abstract

Background. Previous cross-sectional studies have found substantial genetic influences on individual variation in subjective well-being (SWB), and evidence for sex-specific genetic effects has been reported. However, the genetic and environmental influences on stability and change in SWB over time are largely unexplored. Method. Questionnaire data on SWB from a population-based sample of Norwegian twins born 1967 to 1979, initially surveyed in 1992 (T 1 ) and re-surveyed in 1998 (T 2 ), were analysed using structural equation modelling to explore the relative effects of genetic and environmental influences on phenotypic stability and change. Results. The phenotypic cross-time correlations for SWB were 0·51 and 0·49 for males and females respectively. The best-fitting longitudinal model specified only additive genetic and individual environmental effects with qualitative and quantitative sex-specific genetic influences. For both males and females, the additive genetic factors influencing SWB were largely stable, although some time-specific genetic contributions were indicated. Cross-time correlations for genetic effects were 0·85 and 0·78 for males and females respectively. The individual environmental influences were primarily time-specific. Additive genetic effects explained approximately 80% of the phenotypic cross-time correlation. For females, the magnitude of the additive genetic effects decreased significantly from T 1 to T 2 , whereas for males, the estimates generally remained unchanged. Conclusions. For both males and females, long-term stability of SWB was mainly attributable to stable additive genetic factors, whereas susceptibility to change was mostly related to individual environmental factors. However, both stable environmental contributions and emerging genetic influences were indicated.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1017/s0033291706007409

Cites

13 of 13 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
NES, R. B., Røysamb, E., TAMBS, K., HARRIS, J. R., & REICHBORN-KJENNERUD, T.
Affiliations
Norwegian Institute of Public Health (NO)
Venue
Psychological Medicine
Published
2006-03-30
Volume
36
Issue
7
Pages
1033-1042
ISSN
  • 0033-2917 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-8978
OpenAlex
W2055176884
Cited by
214
References
13
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 3 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 11 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 11 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 15 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 18
FWCI
9.90
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Psychological Well-being and Life Satisfaction
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cellular and Molecular Neuroscience › Neurotransmitter Receptor Influence on Behavior
Keywords
subjective well-being, genetic factors, environmental influences, sex differences, additive genetic effects, longitudinal twin study, life satisfaction
MeSH terms
Attitude to Health, Environment, Female, Humans, Life Change Events, Male, Models, Psychological, Norway, Phenotype, Surveys and Questionnaires, Twins, Dizygotic, Twins, Monozygotic

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