Cited by 142Genetics and Physical PerformanceGenetic Associations and EpidemiologyNutrition, Genetics, and Disease

Learning one’s genetic risk changes physiology independent of actual genetic risk

Open access
Turnwald, Bradley P., Goyer, J. Parker, Boles, Danielle Z., Silder, Amy, Delp, Scott L., Crum, Alia J.·2018·Nature Human Behaviour

Abstract

Millions of people now access personal genetic risk estimates for diseases such as Alzheimer's, cancer and obesity 1. While this information can be informative 2-4, research on placebo and nocebo effects 5-8 suggests that learning of one's genetic risk may evoke physiological changes consistent with the expected risk profile. Here we tested whether merely learning of one's genetic risk for disease alters one's actual risk by making people more likely to exhibit the expected changes in gene-related physiology, behaviour and subjective experience. Individuals were genotyped for actual genetic risk and then randomly assigned to receive either a 'high-risk' or 'protected' genetic test result for obesity via cardiorespiratory exercise capacity (experiment 1, N = 116) or physiological satiety (experiment 2, N = 107) before engaging in a task in which genetic risk was salient. Merely receiving genetic risk information changed individuals' cardiorespiratory physiology, perceived exertion and running endurance during exercise, and changed satiety physiology and perceived fullness after food consumption in a self-fulfilling manner. Effects of perceived genetic risk on outcomes were sometimes greater than the effects associated with actual genetic risk. If simply conveying genetic risk information can alter actual risk, clinicians and ethicists should wrestle with appropriate thresholds for when revealing genetic risk is warranted.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1038/s41562-018-0483-4

Cites

64 of 64 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Self-fulfilling prophecy effects do not necessarily take much time to unfold but can happen swiftly in a single interaction right after the ascription.

    “Moreover, these effects don't necessarily take much time to unfold but can happen swiftly in a single interaction (e.g., in interview settings; Word et al. 1974) right after the ascription (Turnwald et al. 2018: 49).”

    From What Is the Function of Confirmation Bias? (2022) · cites this paper as Turnwald et al. 2018

  • Some relevant effects may also come from natural science generalizations, yet the social psychological mechanisms behind them are probably different.

    “Some of the effects relevant here might also arise from natural scientific generalizations (for example, that endocrine disrupters cause infertility).However, the underlying social psychological processes are likely to be distinct; see also(Turnwald et al. [2019]).”

    From Science Communication and the Problematic Impact of Descriptive Norms (2023) · cites this paper as Turnwald et al. [2019]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Turnwald, B. P., Goyer, J. P., Boles, D. Z., Silder, A., Delp, S. L., & Crum, A. J.
Affiliations
Stanford University (US)
Corresponding author
Turnwald, Bradley P.
Venue
Nature Human Behaviour
Published
2018-12-10
Volume
3
Issue
1
Pages
48-56
ISSN
2397-3374 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2903243478
Cited by
142
References
63
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 15 · 2022: 37 · 2021: 13 · 2020: 39 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 1
FWCI
10.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Nature Human Behaviour (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (acceptedVersion)
  • RePEc: Research Papers in Economics (submittedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (U54EB020405)
  • National Center for Complementary and Integrative Health (DP2AT009511)
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetics and Physical Performance
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Genetic Associations and Epidemiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Genetics › Nutrition, Genetics, and Disease
Keywords
genetic risk disclosure, self-fulfilling prophecy, placebo effect, nocebo effect, perceived exertion, running endurance, satiety, genetic testing
MeSH terms
Alpha-Ketoglutarate-Dependent Dioxygenase FTO, Cardiorespiratory Fitness, Adult, Exercise Test, Physical Exertion, Female, Genetic Testing, Humans, Male, Obesity, Risk, Exercise Tolerance, Cyclic AMP Response Element-Binding Protein, Genetic Predisposition to Disease, Young Adult

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