The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Genetic influences on perceptions of childhood family environment: a reared-apart twin study
Abstract
This study estimates the extent to which heredity influences perceptions of childhood family environment in a sample of 58 monozygotic and 46 dizygotic pairs of adult twins who were reared apart. The measures used to assess family environments were the Family Environment Scale (FES) and Block Environmental Questionnaire (BEQ). A principal component factor analysis with a VARIMAX rotation of the FES and BEQ yielded 2 major factors--Support, and Organization and Cultural Orientation. Single and multiple indicator model-fitting techniques were applied to the reared apart twin data on the 2 factors. Perceived support in childhood family environments was fitted best by a model incorporating additive genetic and unshared environmental factors. Perceived organization was fitted most adequately by a model which includes only unshared environmental factors. Maximum-likelihood estimates of heritability from model-fitting analyses suggest that genetic factors explain 44% of the variance of perceptions of support dimension in childhood family environments.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
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?
Genetic effects contribute to relative sensitivity of response to specific environments and shape the propensity to seek out certain environments over others.
“Genetic effects also play a role in determining the potency of these relationships; they contribute both to relative sensitivity of response to specific environments (Trucco et al., 2016) as well as by shaping the propensity to seek out certain environments over others (cf. Hur and Bouchard, 1995; Reiss et al., 2000).”
From Assessment of culture and environment in the Adolescent Brain and Cognitive Development Study: Rationale, description of measures, and early data (2018) · cites this paper as Hur and Bouchard, 1995
Citations
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Zucker, R. A., Gonzalez, R., Feldstein Ewing, S. W., Paulus, M. P., Arroyo, J., Fuligni, A., Morris, A. S., Sanchez, M., & Wills, T. (2018) · Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience · doi:10.1016/j.dcn.2018.03.004 · Cited by 221
Metadata
- Authors
- Hur, Y.-M., & Bouchard, T. J.
- Affiliations
- University of Minnesota (US)
- Venue
- Child Development
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 1995-04
- Volume
- 66
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 330
- ISSN
- 0009-3920 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W1965161558
- Cited by
- 57
- References
- 0
- Citations by year
- 2024: 1 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 1 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 13.07
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Child Development (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Social Sciences › Demography › Family Dynamics and Relationships
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
- Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
- Keywords
- heritability, twins reared apart, childhood family environment, perceived family support, family organization, cultural orientation, monozygotic twins, dizygotic twins, additive genetic effects, nonshared environment, Family Environment Scale
- MeSH terms
- Adolescent, Adult, Attitude, Child, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Models, Genetic, Personality Assessment, Personality Development, Social Environment, Social Support, Twins, Twins, Dizygotic, Twins, Monozygotic, Parenting
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