Hostname: page-component-5c6d5d7d68-thh2z Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-09-01T15:29:55.187Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Constrained Maximum Likelihood Analysis of Familial Resemblance of Twins and Their Parents

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 August 2014

D.I. Boomsma  and
P.C.M. Molenaar
D.I. Boomsma*
Affiliation:
Department of Experimental Psychology, Free University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
P.C.M. Molenaar
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Amsterdam, Netherlands
*
Department of Experimental Psychology, Free University, De Boelelaan 1115, 1081 HV Amsterdam, Netherlands

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

When the univariate twin design is extended by including parents of twins, it is possible to assess additive genetic effects in the presence of assortative mating and genotype-environment correlation, the effects of parental influence, as well as the extent of residual shared environmental influences. The analysis of data obtained in such an extended twin design can be carried out by means of constrained maximum likelihood confirmatory factor analysis. Specifically, the structural model underlying this design can be represented as a LISREL model with nonlinear constraints. This representation offers the possibility to consider extended multivariate twin designs involving common genetic and environmental factors. The proposed method will be illustrated with applications to simulated and real data.

Keywords

Parent-offspring designLISRELConstrained optimizationTwins
Type
Research Article
Information
Acta geneticae medicae et gemellologiae: twin research , Volume 36 , Issue 1 , January 1987 , pp. 29 - 39
Copyright
Copyright © The International Society for Twin Studies 1987

References

REFERENCES

1.Bertsekas, DP (1982): Constrained Optimization and Lagrage Multiplier Methods. New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
2.Box, GEP, Tao, GC (1973): Bayesian Inference in Statistical Analysis. Reading, Massachusetts: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.Google Scholar
3.Eaves, LJ, Last, KA, Young, PA, Martin, NG (1978): Model-fitting approaches to the analysis of human behavior. Heredity 41:249–320.Google Scholar
4.Fulker, DW (1982): Extension of the classical twin method. In Bonné-Tamir, B (ed): Human Genetics: Part A, The Unfolding Genome. New York: Alan R. Liss, pp 395–406.Google Scholar
5.IMSL Inc. (1979): IMSL Library Reference Manual Edition 7. Houston Texas: IMSL Inc.Google Scholar
6.Jencks, C, Smith, M, Acland, H, Bane, MJ, Cohen, D, Gintis, H, Heyns, B, Michelson, S (1972): Inequality: A Reassessment of the Effect of Family and Schooling in America. New York: Basic-Books.Google Scholar
7.Jöreskog, KG (1973): A general method for estimating a linear structural equation system. In Goldberger, AS, Duncan, OD (eds): Structural Equation Models in the Social Sciences. New York: Seminar Press, pp 85–112.Google Scholar
8.Jöreskog, KG (1977): Structural equation models in the social sciences: specification, estimation and testing. In Krishnaiah, PR (ed): Applications of Statistics. Amsterdam: North Holland Publishing Co, pp 265–287.Google Scholar
9.Martin, NG, Eaves, LJ (1977): The genetical analysis of covariance structure. Heredity 38:79–95.Google Scholar
10.Numerical-Algorithms-Group (1974): E04VAF in NAG Library Manual: Mark IV. Oxford: NAG Central Office Oxford University.Google Scholar
11.Vogler, GP, Fulker, DW (1983): Family resemblance for educational attainment. Behav Genet 13: 341–354.Google Scholar