Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-2xdlg Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-23T14:12:35.308Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Polygenic scores ignore development and epigenetics, dramatically reducing their value

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 September 2023

David S. Moore Open the ORCID record for David S. Moore [Opens in a new window]
David S. Moore*
Affiliation:
Psychology Field Group, Pitzer College, Claremont, CA, USA dmoore@pitzer.edu; http://pzacad.pitzer.edu/~dmoore/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Polygenic scores cannot elucidate the mechanisms that produce behavioral phenotypes (including “intelligence”). Therefore, they are unlikely to yield helpful interventions. Moreover, they are poor predictors of individuals' developmental outcomes. Burt's critique is well-supported by the details of molecular biology. Specifically, experiences affect epigenetic factors that influence phenotypes via how the genome functions, a fact that lends support to Burt's conclusions.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 46 , 2023 , e220
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Charney, E. (2022). The “golden age” of behavior genetics? Perspectives on Psychological Science, 174(4), 1188–1210. https://doi.org/10.1177/17456916211041602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraga, M. F., Ballestar, E., Paz, M. F., Ropero, S., Setien, F., Ballestar, M. L., … Esteller, M. (2005). Epigenetic differences arise during the lifetime of monozygotic twins. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 102, 10604–10609.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gottlieb, G. (1995). Some conceptual deficiencies in “developmental” behavior genetics. Human Development, 38(3), 131–141.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harden, K. P. (2021). The genetic lottery: Why DNA matters for social equality. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Harden, K. P., Domingue, B. W., Belsky, D. W., Boardman, J. D., Crosnoe, R., Malanchini, M., … Harris, K. M. (2020). Genetic associations with mathematics tracking and persistence in secondary school. NPJ Science of Learning, 5(1), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-020-0060-2CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Harden, K. P., & Koellinger, P. D. (2020). Using genetics for social science. Nature Human Behavior, 4, 567–576. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-020-0862-5CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lee, J. J., Wedow, R., Okbay, A., Kong, E., Maghzian, O., Zacher, M., … Cesarini, D. (2018). Gene discovery and polygenic prediction from a genome-wide association study of educational attainment in 1.1 million individuals. Nature Genetics, 50, 1112–1121. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-018-0147-3CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lewontin, R. C. (2000). The triple helix: Gene, organism, and environment. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Lickliter, R. (2017). Developmental evolution. WIREs Cognitive Science, 8, e1422. https://doi.org/10.1002/wcs.1422CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moore, D. S. (2001). The dependent gene: The fallacy of “Nature vs. Nurture”. Holt.Google Scholar
Moore, D. S. (2013). Behavioral genetics, genetics, and epigenetics. In Zelazo, P. D. (Ed.), Oxford handbook of developmental psychology, Vol. 1: Body and mind (pp. 91–128). Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199958450.013.0005Google Scholar
Moore, D. S. (2015). The developing genome: An introduction to behavioral epigenetics. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Moore, D. S. (2016). Behavioral epigenetics. WIREs Systems Biology and Medicine, 9(1), e1333. http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wsbm.1333CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moore, D. S. (2017). The potential of epigenetics research to transform conceptions of phenotype development. Human Development, 60, 69–80. http://dx.doi.org/10.1159/000477992CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Morgan, H. D., Sutherland, H. G., Martin, D. I., & Whitelaw, E. (1999) Epigenetic inheritance at the agouti locus in the mouse. Nature Genetics, 23, 314–318.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Morris, T. T., Davies, N. M., & Smith, G. D. (2020). Can education be personalised using pupils’ genetic data? eLife, 9, e49962. https://doi.org/10.7554/eLife.49962CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Noble, D. (2006). The music of life: Biology beyond genes. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Noble, D. (2012). A theory of biological relativity: No privileged level of causation. Interface Focus, 2, 55–64. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsfs.2011.0067CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pan, Q., Shai, O., Lee, L. J., Frey, B. J., & Blencowe, B. J. (2008). Deep surveying of alternative splicing complexity in the human transcriptome by high throughput sequencing. Nature Genetics, 40, 14131415. https://doi.org/10.1038/ng.259CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Plomin, R., & von Stumm, S. (2018). The new genetics of intelligence. Nature Reviews Genetics, 19, 148–159. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg.2017.104CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Provencal, N., Suderman, M. J., Guillemin, C., Massart, R., Ruggiero, A., Wang, D., … Szyf, M. (2012). The signature of maternal rearing in the methylome in rhesus macaque prefrontal cortex and T cells. Journal of Neuroscience, 32(44), 15626–15642. https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.1470-12.2012CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Richardson, K., & Jones, M. C. (2019). Why genome-wide associations with cognitive ability measures are probably spurious. New Ideas in Psychology, 55, 35–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.newideapsych.2019.04.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tung, J., Barreiro, L. B., Johnson, Z. P., Hansen, K. D., Michopoulos, V., Toufexis, D., … Gilad, Y. (2012). Social environment is associated with gene regulatory variation in the rhesus macaque immune system. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, 109, 6490–6495.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Turkheimer, E. (2012). Genome wide association studies of behavior are social science. In Plaisance, K. S. & Reydon, T. A. C. (Eds.), Philosophy of behavioral biology. Boston studies in the philosophy of science (Vol. 282, pp. 43–64). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-1951-4_3CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turkheimer, E. (2019). The social science blues. Hastings Center Report, 49(3), 45–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/hast.1008CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Waddington, C. H. (1957). The strategy of the genes. Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar
Waddington, C. H. (1968). The basic ideas of biology. In Waddington, C. H. (Ed.), Towards a theoretical biology (Vol. 1: Prolegomena, pp. 1–32) (pp. 9–10). Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar