Premium
DEMONSTRATING THE VALIDITY OF TWIN RESEARCH IN CRIMINOLOGY
Author(s) -
BARNES J. C.,
WRIGHT JOHN PAUL,
BOUTWELL BRIAN B.,
SCHWARTZ JOSEPH A.,
CONNOLLY ERIC J.,
NEDELEC JOSEPH L.,
BEAVER KEVIN M.
Publication year - 2014
Publication title -
criminology
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 3.467
H-Index - 139
eISSN - 1745-9125
pISSN - 0011-1384
DOI - 10.1111/1745-9125.12049
Subject(s) - heritability , twin study , behavioural genetics , quantitative genetics , trace (psycholinguistics) , psychology , psychiatric genetics , missing heritability problem , empirical research , subject (documents) , developmental psychology , genetics , genetic variants , biology , epistemology , computer science , genetic variation , philosophy , psychiatry , linguistics , library science , gene , genotype , schizophrenia (object oriented programming)
In a recent article published in Criminology , Burt and Simons ([Burt, Callie H., 2014]) claimed that the statistical violations of the classical twin design render heritability studies useless. Claiming quantitative genetics is “fatally flawed” and describing the results generated from these models as “preposterous,” Burt and Simons took the unprecedented step to call for abandoning heritability studies and their constituent findings. We show that their call for an “end to heritability studies” was premature, misleading, and entirely without merit. Specifically, we trace the history of behavioral genetics and show that 1) the Burt and Simons critique dates back 40 years and has been subject to a broad array of empirical investigations, 2) the violation of assumptions in twin models does not invalidate their results, and 3) Burt and Simons created a distorted and highly misleading portrait of behavioral genetics and those who use quantitative genetic approaches.