Importance of shared genes and shared environments for symptoms of depression in older adults.
ABSTRACT The Center for Epidemiologic Studies-Depression scale was administered to 68 identical and 161 fraternal twin pairs reared apart and 114 identical and 138 fraternal pairs reared together to ascertain relative genetic and environmental contributions to individual differences in self-reported depressive symptoms. Intraclass correlations and model fitting indicated that genetic influences explained 16% of the variance in total depression scores and 19% for the Psychomotor Retardation and Somatic Complaints subscale, but heritability was minimal for the Depressed Mood and Well-Being subscales. Influence of family rearing context played a substantial role in explaining twin similarity, whereas unique life experiences accounted for the greatest proportion of variance. Significant age group differences were observed, with heritability greater in twins of 60 years of age or older than in twins under 60, especially for Psychomotor Retardation.
SourceAvailable from: Luis Rojo MorenoActas espanolas de psiquiatria 01/2008; 37(3):128. · 0.76 Impact Factor
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: In a series of three studies we constructed the Differentiation of Self Inventory—Short Form (DSI-SF) and established initial evidence of reliability and validity. In study 1, we used Item Response Theory to reduce the number of items on the Differentiation of Self Inventory—Revised (Skowron and Schmitt in J Marital Fam Ther 29(2):209–222, 2003. doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.2003.tb01201.x). DSI-SF scale items were chosen based on full length scale item content and item characteristic curves. Study 2 provided evidence for criterion, construct, and structural validity of the DSI-SF. Specifically, scores on the DSI-SF were positively related to self-esteem and negatively related to symptoms of depression, state anxiety, trait anxiety, and perceived stress. Evidence of convergent validity was found in a positive relationship between the subscales of the DSI-SF and the Level of Differentiation of Self Scale (Haber in The measurement of nursing outcomes, 2nd edn. Springer, New York, pp 320–331, 2003). The DSI-SF subscales and full scale were also shown to retain most of the reliability of the full length scales. In the third study, preliminary estimates of 4-week test–retest reliability ranged from 0.72 (Fusion with Others subscale) to 0.85 (DSI-SF Full Scale). These results support the DSI-SF in college student samples.Contemporary Family Therapy 03/2015; DOI:10.1007/s10591-015-9329-7
[Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Mental health is not simply the absence of mental illness; rather it is a distinct entity representing wellness. Models of wellbeing have been proposed that emphasize components of subjective wellbeing, psychological wellbeing, or a combination of both. A new 26-item scale of wellbeing (COMPAS-W) was developed in a cohort of 1669 healthy adult twins (18–61 years). The scale was derived using factor analysis of multiple scales of complementary constructs and confirmed using tests of reliability and convergent validity. Bivariate genetic modeling confirmed its heritability. From an original 89 items we identified six independent subcomponents that contributed to wellbeing. The COMPAS-W scale and its subcomponents showed construct validity against psychological and physical health behaviors, high internal consistency (average r=0.71, Wellbeing r=0.84), and 12-month test–retest reliability (average r=0.62, Wellbeing r=0.82). There was a moderate contribution of genetics to total Wellbeing (heritability h2=48%) and its subcomponents: Composure (h2=24%), Own-worth (h2=42%), Mastery (h2=40%), Positivity (h2=42%), Achievement (h2=32%) and Satisfaction (h2=43%). Multivariate genetic modeling indicated genetic variance was correlated across the scales, suggesting common genetic factors contributed to Wellbeing and its subcomponents. The COMPAS-W scale provides a validated indicator of wellbeing and offers a new tool to quantify mental health.Psychiatry Research 09/2014; 219(1):204–213. DOI:10.1016/j.psychres.2014.04.033 · 2.68 Impact Factor