Integrating Social Science and Genetics: News from the Political Front

United States Studies Centre, University of Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Biodemography and Social Biology (Impact Factor: 1.37). 01/2011; 57(1):67-87. DOI: 10.1080/19485565.2011.568276
Source: PubMed


There has been growing interest in the use of genetic models to expand the understanding of political preferences, attitudes, and behaviors. Researchers in the social sciences have begun incorporating these models and have revealed that genetic differences account for individual differences in political beliefs, behaviors, and responses to the political environment. The first Integrating Genetics and the Social Sciences Conference, held at Boulder, Colorado in May of 2010, brought together these researchers. As a result, we jointly review the last 5 years of research in this area. In doing so, we explicate the methods, findings, and limitations of behavior genetic approaches, including twin designs, association studies, and genome-wide analyses, in their application toward exploring political preferences.

6 Reads
  • Source
    • "To date, these approaches suffer from our limited knowledge about the effects of specific candidate genes on behavioral outcomes (Conley 2009). Here, it is likely that other mechanisms are causing spurious relationships (see, i.e.; Beauchamp et al. 2011; Hatemi et al. 2011; Purcell 2013) and that results are confounded by interaction effects (between different genes or between genes and environment) that cannot be accounted for without deeper knowledge of how DNA operates. So far, results of association studies have seldom been replicated (i.e.; Beauchhamp et. "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: This paper discusses why and how the consideration of inter-individual genetic variation can enhance the explanatory power of sociological inquiries of status attainment and social stratification. We argue that accounting for genetic variation may help to address longstanding and in some cases overlooked causality problems in explaining the emergence of social inequalities—problems which may interfere with both implicit and explicit interpretations of a society as “open” or “closed,” as meritocratic or non-meritocratic. We discuss the basic methodological tenets of genetically informative research (Sect. 2) and provide empirical examples and theoretical conceptualizations on how genetic variation contributes to status attainment (Sect. 3). This is followed by a discussion of gene-environment interplay in relation to more abstract ideas about social mechanisms that generate inequality, touching on normative implications of these ideas as well as considerations from a social justice perspective (Sect. 4). Finally, we briefly review the potential benefits as well as pitfalls of incorporating genetic influences into sociological explanations of status attainment. As we will argue, understanding how social influences impinge on the individual and how genes influence our lives requires sophisticated research designs based on sound sociological theory and methodology (Sect. 5).
    • "(Hatemi et al. 2009b, Littvay, Weith & Dawes 2011, Weber, Johnson & Arceneaux 2011, Arceneaux, Johnson & Maes 2012, Fazekas & Littvay 2012, Klemmensen et al. 2012, Oskarsson et al. 2012 "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Recent research demonstrates that a wide range of political attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors can be explained in part by genetic variation. However, these studies have not yet identified the mechanisms that generate such a relationship. Some scholars have speculated that psychological traits mediate the relationship between genes and political participation, but so far there have been no empirical tests. Here we focus on the role of three psychological traits that are believed to influence political participation: cognitive ability, personal control, and extraversion. Utilizing a unique sample of more than 2,000 Swedish twin pairs, we show that a common genetic factor can explain most of the relationship between these psychological traits and acts of political participation, as well as predispositions related to participation. While our analysis is not a definitive test, our results suggest an upper bound for a proposed mediation relationship between genes, psychological traits, and political participation.
    American Journal of Political Science 05/2014; 58(4). DOI:10.1111/ajps.12100 · 2.76 Impact Factor
  • Source
    • "Leading scholars in this field relate to this point and explain that in " a univariate model, additive genetic variance will include all the genetic influence from all covariates, some part of gene-environment covariation if it exists, and some part of gene environment interaction, if it exists " (Hatemi, Dawes, et al. 2011, 74; emphases added). They also admit that this model simplifies a far more complex interaction and reality (ibid.). "
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: In this article, we respond to Shultziner's critique that argues that identical twins are more alike not because of genetic similarity, but because they select into more similar environments and respond to stimuli in comparable ways, and that these effects bias twin model estimates to such an extent that they are invalid. The essay further argues that the theory and methods that undergird twin models, as well as the empirical studies which rely upon them, are unaware of these potential biases. We correct this and other misunderstandings in the essay and find that gene-environment (GE) interplay is a well-articulated concept in behavior genetics and political science, operationalized as gene-environment correlation and gene-environment interaction. Both are incorporated into interpretations of the classical twin design (CTD) and estimated in numerous empirical studies through extensions of the CTD. We then conduct simulations to quantify the influence of GE interplay on estimates from the CTD. Due to the criticism's mischaracterization of the CTD and GE interplay, combined with the absence of any empirical evidence to counter what is presented in the extant literature and this article, we conclude that the critique does not enhance our understanding of the processes that drive political traits, genetic or otherwise.
    Political Analysis 07/2013; 21(3):368-389. DOI:10.1093/pan/mpt005 · 2.19 Impact Factor
Show more