Genes, Environments, and Differential Susceptibility Current Topics in Evolutionary Developmental Psychology
Book contents
- Genes, Environments, and Differential Susceptibility
- Genes, Environments, and Differential Susceptibility
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I Historical Background and Theoretical Foundations of Jay Belsky’s Work in Evolutionary Developmental Psychology
- Part II Parent–Child Relations and Attachment
- Part III Life-Course Development from Prenatal Environment through Childhood to Adulthood
- Part IV Differential Susceptibility to Environmental Influences
- Chapter 9 Unequal Monks, Unequal Hoods?
- Chapter 10 Child Maltreatment and the Development of Multisystem Resilience
- Chapter 11 Differential Susceptibility and Its Usefulness for the Understanding of Crime and the Rehabilitation of Criminals
- Conclusion
- Afterword
- Biography of Jay Belsky
- Index
- References
Chapter 9 - Unequal Monks, Unequal Hoods?
A Call for Experiments on Genetic Differential Susceptibility
from Part IV - Differential Susceptibility to Environmental Influences
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 04 September 2025
Book contents
- Genes, Environments, and Differential Susceptibility
- Genes, Environments, and Differential Susceptibility
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Figures
- Tables
- Contributors
- Introduction
- Part I Historical Background and Theoretical Foundations of Jay Belsky’s Work in Evolutionary Developmental Psychology
- Part II Parent–Child Relations and Attachment
- Part III Life-Course Development from Prenatal Environment through Childhood to Adulthood
- Part IV Differential Susceptibility to Environmental Influences
- Chapter 9 Unequal Monks, Unequal Hoods?
- Chapter 10 Child Maltreatment and the Development of Multisystem Resilience
- Chapter 11 Differential Susceptibility and Its Usefulness for the Understanding of Crime and the Rehabilitation of Criminals
- Conclusion
- Afterword
- Biography of Jay Belsky
- Index
- References
Summary
Belsky noted that for evolutionary-biological reasons, development may not follow a cumulative risk model. He theorized that ‘vulnerable’ children might actually be susceptible to environmental influences for better and for worse. Moreover, he argued that variation in susceptibility within the family would be evolutionarily advantageous for both parents and children. Stimulated by Belsky’s provocative thinking, and relying on randomized controlled trials that constitute the most stringent and powerful tests of the paradigm, we found meta-analytic support for (genetic) differential susceptibility. Examining the bold idea of within-family differential susceptibility, we included twins in our cohort-sequential randomized controlled trial and designed a series of experiments on mice. One of our mice studies revealed the expected crossover interaction. Heterozygous DRD4 mice who had grown up in an enriched environment licked and groomed their own offspring the most, while those who grew up in adverse circumstances showed the least licking and grooming. In humans, our experimental search for within-family differential susceptibility has not yet supported this bold conjecture. An explanation might be that the available polygenic scores for susceptibility were developed in the context of internalizing, not externalizing, problems. Susceptibility to environmental influences may be more domain specific (Belsky et al., 2022) than we originally thought.
Keywords
Information
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Genes, Environments, and Differential SusceptibilityCurrent Topics in Evolutionary Developmental Psychology, pp. 195 - 216Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2025
References
Aron, E.N., & Aron, A. (1997). Sensory-processing sensitivity and its relation to introversion and emotionality. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 345–368.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Assary, E., Coleman, J., Hemani, G., Veijer, M. V., Howe, L., Palviainen, T., Grasby, K., Ahlskog, R., Nygaard, M., Cheesman, R., Lim, K., Reynolds, C., Ordoñana, J., Colodro-Conde, L., Gordon, S., Madrid-Valero, J., Thalamuthu, A., Hottenga, J. J., Mengel-From, J., Armstrong, N. J., … Keers, R. (2024). Genetics of environmental sensitivity to psychiatric and neurodevelopmental phenotypes: Evidence from GWAS of monozygotic twins. Research Square, rs.3.rs-4333635. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-4333635/v1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2006). Gene-environment interaction of the dopamine D4 receptor (DRD4) and observed maternal insensitivity predicting externalizing behavior in preschoolers. Developmental Psychobiology, 48, 406–409. https://doi.org/10.1002/dev.20152CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2007). Genetic vulnerability or differential susceptibility in child development: The case of attachment. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 48, 1160–1173. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2007.01801.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2015). The hidden efficacy of interventions: Gene x environment experiments from a differential susceptibility perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 381–409. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015407CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belsky, J. (1997a). Variation in susceptibility to rearing influences: An evolutionary argument. Psychological Inquiry, 8, 182–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belsky, J. (1997b). Theory testing, effect-size evaluation, and differential susceptibility to rearing influence: The case of mothering and attachment. Child Development, 68, 598–600.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Belsky, J. (2000). Conditional and alternative reproductive strategies: Individual differences in susceptibility to rearing experience. In Rodgers, J., Rowe, D., & Miller, W. (Eds.), Genetic influences on human fertility and sexuality: Theoretical and empirical contributions from the biological and behavioral sciences (pp. 127–146). Kluwer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belsky, J. (2005). Differential susceptibility to rearing influences: An evolutionary hypothesis and some evidence. In Ellis, B. & Bjorklund, D. (Eds.), Origins of the social mind: Evolutionary psychology and child development (pp. 139–163). Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Belsky, J., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2007). For better and for worse: Differential susceptibility to environmental influences. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16, 300–304. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00525.xCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Belsky, J., & Beaver, K. M. (2011). Cumulative-genetic plasticity, parenting and adolescent self-regulation. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 52(5), 619–626. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-7610.2010.02327.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Belsky, J., Hsieh, K. H., & Crnic, K. (1998). Mothering, fathering, and infant negativity as antecedents of boys’ externalizing problems and inhibition at age 3 years: Differential susceptibility to rearing experience? Development and psychopathology, 10(2), 301–319. https://doi.org/10.1017/s095457949800162xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Belsky, J., Zhang, X., & Sayler, K. (2022). Differential Susceptibility 2.0: Are the same children affected by different experiences and exposures? Development & Psychopathology, 34, 1025–1033.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boyce, W.Th. (2019). The orchid and the dandelion: Why some children struggle and how all can thrive. Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Boyce, W. T., Chesney, M., Alkon, A., Tschann, J. M., Adams, S., Chester- man, B., et al. (1995). Psychobiologic reactivity to stress and childhood respiratory illnesses: Results of two prospective studies. Psychosomatic Medicine, 57, 411–422.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Boyce, W. T., & Ellis, B. J. (2005). Biological sensitivity to context: I. An evolutionary–developmental theory of the origins and functions of stress reactivity. Development and Psychopathology, 17, 271–301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Caspi, A, Sugden, K, Moffitt, TE, Taylor, A, Craig, IW, et al. (2003). Influence of life stress on depression: Moderation by a polymorphism in the 5-HTT gene. Science, 301, 386–389.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chhangur, R. R., Weeland, J., Overbeek, G., Matthys, W., Orobio de Castro, B., van der Giessen, D., Belsky, J. (2017). Genetic moderation of intervention efficacy: dopaminergic genes, the Incredible Years, and externalizing behavior in children. Child Development, 88, 796–811. https://doi-org.libproxy.ucl.ac.uk/10.1111/cdev.12612CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chen, Y. C., Fan, H. Y., Yang, C., Hsieh, R. H., Pan, W. H., & Lee, Y. L. (2019). Assessing causality between childhood adiposity and early puberty: A bidirectional Mendelian randomization and longitudinal study. Metabolism: Clinical and Experimental, 100, 153961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.metabol.2019.153961CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Crone, E. Achterberg, M., …Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2020). Neural and behavioral signatures of social evaluation and adaptation in childhood and adolescence: The Leiden consortium on individual development (L-CID). Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 45, 100805. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2020.100805CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cyr, C., Euser, E. M., Bakermans–Kranenburg, M. J. & Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2010). Attachment security and disorganization in maltreating and high-risk families: A series of meta-analyses. Development and Psychopathology, 22, 87–108. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579409990289CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Duncan, L. E., & Keller, M. C. (2011). A critical review of the first 10 years of candidate gene-by-environment interaction research in psychiatry. American Journal of Psychiatry, 168, 1041–1049.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ellis, B. J., Boyce, W. T., Belsky, J., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2011). Differential susceptibility to the environment: a neurodevelopmental theory. Development and Psychopathology, 23, 7–28. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579410000611CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Euser, S., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., Van den Bulk, B. G., Linting, M., Damsteegt, R.C…Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2016). Efficacy of the video-feedback intervention to promote positive parenting and sensitive discipline in twin families (VIPP-Twins): Study protocol for a randomized controlled trial. BMC Psychology, 4(33), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-016-0139-yCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Frankenhuis, W. E., Panchanathan, K., & Belsky, J. (2016). A mathematical model of the evolution of individual differences in developmental plasticity arising through parental bet-hedging. Developmental Science, 19, 251–274.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Geary, D. C., & Flinn, M. V. (2001). Evolution of human parental behavior and the human family. Parenting, 1(1), 5–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gervai, J., Novak, A., Lakatos, K., Toth, I., Danis, I., Ronai, Z., Nemoda, Z., Sasvari-Szekely, M., Bureau, J. F., Bronfman, E., & Lyons-Ruth, K. (2007). Infant genotype may moderate sensitivity to maternal affective communications: attachment disorganization, quality of care, and the DRD4 polymorphism. Social Neuroscience, 2(3–4), 307–319. https://doi.org/10.1080/17470910701391893CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gilissen, R., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., Van IJzendoorn, M. H. & Van der Veer, R. (2008). Parent-child relationship, temperament, and physiological reactions to fear-inducing film clips: Further evidence for differential susceptibility. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 99, 182–195. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2007.06.004CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gottesman, I. I., & Shields, J. (1967). A polygenic theory of schizophrenia. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 58, 199–205. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.58.1.199CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hartman, S., Freeman, S. M., Bales, K. L., & Belsky, J. (2018). Prenatal Stress as a Risk – and an Opportunity – Factor. Psychological Science, 29(4), 572–580. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797617739983CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hinde, R., & Stevenson-Hinde, J. (1990). Attachment: Biological, cultural and individual desiderata. Human Development, 33, 62–72. https://doi.org/10.1159/000276503CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Juffer, F., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. & Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2017). Pairing attachment theory and social learning theory in video-feedback intervention to promote positive parenting. Current Opinion in Psychology, 15, 189–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2017.03.012CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Karg, K., Burmeister, M., Shedden, K., & Sen, S. (2011). The serotonin transporterpromoter variant (5-HTTLPR), stress, and depression meta-analysis revisited: Evidence of genetic moderation. Archives in General Psychiatry, 68, 444–454.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keers, R., Coleman, J. R., Lester, K. J., Roberts, S., Breen, G., Thastum, M., Bögels, S., Schneider, S., Heiervang, E., Meiser-Stedman, R., Nauta, M., Creswell, C., Thirlwall, K., Rapee, R. M., Hudson, J. L., Lewis, C., Plomin, R., & Eley, T. C. (2016). A genome-wide test of the differential susceptibility hypothesis reveals a genetic predictor of differential response to psychological treatments for child anxiety disorders. Psychotherapy and psychosomatics, 85(3), 146–158. https://doi.org/10.1159/000444023CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Klein Velderman, M., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., Juffer, F., & Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2006). Effects of attachment-based interventions on maternal sensitivity and infant attachment: Differential susceptibility of highly reactive infants. Journal of Family Psychology, 20, 266–274. https://doi.org/10.1037/0893-3200.20.2.266CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knop, J., Joels, M., & Van der Veen, R. (2017). The added value of rodent models in studying parental influence on offspring development: Opportunities, limitations and future perspectives. Current Opinion in Psychology, 15, 174–181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knop, J., Van IJzendoorn, M. H., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., Joels, M., & Van der Veen, R. (2019). The effects of different rearing conditions on sexual maturation and maternal care in heterozygous mineralocorticoid receptor knockout mice. Hormones and Behavior, 112, 54–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2019.04.001CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knop, J., Van IJzendoorn, M. H., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., Joëls, M., & Van der Veen, R. (2020). Maternal care of heterozygous dopamine receptor D4 knockout mice: Differential susceptibility to early-life rearing conditions. Genes, Brain and Behavior, 19: e12655. https://doi.org/10.1111/gbb.12655CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kok, R., Luijk, M. P. C. M., Lucassen, N. et al. (2022) The role of supportive parenting and stress reactivity in the development of self-regulation in early childhood. Journal of Child and Family Studies, 31, 2424–2435. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10826-022-02360-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kong, A., Thorleifsson, G., Frigge, M. L., Vilhjalmsson, B. J., Young, A. I., Thorgeirsson, T. E., Benonisdottir, S., Oddsson, A., Halldorsson, B. V., Masson, G., Gudbjartsson, D. F., Helgason, A., Bjornsdottir, G., Thorsteinsdottir, U., & Stefansson, K. (2018). The nature of nurture: Effects of parental genotypes. Science, 359(6374), 424–428. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aan6877CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lakatos, K., Toth, I., Nemoda, Z., Ney, K., Sasvari-Szekely, M., & Gervai, J. (2000). Dopamine D4 receptor (DRD4) gene polymorphism is associated with attachment disorganization in infants. Molecular Psychiatry, 5(6), 633–637. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.mp.4000773CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Main, M. (1990). Cross-cultural studies of attachment organization: Recent studies, changing methodologies, and the concept of conditional strategies. Human Development, 33, 48–61. https://doi.org/10.1159/000276502CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McClleland, G. H., & Judd, C. M. (1993). Statistical difficulties of detecting interactions and moderator effects. Psychological Bulletin, 114(2), 376–390. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.114.2.376CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Min, J. L., Hemani, G., Hannon, E., Dekkers, K. F., Castillo-Fernandez, J., Luijk, R., Carnero-Montoro, E., Lawson, D. J., Burrows, K., Suderman, M., Bretherick, A. D., Richardson, T. G., Klughammer, J., Iotchkova, V., Sharp, G., Al Khleifat, A., Shatunov, A., Iacoangeli, A., McArdle, W. L., Ho, K. M., … Relton, C. L. (2021). Genomic and phenotypic insights from an atlas of genetic effects on DNA methylation. Nature Genetics, 53(9), 1311–1321. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-021-00923-xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Monroe, S. M., & Simons, A. D. (1991). Diathesis-stress theories in the context of life stress research: Implications for the depressive disorders. Psychological Bulletin, 110(3), 406–425. https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.110.3.406CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nagel, M., Speed, D., Sluis, S., & Østergaard, S. D. (2020). Genome-wide association study of the sensitivity to environmental stress and adversity neuroticism cluster. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 141, 476–478.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Obradovic, J., Portilla, X. A., & Ballard, P. J. (2016). Biological sensitivity to family income: Differential effects on early executive functioning. Child Development, 87, 374–384. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12475.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pappa, I., Mileva-Seitz, V. R., Szekely, E, Verhulst, F. C., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., Jaddoe, V. W. V., Hofman, A., Tiemeier, H. & Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2014). DRD4 VNTRs, observed stranger fear in preschoolers and later ADHD symptoms. Psychiatry Research, 220, 982–986.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Plomin, R., & Bergeman, C. (1991). The nature of nurture: Genetic influence on “environmental” measures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 14(3), 373–386. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X00070278CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pollak, S. D., Messner, M., Kistler, D. J., & Cohn, J. F. (2009). Development of perceptual expertise in emotion recognition. Cognition, 110, 242–247. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cognition.2008.10.010CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rice, C. J., Sandman, C. A., Lenjavi, M. R., & Baram, T. Z. (2008). A novel mouse model for acute and long-lasting consequences of early life stress. Endocrinology, 149(10), 4892–4900.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Runze, J., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., Cecil, C. A. M., Van IJzendoorn, M. H., Pappa, I. (2023). The polygenic and reactive nature of observed parenting. Genes, Brain, and Behavior. https://doi.org/10.1111/gbb.12874CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Runze, J., Pappa, I., Van IJzendoorn, M. H., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. (2022). Conduct problems and hair cortisol concentrations decrease in school-aged children after VIPP-SD: A randomized controlled trial in two twin cohorts. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19, 15026. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192215026CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Runze, J. & Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (2023). Response bias is genetically biased: Another argument for Kagan’s philippic against questionnaires in developmental psychology. Developmental Psychology, 60(11), 2008–2015. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001614CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rutter, M. (2010). Gene-environment interplay. Depression & Anxiety, 27, 1–4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sameroff, A. J. (1983). Developmental systems: Contexts and evolution. In Mussen, P. (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology (pp. 237–294). Wiley.Google Scholar
Schuengel, C., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & Van IJzendoorn, M. H. (1999). Frightening maternal behavior linking unresolved loss and disorganized infant attachment. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67, 54–63. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-006X.67.1.54CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Silventoinen, K., Jelenkovic, A., Latvala, A., Yokoyama, Y., Sund, R., Sugawara, M., Tanaka, M., Matsumoto, S., Aaltonen, S., Piirtola, M., Freitas, D. L., Maia, J. A., Öncel, S. Y., Aliev, F., Ji, F., Ning, F., Pang, Z., Rebato, E., Saudino, K. J., … Kaprio, J. (2019). Parental education and genetics of BMI from infancy to old age: A pooled analysis of 29 twin cohorts. Obesity, 27(5), 855–865. https://doi.org/10.1002/oby.22451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Slagt, M., Dubas, J. S., van Aken, M. A., Ellis, B. J., & Deković, M. (2017). Children’s differential susceptibility to parenting: An experimental test of “for better and for worse.” Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 154, 78–97. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2016.10.004CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Slagt, M., Dubas, J. S., Deković, M., & van Aken, M. A. G. (2016). Differences in sensitivity to parenting depending on child temperament: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 142(10), 1068–1110. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000061CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Suomi, S. J. (1999). Attachment in rhesus monkeys. In Cassidy, J. & Shaver, P. R. (Eds.), Handbook of attachment: Theory, research, and clinical applications (pp. 181–197). Guilford Press.Google Scholar
Van der Kooy-Hofland, V. A. C., van der Kooy, J., Bus, A. G., Van IJzendoorn, M. H., & Bonsel, G. J. (2012). Differential susceptibility to early literacy intervention in children with mild perinatal adversities: Short- and long-term effects of a randomized control trial. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104, 337–349. http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/a0026984CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van IJzendoorn, M. H., & Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. (2006). DRD4 7-repeat polymorphism moderates the association between maternal unresolved loss or trauma and infant disorganization. Attachment & Human Development, 8, 291–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/14616730601048159CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van IJzendoorn, M. H. & Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. (2012). Differential susceptibility experiments: Going beyond correlational evidence: Comment on beyond mental health, differential susceptibility articles. Developmental Psychology, 48, 769–774.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van IJzendoorn, M. H. & Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. (2024). Matters of Significance. Replication, translation, and academic freedom in developmental science. UCL Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van IJzendoorn, M. H., Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., Belsky, J., Beach, S., Brody, G., Dodge, K. A., Greenberg, M., Posner, M., & Scott, S. (2011) Gene-by-environment experiments: A new approach to finding the missing heritability. Nature Reviews Genetics 12, 881, https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg2764-c1CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van IJzendoorn, M. H., Schuengel, C., Wang, Q. & Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. (2023). Improving parenting, child attachment and externalizing behaviors: Meta-analysis of the first 25 randomized controlled trials on the effects of video-feedback intervention to promote positive parenting and sensitive discipline. Development & Psychopathology, 17, 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579421001462Google Scholar
Van Schaik, C. P. (2013). The costs and benefits of flexibility as an expression of behavioural plasticity: a primate perspective. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological Sciences, 368(1618), 20120339. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verhoeven, K. J. F., Jansen, J. J., van Dijk, P. J., & Biere, A. (2010). Stress-induced DNA methylation changes and their heritability in asexual dandelions New Phytologist, 185, 1108–1118. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8137.2009.03121.xCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wertz, J., Belsky, J., Moffitt, T. E., Belsky, D. W., Harrington, H., Avinun, R., Poulton, R., Ramrakha, S., & Caspi, A. (2019). Genetics of nurture: A test of the hypothesis that parents’ genetics predict their observed caregiving. Developmental Psychology, 55(7), 1461–1472. https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0000709CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Windhorst, D. A., Mileva-Seitz, V. R., Linting, M., Hofman, A., Jaddoe, V. W. V., Verhulst, F. C., … Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J. (2015). Differential susceptibility in a developmental perspective: DRD4 and maternal sensitivity predicting externalizing behavior. Developmental Psychobiology, 57(1), 35–49. https://doi.org/10.1002/dev.21257.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zuckerman, M. (1999). Vulnerability to psychopathology: A biosocial model. American Psychological Association.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Accessibility standard: WCAG 2.0 A
The PDF of this book
conforms to version 2.0 of the
Web Content Accessibility Guidelines
(WCAG), ensuring core accessibility principles are addressed and meets the basic
(A)
level of WCAG compliance, addressing essential accessibility barriers.
Content Navigation
Table of contents navigation
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Allows you to navigate directly to chapters, sections, or non‐text items through a linked table of contents, reducing the need for extensive scrolling.
Index navigation
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Provides an interactive index, letting you go straight to where a term or subject appears in the text without manual searching.
Reading Order & Textual Equivalents
Single logical reading order
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
You will encounter all content (including footnotes, captions, etc.) in a clear, sequential flow, making it easier to follow with assistive tools like screen readers.
Short alternative textual descriptions
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
You get concise descriptions (for images, charts, or media clips), ensuring you do not miss crucial information when visual or audio elements are not accessible.
Full alternative textual descriptions
You get more than just short alt text: you have comprehensive text equivalents, transcripts, captions, or audio descriptions for substantial non‐text content, which is especially helpful for complex visuals or multimedia.
You get more than just short alt text: you have comprehensive text equivalents, transcripts, captions, or audio descriptions for substantial non‐text content, which is especially helpful for complex visuals or multimedia.
Visual Accessibility
Use of colour is not sole means of conveying information
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
You will still understand key ideas or prompts without relying solely on colour, which is especially helpful if you have colour vision deficiencies.
Use of high contrast between text and background colour
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.
You benefit from high‐contrast text, which improves legibility if you have low vision or if you are reading in less‐than‐ideal lighting conditions.