Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-cphqk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-27T15:49:21.912Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Causal complexity in human research: On the shared challenges of behavior genetics, medical genetics, and environmentally oriented social science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 September 2023

James W. Madole Open the ORCID record for James W. Madole [Opens in a new window]  and
K. Paige Harden
James W. Madole
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA jmadole@utexas.edu harden@utexas.edu VA Puget Sound Health Care System, Seattle, WA, USA
K. Paige Harden
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA jmadole@utexas.edu harden@utexas.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We received 23 spirited commentaries on our target article from across the disciplines of philosophy, economics, evolutionary genetics, molecular biology, criminology, epidemiology, and law. We organize our reply around three overarching questions: (1) What is a cause? (2) How are randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and within-family genome-wide association studies (GWASs) alike and unalike? (3) Is behavior genetics a qualitatively different enterprise? Throughout our discussion of these questions, we advocate for the idea that behavior genetics shares many of the same pitfalls and promises as environmentally oriented research, medical genetics, and other arenas of the social and behavioral sciences.

Type
Authors' Response
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 46 , 2023 , e206
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

Almas, A. N., Degnan, K. A., Nelson, C. A., Zeanah, C. H., & Fox, N. A. (2016). IQ at age 12 following a history of institutional care: Findings from the Bucharest Early Intervention Project. Developmental Psychology, 52, 1858.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
American Society of Addiction Medicine (2017). Retrieved from https://www.asam.org/docs/default-source/advocacy/2-asam-general-information-flyer.pdf?sfvrsn=3c6f46c2_2Google Scholar
Angrist, J. D. (1990). Lifetime earnings and the Vietnam era draft lottery: Evidence from social security administrative records. American Economic Review, 80, 313–336.Google Scholar
Ayuso, C., & Millan, J. M. (2010). Retinitis pigmentosa and allied conditions today: A paradigm of translational research. Genome Medicine, 2, 1–11.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bakermans-Kranenburg, M. J., & Van Ijzendoorn, M. H. (2015). The hidden efficacy of interventions: Gene×environment experiments from a differential susceptibility perspective. Annual Review of Psychology, 66, 381–409.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Borsboom, D., Cramer, A. O., & Kalis, A. (2019). Brain disorders? Not really: Why network structures block reductionism in psychopathology research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 42, E2. doi:10.1017/S0140525X17002266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bryan, C. J., Tipton, E., & Yeager, D. S. (2021). Behavioural science is unlikely to change the world without a heterogeneity revolution. Nature Human Behaviour, 5, 980–989.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chetty, R., Hendren, N., & Katz, L. F. (2016). The effects of exposure to better neighborhoods on children: New evidence from the moving to opportunity experiment. American Economic Review, 106, 855–902.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Commonwealth v. Eldred (2018). 480 Mass. 90. MA: Supreme Judicial Court. Retrieved from https://law.justia.com/cases/massachusetts/supreme-court/2018/sjc-12279.htmlGoogle Scholar
Courtwright, D. T. (2010). The NIDA brain disease paradigm: History, resistance and spinoffs. BioSocieties, 5, 137–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Emerson, R. W. (1993). Self-reliance, and other essays. Dover (original work published in 1841).Google Scholar
Fisher, R. (1952). Statistical methods in genetics. Heredity, 6, 1–12 (reprinted in 2010, International Journal of Epidemiology, 39, 329–335). https://doi.org/10.1093/ije/dyp379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gulsuner, S., Stein, D. J., Susser, E. S., Sibeko, G., Pretorius, A., Walsh, T., … McClellan, D. J. (2020). Genetics of schizophrenia in the South African Xhosa. Science (New York, N.Y.), 367, 569–573.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hall, W., Carter, A., & Forlini, C. (2015). The brain disease model of addiction: Is it supported by the evidence and has it delivered on its promises? The Lancet Psychiatry, 2, 105–110.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hassan, A. N., Ragheb, H., Malick, A., Abdullah, Z., Ahmad, Y., Sunderji, N., & Islam, F. (2021). Inspiring Muslim minds: Evaluating a spiritually adapted psycho-educational program on addiction to overcome stigma in Canadian Muslim communities. Community Mental Health Journal, 57, 644–654.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hayden, E. C. (2010). Human genome at ten: Life is complicated. Nature, 464, 664–667.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heiler, P., & Knaus, M. C. (2021). Effect or treatment heterogeneity? Policy evaluation with aggregated and disaggregated treatments. arXiv preprint arXiv:2110.01427.Google ScholarPubMed
Heilig, M., MacKillop, J., Martinez, D., Rehm, J., Leggio, L., & Vanderschuren, L. J. (2021). Addiction as a brain disease revised: Why it still matters, and the need for consilience. Neuropsychopharmacology, 46, 1715–1723.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holland, P. W. (1986). Statistics and causal inference. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 81, 945–960. doi:10.1080/01621459.1986.10478354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Howe, L. J., Nivard, M. G., Morris, T. T., Hansen, A. F., Rasheed, H., Cho, Y., … Davies, N. M. (2022). Within-sibship genome-wide association analyses decrease bias in estimates of direct genetic effects. Nature Genetics, 54, 581–592.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kaplan, J. M., & Turkheimer, E. (2021). Galton's Quincunx: Probabilistic causation in developmental behavior genetics. Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, 88, 60–69.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kendler, K. S., Turkheimer, E., Ohlsson, H., Sundquist, J., & Sundquist, K. (2015). Family environment and the malleability of cognitive ability: A Swedish national home-reared and adopted-away cosibling control study. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112, 4612–4617.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kinney, D. (2019). On the explanatory depth and pragmatic value of coarse-grained, probabilistic, causal explanations. Philosophy of Science, 86, 145–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kraft, M. A. (2020). Interpreting effect sizes of education interventions. Educational Researcher, 49, 241–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lehrman, D. S. (1970). Semantic and conceptual issues in the nature–nurture problem. In Aronson, L. R. (Ed.), Development and evolution of behavior. Essays in memory of TC Schneirla (pp. 17–52). WH Freeman.Google Scholar
Leshner, A. I. (1997). Addiction is a brain disease, and it matters. Science (New York, N.Y.), 278, 45–47.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levins, R. (1966). The strategy of model building in population biology. American Scientist, 54, 421–431.Google Scholar
Lewontin, R. C. (1974). Annotation: The analysis of variance and the analysis of causes. American Journal of Human Genetics, 26, 400–411.Google ScholarPubMed
Martin, A. R., Stroud, R. E., Abebe, T., Akena, D., Alemayehu, M., Atwoli, L., … Chibnik, L. B. (2022). Increasing diversity in genomics requires investment in equitable partnerships and capacity building. Nature Genetics, 54, 740–745.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Mathur, R., Fang, F., Gaddis, N., Hancock, D. B., Cho, M. H., Hokanson, J. E., … Johnson, E. O. (2022). GAWMerge expands GWAS sample size and diversity by combining array-based genotyping and whole-genome sequencing. Communications Biology, 5, 1–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meghir, C., & Palme, M. (2005). Educational reform, ability, and family background. American Economic Review, 95, 414–424.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mill, J. S. (2002). A system of logic. University Press of the Pacific (original work published in 1843).Google Scholar
Pereira, L., Mutesa, L., Tindana, P., & Ramsay, M. (2021). African genetic diversity and adaptation inform a precision medicine agenda. Nature Reviews Genetics, 22, 284–306.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pingault, J. B., Richmond, R., & Davey Smith, G. (2022). Causal inference with genetic data: Past, present, and future. Cold Spring Harbor Perspectives in Medicine, 12, a041271.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Plomin, R., & Daniels, D. (1987). Why are children in the same family so different from one another? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 10, 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Popejoy, A. B., & Fullerton, S. M. (2016). Genomics is failing on diversity. Nature, 538, 161–164.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ray, L. A. (2012). Clinical neuroscience of addiction: Applications to psychological science and practice. Clinical Psychology: Science and Practice, 19, 154–166. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2850.2012.01280.xGoogle Scholar
Ross, L. N. (2021). Causal concepts in biology: How pathways differ from mechanisms and why it matters. The British Journal for the Philosophy of Science, 72, 131–158. doi:10.1093/bjps/axy078CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, L. N. (2022). Cascade versus mechanism: The diversity of causal structure in science. PhilSci Archive. Retrieved from http://philsci-archive.pitt.edu/20215/1/Ross_Cascade.pdfCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schneider, B., & Bradford, L. (2020). What we are learning about fade-out of intervention effects: A commentary. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 21, 50–54. doi:10.1177/1529100620935793CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Smith, J. A. (2022). Treatment effect heterogeneity. Evaluation Review, 46, 652–677. doi:10.1177/0193841X221090731CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Stein, Z., Susser, M., Saenger, G., & Marolla, F. (1972). Nutrition and mental performance: Prenatal exposure to the Dutch famine of 1944–1945 seems not related to mental performance at age 19. Science (New York, N.Y.), 178, 708–713.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Strauss, G. M., Herndon, J. E., Maddaus, M. A., Johnstone, D. W., Johnson, E. A., Harpole, D. H., … Green, M. R. (2008). Adjuvant paclitaxel plus carboplatin compared with observation in stage IB non-small-cell lung cancer: CALGB 9633 with the Cancer and Leukemia Group B, Radiation Therapy Oncology Group, and North Central Cancer Treatment Group Study Groups. Journal of Clinical Oncology, 26, 5043–5051.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Turkheimer, E. (2012). Genome wide association studies of behavior are social science. In K. S. Plaisance & T. A. C. Reydon (Eds.), Philosophy of behavioral biology (pp. 43–64). Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
VanderWeele, T. J. (2022). Constructed measures and causal inference: Towards a new model of measurement for psychosocial constructs. Epidemiology (Cambridge, Mass.), 33, 141–151.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
VanderWeele, T. J., & Hernan, M. A. (2013). Causal inference under multiple versions of treatment. Journal of Causal Inference, 1, 1–20.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Volkow, N. D., & Koob, G. (2015). Brain disease model of addiction: Why is it so controversial? The Lancet Psychiatry, 2, 677–679.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Watkins-Hayes, C. (2009). The new welfare bureaucrats: Entanglements of race, class, and policy reform. University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Woodward, J. (2005). Making things happen: A theory of causal explanation (paperback). Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Yarkoni, T. (2022). The generalizability crisis. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 45, E1. doi:10.1017/S0140525X20001685CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yeager, D. S., & Dweck, C. S. (2020). What can be learned from growth mindset controversies? American Psychologist, 75, 1269–1284.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed