Executive Function and Impulsivity Predict Distinct Genetic Variance in Internalizing Problems, Externalizing Problems, Thought Disorders, and Compulsive Disorders: A Genomic Structural Equation Modeling Study
Daniel E. Gustavson, Claire L. Morrison, Travis T. Mallard, Mariela V. Jennings, Pierre Fontanillas, Sarah L. Elson, Abraham A. Palmer, Naomi P. Friedman, Sandra Sanchez-Roige
{"title":"Executive Function and Impulsivity Predict Distinct Genetic Variance in Internalizing Problems, Externalizing Problems, Thought Disorders, and Compulsive Disorders: A Genomic Structural Equation Modeling Study","authors":"Daniel E. Gustavson, Claire L. Morrison, Travis T. Mallard, Mariela V. Jennings, Pierre Fontanillas, Sarah L. Elson, Abraham A. Palmer, Naomi P. Friedman, Sandra Sanchez-Roige","doi":"10.1177/21677026231207845","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Individual differences in self-control predict many health and life outcomes. Building on twin literature, we used genomic structural equation modeling to test the hypothesis that genetic influences on executive function and impulsivity predict independent variance in mental health and other outcomes. The impulsivity factor (comprising urgency, lack of premeditation, and other facets) was only modestly genetically correlated with low executive function ( r = .13). Controlling for impulsivity, we found that low executive function was genetically associated with increased internalizing (β = 0.15), externalizing (β = 0.13), thought disorders (β = 0.38), compulsive disorders (β = 0.22), and chronotype (β = .011). Controlling for executive function, we found that impulsivity was positively genetically associated with internalizing (β = 0.36), externalizing (β = 0.55), body mass index (β = 0.26), and insomnia (β = 0.35) and negatively genetically associated with compulsive disorders (β = −0.17). Executive function and impulsivity were both genetically correlated with general cognitive ability and educational attainment. This work suggests that executive function and impulsivity are genetically separable and show independent associations with mental health.","PeriodicalId":54234,"journal":{"name":"Clinical Psychological Science","volume":" 34","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":4.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Clinical Psychological Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/21677026231207845","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PSYCHIATRY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1
Abstract
Individual differences in self-control predict many health and life outcomes. Building on twin literature, we used genomic structural equation modeling to test the hypothesis that genetic influences on executive function and impulsivity predict independent variance in mental health and other outcomes. The impulsivity factor (comprising urgency, lack of premeditation, and other facets) was only modestly genetically correlated with low executive function ( r = .13). Controlling for impulsivity, we found that low executive function was genetically associated with increased internalizing (β = 0.15), externalizing (β = 0.13), thought disorders (β = 0.38), compulsive disorders (β = 0.22), and chronotype (β = .011). Controlling for executive function, we found that impulsivity was positively genetically associated with internalizing (β = 0.36), externalizing (β = 0.55), body mass index (β = 0.26), and insomnia (β = 0.35) and negatively genetically associated with compulsive disorders (β = −0.17). Executive function and impulsivity were both genetically correlated with general cognitive ability and educational attainment. This work suggests that executive function and impulsivity are genetically separable and show independent associations with mental health.
期刊介绍:
The Association for Psychological Science’s journal, Clinical Psychological Science, emerges from this confluence to provide readers with the best, most innovative research in clinical psychological science, giving researchers of all stripes a home for their work and a place in which to communicate with a broad audience of both clinical and other scientists.