Interaction of family SES with children’s genetic propensity for cognitive and noncognitive skills: No evidence of the Scarr-Rowe hypothesis for educational outcomes

IF 2.7 1区 社会学 Q1 SOCIOLOGY
Gaia Ghirardi , Carlos J. Gil-Hernández , Fabrizio Bernardi , Elsje van Bergen , Perline Demange
{"title":"Interaction of family SES with children’s genetic propensity for cognitive and noncognitive skills: No evidence of the Scarr-Rowe hypothesis for educational outcomes","authors":"Gaia Ghirardi ,&nbsp;Carlos J. Gil-Hernández ,&nbsp;Fabrizio Bernardi ,&nbsp;Elsje van Bergen ,&nbsp;Perline Demange","doi":"10.1016/j.rssm.2024.100960","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>This study examines the role of genes and environments in predicting educational outcomes. We test the Scarr-Rowe hypothesis, suggesting that enriched environments enable genetic potential to unfold, and the compensatory advantage hypothesis, proposing that low genetic endowments have less impact on education for children from high socioeconomic status (SES) families. We use a pre-registered design with <em>Netherlands Twin Register</em> data (426 ≤ <em>N</em><sub>individuals</sub> ≤ 3875). We build polygenic indexes (PGIs) for cognitive and noncognitive skills to predict seven educational outcomes from childhood to adulthood across three designs (between-family, within-family, and trio) accounting for different confounding sources, totalling 42 analyses. Cognitive PGIs, noncognitive PGIs, and parental education positively predict educational outcomes. Providing partial support for the compensatory hypothesis, 39/42 PGI × SES interactions are negative, with 7 reaching statistical significance under Romano-Wolf and 3 under the more conservative Bonferroni multiple testing corrections (p-value &lt; 0.007). In contrast, the Scarr-Rowe hypothesis lacks empirical support, with just 2 non-significant and 1 significant (not surviving Romano-Wolf) positive interactions. Overall, we emphasise the need for future replication studies in larger samples. Our findings demonstrate the value of merging social-stratification and behavioural-genetic theories to better understand the intricate interplay between genetic factors and social contexts.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":47384,"journal":{"name":"Research in Social Stratification and Mobility","volume":"92 ","pages":"Article 100960"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0276562424000738/pdfft?md5=dd5220d910d67afcb7f7e3d25f5347b2&pid=1-s2.0-S0276562424000738-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Social Stratification and Mobility","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0276562424000738","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study examines the role of genes and environments in predicting educational outcomes. We test the Scarr-Rowe hypothesis, suggesting that enriched environments enable genetic potential to unfold, and the compensatory advantage hypothesis, proposing that low genetic endowments have less impact on education for children from high socioeconomic status (SES) families. We use a pre-registered design with Netherlands Twin Register data (426 ≤ Nindividuals ≤ 3875). We build polygenic indexes (PGIs) for cognitive and noncognitive skills to predict seven educational outcomes from childhood to adulthood across three designs (between-family, within-family, and trio) accounting for different confounding sources, totalling 42 analyses. Cognitive PGIs, noncognitive PGIs, and parental education positively predict educational outcomes. Providing partial support for the compensatory hypothesis, 39/42 PGI × SES interactions are negative, with 7 reaching statistical significance under Romano-Wolf and 3 under the more conservative Bonferroni multiple testing corrections (p-value < 0.007). In contrast, the Scarr-Rowe hypothesis lacks empirical support, with just 2 non-significant and 1 significant (not surviving Romano-Wolf) positive interactions. Overall, we emphasise the need for future replication studies in larger samples. Our findings demonstrate the value of merging social-stratification and behavioural-genetic theories to better understand the intricate interplay between genetic factors and social contexts.

家庭 SES 与儿童认知和非认知技能遗传倾向的相互作用:在教育成果方面没有斯卡尔-罗假设的证据
本研究探讨了基因和环境在预测教育成果中的作用。我们检验了斯卡尔-罗假说(Scarr-Rowe hypothesis)和补偿优势假说(Compensatory advantage hypothesis),斯卡尔-罗假说(Scarr-Rowe hypothesis)认为,丰富的环境能使遗传潜能得以发挥,而补偿优势假说(Compensatory advantage hypothesis)则认为,低遗传禀赋对高社会经济地位(SES)家庭子女的教育影响较小。我们利用荷兰双胞胎登记数据(426 ≤ Nindividuals ≤ 3875)进行预登记设计。我们建立了认知和非认知技能的多基因指数(PGIs),通过三种设计(家庭间、家庭内和三人组)来预测从童年到成年的七种教育结果,并考虑了不同的混杂因素,共进行了 42 项分析。认知能力的PGIs、非认知能力的PGIs和父母的教育程度对教育结果有积极的预测作用。为补偿假说提供部分支持的是,39/42 个 PGI × SES 交互作用为负,其中 7 个在 Romano-Wolf 法下达到统计显著性,3 个在更保守的 Bonferroni 多重检验校正法下达到统计显著性(p 值为 0.007)。相比之下,斯卡尔-罗假设缺乏经验支持,仅有 2 项不显著和 1 项显著(罗曼-沃尔夫法不适用)的正交互作用。总之,我们强调今后需要在更大的样本中进行重复研究。我们的研究结果表明,将社会分层理论与行为遗传理论相结合,对更好地理解遗传因素与社会环境之间错综复杂的相互作用具有重要价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
7.80
自引率
6.00%
发文量
46
期刊介绍: The study of social inequality is and has been one of the central preoccupations of social scientists. Research in Social Stratification and Mobility is dedicated to publishing the highest, most innovative research on issues of social inequality from a broad diversity of theoretical and methodological perspectives. The journal is also dedicated to cutting edge summaries of prior research and fruitful exchanges that will stimulate future research on issues of social inequality. The study of social inequality is and has been one of the central preoccupations of social scientists.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信