Polygenic Scores of Executive Function Provide Limited Support for Genetic Confounding With Socio-Economic Measures

IF 2.4 4区 心理学 Q2 BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES
Lucas C. Perry, Nicolas Chevalier, Michelle Luciano
{"title":"Polygenic Scores of Executive Function Provide Limited Support for Genetic Confounding With Socio-Economic Measures","authors":"Lucas C. Perry,&nbsp;Nicolas Chevalier,&nbsp;Michelle Luciano","doi":"10.1111/gbb.70030","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Previous work has suggested that genetic confounding is a persistent issue in studies of environmental predictors of executive function (EF). This is largely because controlling for genetic confounding typically requires specialized samples such as twins or adoptees, which are more difficult to recruit. Polygenic scores provide a potential alternative control, scalable to smaller samples and not requiring specialized sample features. The purpose of this study was to determine if polygenic scores of EF could be used to replicate the findings of other genetic confounding studies in a less specialized sample. Confounding models showed evidence for genetic confounding in maternal education, although it was far weaker in magnitude than in other genetically informed studies. However, consistent with previous research, there were no detectable influences of indirect genetic effects on the EF polygenic score, indicating that the detected genetic confounding was likely a true genetic effect. Finally, while environmental factors other than maternal education seemed predictive of EF, confounding models showed that this was best explained by their association with maternal education. Other predictors of EF may thus be confounded environmentally, not just genetically. While polygenic scores are a promising method with a multitude of applications, in their current state they do not replicate the findings of other genetically informed studies of EF. Caution should thus be used when employing them to study genetic confounding in EF.</p>","PeriodicalId":50426,"journal":{"name":"Genes Brain and Behavior","volume":"24 4","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/gbb.70030","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Genes Brain and Behavior","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/gbb.70030","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BEHAVIORAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Previous work has suggested that genetic confounding is a persistent issue in studies of environmental predictors of executive function (EF). This is largely because controlling for genetic confounding typically requires specialized samples such as twins or adoptees, which are more difficult to recruit. Polygenic scores provide a potential alternative control, scalable to smaller samples and not requiring specialized sample features. The purpose of this study was to determine if polygenic scores of EF could be used to replicate the findings of other genetic confounding studies in a less specialized sample. Confounding models showed evidence for genetic confounding in maternal education, although it was far weaker in magnitude than in other genetically informed studies. However, consistent with previous research, there were no detectable influences of indirect genetic effects on the EF polygenic score, indicating that the detected genetic confounding was likely a true genetic effect. Finally, while environmental factors other than maternal education seemed predictive of EF, confounding models showed that this was best explained by their association with maternal education. Other predictors of EF may thus be confounded environmentally, not just genetically. While polygenic scores are a promising method with a multitude of applications, in their current state they do not replicate the findings of other genetically informed studies of EF. Caution should thus be used when employing them to study genetic confounding in EF.

Abstract Image

执行功能的多基因评分对社会经济措施的遗传混淆提供了有限的支持
先前的工作表明,遗传混淆是执行功能(EF)环境预测因素研究中的一个持续问题。这在很大程度上是因为控制遗传混淆通常需要专门的样本,比如双胞胎或被收养的人,这些样本更难招募。多基因评分提供了潜在的替代控制,可扩展到更小的样本,不需要专门的样本特征。本研究的目的是确定EF的多基因评分是否可以用来在一个不太专业的样本中复制其他遗传混淆研究的结果。混淆模型显示了母亲教育中存在遗传混淆的证据,尽管其量级远远弱于其他遗传信息研究。然而,与先前的研究一致,没有检测到间接遗传效应对EF多基因评分的影响,这表明检测到的遗传混淆可能是真正的遗传效应。最后,虽然除了母亲教育之外的环境因素似乎可以预测EF,但混杂模型表明,这最好是由它们与母亲教育的关联来解释的。因此,EF的其他预测因素可能会受到环境因素的影响,而不仅仅是基因因素。虽然多基因评分是一种很有前途的方法,具有广泛的应用,但在目前的状态下,它们并不能复制其他关于EF的遗传研究的发现。因此,在使用它们研究EF的遗传混淆时应谨慎。
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
Genes Brain and Behavior
Genes Brain and Behavior 医学-行为科学
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
4.00%
发文量
62
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Genes, Brain and Behavior was launched in 2002 with the aim of publishing top quality research in behavioral and neural genetics in their broadest sense. The emphasis is on the analysis of the behavioral and neural phenotypes under consideration, the unifying theme being the genetic approach as a tool to increase our understanding of these phenotypes. Genes Brain and Behavior is pleased to offer the following features: 8 issues per year online submissions with first editorial decisions within 3-4 weeks and fast publication at Wiley-Blackwells High visibility through its coverage by PubMed/Medline, Current Contents and other major abstracting and indexing services Inclusion in the Wiley-Blackwell consortial license, extending readership to thousands of international libraries and institutions A large and varied editorial board comprising of international specialists.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信