Van Leeuwen (Topic 1 child twin-family general IQ (intelligence) Flashcards
Background
Previous twin studies estimated contribution of genetic effects to variability in intelligence at 25% to 50%.
Part of remaining variance due to environmental factors shared by children who grow up in same family (Bartels et al 2002)
(Finley and Perderson 2001) found environment has greater influence on less intelligent people than more intelligent.
Study uses extended twin design including MZ & DZ twins, their siblings and parents.
Aim
Aims to build on earlier research.
Investigated whether biological factors and/or environmental might affect intelligence.
Hypothesis
Van Leeuwen predicted genetic effects would explain large part of any individual differences in intelligence.
Genetic transmission
Transfer of genetic info from genes to another generation.
Cultural transmission
The way a group of people within a society or culture tend to learn and pass on info.
Assortative mating
Individuals with similar genes or observable characteristics mate with one another more frequently than those who do not.
Gene- environment interaction
Theory that certain environments ‘activate’ a particular gene.
Gene-environment correlation
Parents transmit their genes and their environment to their children.
e.g parents may be predisposed to good health and fitness, but also share this lifestyle to their children therefore makes it difficult to establish contribution of nature/nurture.
Heritability
Extent to a parents genes are responsible for a phenotype (way genes are expressed through physical, behavioural and psychological characteristics; determined by both genes and environment)
Phenotypic assortment
Assortative mating occurs because individuals choose one another because they have similar intelligence levels.
Social homogamy
People with similar intelligence levels are clustered together in same environment and more likely to end up having children together.
Research method
Research article/paper.
Assesses presence of assortative mating gene-environment interaction and correlation & the heritability of intelligence in childhood.
Twin- family design with twins, their siblings and parents from 112 families.
Also viewed as collection of (mini) case studies, the findings of which were collated and analysed to compare 2 hypotheses about cause of assortative mating in intelligence.
Also viewed as correlational study as researchers were looking for relationships between such factors as intelligence and biological factors, intelligence and environmental factors.
Sample
Twins recruited from Netherlands Twin Registry (NTR) at VU University in Amsterdam.
112 twin families with extra sibling between 9 - 14 yrs old agreed to take part.
Families with children with major medical history were excluded.
Mean age of twins at time of cognitive assessment was 9.1 yrs.
Sample made up of 23 MZ male, 23 DZ male, 25 MZ female, 21 DZ and 20 DZ pairs of opposite sex.
Mean age of siblings was 12 yrs.
Mean age of biological fathers and mothers were early 40s.
Monozygotic twins
Identical
Dizygotic twins
non-identical
Procedure
Parents signed informed consent for children and themselves.
Children also signed own consent forms.
Parents were compensated for travel expenses and children received a present.
Testing procedures
Data collection took place on 2 different days.
Cheek swabs for DNA were collected at home by parents & children prior to intelligence testing to determine whether children were identical or non-identical twins.
For cognitive/intelligence testing, in lab children were tested in separate rooms with Ravens Standard Progressive Matrices (RSPM) and Ravens Advanced Progressive Matrices (APM) for adults.
Whole protocol took approx 5 hours including 2 short breaks and 1 longer lunch break.
In data analysis researchers used 2 different theoretical models to determine whether spousal resemblance is better explained by phenotypic assortment or social homogamy.
RSPM
Consists of 60 problems divided into 5 sets of 12, progressively more difficult
Provides index of general intelligence.
Advanced compared to Standard progressive matrices
Main difference being level of difficulty and includes 12 practice and 36 test items increasing in difficulty more steadily and becoming considerable more complex.
Results
Raven progressive matrices test was used to assess general intelligence (IQ) and persons IQ was estimated using Rasch model- scored converted using this model as it accounts for level of difficulty in questions.
Scores were not solely calculated on amount of correct answers, more difficult q’s have more marks.
Results- gender differences
No significant differences in IQ scores between males and females across all groups (parents, siblings and twins)
Results- variance in siblings
Variance (spread) in siblings significantly larger than in the twins meaning siblings had wide ranging scores on test whereas twins had similar scores
(supports genetic explanation because the more genetic makeup shared, more similar their IQ)
Results- cultural/ environmental factors
Because most of findings supported genetic explanations for IQ level, cultural / environmental factors were therefore NOT significant on their effects on IQ level.
Results- correlations between Raven test scores
Correlations between scores were higher for identical (MZ) twins than siblings and non-identical (DZ) twins- suggesting intelligence is inherited (supports genetic explanation).