Heritability and Heterogeneity: The Irrelevance of Heritability in Explaining Differences between Means for Different Human Groups or Generations
Heritability and Heterogeneity: The Irrelevance of Heritability in Explaining Differences between Means for Different Human Groups or Generations
复制标题
遗传力和异质性：遗传力在解释不同人类群体或世代的平均值之间的差异时无关紧要
DOI：
10.1162/biot.2006.1.4.392
复制
发表时间：
2006
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
P. Taylor
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
P. Taylor
许多心理测量学家和行为遗传学家认为，种族群体内智商测试分数的高遗传性，加上环境假设未能解释群体平均分数之间的差异，使得从遗传因素方面解释平均差异变得合理。当考虑到Taylor（2006）中引入的概念和方法主题时，这种两部分的论点是站不住脚的。这些主题涉及从观察到的性状（通常在遗传力估计中总结）的方差统计分析（AOV）到调查（通过回归分析和实验）可测量的遗传因素（例如，在一个或多个位点上是否存在特定的等位基因）和可测量的环境因素的困难。其中一个主题是，观察到的性状的AOV估计的数量（“效应”）不能等同于可测量的遗传或环境因素参与这些性状的发展。一旦明确了这一区别，认为环境因素未能解释差异的论点就缺乏说服力，因为它没有考虑遗传因素是否更有效。这篇文章暴露了与双成分论点相关的思路中的其他缺陷，与遗传和环境因素之间被动、被动和主动联系的区别，以及与狄更斯和弗林提出的相互因果关系模型有关，以调和高遗传率和代际间高智商测试分数的增长。人类遗传能力的估计在解释群体或代际差异方面是无关紧要的。我的批评是为了开辟更多的概念空间，以导出经经验验证的发展途径模型，这些模型的组成部分在任何时候和几代人之间都是异质的和不同的。
Many psychometricians and behavioral geneticists believe that high heritability of IQ test scores within racial groups coupled with environmental hypotheses failing to account for the differences between the mean scores for groups lends plausibility to explanations of mean differences in terms of genetic factors. This two-component argument cannot be sustained when viewed in the light of the conceptual and methodological themes introduced in Taylor (2006). These themes concern the difficulties of moving from the statistical analysis of variance (AOV) of observed traits (often summarized in a heritability estimate) to investigation (through regression analysis and experiments) of measurable genetic factors (e.g., the presence or absence of specific alleles at one or more loci) and measurable environmental factors. One such theme is that quantities (“effects”) estimated by an AOV of observed traits cannot be equated with measurable genetic or environmental factors involved in the development of those traits. Once this distinction is clear, the argument that environmental factors have failed to explain the differences lacks weight because it does not consider whether genetic factors have been more successful. This article exposes additional flaws in the lines of thinking associated with the two-component argument, with the distinction between passive, reactive, and active associations between genetic and environmental factors, and with the reciprocal causation models Dickens and Flynn propose in order to reconcile high estimates of heritability and large IQ test score gains between generations. Human heritability estimates are irrelevant in developing explanations of differences across groups or across generations. My critique is directed at opening up more conceptual space for deriving empirically validated models of developmental pathways whose components are heterogeneous and differ among individuals at any one time and over generations.
影响因子：
17.7
作者：
Kendler, KS;Gardner, CO;Prescott, CA
通讯作者：
Prescott, CA