Personality Psychology 6th Edition Larsen Solutions Manual Download

1
Chapter 6 Genetics and Personality
Personality Psychology 6th Edition

Larsen Solutions Manual
Full download at link:
Solution Manual: https://testbankpack.com/p/solution-manual-for-

personality-psychology-6th-edition-larsen-buss-1259870499-
9781259870491/
Test Bank: https://testbankpack.com/p/test-bank-for-personality-

psychology-6th-edition-larsen-buss-1259870499-9781259870491/
Chapter 6
Genetics and Personality
Chapter Overview
This chapter provides students with an introduction to research and theory at the interface of
genetics and personality. The authors begin with a discussion of the human genome, then move
to the controversy surrounding genetic influences on personality. The authors note that much of
this controversy is generated by misinformed political and ideological concerns about the
application of the findings from behavioral genetics. The authors review the scholarly goals of
modern behavioral geneticists and define key terms such as heritability, environmentality,
phenotypic variance, and genotypic variance. Next, the authors detail several key misconceptions
about heritability: it can be applied to a single individual, it is constant and unchangeable, and it
is precise. The authors then review the four key methods used by behavioral geneticists: selective
breeding with animals, family studies, twin studies, and adoption studies. Each method has its
own advantages and disadvantages, which are reviewed in the chapter. Next, the authors review
the major findings generated from behavior genetics research, including findings in the areas of
traditional personality traits, sexual orientation, attitudes and preferences, and drinking and
smoking. The authors then discuss and differentiate shared and nonshared environmental
Larsen, Personality Psychology, 6e
© 2018 by McGraw-Hill Education. This is proprietary material solely for authorized instructor use. Not authorized for sale or distribution in any
manner. This document may not be copied, scanned, duplicated, forwarded, distributed, or posted on a website, in whole or part.
2
influences. Next, the authors review work on genotype–environment interaction and correlations
and then address recent work in the new area of molecular behavior genetics. The authors close
with a discussion of the inter-relationships among science, politics, and values.
Learning Objectives
1. Discuss historical and current controversy surrounding the genetic analysis of personality.
2. Discuss why behavioral genetics research is controversial, with reference to issues

surrounding ideology conflicts and fears about eugenics.
3. Identify and describe the actual scholarly goal of modern behavioral geneticists.
4. Define and discuss the concept of heritability, with reference to phenotypic variance,
genotypic variance, and environmentality.
5. Identify and discuss the three key misconceptions about heritability.
6. Discuss the nature-nurture debate from the modern behavioral genetics perspective.
7. Identify and discuss the four key research deigns used by behavioral geneticists and also
the advantages, disadvantages, and assumption of each.
8. Identify and discuss the major findings from behavioral genetics research, findings in the
areas of personality, sexual orientation, attitudes and preferences, and drinking and
smoking.
9. Discuss and differentiate shared environmental influences from nonshared environmental

influences.
10. Discuss the impact of shared versus nonshared environmental influences on personality.
11. Define and provide examples of genotype-environment interactions.
12. Define and provide examples for each of the three types of genotype-environment
correlation: passive, reactive, and active.
13. Discuss the emerging field of molecular behavior genetics, its goals, methods, and recent
findings.
3
14. Discuss why science, politics, and values sometimes seem to be in conflict with behavioral
genetic findings.
15. Provide a clear rationale for why behavioral genetics research should continue, and why
knowledge is better than operating in ignorance.
Chapter Outline
I. The Human Genome
• Genome refers to the complete set of genes an organism possesses.

• The human genome contains between 20,000 and 25,000 genes.
• One way to think about the human genome is to consider it to be a book containing 23
chapters, with each chapter being a chromosome pair.
• The Human Genome Project is a multibillion-dollar research endeavor that is dedicated to
sequencing the entire human genome—that is, to identifying the particular sequence of
DNA molecules in the human species.
• Identifying sequence of DNA molecules does not mean identifying all the functions of
these DNA molecules.
• Most of the genes within the human genome are the same for each individual on the planet.
o A small number of these genes, however, are different for different individuals.
o Some of the genes that differ from individual to individual influence physical
characteristics, such as eye color, height, and bone width.
o Some genes that differ across individuals influence the behavioral characteristics that
define human personality.
II. Controversy About Genes and Personality
• Researchers in the field of behavioral genetics attempt to determine the degree to which
individual differences in personality are caused by genetic and environmental differences.
• Some popular media sources are proposing “designer babies,” where parents select from a
genetic checklist the characteristics they would like in their children.
o These ideas are controversial because they suggest that genetic differences among
individuals, rather than differences in parental socialization or personal experience,
are responsible for shaping the core features of human personality.
o Part of the reason for the controversy is ideological.
o Another part of the controversy concerns the idea of eugenics—the notion that it is
possible to design the future of the human species by fostering the reproduction of
persons with certain traits and by discouraging the reproduction of persons without
4
those traits.
• Modern psychologists who study the genetics of personality are typically extremely careful
in their attempts to educate others about the use and potential misuse of their findings
(Plomin et al., 2013).
o Knowledge is better than ignorance, they argue.
• Findings that a personality characteristic has a genetic component, for example, does not
mean that the environment is powerless to modify the characteristic.
III. Goals of Behavioral Genetics
• One of the central goals of genetic research is to determine the percentage of an individual
difference that can be attributed to genetic differences and the percentage due to
environmental differences.
• Behavioral geneticists also are interested in determining the ways in which genes and the
environment interact and correlate with each other.
• They are interested in figuring out precisely where in the environment the effects are
taking place—in parental socialization practices, for example; in the teachers to whom
children are exposed; or even in peer influences (Harris, 2007).
IV. What Is Heritability?
• Heritability is a statistic that refers to the proportion of observed variance in group of

individuals that can be accounted for by genetic variance (Plomin et al., 2001).
• Heritability has a formal definition: the proportion of phenotypic variance that is
attributable to genotypic variance.
• The percentage of observed variance in a group of individuals that can be attributed to
environmental (nongenetic) differences is called environmentality.
A. Misconceptions About Heritability
• One common misconception about heritability is that it can be applied to a single

individual.
• Another common misconception about heritability is that it is constant.
• A final common misconception is that heritability is an absolutely precise statistic
(Plomin et al., 2001).
B. Nature-Nurture Debate Clarified
• Clarifying the meaning of the term heritability—what it is and what it is not—allows
5
one to think more clearly about the nature-nurture debate—the arguments about
whether genes or environments are more important determinants of personality.
• At the level of an individual, there is no nature-nurture debate.
• At the level of the population, however, one can disentangle the influence of genes and
environments.
V. Behavioral Genetics Methods
A. Selective Breeding—Studies of Humans’ Best Friend
• Artificial selection—as occurs when dogs are bred for certain qualities—can take place
only if the desired characteristics are under the influence of heredity.
• Selective breeding occurs by identifying the dogs that possess the desired characteristic
and having them mate only with other dogs that also possess the characteristic.
o Such studies cannot be ethically conducted on humans
B. Family Studies
• Family Studies correlates the degree of genetic relatedness among family members
with the degree of personality similarity.
• If a personality characteristic is highly heritable, then family members with greater
genetic relatedness should be more similar to each other than are family members with
less genetic relatedness.
• Family members who share the same genes also typically share the same environment.
C. Twin Studies
• Twin studies estimate heritability by gauging whether identical twins, who share 100
percent of their genes, are more similar to each other than are fraternal twins, who share
only 50 percent of their genes
• Identical twins, technically called monozygotic (MZ) twins, come from a single
fertilized egg (or zygote—hence, monozygotic), which divides into two at some point
during gestation. No one knows why fertilized eggs occasionally divide.
• The other type of twin is not genetically identical to the co-twin; instead, such twins
share only 50 percent of their genes.
o They are called fraternal twins, or dizygotic (DZ) twins, because they come from
two eggs that were separately fertilized (di means “two,” so dizygotic means
“coming from two fertilized eggs”).
• If identical twins are substantially more similar to each other than are fraternal twins on
6
a given characteristic, then this provides evidence that is compatible with a heritability
interpretation.
• A simple method for calculating heritability from twin data calculating heritability is to
double the difference between the MZ correlation and DZ correlation: heritability2 = 2
(rmz − rdz)
• The twin method involves an important assumption, which is known as equal
environments assumption.
• The twin method assumes that the environments experienced by identical twins are no
more similar to each other than are the environments experienced by fraternal twins.
D. Adoption Studies
• In adoption studies, one can examine the correlations between adopted children and
their adoptive parents, with whom they share no genes.
• If one finds a positive correlation between adopted children and their adoptive parents,
then this provides strong evidence for environmental influences on the personality trait
in question.
• Adoption studies are especially powerful because they allow researchers to get around
the equal environments assumption, which must be made in twin studies.
• Adoption studies assume that adopted children, their birth parents, and their adoptive
parents are representative of the general population.
• Another potential problem with adoption studies is selective placement.
o If adopted children are placed with adoptive parents who are similar to their birth
parents, then this may inflate the correlations between the adopted children and
their adoptive parents.
• One of the most powerful behavioral genetic designs is one that combines the strengths
of twin and adoption studies at the same time, by studying twins reared apart.
VI. Major Findings from Behavioral Genetic Research
A. Personality Traits
• The most commonly studied personality traits in behavioral genetic designs are
Extraversion and Neuroticism.
• Summaries of the behavioral genetic data for many of the major personality traits—
Extraversion, Agreeableness, Conscientiousness, Neuroticism, Openness to
experience—yield heritability of approximately 50 percent (Bouchard & Loehlin, 2001;
Caspi, Roberts, & Shiner, 2005).
7
B. Attitudes and Preferences
• Stable attitudes are generally regarded to be part of personality: they show wide
individual differences; they tend to be stable over time; and at least sometimes they are
linked with actual behavior.
• The Minnesota Twin Study showed that traditionalism—as evidenced by attitudes
favoring conservative values over modern values—showed a heritability of 0.59.
• It is not clear or no one knows that why some attitudes appear to be partly heritable.
C. Drinking and Smoking
• Drinking and smoking are often regarded behavioral manifestations of personality

dispositions, such as sensation seeking (Zuckerman & Kuhlman, 2000), extraversion
(Eysenck, 1981), neuroticism (Eysenck, 1981).
• Individuals differ widely in their smoking and drinking habits, and although consumers
sometimes quit for good and abstainers sometimes start, these differences tend to be
stable over time.
• Individual differences in drinking and smoking habits also show evidence of
heritability.
D. Marriage and Satisfaction with Life
• A fascinating study revealed that genes can even influence the propensity to marry or
stay single (Johnson et al., 2004).
o The study showed that the heritability estimate for propensity to marry was 68
percent.
• A genetic proclivity to marry occurs, at least in part, through heritable personality traits
that are desired by potential marriage partners.
VII. Shared Versus Nonshared Environmental Influences: A Riddle
• With all of the findings on the moderate heritability of so many personality characteristics,
it is important not to lose sight of one important fact: the same studies that suggest
moderate heritability also provide the best evidence of the importance of environmental
influences.
• If many personality characteristics show heritabilities in the range of 30 to 50 percent, this
means that the same characteristics show a substantial degree of environmentality—as
much as 50 to 70 percent.
• One critical distinction behavioral geneticists make is between shared and nonshared
8
environmental influences.
• Siblings—brothers and sisters in the same family—share some features of their
environment: the number of books in the home; the presence or absence of a TV, DVD
player, or computer; the quality and quantity of food in the home; the parents’ values and
attitudes; and the schools, church, synagogue, or mosque the parents send the children to.
• On the other hand, the same brothers and sisters do not share all features of their
environment.
o Some children might get special treatment from their parents and have different
groups of friends.
• For most personality traits, the shared environment has either little or no impact.
• Most environmental causes appear to stem from the aspects of the environment that
siblings experience differently.
• The critical environmental influences on personality appear to lie in the unique experiences
of individual children.
VIII. Genes and the Environment
A. Genotype-Environment Interaction
• Genotype–environment interaction refers to the differential response of individuals

with different genotypes to the same environments.
• Extraversion–introversion is a perfect example of genotype–environment interaction,
whereby individuals with different genotypes (introverts and extraverts) respond
differently to the same environment (e.g., noise in the room).
• Individual differences interact with the environment to affect performance.
B. Genotype-Environment Correlation
• Plomin, DeFries, and Loehlin (1977) describe the following three very different kinds of
genotype–environment correlation: passive, reactive, and active.
o The passive genotype–environment correlation, which occurs when parents
provide both genes and the environment to children, yet the children do nothing to
obtain that environment.
▪ There is a correlation between the children’s verbal ability and the number
of books in their home, but it is passive in the sense that the child has done
nothing to cause the books to be there.
o The reactive genotype–environment correlation, which occurs when parents (or
others) respond to children differently, depending on the child’s genotypes.
▪ A good example is cuddlers versus noncuddlers.
9
o Active genotype–environment correlation, which occurs when a person with a

particular genotype creates or seeks out a particular environment.
▪ High sensation seekers, for example, expose themselves to risky
environments: skydiving, motorcycle jumping, and drug taking.
• Genotype-environment correlations can be positive or negative
IX. Molecular Genetics
• The methods of molecular genetics are designed to identify the specific genes associated
with personality traits.
• The most frequently examined gene is called DRD4, which is located on the short arm of
chromosome 11.
• The most frequently examined association between the DRD4 gene and a personality trait
has involved novelty seeking, the tendency to seek out new experiences, especially those
considered risky, such as drug experiences, risky sexual experiences, gambling, and high-
speed driving (Zuckerman & Kuhlman, 2000).
• Individuals with so-called long repeat versions of the DRD4 gene were found to be higher
on novelty seeking than individuals with so-called short repeat versions of this gene
(Benjamin et al., 1996).
• Although the association between DRD4 and novelty seeking has been replicated several
times, there have also been several failures to replicate (Plomin & Crabbe, 2000).
X. Behavior Genetics, Science, Politics, and Values
• Findings that some personality traits were moderately heritable seemed to violate the
dominant paradigm, which was environmentalism (and, especially, behaviorism).
• The prevailing environmentalist view was that personality was determined by
socialization practices, such as parenting style.
• People worried about the potential misuse of findings emerging from behavioral genetics.
• A large part of the controversy over genetic research on personality has centered around
studies of intelligence, which has often been considered to be a personality variable.
• In the past decade, attitudes have shifted, and the field of psychology now considers the
findings from behavioral genetics as fairly mainstream.
• Because scientific research can be misused for political goals, scientists bear a major
responsibility for presenting findings carefully and accurately.
• Science—a set of methods for discovering what exists—can be separated from values.
Summary and Evaluation
10
The behavioral genetic study of personality has a fascinating history. Early on, when behavioral
genetic methods were being developed, the field of psychology was dominated by the behaviorist
paradigm. In this context, findings from behavioral genetic research were not warmly received.
Social scientists worried that findings from behavioral genetic research might be misused for
ideological purposes.
Over the past two decades, the empirical evidence on heritability has become stronger and
stronger, in part because of the convergence of evidence across behavioral genetic methods.
There are four traditional behavioral genetic methods: selective breeding studies, family studies,
twin studies, and adoption studies. Selective breeding studies cannot be ethically conducted on
humans. Family studies are problematic because the genetic and environmental factors are often
confounded. Twin studies have potential problems, such as violations of the equal environments
assumption (the assumption that identical twins are not treated any more alike than fraternal
twins) and the assumption of representativeness (the notion that twins are just like non-twins).
Adoption studies also have potential problems, such as the nonrandom placement of adopted-
away children in particular families. Empirical tests of these assumptions suggest that they are
not violated much or are violated in ways that do not seem to make much difference. However,
the most compelling evidence on the heritability of personality comes from looking across
methods that do not share methodological problems. Thus, if the findings from twin studies and
adoption studies converge on the same result, then researchers can have more confidence in the
results than they can when only a single method is used.
The study of large samples of twins reared together, the study of smaller samples of identical
twins reared apart, and sound adoption studies have added greatly to the credibility of behavioral
genetic research. The empirical findings clearly show that personality variables, such as
extraversion and neuroticism, as well as the other dimensions of the Big Five, have moderate
heritability. Perhaps even more striking are the findings that drinking, smoking, attitudes,
occupational preferences, and even sexual orientation appear to be moderately heritable. Equally
important, however, is the finding that the same studies provide the best evidence for the
importance of environmental influences. Overall, personality characteristics are 30 to 50 percent
heritable and 50 to 70 percent environmental.
The environmental causes appear to be mostly of the nonshared variety—that is, the different
experiences that siblings have even though they are in the same family. This finding is startling
because nearly all theories of environmental influence—such as those that posit the importance
of parental values and child-rearing styles—have been of the shared variety. Thus, behavioral
genetic research may have provided one of the most important insights into the nature of
nurture—the location of the most important environmental influences on personality. The next
decade of personality research should witness progress in identifying the precise locations of
these nonshared environmental influences. Separating perceived environments from objective
11
environments will be an important part of this research program.
In interpreting the research findings, it is important to keep in mind the meaning of heritability
and the meaning of environmentality. Heritability is the proportion of observed individual
differences that are caused by genetic differences in a particular population or sample. It does not
pertain to an individual; genetic and environmental influences are inextricably interwoven at the
individual level and cannot be separated. Heritability does not mean that the environment is
powerless to alter the individual differences. And heritability is not a fixed statistic—it can be
low in one group and high in another, low at one time and high at another. Environmentality is
the proportion of observed individual differences that is caused by environmental differences.
Like heritability, environmentality is not a fixed statistic. It, too, can change over time and across
situations. The discovery of a powerful environmental intervention, for example, could, in
principle, dramatically increase environmentality while lowering heritability. The key point is
that neither heritability nor environmentality is fixed in space and time.
In addition to providing estimates of heritability and environmentality, some behavioral genetic

research examines the interactions and correlations among genetic and environmental variables.
There are three major types of genotype–environment correlations: passive, reactive, and active.
Passive genotype–environment correlation occurs when parents provide both genes and
environment to their children in ways that just happen to be correlated—for example, parents
who pass on genes for verbal ability and stock their houses with a lot of books. Books and verbal
ability become correlated, but in a passive way because the children did not have to do anything
for the correlation to occur. Reactive genotype–environment correlation occurs when parents,
teachers, and others respond differently to some children than to others. Parents generally tickle
and coo at smiley babies more than at nonsmiley babies, creating a correlation between
genotypes for smiling and a cuddly social environment. The correlation occurs because parents
react to babies differently. Active genotype–environment correlation occurs when individuals
with certain genotypes seek out environments nonrandomly. Extraverted individuals, for
example, might throw a lot of parties, thus surrounding themselves with a different social
environment than that of the more reclusive introverts. The correlation occurs because
individuals actively create it.
The more complex and interesting behavioral genetic concepts such as genotype–environment
correlation have received relatively little research attention. One possible exception is the
fascinating finding that individuals low on Negative Emotionality and high on Constraint recall
their early family environment as being extremely cohesive. One interpretation is in terms of
genotype–environment correlation: Calm, nonneurotic individuals may actually promote
calmness and cohesion in their family environment, thus creating an upbringing that further
fosters their calm, controlled personality.
12
Molecular genetics represents the most recent development in the realm of personality
psychology. The research techniques attempt to establish an association between specific genes
and scores on personality traits. The DRD4 gene, for example, is linked with novelty seeking.
One of the most promising new developments is combining molecular genetics with the search
for gene-environment interactions—the ways in which people with different genes react
differently to the same environment. Stressful environments, for example, appear to produce
depressive symptoms, but primarily in people with the short version of the serotonin transporter
(5-HTT) gene.
Key Terms
Genome Equal environments assumption

Genetic junk Adoption studies
Eugenics Selective placement
Percentage of variance Shared environmental influences
Heritability Nonshared environmental Influences
Phenotypic variance Genotype–environment Interaction
Genotypic variance Genotype–environment Correlation
Environmentality Passive genotype–environment Correlation
Nature-nurture debate Reactive genotype–environment Correlation
Selective breeding Active genotype–environment Correlation
Family studies Molecular genetics
Twin studies DRD4 gene
Monozygotic (MZ) twins Environmentalist view
Dizygotic (DZ) twins
Lecture Topics and Lecture Suggestions
1. Heritability of Happiness (Lykken & Tellegen, 1996)
Students are likely to find a presentation of research documenting the heritability of

happiness intensely interesting and controversial. A brief overview of the study can be
presented, as provided below. The instructor should plan to spend a majority of the class
hours discussing the results. What do students think of these results? Are they upsetting?
Are they inspiring? What do they mean? Be sure to monitor the comments from students
for a clear and correct understanding of modern behavior genetics while discussing this
topic. For example, one certainly wrong conclusion based on this research is that happiness
is set at birth and there is nothing one can do to change it—happy people will always be
happy and unhappy people will always be unhappy. This is not a proper conclusion of this
13
research (remind the students about the misunderstanding of behavioral genetics presented
by Larsen and Buss). Instead, this research indicates that, in the population studied, about
80% of the individual differences in happiness “set-point” are attributable to genetic
differences. This means, of course, that about 20% of these individual differences are
attributable to environmental differences. Ask students to consider what some of these
environmental differences might be.
• Lykken & Tellegen (1996) measured happiness, or subjective well-being, on a birth-

record-based sample of 2,310 middle-aged twins.
• The researchers measured happiness using the Well-Being (WB) scale of the
Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire.
• The researchers also measured socioeconomic status (SES), educational attainment,
family income, marital status, and religious commitment.
o None of these variables could account for more than about 3% of the variance
in well-being.
• The variance in well-being ranging from 44–52%, however, is associated with
genetic variation.
• The researchers tested smaller samples of twins again after intervals of 4.5 years and
10 years.
• The researchers estimate that heritability of stable component of subjective well-
being approaches 80%.
Reference:
Lykken, D., & Tellegen, A. (1996). Happiness is a stochastic phenomenon. Psychological
Science, 7, 186–189.
2. Genetic Influence on Risk of Divorce (McGue & Lykken, 1992)
Another topic that students are likely to find interesting and controversial is that of the
heritability of divorce. A brief overview of the McGue and Lykken (1992) study can be
presented, as provided below. The instructor should plan to spend a majority of the class
hours discussing the results. What do the students think of these results? Are they
upsetting? Are they inspiring? What do they mean? Be sure to monitor student comments
for a clear and correct understanding of modern behavior genetics while discussing this
topic. For example, one certainly wrong conclusion based on this research is that the
likelihood that one will divorce is set at birth and there is nothing one can do to change it—
you are born either doomed to divorce or destined not to divorce. This is not a proper
conclusion of this research (remind students about the misunderstanding of behavioral
genetics presented by Larsen and Buss). Instead, this research indicates that, in the
14
population studied, about 50% of the individual differences in risk of divorce are
attributable to genetic differences. This means, of course, that about 50% of these
individual differences are attributable to environmental differences. Ask students to
consider what some of these environmental differences might be.
• McGue and Lykken (1992) explored the separate influence of genetic and
environmental factors on risk of divorce.
• The researchers examined divorce status of 1,516 same-sex twin pairs (722
monozygotic [MZ] and 794 dizygotic [DZ]), their parents, and their spouses’ parents.
• Concordance for divorce was significantly higher in MZ than DZ twins.
• The robustness and magnitude of the MZ-DZ difference in divorce concordance
indicates a strong influence of genetic factors in the etiology of divorce.
• Moreover, family background of both spouses contributed independently to couples’
risk of getting a divorce.
• Latter result suggests that, in many cases, divorce may be largely the result of
characteristics the two spouses bring to the union rather than to the interaction
effects.
• Results also suggest that adjustment difficulties seen with some children of divorced
parents may be due to an interaction between genetic and environmental factors
rather than environmental influences alone.
Reference:
McGue. M., & Lykken, D. T. (1992). Genetic influence on risk of divorce. Psychological
Science, 3, 368–373.
Classroom Activities and Demonstrations
1. Larsen and Buss present a simple formula for calculating heritability. One simply takes the
difference between the correlation on a particular trait for monozygotic (MZ) or identical
twins and the correlation on that same trait for dizygotic (DZ) or fraternal twins. Distribute
Activity Handout 6-1 (“Calculating Heritability from Twin Studies”). Review this formula
for students and give them about 10 minutes to calculate heritability for the three examples
given in the handout. Ask students to volunteer their answers. Work out the examples on
the board or on an overhead transparency, so that students who calculated an incorrect
heritability can understand what they did wrong. The point of this exercise is not to quiz
students on their math skills. Instead, the point is to demystify the calculation of
heritability, so that students see that there is nothing magical about these calculations. Once
you have established the correct answer for each example, discuss with students what each
answer means i.e., the degree to which individual differences in the trait can be attributed
15
to genetic differences or environmental differences. Ask students to identify the reasons

this formula gives an estimate of heritability. Instructors may also wish to use this activity
and the discussion as a springboard for addressing what heritability means and what it does
not mean.
2. Larsen and Buss note that there are two key assumptions of the twin method used by
behavioral geneticists. If neither of these assumptions are true, then the results from the
twin study might be in question. The two assumptions are the equal environments
assumption, and the assumption that twins are representative of the general population.
Distribute Activity Handout 6-2 (“Assumptions of Twin Studies”). Give students five
minutes to describe these assumptions in their own words. Then ask for volunteers to share
their responses. Use this activity as a springboard for discussing the twin design of
behavioral genetics. Challenge students to identify the reason why the two assumptions are
used in the twin method, and why it is problematic if these assumptions are not considered.
Finally, close your discussion by noting that recent research suggests that neither of these
assumptions is violated in most twin studies of personality.
3. Behavioral geneticists distinguish between two types of environmental influences: Shared

environmental influences and nonshared environmental influences. Distribute Activity
Handout 6-3 (“Shared and Nonshared Environmental Variables”). Give students about five
minutes to complete the tasks mentioned in the handout. Ask students to volunteer their
responses. Instructor should carefully tweak the responses that are not accurate. Use this
activity as a springboard for discussing the difference between shared and nonshared
environmental influences on personality. Ask students to speculate why it is the case that
most of the environmental influences on personality have been identified as nonshared,
rather than being influenced by the shared environment. Finally, ask students to address
why this latter set of findings is controversial among social scientists, particularly among
those who argue that parenting and various socialization processes are critical determinants
of personality.
Questions for In-Class Discussion
1. Larsen and Buss note that although some observed differences between people are
attributable to genetic differences this does not mean that the environment plays no role in
modifying the extent of such differences. Larsen and Buss provide the example of height.
Height is about 90% heritable. Over the past century, however, the average height of
people living in the United States has increased by about two inches, probably due to
increases in the nutritional value of food eaten by U.S. citizens. This nutritional increase is
an environmental variable. Ask student to provide other examples of how a trait with high
16
heritability can be modified by the environment. Start by questioning about other physical
traits that are highly heritable that might also have been impacted by the increased
nutritional value of food eaten by U.S. citizens over the past century.
2. Larsen and Buss present three common misconceptions about the concept of heritability.
One misconception is that heritability can be applied to a single individual. A second
misconception is that heritability is constant and immutable or unchangeable. A third
misconception is that heritability is a precise statistic. Ask students to discuss why these
are misconceptions and have them correct these misconceptions by providing examples.
Also, ask them to consider why people, including trained psychologists, continue to believe
these gross misconceptions. Instructors may wish to use this final part of the discussion as
a springboard for discussing ideological and political agendas that thwart a clear
understanding of behavior genetics.
3. Larsen and Buss present four basic research designs used by behavioral geneticists who
study personality (selective breeding studies, family studies, twin studies, and adoption
studies). Ask students to identify and describe each research design and discuss the
advantages and disadvantages of each. Finally, ask them to consider one particular
personality trait, say agreeableness, and how the heritability and environmentality of that
trait might be documented using each of these designs. Ask students to discuss selective
breeding studies being unethical in cases that does not include humans (selective breeding
with dogs), following the presentation by Larsen and Buss. A clear understanding of these
four research designs is central to understanding and appreciating behavioral genetic
studies of personality. Students will gain a clearer and more comprehensive understanding
of this material if they discuss it as a class, with the instructor serving as moderator, in
addition to hearing it in the form of a lecture and reading about it from the textbook.
Critical Thinking Essays
1. Larsen and Buss present several possible reasons why behavioral genetic research in
personality generates controversy. Answer the following questions in your own words:
why is behavioral genetic research so controversial? Discuss the possibility that this
controversy lies primarily in several key misconceptions about behavioral genetics.
2. Larsen and Buss present four key research designs used in the behavioral genetic study of
personality. Briefly review the key features of these designs and discuss the advantages
and disadvantages of each design. Why would it be particularly powerful for a set of
results (such as heritability and environmentality estimates) to be documented using more
than one design? Refer to a specific personality trait in formulating your answer to this
17
question.
3. Larsen and Buss review recent research documenting that some attitudes, such as
traditionalism, have moderate heritability (30–60%), whereas other attitudes, such as
beliefs in God, involvement in religious affairs, and attitudes toward racial integration are
much less heritable, with heritabilities approaching 0%. What might account for the
variance in the heritability of different attitudes? If individual differences in some attitudes
are accounted for almost entirely by environmental differences, what might some of these
environmental differences be? Include in your response a discussion of the difference
between shared environmental influences and nonshared environmental influences.
Research Papers
1. Larsen and Buss discuss four key research designs used by behavioral geneticists who
study personality. These are selective breeding studies, family studies, twin studies, and
adoption studies. Conduct a search on the Internet or any other resources for the
psychological research literature and locate four research articles published within the last
five years, each of which uses only one of the four types of designs. For each article, first
summarize the objectives, the process involved, and the findings of the research. Then,
suggest how the researchers might have used each of the remaining three research designs.
Finally, address whether you think the results might have turned out differently if they had
used different research designs and why.
2. Larsen and Buss distinguish between shared environmental influences and nonshared
environmental influences. Larsen and Buss note that, for most personality variables, the
shared environment has either little or no discernible impact. Instead, environmental
influences are usually of the nonshared type. First, briefly discuss, describe, and
distinguish between shared environmental influences and nonshared environmental
influences. Next, in your own words, speculate as to why nonshared environmental
influences so frequently account for more of environmental impact than do shared
environmental influences. Finally, conduct a search on the Internet or any other resources
for the psychological research literature and identify three articles that address empirically
shared and nonshared environmental influences on personality (try searching by using the
key words “personality and nonshared environment”). For each article, summarize the
objectives, the process involved, and the findings of the research. Highlight the distinction
between shared and nonshared environmental influences.
3. Larsen and Buss discuss molecular behavior genetics, the most recent development in the
science of behavioral genetics. Larsen and Buss note that these techniques are designed to
18
identify, for example, the specific genes associated with, for example, personality traits.
Conduct a search on the Internet or any other resources for the psychological literature and
identify three articles that report research at the interface of molecular genetics and
personality. For each article, summarize the objectives, the process involved, and the
findings of the research. Answer the following question in your own words: what are some
of the advantages and disadvantages of studying personality using molecular behavioral
genetics?
Recent Research Articles and Other Scholarly Readings
Bailey, J. M., Kirk, K. M., Zhu, G., et al. (2000). Do individual differences in sociosexuality
represent genetic or environmentally contingent strategies? Evidence from the Australian
twin registry. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 537–545.
Borkenau, P., Riemann, R., Angleitner, A., et al. (2001). Genetic and environmental influences
on observed personality: Evidence from the German Observational Study of Adult Twins.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 80, 655–668.
Bucholz, K. K., Hesselbrock, V. M., Heath, A. C., et al. (2000). A latent class analysis of
antisocial personality disorder symptom data from a multi-centre family study of alcoholism.
Addiction, 95, 553–567.
Comings, D. E., Johnson, J. P., Gonzalez, N. S., et al. (2000). Association between adrenergic
alpha-sub (2A) receptor gene (ADRA2A) and measures of irritability, hostility, impulsivity
and memory in normal subjects. Psychiatric Genetics, 10, 39–42.
Coolidge, F. L., Thede, L. L., Young, S. E. (2000). Heritability and the comorbidity of attention
deficit hyperactivity disorder with behavioral disorders and executive function deficits: A
preliminary investigation. Developmental Neuropsychology, 17, 273–287.
Geijer, T., Frisch, A., Persson, M.-L., et al. (2000). Search for associations between suicide
attempt and serotonergic polymorphisms. Psychiatric Genetics, 10, 19–26.
Goldsmith, H. H., & Lemery, K. S. (2000). Linking temperamental fearfulness and anxiety
symptoms: A behavior-genetic perspective. Biological Psychiatry, 48, 1199–1209.
Jocklin, V., McGue, M., & Lykken, D. T. (1996). Personality and divorce: A genetic analysis.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 71, 288–299
19
Johansson, B., Grant, J. D., Plomin, R., et al. (2001). Health locus of control in late life: A study
of genetic and environmental influences in twins aged 80 years and older. Health
Psychology, 20, 33–40.
Jorm, A. F., Henderson, A. S., Jacomb, P. A., et al. (2000). Association of a functional
polymorphism of the monoamine oxidase: A gene promoter with personality and psychiatric
symptoms. Psychiatric Genetics, 10, 87–90.
Lake, R. I. E., Eaves, L. J., Maes, H. H. M., et al. (2000). Further evidence against the
environmental transmission of individual differences in neuroticism from a collaborative
study of 45,850 twins and relatives on two continents. Behavior Genetics, 30, 223–233.
Lykken, D., & Tellegen, A. (1996). Happiness is a stochastic phenomenon. Psychological

Science, 7, 186–189.
McCrae, R. R., Costa, P. T., Jr., Ostendorf, F., et al. (2000). Nature over nurture: Temperament,
personality, and life span development. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78,
173–186.
McGue. M., & Lykken, D. T. (1992). Genetic influence on risk of divorce. Psychological
Science, 3, 368–373.
McGuffin, P., Riley, B., & Plomin, R. (2001). Toward behavioral genomics. Science, 291, 1232–
1249.
O’Connor, T. G., Caspi, A., DeFries, J. C., et al. (2000). Are associations between parental
divorce and children’s adjustment genetically mediated? An adoption study. Developmental
Psychology, 36, 429–437.
Plomin, R. (2001). Genetics and behaviour. Psychologist, 14, 134–139.
Plomin, R., & Craig, I. (2001). Genetics, environment and cognitive abilities: Review and work
in progress towards a genome scan for quantitative trait locus associations using DNA
pooling. British Journal of Psychiatry, 178, s41–s48.
Price, T. S., Eley, T. C., Dale, P. S., et al. (2000). Genetic and environmental covariation
between verbal and nonverbal cognitive development in infancy. Child Development, 71,
948–959.
Sander, T., Ostapowicz, A., Samochowiec, J., et al. (2000). Genetic variation of the glutamate
20
transporter EAAT2 gene and vulnerability to alcohol dependence. Psychiatric Genetics, 10,
103–107.
Turkheimer, E., & Waldron, M. (2000). Nonshared environment: A theoretical, methodological,

and quantitative review. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 78–108.
Weiss, A., King, J. E., & Figueredo, A. J. (2000). The heritability of personality factors in
chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). Behavior Genetics, 30, 213–221.
Wills, T. A., Sandy, J. M., & Yaeger, A. (2000). Temperament and adolescent substance use: An
epigenetic approach to risk and protection. Journal of Personality, 68, 1127–1151.
21
Activity Handout 6-1: Calculating Heritability

from Twin Studies
Instructions: Larsen and Buss present a simple formula for calculating heritability. One simply
takes two times the difference between the correlation (“r”) on some trait for monozygotic (MZ)
or identical twins and the correlation on that same trait for dizygotic (DZ) or fraternal twins.
Here is the formula:
Heritability = 2 (rmz - rdz)
Calculate the heritability for the following three examples:
1. rmz = .90, rdz = .10
2. rmz = .60, rdz = .40
3. rmz = .30, rdz = .30
22
23
Activity Handout 6-2: Assumptions of Twin

Studies
Instructions: Larsen and Buss note that there are two key assumptions of the twin method used
by behavioral geneticists. If either assumption is not met, then the results from the twin study
might be in question. These assumptions are the equal environments assumption and the
assumption that twins are representative of the general population. Define each of these
assumptions in your own words.
1. Equal Environments Assumption:
2. Assumption of Representativeness:
24
Activity Handout 6-3: Shared and Nonshared

Environmental Variables
Instructions: Under the section labelled “Shared Environmental Variables” that is given below,
write down five shared variables that you had in common with your siblings while you were
growing up (if you are the only child, write down five things that might be shared environmental
variables if you had siblings). Next, under the label “Nonshared Environmental Variables,” write
down five environmental variables that you did not share with any of your siblings while you
were growing up (again, imagine you had siblings if you are the only child).
Shared Environmental Variables
1. _________________________________________________________________________
2. _________________________________________________________________________
3. _________________________________________________________________________
4. _________________________________________________________________________
5. _________________________________________________________________________
Nonshared Environmental Variables
1. _________________________________________________________________________
2. _________________________________________________________________________
3. _________________________________________________________________________
4. _________________________________________________________________________
5. _________________________________________________________________________

Personality Psychology 6th Edition Larsen Solutions Manual Download

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Personality Psychology 6th Edition Larsen Solutions Manual Download

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Personality Psychology 6th Edition Larsen Solutions Manual Download

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

Chapter 6 Genetics and Personality

Personality Psychology 6th Edition

Full download at link:

Solution Manual: https://testbankpack.com/p/solution-manual-for-

Test Bank: https://testbankpack.com/p/test-bank-for-personality-

Larsen, Personality Psychology, 6e

2. Discuss why behavioral genetics research is controversial, with reference to issues

5. Identify and discuss the three key misconceptions about heritability.

9. Discuss and differentiate shared environmental influences from nonshared environmental

11. Define and provide examples of genotype-environment interactions.

Larsen, Personality Psychology, 6e

I. The Human Genome

• Genome refers to the complete set of genes an organism possesses.

II. Controversy About Genes and Personality

Larsen, Personality Psychology, 6e

III. Goals of Behavioral Genetics

IV. What Is Heritability?

• Heritability is a statistic that refers to the proportion of observed variance in group of

A. Misconceptions About Heritability

• One common misconception about heritability is that it can be applied to a single

B. Nature-Nurture Debate Clarified

• Clarifying the meaning of the term heritability—what it is and what it is not—allows

Larsen, Personality Psychology, 6e

V. Behavioral Genetics Methods

A. Selective Breeding—Studies of Humans’ Best Friend

Larsen, Personality Psychology, 6e

VI. Major Findings from Behavioral Genetic Research

Larsen, Personality Psychology, 6e

B. Attitudes and Preferences

C. Drinking and Smoking

• Drinking and smoking are often regarded behavioral manifestations of personality

D. Marriage and Satisfaction with Life

VII. Shared Versus Nonshared Environmental Influences: A Riddle

Larsen, Personality Psychology, 6e

VIII. Genes and the Environment

• Genotype–environment interaction refers to the differential response of individuals

Larsen, Personality Psychology, 6e

o Active genotype–environment correlation, which occurs when a person with a

IX. Molecular Genetics

X. Behavior Genetics, Science, Politics, and Values

Summary and Evaluation

Larsen, Personality Psychology, 6e

environments will be an important part of this research program.

In addition to providing estimates of heritability and environmentality, some behavioral genetic

Larsen, Personality Psychology, 6e

Genome Equal environments assumption

Lecture Topics and Lecture Suggestions

1. Heritability of Happiness (Lykken & Tellegen, 1996)

Students are likely to find a presentation of research documenting the heritability of

Larsen, Personality Psychology, 6e

• Lykken & Tellegen (1996) measured happiness, or subjective well-being, on a birth-

2. Genetic Influence on Risk of Divorce (McGue & Lykken, 1992)

Larsen, Personality Psychology, 6e

Classroom Activities and Demonstrations

Larsen, Personality Psychology, 6e

to genetic differences or environmental differences. Ask students to identify the reasons

3. Behavioral geneticists distinguish between two types of environmental influences: Shared

Questions for In-Class Discussion