Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T00:17:05.814Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Prosocial peer affiliation suppresses genetic influences on non-aggressive antisocial behaviors during childhood

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 May 2013

S. A. Burt  and
K. L. Klump
S. A. Burt*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA
K. L. Klump
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, USA
*
* Address for correspondence: S. A. Burt, Ph.D., Department of Psychology, Michigan State University, 107D Psychology Building, East Lansing, MI 48824, USA. (Email: [email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

Available research has suggested that affiliation with prosocial peers reduces child and adolescent antisocial behavior. However, the etiologic mechanisms driving this association remain unclear. The current study sought to evaluate whether this association takes the form of a gene–environment interaction (G × E) in which prosocial peer affiliation acts to reduce the consequences of genetic risk for non-aggressive antisocial behavior during childhood.

Method

Our sample consisted of 500 twin pairs aged 6–10 years from the Michigan State University Twin Registry (MSUTR).

Results

The results robustly support moderation by prosocial peer affiliation. Genetic influences on non-aggressive antisocial behavior were observed to be several times larger in those with lower levels of prosocial peer affiliation than in those with higher levels of prosocial peer affiliation. This pattern of results persisted even after controlling for gene–environment correlations and deviant peer affiliation, and when restricting our analyses to those twins who shared all or nearly all of their friends.

Conclusions

Such findings not only suggest that prosocial peer affiliation moderates genetic influences on non-aggressive antisocial behaviors during childhood but also provide support for the theoretical notion that protective environmental experiences may exert their influence by promoting resilience to genetic risk.

Keywords

G × Enon-aggressive antisocial behaviorprosocial peersresiliencerule-breaking
Type
Original Articles
Information
Psychological Medicine , Volume 44 , Issue 4 , March 2014 , pp. 821 - 830
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Achenbach, TM, McConaughy, SH, Howell, CT (1987). Child/adolescent behavioral and emotional problems: implications of cross-informant correlations for situational specificity. Psychological Bulletin 101, 213–232.Google Scholar
Achenbach, TM, Rescorla, LA (2001). Manual for ASEBA School-Age Forms and Profiles. University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, and Families: Burlington, VT. Google Scholar
Akaike, H (1987). Factor analysis and AIC. Psychometrika 52, 317–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beaver, KM, DeLisi, M, Wright, JP, Vaughn, MG (2009). Gene-environment interplay and delinquent involvement: evidence of direct, indirect, and interactive effects. Journal of Adolescent Research 24, 147–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burt, SA (2009 a). Are there meaningful etiological differences within antisocial behavior? Results of a meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review 29, 163–178.Google Scholar
Burt, SA (2009 b). A mechanistic explanation of popularity: genes, rule-breaking, and evocative gene-environment correlations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 96, 783–794.Google Scholar
Burt, SA (2009 c). Rethinking environmental contributions to child and adolescent psychopathology: a meta-analysis of shared environmental influences. Psychological Bulletin 135, 608–637.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burt, SA, Klump, KL (2012). Delinquent peer affiliation as an etiological moderator of childhood delinquency. Psychological Medicine. Published online: 20 January 2012 . doi:10.1017/S0033291712000013. Google ScholarPubMed
Burt, SA, Klump, KL (2013). The Michigan State University Twin Registry (MSUTR): an update. Twin Research and Human Genetics 16, 344–350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Button, TMM, Corley, RP, Rhee, SH, Hewitt, JK, Young, SE, Stallings, MC (2007). Delinquent peer affiliation and conduct problems: a twin study. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 116, 554–564.Google Scholar
Cleveland, HH, Wiebe, RP, Rowe, DC (2005). Sources of exposure to smoking and drinking friends among adolescents: a behavioral-genetic evaluation. Journal of Genetic Psychology 166, 153–169.Google Scholar
Curtis, NM, Ronan, KR, Borduin, CM (2004). Mutisystemic treatment: a meta-analysis of outcome studies. Journal of Family Psychology 18, 411–419.Google Scholar
Dayan, P, Balleine, BW (2002). Reward, movtivation, and reinforcement learning. Neuron 36, 285–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deater-Deckard, K (2001). Annotation: Recent research examining the role of peer relationships in the development of psychopathology. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 42, 565–579.Google Scholar
Feinberg, ME, Button, TMM, Neiderhiser, JM, Hetherington, EM, Reiss, D (2007). Parenting and adolescent antisocial behavior and depression: evidence for genotype by parenting interaction. Archives of General Psychiatry 64, 457–465.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feldman, RA, Caplinger, TE, Wodarski, JS (1983). The St. Louis Conundrum: The Effective Treatment of Antisocial Youth. Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ.Google Scholar
Granic, I, Patterson, GR (2006). Towards a comprehensive model of antisocial development: a dynamic systems approach. Psychological Bulletin 113, 101–131.Google Scholar
Harden, PW, Hill, JE, Turkheimer, E, Emery, RE (2008). Gene-environment correlation and interaction on peer effects on adolescent alcohol and tobacco use. Behavior Genetics 38, 339–347.Google Scholar
Hektner, JM, August, GJ, Realmuta, GM (2000). Patterns and temporal changes in peer affiliation among aggressive and non-aggressive children particpating in a summer school program. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology 29, 603–614.Google Scholar
Hicks, BM, South, SC, DiRago, AC, Iacono, WG, McGue, M (2009). Environmental adversity and increasing genetic risk for externalizing disorders. Archives of General Psychiatry 66, 640–648.Google Scholar
Huey, SJ, Henggeler, SW, Brondino, MJ, Pickrel, SG (2000). Mechanisms of change in multisystemic therapy: reducing delinquent behavior through therapist adherence and improved family and peer functioning. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 68, 451–467.Google Scholar
Kazdin, AE (1987). Treatment of antisocial behavior in children: current status and future directions. Psychological Bulletin 102, 187–203.Google Scholar
Kendler, KS (2005). Psychiatric genetics: a methodological critique. American Journal of Psychiatry 162, 3–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kendler, KS, Jacobson, KC, Myers, JM, Eaves, LJ (2008). A genetically informative developmental study of the relationship between conduct disorder and peer deviance in males. Psychological Medicine 38, 1001–1011.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lahey, BB, Waldman, ED (2003). A developmental propensity model of the origins of conduct problems during childhood and adolescence. In Causes of Conduct Disorder and Juvenile Delinquency (ed. Lahey, B., Moffitt, T. E. and Caspi, A.), pp. 76–117. Guilford Press: New York.Google Scholar
McGue, M, Bouchard, TJJ (1984). Adjustment of twin data for the effects of age and sex. Behavior Genetics 14, 325–343.Google Scholar
Moffitt, TE (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: a developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review 100, 674–701.Google Scholar
Moffitt, TE (2003). Life-course persistent and adolescence-limited antisocial behavior: a research review and a research agenda. In Causes of Conduct Disorder and Serious Juvenile Delinquency (ed. Lahey, B., Moffitt, T. E. and Caspi, A.), pp. 49–75. Guilford Press: New York.Google Scholar
Neale, MC, Boker, SM, Xie, G, Maes, HH (2003). Mx: Statistical Modeling, 6th edn. Department of Psychiatry, VCU Box 900126: Richmond, VA 23298.Google Scholar
Neale, MC, Cardon, LR (1992). Methodology for Genetic Studies of Twins and Families. Kluwer Academic Publishers: Boston, MA.Google Scholar
Peeters, H, Van Gestel, S, Vlietinck, R, Derom, C, Derom, R (1998). Validation of a telephone zygosity questionnaire in twins of known zygosity. Behavior Genetics 28, 159–161.Google Scholar
Plomin, R, DeFries, JC, Loehlin, JC (1977). Genotype-environment interaction and correlation in the analysis of human behavior. Psychological Bulletin 84, 309–322.Google Scholar
Purcell, S (2002). Variance components model for gene-environment interaction in twin analysis. Twin Research 5, 554–571.Google Scholar
Quinton, D, Pickles, A, Maughan, B, Rutter, M (1993). Partners, peers, and pathways: assortative pairing and continuities in conduct disorder. Development and Psychopathology 5, 763–783.Google Scholar
Raftery, AE (1995). Bayesian model selection in social research. Sociological Methodology 25, 111–163.Google Scholar
Rathouz, PJ, Van Hulle, CA, Rodgers, JL, Waldman, ID, Lahey, BB (2008). Specification, testing, and interpretation of gene-by-measured-environment interaction models in the presence of gene-environment correlation. Behavior Genetics 38, 301–315.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Rowe, DC, Osgood, DW (1984). Heredity and sociological theories of delinquency: a reconsideration. American Sociological Review 49, 526–540.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rutter, M, Moffitt, TE, Caspi, A (2006). Gene-environment interplay and psychopathology: multiple varieties but real effects. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 47, 226–261.Google Scholar
Scarr, S, McCartney, K (1983). How people make their own environments: a theory of genotype-environment effects. Child Development 54, 424–435.Google Scholar
Schultz, W (2002). Getting formal with dopamine and reward. Neuron 36, 241–263.Google Scholar
Schultz, W, Dayan, P, Montague, PR (1997). A neural substrate of prediction and reward. Science 275, 1593–1599.Google Scholar
Sclove, LS (1987). Application of model-selection criteria to some problems in multivariate analysis. Psychometrika 53, 333–343.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shanahan, MJ, Hofer, SM (2005). Social context and gene-environment interactions: retrospect and prospect. Journals of Gerontology. Series B, Psychological Sciences and Social Sciences 60, 65–76.Google Scholar
Simonoff, E, Elander, J, Holmshow, J, Pickles, A, Murray, R, Rutter, M (2004). Predictor of antisocial personality: continuities from childhood to adult life. British Journal of Psychiatry 184, 118–127.Google Scholar
Spiegelhalter, DJ, Best, NG, Carlin, BP, Van Der Linde, A (2002). Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B 64, 583–639.Google Scholar
Tremblay, RE, Pagani-Kurtz, L, Masse, LC, Vitaro, F, Pihl, RO (1995). A bimodal preventive intervention for disruptive kindergarten boys: its impact through mid-adolescence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 63, 560–568.Google Scholar
van der Sluis, S, Posthuma, D, Dolan, CV (2012). A note on false positives and power in G × E modeling of twin data. Behavior Genetics 42, 170–186.Google Scholar
Walden, SB, McGue, M, Iacono, WG, Burt, SA, Elkins, I (2004). Identifying shared environmental contributions to early substance use: the importance of peers and parents. Journal of Abnormal Psychology 113, 440–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar