Basic quantitative genetic models of human behavioral variation have made clear that individual differences in behavior cannot be understood without acknowledging the importance of genetic influences. Yet these basic models estimate average, population-level genetic and environmental influences, obscuring differences that might exist within the population and masking systematic transactions between specific genetic and environmental influences. This article discusses a newer, more sophisticated and powerful quantitative genetic model that articulates these transactions. Results from this model highlight the ways in which the (...) gene- environment interaction and correlation are intertwined. They can be used to integrate findings from quantitative and molecular genetic studies and to understand the roles of genetic influences and social forces in manifested behaviors, even when DNA sequence variation is not relevant. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved). (shrink)

Recent evidence from psychological science and genetics suggests that genetic influences underlie all behavior as well as the most worrisome social inequalities. This may be considered to call into question traditional conceptions of agency and agent responsibility. They could be thought to be undermined if gene-environment transactions were sufficiently potent in influencing behaviors. Here we identify the theoretical parameters that require investigation and the conceptual challenges to agent responsibility that arise from research in behavior genetics. We (i) introduce the empirical (...) basis of the discussion, (ii) identify the particular questions that arise from considering the connection between behavior genetics and agent responsibility in the context of the legal system, (iii) bring into focus the general challenges to agent responsibility, and (iv) outline a potential resolution. (shrink)

Latent variable modeling has revealed important conundrums in the DSM classification system. We agree that the network perspective has potential to inspire new insights and resolve some of these conundrums. We note, however, that alone it cannot really help us understand etiology. Etiology, not comorbidity, is the fundamental question.