| Title |
Twin Studies in Psychiatry and Psychology: Science or Pseudoscience?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Psychiatric Quarterly, March 2002
|
| DOI | 10.1023/a:1012896802713 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Jay Joseph |
| Abstract |
Twin studies are frequently cited in support of the influence of genetic factors for a wide range of psychiatric conditions and psychological trait differences. The most common method, known as the classical twin method, compares the concordance rates or correlations of reared-together identical (MZ) vs. reared-together same-sex fraternal (DZ) twins. However, drawing genetic inferences from MZ-DZ comparisons is problematic due to methodological problems and questionable assumptions. It is argued that the main theoretical assumption of the twin method--known as the "equal environment assumption"--is not tenable. The twin method is therefore of doubtful value as an indicator of genetic influences. Studies of reared-apart twins are discussed, and it is noted that these studies are also vulnerable to methodological problems and environmental confounds. It is concluded that there is little reason to believe that twin studies provide evidence in favor of genetic influences on psychiatric disorders and human behavioral differences. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 16 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United States | 4 | 25% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 6% |
| Switzerland | 1 | 6% |
| Spain | 1 | 6% |
| Unknown | 9 | 56% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 10 | 63% |
| Scientists | 3 | 19% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 2 | 13% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 6% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 96 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Turkey | 1 | 1% |
| Norway | 1 | 1% |
| Ireland | 1 | 1% |
| United Kingdom | 1 | 1% |
| Japan | 1 | 1% |
| Unknown | 91 | 95% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 20 | 21% |
| Student > Bachelor | 14 | 15% |
| Student > Master | 13 | 14% |
| Researcher | 8 | 8% |
| Professor | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 20 | 21% |
| Unknown | 17 | 18% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Psychology | 34 | 35% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 14 | 15% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 6 | 6% |
| Social Sciences | 6 | 6% |
| Neuroscience | 4 | 4% |
| Other | 12 | 13% |
| Unknown | 20 | 21% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 22. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 May 2023.
All research outputs
#1,707,671
of 25,639,676 outputs
Outputs from Psychiatric Quarterly
#37
of 649 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#1,558
of 49,994 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Psychiatric Quarterly
#1
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,639,676 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 93rd percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 649 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 14.0. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 49,994 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them