IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/taf/rpsyxx/v8y2016i1p72-84.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Schizophrenia: A critical view on genetic effects

Author

Listed:
  • Roar Fosse
  • Jay Joseph
  • Mike Jones

Abstract

The main justification for molecular genetics studies of enduring psychosis (schizophrenia) are high heritability estimates obtained from classical twin studies. The classical twin method rests upon the equal environment assumption (EEA), which holds that reared-together identical and fraternal twin pairs grow up experiencing equally similar environmental exposures. However, a review of prior twin studies shows that identical twins are more similar than fraternal twins on childhood exposures that are central to the etiology of psychosis. Such exposures include bullying, sexual abuse, physical maltreatment, emotional neglect and abuse, and general trauma. An additional assumption presented by twin researchers, that the differential intraclass correlation for child social adversities can be explained by evocative gene–environment covariation, is not consistent with the available evidence. Moreover, due to an array of methodological problems and questionable assumptions, adoption studies provide misleading indications in support of genetic effects. As a result, direct studies of DNA variations in schizophrenia must stand on their own ground. Possible minor findings from such molecular genetics studies, when combined with the available evidence of environmental effects, support a stress-based sociopsychobiological model of schizophrenia etiology.

Suggested Citation

  • Roar Fosse & Jay Joseph & Mike Jones, 2016. "Schizophrenia: A critical view on genetic effects," Psychosis, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 72-84, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:8:y:2016:i:1:p:72-84
    DOI: 10.1080/17522439.2015.1081269
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1080/17522439.2015.1081269
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1080/17522439.2015.1081269?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:taf:rpsyxx:v:8:y:2016:i:1:p:72-84. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Chris Longhurst (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.tandfonline.com/RPSY20 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.