Genetic Mediation of Divorce Risk

The concern with regards to divorce risk is that it is genetically mediated. For example, people who are impulsive are more likely to divorce, and impulsivity is heritable (along with many other things: http://ussc.edu.au/ussc/assets/media/docs/publications/44_Hatemi_Trends.pdf#page=29).

—

A number of studies have demonstrated associations between sensation seeking traits and measures of impulsivity. This study examined genetic contributions to the observed correlations between impulsivity and sensation seeking traits. Fifty-seven pairs of identical and 49 pairs of fraternal twins who were reared apart and 90 individuals who also participated in the Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart completed the Control scale of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ; Tellegen, 1982) and the four subscales of the Sensation Seeking Scale (SSS; Zuckerman, 1979), Consistent with previous studies, the Control scale was significantly correlated with the SSS. A Cholesky decomposition of the data indicated that the phenotypic correlations between the Control scale and the four subscales of the SSS were mediated almost entirely by genetic factors. In the final reduced model the proportion of the genetic variance of the Control scale in common with the SSS was estimated as 55%, and the rest of the genetic variance (45%) was attributed to the genetic variance specific to the Control scale. The results emphasize the importance of common biological mechanisms underlying associations between impulsivity and sensation seeking traits.

Hur, Yoon-Mi, and Thomas J. Bouchard Jr. “The genetic correlation between impulsivity and sensation seeking traits.” Behavior Genetics 27.5 (1997): 455-463.

—

M. McGue and D. T. Lykken (1992) found that divorce risk was, to a substantial degree, genetically mediated; prior research has identified numerous social and psychological factors that affect divorce risk (G. C. Kitson, K. B. Barbi, & M. J. Roach, 1985). The present study attempted to link these domains by examining the extent to which genetic influences on one such psychological factor, personality, explain divorce risk heritability. A sample of adult twins from the Minnesota Twin Registry completed a marital history questionnaire and the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (A. Tellegen, 1982). Positive Emotionality and Negative Emotionality factors were positively related to divorce risk, whereas Constraint was negatively related. In women and men, respectively, 30% and 42% of the heritability of divorce risk consisted of genetic factors affecting personality, and personality and divorce risk correlated largely as a result of these common genetic influences.

Jocklin, Victor, Matt McGue, and David T. Lykken. “Personality and divorce: a genetic analysis.” Journal of personality and social psychology 71.2 (1996): 288.

—

Recent research on the interplay of genetic and social factors in psychological development has several strands. First, genetic influences are important in the development of both competent and pathological behaviors (see review, Plomin, DeFries, McClearn, & Rutter, 1997a). Second, research is now focused on explaining these genetic influences. Figure 1 shows a simplified version of a model of reciprocal environmental and genetic influences (Kendler & Eaves, 1986; Plomin, DeFries, & Loehlin, 1977; Scarr & McCartney, 1983) that fits current data. Because the reciprocating process are evoked initially by an individual’s genotype this has been called the Evocative Model (Reiss, Neiderhiser, Hetherington, & Plomin, 2000). In Figure 1, “attributes” are heritable features of an individual’s reactivity, self-regulation, and cognitive skills. These appear earlier in development but do not necessarily affect overall adjustment. However, according to this model, heritable attributes evoke distinctive patterns of responses from intimates such as parents, children, sibs, and spouses. It is these evoked social responses that intensify and transform heritable traits into the profiles of heritable strengths and weaknesses that shape the individual’s adjustment.

[...]

Recent findings support this model. For example, step 2 suggests that differences in genotype among individuals would be associated with differences in the patterns of responses to them by their family and friends. Indeed, genetic differences among children and adults show substantial associations with the quality of their intimate relationships. These include, for children, the quality of their relationship with their parents as measured by self-report (Plomin, Reiss, Hetherington, & Howe, 1994) and by coded videotape (Dunn & Plomin, 1986; O’Connor, Hetherington, Reiss, & Plomin, 1995); their sibling relationships (Pike, McGuire, Hetherington, et al., 1996; Reiss et al., 2000; Rende, Slomkowski, Stocker, et al., 1992); and their peer and friendship relationships (Manke, McGuire, Reiss, et al., 1995). For adults these include their parental behaviors (see below) and their liability for divorce (McGue & Lykken, 1992).

Reiss, David, et al. “Genetic Probes of Three Theories of Maternal Adjustment: I. Recent Evidence and a Model*.” Family Process 40.3 (2001): 247-259.
—

From Turkheimer himself:

Turkheimer, Eric. “Heritability and biological explanation.” Psychological Review 105.4 (1998): 782.