Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-mp689 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T12:55:53.170Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Parent–child conflict as an etiological moderator of childhood conduct problems: an example of a ‘bioecological’ gene–environment interaction

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 June 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 48824USA. (Email: burts@msu.edu)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

Prior research has suggested that, consistent with the diathesis–stress model of gene–environment interaction (G × E), parent–child conflict activates genetic influences on antisocial/externalizing behaviors during adolescence. It remains unclear, however, whether this model is also important during childhood, or whether the moderation of child conduct problems by negative/conflictive parenting is better characterized as a bioecological interaction, in which environmental influences are enhanced in the presence of environmental risk whereas genetic influences are expressed most strongly in their absence. The current study sought to distinguish between these possibilities, evaluating how the parent–child relationship moderates the etiology of childhood-onset conduct problems.

Method

We conducted a series of ‘latent G by measured E’ interaction analyses, in which a measured environmental variable was allowed to moderate both genetic and environmental influences on child conduct problems. Participants included 500 child twin pairs from the Michigan State University Twin Registry (MSUTR).

Results

Shared environmental influences on conduct problems were found to be several-fold larger in those with high levels of parent–child conflict as compared with those with low levels. Genetic influences, by contrast, were proportionally more influential at lower levels of conflict than at higher levels.

Conclusions

Our findings suggest that, although the diathesis–stress form of G × E appears to underlie the relationship between parenting and conduct problems during adolescence, this pattern of moderation does not extend to childhood. Instead, results were more consistent with the bioecological form of G × E which postulates that, in some cases, genetic influences may be most fully manifested in the absence of environmental risk.

Keywords

Child conduct problemsG × Eparent–child conflictparental negativityshared environment
Type
Original Articles
Information
Psychological Medicine , Volume 44 , Issue 5 , April 2014 , pp. 1065 - 1076
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, Dumenci, L, Rescorla, LA (2001). Ratings of Relations Between DSM-IV Diagnostic Categories and Items of the CBCL/6-18, TRF, and YSR. University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, and Families: Burlington, VT.Google Scholar
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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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
Arsenault, L, Moffitt, TE, Caspi, A, Taylor, A, Rijsdijk, FV, Jaffee, SR, Ablow, JC, Measelle, JR (2003). Strong genetic effects on cross-situational antisocial behavior among 5-year-old children according to mothers, teachers, examiner-observers, and twins’ self-reports. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 44, 832–848.Google Scholar
Aslund, C, Nordquist, N, Comasco, E, Leppert, J, Oreland, L, Nilsson, KW (2011). Maltreatment, MAOA, and delinquency: sex differences in gene–environment interaction in a large population-based cohort of adolescents. Behavior Genetics 41, 262–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Beach, SRH, Brody, GH, Gunter, TD, Packer, H, Wernett, P, Philibert, RA (2010). Child maltreatment moderates the association of MAOA with symptoms of depression and antisocial personality disorder. Journal of Family Psychology 24, 12–20.Google 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
Bronfenbrenner, U, Ceci, SJ (1994). Nature–nurture reconceptualized in developmental perspective: a bioecological model. Psychological Review 101, 568–586.Google Scholar
Burt, SA (2009 a). Are there meaningful etiological differences within antisocial behavior? Results of a meta-analysis. Clinical Psychology Review 29, 163–178.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burt, SA (2009 b). Rethinking environmental contributions to child and adolescent psychopathology: a meta-analysis of shared environmental influences. Psychological Bulletin 135, 608–637.Google Scholar
Burt, SA (2011). Some key issues in the study of gene–environment interplay: activation, deactivation, and the role of development. Research in Human Development 8, 192–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Burt, SA, Klahr, AM, Rueter, MA, McGue, M, Iacono, WG (2011). Confirming the etiology of adolescent acting-out behaviors: an examination of observer-ratings in a sample of adoptive and biological siblings. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry 52, 519–526.Google Scholar
Burt, SA, Klump, KL (2009). The etiological moderation of aggressive and non-aggressive antisocial behavior by age. Twin Research and Human Genetics 12, 343–350.Google Scholar
Burt, SA, Klump, KL (2013 a). The Michigan State University Twin Registry (MSUTR): an update. Twin Research and Human Genetics 16, 344–350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burt, SA, Klump, KL (2013 b). Delinquent peer affiliation as an etiological moderator of childhood delinquency. Psychological Medicine 43, 1269–1278.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Burt, SA, Krueger, RF, McGue, M, Iacono, WG (2003). Parent–child conflict and the comorbidity among childhood externalizing disorders. Archives of General Psychiatry 60, 505–513.Google Scholar
Burt, SA, McGue, M, Krueger, RF, Iacono, WG (2005). How are parent–child conflict and child externalizing behaviors related over time? Results from a genetically-informative cross-lagged study. Development and Psychopathology 17, 1–21.Google Scholar
Burt, SA, Neiderhiser, JM (2009). Aggressive versus non-aggressive antisocial behavior: distinctive etiological moderation by age. Developmental Psychology 45, 1164–1176.Google Scholar
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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Button, TMM, Lau, JYF, Maughan, B, Eley, TC (2008). Parental punitive discipline, negative life events, and gene–environment interplay in the development of externalizing behavior. Psychological Medicine 38, 29–39.Google Scholar
Caspi, A, McClay, J, Moffitt, TE, Mill, J, Martin, J, Craig, IW, Taylor, A, Poulton, R (2002). Role of violence in maltreated children. Science 297, 851–854.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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
Cumming, G, Finch, S (2005). Inference by the eye: confidence intervals and how to read pictures of data. American Psychologist 60, 170–180.Google Scholar
Deater-Deckard, K, Pylas, M, Petrill, SA (1997). Twin Parent–Child Interaction System. Institute of Psychiatry: London.Google Scholar
Elkins, IJ, McGue, MK, Iacono, WG (1997). Genetic and environmental influences on parent–son relationships: evidence for increasing genetic influence during adolescence. Developmental Psychology 33, 351–363.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
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
Foley, DL, Eaves, LJ, Wormley, B, Silberg, JL, Maes, HH, Kuhn, J, Riley, B (2004). Childhood adversity, monoamine oxidase A genotype, and risk for conduct disorder. Archives of General Psychiatry 61, 738–744.Google Scholar
Gottlieb, G (2007). Probabilistic epigenesis. Development Science 10, 1–11.Google Scholar
Harden, PW, Hill, JE, Turkheimer, E, Emery, RE (2008). Gene–envrionment correlation and interaction on peer effects on adolescent alcohol and tobacco use. Behavior Genetics 38, 339–347.CrossRefGoogle 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
Humbad, MN, Klump, KL, Burt, SA (2012). Comparing the effects of three measures of marital conflict on the etiology of conduct problems. Behavior Genetics 42, issue 6, November 2012.Google 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.Google Scholar
Kim-Cohen, J, Caspi, A, Taylor, A, Williams, B, Newcombe, R, Craig, IW, Moffitt, TE (2006). MAOA, maltreatment, and gene–environment interaction predicting children's mental health: new evidence and a meta-analysis. Molecular Psychiatry 11, 903–913.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Knezevic, A (2008). Overlapping confidence intervals and statistical significance. Cornell Statistical Consulting Unit (http://www.cscu.cornell.edu/news/statnews/stnews73.pdf). Accessed September 2012.Google Scholar
Legrand, LN, Keyes, MA, McGue, M, Iacono, WG, Krueger, RF (2008). Rural environments reduce the gentic influence on adolescent substance use and rule-breaking behavior. Psychological Medicine 38, 1341–1350.Google Scholar
Lewontin, R (1995). Human Diversity. Scientific American Library: New York.Google Scholar
Li, JJ, Lee, SS (2010). Latent class analysis of antisocial behavior: interaction of serotonin transporter genotype and maltreatment. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 38, 789–801.Google Scholar
Lyons, MJ, True, WR, Eisne, SA, Goldberg, J, Meyer, JM, Faraone, SV, Eaves, L, Tsuang, MT (1995). Differential heritability of adult and juvenile antisocial traits. Archives of General Psychiatry 52, 906–915.Google Scholar
McConaughy, SH, Achenbach, TM (2001). Manual for the Semistructured Interview for Children and Adolescents. University of Vermont, Research Center for Children, Youth, and Families: Burlington, VT.Google Scholar
McGue, M, Bouchard, TJJ (1984). Adjustment of twin data for the effects of age and sex. Behavior Genetics 14, 325–343.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moffitt, TE (1993). Adolescence-limited and life-course-persistent antisocial behavior: a developmental taxonomy. Psychological Review 100, 674–701.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moffitt, TE (2003). Life-course persistent and adolescence-limited antisocial behavior: a research review and a research agenda. In The Causes of Conduct Disorder and Serious Juvenile Delinquency (ed. Lahey, B., Moffitt, T. E. and Caspi, A.), pp. 49–75. Guilford: New York.Google Scholar
Moffitt, TE, Caspi, A, Rutter, M (2006). Measured gene–environment interactions in psychopathology. Perspectives on Psychological Science 1, 5–27.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Neale, MC, Boker, SM, Xie, G, Maes, HH (2003). Mx: Statistical Modeling, 6th edn. Virginia Commonwealth University Department of Psychiatry: Richmond, VA.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
Pennington, BF, McGrath, LM, Rosenberg, J, Barnard, H, Smith, SD, Willcutt, EG, Friend, A, DeFries, JC, Olson, RK (2009). Gene x environment interactions in reading disability and attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Developmental Psychology 45, 77–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Plomin, R, DeFries, JC, Knopik, VS, Neiderhiser, JM (2012). Behavioral Genetics. Worth Publishers: New York.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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Purcell, S (2002). Variance components model for gene–environment interaction in twin analysis. Twin Research 5, 554–571.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Raftery, AE (1995). Bayesian model selection in social research. Sociological Methodology 25, 111–163.Google Scholar
Raine, A (2002). Biosocial studies of antisocial and violent behavior in children and adolescents: a review. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology 30, 311–326.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.Google 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
Sclove, LS (1987). Application of model-selection criteria to some problems in multivariate analysis. Psychometrika 53, 333–343.Google Scholar
Spatz Widom, C, Brzustowicz, LM (2006). MAOA and the “cycle of violence:” childhood abuse and neglect, MAOA genotype, and risk for violent and antisocial behavior. Biological Psychiatry 60, 684–689.CrossRefGoogle 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
Torgesen, JK, Wagner, RK, Rashotte, CA (1999). Test of Word Reading Efficiency. PRO-ED: Austin.Google Scholar
van der Sluis, S, Posthuma, D, Dolan, CV (2012). A note on false positives and power in GxE modeling of twin data. Behavior Genetics 42, 170–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar