Abstract
The association between parental socialization and antisocial behavior is central to much criminological theory and research. For the most part, criminologists view parental socialization as reflecting a purely social process, one that is not influenced by genetic factors. A growing body of behavioral genetic research, however, has cast doubt on this claim by revealing that environments are partially shaped by genetic factors. The current study used these findings as a springboard to examine the genetic and environmental underpinnings to various measures of perceived paternal and maternal parenting. Analysis of twin pairs drawn from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent Health revealed that between 16 and 31% of the variance in perceptions of maternal attachment, maternal involvement, maternal disengagement, and maternal negativity was the result of genetic factors. Additionally, between 46 and 63% of the variance in perceptions of paternal attachment, paternal involvement, and paternal negativity was accounted for by genetic factors. The implications that these results have for criminologists are explored.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
Bivariate correlations were calculated to ensure that the maternal and paternal measures were not tapping the same underlying construct. The results of these bivariate correlations revealed statistically significant associations between all of the maternal and paternal parenting measures. These correlations, however, ranged between r = .09 and r = .48, indicating that the maternal and paternal scales were measuring parent-specific behaviors, not family-wide parenting practices.
I tested for harmful levels of multicollinearity by calculating variance inflation factors (VIF) and tolerance values. The results of these statistics indicated the presence of some multicollinearity (as a function of the heritability term and the shared environmental term) for the models in Table 2 and the maternal negativity model in Table 4. This is not surprising because the DF model is essentially an interaction model and interaction models are known to be affected by multicollinearity (for the models with the paternal measures as the dependent variable, the shared environmental effect was dropped from the equation because it was non-significant and so collinearity was not a problem). Nonetheless, I recalculated the DF models using different variants of the DF model and the results were virtually identical. Similarly, I recalculated the DF models in three steps. First, I entered only the ENVDIF measures into the equation (this was the baseline model). I then sequentially introduced the heritability term and then the shared environmental term. The standard errors for all of the coefficients were then examined across all of the models. The results revealed that the magnitude of the standard errors remained very similar across all of the models. Additionally, the results of these models are in line with the extant literature examining the genetic basis to family environments. Last, I recalculated all of the models by removing all of the ENVDIF measures and the shared environmental component. These models had no issues with collinearity (because they were essentially bivariate models) and the heritability estimates were similar to the ones that were reported in the full model (i.e., the confidence intervals overlapped). As a result, it does not appear as though the results are a function of collinearity or multicollinearity.
References
Astone NM, McLanahan SS (1991) Family structure, parental practices and high school completion. Am Sociol Rev 56:309–320
Beaver KM (2008) Nonshared environmental influences on adolescent delinquent involvement and adult criminal behavior. Criminology 46:341–370
Beaver KM, Wright JP (2007) A child effects explanation for the association between family risk and involvement in an antisocial lifestyle. J Adolescent Res 22:640–664
Beaver KM, DeLisi M, Vaughn MG, Wright JP, Boutwell BB (2008) The relationship between self-control and language: evidence of a shared etiological pathway. Criminology 46:939–970
Beaver KM, DeLisi M, Mears DP, Stewart EA (2009) Low self-control and contact with the criminal justice system in a nationally representative sample of males. Justice Q 26:695–715
Crosnoe R, Elder GH (2004) Family dynamics, supportive relationships, and educational resilience during adolescence. J Fam Issues 25:571–602
Cullen FT, Unnever JD, Wright JP, Beaver KM (2008) Parenting and self-control. In: Goode E (ed) Out of control: assessing the general theory of crime. Stanford University Press, Stanford, pp 61–74
Dawkins R (1982) The extended phenotype: the long reach of the gene. Oxford University Press, New York
DeFries JC, Fulker DW (1985) Multiple regression analysis of twin data. Behav Genet 15:467–473
Farrington DP, Welsh BC (2007) Saving children from a life of crime: early risk factors and effective interventions. Oxford University Press, New York
Ge X, Conger RD, Cadoret RJ, Neiderhiser JN, Yates W, Troughton E, Stewart ME (1996) The developmental interface between nature and nurture: a mutual influence model of child antisocial behavior and parent behaviors. Dev Psych 32:574–589
Glueck S, Glueck E (1950) Unraveling juvenile delinquency. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Gottfreson MR, Hirschi T (1990) A general theory of crime. Stanford University Press, Stanford
Guo G, Roettger ME, Shih JC (2007) Contributions of the DAT1 and DRD2 genes to serious and violent delinquency among adolescents and young adults. Hum Genet 121:125–136
Harris JR (1995) Where is the child’s environment? A group socialization theory of development. Psychol Rev 102:458–489
Harris JR (1998) The nurture assumption: why children turn out the way they do. The Free Press, New York
Harris, KM, Florey, F, Tabor, J, Bearman, PS, Jones, J, Udry, JR (2003) The national longitudinal study of adolescent health: research design [www document]. URL: http://www.cpc.unc.edu/projects/addhealth/design
Haynie DL (2001) Delinquent peers revisited: does network structure matter? Am J Sociol 106:1013–1057
Hirschi T (1969) Causes of delinquency. University of California Press, Berkeley
Hu D, Tristan J, Wade E, Stice E (2006) Does problem behavior elicit poor parenting? A prospective study of adolescent girls. J Adolescent Res 21:185–204
Jacobson K, Rowe DC (1998) Genetic and shared environment influences on adolescent BMI: interaction with race and sex. Behav Genet 28:265–278
Jacobson K, Rowe DC (1999) Genetics and environmental influences on the relationship between family connectedness, school connectedness and adolescent depressed mood: sex differences. Dev Psych 35:926–939
Jaffee SR, Price TS (2007) Gene-environment correlations: a review of the evidence and implications for prevention of mental illness. Mol Psychiatr 12:432–442
Jaffee SR, Caspi A, Moffitt TE, Polo-Tomas M, Price TS, Taylor A (2004) The limits of child effects: evidence for genetically mediated child effects on corporal punishment but not on physical maltreatment. Dev Psych 40:1047–1058
Kendler KS, Baker JH (2007) Genetic influences on measures of the environment: a systematic review. Psychol Med 37:615–626
Loeber R, Stouthamer-Loeber M (1986) Family factors as correlates and predictors of juvenile conduct problems and delinquency. In: Tonry M, Morris N (eds) Crime and justice: a review of research, vol 7. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 29–149
Loeber R, Drinkwater M, Yin Y, Anderson SJ, Schmidt LC, Crawford A (2000) Stability of family interaction from ages 6 to 18. J Abnorm Child Psych 28:353–369
Lytton H (1990) Child and parent effects in boys’ conduct disorder: a reinterpretation. Dev Psych 26:683–697
Miller BC, Benson B, Galbraith KA (2001) Family relationships and adolescent pregnancy risk: a research synthesis. Dev Rev 21:1–38
Neiderhiser JM, Reiss D, Pedersen NL, Lichtenstein P, Spotts EL, Hansson K, Cederblad M, Elthammer O (2004) Genetic and environmental influences on mothering of adolescents: a comparison of two samples. Dev Psych 40:335–351
O’Connor TG, Deater-Deckard K, Fulker D, Rutter M, Plomin R (1998) Genotype-environment correlations in late childhood and early adolescence: antisocial behavioral problems and coercive parenting. Dev Psych 34:970–981
Paternoster R, Brame R, Mazerolle P, Piquero A (1998) Using the correct statistical test for the equality of regression coefficients. Criminology 36:859–866
Pinker S (2002) The blank slate: the modern denial of human nature. Viking, New York
Piquero AR, Farrington DP, Welsh BC, Tremblay R, Jennings W (2009) Effects of early family/parent training programs on antisocial behavior and delinquency. J Exp Criminol 5:83–120
Plomin R, Bergeman CS (1991) The nature of nurture: genetic influence on “environmental” measures. Behav Brain Sci 14:373–427
Plomin R, DeFries JC, Loehlin JC (1977) Genotype-environment interaction and correlation in the analysis of human behavior. Psychol Bull 84:309–322
Plomin R, Reiss D, Hetherington EM, Howe GW (1994) Nature and nurture: genetic contributions to measures of the family environment. Dev Psych 30:32–43
Plomin R, DeFries JC, McClearn GE, McGuffin P (2008) Behavioral genetics, 5th edn. Worth Publishers, New York
Rodgers JL, Kohler HP (2005) Reformulating and simplifying the DF analysis model. Behav Genet 35:211–217
Rodgers JL, Rowe DC, Li C (1994) Beyond nature versus nurture: DF analysis of nonshared influences on problem behaviors. Dev Psych 30:374–384
Rowe DC (1983) A biometrical analysis of perceptions of family environment: a study of twin and singleton sibling kinships. Child Dev 54:416–423
Rowe DC (1994) The limits of family influence: genes, experience, and behavior. Guilford, New York
Rutter M (2006) Genes and behavior: nature-nurture interplay explained. Blackwell, Malden, MA
Sampson RJ, Laub JH (1993) Crime in the making: pathways and turning points through life. Harvard University Press, Cambridge
Scarr S (1992) Developmental theories for the 1990s: development and individual differences. Child Dev 63:1–19
Scarr S, McCartney K (1983) How people make their own environments: a theory of genotype → environment effects. Child Dev 54:424–435
Schreck CJ, Fisher BS, Miller JM (2004) The social context of violent victimization: a study of the delinquent peer effect. Justice Q 21:23–47
Schulz-Heik RJ, Rhee SH, Silvern L, Lessem JM, Haberstick BC, Hopfer C, Hewitt JK (2009) Investigation of genetically mediated child effects on maltreatment. Behav Genet 39:265–276
Shah R, Waller G (2000) Parental style and vulnerability to depression: the role of core beliefs. J Nerv Ment Dis 188:19–25
Simons RL, Simons LG, Wallace LE (2004) Families, delinquency, and crime: linking society’s most basic institution to antisocial behavior. Roxbury, Los Angeles
Turkheimer E (2000) Three laws of behavior genetics and what they mean. Curr Dir Psychol Sci 9:160–164
Udry JR (2003) The national longitudinal study of adolescent health (Add Health), waves I and II, 1994–1996; wave III, 2001–2002 [machine-readable data file and documentation]. Carolina Population Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill
Unnever JD, Cullen FT, Agnew R (2006) Why is “bad” parenting criminogenic? Implications from rival theories. Youth Violence Juv Justice 4:3–33
Walsh A (2002) Biosocial criminology: introduction and integration. Anderson, Cincinnati
Wright JP, Beaver KM (2005) Do parents matter in creating self-control in their children? a genetically informed test of Gottfredson and Hirschi’s theory of low self-control. Criminology 43:1169–1202
Wright JP, Cullen FT (2001) Parental efficacy and delinquent behavior: do control and support matter? Criminology 39:677–706
Acknowledgments
This research uses data from Add Health, a program project directed by Kathleen Mullan Harris and designed by J. Richard Udry, Peter S. Bearman, and Kathleen Mullan Harris at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, and funded by grant P01-HD31921 from the Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, with cooperative funding from 23 other federal agencies and foundations. Special acknowledgment is due Ronald R. Rindfuss and Barbara Entwisle for assistance in the original design. Information on how to obtain the Add Health data files is available on the Add Health website (http://www.cpc.unc.edu/addhealth). No direct support was received from grant P01-HD31921 for this analysis.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Appendix 1
Appendix 1
See Table 6.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Beaver, K.M. The Effects of Genetics, the Environment, and Low Self-Control on Perceived Maternal and Paternal Socialization: Results from a Longitudinal Sample of Twins. J Quant Criminol 27, 85–105 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-010-9100-z
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10940-010-9100-z