Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-vvkck Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T05:28:05.763Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Genomics might not be the solution, but epistemic validity remains a challenge in the social sciences

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 September 2023

David Moreau Open the ORCID record for David Moreau [Opens in a new window]  and
Kristina Wiebels Open the ORCID record for Kristina Wiebels [Opens in a new window]
David Moreau
Affiliation:
School of Psychology and Centre for Brain Research, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand d.moreau@auckland.ac.nz k.wiebels@auckland.ac.nz https://braindynamicslab.com/ https://kwiebels.github.io/
Kristina Wiebels
Affiliation:
School of Psychology and Centre for Brain Research, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand d.moreau@auckland.ac.nz k.wiebels@auckland.ac.nz https://braindynamicslab.com/ https://kwiebels.github.io/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We sympathize with many of the points Burt makes in challenging the value of genetics to advance our understanding of social science. Here, we discuss how recent reflections on epistemic validity in the behavioral sciences can further contribute to a reappraisal of the role of sociogenomics to explain and predict human traits, aptitudes, and achievement.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 46 , 2023 , e221
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2023. Published by Cambridge University Press

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

Furnham, A. (2003). Belief in a just world: Research progress over the past decade. Personality and Individual Differences, 34(5), 795–817.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Madole, J., & Harden, K. (2023). Building causal knowledge in behavior genetics. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 1–76. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X22000681Google Scholar
McCarthy, J. J., McLeod, H. L., & Ginsburg, G. S. (2013). Genomic medicine: A decade of successes, challenges, and opportunities. Science Translational Medicine, 5(189), 189sr4.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moreau, D. (2021). Shifting minds: A quantitative reappraisal of cognitive intervention research. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 16(1), 148–160.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moreau, D. (2022). How malleable are cognitive abilities? A critical perspective on popular brief interventions. American Psychologist, 77(3), 409–423.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moreau, D., Macnamara, B. N., & Hambrick, D. Z. (2019). Overstating the role of environmental factors in success: A cautionary note. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 28(1), 28–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreau, D., & Wiebels, K. (2021). Assessing change in intervention research: The benefits of composite outcomes. Advances in Methods and Practices in Psychological Science, 4(1), 1–14.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreau, D., & Wiebels, K. (2022). Psychological constructs as local optima. Nature Reviews Psychology, 1, 188–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nathan, L. (2017). When grit isn't enough: A high school principal examines how poverty and inequality thwart the college-for-all promise. Beacon Press.Google Scholar
Plomin, R., DeFries, J. C., Knopik, V. S., & Neiderhiser, J. M. (2016). Top 10 replicated findings from behavioral genetics. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(1), 3–23.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sala, G., & Gobet, F. (2019). Cognitive training does not enhance general cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 23(1), 9–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar