Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
A
t the dawn of the new century, in nature-nurture battles. Indeed, his personality, or mental illness, other than
Robert Plomin was gloomy, moderation showed the way for the ac- that they are all more or less heritable.
though at first it is hard to ceptance of heritability into the main- For better or for worse, twin studies are
imagine why. He had just led one of stream of developmental psychology social science, and Robert Plomin was a
the greatest intellectual transformations and psychopathology, and later into social scientist; he wanted more.
in the history of behavioral science. In sociology, economics, and political sci- As the new century began, however,
the seventies, as Plomin completed his ence. He mostly avoided the thorny the potential for vindication presented
Ph.D., behavioral genetics was an out- social problems associated with behav- itself. The Human Genome Project
cast in the social sciences. Although ior genetics. He never went out of his was being completed, and soon, be-
there was already a robust genetic litera- way to either endorse or attack Richard havior genetics would no longer rely
ture about the behavior of farm animals Herrnstein and Charles Murray, Arthur on distal inferences from twins. It was
and dogs, the idea that the most com- Jensen, or any of the other major hered- more and more possible to collect hu-
plex aspects of human behavior might itarian theorists of the time. His CV is man DNA from large samples at low
be substantially influenced by genes was studded with important contributions cost. The source of Plomin’s gloom,
anathema. The few scientists who ven- to the study of the environment. Like the need to “find the DNA differences
tured into the domain were ostracized. many scientists who are described as be- responsible for the heritability of psy-
Only twenty years later, as Plomin havior geneticists, Robert Plomin was chological traits” (p. 122), would finally
contemplated the future of his field from never a geneticist in the biological sense; be addressed head-on. The field held
his chair at the Institute of Psychiatry in he was a psychologist, arguably the most its breath as DNA was collected from
London, behavior genetics was thor- successful of his generation. schizophrenics and controls, the intel-
oughly established as one of the foun- Yet there he was in London in the ligent and the slow, the introverted and
dations of scientific psychology. Twin late nineties, in the middle of one of the the extroverted. The great era of behav-
and adoption studies had sprouted ev- greatest careers in this history of psy- ioral genomics was on the horizon.
erywhere, many of them under Plomin’s chology, despairing. He contemplated But it never arrived. As Plomin re-
leadership. The idea that schizophrenia retirement. What could have been the counts in part two of Blueprint, titled,
or bipolar disorder has a genetic basis matter? Here are his words in Blueprint: “The DNA Revolution,” attempts to
was accepted by nearly everyone; it was How DNA Makes Us Who We Are: “Even find the DNA responsible for the heri-
the doubters who were on the fringes of though I am an incorrigible optimist, tability of behavior failed. Month after
the field. Moreover, the field had largely a decade ago I was getting depressed month, journals would report new find-
been liberated from its old ties to rac- about these three false starts and their ings of specific genes for behavioral phe-
ism, eugenics, and genetic determinism. implications for future attempts to find notypes, but they never replicated. One
Behavior genetics had joined the aca- the DNA differences responsible for amazing genomic methodology after
demic establishment: routine, expected, the heritability of psychological traits.” another was developed in biological ge-
moderate, even anodyne. Genes and Twin and adoption genetics, as pro- netics and applied to medicine, where it
environment worked together, inextri- foundly influential as they had been,
cably, in the genesis of human behavior. always had a flaw: they were abstracted Blueprint: How DNA Makes Us Who
Robert Plomin was not just a lead- from DNA, and therefore from biology We Are. By Robert Plomin. MIT
er of this transformation: he was the itself. The methodological details had Press, 2018.
leader. Plomin was always a moderate been worked out in the 1920s, when ge-
H AS TI N GS C E N TE R REPORT 1
succeeded, and then to human behavior, cesses in complex medical disease, but tions with phenotypes, and polygenic
where it failed. This was the moment of it hasn’t discovered anything resembling scores sum those effects in ways that
Plomin’s despair. He had, with great in- genes for schizophrenia or intelligence. are sometimes useful. A generation of
tellectual courage, staked his reputation A decade after the completion of the young scientists is exploring how poly-
on the existence of actionable scientific Human Genome Project, the prospects genic scores and other GWAS products
knowledge of the DNA-based genesis of for a true genomics of human behavior can be integrated into the investigation
twin-based heritability. As reports of as- remained gloomy. of traditional social science questions.
sociations between DNA and behavioral Then, yet again, a technical inno- Like all social science, and, in particu-
phenotypes slowly faded into nonrepli- vation, this one more statistical than lar, like the twin genetics of the previous
cation, one can understand the scientif- biological, presented itself. Especially generation, genomic social science at its
ic doubts Plomin was experiencing. The in the study of normal continuous traits best is informative and descriptive, illu-
path out of the gloomy social scientific as opposed to psychiatric disorders— minating and even enlightening. At its
swamp appeared to be blocked. an enterprise known as social science most frustrating, it is local, contextual,
But Blueprint is hardly the product genomics—investigators became less nonreplicable, and causally refractory.
of a gloomy author. Quite the opposite: concerned with the action of individual None of its conclusions are revelatory:
it is a declaration of victory of nature genes and more interested in statistical no one is about to use polygenic scores
over nurture, a celebration of the vindi- composites of DNA called polygenic to figure out why children excel or fail
cation of Plomin as a scientist and of be- scores, which can be used as predic- in school or become addicted to drugs.
havior genetics as a field of study. What tors in social science research. Polygenic But unless one has just had it with so-
happened between 2000 and 2019 to scores, finally, pulled Plomin out of his cial science in general, genomic social
brighten Plomin’s outlook so radically? gloom. The best polygenic scores pre- science works well enough; it’s good to
Were the genes for schizophrenia and dict pretty well. A polygenic score can have a new way to ask the old questions
intelligence finally discovered? Are we at predict about 40 percent of the pheno- at slightly higher genomic resolution.
last on our way to understanding why, typic variance in height, which is tech- Like most cases of melancholy,
at a biological level, all differences in nically impressive if not theoretically Plomin’s millennial gloom originated in
human behavior are substantially heri- surprising. (Who doubted that height a realistic view of a harsh reality: human
table? Alas, no. What happened is that was genetic in a fairly straightforward behavioral science, genetically informed
Robert Plomin gave up on the search for way?) The most robust polygenic scores or not, never partakes of the bracing
individual genes that explain heritability for behavioral differences account for certainty of the natural sciences. The
and decided to be satisfied with much 10 to 15 percent of the phenotypic vari- lesson to be drawn from the failure of
less. There were two stages to Plomin’s ance. Most do far worse: for personality, the gene-finding project is that the gap
scientific redemption. for example, they are still close to zero. between the biological action of indi-
The first of them was another techni- They will no doubt get better, although vidual genes and complex, uncontrolled
cal innovation from biological genom- how much better is anyone’s guess. behavior in humans is in a real sense
ics, called genome-wide association In any case, polygenic scores achieve permanent. Social science, and there-
studies, or GWAS. In GWAS, instead their predictive power by abdicating fore social scientists, are not going to be
of preselecting individual genes to test any claim to biological meaning. SNPs rescued by genomics; to the contrary,
for association with complex outcomes, are summed willy-nilly across chromo- genomics will only become more and
geneticists search the entire genome for somes. At first, part of the procedure more ensnared in the frustrations of so-
tiny correlations between complex phe- involved experimenting with how many cial science. The best tonic for Plomin’s
notypes and individual bits of DNA SNPs to include in the sum: only the melancholy would be an unblinking ac-
called single nucleotide polymorphisms, genome-significant ones at p < .05 * 10- ceptance of the inherent frustrations of
or SNPs, with stringent statistical cor- 8, or all at p < .05, or some other thresh- human science. Polygenic scores may be
rections for the millions of tests that old? But as Plomin describes, the field a retreat from the dream of a behavioral
are conducted. At first, GWAS was yet has rapidly drifted in the direction of science finally based in biology, but it
another failure. It rapidly became clear just including all of them, large effect or is a prudent retreat, one that offers real
that the magnitude of associations be- small, significant or not. At this point, benefits to both genetically informed
tween SNPs and behavior were so tiny the original task of figuring out which social scientists and biological geneti-
as to require gargantuan samples, in gene does what on a biological level has cists who are ready to confront the sci-
the tens and even hundreds of thou- been abandoned. Polygenic scores have entific ambiguities of human behavior.
sands, to detect them. Although those returned behavior genetics to its origins Plomin, however, is not ready to face
samples were eventually compiled, and as social science. that reality and accept polygenic scores
“significant” associations found, it still GWAS and polygenic scores are as rough but useful tools in the age-old
didn’t fulfill Plomin’s dream of locat- perfectly sound on their own terms. slog of human social science. He wants
ing the DNA responsible for statistical They do what they are supposed to do: them to provide vindication of the en-
heritability. GWAS has had some suc- GWAS finds DNA with tiny correla- tire behavior genetic research program,
H AS TI N GS C E N TE R REPORT 3