This graduate seminar will try to introduce behavior genetics by integrating its key methods, theories, and findings with perspectives from evolutionary genetics and evolutionary psychology.
Until recently, these three research traditions have been surprisingly isolated – whereas BG studied individual differences, EP studied human universals; whereas EG tried to develop deep theories about how evolution shapes the genetic architecture of species, BG tried to understand the genetic architecture of human behavior without using any coherent predictive theory. My hope in this course is that we’ll find some useful synergies between these three fields, that can deepen our understanding of human genetics, human behavior, and individual differences.
So, this course is very much an experiment, a venture into uncharted territory. I think it’s the first course of this type that has ever been taught, which means there will be a lot of excitement and novelty (I hope), and some anxiety, confusion, and frustration (I’m afraid). There will be difficult questions and very few easy answers.
The course will be intellectually demanding, and will require a substantial amount of reading, active in-class discussion, and attentive development of a serious term paper. The course readings will require about 3 hours per week outside class. Apart from the textbook, they will include some recent journal papers and book chapters. If you have any concerns about your preparedness for this course, please email or talk with the instructor about what you have taken and how well you did.
For undergraduates: This is probably one of the hardest psychology courses open to undergraduates, but I hope also one of the most rewarding. It would be helpful for interested undergraduates to have some background in two or more or the following topics from Psychology, Biology, and/or Anthropology:
These are not formal pre-requisites, just guides to help you decide whether this course is right for you. If you do not have this sort of background but are strongly interested in taking this course, please try to catch up by skimming some books such as:
· John Mayard Smith (1998). Evolutionary genetics (2nd Ed.). Oxford, UK: Oxford U. Press.
· David Buss (2003). Evolutionary psychology: The new science of mind (2nd Ed.). New York: Allyn & Bacon.
For graduate students: This is also probably one of the hardest graduate courses, since most of our PhD students have very little background in evolutionary genetics or behavior genetics. It will require some dedication, some reading time, and some sustained work on the term paper.
Instructors’ contact details:
Dr. Geoffrey Miller
4th year Assistant Professor
Psychology, Logan Hall 160
University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM 87131-1161, USA
(505) 277-1967 (office/fax)
http://www.unm.edu/~psych/faculty/gmiller.html
Office hours: Tuesdays, 11 am to noon, Logan Hall 160
If you can’t make office hours and you have a question, please call or email.
Required Textbook:
Behavior genetics (4th Edition, 2003) by Robert Plomin, John C. DeFries, Gerald E. McClearn, and Peter McGuffin. New York: Worth Publishers. $102.75 new; used copies available from amazon.com, etc. This is a comprehensive, well-written textbook by four of the leading scientists in behavior genetics, with some nice biographical profiles of other researchers.
The term paper determines 60% of your course grade. You can choose any topic related to the course content and course readings, as long as I approve it. The final paper should be about 4,000 to 6,000 words, plus references. I care more about clarity, insight, research, and the flow of argument than about length per se.
Please plan to submit the rough draft and the final draft in standard APA (American Psychological Association) research paper format. This means computer-printed, double-spaced, single-sided, in 12 point Arial (preferably) or Times Roman font, with a proper title page, abstract, references, and page numbering. Consult the APA Publication Manual (4th Edition) for more details.
For graduate students, my goal is for you to produce a paper that you could turn around and submit to a decent journal as a review or commentary piece to improve your C.V., and that you would be proud to submit in an application for a post-doc, tenure-track job, or clinical internship.
You’ll get extra credit if you actually submit the term paper for publication in a reputable journal. Please provide a copy of your submission cover letter.
To make sure that you are thinking, researching, and writing the paper on a good schedule throughout the semester, I require the following:
1. October 1: Provisional Abstract/outline/bibliography due. A provisional topic statement/abstract (one paragraph), provisional outline of paper (about a page), and provisional bibliography.
The bibliography should list about 10 to 20 references (not all from the syllabus here!), that you have actually read, with brief notes about their relevance to your paper. In the abstract, just let me know what you think you’ll probably write about. If you change your mind, no problem, just tell me in an email later. But I want you to have some topic in mind by this date. Pick a topic that you feel passionate about – you’ll have to live with it for several months! This topic statement/outline will determine 20% of the course grade. Late submissions will be penalized.
After you submit this outline and bibliography, come to our office hours at least once for my feedback. This is very important; I will try to make sure your paper looks viable and will try to give you some useful suggestions and references
2. November 5: Rough draft due.
This should be a full-length, APA format draft of your term paper – the sort of thing you would submit as your final draft in most other courses. After I get this rough draft, I will write comments and suggestions on it and return it to you as soon as I can. This should allow you to submit a really good final draft, and I hope it will help you improve your writing generally. This rough draft will determine 20% of the course grade. Late submissions will be penalized.
3. December 10: Final draft due.
This should be a highly polished document in correct format with no spelling or grammatical errors. It should represent the culmination of three months of research, thinking, and writing about a topic that passionately interests you. The final draft will determine 20% of your course grade. Late submissions will be penalized. I will try to grade final drafts by the last days of exams.
Structure of the term paper: The ideal paper would include the following elements:
Readings for each week will be either from the textbook, or copied by the instructor and distributed at least a week ahead of time to each student.
For the non-textbook readings, I have tried very hard to find recent, theoretically interesting journal papers and book chapters. Most weeks, there are about 40 to 50 pages of actual reading to be done (not counting references sections of the papers.) This should take about three hours. My intention is for you to have a deep, focused exposure to the state of the art in behavior genetics. Some of the readings are harder than others; some weeks require more reading than other weeks.
Please do not take this course if you cannot commit an average of three hours a week to the readings. The major educational benefits of the course depend on you doing the readings on time; otherwise, the class discussions will mean very little to you. I expect all of each week’s required readings to be completed well before class, so you have time to digest them, think about them, compare and contrast them, and prepare intelligent comments and questions about them. Last-minute reading on Thursday night will not result in good comprehension or good in-class discussion.
One week before each reading, I will ask for a student volunteer to prepare a one-page set of notes, comments, and questions concerning that reading.
Please bring enough copies of your one-page analysis to distribute to everyone else in the class. Assume that the other students have read the paper fairly attentively, and want to know what you think of it. This analysis will serve to initiate class discussion of that reading.
I expect each student to volunteer for several such reading analyses throughout the semester. The quality of these analyses will form a substantial portion of your class participation grade.
The one-page analyses should have your name at the top, the date, and the APA-format reference for each reading as the header for your comments on that reading. Use numbered lists to identify your specific notes, comments, and questions under each reading. Please make at least three or four substantive comments on each reading – not simply summarizing the reading’s main points, but offering some sort of critical analysis of the reading’s ideas, or comparison to other readings, etc. Assume that the other students have read each reading thoroughly and attentively.
Key Dates and Course Schedule
1: Aug 27 Friday Introduction to the course
2: Sept 3 Friday Introduction to behavior genetics
Readings to be completed before class:
Plomin textbook. Chapter 5: Nature, Nurture, and Behavior (just read from p. 72 ‘Summing up’ through p. 92).
Steven Pinker (2002). Chapter 19: Children. In The blank slate: The modern denial of human nature, pp. 372-399. New York: Viking.
***************************************
John Tooby & Leda Cosmides (1990). On the universality of human nature and the uniqueness of the individual: The role of genetics and adaptation. Journal of Personality, 58, 17-67.
David M. Buss & Heidi Greiling (1999). Adaptive individual differences. Journal of Personality, 67, 209-243.
Mark Ridley (2000). Chapters 3 (‘The mutational meltdown, pp. 56-79) and 4 (‘The history of error’, pp. 80-108) from Mendel’s demon: Gene justice and the complexity of life. [US title: The cooperative gene.] London; Weidenfeld & Nicholson.
Lynch, M., Blanchard, J., Houle, D., Kibota, T., Shultz, S., Vasilieva, L., & Willis, J. (1999). Perspective: Spontaneous deleterious mutation. Evolution, 53, 645-663.
Adam Eyre-Walker & Peter D. Keightley (1999). High genomic deleterious mutation rates in hominids. Nature, 397, 344-346.
***************************************
Francis Galton (1865). Hereditary talent and character. Macmillan’s Magazine, XII, 157-166, 318-327. [Reprinted in R. Jacoby & N. Galuberman (Eds.). (1995). The bell curve debate: History, documents, opinions, pp. 393-409. New York: Random House.]
Richard J. Herrnstein (1971). I.Q. Atlantic Monthly, Sept., 43-64. [Reprinted in R. Jacoby & N. Galuberman (Eds.). (1995). The bell curve debate: History, documents, opinions, pp. 599-616. New York: Random House.]
Arthur Jensen (1973). The differences are real. Psychology Today. [Reprinted in R. Jacoby & N. Galuberman (Eds.). (1995). The bell curve debate: History, documents, opinions, pp. 617-629. New York: Random House.]
Plomin textbook. Chapter 9: General Cognitive Ability (pp. 156-183)
Geoffrey F. Miller (2000). Sexual selection for indicators of intelligence (pp. 260-270). In Bock, G.R., Goode, J.A., & Webb, K. (Eds.), The nature of intelligence. (Novartis Foundation Symposium 233). New York: Wiley.
Brett Anderson (2001). g as a consequence of shared genes. Intelligence, 29, 367-371.
Scott J. Steppan, Patrick C. Phillips, & David Houle (2002). Comparative quantitative genetics: Evolution of the G matrix. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 17, 320-327.
P. M. Thompson, T. D. Cannon, K. L. Narr, T. van Erp, V. P. Poutanen, M. Huttunen, J. Lonnqvist, C. G. Standertskjold-Nordenstam, J. Kaprio, M. Khaledy, R. Dail, C. I. Zoumalan, A. W. Toga (2001). Genetic influences on brain structure. Nature Neuroscience, 4(12), 1253-1258.
Danielle Postuma, William F. C. Baare, Hilleke E. Hulshoff Pol, Rene S. Kahn, Dorret I. Boomsma, & Eco J. C. De Geus (2003). Genetic correlations between brain volumes and the WAIS-III dimensions of verbal comprehension, working memory, perceptual organization, and processing speed. Twin Research, 6(2), 131-139.
William F. C. Baare, Hilleke E. Hulshoff Pol, Dorret I. Boomsma, Danielle Posthuma, Eco J. C. de Geus, Hugo G. Schnack, Neeltje E. M. van Haren, Clarine J. van Oel, & Rene S. Kahn (2001). Quantitative genetic modeling of variation in human brain morphology. Cerebral Cortex, 11, 816-824.
(no class October 15: fall break)
***************************************
Plomin textbook. Chapter 12: Personality and Personality Disorders (pp. 234-257) [24 pp]
K. L. Jang, R. R. McCrae, A. Angleitner, R. Riemann, & W. L. Livesley (1998). Heritability of facet-level traits in a cross-cultural twin sample: Support for a hierarchical model of personality. J. of Personality and Social Psychology, 74(6), 1556-1565.
J. Kuntsi, T. C. Eley, A. Taylor, C. Hughes, P. Asherson, A. Caspi, & T. E. Moffitt (2004). Co-occurrence of ADHD and low IQ has genetic origins. American J. of Medical Genetics B: Neuropsychiatric Genetics, 124B(1), 41-47.
A. Weiss, J. E. King, & R. M. Enns (2002). Subjective well-being is heritable and genetically correlated with dominance in chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes). J. of Personality and Social Psychology, 83(5), 1141-1149.
L. A. Fairbanks, T. K. Newman, J. N. Bailey, M. J. Jorgensen, S. E. Breidenthal, R. A. Ophoff, A. G. Comuzzie, L. J. Martin, & J. Rogers. (2004). Genetic contributions to social impulsivity and aggressiveness in vervet monkeys. Biological Psychiatry, 55(6), 642-647.
S. D. Gosling, V. S. Y. Kwan, O. P. John (2003). Dog’s got personality: A cross-species comparative approach to personality judgments in dogs and humans. J. of Personality and Social Psychology, 85(6), 1161-1169.
D. L. Sinn, N. A. Perrin, J. A. Mather, & R. C. Anderson (2001). Early temperamental traits in an octopus (Octopus bimaculoides). J. of Comparative Psychology, 115(4), 351-364.
Plomin textbook. Chapter 11: Psychopathology (pp. 204-223).
Shaner, A., Miler, G. F., & Mintz, J. (2004). Schizophrenia as one extreme of a sexually selected fitness indicator. Schizophrenia Research, 70(1), 101-109.
Keller, M., & Miller, G. F. (draft paper). The evolutionary genetics of psychopathology: Mutation-selection balance explains why psychiatric genetics has failed for thirty years.
11: Nov 12 Friday Behavior genetics of sexuality and reproduction
Bailey, J. M., Kirk, K. M., Zhu, G., Dunne, M. P., Martin, N. G. (2000). Do individual differences in sociosexuality represent genetic or environmentally contingent strategies? Evidence from the Australian Twin Registry. J. of Personality and Social Psychology, 78(3), 537-545.
Katherine M. Kirk, Simon P. Blomberg, David L. Duffy, Andrew C. Heath, Ian P. F. Owens, & Nick G. Martin (2001). Natural selection and quantitative genetics of life-history traits in Western women: A twin study. Evolution, 55(2), 423-435.
Lyons, M. J., Koenen, K. C., Buchting, F, Meyer, J. M., Eaves, L., Toomey, R., Eisen, S. A., Goldberg, J., Faraone, S. V., Ban, R. J., Jerskey, B. A., & Tsuang, M. T. (2004). A twin study of sexual behavior in men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 33(2), 129-136.
Reynolds, C. A., Baker, L. A., & Pedersen, N. L. (2000). Multivariate models of mixed assortment: Phenotypic assortment and social homogamy for education and fluid ability. Behavior Genetics, 30(6), 455-476.
K. Silventoinen, J. Kaprio, E. Lahelma, R. J. Viken, & R. J. Rose (2003). Assortative mating by body height and BMI: Finnish twins and their spouses. American J. of Human Biology,- 15(5), 620-627.
Satoshi Kanazawa & Jody L. Kovar (2004). Why beautiful people are more intelligent. Intelligence, 32, 227-243.
(no class November 26: Thanksgiving holiday)
Plomin textbook. Chapter 6: Identifying genes (pp. 93-115)
Gregory Carey (2003). Chapter 7: The new genetics: Techniques for DNA analysis (pp. 109-130). In Human genetics for the social sciences. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Hill, L., Chorney, M. J., Lubinski, D., Thompson, L. A., & Plomin, R. (2002). A quantitative trait locus not associated with cognitive ability in children: A failure to replicate. Psychological Science, 13(6), 561-562.
(Optional for students without much biology background:
Plomin Chapter 4: DNA: The Basis of Heredity (pp. 41-60)
Plomin textbook. Chapter 15: Environment (pp. 296-318)
Sandra Scarr (1996). How people make their own environments: Implications for parents and policy makers. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 2(2), 204-228.
(Final exams Dec 15-19: No final exam in this course)