Joint consideration of means and variances might change our understanding of etiology

Twin and adoption studies compare the similarities of people with differing degrees of relatedness to estimate genetic and environmental contributions to trait population variance. The analytic workhorse of these kinds of variance-focused designs is the intraclass correlation, which estimates similarity between pairs of individuals. Group means, by contrast, play no overt role in estimating genetic and environmental influences. Although this focus on variance has made very important contributions to understanding psychological characteristics, we contend that the exclusion of mean effects from behavioral genetic designs may have obscured key environmental influences and impeded full appreciation of the ubiquity and nature of gene–environment interplay in human outcomes. We provide empirical examples already in the literature and a theoretical framework for thinking through the incorporation of mean effects using largely forgotten, non-Mendelian theory regarding how genes influence human outcomes. We conclude that the field needs to develop models capable of fully incorporating mean effects into twin and adoption studies.