Partners in health? Investigating social genetic effects for married and cohabiting couples.
Mandemakers, J.; Otten, K.
Show abstract
Social contagion research suggests that health behaviors (BMI, smoking, drinking, etc.) spread through social networks, including dyadic ties such as between married/cohabiting partners. However, separating contagion from assortative mating ( like seeks like) and shared environmental factors remains notoriously difficult in observational studies. It is not possible to obtain exogenous variation in long-term partnerships ( random mating), but genetic approaches can offer a novel way to examine partner similarity and the role of social contagion. This paper explores possible social genetic effects among partners, i.e., effects of the partners genes on ones own behavior. We use the longitudinal Health and Retirement Study with data on health behavior and genomic data for both ego and his/her partner to examine social genetic effects for BMI, drinking, and smoking behavior. For each outcome, we find support for social genetic effects. Americans of European descent were more overweight if they had partners with higher polygenic scores for BMI net of their own polygenic score. Similar findings were found for the number of drinks per week and cigarettes per day. Longitudinal analyses that conditioned on past health behavior of both spouses confirmed these findings. We further explored whether susceptibility to the partners influence differed between men and women, but did not find consistent differences across outcomes. Findings are further discussed in the light of ramifications of social genetic effects for the social and biological sciences.
Matching journals
The top 4 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.
Similar papers in this journal
- Correction for participation bias in the UK Biobank reveals non-negligible impact on genetic associations and downstream analyses 95%
- Resource Profile and User Guide of the Polygenic Index Repository 94%
- Correlations between human mating partners: a comprehensive meta-analysis of 22 traits and raw data analysis of 133 traits in the UK Biobank 94%
"Similar papers" are the closest papers from that journal in the model's embedding space. They show what the match is built on, but the ranking comes mostly from a classifier over the whole training set, not from these examples alone.