Reynolds C A, Baker L A, Pedersen N L
Department of Psychology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles 90089-1061, USA.
Behav Genet. 2000 Nov;30(6):455-76. doi: 10.1023/a:1010250818089.
Phenotypic assortment is assumed to be the principal mechanism of spouse similarity in most biometrical studies. Other assortment mechanisms, such as social homogamy, may be plausible. Two models are presented that consider phenotypic assortment and social homogamy simultaneously (i.e., mixed assortment), where selective associations between social background factors (Model I) versus selective associations between total environments (Model II) distinguish the models. A series of illustrative analyses was undertaken for education and fluid ability available on a sample of 116 Swedish twin pairs and their spouses. On the basis of several fit criteria Model I was preferred over Model II. Both social homogamy and phenotypic assortment may contribute to spouse similarity for educational attainment and fluid ability. Furthermore, spouse similarity for fluid ability may arise indirectly from social homogamy and phenotypic assortment for educational attainment. Power analyses indicated greater observed power for Model I than Model II. Additional power analyses indicated that considerably more twin-spouse sets would be needed for Model II than Model I, to resolve social homogamy and phenotypic assortment. Effects of misspecification of mechanisms of spouse similarity are also briefly discussed.
在大多数生物统计学研究中,表型分类被认为是配偶相似性的主要机制。其他分类机制,如社会同质性,可能也是合理的。本文提出了两个同时考虑表型分类和社会同质性(即混合分类)的模型,其中社会背景因素之间的选择性关联(模型I)与总环境之间的选择性关联(模型II)区分了这两个模型。对116对瑞典双胞胎及其配偶样本中可得的教育程度和流体能力进行了一系列说明性分析。基于几个拟合标准,模型I比模型II更受青睐。社会同质性和表型分类都可能导致配偶在教育程度和流体能力方面的相似性。此外,流体能力方面的配偶相似性可能间接源于教育程度方面的社会同质性和表型分类。功效分析表明,模型I比模型II具有更大的观测功效。额外的功效分析表明,与模型I相比,模型II需要更多的双胞胎 - 配偶组来解析社会同质性和表型分类。还简要讨论了配偶相似性机制错误设定的影响。