Oksman Elli, Rosenström Tom, Hintsanen Mirka, Pulkki-Råback Laura, Viikari Jorma, Lehtimäki Terho, Raitakari Olli Tuomas, Keltikangas-Järvinen Liisa
Department of Psychology and Logopedics, Faculty of Medicine, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland.
Unit of Psychology, Faculty of Education, University of Oulu, Oulu, Finland.
Front Psychol. 2018 Oct 24;9:2034. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2018.02034. eCollection 2018.
Sociability and social domain-related behaviors have been associated with better well-being and endogenous oxytocin levels. Inspection of the literature, however, reveals that the effects between sociability and health outcomes, or between sociability and genotype, are often weak or inconsistent. In the field of personality psychology, the social phenotype is often measured by error-prone assessments based on different theoretical frameworks, which can partly explain the inconsistency of the previous findings. In this study, we evaluated the generalizability of "sociability" measures by partitioning the population variance in adulthood sociability using five indicators from three personality inventories and assessed in two to four follow-ups over a 15-year period ( = 1,573 participants, 28,323 person-observations; age range 20-50 years). Furthermore, we tested whether this variance partition would shed more light to the inconsistencies surrounding the "social" genotype, by using four genetic variants (rs1042778, rs2254298, rs53576, rs3796863) previously associated with a wide range of human social functions. Based on our results, trait (between-individual) variance explained 23% of the variance in overall sociability, differences between sociability indicators explained 41%, state (within-individual) variance explained 5% and measurement errors explained 32%. The genotype was associated only with the sociability indicator variance, suggesting it has specific effects on sentimentality and emotional sharing instead of reflecting general sociability.
社交性及与社交领域相关的行为与更好的幸福感和内源性催产素水平有关。然而，查阅文献发现，社交性与健康结果之间，或社交性与基因型之间的影响往往微弱或不一致。在人格心理学领域，社会表型通常通过基于不同理论框架的容易出错的评估来衡量，这可以部分解释先前研究结果的不一致性。在本研究中，我们通过使用来自三份人格量表的五个指标对成年社交性的总体方差进行划分，评估了“社交性”测量的可推广性，并在15年期间进行了两到四次随访评估（n = 1573名参与者，28323人次观察；年龄范围20 - 50岁）。此外，我们通过使用先前与广泛的人类社交功能相关的四个基因变体（rs1042778、rs2254298、rs53576、rs3796863），测试这种方差划分是否能更清楚地解释围绕“社交”基因型的不一致性。根据我们的结果，特质（个体间）方差解释了总体社交性方差的23%，社交性指标之间的差异解释了41%，状态（个体内）方差解释了5%，测量误差解释了32%。基因型仅与社交性指标方差相关，表明它对多愁善感和情感分享有特定影响，而不是反映一般社交性。
