We administered the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire (MPQ) to 217 monozygotic and 114 dizygotic reared-together adult twin pairs and 44 monozygotic and 27 dizygotic reared-apart adult twin pairs. A four-parameter biometric model (incorporating genetic, additive versus nonadditive, shared family-environment, and unshared environment components) and five reduced models were fitted through maximum-likelihood techniques to data obtained with the 11 primary MPQ scales and its 3 higher order scales. Solely environmental models did not fit any of the scales. Although the other reduced models, including the simple additive model, did fit many of the scales, only the full model provided a satisfactory fit for all scales. Heritabilities estimated by the full model ranged from .39 to .58. Consistent with previous reports, but contrary to widely held beliefs, the overall contribution of a common family-environment component was small and negligible for all but 2 of the 14 personality measures. Evidence of significant nonadditive genetic effects, possibly emergenic (epistatic) in nature, was obtained for 3 of the measures.Until recently, almost all knowledge regarding environmental and genetic causal influences on stable personality traits has come from studies of twins reared together. The findings have been both remarkable and puzzling. On the genetic side, regardless of the trait studied, the intraclass correlation for fraternal, or dizygotic (DZ), twins has approached .25; that for identical, or monozygotic (MZ), twins has approached .50 (Goldsmith, 1983;Nichols, 1978). Application of the simplest genetic model, the Falconer (1960) formula for heritability, [h 2 = 2(R M z -RDZ)], to those results yields a heritability of about .50. This leaves 50% of the variance to systematic environmental influences, measurement error, and temporal instability.Particularly puzzling, and contrary to what many psychologists would predict, is the finding that almost none of the enviThis research has been supported by grants from the University of Minnesota Graduate School, the Koch Charitable Foundation, the Spencer Foundation, the National Science Foundation (BNS-7926654), the Pioneer Fund, and the Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishing Company.We thank the following people for the time and effort they have given to testing the twins: Margaret Keyes, Jeff McHenry, Elizabeth Rengel, Susan Resnick, Joy Fisher, Jan Englander, and Ann Riggs. We are indebted to our colleagues and collaborators on the Minnesota Study of Twins Reared Apart project, Elke Eckert and Leonard Heston for their help and advice. We owe special thanks to our colleagues, Greg Carey and Matt McGue, for their valuable biometric advice and assistance. We also thank Jack Darley for his resolute and dedicated support and the Minneapolis War Memorial Blood Bank, Herbert Polesky, Director, for the blood testing.Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Auke Tellegen, Department of Psychology, Elliott Hall, University of Minnesota, 75 East River Road...

Intensive studies of visual illusion have rarely shown examples of polymorphic responses. We show here that, using figures consisting of stripes shaded from dark to light, arranged in repeating sectors, an illusion of movement can be induced in about 75% of observers when viewed peripherally. The responses of the viewers fall into four categories. This polymorphic response suggests a genetic origin.

Affective learning is a key dimension of health professional education and involves teaching topics such as empathy or grief that impact student attitudes and beliefs to prepare them to be novice practitioners. The move in higher education toward online and blended learning (a mix of online and traditional, classroombased learning) disrupts traditional approaches to teaching professional affect, which is heavily reliant on instructor modeling. This paper documents insight into the redesign process of a course, Professional Identity: Behaviors and Attitudes, from a traditional to a blended learning format, with a focus on affective learning. This study employed a survey approach to compare classroom and online student perceptions of learning across the seven affective topics of the course. The study also examined the contribution of various technology-enhanced learning activities to the students' perceptions of learning. Twenty-five classroom students and 64 blended learning students indicated that while both formats increased students' perceived understanding of topics related to affective learning, the blended learning group perceived a significantly greater understanding in four affective topic areas. Furthermore, blended learning students cited reading, online discussions, and unstructured out-of-classroom discussions as contributing to their learning significantly more than the classroom group. KeywordsAffective learning, Blended learning, Occupational therapy education Abstract Affective learning is a key dimension of health professional education and involves teaching topics such as empathy or grief that impact student attitudes and beliefs to prepare them to be novice practitioners. The move in higher education toward online and blended learning (a mix of online and traditional, classroom-based learning) disrupts traditional approaches to teaching professional affect, which is heavily reliant on instructor modeling. This paper documents insight into the redesign process of a course, Professional Identity: Behaviors and Attitudes, from a traditional to a blended learning format, with a focus on affective learning. This study employed a survey approach to compare classroom and online student perceptions of learning across the seven affective topics of the course. The study also examined the contribution of various technology-enhanced learning activities to the students' perceptions of learning. Twenty-five classroom students and 64 blended learning students indicated that while both formats increased students' perceived understanding of topics related to affective learning, the blended learning group perceived a significantly greater understanding in four affective topic areas. Furthermore, blended learning students cited reading, online discussions, and unstructured out-of-classroom discussions as contributing to their learning significantly more than the classroom group.

No abstract

No abstract