The Influence of Major Life Events on Economic Attitudes in a World of Gene‐Environment Interplay

Abstract

The role of “genes” on political attitudes has gained attention across disciplines. However, person-specific experiences have yet to be incorporated into models that consider genetic influences. Relying on a gene-environment interplay approach, this study explicates how life-events, such as losing one’s job or suffering a financial loss, influence economic policy attitudes. The results indicate genetic and environmental variance on support for unions, immigration, capitalism, socialism and property tax is moderated by financial risks. Changes in the magnitude of genetic influences, however, are temporary. After two years, the phenotypic effects of the life events remain on most attitudes, but changes in the sources of individual differences do not. Univariate twin models that estimate the independent contributions of genes and environment on the variation of attitudes appear to provide robust baseline indicators of sources of individual differences. These estimates, however, are not event or day specific. In this way, genetic influences add stability, while environment cues change, and this process is continually updated.

Genetic Influences on Political Ideologies: Twin Analyses of 19 Measures of Political Ideologies from Five Democracies and Genome-Wide Findings from Three Populations

“…The formulation of an integrated theory of political ideology, including the acquisition and application of social values and behavior, requires the integration of genes and environment, embedded within a developmental framework, that allows for the incorporation of parental investment, social groups, cognition, perception, education, and a wide array of neurobiological mechanisms at the very least. In such a framework, there is scope for the roles of gene-environment interplay, including genetic expression, operating in social environments that change with the changing roles of an individual’s life and disposition (e.g., Eaves et al 1997; Eaves and Hatemi 2008; Hatemi, Funk, et al 2009; Hatemi 2013). In this way, models of genetic and environmental variation may be useful to provide a critical bridge that merges the research in the social and life sciences into a more comprehensive theory of ideology.…”

Gene-Environment Interplay in Twin Models

“…Hence, rather than using the linear equation V t = A + C + E , the variance associated with each of the three components is expressed as a linear interaction with the environmental condition of choice: V t = ( a + ß a X ) 2 + ( c + ß c X ) 2 + ( e + ß e X ) 2 . Thus, extending the CTD to estimate G × E interactions simply allows each variance components to have one additional parameter that allows the environmental variable, X , to increase or decrease the amount of variance in the trait that is attributed to the specific variance component (for a full description of G × E models, see Hatemi 2013). As is evident, each term in the G × E model is essentially a linear regression model that predicts the A , C , and E variance components.…”

“…In some cases, GE interplay will result in overestimates of the genetic effect, as the criticism argues. In other cases, however, common or unique environmental estimates will be inflated (for an example of both conditions, see Hatemi 2013) . Thus, not only is it essential to understand GE interplay from the genetic perspective, but it is also essential to explore it from the environmental perspective, a concern the critique does not consider.…”

“…Yet, most of the essay’s criticisms are based upon a small subset of articles, with a disproportionate emphasis on Alford, Funk, and Hibbing (2005). These articles are not representative of the wider body of literature that includes GE interplay (e.g., Boardman 2011; Hatemi, Dawes, et al 2011; Boardman et al 2012; Hatemi 2013). In other places, the critique is built upon a series of individual sentences taken out of context, where the interpretation of the statements does not correspond with the conclusions from the cited studies.…”

Are genetic markers of interest for economic research?

“…39 Hatemi (2013) provides an illustration of a policy relevance of G*E effects by exploring how proximate events such as losing one's job, suffering a major financial loss, or getting a divorce can lead to a short-term change in one's economic policy attitudes that are consistent with maximizing selfinterest. The results suggest that there are differential responses by genetic markers across individuals who lost a job, which are more likely to oppose policies that may have caused their change in economic situations such as immigration and capitalism.…”