Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37961599›Full record

ArticlebioRxiv : the preprint server for biology2025

Confounding Fuels Misinterpretation in Human Genetics.

John W Benning, Jedidiah Carlson, Olivia S Smith, Ruth G Shaw, Arbel Harpak

Abstract readPreprint
In one paragraph

Article in bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

John W BenningDepartment of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-2583-2503
Jedidiah CarlsonDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-1363-872X
Olivia S SmithDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.
Ruth G ShawDepartment of Ecology, Evolution and Behavior, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN, USA.
Arbel HarpakDepartment of Integrative Biology, University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-3655-748X

Funding

Making Genomic Prediction of Complex Disease EquitableR35GM151108 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN · PI Arbel Harpak · 2023 to 2026
$1.6M
NIGMS NIH HHS R35 GM151108
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The scientific literature has seen a resurgence of interest in genetic influences on human behavior and socioeconomic outcomes. Such studies face the central difficulty of distinguishing possible causal influences, in particular genetic and non-genetic ones. When confounding between possible influences is not rigorously addressed, it invites over- and misinterpretation of data. We illustrate the breadth of this problem through a discussion of the literature and a reanalysis of two examples. Clark (2023) suggested that patterns of similarity in social status between relatives indicate that social status is largely determined by one's DNA. We show that the paper's conclusions are based on the conflation of genetic and non-genetic transmission (for example, of wealth) within families. Song & Zhang (2024) posited that genetic variants underlying bisexual behavior are maintained in the population because they also affect risk-taking behavior, thereby conferring an evolutionary fitness advantage through increased sexual promiscuity. In this case, too, we show that possible explanations cannot be distinguished, but only one is chosen and presented as a conclusion. We discuss how issues of confounding apply more broadly to studies that claim to establish genetic underpinnings to human behavior and societal outcomes.

Identifiers

PMID37961599
PMCPMC10635045

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.