Analyzing UK twin data, the authors show polygenic score prediction for intelligence and educational outcomes is split roughly evenly between within‑family genetic effects and between‑family effects. Socioeconomic status explains much of the between‑family portion, while height and BMI are driven mostly by within‑family genetics. Population PGS estimates for cognition thus blend individual biology with family‑level pathways.
— This reframes how journalists, policymakers, and schools interpret genetic prediction in education and merit debates by showing PGS reflects both individual genes and family/SES structure.
Aporia
2026.01.12
86% relevant
Carl discusses mechanisms and notes family/environmental confounding (and cites within‑sibling tests); this ties to the existing point that polygenic scores conflate within‑family genetic effects and between‑family SES pathways, which is central to interpreting intelligence–politics correlations.
Davide Piffer
2026.01.12
85% relevant
The article calls out conflation between genetic signal and family/SES effects (between‑family vs within‑family effects) and urges care in interpretation — directly echoing the existing idea that population PGS capture both genetic and family‑level pathways.
2026.01.05
78% relevant
Plomin discusses how polygenic scores correlate with educational and social outcomes and highlights confounding by family background and gene–environment interplay, which connects to the existing idea that population PGS effects partly reflect between‑family socioeconomic structure as well as within‑family genetics.
2026.01.04
70% relevant
The bibliography collects studies, popular posts and technical resources on IQ heritability and genetics; this shows an active effort to translate genetic and PGS-related material for a non‑English audience, relevant to debates about how genetic findings are reported and conflated with social causes.
2026.01.04
50% relevant
The article’s treatment of 'nature vs. nurture'—noting fading shared environment—interfaces with the caution that genotype‑based signals can reflect family/SES structure; the post strengthens the need for nuance that this existing idea warns about.
@degenrolf
2026.01.02
90% relevant
The tweet makes a direct empirical claim about heredity relative to upbringing; the existing idea about polygenic scores blending within‑family genetics and between‑family socioeconomic effects is the most relevant prior: it warns that observed parent–child political similarity could reflect both inherited genetic predisposition and family‑level environmental channels, requiring careful decomposition.
2025.10.07
100% relevant
Results from the Twins Early Development Study: within‑family vs population PGS predictions across childhood to early adulthood and SES adjustments (Figures 2–3).
2025.03.26
86% relevant
The perspective highlights how between‑family (socioeconomic) structure inflates population‑level PGS associations and that within‑family effects differ — directly connecting to the existing idea that polygenic‑score prediction blends individual genetics with family/SES pathways and must be decomposed.