3 ms·

I'm basing it on http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/laibson/files/most_reported_genetic_assoc_13dec2011.pdf http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/laibson/files/most_re

by cariaso 12y ago

I'm basing it on http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/laibson/files/most_reported_genetic_assoc_13dec2011.pdf http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/laibson/files/most_reported... but will concede that I misquoted and that 'Most' vs 'All' is an important distinction. The most current information I see is Rietveld published 10 days ago. http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/10/06/0956797614545132.abstract http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2014/10/06/095679761454... and that paper claims to have found an explanation for ≈2% of educational attainment and cognitive function. None of the reported snps (rs9320913, rs11584700, rs4851266) have been mentioned in any other publication. So I don't yet see a basis for "the hits seem to be replicating pretty well". I do not doubt that genetics plays a significant role in intelligence, but I expect that intelligence, and the proxy of educational attainment, is an overly broad phenotype. I also expect that epistatic effects may be important and would necessitate unrealistically massive sample size or a very different experimental design.

Shinkei 12y ago
I appreciate the replies. I learned a lot just reading some of these sources posted. I think I misused heritability regarding eye color and my numbers are probably dated.
gwern 12y ago
> I'm basing it on http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/laibson/files/most_reported.. http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/laibson/files/most_reported.... but will concede that I misquoted and that 'Most' vs 'All' is an important distinction. Yes, since people upped their game precisely because of that paper's findings... > None of the reported snps (rs9320913, rs11584700, rs4851266) have been mentioned in any other publication. So I don't yet see a basis for "the hits seem to be replicating pretty well". What do you mean? As I recall, Rietveld et al 2013 used internal replication to test its hits, which worked out well. Your link is itself a another replication of Rietveld et al 2013, is it not? (What exactly did you think the abstract meant when it talked about "A recent genome-wide-association study" or "The study"?) And then there's "Genetic Variation Associated with Differential Educational Attainment in Adults Has Anticipated Associations with School Performance in Children" , Ward et al 2014; and I believe "Educational attainment-related loci identified by GWAS are associated with select personality traits and mathematics and language abilities", Zhu et al 2015 is also relevant.
- cariaso 12y ago
  Rietveld replicating Rietveld doesn't do it for me in an area so lacking of success stories. Ward and Zhu are new to me and I am reading them now. Time will tell, I have no doubt.
  - gwern 12y ago
    > Rietveld replicating Rietveld doesn't do it for me in an area so lacking of success stories. I think this is unreasonable. This is not a lone author working with a set he hand-collected and has had unlimited freedom to monkey with. This is the lead author on a project involving scores of authors analyzing vast datasets pooled together by like a dozen distinct organizations.

by cariaso 12y ago

Shinkei 12y ago

I appreciate the replies. I learned a lot just reading some of these sources posted. I think I misused heritability regarding eye color and my numbers are probably dated.

gwern 12y ago

> I'm basing it on http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/laibson/files/most_reported.. http://scholar.harvard.edu/files/laibson/files/most_reported.... but will concede that I misquoted and that 'Most' vs 'All' is an important distinction. Yes, since people upped their game precisely because of that paper's findings... > None of the reported snps (rs9320913, rs11584700, rs4851266) have been mentioned in any other publication. So I don't yet see a basis for "the hits seem to be replicating pretty well". What do you mean? As I recall, Rietveld et al 2013 used internal replication to test its hits, which worked out well. Your link is itself a another replication of Rietveld et al 2013, is it not? (What exactly did you think the abstract meant when it talked about "A recent genome-wide-association study" or "The study"?) And then there's "Genetic Variation Associated with Differential Educational Attainment in Adults Has Anticipated Associations with School Performance in Children" , Ward et al 2014; and I believe "Educational attainment-related loci identified by GWAS are associated with select personality traits and mathematics and language abilities", Zhu et al 2015 is also relevant.

cariaso 12y ago
Rietveld replicating Rietveld doesn't do it for me in an area so lacking of success stories. Ward and Zhu are new to me and I am reading them now. Time will tell, I have no doubt.
- gwern 12y ago
  > Rietveld replicating Rietveld doesn't do it for me in an area so lacking of success stories. I think this is unreasonable. This is not a lone author working with a set he hand-collected and has had unlimited freedom to monkey with. This is the lead author on a project involving scores of authors analyzing vast datasets pooled together by like a dozen distinct organizations.