Search

Specific personality traits and poor social support are risk factors for anxiety and depression. Little work, however, has considered the effects of social support and personality on these aspects of psychopathology simultaneously. We examined whether perceived social support mediates the effects of core personality domains on symptoms of anxiety and depression. Measures of personality (based on the Five-Factor Model [FFM]), perceived social support, and symptoms of depression and anxiety were collected in a large Dutch adult population-based sample (n = 555), and, except for depression symptoms, in an independent U.S. adult population-based sample (n = 511). Path modeling was used to test the effects of FFM traits on symptoms of depression and anxiety, with and without the mediation of perceived social support. Social support showed no link to symptoms of anxiety and only modest links to symptoms of depression when controlling for the FFM traits. Neuroticism had the strongest effect on symptoms of both depression and anxiety, with Extraversion also showing links to symptoms of depression. Social support has limited influence on symptoms of depression, and no effects on anxiety, over and above the effects of personality. Links between social support and anxiety/depression may largely reflect influences of Neuroticism and Extraversion.

Research has shown that in-group favoritism is associated with concerns over the maintenance of social norms. Here we present two studies examining whether genetic factors underpin this association. A classical twin design was used to decompose phenotypic variance into genetic and environmental components in two studies. Study 1 used 812 pairs of adult U.S. twins from the nationally representative MIDUS II sample. Study 2 used 707 pairs of middle-age twins from the Minnesota Twin Registry. In-group favoritism was measured with scales tapping preferences for in-group (vs. out-group) individuals; norm concerns were measured with the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire–Traditionalism (Study 1) and Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA; Study 2) scales. In Study 1, heritable effects underlying traditionalism were moderately (c. 35%) overlapping with the genetic variance underpinning in-group favoritism. In Study 2, heritable influences on RWA were entirely shared with the heritable effects on in-group favoritism. Moreover, we observed that Big Five Openness shared common genetic links to both RWA and in-group favoritism.These results suggest that, at the genetic level, in-group favoritism is linked with a system related to concern over normative social practices, which is, in turn, partially associated with trait Openness. Studies of both implicit and explicit attitudes in diverse settings show that preferences for members of one’s in-group, and negative sentiment toward out-group individuals, are widespread (Fiske, 2002; LeVine & Campbell, 1972; Sumner, 1907; Tajfel, Billig, Bundy, & Flament, 1971; Vanman, Saltz, Nathan, & Warren, 2004; Wittenbrink, Judd, & Park, 1997). While environmental factors are commonly believed to underpin in-group favoritism and out-group derogation, including parental rearing environment (Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswik, Levinson, & Sanford, 1950) or scarcity of key resources (Sherif, 1966), recent research shows that genetic factors also influence individual differences concerning in-group sentiment (Lewis & Bates, 2010; Orey & Park, 2012; Weber, Johnson, & Arceneaux, 2012). However, whether these heritable effects are specific for in-group bias or overlap with more general psychological systems is currently unclear. Here, using two independent, genetically informative samples, we test the hypothesis that genetic variation underlying in-group favoritism reflects more general differences in concerns for norm maintenance—the tendency to adopt prevailing norms and to be concerned when others violate these norms (Altemeyer, 1981; Duckitt, 2006). In addition, we examine the extent to which basic dimensions of personality—the Big Five traits— overlap with heritable aspects of norm concerns and in-group favoritism (Study 2), in line with work positing that both of these constructs reflect basic personality traits (Ekehammar & Akrami, 2007; Sibley & Duckitt, 2008).

Objective:Psychological well-being,or eudaimonia,features strongly in theories of human development and thriving.However, the factors of eudaimonia are debated, and their genetic architecture has not been studied in detail. Method: A classical twin design was used to decompose behavioral variance into genetic and environmental components implemented in a multigroup,multivariate structural equation modeling framework.Subjects were 837 pairs of adult U.S.twins from the nationally representative MIDUS II sample.Psychological well-being was measured using the 42-item Ryff Psychological Well-Being Scale,which assesses autonomy,environmental mastery,personal growth,positive relations with others,purpose in life, and self-acceptance. Results: Substantial genetic influences were observed on all components of well-being.Attempts to model these six factors as reflecting a single common psychological mechanism gave a poor fit to the data.The best-fitting model supported the existence of five distinct genetic effects. Effects of shared environment were weak and nonsignificant. Unique environmental effects for all measures were mostly trait specific. Conclusions: These results indicate that psychological well-being is underpinned by a general genetic factor influencing self-control, and four underlying biological mechanisms enabling the psychological capabilities of purpose, agency, growth, and positive social relations.

Specific personality traits and poor social support are risk factors for anxiety and depression. Little work, however, has considered the effects of social support and personality on these aspects of psychopathology simultaneously. We examined whether perceived social support mediates the effects of core personality domains on symptoms of anxiety and depression. Measures of personality (based on the Five-Factor Model [FFM]), perceived social support, and symptoms of depression and anxiety were collected in a large Dutch adult population-based sample (n = 555), and, except for depression symptoms, in an independent U.S. adult population-based sample (n = 511). Path modeling was used to test the effects of FFM traits on symptoms of depression and anxiety, with and without the mediation of perceived social support. Social support showed no link to symptoms of anxiety and only modest links to symptoms of depression when controlling for the FFM traits. Neuroticism had the strongest effect on symptoms of both depression and anxiety, with Extraversion also showing links to symptoms of depression. Social support has limited influence on symptoms of depression, and no effects on anxiety, over and above the effects of personality. Links between social support and anxiety/depression may largely reflect influences of Neuroticism and Extraversion.

Psychological well-being, or eudaimonia, features strongly in theories of human development and thriving. However, the factors of eudaimonia are debated, and their genetic architecture has not been studied in detail.A classical twin design was used to decompose behavioral variance into genetic and environmental components implemented in a multigroup, multivariate structural equation modeling framework. Subjects were 837 pairs of adult U.S. twins from the nationally representative MIDUS II sample. Psychological well-being was measured using the 42-item Ryff Psychological Well-Being Scale, which assesses autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth, positive relations with others, purpose in life, and self-acceptance.Substantial genetic influences were observed on all components of well-being. Attempts to model these six factors as reflecting a single common psychological mechanism gave a poor fit to the data. The best-fitting model supported the existence of five distinct genetic effects. Effects of shared environment were weak and nonsignificant. Unique environmental effects for all measures were mostly trait specific.These results indicate that psychological well-being is underpinned by a general genetic factor influencing self-control, and four underlying biological mechanisms enabling the psychological capabilities of purpose, agency, growth, and positive social relations.