Understanding “What Could Be”: A Call for ‘Experimental Behavioral Genetics’

Behavior Genetics 2 (49):235-243 (2019)
Download Edit this record How to cite View on PhilPapers
Abstract
Behavioral genetic (BG) research has yielded many important discoveries about the origins of human behavior, but offers little insight into how we might improve outcomes. We posit that this gap in our knowledge base stems in part from the epidemiologic nature of BG research questions. Namely, BG studies focus on understanding etiology as it currently exists, rather than etiology in environments that could exist but do not as of yet (e.g., etiology following an intervention). Put another way, they focus exclusively on the etiology of “what is” rather than “what could be”. The current paper discusses various aspects of this field-wide methodological reality, and offers a way to overcome it by demonstrating how behavioral geneticists can incorporate an experimental approach into their work. We outline an ongoing study that embeds a randomized intervention within a twin design, connecting “what is” and “what could be” for the first time. We then lay out a more general framework for a new field—experimental BGs—which has the potential to advance both scientific inquiry and related philosophical discussions.
Keywords
No keywords specified (fix it)
PhilPapers/Archive ID
BURUWC-2
Revision history
Archival date: 2019-11-11
View upload history
References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Added to PP index
2019-11-11

Total views
32 ( #40,259 of 44,292 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
32 ( #22,096 of 44,292 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads since first upload
This graph includes both downloads from PhilArchive and clicks to external links.