🚀 go-pugleaf

I'm unsure of the stand you're taking on the issue of genetic and
environmental influences.  I understand why you would say that the
diathesis/stress model is vague, but are you also saying that we shouldn't
bother partialling out gentic and environmental influences on behaviors
and interactions?

Erica Spotts
The George Washington University


On Mon, 20 Oct 1997, Jason Seidel wrote:

> Hi, I'm Jason Seidel, interning at the SUNY, Buffalo Counseling Center,
> and a Psy.D. student from Univ. of Denver. I have a little something to
> add as this  discussion about Brett's paper turns more "genetic."
> Brett Deacon wrote:
> "It is essential to separate out genetic effects
> from environmental effects when looking at this issue. Most good
> behavioral genetics studies attempt to statistically account for both
> genetic and environmental effects."
> The attempt to "statistically account" for the different variances that
> genetics and environment play in complex behaviors as well as in
> physiological processes has been hotly contested by a number of
> scientists, including geneticists themselves. For instance, see R.L.
> Lewontin's "Biology as Ideology" (HarperCollins). I suggest that before
> we get into talking about so-called "genetic effects" we are clear about
> the context in which these statistics are generated. A close look at the
> alcoholism research reveals a pattern of vociferous objections and
> retractions following the "latest breakthrough" that we "may" have found
> a locus for alcoholism that "may one day" lead to better tx.
> Furthermore, the idea that alcoholism or depression is "diasthetic" or
> whatever, is pretty much irrelevant considering that people without
> family histories have no difficulty at all either in "contracting" these
> "diseases" nor in being "cured" of them, all without medical
> interventions, and even (in the case of alcoholism) without having to
> abstain from the "stressors" for the rest of their lives. I'm glad you
> are interested in the topic of gender roles and how they affect how we
> try to cope with life's difficulties. I just want us psychologists not
> to try to cope with life's difficulties by trying to pump up and
> legitimize ourselves with scientistic constructs that sound concrete and
> unarguable, but which are neither. We want to simplify things because we
> get headaches writing our discussion sections, but the answer does not
> lie in falling back on the "diasthesis/stress" crutch that is becoming
> as banal these days as saying one does therapy from an "integrationist
> perspective."
> -Jason Seidel (jseidel@acsu.buffalo.edu)
>