Gene–environment interaction between the oxytocin receptor (<i>OXTR</i>) gene and parenting behaviour on children’s theory of mind
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Theory of mind (ToM) is the ability to interpret and understand human behaviour by representing the mental states of others. Like many human capacities, ToM is thought to develop through both complex biological and socialization mechanisms. However, no study has examined the joint effect of genetic and environmental influences on ToM. This study examined how variability in the oxytocin receptor gene (OXTR) and parenting behavior--two widely studied factors in ToM development-interacted to predict ToM in pre-school-aged children. Participants were 301 children who were part of an ongoing longitudinal birth cohort study. ToM was assessed at age 4.5 using a previously validated scale. Parenting was assessed through observations of mothers' cognitively sensitive behaviours. Using a family-based association design, it was suggestive that a particular variant (rs11131149) interacted with maternal cognitive sensitivity on children's ToM (P = 0.019). More copies of the major allele were associated with higher ToM as a function of increasing cognitive sensitivity. A sizeable 26% of the variability in ToM was accounted for by this interaction. This study provides the first empirical evidence of gene-environment interactions on ToM, supporting the notion that genetic factors may be modulated by potent environmental influences early in development.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".