A Variable-Number-of-Tandem-Repeats Polymorphism in the Dopamine D4 Receptor Gene Affects Social Adaptation of Alcohol Use
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Research suggests that people adapt their own drinking behavior to that of other people. According to a genetic-differences approach, some individuals may be more inclined than others to adapt their alcohol consumption level to that of other people. Using a 3 (drinking condition) x 2 (genotype) experimental design (N = 113), we tested whether susceptibility to alcohol-related cues (i.e., seeing someone drink) was related to the variable number of tandem repeats in exon 3 of the D4 dopamine receptor gene. A strong gene-environment interaction showed that participants carrying at least one copy of the 7-repeat allele consumed substantially more alcohol in the presence of a heavy-drinking individual than did participants without this allele. This study highlights that individual variability in sensitivity to other people's drinking behavior may be attributable to genetic differences. Carrying the 7-repeat allele may increase the risk for heavy alcohol use or abuse in the company of heavy-drinking peers.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".