Exploring the genetic prediction of academic underachievement and overachievement.
Journal
NPJ science of learning
ISSN: 2056-7936
Titre abrégé: NPJ Sci Learn
Pays: England
ID NLM: 101689142
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
01 Jun 2024
01 Jun 2024
Historique:
received:
23
10
2023
accepted:
10
05
2024
medline:
2
6
2024
pubmed:
2
6
2024
entrez:
1
6
2024
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Academic underachievement refers to school performance which falls below expectations. Focusing on the pivotal first stage of education, we explored a quantitative measure of underachievement using genomically predicted achievement delta (GPAΔ), which reflects the difference between observed and expected achievement predicted by genome-wide polygenic scores. We analyzed the relationship between GPAΔ at age 7 and achievement trajectories from ages 7 to 16, using longitudinal data from 4175 participants in the Twins Early Development Study to assess empirically the extent to which students regress to their genomically predicted levels by age 16. We found that the achievement of underachievers and overachievers who deviated from their genomic predictions at age 7 regressed on average by one-third towards their genomically predicted levels. We also found that GPAΔ at age 7 was as predictive of achievement trajectories as a traditional ability-based index of underachievement. Targeting GPAΔ underachievers might prove cost-effective because such interventions seem more likely to succeed by going with the genetic flow rather than swimming upstream, helping GPAΔ underachievers reach their genetic potential as predicted by their GPS. However, this is a hypothesis that needs to be tested in intervention research investigating whether GPAΔ underachievers respond better to the intervention than other underachievers. We discuss the practicality of genomic indices in assessing underachievement.
Identifiants
pubmed: 38824137
doi: 10.1038/s41539-024-00251-9
pii: 10.1038/s41539-024-00251-9
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
39Informations de copyright
© 2024. The Author(s).
Références
Badger, J. R., Howarth, B. C., Svirko, E. & Mellanby, J. Underachievement at school relative to potential: links between reasoning, phonological decoding, short-term memory, and complex grammar. Educ. Psychol. 42, 952–971 (2022).
doi: 10.1080/01443410.2022.2115978
Heckman, J. J. Skill formation and the economics of investing in disadvantaged children. Science 312, 1900–1902 (2006).
doi: 10.1126/science.1128898
pubmed: 16809525
Vignoles, A. & Murray, N. Widening participation in higher education. Educ. Sci. 6, 13 (2016).
doi: 10.3390/educsci6020013
Preckel, F., Holling, H. & Vock, M. Academic underachievement: Relationship with cognitive motivation, achievement motivation, and conscientiousness. Psychol. Sch. 43, 401–411 (2006).
doi: 10.1002/pits.20154
Reis, S. M. & McCoach, D. B. The underachievement of gifted students: what do we know and where do we go? Gift. Child Q 44, 152–170 (2000).
Davey, G. C. Psychology. (John Wiley & Sons, 2018).
Von Stumm, S. & Plomin, R. Socioeconomic status and the growth of intelligence from infancy through adolescence. Intelligence 48, 30–36 (2015).
doi: 10.1016/j.intell.2014.10.002
Plomin, R. Blueprint: How DNA Makes Us Who We Are. (Penguin Books, London, 2019).
Visscher, P. M. et al. 10 years of GWAS discovery: biology, function, and translation. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 101, 5–22 (2017).
doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2017.06.005
pubmed: 28686856
pmcid: 5501872
Knopik, V. S., Neiderhiser, J. M., DeFries, J. C. & Plomin, R. Behavioral Genetics. (Worth Publishers, Macmillan Learning New York, 2017).
Fahed, A. C., Philippakis, A. A. & Khera, A. V. The potential of polygenic scores to improve cost and efficiency of clinical trials. Nat. Commun. 13, 2922 (2022).
doi: 10.1038/s41467-022-30675-z
pubmed: 35614072
pmcid: 9132885
Allegrini, A. G. et al. Genomic prediction of cognitive traits in childhood and adolescence. Mol. Psychiatry 24, 819–827 (2019).
doi: 10.1038/s41380-019-0394-4
pubmed: 30971729
pmcid: 6986352
Okbay, A. et al. Polygenic prediction of educational attainment within and between families from genome-wide association analyses in 3 million individuals. Nat. Genet. 54, 437–449 (2022).
doi: 10.1038/s41588-022-01016-z
pubmed: 35361970
pmcid: 9005349
Savage, J. E. et al. Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867 individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence. Nat. Genet. 50, 912–919 (2018).
doi: 10.1038/s41588-018-0152-6
pubmed: 29942086
pmcid: 6411041
Lee, J. J. et al. Gene discovery and polygenic prediction from a genome-wide association study of educational attainment in 1.1 million individuals. Nat. Genet. 50, 1112–1121 (2018).
doi: 10.1038/s41588-018-0147-3
pubmed: 30038396
pmcid: 6393768
Krapohl, E. et al. Multi-polygenic score approach to trait prediction. Mol. Psychiatry 23, 1368–1374 (2018).
doi: 10.1038/mp.2017.163
pubmed: 28785111
Procopio, F. et al. Multi-Polygenic Score Prediction of Mathematics, Reading, and Language Abilities Independent of General Cognitive Ability. https://www.researchsquare.com/article/rs-3573692/v1 (2024) https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-3573692/v1 .
Snyder, K. E. et al. Interventions for academically underachieving students: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Edu. Res. Rev. 28, 100294 (2019).
doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2019.100294
Steenbergen-Hu, S., Olszewski-Kubilius, P. & Calvert, E. The effectiveness of current interventions to reverse the underachievement of gifted students: findings of a meta-analysis and systematic review. Gift. Child Q. 64, 132–165 (2020).
doi: 10.1177/0016986220908601
Majumder, M. A., Guerrini, C. J. & McGuire, A. L. Direct-to-consumer genetic testing: value and risk. Annu. Rev. Med. 72, 151–166 (2021).
doi: 10.1146/annurev-med-070119-114727
pubmed: 32735764
Niemiec, E., Kalokairinou, L. & Howard, H. C. Current ethical and legal issues in health-related direct-to-consumer genetic testing. Pers. Med. 14, 433–445 (2017).
doi: 10.2217/pme-2017-0029
Abdellaoui, A., Yengo, L., Verweij, K. J. H. & Visscher, P. M. 15 years of GWAS discovery: realizing the promise. Am. J. Hum. Genet. 110, 179–194 (2023).
doi: 10.1016/j.ajhg.2022.12.011
pubmed: 36634672
pmcid: 9943775
Baker, J. A., Bridger, R. & Evans, K. Models of underachievement among gifted preadolescents: the role of personal, family, and school factors. Gift. Child Q. 42, 5–15 (1998).
doi: 10.1177/001698629804200102
Snyder, K. E. & Linnenbrink-Garcia, L. A developmental, person-centered approach to exploring multiple motivational pathways in gifted underachievement. Educ. Psychol. 48, 209–228 (2013).
doi: 10.1080/00461520.2013.835597
Peterson, J. S. & Colangelo, N. Gifted achievers and underachievers: a comparison of patterns found in school files. J. Couns. Dev. 74, 399–407 (1996).
doi: 10.1002/j.1556-6676.1996.tb01886.x
Carr, M., Borkowski, J. G. & Maxwell, S. E. Motivational Components of Underachievement. (1991).
Vlahovic‐Stetic, V., Vidovic, V. V. & Arambasic, L. Motivational Characteristics in Mathematical Achievement: a study of gifted high‐achieving, gifted underachieving and non‐gifted pupils. High. Abil. Stud. 10, 37–49 (1999).
doi: 10.1080/1359813990100104
Thompson, C. G., Kim, R. S., Aloe, A. M. & Becker, B. J. Extracting the variance inflation factor and other multicollinearity diagnostics from typical regression results. Basic Appl. Soc. Psychol. 39, 81–90 (2017).
doi: 10.1080/01973533.2016.1277529
Salmerón, R., García, C. B. & García, J. Variance inflation factor and condition number in multiple linear regression. J. Stat. Comput. Simul. 88, 2365–2384 (2018).
doi: 10.1080/00949655.2018.1463376
Kovas, Y. et al. Literacy and numeracy are more heritable than intelligence in primary school. Psychol. Sci. 24, 2048–2056 (2013).
doi: 10.1177/0956797613486982
pubmed: 24002885
Haider, Z. F. & von Stumm, S. Predicting educational and social–emotional outcomes in emerging adulthood from intelligence, personality, and socioeconomic status. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. (2022).
Duncan, L. et al. Analysis of polygenic risk score usage and performance in diverse human populations. Nat. Commun. 10, 3328 (2019).
doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-11112-0
pubmed: 31346163
pmcid: 6658471
Martin, A. R. et al. Clinical use of current polygenic risk scores may exacerbate health disparities. Nat. Genet. 51, 584–591 (2019).
doi: 10.1038/s41588-019-0379-x
pubmed: 30926966
pmcid: 6563838
Lewis, A. C. F. & Green, R. C. Polygenic risk scores in the clinic: new perspectives needed on familiar ethical issues. Genome Med. 13, 14 (2021).
doi: 10.1186/s13073-021-00829-7
pubmed: 33509269
pmcid: 7844961
Palk, A. C., Dalvie, S., De Vries, J., Martin, A. R. & Stein, D. J. Potential use of clinical polygenic risk scores in psychiatry – ethical implications and communicating high polygenic risk. Philos. Ethics Humanit. Med. 14, 4 (2019).
doi: 10.1186/s13010-019-0073-8
pubmed: 30813945
pmcid: 6391805
Rimfeld, K. et al. Twins early development study: a genetically sensitive investigation into behavioral and cognitive development from infancy to emerging adulthood. Twin Res. Hum. Genet. 22, 508–513 (2019).
doi: 10.1017/thg.2019.56
pubmed: 31544730
pmcid: 7056571
Selzam, S. et al. Predicting educational achievement from DNA. Mol. Psychiatry 22, 267–272 (2017).
doi: 10.1038/mp.2016.107
pubmed: 27431296
Rimfeld, K. et al. The stability of educational achievement across school years is largely explained by genetic factors. Npj Sci. Learn. 3, 16 (2018).
doi: 10.1038/s41539-018-0030-0
pubmed: 30631477
pmcid: 6220264
McCarthy, D. A. Manual for the McCarthy scales of children’s abilities. No Title (1972).
Wechsler, D. Manual for the wechsler intelligence scale for children-third UK Edition (WISC-III UK). Kent Psychol. Corp. (1992).
Petrill, S. A., Rempell, J., Oliver, B. & Plomin, R. Testing cognitive abilities by telephone in a sample of 6- to 8-year-olds. Intelligence 30, 353–360 (2002).
doi: 10.1016/S0160-2896(02)00087-9
Leys, C., Ley, C., Klein, O., Bernard, P. & Licata, L. Detecting outliers: do not use standard deviation around the mean, use absolute deviation around the median. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 49, 764–766 (2013).
doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2013.03.013
Jackson, R. L. & Jung, J. Y. The identification of gifted underachievement: validity evidence for the commonly used methods. Br. J. Educ. Psychol. 92, 1133–1159 (2022).
doi: 10.1111/bjep.12492
pubmed: 35199852
pmcid: 9543815
White, S. L. J., Graham, L. J. & Blaas, S. Why do we know so little about the factors associated with gifted underachievement? A systematic literature review. Educ. Res. Rev. 24, 55–66 (2018).
doi: 10.1016/j.edurev.2018.03.001
Fong, C. J. & Kremer, K. P. An expectancy-value approach to math underachievement: examining high school achievement, college attendance, and STEM Interest. Gift. Child Q. (2020).
Kuhn, M. Building Predictive Models in R Using the caret Package. J. Stat. Softw. 28, (2008).
Diedenhofen, B. & Musch, J. cocor: a comprehensive solution for the statistical comparison of correlations. PLoS ONE 10, e0121945 (2015).
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0121945
pubmed: 25835001
pmcid: 4383486
Zou, G. Y. Toward using confidence intervals to compare correlations. Psychol. Methods 12, 399–413 (2007).
doi: 10.1037/1082-989X.12.4.399
pubmed: 18179351
Fox, J. et al. Package ‘car’. Vienna R. Found. Stat. Comput. 16, 333 (2012).
Neale, M. C. et al. OpenMx 2.0: extended structural equation and statistical modeling. Psychometrika 81, 535–549 (2016).
doi: 10.1007/s11336-014-9435-8
pubmed: 25622929