↓ Skip to main content

What Explains the Heritability of Completed Fertility? Evidence from Two Large Twin Studies

Overview of attention for article published in Behavior Genetics, August 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (83rd percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (75th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
21 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
3 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
What Explains the Heritability of Completed Fertility? Evidence from Two Large Twin Studies
Published in
Behavior Genetics, August 2016
DOI 10.1007/s10519-016-9805-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel A. Briley, Felix C. Tropf, Melinda C. Mills

Abstract

In modern societies, individual differences in completed fertility are linked with genotypic differences between individuals. Explaining the heritability of completed fertility has been inconclusive, with alternative explanations centering on family formation timing, pursuit of education, or other psychological traits. We use the twin subsample from the Midlife Development in the United States study and the TwinsUK study to examine these issues. In total, 2606 adult twin pairs reported on their completed fertility, age at first birth and marriage, level of education, Big Five personality traits, and cognitive ability. Quantitative genetic Cholesky models were used to partition the variance in completed fertility into genetic and environmental variance that is shared with other phenotypes and residual variance. Genetic influences on completed fertility are strongly related to family formation timing and less strongly, but significantly, with psychological traits. Multivariate models indicate that family formation, demographic, and psychological phenotypes leave no residual genetic variance in completed fertility in either dataset. Results are largely consistent across U.S. and U.K. sociocultural contexts.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 21 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 23 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Croatia 1 4%
Unknown 22 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 8 35%
Student > Master 2 9%
Other 2 9%
Student > Bachelor 2 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 2 9%
Other 7 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Social Sciences 8 35%
Psychology 5 22%
Unspecified 3 13%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 9%
Philosophy 2 9%
Other 3 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 10. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 June 2019.
All research outputs
#1,604,078
of 13,483,630 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Genetics
#117
of 722 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#36,502
of 221,057 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Genetics
#3
of 12 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 13,483,630 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 87th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 722 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 8.0. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 221,057 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 83% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 12 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.