↓ Skip to main content

Genotype × Cohort Interaction on Completed Fertility and Age at First Birth

Overview of attention for article published in Behavior Genetics, December 2014
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (67th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 tweeters

Citations

dimensions_citation
12 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
23 Mendeley
Title
Genotype × Cohort Interaction on Completed Fertility and Age at First Birth
Published in
Behavior Genetics, December 2014
DOI 10.1007/s10519-014-9693-3
Pubmed ID
Authors

Daniel A. Briley, K. Paige Harden, Elliot M. Tucker-Drob

Abstract

Microevolutionary projections use empirical estimates of genetic covariation between physical or psychological phenotypes and reproductive success to forecast changes in the population distributions of those phenotypes over time. The validity of these projections depends on relatively consistent heritabilities of fertility-relevant outcomes and consistent genetic covariation between fertility and other physical or psychological phenotypes across generations. However, well-documented, rapidly changing mean trends in the level and timing of fertility may have been accompanied by differences in the genetic mechanisms of fertility. Using a sample of 933 adult twin pairs from the Midlife Development in the United States study, we demonstrate that genetic influences on completed fertility and age at first birth were trivial for the 1920-1935 birth cohort, but rose substantially for the 1936-1955 birth cohort. For the 1956-1970 birth cohort, genetic influences on completed fertility, but not age at first birth, persisted. Because the heritability of fertility is subject to change dynamically with the social context, it is difficult to project selection pressures or the rate at which selection will occur.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 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 %
United States 1 4%
Unknown 22 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 22%
Researcher 3 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 3 13%
Student > Master 3 13%
Other 2 9%
Other 7 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Psychology 8 35%
Social Sciences 4 17%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 17%
Unspecified 2 9%
Medicine and Dentistry 2 9%
Other 3 13%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. 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 16 June 2015.
All research outputs
#3,538,506
of 12,321,765 outputs
Outputs from Behavior Genetics
#231
of 674 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#76,481
of 269,942 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Behavior Genetics
#7
of 18 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,321,765 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 674 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.0. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 269,942 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 67% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 18 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.