The paper presents an experimental study that examines the conditions required for news about behavioral genetics to activate genetic essentialism beliefs. Nine hundred sixty-five adults living in the USA were randomly assigned to read either a control news article or one of the three versions of a news story about behavioral genetics. The cautious version presents a general introduction to behavioral genetics and examples while also discrediting the genetic determinist myth and clarifying that this field is not interested in studying differences between populations. Another version was identical to the cautious version, except that it mentioned high heritability estimates as supporting evidence. Finally, a third version included claims supporting Nicolas Wade’s (2014) main thesis, which argued that societies develop different institutions partly because of their population’s behavioral genetic predispositions. Compared to participants in the control group, those exposed to the high heritability version and the Wade’s thesis version reported higher scores on a scale measuring belief in genetics determinism. The results revealed no overall effect for the cautious version, but an exploratory interaction model indicates that reactions to this version vary depending on educational attainment. Implications and limitations are discussed.

中文翻译：

---

行为遗传学、群体遗传学和遗传本质主义

该论文提出了一项实验研究，该研究检查了有关行为遗传学的新闻激活遗传本质主义信念所需的条件。居住在美国的 965 名成年人被随机分配阅读控制新闻文章或关于行为遗传学的新闻报道的三个版本之一。谨慎的版本对行为遗传学和示例进行了一般性介绍，同时也驳斥了遗传决定论的神话，并澄清了该领域对研究人群之间的差异不感兴趣。另一个版本与谨慎版本相同，只是它提到了高遗传力估计作为支持证据。最后，第三个版本包括支持 Nicolas Wade (2014) 主要论文的声明，它认为社会发展不同的制度部分是因为其人口的行为遗传倾向。与对照组的参与者相比，那些暴露于高遗传力版本和韦德论文版本的参与者在衡量对遗传决定论的信念的量表上报告了更高的分数。结果显示谨慎版本没有整体影响，但探索性交互模型表明对该版本的反应因教育程度而异。讨论了影响和限制。结果显示谨慎版本没有整体影响，但探索性交互模型表明对该版本的反应因教育程度而异。讨论了影响和限制。结果显示谨慎版本没有整体影响，但探索性交互模型表明对该版本的反应因教育程度而异。讨论了影响和限制。