ABSTRACT

Genetic influences on human behavior are increasingly well understood, but laypeople may endorse genetic attributions selectively; e.g., they appear to make stronger genetic attributions for prosocial than for antisocial behavior. We explored whether this could be accounted for by the relationship of genetic attributions to perceptions of naturalness. Participants read about positively or negatively valenced traits or behaviors and rated naturalness and genetic causation. Positively valenced phenotypes were rated significantly more natural and significantly more genetically influenced than negatively valenced phenotypes, and the former asymmetry significantly mediated the latter (Experiments 1 and 2). Participants’ interpretation of what “natural” meant was not synonymous with valence or genetic attributions (Experiment 3). People ascribe differing degrees of genetic influence to the same phenotype depending on whether it is expressed in socially favored or disfavored ways, potentially representing a significant threat to public understanding of genetics.

 抽象的

人们越来越了解遗传对人类行为的影响，但外行可能会选择性地认可遗传归因；例如，他们对亲社会行为的遗传归因似乎比对反社会行为的遗传归因更强。我们探讨了这是否可以通过遗传归因与自然感知的关系来解释。参与者阅读正价或负价特征或行为，并对自然性和遗传因果关系进行评级。正价表型被认为比负价表型更自然，并且受遗传影响更大，并且前者的不对称性显着介导后者（实验1和2）。参与者对“自然”含义的解释并不等同于效价或遗传属性（实验3）。人们将不同程度的遗传影响归因于相同的表型，具体取决于它是否以社会青睐或不受欢迎的方式表达，这可能对公众对遗传学的理解构成重大威胁。