Analysis reveals distinct genomic and environmental influences on cognition and social traits, suggesting unique developmental processes.
Cognitive, language, and social abilities are complex, heritable and intertwined traits shaping children's development and later mental health. To better understand cross-trait interrelationships, we model here the structures of shared genomic and shared non-genomic/residual (i.e. broadly environmental) influences, and their correlation (r GE ), investigating cognitive, language, and social behavioural/communication measures. Data were obtained for unrelated children (8-13 years) from two population-based cohorts: the UK Avon Longitudinal Study of Parents and Children (ALSPAC, N≤6,543) and the US Adolescent Brain Cognitive Development℠ (ABCD) Study (N≤4,412), and analyses were carried out implementing an extended data-driven genetic-relationship-matrix structural equation modelling (GRM-SEM) approach. In ALSPAC, we identified two independent phenotypic domains, each captured by a structurally matching pair consisting of a genomic (A) and a non-genomic/residual (E) factor. The first domain reflected cognitive/language difficulties, with the largest genomic and residual factor loadings (λ A and λ E , respectively) for verbal IQ (λ A =0.73(SE=0.05); λ E =0.57(SE=0.07)). The second domain captured social difficulties, with the largest λ A and λ E for social communication measures (λ A =0.39(SE=0.10); λ E =0.82(SE=0.10)). We identified trait-specific r GE between pairs of A and E factors with different directions of effect (cognition/language r GE =0.89(SE=0.18), social r GE =-0.62(SE=0.17)). r GE patterns were linked to increased measurable A and E contributions for cognition/language difficulties, but decreased contributions for social problems. Analyses in ABCD confirmed the two domains for E and phenotypic structures, although genomic contributions were low. In childhood, cognitive/language abilities versus social abilities are influenced by distinct genomic and/or environmental factors, potentially interlinked through trait-specific r GE , suggesting differences in developmental processes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Schlag et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: