Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24349000›Full record

ArticlePloS one2013

Strong genetic influence on a UK nationwide test of educational achievement at the end of compulsory education at age 16.

Nicholas G Shakeshaft, Maciej Trzaskowski, Andrew McMillan, Kaili Rimfeld, Eva Krapohl, Claire M A Haworth, Philip S Dale, Robert Plomin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 41 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
41citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

41 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Myopia is predominantly genetic or predominantly environmental?Ophthalmic & physiological optics : the journal of the British College of Ophthalmic Opticians (Optometrists) · 2025
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Genetic contributions of noncognitive skills to academic development.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2023
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Nicholas G ShakeshaftMedical Research Council Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Maciej TrzaskowskiMedical Research Council Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Andrew McMillanMedical Research Council Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Kaili RimfeldMedical Research Council Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Eva KrapohlMedical Research Council Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Claire M A HaworthDepartment of Psychology, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom.
Philip S DaleDepartment of Speech and Hearing Sciences, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States of America.
Robert PlominMedical Research Council Social, Genetic and Developmental Psychiatry Centre, Institute of Psychiatry, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.

Funding

Genetics, School environments and cognitive developmentR01HD044454 · NICHD · KING'S COLLEGE LONDON · PI PLOMIN, ROBERT · 2005 to 2014
$3.4M
Genetics of Mathematical Cognition and DisabilitiesR01HD059215 · NICHD · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI PETRILL, STEPHEN A. · 2009 to 2012
$2.4M
European Research Council 295366Medical Research Council G0500079Medical Research Council G0500079(73692)Medical Research Council G0901245Medical Research Council G19/2Medical Research Council G19/2(78332)NICHD NIH HHS HD044454NICHD NIH HHS HD059215NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD044454NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD059215
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We have previously shown that individual differences in educational achievement are highly heritable in the early and middle school years in the UK. The objective of the present study was to investigate whether similarly high heritability is found at the end of compulsory education (age 16) for the UK-wide examination, called the General Certificate of Secondary Education (GCSE). In a national twin sample of 11,117 16-year-olds, heritability was substantial for overall GCSE performance for compulsory core subjects (58%) as well as for each of them individually: English (52%), mathematics (55%) and science (58%). In contrast, the overall effects of shared environment, which includes all family and school influences shared by members of twin pairs growing up in the same family and attending the same school, accounts for about 36% of the variance of mean GCSE scores. The significance of these findings is that individual differences in educational achievement at the end of compulsory education are not primarily an index of the quality of teachers or schools: much more of the variance of GCSE scores can be attributed to genetics than to school or family environment. We suggest a model of education that recognizes the important role of genetics. Rather than a passive model of schooling as instruction (instruere, 'to build in'), we propose an active model of education (educare, 'to bring out') in which children create their own educational experiences in part on the basis of their genetic propensities, which supports the trend towards personalized learning.

Indexed as

AchievementAdolescentEducational StatusFemaleHumansIndividualityIntelligenceMaleSchoolsSocial EnvironmentTwins

Identifiers

PMID24349000
PMCPMC3859476

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.