Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33420086›Full record

ReviewNPJ science of learning2021

Nurture might be nature: cautionary tales and proposed solutions.

Sara A Hart, Callie Little, Elsje van Bergen

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in NPJ science of learning, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
69citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
53.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

69 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 157 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. The intergenerational impact of mothers and fathers on children's word reading development.Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines · 2025
    Article
  18. Longitudinal trajectories of brain development from infancy to school age and their relationship with literacy development.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

9 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

3 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Sara A HartDepartment of Psychology, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA. hart@psy.fsu.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9793-0420
Callie LittleFlorida Center for Reading Research, Florida State University, Tallahassee, FL, USA.
Elsje van BergenDepartment of Biological Psychology, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5860-5745
Florida State University · USVrije Universiteit Amsterdam · NL

Funding

THE FLORIDA LONGITUDINAL STUDYP50HD052120 · NICHD · FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY · PI Nicole Sandi Patton-Terry · 2006 to 2026
$31.7M
An Open Learning Disabilities Behavioral Data RepositoryR01HD095193 · NICHD · FLORIDA STATE UNIVERSITY · PI HART, SARA ANN, SCHATSCHNEIDER, CHRIS W · 2019 to 2023
$2.9M
NICHD NIH HHS P50 HD052120NICHD NIH HHS R01 HD095193
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Across a wide range of studies, researchers often conclude that the home environment and children's outcomes are causally linked. In contrast, behavioral genetic studies show that parents influence their children by providing them with both environment and genes, meaning the environment that parents provide should not be considered in the absence of genetic influences, because that can lead to erroneous conclusions on causation. This article seeks to provide behavioral scientists with a synopsis of numerous methods to estimate the direct effect of the environment, controlling for the potential of genetic confounding. Ideally, using genetically sensitive designs can fully disentangle this genetic confound, but these require specialized samples. In the near future, researchers will likely have access to measured DNA variants (summarized in a polygenic scores), which could serve as a partial genetic control, but that is currently not an option that is ideal or widely available. We also propose a work around for when genetically sensitive data are not readily available: the Familial Control Method. In this method, one measures the same trait in the parents as the child, and the parents' trait is then used as a covariate (e.g., a genetic proxy). When these options are all not possible, we plead with our colleagues to clearly mention genetic confound as a limitation, and to be cautious with any environmental causal statements which could lead to unnecessary parent blaming.

Identifiers

PMID33420086
PMCPMC7794571
OpenAlexW3119402276

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.