Comparative Rating Measures of Health and Environmental Exposures: How Well Do Twins Agree?
Authors: Reynolds, Chandra A.1; Turner, Adam2; Gatz, Margaret2; Pedersen, Nancy L.2
Source: Twin Research and Human Genetics, Volume 8, Number 2, April 2005 , pp. 113-119(7)
Publisher: Australian Academic Press
- Free Content
- New Content
- Subscribed Content
- Free Trial Content
Abstract:
Twins are sometimes used as proxy informants but little is known about reliability and validity of the information thus obtained. The present study asks: (1) to what extent do twin pairs agree with each other on comparative ratings of health, psychosocial traits, and environmental exposures?; and (2) how well do comparative ratings agree with usual self-reported information about the exposures? Using 55 monozygotic (MZ) and 71 dizygotic (DZ) same-sex pairs reared together, percentage agreement was calculated for 44 comparative ratings. Pairs agreed on average about half of the time. Agreement was higher for more discrete exposures, such as smoking, but lower for more subjective variables, such as the degree to which life is experienced as stressful. Signed rank tests were used to contrast comparative ratings to differences in selfreports. Differences between twin partners in their self-report indices, where available, were in the direction suggested by the comparative rating. Comparative ratings appear most accurate for smoking and alcohol use, and less consistent for mental health symptoms and self-rated health.Document Type: Research article
DOI: 10.1375/1832427053738791
Affiliations: 1: Department of Psychology, University of California at Riverside, Riverside, California, United States of America, Email: chandr.reynolds@ucr.edu 2: Department of Psychology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, United States of America
- Free Content
- New Content
- Subscribed Content
- Free Trial Content
Click here for Page Help