Evidence-based Kernels: Fundamental Units of Behavioral Influence

This paper describes evidence-based kernels, fundamental units of behavioral influence that appear to underlie effective prevention and treatment for children, adults, and families. A kernel is a behavior–influence procedure shown through experimental analysis to affect a specific behavior and that is indivisible in the sense that removing any of its components would render it inert. Existing evidence shows that a variety of kernels can influence behavior in context, and some evidence suggests that frequent use or sufficient use of some kernels may produce longer lasting behavioral shifts. The analysis of kernels could contribute to an empirically based theory of behavioral influence, augment existing prevention or treatment efforts, facilitate the dissemination of effective prevention and treatment practices, clarify the active ingredients in existing interventions, and contribute to efficiently developing interventions that are more effective. Kernels involve one or more of the following mechanisms of behavior influence: reinforcement, altering antecedents, changing verbal relational responding, or changing physiological states directly. The paper describes 52 of these kernels, and details practical, theoretical, and research implications, including calling for a national database of kernels that influence human behavior

Self-reported race/ethnicity in the age of genomic research: its potential impact on understanding health disparities

This review explores the limitations of self-reported race, ethnicity, and genetic ancestry in biomedical research. Various terminologies are used to classify human differences in genomic research including race, ethnicity, and ancestry. Although race and ethnicity are related, race refers to a person’s physical appearance, such as skin color and eye color. Ethnicity, on the other hand, refers to communality in cultural heritage, language, social practice, traditions, and geopolitical factors. Genetic ancestry inferred using ancestry informative markers (AIMs) is based on genetic/genomic data. Phenotype-based race/ethnicity information and data computed using AIMs often disagree. For example, self-reporting African Americans can have drastically different levels of African or European ancestry. Genetic analysis of individual ancestry shows that some self-identified African Americans have up to 99% of European ancestry, whereas some self-identified European Americans have substantial admixture from African ancestry. Similarly, African ancestry in the Latino population varies between 3% in Mexican Americans to 16% in Puerto Ricans. The implication of this is that, in African American or Latino populations, self-reported ancestry may not be as accurate as direct assessment of individual genomic information in predicting treatment outcomes. To better understand human genetic variation in the context of health disparities, we suggest using “ancestry” (or biogeographical ancestry) to describe actual genetic variation, “race” to describe health disparity in societies characterized by racial categories, and “ethnicity” to describe traditions, lifestyle, diet, and values. We also suggest using ancestry informative markers for precise characterization of individuals’ biological ancestry. Understanding the sources of human genetic variation and the causes of health disparities could lead to interventions that would improve the health of all individuals

Rediscovering the value of families for psychiatric genetics research

As it is likely that both common and rare genetic variation are important for complex disease risk, studies that examine the full range of the allelic frequency distribution should be utilized to dissect the genetic influences on mental illness. The rate limiting factor for inferring an association between a variant and a phenotype is inevitably the total number of copies of the minor allele captured in the studied sample. For rare variation, with minor allele frequencies of 0.5% or less, very large samples of unrelated individuals are necessary to unambiguously associate a locus with an illness. Unfortunately, such large samples are often cost prohibitive. However, by using alternative analytic strategies and studying related individuals, particularly those from large multiplex families, it is possible to reduce the required sample size while maintaining statistical power. We contend that using whole genome sequence (WGS) in extended pedigrees provides a cost-effective strategy for psychiatric gene mapping that complements common variant approaches and WGS in unrelated individuals. This was our impetus for forming the “Pedigree-Based Whole Genome Sequencing of Affective and Psychotic Disorders” consortium. In this review, we provide a rationale for the use of WGS with pedigrees in modern psychiatric genetics research. We begin with a focused review of the current literature, followed by a short history of family-based research in psychiatry. Next, we describe several advantages of pedigrees for WGS research, including power estimates, methods for studying the environment, and endophenotypes. We conclude with a brief description of our consortium and its goals.This research was supported by National Institute of Mental Health grants U01 MH105630 (DCG), U01 MH105634 (REG), U01 MH105632 (JB), R01 MH078143 (DCG), R01 MH083824 (DCG & JB), R01 MH078111 (JB), R01 MH061622 (LA), R01 MH042191 (REG), and R01 MH063480 (VLN).UCR::Vicerrectoría de Investigación::Unidades de Investigación::Ciencias Básicas::Centro de Investigación en Biología Celular y Molecular (CIBCM)UCR::Vicerrectoría de Docencia::Ciencias Básicas::Facultad de Ciencias::Escuela de Biologí