#1
|
|||
|
|||
Only about 30% of shyness is genetics
The science behind why some of us are shy
5 June 2019 Does the idea of mingling at a party send cold fingers of dread creeping up your spine? Or the thought of giving a presentation in front of a room full of people make you feel physically sick? If so, then you are not alone. Akindele Michael was a shy kid. Growing up in Nigeria he spent a lot of time indoors at his parents’ house. His parents, incidentally, are not shy. He believes that his sheltered upbringing is linked to his shyness – but is he right? Partly, says Thalia Eley, professor of developmental behavioural genetics at Kings College London. “We think of shyness as a temperamental trait and temperament is like a precursor to personality,” she says. “When very young children are starting to engage with other people you see variation in how comfortable [they] are in speaking to an adult that they don’t know.” She says that only about 30% of shyness as a trait is down to genetics and the rest comes about as a response to the environment. Read more: http://www.bbc.com/future/story/2019...-of-us-are-shy |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Only about 30% of shyness is genetics
I'm wondering how it can be genetic when neither of my parents are/were shy(unless it skips a generation). Then again I 'm wondering what made me become more quiet and withdrawn in early childhood(according to what my parents told my sister) .
I'm also wondering how it can be due to a 'response to the environment' as neither my brother or sister are really shy. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Only about 30% of shyness is genetics
I don't think we can ever know what percentage of SA is down to genetics and what is down to the environment we grew up in.
From the little information I have, SA certainly doesn't appear to be something that my biological family suffer with - quite the opposite I think! However, my adoptive Dad was very quiet and obviously greatly lacking in confidence and my adoptive Mum was constantly pre-occupied with what Mrs so and so down the road might be thinking. Whether any of that played any part in me developing SA who knows, and knowing isn't going to change a thing. All I know is that I've been highly sensitive and anxious for as far back as I can remember |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Only about 30% of shyness is genetics
No-one in my family has diagnosable SA either. Although there is a story about one of my Great Granddads that he used to wind up the clock and say "What time's your train Mabel?", as in what time are you leaving to visitors....
Maybe SA lurks in the genes. |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Only about 30% of shyness is genetics
Moksha's gonna be upset to hear this...
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Only about 30% of shyness is genetics
Quote:
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Only about 30% of shyness is genetics
^^^
There’s something endearing about your Great Grandfather saying: What time's your train Mabel? I think it’s the politeness that I like the most. Whereas some people might just have yawned, or even looked at their watches in frustration in getting their house guests to go home. Talking of endearing, my Nan used to have a fairly subtle way of exiting a conversation with someone. Although I think it only centred around a time when my Nan was watching her soaps. So whenever someone would call her during that time, she would often blame the phone for being faulty. I always remember this one time when I could hear her friend speaking really loudly and I saw my Nan having to distance herself from the vibrating sounds of the phone receiver. But this is where the politeness comes in, as my Nan then asked if she could call back after Emmerdale had finished. Although I used to wonder what would happen if there was an emergency during that time. Like for example, me being held to ransom: Kidnapper: We have your Grandson! Nan: Hello? Hello? You will have to speak up Kidnapper: You need to pay us £10,000! *Background tv noise* “Deirdre, why don’t you love me anymore!” Kidnapper: If you don’t pay up by this weekend, we will start posting bits of him to you! Nan: I’m sorry, I still can’t hear you. Can you call back after Coronation Street? Although without question, my Nan certainly would have paid the money in that scenario. I just think it’s possible that it needed to be after the closing credits. Now I don’t think my Nan ever had SA. Whereas Great Grandfather, he seemed to have those traits. He died 2 years before I was born, but I was told examples of how he avoided social situations. Such as going to weddings, but not attending the social gatherings afterwards with the family. Then there was my Grandfather, who had a great ability to be very sociable when he was out of the home. But at home, he was a lot more subdued in his personality. Although it’s possible that my Nan had worn him down over the years from watching so many soaps. As for the article, thanks for posting the link Wjfox. I found it interesting. I always thought there was a genetic component, as well as environmental factors. Although I’m still unsure in how to overcome those factors. But in the meantime, in honour of Dougella’s Great Grandfather, I do believe it’s time for me to catch that train. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Only about 30% of shyness is genetics
Quote:
^ I suppose it is quite a subtle way of getting people to leave. It probably worked better in the days when not so many people had their own transport! |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Only about 30% of shyness is genetics
^ The thing about mental health running in families is that it's not just genetics that gets passed on, it's the environment caused by the parent's own struggles and the effect on the children that also plays a part.
|
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Only about 30% of shyness is genetics
A few years ago I read some of the love-shyness book by Dr Brian Gilmartin. One part that seemed to make a lot of sense was where he discussed the notion of the unborn child not being exposed to adequate levels of androgens, such as testosterone, during development and before birth. That's not strictly genetics, but fills in the gap between genetics and post-birth environmental factors. I think the book refers to some Russian studies looking into this, as well.
The book is probably still available on-line, and in the relevant parts is interesting and worth a read. For 'love-shyness' just read 'shyness' or 'SA', and it makes a lot of sense, for both sexes, without getting hung up on the label 'love-shyness'. Some of it gets a bit off-beat later on, e.g. astrology, but I don't think it negates the rest of the material. |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Only about 30% of shyness is genetics
^ I wouldn't be surprised if the environment of the womb plays a significant role in mental development.
|
#12
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Only about 30% of shyness is genetics
Just out of interest... is anyone here hypermobile?
It's a genetic trait. I found out I am recently, and find it fascinating that there are links between hypermobility and anxiety. The reasons for this aren't 100% clear but it's been theorised it could be to do with chronic pain, or even that our bodies are more sensitive to stress so produce more adrenaline. I'm just praying for a wonder drug but don't think it's going to happen! |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Only about 30% of shyness is genetics
I've been fascinated by this nature vs nurture question for a long time.
I'm not sure if it's fully factored into the 30% (maybe it is) but people's temperament can have a strong effect on the social environment, and that's especially true with shyness/introversion I'd have thought. So there's a feedback effect, with us influencing the behaviour of others around us, and then that reinforcing certain beliefs we have about ourselves and reinforcing our temperamentally related behaviour. So the genetic effect could be a lot higher in practice. We can't change our temperaments but we can change the environment we're in (to an extent). Although that's easier for people with the financial and social capital to do so, which is a whole other story. It's often difficult to change the social environment we're born into. Increasingsly so in this age of austerity and neoliberalism, where we seem to be at the mercy of predatory, unregulated capitalism. So a lot of it is Capitalism's fault - but that never gets given a percentage by social scientists. Some acknowledge it though- I'd recommend 'Power, Interest and Psychology: Elements of a Social Materialist Understanding of Distress' by David Smail which is a lot more readable than the title suggests, and is only 116 pages. I'm also fascinated by twin studies. Although the best ones would be where two identical twins are raised in different cultures / social classes, and that hardly ever happens. |