Is Neuroticism Genetic? Heritability, Polygenic Influences, and Environment
Author: Ukrainian Psychological Hub · Published: September 30, 2026 · Editorial Policy
Yes. Neuroticism is partly heritable, meaning that genetic differences contribute to differences in neuroticism within populations. But “heritable” does not mean genetically fixed, inherited in a simple Mendelian pattern, or predictable from a single gene. Neuroticism is a complex, dimensional personality trait produced by many genetic variants of very small effect together with environmental, developmental, and measurement influences.
The most important number to interpret correctly is heritability. MedlinePlus Genetics explains that heritability is a population statistic: it estimates how much variation among people, in a particular population and environment, is associated with genetic variation. A heritability estimate of 40% does not mean that 40% of one person’s neuroticism was caused by genes and 60% by environment. It also does not tell us how changeable the trait is.
This article uses neuroticism in its modern personality-science sense. For the broader construct, see Neuroticism: What It Is in the Big Five Personality Model. Neuroticism is continuous, everyone can be located somewhere on the dimension, and a high score is not a psychiatric diagnosis. For the broader developmental question of how genetics, temperament, environment, and life experience jointly contribute to the trait, see What Causes Neuroticism? Genetics, Temperament, Environment, and Life Experience.
Is Neuroticism Genetic? The Short Answer
The best-supported answer is that neuroticism reflects both genetic and environmental sources of individual differences. Behavioral-genetic studies repeatedly find moderate heritability. A large meta-analysis of behavior-genetic personality studies covering more than 100,000 participants estimated average personality heritability at about .40, while showing that estimates differed substantially by study design. Twin studies averaged about .47 and family/adoption designs about .22. The meta-analysis did not find personality model to be a significant moderator, including for neuroticism.
Neuroticism-specific studies are compatible with that broad picture but also show why no single percentage should be treated as the universal answer. An extended twin-pedigree study from the Netherlands Twin Register estimated broad-sense heritability of neuroticism at 47% in more than 30,000 participants with harmonized neuroticism scores. A DNA-based family analysis in UK Biobank, however, estimated about 10% from unrelated individuals and about 27% when family-based genetic effects were incorporated; see Cheesman and colleagues. Different designs estimate different portions of genetic variation and rest on different assumptions.
Molecular genetics points in the same direction without reducing the trait to a small set of genes. A 2018 GWAS meta-analysis of 449,484 people identified 136 independent genome-wide significant loci at the time; a 2024 peer-reviewed study expanded that map; and the newest large peer-reviewed analysis, published in Nature in September 2026, analyzed neuroticism in 1,136,711 participants and reported 706 genome-wide significant loci. The trajectory of discovery is exactly what a highly polygenic trait predicts: increasing sample size reveals many more variants of individually small effect rather than one decisive “neuroticism gene.”
What “Genetic” Means for a Personality Trait
In everyday language, genetic can sound like a switch: a person either has the gene or does not. That model works poorly for neuroticism. Neuroticism is a quantitative trait. Its measured variation is distributed across a population, and the genetic contribution is spread across many variants rather than one dominant or recessive allele.
A genome-wide association study, or GWAS, searches across the genome for variants whose frequencies are statistically associated with differences in a measured trait. An association can be highly reliable at the group level while still having a tiny effect for any one person. Finding an associated locus therefore does not establish a “neuroticism gene,” does not identify a biological diagnosis, and does not mean that a variant by itself causes a person to be high or low in neuroticism.
This matters because three different statements are often collapsed into one. First, a trait can be heritable. Second, specific genomic variants can be associated with it. Third, a genetic score can predict some variation in new samples. These are related but distinct claims, and none of them implies deterministic individual prediction.
Heritability: What the Number Does and Does Not Mean
Heritability is a ratio of variances, not a recipe for an individual personality. If a study estimates neuroticism heritability at 40%, the interpretation is that, under the assumptions of that study, genetic differences statistically account for about 40% of the observed variation in neuroticism within that population and environment. The remaining variance is not a clean list of identifiable environmental causes. Depending on the design, it may contain nonshared environmental influences, shared environmental influences, measurement error, time-specific states, and effects that the model does not separately identify.
Heritability is also population- and environment-specific. It can differ across cohorts, ages, instruments, ancestries, historical periods, and environmental conditions. MedlinePlus Genetics emphasizes that a heritability estimate can change as circumstances change. That is why “neuroticism is 40% genetic” is an oversimplification even when it is being used as a rough summary of the literature.
Heritability is not immutability
A highly heritable trait can still be influenced by experience, development, or intervention. Heritability tells us about the sources of variation in a defined population; it does not tell us how difficult a trait is to change. Conversely, an environmental influence can be stable for years. Genetic influence and changeability belong to different questions.
Heritability is not the probability that a child will inherit a trait level
Parents pass DNA variants to children, but they do not pass a fixed neuroticism score. Because the trait is polygenic, a child receives a unique combination of variants, develops in a particular environment, encounters different experiences, and is measured with an instrument that contains its own error. A parent high in neuroticism may have a child who is lower, similar, or higher on the trait.
What Twin and Family Studies Show
Classical twin studies compare monozygotic twins, who are genetically almost identical, with dizygotic twins, who on average share about half of their segregating genetic variation. If monozygotic twins resemble one another more strongly on neuroticism, that pattern is consistent with genetic influence under the assumptions of the model.
The strongest reason not to reduce this literature to one number is design sensitivity. Vukasović and Bratko’s meta-analysis found that the average heritability estimate for personality was .40 but that twin studies produced higher estimates than family and adoption designs. This does not mean one design is simply correct and the other wrong. Different relatedness structures and model assumptions capture different components of genetic and environmental variance.
Extended pedigree designs add information from parents, siblings, spouses, offspring, and more distant relatives. In the Netherlands Twin Register study, broad-sense heritability of neuroticism was estimated at 47%, with additive and nonadditive genetic components both contributing. The same model estimated a shared household component of 13% and unique environmental variance of 40%.
A different family-based genomic design in UK Biobank produced another pattern. Cheesman and colleagues estimated 10% heritability from unrelated participants and 27% after incorporating additional family-based genetic effects, while detecting no family environmental influence on neuroticism in that model. The contrast is scientifically useful: estimates of “genes” and “environment” depend partly on the design’s ability to separate additive genetic effects, nonadditive effects, shared household effects, assortative mating, rare variation, and residual confounding.
Why Twin Heritability and SNP Heritability Are Different
Modern genomic studies can estimate how much variance is captured by measured common single-nucleotide polymorphisms, or SNPs. This SNP-based heritability is usually lower than the heritability inferred from twin and pedigree resemblance because it measures a narrower slice of genetic variation.
For example, a 2016 GWAS of more than 106,000 individuals using the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire–Revised Short Form neuroticism scale estimated SNP-based heritability at roughly 15%. The UK Biobank family analysis found that a DNA-based estimate rose from about 10% in unrelated individuals to 27% when family-based genetic effects were included. These estimates should not be averaged into one number because they answer different statistical questions.
The gap is sometimes called missing heritability, but that phrase can be misleading if it suggests that one hidden set of genes is waiting to be discovered. Some of the difference can arise because common-SNP methods do not capture rare variants well, may miss structural variation, usually model additive effects more readily than nonadditive effects, and can be influenced by how relatedness, ancestry, phenotype measurement, and indirect genetic effects are handled.
Rare coding variation is one part of this broader picture. A large-scale exome study of 394,005 UK-based participants identified rare-variant gene associations and estimated that rare coding variants could account for up to 7.3% of neuroticism variance in that dataset. This does not close the gap between family-based and common-SNP estimates, but it shows why “SNP heritability” should not be read as “all genetic influence.”
GWAS: Neuroticism Is Highly Polygenic
Large GWAS have transformed the genetics of neuroticism. Early studies found few robust loci because individual variant effects are extremely small and very large samples are needed. As sample sizes increased, the number of genome-wide significant associations rose substantially.
In 2018, Nagel and colleagues analyzed 449,484 participants and identified 136 independent genome-wide significant loci, implicating hundreds of genes through follow-up mapping. Their analyses also suggested that the genetic signal in the neuroticism phenotype was heterogeneous, including distinguishable “depressed affect” and “worry” components.
The updated 2024 Nature Human Behaviour study used Million Veteran Program data and other published datasets. Its neuroticism meta-analysis reached about 680,000 participants and identified 208 genome-wide significant loci in the European-ancestry analysis, including 62 loci described as novel relative to the previous work. A trans-ancestry analysis identified 216 significant loci. The changing locus count across studies illustrates a key feature of polygenic research: discoveries depend strongly on sample size, ancestry composition, phenotype definition, statistical power, and analytic method.
The 2026 ReGPC Study
The most current large peer-reviewed evidence comes from Schwaba and colleagues’ 2026 Nature study. The Revived Genomics of Personality Consortium meta-analyzed 46 cohorts, with 611,037 to 1.14 million participants across the Big Five traits. Neuroticism had 1,136,711 participants and 706 genome-wide significant loci. Across the Big Five measures, common genetic variants explained about 4.8–9.3% of observed trait variance, with larger estimates after accounting for typical measurement reliability.
The study is especially important because it went beyond simply adding more loci. Genetic associations were broadly consistent, though not identical, across geography, age group, reporter, and personality instrument. Within-family GWAS and polygenic-index analyses suggested that the observed DNA–personality associations were minimally confounded by shared family environment in those data. These results strengthen evidence for robust genetic association while still leaving personality development as a joint genetic, environmental, and measurement process.
There is no single neuroticism gene
A single associated locus can contain multiple genes, and an associated variant may influence regulation rather than alter a protein directly. GWAS is exceptionally useful for mapping statistical architecture, but association is not the same thing as a one-variant causal explanation. Neuroticism does not follow a simple Mendelian inheritance pattern.
A gene name is not an individual explanation
Studies have highlighted genes and regions involved in neurodevelopment, neurotransmission, stress-related systems, and other biological processes. These findings generate hypotheses about mechanisms at the population level. They do not justify looking at one gene result and explaining why a particular person worries, becomes distressed, or scores highly on a personality inventory.
Polygenic Scores: Statistical Prediction, Not a Personality Diagnosis
A polygenic score combines information from many variants, weighting them according to associations observed in a discovery GWAS. Such scores can predict a small portion of variation in neuroticism across groups, but they are not clinical tests of personality and do not establish a person’s inevitable psychological future.
The National Human Genome Research Institute emphasizes two limitations of polygenic scores that are equally important when thinking about personality genetics: scores are probabilistic rather than certain, and their performance can vary across populations because genomic discovery datasets have historically been ancestry-imbalanced. A neuroticism polygenic score is therefore sensitive to the discovery sample, target population, phenotype definition, and analytic pipeline.
The prediction problem is even sharper for neuroticism because the phenotype itself is a psychological measurement. The genetic signal is tied to how neuroticism was operationalized. Large genomic studies have used scales derived from the Eysenck tradition, harmonized scores across cohorts, and other personality measures. These phenotypes overlap, but they are not identical. For the measurement tradition used in several major genetic studies, see Eysenck Neuroticism: The Eysenck Personality Model and Modern Big Five Research.
Measurement Matters in Genetic Research
Genes are not associated with an abstract label floating free of measurement. They are associated with a phenotype as it was actually defined in a study. Neuroticism can be measured by NEO inventories, Eysenck scales, IPIP-based measures, BFI-2 Negative Emotionality, or other instruments. These scales are strongly related at the broad-domain level, but they differ in items, facet structure, scoring, and construct emphasis.
The BFI-2, for example, uses the domain label Negative Emotionality rather than Neuroticism and organizes it around anxiety, depression, and emotional volatility facets. See BFI-2 Negative Emotionality: How It Relates to Neuroticism. A genetic association found using an EPQ-R-S neuroticism sum cannot automatically be treated as an association with every facet score from the NEO PI-R or BFI-2.
The same caution applies to an individual test result. A raw score, percentile, T score, or “high neuroticism” label from a personality website cannot be converted into a genetic estimate. Instrument, scoring direction, norm sample, population, and measurement error all matter. For score interpretation, see Neuroticism Test: What It Measures and How to Interpret Results.
What Does the Environment Contribute?
Environmental influence is not one thing. In behavioral genetics, researchers often distinguish shared environmental factors that make relatives more similar from nonshared environmental factors that contribute to differences among relatives. But these are statistical variance components, not ready-made lists of experiences.
A nonshared environmental component can include experiences that genuinely differ between siblings, different responses to the same event, relationship and peer contexts, illnesses, random developmental events, and measurement error. A shared environmental component can include household-level conditions, but whether it is detected depends on the design, ages, measurement, and model.
That is why the common statement “family environment has no effect on neuroticism” is too strong. Some classical twin studies estimate little shared environmental variance, while the extended Netherlands pedigree analysis detected a shared household component. Other family-genomic designs have not detected such a component. Statistical absence in one model does not establish that parenting, family adversity, socioeconomic conditions, or other shared experiences are psychologically irrelevant.
Genes and Environment Are Not Independent Boxes
The familiar nature-versus-nurture question suggests two separate forces competing for percentages. Human development is more intertwined. Genotypes can influence the environments people encounter, and environments can alter when, where, and how genetic differences are expressed.
Gene–environment correlation
Gene–environment correlation occurs when genetic differences become statistically associated with environmental exposure. Parents provide both genes and developmental environments; a person’s genetically influenced tendencies can evoke responses from others; and people can select environments that fit their dispositions. These pathways make it difficult to interpret an observed environment–neuroticism correlation as purely environmental.
Research on indirect parental genetic effects is still developing. A 2023 JAMA Psychiatry study reported limited preliminary evidence for genetic nurture in depression and neuroticism using polygenic-score modeling in UK Biobank families. The authors’ wording matters: the evidence was preliminary, effect sizes were small, and polygenic scores captured only part of genetic variation.
Gene–environment interaction
Gene–environment interaction asks whether the statistical effect of genetic variation differs across environmental conditions, or whether environmental effects differ across genotypes. This is plausible for complex psychological traits, but robust detection is difficult because interaction studies require large samples and precise measurement of both genotype and environment. An exploratory genome-wide study across 25 environments illustrates the research direction, but it does not justify a simple rule such as “stress activates neuroticism genes.”
Development Across the Lifespan
Genetic influence does not imply that neuroticism appears fully formed at birth. Personality develops. Temperamental tendencies, emotional learning, social roles, relationships, stress exposure, cognitive development, and biological maturation all unfold over time.
A meta-analysis of 24 longitudinal behavioral-genetic studies including 21,057 sibling pairs found that both genetic and environmental influences on personality become more stable with age. Importantly, the increasing phenotypic stability of personality across the lifespan was attributed predominantly to increasing stability of environmental mechanisms rather than to a simple genetic “locking in.”
Neuroticism-specific longitudinal twin work also supports a joint account. Nivard and colleagues followed neuroticism from adolescence into adulthood and found high stability of genetic influences together with meaningful environmental stability after accounting for measurement error. The result is more informative than a nature-versus-nurture slogan: enduring genetic and environmental influences can coexist.
Can Life Experience Change a Heritable Trait?
Yes. Heritability and change are compatible. A person’s standing on neuroticism can show long-term stability while still changing across development, life transitions, psychotherapy, psychiatric symptom change, relationships, health changes, or other experiences. The amount and direction of change vary between people.
It is also important to separate trait change from state fluctuation. A temporary increase in worry after a stressful week can raise answers on some neuroticism items without representing a durable shift in personality. Repeated measurement and longitudinal designs are needed to distinguish persistent individual change from short-term states and measurement noise.
The practical implication is straightforward: a genetic contribution does not make high neuroticism a disease that must be “cured,” and it does not make a person’s emotional patterns inevitable. High neuroticism is a location on a personality dimension. Whether a person needs clinical care depends on symptoms, distress, impairment, and condition-specific assessment rather than on a trait score or genetic estimate.
Is Neuroticism Inherited From the Mother or the Father?
Neuroticism is not inherited from one parent in the way some single-gene disorders can follow recognizable inheritance patterns. Children receive DNA from both biological parents, and polygenic traits reflect very large numbers of variants distributed across the genome. Recombination means that siblings receive different combinations of parental variants.
Family resemblance also includes more than transmitted DNA. Parents shape environments, children influence how parents respond to them, family members share social and material conditions, and some parental genotypes can be associated with the environments they provide. These processes are one reason intergenerational resemblance cannot be interpreted as a simple percentage passed from mother or father.
Does a Family History of Anxiety Mean High Neuroticism Is Genetic?
No. Family clustering by itself cannot separate shared genes from shared environments, correlated experiences, cultural transmission, assortative mating, or diagnostic and measurement practices. Neuroticism and anxiety are related but distinct constructs: neuroticism is a broad personality trait, while anxiety can refer to a temporary state, a symptom dimension, trait anxiety, or a diagnosed anxiety disorder.
Genetic correlations between neuroticism and psychiatric phenotypes have been reported in large genomic studies, but genetic correlation does not mean two constructs are the same condition. It indicates that some of the common genetic variants associated with one phenotype are statistically associated with the other. A personality trait cannot diagnose depression, an anxiety disorder, OCD, PTSD, ADHD, autism, a personality disorder, or another clinical condition.
Why Ancestry and Population Matter
Heritability and polygenic prediction are not universal constants. Genetic variant frequencies and linkage disequilibrium patterns differ across ancestry groups, environmental exposures differ across populations, and personality measures may function differently across languages and cultures.
The 2024 Nature Human Behaviour study expanded genomic work by analyzing Million Veteran Program participants of European and African ancestry and conducting trans-ancestry analyses. At the same time, the larger European-ancestry sample still provided substantially more statistical power. This asymmetry is common in human genomics and limits how confidently results from one ancestry group can be generalized to another.
The 2026 Nature analysis further expanded the evidence base across cohorts with European-like and African-like genomes and tested consistency across geography and measurement contexts. This improves generalizability compared with earlier European-heavy work, while the broader methodological point remains: genetic effect estimates and polygenic prediction are properties of datasets and populations, not universal constants detached from ancestry and measurement.
NHGRI similarly warns that polygenic-score accuracy can vary across populations because discovery datasets have historically overrepresented people of European ancestry. For neuroticism, ancestry is therefore part of the measurement and prediction context, not a footnote.
What Genetics Can Tell Us—and What It Cannot
Genetic research can tell us that individual differences in neuroticism are partly heritable, that the trait has a highly polygenic architecture, that some genetic influences overlap with other psychological and health phenotypes, and that biological pathways can be investigated statistically at scale.
Genetic research cannot currently read a person’s genome and provide a clinically definitive neuroticism level, identify one causal gene for their emotional style, distinguish a psychiatric diagnosis from a personality trait, or explain a specific life reaction by DNA alone. Group-level association is not individual destiny.
The strongest contemporary model is therefore developmental and probabilistic. Neuroticism emerges from many small genetic influences embedded in environmental and developmental systems. Genetic effects can be stable without being deterministic; environmental effects can be durable without being independent of genotype; and measurement choices shape the phenotype on which both kinds of inference depend.
Common Misinterpretations
“Neuroticism is 40% genetic, so 40% of my personality came from DNA.”
Heritability applies to variation among people in a defined population. It does not partition one person into genetic and environmental percentages.
“Scientists found hundreds of loci, so they found the genes for neuroticism.”
GWAS loci are statistical association regions. The trait is polygenic, individual effects are tiny, loci can map to multiple genes, and biological interpretation requires follow-up.
“If neuroticism is heritable, therapy or experience cannot change it.”
Heritability says nothing by itself about changeability. Personality shows both stability and change, and symptom improvement is a separate outcome from personality-trait change.
“My parent is highly neurotic, so I will be too.”
Family resemblance changes probabilities at the group level. A child receives a unique polygenic combination and develops in a unique set of environments and relationships.
“A high polygenic score means I have high neuroticism.”
A polygenic score is a statistical predictor derived from a particular discovery dataset. It explains only a portion of trait variation and does not replace a validated personality assessment.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is neuroticism hereditary?
Neuroticism is heritable in the statistical sense that genetic differences contribute to population variation in the trait. It is not inherited through a simple single-gene pattern.
What percentage of neuroticism is genetic?
There is no universal percentage. Twin and pedigree studies often produce estimates around 40–50%, while common-SNP genomic estimates are lower. The estimate depends on design, population, age, instrument, ancestry, and the genetic variation captured.
Is there a gene for neuroticism?
No single gene explains neuroticism. Large GWAS identify many associated loci, each generally contributing a very small statistical effect. The architecture is highly polygenic.
Can neuroticism skip a generation?
“Skipping a generation” is not a useful model for a complex polygenic personality trait. Trait levels reflect many inherited variants plus developmental and environmental influences, so resemblance can vary widely among relatives.
If both parents have high neuroticism, will their child have it?
The child may have a higher statistical likelihood of inheriting some variants associated with higher neuroticism, but no deterministic prediction follows. Recombination, polygenicity, environment, development, and measurement all contribute.
Are genes or environment more important for neuroticism?
The evidence does not support a universal winner. Genetic and environmental contributions are both substantial, estimates vary by design, and gene–environment correlation means the two sources are not always separable in everyday life.
Can childhood experiences cause neuroticism?
Childhood experiences can be associated with later neuroticism, but observational associations do not automatically establish causation. Genetically informed and longitudinal designs are needed because family factors, genetic selection, preexisting temperament, and measurement can confound simple cause-and-effect interpretations.
Can stress change neuroticism?
Stress can change emotional states immediately, and repeated or major experiences may contribute to longer-term personality change in some people. A temporary stress reaction and a durable change in the neuroticism trait are different outcomes.
Is neuroticism genetic in men and women to the same degree?
Many large studies do not find a simple sex-specific genetic architecture, but estimates depend on the sample and model. Population mean differences, variance differences, measurement effects, and genetic architecture are separate questions.
Can a DNA test tell me my neuroticism level?
Not with clinical or psychometric authority. Research polygenic scores can predict a small portion of variation in some samples, but they do not replace validated personality measurement and are sensitive to ancestry and study design.
Is high neuroticism a genetic disorder?
No. Neuroticism is a continuous personality dimension. A high trait level is not a genetic disease and is not itself a psychiatric diagnosis. For the personality meaning of a high score, see High Neuroticism: Meaning, Traits, Strengths, and Risks.
Can neuroticism change even if it is heritable?
Yes. Heritability and changeability are different concepts. Longitudinal research shows both stability and change in personality, while genetic and environmental influences can both remain stable across time.
Related Articles
References
Boomsma, D. I., Helmer, Q., Nieuwboer, H. A., et al. (2018). An Extended Twin-Pedigree Study of Neuroticism in the Netherlands Twin Register. Behavior Genetics, 48(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10519-017-9872-0
Briley, D. A., & Tucker-Drob, E. M. (2014). Genetic and environmental continuity in personality development: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 140(5), 1303–1331. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0037091
Cheesman, R., Coleman, J., Rayner, C., et al. (2020). Familial Influences on Neuroticism and Education in the UK Biobank. Behavior Genetics, 50, 84–93. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10519-019-09984-5
Gupta, P., Galimberti, M., Liu, Y., et al. (2024). A genome-wide investigation into the underlying genetic architecture of personality traits and overlap with psychopathology. Nature Human Behaviour, 8, 2235–2249. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-024-01951-3
MedlinePlus Genetics. (2021). What is heritability? U.S. National Library of Medicine. https://medlineplus.gov/genetics/understanding/inheritance/heritability/
Nagel, M., Jansen, P. R., Stringer, S., et al. (2018). Meta-analysis of genome-wide association studies for neuroticism in 449,484 individuals identifies novel genetic loci and pathways. Nature Genetics, 50(7), 920–927. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41588-018-0151-7
National Human Genome Research Institute. (2020). Polygenic risk scores. https://www.genome.gov/Health/Genomics-and-Medicine/Polygenic-risk-scores
Nivard, M. G., Middeldorp, C. M., Dolan, C. V., & Boomsma, D. I. (2015). Genetic and Environmental Stability of Neuroticism From Adolescence to Adulthood. Twin Research and Human Genetics, 18(6), 746–754. https://doi.org/10.1017/thg.2015.80
Schwaba, T., Clapp Sullivan, M. L., Akingbuwa, W. A., et al. (2026). Robust inference and correlates from genetic associations with personality. Nature. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-026-10992-9
Smith, D. J., Escott-Price, V., Davies, G., et al. (2016). Genome-wide analysis of over 106,000 individuals identifies 9 neuroticism-associated loci. Molecular Psychiatry, 21(6), 749–757. https://doi.org/10.1038/mp.2016.49
Tubbs, J. D., & Sham, P. C. (2023). Preliminary Evidence for Genetic Nurture in Depression and Neuroticism Through Polygenic Scores. JAMA Psychiatry, 80(8), 832–841. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamapsychiatry.2023.1544
Vukasović, T., & Bratko, D. (2015). Heritability of personality: A meta-analysis of behavior genetic studies. Psychological Bulletin, 141(4), 769–785. https://doi.org/10.1037/bul0000017
Werme, J., van der Sluis, S., Posthuma, D., & de Leeuw, C. A. (2021). Genome-wide gene-environment interactions in neuroticism: an exploratory study across 25 environments. Translational Psychiatry, 11, 180. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41398-021-01288-9
Wu, X.-R., Li, Z.-Y., Yang, L., et al. (2025). Large-scale exome sequencing identified 18 novel genes for neuroticism in 394,005 UK-based individuals. Nature Human Behaviour, 9, 406–419. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-024-02045-w