{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02562170308967596, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006782215523737754, 'mean_word_length': 5.384615384615385, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
A biometrical analysis of perceptions of family environment: a study of twin and singleton sibling kinships.

Biometrical genetic analysis was applied to sibling and twin kinship data on 2 dimensions of perceived home environment. Correlations on 1 dimension, Restrictiveness-Permissiveness, were equal and significant for all kinships: MZ twins, DZ twins, same-sex siblings, and opposite-sex siblings significant for all 4 kinships: MZ twins, DZ twins, same-sex siblings, and opposite-sex siblings (r greater than .40). An E2-E1 biometrical model fitted Restrictiveness-Permissiveness, implying that treatments common to siblings create agreement about perceived environment. As intrapair differences were the same for all 4 kinships under this model, the equal environments assumption of the twin method was supported. In contrast, the Acceptance-Rejection dimension fitted a G-E1 model that makes the assumption that sibling similarity is the result of genetic factors and postulates an absence of shared environmental influences. This finding suggests that this aspect of home environment may depend as much on the child's inherited traits as on actual treatments and is in accord with the genetic analysis of individual traits in that developmentally effective environmental factors do not appear to be common to siblings.