Considerations, Caveats, and Suggestions for the Use of Polygenic Scores for Social and Behavioral Traits

Abstract

AbstractPolygenic scores (PGS) are increasingly being used for prediction of social and behavioral traits, but suffer from many methodological, theoretical, and ethical concerns that profoundly limit their value. Primarily, these scores are derived from statistical correlations, carrying no inherent biological meaning, and thus may capture indirect effects. Further, the performance of these scores depends upon the diversity of the reference populations and the genomic panels from which they were derived, which consistently underrepresent minoritized populations, leading to poor fit when applied to diverse groups. There is also inherent danger of eugenic applications for the information gained from these scores, and general risk of misunderstandings that could lead to stigmatization for underrepresented groups. We urge extreme caution in use of PGS particularly for social/behavioral outcomes fraught for misinterpretation, with potential harm for the minoritized groups least likely to benefit from their use.