Skip to main content
. 2024 Jan 6;7:55. doi: 10.1038/s42003-023-05710-4

Table 2.

Univariate modelling of genetic and environmental contributions to inter-individual differences in aesthetic evaluations.

Images Sample Model −2LL, AIC df, χ2 A C|D E
Taste- typicality
 Abstract Images Discovery CE*

349.52,

359.52

1409, 0.04 0

0.29

[0.22; 0.36]

0.71

[0.64; 0.78]

ACE

349.47,

361.47

1408, 8.41

−0.03

[−0.31; 0.37]

0.32

[0.05; 0.55]

0.71

[0.63; 0.80]

 Scenes Discovery AE*

373.23,

383,23

1518, 0.03

0.36

[0.29; 0.43]

0

0.64

[0.57; 0.71]

ACE

373.20,

385.20

1517, 4.65

0.34

[0.04; 0.66]

0.02

[−0.27; 0.29]

0.64

[0.57; 0.71]

 Scenes Validation AE*

276.70,

286.50

1204, 1.76

0.30

[0.19; 0.39]

0

0.70

[0.61; 0.81]

ACE

276.50,

288.50

1203, 12.45

0.29

[−0.05; 0.64]

0.00

[−0.30; 0.28]

0.70

[0.60; 0.82]

 Faces Discovery AE*

−804.66,

−795.66

1505, 0.05

0.33

[0.25; 0.40]

0

0.67

[0.62; 0.76]

ACE

−804.71,

−792.71

1504, 6.40

0.29

[−0.02; 0.63]

0.03

[−0.29; 0.32]

0.67

[0.60; 0.75]

 Faces Validation AE*

−439.82

−429.82

1161, 0.84

0.31

[0.21; 0.41]

0

0.69

[0.59; 0.79]

ADE

−440.65

−428.65

1160, 7.81

0.00

[−0.69; 0.66]

0.33

[−0.35; 1.04]

0.67

[0.57; 0.78]

Evaluation-bias
 Abstract Images Discovery AE*

3523.48,

3533.48

1410,1.17

0.32

[0.24; 0.40]

0

0.68

[0.60; 0.76]

ADE

3522.31,

3534.31

1409,2.74

0.02

[−0.54; 0.56]

0.31

[−0.24; 0.89]

0.68

[0.58; 0.75]

 Scenes Discovery AE*

3110.07,

3120.07

1520,0.18

0.26

[0.18; 0.33]

0

0.74

[0.67; 0.82]

ACE

3109.88,

3121.88

1519,10.56

0.19

[−0.11; 0.51]

0.06

[−0.23; 0.34]

0.74

[0.67; 0.82]

 Scenes Validation AE*

2855.31,

2865.31

1203,0.21

0.31

[0.21; 0.40]

0

0.69

[0.60; 0.79]

ACE

2855.13,

2867.13

1202,6.85

0.24

[−0.13; 0.62]

0.07

[−0.28; 0.38]

0.69

[0.60; 0.80]

 Faces Discovery AE*

3062.91,

3072.91

1507,0.07

0.41

[0.33; 0.47]

0

0.59

[0.53; 0.66]

ACE

3062.84,

3074.84

1506,7.43

0.37

[0.10; 0.66]

0.03

[−0.23; 0.27]

0.60

[0.53; 0.67]

 Faces Validation AE*

3164.23,

3174.23

1165,0.05

0.32

[0.21; 0.41]

0

0.68

[0.59; 0.79]

ACE

3164.19,

3176.19

1164,2.64

0.27

[−0.16; 0.74]

0.05

[−0.40; 0.43]

0.69

[0.59; 0.79]

Sex and age are included as covariates in every model. Significance and comparative statistics for the reduced models (AE and CE) are obtained by comparison with the respective full ACE|ADE model. (All ACE|ADE models fit were considered good compared to the respective full saturated models). Reported χ2 df = 1 for the full vs. reduced model (e.g., AE vs. ACE) and df = 6 for all saturated vs. full model. * Final reduced models.

−2LL − 2 Log likelihood, AIC Akaike information criterion, df degrees of freedom, A additive genetic, C|D common environmental or dominance genetic, E unique environmental and error.