Table 2.
Power to detect A × C and A × E using different models in scenario I
| Effect | Data | ACE–A × E–A × C | ACE–A × C | ACE–A × E | AE 500 | AE 1,000 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Power to detect | A × C | A × E | Both | A × C | A × E | A × E | A × E | |
| No G × E | 0.06 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | 0.05 | |
| Small | A × E | 0.08 | 0.61 | 0.26 | 0.72 | 0.64 | 0.42 | 0.70 |
| A × C | 0.16 | 0.05 | 0.24 | 0.11 | 0.18 | 0.05 | 0.05 | |
| Same dir. | 0.05 | 0.54 | 0.70 | 0.90 | 0.83 | 0.47 | 0.76 | |
| Opp. dir. | 0.35 | 0.67 | 0.06 | 0.44 | 0.57 | 0.35 | 0.60 | |
| C × E | 0.07 | 0.30 | 0.13 | 0.36 | 0.29 | 0.20 | 0.36 | |
| Medium | A × E | 0.09 | 0.81 | 0.40 | 0.90 | 0.85 | 0.63 | 0.90 |
| A × C | 0.24 | 0.05 | 0.34 | 0.15 | 0.27 | 0.05 | 0.05 | |
| Same dir. | 0.07 | 0.73 | 0.90 | 0.98 | 0.97 | 0.72 | 0.95 | |
| Opp. dir. | 0.50 | 0.85 | 0.09 | 0.65 | 0.79 | 0.52 | 0.81 | |
| C × E | 0.07 | 0.42 | 0.17 | 0.50 | 0.42 | 0.32 | 0.56 | |
| Large | A × E | 0.11 | 0.92 | 0.55 | 0.97 | 0.95 | 0.77 | 0.97 |
| A × C | 0.32 | 0.05 | 0.46 | 0.19 | 0.36 | 0.05 | 0.05 | |
| Same dir. | 0.10 | 0.85 | 0.97 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 0.84 | 0.99 | |
| Opp. dir. | 0.70 | 0.96 | 0.12 | 0.82 | 0.93 | 0.68 | 0.93 | |
| C × E | 0.11 | 0.56 | 0.24 | 0.66 | 0.59 | 0.43 | 0.72 | |
Underlined values consider the cases in which the fitted model includes none of the effects in the data. The results for the AE-model are based on the MZ-twins only
Same dir. Both an A × E and an A × C interaction are in the data in the same direction, opp. dir. they are in opposite direction, AE 500 and AE 1,000 the analyses are based on 500 MZ and 1,000 MZ twins, respectively