The interpretation of discrepancies between peer victimization experiences reported by different informants in capturing victimization-related genetic liability. A commentary on Armitage et al. (2022)

A recent work published in this journal by Armitage et al. reported that wellbeing-related genetic scores (PGS) are associated with self-informed peer victimization questionnaires. In contrast, peer- and teacher-informed measures would capture intelligence and educational attainment PGS better. However, we argue that this dichotomy does not find comprehensive support in the literature; instead, informants other than self and especially peers may provide reports from angles particularly relevant to mental health. For example, peer reports may more objectively capture adverse social reactions evoked by genetic factors (i.e., evocative gene-environment correlations). Thus, we recommend caution in generalizing the conclusion that self-reports capture the association between genetic contribution to mental health and peer victimization better than other-informant measures, as different gene-environment mechanisms may be at play.