NEWS, VIEWS AND COMMENTS Spotlights; Research Samplings; Literature, Politics, Photography and Athletics Nancy L. Segal Department of Psychology, California State University, Fullerton, California, USA ajor reared apart twin studies and the principal investigators behind them are presented. Personal tributes to two early Mresearchers are provided by their colleagues and associates. Next, current twin studies and discussions of posttraumatic stress, synaesthesia, vanishing twins and bioethical issues are summarized. Human interest stories include twins in literature, poli- tics, photography and athletics. Spotlights just their own lives and those of their contributions of countless collaborators Reared Apart Twin Researchers families, but ultimately the course of and assistants are clearly acknowledged. There are seven formal reared apart twin research, the nature of psychologi- There are, in addition, several case cal inquiry and the progress of medical twin studies, past and present. We may reports of reared apart twins in the investigation. It also fashioned the well see new investigations in the medical and psychological literature careers of many professors and students future, due to increasing numbers of that are not reviewed here; I may who became enchanted by the develop- national twin registries (Boomsma, discuss these papers in a future column. mental stories only reared apart twins 1998; Busjahn, 2002) and improved could tell. Had the Jim twins never met, 1. Horatio H. Newman, Frank N. methods for tracking adopted away many seminal (and now familiar), Freeman and K.J. Holzinger: relatives (e.g., reunion registries, The Big Three papers, chapters and presentations Internet searches). I also anticipate a would not have been written, studied The first systematically conducted rise in separated twins from western and debated. study of separated twins, Twins: A nations — not only for the reasons When this article is in print, it Study of Heredity and Environment mentioned above, but also as a byprod- will have been 24 years since the Jim (1937), took place at the University of uct of advances in assisted repro- twins met. That is nearly a silver Chicago. It was undertaken by a truly ductive technologies (ART). Physicians anniversary. I have now been away multidisciplinary trio: a biologist cannot guarantee successful singleton from the Minnesota study for slightly (Newman), a psychologist (Freeman) pregnancies via artificial procedures, longer than I was present. For this and and a statistician (Holzinger). Their so a common option has been to other reasons it seems appropriate to original aim was to compare psycho- implant multiple embryos. This prac- recall the wonderful reared apart twin logical similarities of 50 monozygotic tice has produced increased numbers work that set the stage for current (MZ) twin pairs and 50 dizygotic of twins, triplets, quadruplets and efforts and will surely affect those that (DZ) twin pairs raised together. The more. An unfortunate consequence follow. Rereading sections from origi- idea of adding separated twins to the has been separation of multiple birth nal studies has been inspiring, project occurred later when “ … it siblings by some families lacking informative and fun. I expect some became obvious that this material resources to raise them. Twin Research readers may be sur- alone [twins reared together] gave only I was associated with the Minnesota prised, as I was, to discover new things an incomplete picture of the roles of Study of Twins Reared Apart (MISTRA) about each investigation. heredity and environment and that it between 1982 and 1991. The study Below are brief summaries of each originated with the famous Jim twins project’s backgrounds, and the names Address for Correspondence: Nancy (Jim Lewis and Jim Springer) of Ohio, and photographs of the principal inves- L. Segal, Department of Psychology, Calif- who first met in February, 1979 at age tigators. Space considerations precluded ornia State University, Fullerton CA 92834 39. The Jim twins’ meeting affected not more detailed treatments, but the USA. Email: [email protected] 72 Twin Research Volume 6 Number 1 pp. 72–81 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.40.219, on 27 Sep 2021 at 20:00:06, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1375/twin.6.1.72 News, Views and Comments surprised and overwhelmed by the material was a 1928 reprint of a statis- volume of responses, although not all tics article authored by Holzinger. replies yielded usable sets. In fact, most Meanwhile, I explored the library’s web letters came from twins and “proud site and came upon the following item, mothers of twins” (p. 132) eager to albeit not related to twin research: describe within-pair similarities and The biology club [an informal gather- differences, and to seek answers to per- ing] also served as a source of support sistent problems. The most commonly for Darrow in 1925 during the famous asked questions concerned sterility or ‘Monkey Trial’ in Dayton, Tennessee. mental handicap in one co-twin. The Backing Darrow’s successful defense of team also received replies from many John Scopes and evolutionary theory “non-identical twins reared apart, even were expert witness statements pre- twins of opposite sex” — unfortu- pared by three friends on the Figure 1 nately, these cases were excluded from University faculty: zoologist Horatio H. Newman, educator Charles H. Horatio H. Newman the study. (courtesy of the University of Chicago, Newman et al.’s final sample Judd, and anthropologist Fay-Cooper Regenstein Library Archives). included 19 reared apart MZ twin sets. Cole (University of Chicago Exhib- It was small in size, but nearly four ition Catalogues, 2002, online). times as large as anticipated. This was explained by the enormous publicity 2. James Shields: On the BBC surrounding the first set (“through no Shields’s 1962 study, Monozygotic fault of ours,” p. 132), which led to Twins: Brought Up Apart and Together, additional contacts and cases. The is a classic among researchers investi- descriptive material and accompanying gating twins. It is astonishing, but true, photographs in this volume are still that Shields investigated nearly all the delightful to peruse. pairs on his own. Most twins did visit I visited Holzinger’s daughter at her the Maudsley Hospital, in London, home in Arizona sometime during the but when this was not possible, he 1980s. She talked at length about her traveled to their homes or arranged for father and graciously provided me with colleagues to do so. “In view of the a photograph and a newspaper clip- scarcity of twins brought up apart and ping. The name and date of the their great value as research material it Figure 2 newspaper were not noted, although was thought that the plan of the inves- Frank N. Freeman (courtesy of the University given the subject, the date was most of Chicago, Regenstein Library Archives). likely the late 1930s or early 1940s. tigation should be sufficiently The article noted that awards were flexible…” (p. 22). Shields’s volume is won by two members of the research another wonderful blend of quantita- team: Newman and Holzinger were tive analysis and biographical detail. honored for their contributions by the Dr. Irving I. Gottesman worked American Educational Research closely with James Shields for many Association; it is curious that Freeman years. I asked him to prepare a brief did not share that award. tribute to his friend and colleague. The comprehensive volume, first It appeared on my computer screen copyrighted in 1937, was renewed in 1965 by Newman’s daughter, Marie and reissued in 1982 by Midway Reprints, a division of the University of Chicago Press. Midway’s mission, etched on the book cover, is to “keep in print titles for which there is a Figure 3 steady but small demand”. I stumbled Karl J. Holzinger (courtesy of Dr. Holzinger’s upon my copy at a discount bookstore, daughter). either in Chicago or in Minneapolis. A nice feature of this edition is a fold-out badly needed to be supplemented by a chart with IQ, personality, handedness study of identical twins reared apart” and dermatoglyphic data for each pair. (p. 132). The aim was to find four or I contacted archivists at the Uni- five such pairs. versity of Chicago’s library for Newman prepared several short arti- interesting materials about the study Figure 4 cles for the purpose of recruiting and the investigators. I recently received James (“Jerry”) Shields separated twins. The research team was a note saying that the only relevant (courtesy of Dr. Irving I. Gottesman). Twin Research February 2003 73 Downloaded from https://www.cambridge.org/core. IP address: 170.106.40.219, on 27 Sep 2021 at 20:00:06, subject to the Cambridge Core terms of use, available at https://www.cambridge.org/core/terms. https://doi.org/10.1375/twin.6.1.72 Nancy L. Segal less than 24 hours later — a tribute as he notes, most cases were gathered in itself: by systematic means. After Newman, Freeman, and Holzinger Gudrun Hauge, secretary in the published their systematic findings on twin registry for 50 years, graciously 19 MZA pairs in 1937, only sporadic provided the following tribute to case studies of such rare birds appeared Professor Juel-Nielsen. I am grateful to until James (Jerry) Shields’s remarkable my friend and colleague, Dr. Kaare series of 44 MZA pairs (together with Christensen, at the University of 44MZT, 11DZA, and 17 DZT) was Odense and Danish Twin Registry, for published in 1962. The magnum opus is all the more remarkable as it was forwarding my request to her: accomplished despite two traumatic Niels Juel-Nielsen was born on 24 life events that would have dissuaded March 1920, in Denmark.