AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL ANTHROPOLOGY 59243-249(19821 Dermatoglyphics of Hyperactive Males

In investigating the dermatoglyphics of hyperactive subjects, it was proposed that if similar hyperactives were sampled and significant differences were found from suitable controls, a genetic effect could be responsible. From two clinical populations, we ascertained 26 subjects in 24 sibships comprising the hyperactive study group. The control subjects came from an earlier study. Tables 2-9 contain summaries of the dermatoglyphic analyses of both subjects and controls. Data were grouped following a dermatoglyphic principle of complexity of pattern, specifically, and the number of triradii present. The scheme for reporting the results is: selection of the characteristic (pattern, ridge count); determination of the areas (digit, palm, sole); and comparison of the frequencies or counts in the two populations (hyperactives, controls). Among the 45 statistical tests, four achieved a 5% level of significance. Thus, with a seemingly homogeneous sample of hyperactive males and with criteria for comparisons, no characteristic dermatoglyphic features emerged. Considering the highly characteristic effects of chromosomal abnormality on dermatoglyphics as well as the features associated with an early intrauterine developmental disturbance, the lack of dermatoglyphic similarities in these hyperactive males reduces the likelihood of such a profound factor as a causal mechanism. Hyperactivity in childhood has escaped causal understanding at least partly because of difficulty distinguishing between hyperactive and normal behavior. Hyperactivity commonly disturbs someone-a parent, a teacher, or any person in frequent communication with the accusedbut tolerance of irritating behavior differs among persons. Other reasons exist for the lack of understanding: the frequent assumption that hyperactivity may be transient; the hope that amelioration may be achieved by behavior modification or medication; and the belief that the behavior will not interfere with progress to a normal adult life. Such reasoning suggests that hyperactivity deserves no effort in etiologic research. How. ever, hyperactivity frequently interferes with educating the affected and usually disturbs any others sharing the same environment. Views differ concerning the origin, manifestations, and even the existence of the hyperactive syndrome. Some observers point to possible disturbances in the neurochemistry or neurophysiology of the central nervous system. One extreme of the etiological spectrum hypothesizes complete genetic determination, while the other extreme claims total environmental determination. Between these extremes, interactive contributions of genetic and environmental factors could be implicated, although not necessarily in the same proportions in all cases. A genetic component could result from a major gene effect. Such a gene produces a pronounced phenotypic effect. A major gene controls the production of a discontinuous or qualitative character in contrast to a minor gene, which, along with similar genes, has an individually small effect. These polygenes control Received January 4, 1982; accepted April 18, 1982. 0002-9483/82/5903-0243$02.50