accurately reported. It is important to note that if error were nonrandom, bias might be introduced into our results. To explore this possibility, we examined correlations between variables that are included in the path model and DRD4 (see Table 1). We also considered child gender, child age, parent age, parent education, and household income. All correlations with DRD4 were |.08| or less, suggesting the error rate did not introduce bias. Participants with at least one copy of the 7-repeat allele were coded 1 (7+; N = 158, 35.0%); all other participants were coded 0 (7− ; N = 294, 65.0%). Although there are alternative DRD4 coding methods (e.g. 4/4 vs. 7+; short vs. long), we adopt the 7+ versus 7− coding on the basis of its function (Asghari et al., 1995; Schoots & Van Tol, 2003; Wong, et al., 2000) and to maintain consistency with other DST studies that include DRD4 (Bakermans-Kranenberg & van IJzendoorn, 2011).
