Of course the interesting science would be - nature or nurture?

Eg in a “village” would the kids of quiet parents be exposed all day to all these other talkative people, and therefore the effect disappears? Or is it genetic?

Great identical twins studies would be very interesting here.

And I agree due to the complexity of this, it's one of the most fascinating questions out there. How much and with what kind of likelihood I as a parent can influence my child?

Because due the complexity of it all, it sometimes also happens that bad parents providing bad environment and perhaps bad genes as well, get good children and vice versa. No one likes the ideas of this happening though as it dismisses the idea of responsibility, and no one likes the idea that they won't have 100% control over raising their children.

It would be great to know the exact odds, e.g. if you classified parents into different buckets, how often could it happen that with whatever rules that are perfect environment would it happen that children happen to grow up in a bucket where they aren't with desired characteristics.

Then sometimes identical twins who grow up with same parents, still become different personality wise. What exactly explains that? Is it that one of them just happens to take the leading role in their relationship and the other just balances and the difference between them snowballs because of the dynamic they just built with each other.

It may be obvious, but as a relative HN long timer, I've been hit too many times with the "source please" when making statements based on what I thought were obvious well known things, so studies like these are ammo for those sticklers who insist on seeing the sauce for everything.

The whole point of study is to break down these “obvious” conclusions and make sure we understand the exact causal chain, free of confounding variables. Extremely often something is studied that seems “obvious” and turns out to be anything but.

"Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something."

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

This was not shallow. Dang yet again sucks all the air out of the virtual room with his terrible takes. Please go moderate actually important threads

I think dang is right and his moderation is what keeps this place worth visiting. YMMV.

I don't think it was shallow but it doesn't seem very well thought out

It's a fair point on the title of the article.

Title is an obvious statement of fact that anyone would also just naturally expect, that either genes or nurture have correlation to where children have similar behaviour to their parents.

Within the article maybe what would have been more interesting statement and for the title is that "Global data set suggests socioeconomic status does not play a role in children’s language development".

Otherwise it reads like an onion article or something.

"Study shows that children's skin color correlates with their parent's skin color".

Every comment in this thread is a shallow dismissal. Are you going to parrot that BS at every one of them, or just me, you dong?

Assuming you're right, it doesn't change the point. Commenters here need to follow the rules regardless of what others are doing.

> Are you going to parrot that BS at every one of them, or just me, you dong?

As we already had to ask you not to post like this (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38003769), it seems that you don't want to use HN as intended. I've therefore banned the account.

If you don't want to be banned, you're welcome to email [email protected] and give us reason to believe that you'll follow the rules in the future. But please don't create accounts to break HN's rules with.

Ding dong

Are you sure it's obvious? I have parents that are always joking and what they transmitted me is to hate everything, in my experience people tend to hate the traits they grow up with and to which they're continuously exposed, as I hear often "Who did he take it from?"