A Biological Theory Perspective on Generalized Anxiety Disorder

“Biology is the key to human nature, and social scientists cannot afford to ignore its rapidly tightening principles.” — E.O. Wilson.

Generalized Anxiety through the Molecular Genetics of Behavior

Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is a chronic psychiatric condition marked by excessive worry, restlessness, and physiological arousal (American Psychiatric Association [APA], 2022; Zhang, 2024). Biological theories of personality conceptualize GAD as rooted in neurobiological predispositions influenced by genetic and molecular variations (Cervone & Pervin, 2023; Ebstein, 2006; Montag & Reuter, 2014). While much focus has been placed on trait foundations and empirically observed links with neuroticism (Aguirre et al., 2024; Mammadov et al., 2024; Pawlak et al., 2024; Watson & Naragon-Gainey, 2014), converging evidence highlights additional biological pathways involving brain morphology, neurotransmitter function, and gene-environment interactions that may contribute to GAD symptomatology. Researchers Schienle et al. (2011) identified increased amygdala and dorsomedial prefrontal cortex volumes in GAD patients. Similarly, Cohen-Woods et al. (2013) later emphasized the role of monoamine-related gene variants and environmental stressors in shaping anxiety vulnerability. When aligned with twin studies, estimating approximately 50% heritability in dimensions of personality compelling research supports the premise that a component of development is attributable to genetic factors (Cloninger et al., 2019, as cited in Cervone & Pervin, 2023; Ebstein, 2006; Montag & Reuter, 2014).

These biological perspectives of personality development offer insight into the heritable neurochemical and genetic underpinnings of GAD that may contribute to or account for moderate heritability of anxiety-related qualities consistently linked to the disorder across populations (APA, 2022; Cervone & Pervin, 2023; Montag et al., 2020; Zhang, 2024).

Biological and Genetic Structure and Process Underlying GAD

In biological theory, personality structure comprises genetically influenced stable neural substrates and neurochemical systems that persist over time (Cervone & Pervin, 2023; Montag et al., 2020; Schienle et al., 2011). Worry or anxiety, as a structural disposition, reflects the biological sensitivity of brain systems involved in threat detection and emotional regulation, such as the amygdala and serotonin pathways (Montag et al., 2020). Neuroimaging research has revealed increased volume in the amygdala and dorsomedial prefrontal cortex (DMPFC) in individuals with GAD, which are involved in emotion generation and worry regulation (Schienle et al., 2011). This biological disposition may be foundational in influencing vulnerability, and these enduring neural features may underlie persistent cognitive and affective tendencies observed in GAD (Cervone & Pervin, 2023; Montag et al., 2020; Schienle et al., 2011). The personality process refers to gene-environment interactions and momentary biological regulation in this context (Cervone & Pervin, 2023; Cohen-Woods et al., 2013). This dynamic biological activity is illustrated by altered functional connectivity between the amygdala and the anterior cingulate cortex (ACC) and impaired emotional regulation attributed to sustained worry (Schienle et al., 2011). The short allele of the serotonin transporter gene molecule has been associated with increased amygdala reactivity and reduced serotonin availability, both of which are linked to heightened anxiety responses (Ebstein, 2006; Montag et al., 2020; Montag & Reuter, 2014). These gene-expression dynamics are proposed to shape how individuals experience and regulate emotion and contribute to the persistent uneasy or reduced states experienced by individuals with GAD (Cohen-Woods et al., 2013; Ebstein, 2006; Montag et al., 2020; Montag & Reuter, 2014; Schienle et al., 2011).

Developmental and Clinical Implications of GAD under Biological Theory

The biological theory addresses growth and development through the perspective of genetic predispositions and gene-environment interactions that form the trajectory of vulnerability for GAD (Cervone & Pervin, 2023; Cohen-Woods et al., 2013; Montag et al., 2020; Schienle et al., 2011). Variation in the brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) gene influences stress reactivity and neural plasticity, which are factors implicated in the development of GAD (Cohen-Woods et al., 2013). When associated with early developmental adversities or other environmental factors, this oxytocin receptor gene variation may modulate stress reactivity and social sensitivity and advance paths to anxiety (Montag & Reuter, 2014). Similarly, monoamine oxidase A (MAOA) gene variations modulate neurotransmitter degradation and have been linked to emotional dysregulation in anxiety subtypes (Cohen-Woods et al., 2013). Such findings highlight the role of molecular genetic mechanisms in influencing enduring emotional attributes of personality. Regarding psychopathology and therapeutic change, biological models primarily support interventions that modulate these neurochemical imbalances and emphasize targeted pharmacological and neuromodulator interventions (Cohen-Woods et al., 2013; Schienle et al., 2011). Pharmacotherapy targeting serotonergic systems and personalized interventions informed by genetic risk assessments for receptor density represents a future direction for biologically informed treatment of GAD (Montag et al., 2020; Schienle et al., 2011). Both approaches have been observed to correspond to symptom reduction and neurobiological normalization (Cohen-Woods et al., 2013; Montag et al., 2020; Schienle et al., 2011).

Closing Thoughts

Biological theories, enriched by molecular genetics and neuroscience research, suggest that GAD results from maladaptive neurobiological processes and gene-environment interplay predisposing individuals to the associated clinical symptomology. (Cervone & Pervin, 2023; Cohen-Woods et al., 2013; Ebstein, 2006; Montag et al., 2020; Montag & Reuter, 2014; Schienle et al., 2011). Insights into these mechanisms inform a biologically grounded approach to treatment and prevention and support a perspective that accommodates biological vulnerability within contextual therapeutic strategies for GAD (Cervone & Pervin, 2023; Cohen-Woods et al., 2013; Schienle et al., 2011; Zhang, 2024). Future discussions will explore behaviorist and cognitive/social-cognitive perspectives on GAD, further expanding the understanding of personality structures and therapeutic change.

I invite readers to join this advancing conversation.

References:

Aguirre, P., Michelini, Y., Bravo, A. J., Pautassi, R. M., & Pilatti, A. (2024). Association between personality traits and symptoms of depression and anxiety via emotional regulation and distress tolerance. PLoS ONE, 19(7). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0306146

American Psychiatric Association. (2022). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (5th ed., text rev.; DSM-5-TR).

Cervone, D., & Pervin, L. A. (2023). Personality: Theory and research (15th ed.). Wiley.

Cohen-Woods, S., Craig, I. W., & McGuffin, P. (2013). The current state of play on the molecular genetics of depression. Psychological Medicine, 43(4), 673–687. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0033291712001286

Ebstein, R., P. (2006). The molecular genetic architecture of human personality: beyond self-report questionnaires. Molecular Psychiatry, 11(5), 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.mp.4001814

Mammadov, S., Wang, S., & Lu, Z. (2024). Personality types and their associations with psychological resilience, coping with stress, and life satisfaction among undergraduate students: A latent profile analysis approach. Personality and Individual Differences, 222, 112599.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2024.112599

Montag, C., Ebstein, R. P., Jawinski, P., & Markett, S. (2020). Molecular genetics in psychology and personality neuroscience: On candidate genes, genome-wide scans, and new research strategies. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 118, 163–174. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2020.06.020

Montag, C., & Reuter, M. (2014). Disentangling the molecular genetic basis of personality: From monoamines to neuropeptides. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 43, 228–239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2014.04.006

Pawlak, M., Schmidtler, H., & Kopala-Sibley, D. C. (2024). Neuroticism and extraversion as predictors of first-lifetime onsets of depression, anxiety, and suicidality in high-risk adolescents. Development and Psychopathology. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579424000130

Schienle, A., Hettema, J. M., Cáceda, R., & Nemeroff, C. B. (2011). Neurobiology and genetics of generalized anxiety disorder. Psychiatric Annals, 41(2), 113–123.

Watson, D., & Naragon-Gainey, K. (2014). Personality, emotions, and the emotional disorders. Clinical Psychological Science, 2(4), 422–442. https://doi.org/10.1177/2167702614536162

Zhang, Z. (2024). A comprehensive overview on the generalized anxiety disorder – etiology and treatment. SHS Web of Conferences, 193, 03008. https://doi.org/10.1051/shsconf/202419303008