Tanya Button, a postdoctoral fellow in behavioral genetics at the University of Colorado Boulder, studied identical and fraternal twins in adolescence and early adulthood and found that:

genetic factors could influence problem alcohol use more in nonreligious adolescents than adolescents with a greater religious outlook. This attenuation in religious participants indicates that religiosity exerted a strong enough influence over the behavior of religious individuals to override any genetic predisposition. The same was not true for young adults, however, for whom the genetic influence was consistent across levels of religiosity.

The researchers aren’t sure why the effect doesn’t hold for young adults, but suggest it may be because there is greater social control in our teenage years.

Here’s an interesting finding: It turns out that the emotional ups and downs of a romantic relationship take a greater toll on men than women. Robin Simon, a professor of sociology at Wake Forest University, looked at 1,000 unmarried males and females between the ages of 18 and 23 and found that males got greater emotional benefits than females when their relationships were going well, but their mental health suffered more during strained and unhappy times.
Simon suggests this may be because women are more likely to have other close relationships with family members or friends, while young men tend to be emotionally intimate primarily with their girlfriends.
On the other hand, girls are more affected by whether or not they’re in a romantic relationship at all, meaning they benefit more from simply being in a relationship, but they’re more likely to be depressed when a relationship ends.

Apparently so, according to researchers from the University of Toronto. They found that people who are motivated by compassion, empathy, and equality tend to be liberal, while those who are concerned with order, tradition, and politeness tend to be conservative.
As the researchers explain:

Individuals who have high needs for order but low needs for equality are likely to score at the high ends of conservative ideology. Conversely, individuals with low needs for order but high needs for equality are likely to score at the high ends of liberal ideology. If, by contrast, both of these needs are relatively balanced, a more moderate political outlook is likely to be observed. Although the term “bleeding-heart liberal” is often used pejoratively, the current findings suggest that liberals do indeed tend to have higher levels of compassion. These higher levels of compassion likely contribute to the liberal’s preference for fairness and equality. In contrast, the term “compassionate conservative” may be something of an oxymoron. It is true that individuals with a more balanced personality profile may endorse both conservative and liberal values, but conservatism as a political orientation appears to be negatively associated with compassion. This does not mean there are no compassionate conservatives, but it suggests that the extent to which conservatives are compassionate may reflect the extent to which they possess the underlying motivation driving the liberal value of egalitarianism.

It’s an argument in line with the one Jon Hanson, director of The Project on Law and Mind Sciences at Harvard Law School, made back in March, when he told Big Think about other research suggesting we’re predisposed to different ideologies based on certain personality traits and motivations— like how we feel about inequality, uncertainty, and new experiences; conservatives, for example, tend to like order, clarity, and closure, while liberals are more comfortable with chaos.

Researchers from the University of Sheffield studied villagers in rural Senegal and found that women who were more neurotic had 12 percent more children than women with below-average neuroticism. They also found that neurotic women—who tend to be stressed, depressive, and moody—were more likely to have children with lower body mass index, a sign of malnutrition (possibly because they have more babies to feed).
In Western countries, on the other hand, past research has shown that women who score high on neuroticism tend to have fewer children than women who are less neurotic. Virpi Lummaa, who led the new study, tells the Daily Mail:

Women who are highly neurotic tend to have more short-term sexual partners, suggesting a link between their sex drive and personality trait. In the type of society where contraception is not common that could explain why these women have more children. For a long time what has been puzzling about neuroticism is that it is related to bad health, dying younger, and less kids. There was nothing positive related to it and as a heritable trait you would have predicted it would disappear from the population. That is why we wanted to look for reproductive outcomes in other types of society.

As for men, those who scored high on extroversion had 14 percent more children than those who scored low on this personality trait, perhaps because their sociable and outgoing nature leads to more sexual partners.