Being a lawyer requires one to constantly search for problems, to wonder what could go wrong, to find the flaws and defects in an assertion. As a result, people with a personality that leans in this direction are more prone to entering the profession, and people with less of this tendency drop out of law school and out of practice at a disproportionately higher rate than their more skeptical counterparts. This concentrates the skeptics in two ways–more are attracted in the first place, and fewer drop out over time.
Skepticism itself is one of those personality traits that is more influenced by one’s environment than is typical. Most personality traits are more genetically predisposed, more nature than nurture, but skepticism is an exception. It is very much influenced by one’s milieu.
For those not well versed in psychological lingo, the first quote sentence makes reference to the trait theory of personality.
What I want to ask here is if there's empirical evidence that skepticism is (significantly) more influenced by environment/nurture/milieu than other personality traits.
Christian said in the comments below that we should define skepticism. I think the first paragraph from the source uses it with reasonably common meaning, quoting from Wikipedia, either/both
an attitude of doubt or a disposition to incredulity either in general or toward a particular object;
a mode of inquiry that emphasizes critical scrutiny, caution, and intellectual rigor;
seem consistent with the first paragraph I quoted from the blog.
Of course if you don't buy that personality traits exist at all, the question is meaningless to you. Please don't post answers saying that, I already know that option exists. And I'm saying this because I've asked here a question about the relative merits of IQ vs. another psychometric measure, and the only answer I've got was "IQ is meaningless" +3.