Suchergebnisse

ABSTRACTResearch reported up through and including the 1970s directly bearing upon the relationship between genetics and criminality is reviewed. Studies using four classes of research designs are considered: general pedigree (or family) studies, twin studies, karyotype studies, and adoption studies. Only the latter three offer solid evidence at least consistent with a partial genetic etiological hypothesis, and of these, only one type of karyotype study and the adoption studies appear to be on the verge of definitely settling the matter. Among the fairly definitive types of studies, most of the evidence is extremely supportive of the proposition that human variation in tendencies to commit criminal behavior is significantly affected by some genetic factors.

AbstractGene‐environment interactions are important for the development of much human behavior. We examined the possibility that a genetic propensity to criminal behavior interacts with the type of environment in which an individual is raised. Using a cohort of adoptees, we found evidence for independent contributions of biological parent criminality (genetic influence) and urban environment rearing to prediction of adoptee criminality, but no evidence for a gene‐environment interaction involving these factors.

Contrary to the environmental determinism presumed by most social science commentators, & to the genetic determinism propounded by advocates of hardcore "sociobiology," presented here is the transactional, epigenetic approach commonly accepted in the life sciences. For the study of humans, this approach requires a focus on the reciprocal effects between genotype & both physical & sociocultural environments throughout development. Discussed are: the biology of human sexuality, sex roles, & political behavior. Political models & practices are proposed that will take better advantage of the characteristic differences between M & F brains in political thinking & behavior, & that will require a major reversal of the contemporary ratio in sex representation in political roles. Modified HA.

At the 1980 APSA meeting in Washington, a group of approximately 25 political scientists and others, out of a much larger network of contributors and sympathizers, agreed to form an Association for Politics and the Life Sciences dedicated to the advancement of an integrated biosocial perspective in our discipline. Although this short article is intended primarily to announce that fact and detail plans for the immediate future, we feel that this might also be an appropriate occasion to review briefly the history and rationale behind this intellectual activity and describe some of the objectives of the Association.The study of the relationship between biology and politics (sometimes called "biobehavioral political science" and sometimes also "biopolitics") drew its initial impetus in the latter 1960s and early 1970s from emergent developments in a number of other disciplines, particularly (a) ethology (the naturalistic study of animal behavior and adaptation), (b) psychophysiology (specifically, efforts to correlate various physiological characteristics and "indicators" with various mental and behavioral states), (c) psychobiology (including neurological and endocrine influences on social behavior), (d) behavior genetics (involving both human and non-human animal research), (e) psychopharmacology (especially the chemical manipulation of behavioral states), (f) sociobiology (the application of modern Darwinian theory to the explanation of social behaviors), and (g) ecology (the study of the relationships between organisms and their environments, which gained visibility when the so-called "environmental crisis" erupted).

Any culture, by its attained complication of jobs & roles, presents a demand for a particular distribution of intelligence endowments in its citizens. Behavior genetics research has now shown that fluid intelligence is substantially inherited, so the distribution curve of supply of intelligence is decided by birth rates across different intelligence levels. Education can shift the mean of this curve but not its form. This is an era of dislocation of the curves of supply & demand of human intelligence due to: (1) increasing complications of occupations & roles, & (2) decreasing supply, from a dysgenic birth rate, of intelligence at upper levels & increasing supply at borderline employable levels. The market value of people, like that of goods, is determined by the ratio of supply to demand. The dislocation of the curves produces a willingness to pay very well for top intelligence, but very badly for low intelligence. Humanitarian motives, unionization, etc, preclude direct adjustment of wages by market realities, but the dislocation is not removed -- only translated into secondary symptoms. If the curve of demand for intelligence, by cultural developments, is indeed shifting to higher levels, the only escape from the dislocation, & its manifold evils, is a switch from a dysgenic to a eugenic population growth. 4 Figures, 18 References. Modified HA.

TO AVOID TRIVIALIZING OR SENSATIONALIZING BIOPOLITICS, THE AUTHORS HAVE TO SPECIFY WHICH BIOLOGY IS RELEVANT TO WHICH POLITICAL PHENOMENA. THE POLITICAL BEHAVIOR REQUIRING BIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION IS THAT WHICH OCCURS WHEN INNATE, I.E., ORGANIC, DRIVES ARE DENIED FULFILLMENT BY THE NATURAL, SOCIAL, AND INSTITUTIONAL ENVIRONMENT. WHEN THIS DENIAL IS PROLONGED OR INTENSE, THE BRAIN'S LIMBIC SYSTEM COMBINES WITH NEOCORTEX TO PRODUCE SOMETIMES VIOLENT ACTION. THEREFORE, THE NERVOUS AND ENDOCRINE SYSTEMS CAN BE CAN BE MOST FRUITFULLY STUDIED TO EXPLAIN BEHAVIOR THAT OCCURS DURING PERIODS OF EXTREME SOCIAL TENSION, RATHER THAN DURING CALM PERIODS WHEN HABITS, CONVENTIONS, AND INSTITUTIONS SUCCESSFULLY CHANNEL AND FULFILL INNATE NEEDS. IN ADDITION TO NEUROPHYSIOLOGY, ETHOLOGY NOW AND GENETICS EVENTUALLY WILL HELP EXPLAIN POLITICAL BEHAVIOR IN WHICH THE ORGANIC COMPONENT IS OF MAJOR SIGNIFICANCE. SOME PHYSIOLOGICAL RESEARCH IS CITED.

ROUND TABLE ARRANGED BY EDITORS OF "VOPROSY FILOSOFII." BOCHKOV EXAMINES CURRENT DEMOGRAPHIC PROCESSES AND GENETICS. BOLDYREV QUESTIONS MOTION THAT POPULATION GROWTH ENHANCES SOCIALIST ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. PEREVEDENTSEV ARGUES CASE FOR STIMULATING POPULATION GROWTH. KOZLOV URGES INTERDISCIPLINARY COOPERATION TO IMPROVE DEMOGRAPHIC METHODS. DARSKII ELUCIDATES MOTIVES AND MECHANISMS OF DEMOGRAPHIC BEHAVIOR.

1 Introduction -- I Criminal Behavior -- 2 Delinquency in Two Birth Cohorts -- 3 Offending from 10 to 25 Years of Age -- 4 Genetic Influence in Criminal Behavior: Evidence from an Adoption Cohort -- 5 Social Class and Crime: Genetics and Environment -- 6 School and Family Origins of Delinquency: Comparisons by Sex -- 7 A Psychosocial Approach to Recidivism -- 8 Testing a General Theory of Deviant Behavior in Longitudinal Perspective -- 9 Delinquency among Metropolitan Boys: A Progress Report -- 10 Hyperactive Boys and Their Brothers at 21: Predictors of Aggressive and Antisocial Outcome -- II Violence and Psychopathy -- 11 Criminal Violence in a Birth Cohort -- 12 Criminal History of the Male Psychopath: Some Preliminary Data -- 13 Testosterone in the Development of Aggressive Antisocial Behavior in Adolescents -- 14 Violent Crime in a Birth Cohort: Copenhagen 1953–1977 -- 15 A Longitudinal Study of Aggression and Antisocial Behavior -- 16 Aggression and Criminality in a Longitudinal Perspective -- 17 Linear Causal Modeling of Adaptation and Criminal History in Sexual Offenses -- III Noncriminal Aggressive Behavior -- 18 Early Life Experiences that Relate to Later Aggression by Women -- 19 Familial Characteristics of Adolescents Vulnerable to Subsequent Antisocial Disorders -- Author Index -- Contributing Authors.