Gymcelled
Genetically shackled to hell
★★★★★
- Joined
- Jul 15, 2019
- Posts
- 11,131
SAGE Journals: Your gateway to world-class research journals
Subscription and open access journals from SAGE Publishing, the world's leading independent academic publisher.
journals.sagepub.com
I'll put some important quotes in here, then i'll copy paste some paragraphs of the study and underline some other good parts. Enjoy.
In both studies, bullying was significantly positively correlated with having dated, number of dating partners, having had sexual activity, and number of sexual partners
Attractiveness was positively related to having dated, number of dating partners, and self-perceived likeability
Attractiveness was positively associated with bullying, number of dating partners, having had sex, and number of sexual partners, as well as being negatively correlated with age of first dating
Bullies are perceived as being more popular and dominant than adolescents who do not bully others
Bullies can also gain access to greater economic or physical resources
Teens who bully others show as good or better mental health, physical health and social skills, including leadership.
This in in stark contrast to victims of bullies and especially bully victims who show poorer mental and physical health than adolescents not involved in bullying, particularly once family and childhood risk factors have been taken into account
Bullies generally elevated social and physical attributes may offer a signal of good genes
Bullying (in both sexes) was associated with an earlier entrance into puberty and dating at a younger age, more activity with members of the opposite sex, greater dating opportunities, and being more likely to be in a dating relationship.
Traditionally believed to be the result of maladaptive development, bullying perpetration is increasingly being viewed as a potentially adaptive behavior. We were interested in determining whether adolescents who bully others enjoy a key evolutionary benefit: increased dating and mating (sexual) opportunities.
In both studies, bullying was significantly positively correlated with having dated, number of dating partners, having had sexual activity, and number of sexual partners. In Study 1, it was positively associated with an interest in dating, and in Study 2, it was positively associated with self-perceived attractiveness and negatively associated with age of first sexual experience.
Attractiveness was positively related to having dated, number of dating partners, and self-perceived likeability in Study 1, while in Study 2, attractiveness was positively associated with bullying, number of dating partners, having had sex, and number of sexual partners, as well as being negatively correlated with age of first dating.
A behavioral genetics study calculated that 61% of the variability in bullying perpetration was due to genetic rather than environmental factors (Ball et al., 2008). Bullying is also significantly correlated with behavior traits known to have a significant genetic component, such as personality and temperament (Book, Volk, & Hosker, 2012; Farrell, Della Cioppa, Volk, & Book, 2014; Lewis & Bates, 2014; Marini, Dane, & Kennedy, 2010; Saudino & Micalizzi, 2015). These data do not suggest that an adaptive behavior (such as bullying) is purely genetically determined or that the most important factor in predicting bullying is genetics (Tooby & Cosmides, 1990). Rather, these data offer support the idea that there exist sufficient genetic linkages and individual variation to have allowed for natural and/or sexual selection to evolve facultative mental predispositions that, in combination with the right environmental cues, can result in behavior such as bullying (Ellis et al., 2012). That is, the presumably conditional nature of bullying relies on the right confluence of internal and external ecological factors (Hong & Espelage, 2012). We have predicted that bullying is associated with at least three benefits, reputation, resources, and reproduction, all of which are likely to be associated with passing on one’s genes to future generations (Volk et al., 2014).
To begin with, bullies are perceived as being more popular than adolescents who do not bully others (Caravita, Di Blasio, & Salmivalli, 2010; de Bruyn, Cillessen, & Wissinck, 2010; Estell, Farmer, & Cairns, 2007; Salmivalli, 2010; Vaillancourt, Hymel, & McDougall, 2003; Veenstra, Lindenberg, Munniksma, & Dijkstra, 2010). They are also ranked as being more socially dominant (Vaillancourt et al., 2003). Moreover, a recent longitudinal study found that, over time, high levels of bullying were highly positively related to high social status as indexed by perceived popularity (Reijntjes et al., 2013). This study also demonstrated that bullies appeared to maintain modest to high levels of likeability among their peers, in contrast with previous literature (e.g., Salmivalli, 2010). Overall, effect sizes in the above-cited literature for dominance-related measures range from medium to large, suggesting that bullying is a potential path to gaining a powerful social reputation.
Although a dominant social reputation is the best studied benefit of bullying, there are other benefits to bullying that have been noted in the literature. Bullies can also gain access to greater economic (e.g., Flanagan, 2007) or physical resources (Turnbull, 1972). Under intense survival conditions, bullying for food access can be a matter of life or death (e.g., Turnbull, 1972). When compared to adolescents not involved with bullying, teens who bully others show as good or better mental health (Volk et al., 2006), physical health (Juvonen, Graham, & Schuster, 2003), and social skills (Garandeau, & Cillessen, 2006), including leadership (Vaillancourt et al., 2003). This in in stark contrast to victims of bullies and especially bully victims who show poorer mental and physical health than adolescents not involved in bullying, particularly once family and childhood risk factors have been taken into account (Grandeau & Cillessen, 2006; Shakoor et al., 2012; Wolke & Lereya, 2015).
Finally, as we have suggested, bullies may also benefit from having more mating success (Volk et al., 2012, 2014). Given that the selective regime used by evolution is whether a gene increases or decreases in frequency, reproduction is a key evolutionary variable (Dawkins, 1989). Thus, an important question for determining whether bullying is an evolutionarily adaptive is whether or not it is associated with increased mating success. Prior to addressing this question, we briefly review the literature on adolescent dating and sexual behavior.
Bullying is a special case of aggression that is primarily differentiated on the basis of power (Olweus, 1994; Vaillancourt et al., 2010; Volk et al., 2014; Ybarra, Espelage, & Mitchell, 2014). Specifically, individuals who bully are more powerful than their victims, who in turn have difficulty defending themselves (Vaillancourt et al., 2003), whereas individuals who employ general aggression are not necessarily more powerful than those they attack (Hawley, Stump, & Ratliff, 2010). From an evolutionary perspective, there are many potential reasons why bullies should enjoy increased reproductive benefits. Bullies generally elevated social and physical attributes may offer a signal of good genes (Vaillancourt et al., 2003; Volk et al., 2012). Furthermore, their social dominance and ability to control resources are also likely to be reasons why bullies appear more attractive to partners than nonbullies as a signal that they could provide for and protect their partner and potential offspring (Buss, 1988; Volk et al., 2012). In addition, the confluence of increased bullying (Volk et al., 2006) and dating (Zimmer-Gembeck, 2002) during adolescence may help explain why antibullying interventions often fail to work (or are iatrogenic) among older adolescents. They fail because they do not address the novel, sexually motivated goals of adolescents that foster new forms and goals of competition that are generally absent among younger children (Volk et al., 2014; Yeager, Fong, Lee, & Espelage, 2015).
In one of only a few studies to directly measure bullying and dating, Connolly, Pepler, Craig, and Taradash (2000) found that bullying (in both sexes) was associated with an earlier entrance into puberty and dating at a younger age, more activity with members of the opposite sex, greater dating opportunities, and being more likely to be in a dating relationship. However, Arnocky and Vaillancourt (2012) recently reported that while peer-reported indirect aggression was associated with increased reports of dating, self-reported bullying was not associated with any increase in reported dating. Peer-reported bullying was not examined in this study, although in most studies, peer reports of physical and indirect aggression correlated with peer reports of bullying at .50–.80 (e.g., Vaillancourt et al., 2003). Nevertheless, results from Arnocky and Vaillancourt’s study raises some doubt about the link between bullying and reproductive success given that self-identified bullies did not report higher dating levels.
@soymonkcel @The Mistake of God
@ionlycopenow just another proof that "banter" is just normies trying to socially shit on you and elevate themselves