I didn’t change the title, but without access to the original article, it seems like a correlation not causation.

  • Contramuffin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    13 hours ago

    The study seems to mention that the bullies have children at an earlier age. I’d be willing to guess that the relation between having more children and bullying is purely correlative and that neither factor has any direct impact on the other. Instead, it seems significantly more likely that impulsiveness drives both bullying behavior and unsafe sex, which then leads to more children.

    It seems somewhat odd to me that, instead of addressing possible mechanisms of this correlation, the authors talk about how bullying is an evolutionary trait to pass on genes.

    • godiganbabay@ponder.catOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 hours ago

      It seems somewhat odd to me that, instead of addressing possible mechanisms of this correlation, the authors talk about how bullying is an evolutionary trait to pass on genes.

      Yeah, that’s why I want to get my hands on the study. Maybe the authors did consider that but the article is misrepresenting the study.

  • godiganbabay@ponder.catOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    1 day ago

    My guesses are that there ate multiple factors at play:

    • less educated people make more kids
    • “nice guys finish last” - assertive and more socially active people are more likely to find a partner and make children
    • forcing others to follow perceived social dynamics means internal pressure to follow them oneself; having children is a social norm and expectation that is expected to be followed

    I’d try and look for papers to see if my guesses hold any water, but time eludes me.

  • dumnezero@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    11
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 day ago

    Is this evopsych bullshit?

    “This study shows us that bullying seems to be associated with some meaningful outcomes that help explain why kids do it,” Volk says. “This isn’t just ‘broken kids’ doing bad behavior; it’s getting them important things that matter.”

    Yeah, same as bandits.

    Volk says the results support the idea that adolescent bullying is, at least in part, an evolutionary adaptation that may help individuals pass on their genes to future generations.

    Yep, evopsych bullshit.

    • Swedneck@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 hours ago

      calling this evopsych is like calling freud the father of psychology

      this is just them saying something that they like the sound of, humans are fundamentally an extremely social species and there are way more things that go into passing on our genes than just having kids; being celibate and just raising the kids of your siblings is more efficient at spreading your genes.

  • Septimaeus@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    1 day ago

    Each has a strong inverse relationship with socioeconomics.

    Note

    I am not saying being poor makes a kid a bully. My parent was poor and I only ever bullied bullies (and stopped when they stopped).

    It’s just a nondescript statistical relationship. As to why it exists, I don’t know. My guess is greater baseline stress, less emotional support, and higher chance of domestic violence.

  • AbouBenAdhem@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    I guess a purely statistical consequence of this would be that the typical child has a greater-than-random chance of having a bully parent, and that chance increases with the number of siblings.