Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-76dd75c94c-sgvz2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T07:33:36.341Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

8 - Sex effects in risk predictors for antisocial behaviour: are males more vulnerable than females to risk factors for antisocial behaviour?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  22 September 2009

Terrie E. Moffitt
Affiliation:
University of London
Avshalom Caspi
Affiliation:
University of London
Michael Rutter
Affiliation:
University of London
Phil A. Silva
Affiliation:
University of Otago, New Zealand
Get access

Summary

In previous chapters we saw evidence that males are more antisocial than females. In the next three chapters we ask if the aetiology of antisocial behaviour differs for males and females. This chapter takes a first look at this question by testing the hypothesis that males are more vulnerable than females to individual, familial, and environmental risk factors for antisocial behaviour. The basic premise is that biological sex or psychological gender serve either to exacerbate the influence of the risk factor or conversely to protect the individual from its influence.

Three types of research designs have been used to try to address the question of whether certain risk factors have a greater influence on the development of antisocial behaviour in males versus females. One approach is to use behavioural genetic designs to examine whether there are any sex differences in the genetic and environmental aetiology of antisocial behaviour. The available evidence suggests that estimates are more similar than different among males and females for genetic and environmental liability for externalizing behaviour problems (Gjone, Stevenson, and Sundet, 1996; Gjone et al., 1996), conduct problems (Cadoret and Cain, 1980; Cadoret et al., 1995; Slutske et al., 1997), and crime (Baker et al., 1989; Gottesman, Goldsmith, and Carey, 1997). Two studies that have found sex differences in the magnitude of genetic and environmental influences on antisocial behaviour reached opposite conclusions (Eley et al., 1999; Silberg et al., 1994).

Type
Chapter
Information
Sex Differences in Antisocial Behaviour
Conduct Disorder, Delinquency, and Violence in the Dunedin Longitudinal Study
, pp. 90 - 108
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×