AGGRESSION FUELED: Contrary to popular opinion, the male hormone testosterone is not solely responsible for aggression.
Image: © ISTOCKPHOTO.COM/Kenneth C. Zirkel
-
What a Plant Knows
How does a Venus flytrap know when to snap shut? Can it actually feel an insect’s tiny, spindly legs? And how do cherry blossoms know when to bloom? Can they...
Read More »
It's commonly assumed that testosterone, that stereotypically male hormone, is intimately tied to violence. The evidence is all around us: weight lifters who overdose on anabolic steroids experience "roid rage," and castration—the removal of the source of testosterone—has been a staple of animal husbandry for centuries.
But what is the nature of that relationship? If you give a normal man a shot of testosterone, will he turn into the Incredible Hulk? And do violent men have higher levels of testosterone than their more docile peers?
"[Historically,] researchers expected an increase in testosterone levels to inevitably lead to more aggression, and this didn't reliably occur," says Frank McAndrew, a professor of psychology at Knox College in Galesburg, Ill. Indeed, the latest research about testosterone and aggression indicates that there's only a weak connection between the two. And when aggression is more narrowly defined as simple physical violence, the connection all but disappears.
"What psychologists and psychiatrists say is that testosterone has a facilitative effect on aggression," comments Melvin Konner, an anthropologist at Emory University and author of The Tangled Wing: Biological Constraints on the Human Spirit. "You don't have a push-pull, click-click relationship where you inject testosterone and get aggressiveness."
Castration experiments demonstrate that testosterone is necessary for violence, but other research has shown that testosterone is not, on its own, sufficient. In this way, testosterone is less a perpetrator and more an accomplice—one that's sometimes not too far from the scene of the crime.
For example: regardless of their gender, the most violent prisoners have higher levels of testosterone than their less violent peers. Yet scientists hypothesize that this violence is just one manifestation of the much more biologically and reproductively salient goal of dominance.
"It has been suggested that the antisocial behaviors related to high testosterone are a function of the manner by which dominance is maintained in these groups," says Robert Josephs of the University of Texas at Austin. In other words, if researchers were to study other groups of folks, say the rich and famous, they might discover that testosterone is connected not to violence, but to who drives the biggest SUV or has the nicest lawn. As Josephs put it: "Perhaps slipping a shiv into your neighbor's back might play in the penitentiary, but it probably won't earn you any status points in Grosse Pointe."
One psychologist, James Dabbs of Georgia State University in Atlanta, made a career out of conducting studies connecting testosterone to every kind of lifestyle imaginable. In his book Heroes, Rogues and Lovers, he noted that athletes, actors, blue-collar workers and con men tend to have higher levels of testosterone than clerks, intellectuals and administrators.
What Dabbs didn't address was whether this correlation was the cause or an effect of the environment these men found themselves in. Which is to say, are high-testosterone males more likely to become violent criminals, or does being a violent criminal raise a man's level of testosterone?
No one really knows the answer, but a growing body of evidence suggests that testosterone is as much the result of violence as its cause. Indeed, both winning a sporting match and beating an opponent at chess can boost testosterone levels. (On the other hand, losing a sporting match, growing old and becoming obese all reduce levels of testosterone.)
"The causal arrow goes both ways," says Peter Gray of the University of Nevada, Las Vegas, whose own work shows that marriage and fatherhood lower testosterone levels. "There's evidence in humans that, just as in animals, testosterone is responsive to male-male competition."
Changes in testosterone levels in response to challenges can be further shaped by our expectations. In one experiment that put a biological spin on the red state–blue state divide, researchers at the University of Michigan at Ann Arbor had a volunteer "accidentally" bump into and then insult men who were raised either in the North or the South. The researchers hypothesized that Southerners come from a "culture of honor" in which aggressive responses to insults are culturally appropriate, and the results of their experiment bolstered that notion: Not only were Southerners more likely than their northern counterparts to respond with aggression, but their levels of testosterone also rose as a result. The Northerners, in contrast, were much less likely to experience an increase in testosterone.
See what we're tweeting about
7 Comments
Add CommentI was just about ready to appraise you for speaking the truth,,alas,, I got to the bottom line..Nice try !
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHowever.. I am open for hire if you are all out of honest reporters...
No matter what story you come up with, People see thru..Stop trying to push your gun control agenda.
And..Estrogen is by far, a more aggressive hormone than testosterone .. You may want to glance over the evidence pedro...
testosterone+low seraton=violence.....why do males keep needing to prove it doesn't? Use common sense....numerous studies have proven that testosterone in violent criminal males was significantly higher than in non-violant male prisoners....then comes y-chromes itching to disprove! Even WOMEN PRISONERS of violent crimes have higher testosterone. What could be an issue is the man lacking aromatase or he may have low oestrogen-both turn testosterone into estrogen.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThis article is using a logical fallacy (the all or nothing one). They're trying to say that if all men have high T and they all don't turn into raging monsters, then magically T can't cause aggression.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's just a way to avoid categorizing men as "inherently more violent than women", and hey a problem can't be addressed until it's identified correctly. Instead, we're supposed to pretend that the reason which explains why men are indeed more violent than women, on average, is solely and exclusively due to socialization. But this is false because the higher levels of T in males actually does increase aggression *on average* when compared to the lower levels of T in women even if all boys were socialized to be more empathetic.
I'm sure socialization has a lot to do with violence, but it's only part of the issue.
This article is using a logical fallacy (the all or nothing one). They're trying to say that if all men have high T and they don't ALL turn into raging monsters, then magically T can't cause aggression.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's just a way to avoid categorizing men as "inherently more violent than women", and hey a problem can't be addressed until it's identified correctly. Instead, we're supposed to pretend that the reason which explains why men are indeed more violent than women, on average, is solely and exclusively due to socialization. But this is false because increasing T actually does increase aggression *on average* even if all the people involved in a study were women who were socialized to be empathetic.
I'm sure socialization has a lot to do with violence, but it's only part of the issue. The other thing is that criminals get convicted and incarcerated for all sorts of reasons, not merely because they're all violently aggressive.
This article is using a logical fallacy (the all or nothing one). They're trying to say that if all men have high T and they don't ALL turn into raging monsters, then magically T can't cause aggression.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's just a way to avoid categorizing men as "inherently more violent than women", and hey a problem can't be addressed until it's identified correctly. Instead, we're supposed to pretend that the reason which explains why men are indeed more violent than women, on average, is solely and exclusively due to socialization. But this is false because increasing T actually does increase aggression *on average* even if all the people involved in a study were women who were socialized to be empathetic.
I'm sure socialization has a lot to do with violence, but it's only part of the issue. The other thing is that criminals get convicted and incarcerated for all sorts of reasons, not merely because they're all violently aggressive.
I think the article explained pretty well that high testosterone is a necessary but not sufficient explanation of violence, but it would be simplistic to identify it as the cause of violence. The "all or nothing" criticism is a very simplistic criticism of the argument; in fact it a straw man. Also, if testosterone rise is felt as pleasant, nad testosterone rises when men handle guns, it might explain why attraction to guns is somewhat habituating. It doesn't, by the article's own reasoning, imply anything about gun violence.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOverall, some pretty dumb criticisms, which may be explained as resulting from perceived insults that led to raised testesterone levels, undermining calm rational evaluation.
I think the article explained pretty well that high testosterone is a necessary but not sufficient explanation of violence, but it would be simplistic to identify it as the cause of violence. The "all or nothing" criticism is a very simplistic criticism of the argument; in fact it a straw man. Also, if testosterone rise is felt as pleasant, nad testosterone rises when men handle guns, it might explain why attraction to guns is somewhat habituating. It doesn't, by the article's own reasoning, imply anything about gun violence.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisOverall, some pretty dumb criticisms, which may be explained as resulting from perceived insults that led to raised testesterone levels, undermining calm rational evaluation.