Tieger T
Child Dev. 1980 Dec;51(4):943-63.
The prevalence of aggression as a predominantly male behavior pattern has often been noted. The nature and perceived extent of sex differences in aggression have recently revived interest in speculation that such differences are attributable to factors inherent in the biological basis of sex differentiation. This paper will critically examine the empirical and theoretical basis for Maccoby and Jacklin's contention that males are biologically predisposed toward aggressive behavior. The literature to be examined includes: (1) cross-cultural studies of children's behavior, (2) the behavior of nonhuman primates, (3) sex hormones and aggression, and (4) early learning influences in child development. Contrary to Maccoby and Jacklin's assertions, these first 3 research traditions are found to indicate no biological predisposition toward aggression in human males. Furthermore, the pattern of existing evidence suggests that the gender-dimorphic nature of aggression is reliably observable in children's spontaneous behavior only after the age of 5 years. This finding presents great difficulty for the biological theory as proposed by Maccoby and Jacklin. Suggestions are presented for an interactional theory of the etiology of observed sex differences in adult aggression.
攻击行为作为一种主要的男性行为模式,其普遍性常常受到关注。攻击行为中性别差异的本质和人们所感知的程度,最近重新引发了人们对于这种差异可归因于性别分化生物学基础中固有因素这一推测的兴趣。本文将批判性地审视麦科比(Maccoby)和杰克林(Jacklin)所提出的男性在生物学上倾向于攻击行为这一论点的实证和理论基础。将要审视的文献包括:(1)儿童行为的跨文化研究,(2)非人类灵长类动物的行为,(3)性激素与攻击行为,以及(4)儿童发展中的早期学习影响。与麦科比和杰克林的断言相反,发现前三个研究传统并未表明人类男性在生物学上倾向于攻击行为。此外,现有证据的模式表明,只有在5岁之后,攻击行为的性别二态性本质才能在儿童的自发行为中可靠地观察到。这一发现给麦科比和杰克林提出的生物学理论带来了巨大困难。针对观察到的成人攻击行为中的性别差异的病因,提出了一种相互作用理论的建议。