Martyn Smith

Is Anti-Social Behaviour a Result of Your Genetic Inheritance or Your Environment

and Upbringing?

The question posed is a logical non-sequitur and a single cause fallacy. The conclusion is not an
either\or answer but a combination of the two propositions. Departing from the construction of the
interrogative the issue of anti social behaviour can be examined in two causal parts: nature and
nurture.

'Anti-social behaviour' is conduct that lacks consideration for others and that may cause damage to
society, whether intentionally or through negligence, as opposed to pro-social behaviour, actions
that helps or benefits society.1
The definition of anti social behaviour according to Berger and other luminaries such as David W.
MacDonald2 and J Richard Eiser3 indicates this is therefore a modular idea. To determine the
difference behavioural geneticists perform adoption and twin studies.
Acquiring traits from nurture is known as tabula rasa and now considered inappropriate to describe
upbringing in this way4. In 1976 evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins coined the word 'meme' in
his book 'The Selfish Gene'5. Essentially Dawkins described an explanation for the cultural
phenomena using evolutionary principles. There is a whole series of mimetic structures that cause
behaviour on both individual and groups.
Bernard Guerin outlines that the aggressive nature of our species due to social factors. His analysis
of dozens of experimental studies concludes that group membership is essential for illuminating the

. Berger, Kathleen Stassen (2003). The Developing Person Through Childhood and Adolescence, 6th edition (3rd
publishing). Worth Publishers p.302
2
W. MacDonald, David,The Ecology of Carnivore Social Behaviour, Nature Vol. 301(3 February, 1983) p.379
3
Eiser, J. Richard, Social Psychology: Attitudes, Cognition and Social Behaviour, Cambridge University Press, 1986, p.
5
4
Dusheck, Jennie, The Interpretation of Genes, Natural History, October, 2002
5
Dawkins, Richard (2006) The Selfish Gene: 30th Anniversary Edition p.190

Martyn Smith
entire spectrum of social behaviour6.
The nature side of the argument concentrates on looking at DNA interacting with signals from
other genes7. Neurobehavioral disorders such as Attention-Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD)
reveal that in seventy five percent of cases the causes can be linked to genetic deficiencies8.

A common perception is that men are more anti-social than women. For example a notable study in
19659 found that males with an additional Y chromosome are more prone to aggressive behaviour.
An abnormality of XYY karyotype has been found in subsequent experiments analysing criminal
behaviour. In the general population this occurs in one in a thousand males and up to one in five in a
prison population10.

One study of heritability relating to intelligence accounts for around forty to fifty percent of traits in
children and up to eighty percent in adults11. However other studies issue varying percentages and
there is certainly no scientific consensus on this issue.

In conclusion anti-social behaviour is caused by both the genetic makeup of a person in conjunction
with cultural transmission. As continuous evidence shows; upbringing is more important in
preventing anti social behaviour than the innate being.

Guerin, Bernard Social Facilitation Cambridge University Press, 1993 p.129

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_versus_nurture accessed 23rd August 2010
8
http://www.continuingedcourses.net/active/courses/course003.php
9
. "Aggressive Behavior, MentalSub-Normality and the XYY Male." Nature 208 (December 1965): p.1351-2
10
http://www.scienceclarified.com/dispute/Vol-1/Are-XYY-males-more-prone-to-aggressive-behavior-than-XYmales.html accessed 23rd August 2010
11
Plomin, R. 2004. Intelligence: genetics, genes, and genomics. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 86 112129
7