CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 275Crime Patterns and InterventionsAnimal Behavior and ReproductionChild and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 62 of the 62 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assortative Mating for Antisocial Behavior: Developmental and Methodological Implications

Krueger, Robert F., Moffitt, Terrie E., Caspi, Avshalom, Bleske, April, Silva, Phil A.·1998·Behavior Genetics
DOI 10.1023/a:1021419013124
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Do people mate assortatively for antisocial behavior? If so, what are the implications for the development and persistence of antisocial behavior? We investigated assortative mating for antisocial behavior and its correlates in a sample of 360 couples from Dunedin, New Zealand. We found substantial assortative mating for self-reports of antisocial behavior per se and for self-reports of couple members' tendencies to associate with antisocial peers (0.54 on average). Perceptions about the likelihood of social sanctions for antisocial behavior (e.g., being caught by the authorities or losing the respect of one's family) showed moderate assortative mating (0.32 on average). However, assortative mating for personality traits related to antisocial behavior was low (0.15 on average). These findings suggest that, whereas assortative mating for many individual-difference variables (such as personality traits) is low, assortative mating for actual antisocial behaviors is substantial. We conclude that future family studies of antisocial behavior should endeavor to measure and understand the influence of assortative mating. In addition, we outline a testable behavior-genetic model for the development of antisocial behavior, in which genes and environments promoting or discouraging antisocial behavior become concentrated within families (due to assortative mating), giving rise to widely varying individual developmental trajectories that are, nevertheless, similar within families.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1023/a:1021419013124

Cites

62 of 62 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Citations

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Show all 62 references

Research works printed but not linked: 6

  1. Elliott, D. S., Ageton, S. S., Huizinga, D., Knowles, B. A., and Canter, R. J. (1983). The Prevalence and Incidence of Delinquent Behavior: 1976–1980, Behavioral Research Institute, Boulder, CO.
  2. Hirschi, T., Hindelang, M. J., and Weis, J. G. (1980). The status of self-report measures. In Klein, M. W., and Teilman, K. S. (eds.), Handbook of Criminal Justice Evaluation, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA, pp. 473–488.
  3. Jöreskog, K. G., and Sörbom, D. (1989). LISREL 7 User's Reference Guide, Scientific Software International, Chicago.
  4. Maynard, R. A. (ed.) (1997). Kids Having Kids, Urban Institute Press, Washington, DC.
  5. Moffitt, T. E., Silva, P. A., Lynam, D. R., and Henry, B. (1994). Self-reported delinquency at age 18: New Zealand's Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study. In Jungertas, J., Terlouw, G. J., and Kelin, M. W. (eds.), Delinquent Behavior Among Young People in the Western World, Kugler, Amsterdam, pp. 354–369.
  6. Plomin, R., DeFries, J. C., McClearn, G. E., and Rutter, M. (1997). Behavioral Genetics, 3rd ed., W. H. Freeman, New York.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 201–275 of 275

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Krueger, R. F., Moffitt, T. E., Caspi, A., Bleske, A., & Silva, P. A.
Affiliations
  • University of Wisconsin–Madison (US)
  • University of London (GB)
  • University of Otago (NZ)
Corresponding author
  • Moffitt, Terrie E.
  • Caspi, Avshalom
ORCID
Venue
Behavior Genetics
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
1998-05
Volume
28
Issue
3
Pages
173-186
ISSN
  • 0001-8244 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-3297
DOI
10.1023/a:1021419013124
OpenAlex
W1771335242
Cited by
275
References
62
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 8 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 8 · 2016: 19 · 2015: 18 · 2014: 18 · 2013: 18 · 2012: 17
FWCI
29.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • Behavior Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Institute of Mental Health (MH-49414, MH 45070, R01MH045070)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Crime Patterns and Interventions
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Ecology, Evolution, Behavior and Systematics › Animal Behavior and Reproduction
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Child and Adolescent Psychosocial and Emotional Development
Keywords
assortative mating, antisocial behavior, couples, social sanctions, personality traits, family studies, developmental trajectories
MeSH terms
Adult, Antisocial Personality Disorder, Choice Behavior, Crime, Cross-Sectional Studies, Factor Analysis, Statistical, Female, Health Surveys, Humans, Male, Models, Genetic, Netherlands, Personality, Sexual Partners, Social Behavior, Cohort Studies, Multivariate Analysis, Likelihood Functions, Least-Squares Analysis

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review