Physiognomy predicts criminality

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2011.1193

Another time judging appearances turns out to be true.

Bad to the bone: facial structure predicts unethical behaviour

Researchers spanning many scientific domains, including primatology, evolutionary biology and psychology, have sought to establish an evolutionary basis for morality. While researchers have identified social and cognitive adaptations that support ethical behaviour, a consensus has emerged that genetically determined physical traits are not reliable signals of unethical intentions or actions. Challenging this view, we show that genetically determined physical traits can serve as reliable predictors of unethical behaviour if they are also associated with positive signals in intersex and intrasex selection. Specifically, we identify a key physical attribute, the facial width-to-height ratio, which predicts unethical behaviour in men. Across two studies, we demonstrate that men with wider faces (relative to facial height) are more likely to explicitly deceive their counterparts in a negotiation, and are more willing to cheat in order to increase their financial gain. Importantly, we provide evidence that the link between facial metrics and unethical behaviour is mediated by a psychological sense of power. Our results demonstrate that static physical attributes can indeed serve as reliable cues of immoral action, and provide additional support for the view that evolutionary forces shape ethical judgement and behaviour.

So Chad is a mindset?

Wait, is looksmaxing real? Like would surgery give you the mindset? Maybe?

Maybe this is why modern women prefer softer features?

The facial WHR is a sexually dimorphic trait (with men having larger ratios than women) that is independent of body size and is argued to have evolutionary origins [11]. Consistent with the idea that evolutionary pressures account for this dimorphism, intrasex differences in facial WHRs have been linked to aggression in men, with greater facial WHRs associated with more aggressive behaviour [10,12]. For instance, men with greater facial WHRs are more likely to retaliate to perceived slights by others [10] and are more likely to act in their own self-interest, even if it means violating another’s trust [13].

Less likely to murder us.

I love when guys try to tell women what to fancy, it’s like telling them to stop liking tits. The buff look reads homo at best, dangerous at worst. Stop telling men it’s what women want. Not fat, not veiny. It isn’t hard.

Paper: Methods and Assumptions of Research in Behavioral Genetics

Click to access Methods%20in%20Behavior%20Genetics.pdf

Mendelian is…. outdated. Dominant/recessive doesn’t work on the level of behavioural traits we observe, for the same reason there isn’t a “gene for X” as the papers declare, the interactions alone require a great deal of processing power and the outcomes will become clear over the coming decades.
But the gist in this is good.

Criminals are genetically predisposed but triggered

http://medicalxpress.com/news/2014-06-genes-adversity-linked-crime-incarcerated.html

Doesn’t mention which groups. I wonder why.

“The study is the first in a series that will examine contributions of genetic and environmental variations to . Published in Psychiatric Genetics, this study examines the role of monoamine oxidase A (MAOA), which has been linked to aggression, violence, and various types of childhood adversity in prior research. The study found MAOA genotype interacted with childhood adversity to predict self-reported criminal behavior and arrest rates for both property and .

“These findings indicate that gene-by-environment interactions are important for understanding variation in crime amongst populations with high base rates of criminal activity,” said Todd Armstrong, principal investigator of the study.”

Why do I have a feeling Psychiatric Genetics is going to become a bigger publication over time…?