Sex differences in aggression: Origins and implications for sexual integration of combat forces

Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):270-271 (2009)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

Sex differences in aggressive and risk-taking behaviors have practical implications for sexual integration of military combat units. The social-role theory implies that female soldiers will adapt to their role and display the same aggressive and risk-taking propensities as their male comrades. If sex differences reflect evolved propensities, however, adoption of the soldier's role is unlikely to eliminate those differences

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 90,616

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Some reflections on sex differences in aggression and violence.Stephen C. Maxson - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (2):232-233.
Does sexual selection explain human sex differences in aggression?John Archer - 2009 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):249-266.
Theories of male and female aggression.Kirsti M. J. Lagerspetz - 1999 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22 (2):229-230.
What the differences are: Reply to Hardcastle.John Tienson - 1997 - Philosophical Psychology 10 (3):385 – 389.
Primacy of organising effects of testosterone.Anne Campbell, Steven Muncer & Josie Odber - 1998 - Behavioral and Brain Sciences 21 (3):365-365.

Analytics

Added to PP
2013-10-27

Downloads
15 (#809,217)

6 months
2 (#668,348)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Kingsley Richard Browne
Wayne State University

Citations of this work

No citations found.

Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references