PDA

View Full Version : Y haplogroups and aggressive behavior in a Pakistani ethnic group



paoloferrari
07-17-2017, 10:41 AM
Y haplogroups and aggressive behavior in a Pakistani ethnic group

https://www.academia.edu/4481882/Y_haplogroups_and_aggressive_behavior_in_a_Pakista ni_ethnic_group?auto=download

"Studies show that personality dimensions such as aggression are influenced by genetic factors and that allelic variants located on the Y chromosome influence such behavior. We investigated polymorphisms on the male-specific region of the human Y chromosome in 156 unrelated males from the same ethnic background, who were administered the Punjabi translation of the Buss and Perry Aggression Questionnaire that measures four aspects that constitute aggressive behavior, i.e. physical aggression, verbal aggression, anger, and hostility. A value of .85 for Cronbach’s coefficient a indicates considerable internal consistency and suggests that the psychometric properties of the aggression questionnaire can be adapted for the Pakistani population. A mean score7SD of 69.70719.95 was obtained for the questionnaire. Each individual was genotyped following a phylogenetic hierarchical approach to define evolutionary Y haplogroups. Five Y haplogroups that are commonly found in Eurasia and Pakistan comprised 87% (n5136) of the population sample, with one haplogroup, R1a1, constituting 55% of the sampled population. A comparison of the total and four subscale mean scores across the five common Y haplogroups that were present at a frequency Z3% in this ethnic group revealed no overall significant differences. However, effect-size comparisons allowed us to detect an association of the haplogroups R2 (Cohen’s d statistic5.448–.732) and R1a1 (d5.107–.448) with lower self-reported aggression mean scores in this population. Aggr. Behav. 34:1–7, 2008. r 2008 Wiley-Liss, Inc"

Afshar
07-17-2017, 01:04 PM
Sounds weird, until you start googling angry pakistani.

Rethel
07-17-2017, 02:18 PM
I don't get it. So what? R1a1 and R2 are NOT agressive?

So which hg are agressive? All rest?

A Norfolk L-M20
07-17-2017, 03:31 PM
... and does that include L? Grrrrr! It better had or else!

Megalophias
07-17-2017, 03:41 PM
R1a (and R2) are indeed the sissies here, the meanest are J2a (L is second place).

As much as I'd like to spend the whole thread trolling, psychology replication crisis ho! I give this study ~zero credence.

Erik
07-17-2017, 03:44 PM
R1a (and R2) are indeed the sissies here, the meanest are J2a (L is second place).

As much as I'd like to spend the whole thread trolling, psychology replication crisis ho! I give this study ~zero credence.

I'm J2a, and I agree with this statement.

DMXX
07-17-2017, 03:50 PM
The Introduction of the paper, ironically, dismisses whatever statistical conclusions they may have reached:



Males generally tend to be more aggressive thanfemales, and androgens are often blamed for this phenomenon. It was also suggested that the male-specific gene, SRY, located on the human Y chromosome contributed to aggressive behavior, but recent studies have shown that this effect is very indirect [Lovell-Badge, 2005]


We now know there are far more likely genetic polymorphisms for aggression than the SRY region, such as the MAOA gene (which is ironically located in the X Chromosome).

I suspect this paper fell victim from the outset to the supposition that whatever makes men "men" must be responsible", given, as the authors state:



Males generally tend to be more aggressive than females, and androgens are often blamed for this phenomenon.


Even the connection between total testosterone levels and aggression doesn't seem to exist; higher testosterone levels instead correlate with assertiveness (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8885586), not aggression.



R1a (and R2) are indeed the sissies here. ...


This is my arsenal and I'm not afraid to use it! (https://ae01.alicdn.com/kf/HTB1bNiwIXXXXXceXVXXq6xXFXXXI/30cm-font-b-hello-b-font-font-b-kitty-b-font-plush-toys-for-children-kids.jpg)

nuplix
07-17-2017, 05:16 PM
Pheww ... I am less aggressive. :biggrin1:

Rethel
07-17-2017, 05:57 PM
So, if this is true, that R1 and R2 have such funny feature,
it can be an additional argument for indoeuropeanness of R2.
Some trace, but if IEness would be confirmed, it wouldn't
be so strange, that they have the same ability...

MikeWhalen
07-17-2017, 06:27 PM
I guess that leaves us Celic R1b's the lambs of the Y groups?

Baaaaaaaaa
:)

Mike

DMXX
07-17-2017, 06:33 PM
So, if this is true, that R1 and R2 have such funny feature,
it can be an additional argument for indoeuropeanness of R2.
Some trace, but if IEness would be confirmed, it wouldn't
be so strange, that they have the same ability...

This study's findings are likely a statistical fluke secondary to their chance sampling. Repeat the study again with a different cohort of Pakistani men and, odds are, you'll see different results.

As for Indo-Europeans and R2a... Based on distribution, subclade diversity and parahaplogroups, we could only really attribute specific R2a subclades with specific Indo-Iranian migration events in a hypothetical best case scenario. Not a single West Eurasian Bronze Age steppe sample has yielded anything outside of R1b, R1a, I2 and Q.

There's some theoretical space for a wayward R2*-M479 individual to have been involved in the Indo-Europeanisation of the Pontic-Caspian steppes. Modern R2*-M479 is distributed very lightly across West Eurasia, with most of it being to the west (north Italy, Spain, Portugal), south (north Caucasus) and southeast (north Pakistan) of the P-C steppes. If that was so, they clearly weren't a successful branch (given R1a and R1b's relative demographic success from the EMBA onwards).

Megalophias
07-17-2017, 06:51 PM
We already know R1a and R2 are related, some dubious supposed shared trait does not add anything to that, which is established on very much firmer grounds. So no, it does not support Indo-Europeanness or otherwise.

Rethel
07-17-2017, 06:58 PM
Q is supposedly also related but do not share the same feature.

About IEness of R2 - it cannot be said, they yes or no.
Data from the east Europe is to small to say anything,
especially, that at the time of living in Europe it was
probably very small clan, if not a family. As for today,
it is not known, possible, but not known.

Megalophias
07-17-2017, 07:23 PM
Q is supposedly also related but do not share the same feature.
Q was not even tested. Believe whatever nonsense you like, but at least apply basic logic.

Rethel
07-17-2017, 08:13 PM
Q was not even tested.

How do you know, it was not tested, if there is only say about these to particularly.


Believe whatever nonsense you like, but at least apply basic logic.

Basic logic is this, that such feature can be influenced by
similar circumctanes - so came from commone source.

Saetro
07-17-2017, 08:16 PM
This sort of correlation (except with various diseases) comes out frequently with mtDNA.
When more people are tested, the correlation goes away.
I bet, in a group of the size they tested, they could have found some other random correlation.
You could probably compare Y haplogroup with car choice and get a pseudo-correlation.
Surprisingly, the editors and reviewers who allowed these things have not been named and shamed.

Gandhara
07-17-2017, 10:02 PM
This sort of correlation (except with various diseases) comes out frequently with mtDNA.
When more people are tested, the correlation goes away.
I bet, in a group of the size they tested, they could have found some other random correlation.
You could probably compare Y haplogroup with car choice and get a pseudo-correlation.
Surprisingly, the editors and reviewers who allowed these things have not been named and shamed.

You nailed it perfectly, but the problem is that people start believing such stories and coorelations. I may go as far as saying that such studies are basically pseudoscience.

Táltos
07-18-2017, 02:27 PM
Q was not even tested. Believe whatever nonsense you like, but at least apply basic logic.

Well just for fun of course.... pretty aggressive Q1b here.. :eek::P
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3581-Famous-Q1b

J. Robert Oppenheimer (1904-1967) belonged to haplogroup Q1b. Oppenheimer played a major role in the Manhattan Project and is considered one of the fathers of the atomic bomb.

Megalophias
07-18-2017, 04:55 PM
Well just for fun of course.... pretty aggressive Q1b here.. :eek::P
http://www.anthrogenica.com/showthread.php?3581-Famous-Q1b
Pffft, no one has ever been killed by that weapon. :P Well, not on purpose at least.

Edit: whoops, was thinking of H-bomb, that was Teller. Nevermind.