Canadian scientists investigated photos of pro and varsity hockey players, measuring how wide and long their faces were. They found the wider that faces looked, the more aggressive players were, as measured by the number of penalty minutes they accrued, which are handed out for aggressive behavior.
I have so many questions. And though comment almost seems superfluous, I do invite you to try anyway.
Posts
4 comments:
I'm not sure that measuring penalty mins is an accurate indicator of aggression (too many other variables come into play with penalties), but this isn't the first time I've heard of physical features being used as an indicator of aggression.
As I understand it, aggression comes from elevated testosterone levels, and those testosterone levels also affect certain physical characteristics. So, in theory you could look at those features (like face width/length) and find a correlation with aggression.
A while ago I came across an article that described some research conducted on the correlation between men’s finger lengths (I think it was if the guy’s ring and middle fingers were close to the same length, or something like that) and the prevalence of domestic violence (i.e. was the guy a wife beater). It sounds absurd, but they found a strong correlation, at least in the preliminary research, and they figured it was due to the testosterone connection.
Anyway, I’m not saying all that is valid or anything (I’m no scientist), just saying that I read an article about it a couple months ago.
Back to lurking in the blogosphere...
I'm de-lurking again. My last comment has been bugging me because I think I made it sound like I agreed with the hockey-face study. In fact, I think it's making way too much of what might be, at best, an indirect connection. Maybe the testosterone link is really there, but maybe not. Correlation isn't causation.
As someone used to tell me: 99% of cancer patients have two eyes. Doesn't mean that having two eyes causes cancer.
Now back to lurking again (and waiting for hockey to start again so I can stop thinking so dang much).
@ Weeza:
Pleasure to have you de-lurk here! I agree with you about the study, it seems a bit... off. I just thought it was hilarious that out of all the similar studies, these scientists chose hockey players.
By the way, based on your CinO survey responses, I think you may be my long-lost twin. Have you been reading the season 8 comic books?
@ Long lost twin (lol):
I bought the Buffy comic books, but haven't read them yet. Have you read them, and are they good?
I'm waiting until I finish re-watching the entire TV series before reading them. I'm motoring through the show to make sure I finish it before the hockey season starts. (Priorities!) I'm currently near the end of season 4 and watching 2-3 episodes most nights.
Then I have to find a way to watch the Angel DVDs during the hockey season. It'll be a challenge but I think I'm up to it, lol.
Hey, I love your blog by the way. It strikes me as the kind of blog I'd keep if I kept a hockey blog (which I've thought about but can't think of enough content to keep it fresh). If you ever want a co-blogger, let me know.
Post a Comment