The Mediating Role of Heart Rate on the Social Adversity-Antisocial Behavior Relationship

Abstract

Objectives: Tests the hypothesis that the social adversity-antisocial behavior relationship is partly mediated by a biological mechanism, low heart rate. Method: 18 indicators of social adversity and heart rate measured at rest and in anticipation of a speech stressor were assessed alongside nine measures of antisocial behavior including delinquency (Youth Self-Report [YSR] and Child Behavior Checklist [CBCL]), conduct disorder (Conduct Disorder and Oppositional Defiant Disorder Questionnaire), and child psychopathy (Antisocial Process Screening Device [APSD]) in a community sample of 388 children aged 11 to 12 years. PROCESS was used to test mediation models. Results: Low heart rate was a partial mediator of the adversity-antisocial behavior relationship, explaining 20.35 percent and 15.40 percent of the effect of social adversity on delinquency and overall antisocial behavior, respectively. Conclusions: Findings are, to the authors’ knowledge, one of the first to establish any biological risk factor as a mediator of the social adversity-antisocial behavior relationship and suggest that social processes alter autonomic functioning in a way to predispose to antisocial behavior. While not definitive, results give rise to a social neurocriminology theory that argues that the social environment influences biological risk factors in a way to predispose to antisocial and criminal behavior.

Social Adversity and Antisocial Behavior: Mediating Effects of Autonomic Nervous System Activity

“…First, given that both social adversity and antisocial behaviors have been associated with low resting HR, it was predicted that the connection between social adversity and antisocial behaviors could be partially explained by reduced resting HR. To our knowledge, only one study has investigated the mediating effects of HR on social adversity and facets of criminality (Choy et al 2015). The authors assessed various aspects of antisocial behavior in a community sample of children 11–12 years old who participated in a stress task in which they were asked to give a 4-min speech following a 2-min “preparation phase.” Reduced HR during stress but not resting HR was found to mediate the relationship between social adversity and antisocial behavior (Choy et al 2015).…”

“…Propagation of such behavior is often reinforced in high crime areas, representing a counter-culture attitude that supports aggressive behavior and mistrust of societal rules (Ingoldsby et al 2006; Simons et al 2012). Social neuroscience perspectives on antisocial behavior and risk-taking have begun to investigate how neurobiological processes influence the relationship between early-life exposure to social adversity and persistent behavioral deficits that may result in future criminal offending (Choy et al 2015). …”

The Role of Heart Rate Levels in the Intergenerational Transmission of Crime

“…Young children from broken homes, for example, have lower resting heart rates [32], and experiencing stress such as maternal separation or physical abuse at young age could also make children more resistant to later life stress [26]. Further support for this position has been provided by Choy et al [41] who documented in a mediation model that social adversity (including parental crime) predisposed to low heart rate which in turn was associated with delinquency. We therefore expect that: Hypothesis 3.…”

The Need to Incorporate Autonomic Arousal in Developmental and Life-Course Research and Theories

“…1. Although some empirical support for the proposed model has been documented [38], one study found that the relationship between resting heart rate and antisocial behavior in children was almost entirely explained by genetic influences [3]. With the dearth of replicated studies, additional research on autonomic arousal can reveal whether findings that challenge the model exist and thus, shed light on this important issue raised in DLC criminology.…”

“…For example, the social neurocriminology perspective proposes that the social environment influences biological functions, in part, to predispose to antisocial and criminal behavior [38]. In another model, van Goozen et al [140] proposed that family Fig.…”