© 2009

I chose the topic warfare and aggression, which relate to each other in that to be successful at war, you must act aggressively, vice versa when you are aggressive you may be more likely to go to war to regain peace at a quicker pace. My independent variables are religion, culture and environment. People of different religions believe in different ideals, which can make them more radical towards people of opposing ideals. Also, people of different cultures may believe that their way is better than another’s based on their ideals of what is right and wrong. Environmentally individuals do things to get what they need out of other environments due to lack of resources or lack of what they need in their own environment.

Countries are more prone to warfare if they are nations that have a lot of male segregation, male dominance, violence and fighting. (Originally I was thinking about cultural influences and environmental causes, but now I am focusing on more specific things.)

 DepVar  693. Frequency of Intercommunity Armed Conflict  IndVar  679. Warfare or Fighting  664. Ideology of Male Toughness  665. Male Segregation: One or more places where males congregate alone, or males occupy a separate part of the household, or there is sharp ceremonial segregation of the sexes.

 666. Moderate or Frequent Interpersonal Violence  667. Rape: Incidents reports, or thought of as means of punishment women, or part of ceremony. <-- DRW not a candidate for causation in any case although it is not a significant predictor.  669. Male Aggression  670. Composite of Male Dominance

> bbb coef Fstat ddf pvalue VIF (Intercept) NA fyll fydd popdens <--negative > r2 R2:final model R2:IV(distance) R2:IV(language) > ccc Fstat df pvalue RESET Wald on restrs NCV SWnormal lagll lagdd

 Surprisingly without adding any of my independent variables, a few variables came up as significant  156. Density of Population  208. Mode of Marriage (bride price)

 None of my added IndVars came up as significant.

 Since the dependent variable is based on intercommunity warfare, population density made sense as a independent variable, but after looking at which parts of the variable were significant, I realized that when the community was smaller, there was more warfare, which surprised me since I thought a denser population would cause more warfare.  DRW: might be that the larger societies have periods of war and peace but it is the peaceful periods on which ethnographic portraits of the “culture” are based, an interesting bias?

 After seeing that my depvar only pertained to intercommunity warfare, I realized why my indvars did not work.  I changed my depvar to variable 679: Warfare or Fighting  Again my original indvars did not turn out to be significant  The significant variable is aggressive late boys (v300)

> bbb coef Fstat ddf pvalue VIF (Intercept) NA pigs milk popdens agrlateboy <--significant war > r2 R2:final model R2:IV(distance) R2:IV(language) > ccc Fstat df pvalue RESET Wald on restrs NCV SWnormal lagll lagdd

 Sanday, author of v679, says when warfare is frequent or epidemic, rape is more likely the be present.  She also describes sexually assaulting enemy women during warfare as another expression of male aggression.

 I am going to compare the differences in warfare as a whole with intercommunity warfare as relating to population density.  DRW: There are variables on internal war (intracommunity), intercommunity war within a society and external war (intersocietal), and many measures of violence, but it is not clear what you mean by “warfare as a whole” – is it external war at the intersocietal level?