7 year old rampage at Zoo

Well, to be honest, this is pretty well established and not at all controversial in the field of child psychology. I actually don’t give a shit if you believe it or not. I’m not looking for a debate.

You say this as if occurring earlier would mean that it was less of a predictor of later antisocial behavior. Significant early antisocial behavior is more predictive of persisting antisocial behavior than antisocial behavior with an onset in adolescence. Look into the literature, particularly the work of Rolf Loeber, Tammy Moffitt, and of course the DSM distinction between childhood onset and adolescent onset CD. Tammy Moffitt’s work on life course persistent versus adolescent limited antisocial behavior is pretty well-established too, including a study showing genetic underpinnings for the life-course persistent type of antisocial behavior.

Google Scholar shows many, many studies of the relationship between animal cruelty and later antisociality. You could not have read through the findings and drawn the limited conclusion you just did. However, I’ve culled from PsychInfo a set of references that describe the links between animal cruelty and later antisocial behavior:

Lahey, Benjamin B; Waldman, Irwin D. Personality dispositions and the development of violence and conduct problems. [References]. [Book; Edited Book] Flannery, Daniel J (Ed); Vazsonyi, Alexander T (Ed); Waldman, Irwin D (Ed). (2007). The Cambridge handbook of violent behavior and aggression. (pp. 260-287). New York, NY, US: Cambridge University Press.

Roberts, Kim. Interlocking oppressions: The nature of cruelty to nonhuman animals and its relationship to violence toward humans. [References]. [Book; Edited Book] Waldau, Paul (Ed); Patton, Kimberley (Ed). (2006). A communion of subjects: Animals in religion, science, and ethics. (pp. 605-615). xxxi, 686 pp. New York, NY, US: Columbia University Press.

Petersen, Marie Louise; Farrington, David P. Cruelty to animals and violence to people. [References]. [Journal; Peer Reviewed Journal] Victims & Offenders. Vol 2(1) Jan 2007, 21-43.

Waldman, Irwin D; Singh, Amber L; Lahey, Benjamin B. Dispositional Dimensions and the Causal Structure of Child and Adolescent Conduct Problems. [References]. [Book; Edited Book] Krueger, Robert F (Ed); Tackett, Jennifer L (Ed). (2006). Personality and psychopathology. (pp. 112-152). xii, 402 pp. New York, NY, US: Guilford Press.

Ascione, Frank R. Children who are cruel to animals: A review of research and implications for developmental psychopathology. [Journal; Peer Reviewed Journal] Anthrozoos. Vol 6(4) 1993, 226-247.b

Felthous, Alan R; Kellert, Stephen R. Childhood cruelty to animals and later aggression against people: A review. [Journal; Peer Reviewed Journal] American Journal of Psychiatry. Vol 144(6) Jun 1987, 710-717.

A neutral source? What the fuck do you think the literature referenced in Google Scholar was, a pro-animal cruelty labeling lobby? Is there such a thing? I don’t know what your game is here, but again, I really don’t care what you believe about animal cruelty. The fact is that it is well established as an indicator of significant antisocial behavior in numerous empirical works.

Relatedly, Frick’s work on callous unemotional behavior and Lynam’s work on childhood psychopathy show how these traits more generally are strong predictors of later aggression, violence and serious delinquency.

I don’t know what is going on for the specific child in the story. I’m only providing you with what this kind of behavior means in general in terms of the development and course of antisocial behavior. Like it or not, I really don’t care. I’m not interested in a debate on the matter.

Ask for some information and you spit this garbage at me. Say, did you happen to torture puppies as a kid?

EDIT: on edit: I’m referring to the attitude, not the information. It was helpful, but are those books or articles that I can find online? I’m not so invested in the subject that I can afford to purchase books on it.

After demanding “Cite?”, you gave a cursory and dismissive look at information readily available to you online, and suggested that it was biased in some fashion. You’re being intentionally obtuse and not acting in the fashion of someone interested in understanding.

You’re not at all invested in the subject. Take it or leave it. I really don’t care if you believe it or not. The world of child psychology will go on spinning on its axis in the morning.

Some CCTV stills of the incident: http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/gallery/0,22056,5034915-5010140,00.html

Jesus you’re hostile. Where have I stated any kind of position on this? FYI, I was seriously interested in learning about this argument (since I’ve heard of it before), but I’m not well-versed in psychology (or it’s research) at all. Is this how you always react to people looking for easy-to-access information about what I’m supposing is your field? Because if so, maybe you’re the one who needs counseling.

No, that’s how I react to people who throw out “Cite?” and then call the general literature biased. If you didn’t mean to be a dick, I apologize. Other than that, good luck in your efforts to educate yourself.

Are you referring to my request that the source be neutral? Because that’s a really tiny platform you’re standing on if so. Is it unfair for me to ask for a neutral source? To be specific, I just didn’t want someone to post a non-peer reviewed source. Because when I googled the subject for general matches, I did get some results that were heavy animal sympathy. Which isn’t a negative thing, but I did want something truly neutral.

Anyway, you seem like you want to drop this, so I am, too. Just keep in mind in the future that there are authentically curious people out there without the academic background to know any better about whatever subject you happen to get happy over.

Deal.

I missed the excellent pun, wondering why all the reptile hate. Are not a puppy and a gecko equal in the eyes of (random chance/impersonal forces/pangenitor/Fatheralmighty/YHVH) God?

Pure mamallian chauvenism.
Someone mentioned bullfighting, and posited that if you go to see the suffering of the bull, you are crazy/disturbed/immoral.

What if you go to the bullfight to see the skill of the matador, the pretty costumes, be with a crowd, and because the stadium has the cheapest tacos in town?

Is that OK?

Plus, they eat the bull, usually, don’t they.
If anyone is to kill me, please arm me with a club, and turn me loose on your private island to hunt me down at your leisure.

It’s the most dangerous games that are the most fun.

‘When love is play for mortal stakes’, and all that.