A recent Binghamton University study reveals that peer victimization in high school and middle school can be used as an indicator of sexual behavior in college students.

The study was conducted by Andrew Gallup, a second year graduate student looking to get his Ph.D. in ecology, evolution and behavioral sciences; Daniel O’Brien, a third year Ph.D. student; David Sloan Wilson, a biological anthropology professor; and Daniel White, a professor from the University at Albany.

According to Gallup, males who were victimized during adolescence reported fewer sexual partners per year, while females who were victimized reported more sexual partners and were more likely to have sex at an earlier age. The researchers viewed results from an evolutionary perspective, with aggression viewed as a way to compete for reproductive opportunities.

“What’s driving aggression in adolescence is aggressive strategies to try and obtain more sexual partners,” Gallup said. “As a way to demean and diminish the reputations of others to make yourself look better in the opposite sex.”

While reproductive competition is not the only reason for aggression and victimization, Gallup’s data suggests it accounts for a significant amount of the variance.

The study began in fall 2007, anonymously surveying 65 male and 47 female undergraduate students with the majority of both males and females reported being victimized by the same sex. Students who reported being indirectly victimized — for example teased, isolated, excluded or demeaned — showed a correlation with sexual behavior, while physical victimization had no effect.

“There were strong correlations between victimization and sexual behavior, but what’s interesting is that there were inverse relationships between the sexes,” Gallup said. “So males who were routinely victimized had less sexual opportunities than the rest of their peers, but females had a heightened sexual activity.”

Previous psychological studies have indicated that when looking for a mate, females put more importance on a male’s status, while males simply prefer physical attractiveness. Gallup hypothesized that victimization results in lowering status and reputation in males, therefore explaining the decrease in sexual partners. For example, if a boy is not invited to a party, this both reduces his social stature and diminishes opportunities for mating.

“Males operate on a dominant social hierarchy system and men with higher status are able to be more aggressive with men with lower status,” Gallup said. “Someone who is victimized or teased is at a lower end of the hierarchy.”

Gallup also hypothesizes that his results correlate with other studies indicating that females who are attractive during middle school become targets by other females out of resentment and in an attempt to bring down their status. However, since males put no precedence on status, it does not affect their likelihood to engage in sexual activity or their appeal to males.

“I don’t doubt that victimization reduces female status, in fact it probably does, but status is not important for males when choosing mates,” Gallup said. “Males put a precedence on physical features, and status is one of the lowest factors when choosing a mate.”

Gallup said he believes if a girl is being picked on for being attractive, it may diminish her status with other females, but it would not affect her interaction with males. Because the girl is still receiving attention from males in spite of her victimization, it makes other girls more envious of her and causes her to be victimized even more.

Another explanation is that females who are victimized have lower self-esteem and a reduced self-image. Both could result in females being more likely to engage in sexual activity because they are more susceptible to male coercion. Because attractiveness was not measured, Gallup said, future studies are being aimed at determining individual self-esteem and perceived physical attractiveness levels.