Due to a coding error in the analyses, presented estimates on confounding effects of intelligence in one paragraph in the results section of Frøyland and von Soest (2020) were incorrect. We apologize for the error and any problem it may have caused.

The original paragraph was:

For two of the five outcomes, intelligence was a significant confounder in the relationship between adolescent boys' physical fighting and adult outcomes. Regarding violent crime, the confounder effect of intelligence was estimated to –0.04 (p = .030; 95% CI [–0.08; –0.01]). This is equal to 11.6% of the total estimated effect. Labor market marginalization showed a similar coefficient, with a confounder effect of –0.03 (p = .027; 95% CI [–0.07; –0.01]), equaling to 8.1% of the total estimated effect. Hence, individual differences in intelligence accounted for some part of the negative association of boys' physical fighting with adult life outcomes. Intelligence was not a significant confounder for being charged with a crime (confounder effect = –0.01; p = .053; 95% CI [–0.03; 0.00]), education level (0.00; p = .073; 95% CI [0.00; 0.01]), and income (–0.01; p = .190; 95% CI [–0.02; 0.00]).

The corrected paragraph is:

For four of the five outcomes, intelligence was a significant confounder in the relationship between adolescent boys' physical fighting and adult outcomes. Regarding being charged with a crime, the confounder effect of intelligence was estimated to 0.09 (p = .008; 95% CI [0.04; 0.17]). This is equal to 16.2% of the total estimated effect. The confounder effect for violent crime was calculated to 0.10 (p = .041; 95% CI [0.03–0.22], equaling to 6.6% of the total estimated effect. For labor market marginalization, intelligence induced a confounder effect of 0.13 (p = .017; 95% CI [0.05; 0.26]), equaling to 9.4% of the total estimated effect. For the obtained education level, the confounding effect of intelligence was estimated to –0.07 (p = .002; 95% CI [–0.11; –0.03]), equaling 28.4% of the total effect. Intelligence was not a confounder in the relationship between adolescent physical fighting and income in young adulthood.

As a result of these corrections in the results, one sentence in the discussion section is also incorrect.

The original sentence was:

However, the confounder effects were found for only two of the five included outcomes and were rather small (8%–12% of the total effect), thereby indicating that intelligence may be one of a multitude of confounders of the relationship between adolescent boys' physical fighting and future life outcomes.

The correct sentence is:

The confounder effects were found for four of the five included outcomes but accounted only for parts of the observed associations (7%–28% of the total effect), thereby indicating that intelligence may be one of a multitude of confounders of the relationship between adolescent boys' physical fighting and future life outcomes.

We wish to emphasize that the fundamental interpretation of the study results has not changed and that all other figures reported in the text and tables are correct.

由于分析中的编码错误，Frøyland 和 von Soest（2020 年）的结果部分中的一段中对智力混杂影响的估计是不正确的。对于错误及其可能引起的任何问题，我们深表歉意。

原来的段落是：

对于五个结果中的两个，智力是青春期男孩的身体战斗与成人结果之间关系的重要混杂因素。关于暴力犯罪，智力的混杂效应估计为 –0.04（p  = .030；95% CI [–0.08；–0.01]）。这相当于总估计效果的 11.6%。劳动力市场边缘化显示出类似的系数，混杂效应为 –0.03（p  = .027；95% CI [–0.07；–0.01]），等于总估计效应的 8.1%。因此，智力的个体差异在一定程度上解释了男孩的身体搏斗与成年生活结果之间的负相关。智力不是被指控犯罪的重要混杂因素（混杂效应 = –0.01；p = .053; 95% 置信区间 [–0.03; 0.00]）、教育水平（0.00；p  = .073；95% CI [0.00；0.01]）和收入（–0.01；p  = .190；95% CI [–0.02；0.00]）。

更正后的段落是：

对于五个结果中的四个，智力是青春期男孩身体搏斗与成人结果之间关系的重要混杂因素。关于被指控犯罪，情报的混杂效应估计为 0.09 ( p  = .008; 95% CI [0.04; 0.17])。这相当于总估计效果的 16.2%。暴力犯罪的混杂效应计算为 0.10 ( p  = .041; 95% CI [0.03–0.22]，相当于总估计效应的 6.6%。对于劳动力市场边缘化，智力引起的混杂效应为 0.13 ( p  = .017; 95% CI [0.05; 0.26])，等于总估计效应的 9.4%。对于所获得的教育水平，智力的混杂效应估计为 –0.07 ( p = .002; 95% 置信区间 [–0.11; –0.03])，相当于总效果的 28.4%。智力不是青少年身体搏斗与青年时期收入之间关系的混杂因素。

由于结果中的这些更正，讨论部分中的一个句子也是不正确的。

原来的句子是：

然而，在五个包含的结果中只发现了两个混杂效应，而且相当小（占总效应的 8%–12%），从而表明智力可能是青春期男孩之间关系的众多混杂因素之一。身体战斗和未来的生活结果。

正确的句子是：

五个纳入结果中的四个发现了混杂效应，但仅占观察到的关联的一部分（总效应的 7%–28%），从而表明智力可能是青少年之间关系的众多混杂因素之一。男孩的身体战斗和未来的生活结果。

我们要强调的是，对研究结果的基本解释没有改变，文本和表格中报告的所有其他数字都是正确的。