Skip to main content
Open Book Publishers

23. Bateman’s Principles and the Study of Evolutionary Demography

Chapter of: Human Evolutionary Demography(pp. 551–574)

Export Metadata

  • ONIX 3.0
    • Thoth
    • Project MUSE
      Cannot generate record: No BIC or BISAC subject code
    • OAPEN
    • JSTOR
      Cannot generate record: No BISAC subject code
    • Google Books
      Cannot generate record: No BIC, BISAC or LCC subject code
    • OverDrive
      Cannot generate record: No priced EPUB or PDF URL
  • ONIX 2.1
  • CSV
  • JSON
  • OCLC KBART
  • BibTeX
  • CrossRef DOI deposit
    Cannot generate record: This work does not have any ISBNs
  • MARC 21 Record
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
  • MARC 21 Markup
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
  • MARC 21 XML
    Cannot generate record: MARC records are not available for chapters
Metadata
Title23. Bateman’s Principles and the Study of Evolutionary Demography
ContributorMonique Borgerhoff Mulder(author)
DOIhttps://doi.org/10.11647/obp.0251.23
Landing pagehttps://www.openbookpublishers.com/books/10.11647/obp.0251/chapters/10.11647/obp.0251.23
Licensehttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
CopyrightMonique Borgerhoff Mulder
PublisherOpen Book Publishers
Published on2024-06-14
Long abstractOver the last 40 years, investigators have been applying ideas from the body of theory known as sexual selection to the behaviour of humans, breaking exciting new interdisciplinary ground. The Darwin-Bateman Paradigm has been central to this endeavor, essentially the idea that males are more competitive over mates than are females, and that mating success affects reproductive success more strongly in males than in females. Less known among social scientists is the fact that biologists continue a vigorous debate over the validity of this paradigm. In this chapter I take social scientists into some of these issues, to see how and why the study of the operation of sexual selection on males and females has changed as a result of clearer theory and better methods. The simple takeaway message is that in many species gender roles are much less distinct than original investigations of the Darwin-Bateman paradigm might suggest. Applying some of the emerging insights to humans, we find a surprisingly limited general understanding about the extent and patterning of variability in reproductive success in either sex. Furthermore, success in the marriage or mating pool is associated with a range of reproductive outcomes, both positive and negative, for men and women. A new methodological approach is proposed for studying the effects of mating success on reproductive success which may help to sort through some of the extensive variation in our species. More generally, the chapter argues that an updated understanding of Bateman’s work might serve to guide evolutionary demographers today, just as Bateman’s original work steered research in the early days of sociobiology.
Page rangepp. 551–574
Print length24 pages
LanguageEnglish (Original)
Contributors

Monique Borgerhoff Mulder

(author)
Distinguished Research Professor (emerita) at University of California, Davis
https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1117-5984
https://www.eva.mpg.de/ecology/staff/monique-borgerhoff-mulder/

Monique Borgerhoff Mulder is a human behavioural ecologist who works on marriage, reproduction, economic inequality and conservation issues, primarily at sites across East Africa. Distinguished Research Professor (emerita) from University of California at Davis, she is now affiliated with the Max Planck Institute of Evolutionary Anthropology in Leipzig Germany, and the Santa Fe Institute in New Mexico USA.

References
  1. Ah-King M, Ahnesjö I. 2013. ‘The “sex role” concept: an overview and evaluation’. Evolutionary biology. 40.4: pp. 461–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11692-013-9226-7
  2. Alexander RD. 1974. ‘The evolution of social behavior’. Annual review of ecology and systematics, 5.1: pp. 325–83. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.es.05.110174.001545
  3. Alexander RD. 1979. Darwinism and human affairs. University of Washington Press, Seattle.
  4. Alexander RD, Hoogland JL, Howard RD, Noonan KM, Sherman PW. 1979. ‘Sexual dimorphisms and breeding systems in pinnipeds, ungulates, primates, and humans’. Pp. 402–35 in Chagnon NA, and Irons W, editors. Evolutionary Biology and Human Social Behavior: An anthropological perspective. Duxbury, North Scituate, Mass.
  5. Amato PR. 2010. ‘Research on divorce: Continuing trends and new developments’. Journal of Marriage and Family, 72.3: pp. 650–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2010.00723.x
  6. Anderson KG. 2006. ‘How well does paternity confidence match actual paternity? Results from worldwide nonpaternity rates’. Current Anthropology, 47. 3: pp. 511–18. https://doi.org/10.1086/504167
  7. Anthes N, Häderer IK, Michiels NK, Janicke T. 2017. ‘Measuring and interpreting sexual selection metrics: evaluation and guidelines’. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 8.8: pp. 918–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210x.12707
  8. Arnold SJ. 1994. ‘Bateman’s principles and the measurement of sexual selection in plants and animals’. American Naturalist, 144: pp. S126–S149. https://doi.org/10.1086/285656
  9. Balaresque P, Poulet N, Cussat-Blanc S, Gerard P, Quintana-Murci L, Heyer E, Jobling MA. 2015. ‘Y-chromosome descent clusters and male differential reproductive success: young lineage expansions dominate Asian pastoral nomadic populations’. European Journal of Human Genetics, 23.10: pp. 1413–22. https://doi.org/10.1038/ejhg.2014.285
  10. Balbo N, Billari FC, Mills M. 2013. ‘Fertility in advanced societies: A review of research’. European Journal of Population/Revue européenne de Démographie, 29.1: pp. 1–38. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10680-012-9277-y
  11. Barrett L, Dunbar RIM, Lycett J 2002. Human evolutionary psychology. Palgrove, Basingstoke, UK.
  12. Bateman AJ. 1948. ‘Intrasexual selection in Drosophila’. Heredity, 2.3: pp. 349–68. https://doi.org/10.1038/hdy.1948.21
  13. Beckerman S, Lizarralde R, Ballew C, Schroeder S, Fingelton C, Garrison A, Smith H. 1998. ‘The Bari partible paternity project: Preliminary results’. Current Anthropology, 39.1: pp. 164–67. https://doi.org/10.1086/204706
  14. Betzig L. 1989. ‘Causes of Conjugal Dissolution: A Cross-cultural study’. Current Anthropology, 30.5: pp. 654–76. https://doi.org/10.1086/203798
  15. Betzig L. 2012. ‘Means, variances and ranges in reproductive success: Comparative evidence’. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33.4: pp. 309–17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2011.10.008
  16. Betzig LL 1986. Despotism and differential reproduction: A Darwinian view of history. Aldine de Gruyter, Hawthorne, NY.
  17. Bird R. 1999. ‘Cooperation and conflict: The behavioural ecology of the sexual division of labor’. Evolutionary Anthropology, 8.2: pp. 65–75. https://doi.org/10.1002/(sici)1520-6505(1999)8:2%3C65::aid-evan5%3E3.0.co;2-3
  18. Birkhead T. 1998. ‘Cryptic female choice: criteria for establishing female sperm choice’. Evolution, 52.4: pp. 1212–18. https://doi.org/10.2307/2411251
  19. Birkhead TR. 2000. Promiscuity. Harvard University Press, Cambridge, MA.
  20. Blurton Jones N. 1986. ‘Bushman birth spacing: A test for optimal interbirth intervals’. Ethology and Sociobiology, 7.2: pp. 91–105. https://doi.org/10.1016/0162-3095(86)90002-6
  21. Blurton Jones N 2016. Demography and Evolutionary Ecology of Hadza Hunter-Gatherers. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  22. Bongaarts J. 1976. ‘Intermediate fertility variables and marital fertility rates’. Population Studies, 30.2: pp. 227–41. https://doi.org/10.2307/2173606
  23. Borgerhoff Mulder M. 1990. ‘Kipsigis women’s preferences for wealthy men: Evidence for female choice in mammals’. Behavioural ecology and Sociobiology, 27.4: pp. 255–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00164897
  24. Borgerhoff Mulder M. 1992. ‘Reproductive decisions’. Pp. 339–74 in Smith EA, and Winterhalder B, editors. Evolutionary ecology and human behavior. Aldine de Gruyter, New York.
  25. Borgerhoff Mulder M. 2009. ‘Serial monogamy as polygyny or polyandry? Marriage in the Tanzanian Pimbwe’. Human Nature, 20.2: pp. 130–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-009-9060-x
  26. Borgerhoff Mulder M. 2010. ‘The unusual women of Mpimbwe: why sex differences in humans are not universal’. Pp. 85–106. Mind the Gap. Springer.
  27. Borgerhoff Mulder M. 2017. ‘Review of Demography and Evolutionary Ecology of Hadza Hunter-Gatherers by Nicholas Blurton Jones’. Human Nature, 28.1: pp. 117–27. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-016-9280-9
  28. Borgerhoff Mulder M, et al. 2009. ‘Intergenerational wealth transmission and the dynamics of inequality in small-scale societies’. Science, 326.5953: pp. 682–88. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1178336
  29. Borgerhoff Mulder M, Rauch KL. 2009. ‘Sexual conflict in humans: Variations and Solutions’. Evolutionary Anthropology, 18.5: pp. 201–14. https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.20226
  30. Borgerhoff Mulder M, Ross CT. 2019. ‘Unpacking Mating Success and Testing Bateman’s Principles in a Human Population’. Proceedings of Royal Society B. 286.1908: p. 20191516. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2019.1516
  31. Brown DE, Hotra D. 1988. ‘Are prescriptively monogamous societies effectively monogamous’. Pp. 153–59 in Betzig L, Borgerhoff Mulder M, and Turke PW, editors. Human reproductive behaviour: a Darwinian perspective. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  32. Brown GR, Laland KN, Borgerhoff Mulder M. 2009. ‘Bateman’s principles and human sex roles’. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 24.6: pp. 297–304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2009.02.005
  33. Buss DM 1999. Evolutionary psychology: the new science of the mind. Allyn and Bacon, Boston.
  34. Bzostek SH, McLanahan SS, Carlson MJ. 2012. ‘Mothers’ Repartnering after a Nonmarital Birth’. Social Forces, 90.3: pp. 817–41. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/sos005
  35. Campbell MM, Prata N, Potts M. 2013. ‘The impact of freedom on fertility decline’. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care, 39.1: pp. 44–50. https://doi.org/10.1136/jfprhc-2012-100405
  36. Cant MA, Johnstone RA, Russell AF. 2009. ‘Reproductive conflict and the evolution of menopause’ in Hager R, and Jones CB, editors. Reproductive skew in vertebrates: Proximate and ultimate causes. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
  37. Chagnon N. 1988. ‘Life histories, blood revenge, and warfare in a tribal population’. Science, 239.4843: pp. 985–39. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.239.4843.985
  38. Chagnon NA, Irons W 1979. Evolutionary biology and human social behavior: an anthropological perspective. Duxbury Press, North Scituate, Mass.
  39. Clutton-Brock T 1991. The evolution of parental care. Princeton University Press, Princeton.
  40. Clutton-Brock T. 2009. ‘Sexual selection in females’. Animal Behaviour, 77.1: pp. 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.08.026
  41. Clutton-Brock TH, Huchard E. 2013. ‘Social competition and selection in males and females’. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 368:20130074. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2013.0074
  42. Cohen SB, Sweet JA. 1974. ‘The Impact of Marital Disruption and Remarriage on Fertility’. Journal of Marriage and Family, 36.1: pp. 87–96. https://doi.org/10.2307/350998
  43. Collet JM, Dean RF, Worley K, Richardson DS, Pizzari T. 2014. ‘The measure and significance of Bateman’s principles’. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 281.1782: p. 20132973. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2013.2973
  44. Courtiol A, Pettay JE, Jokela M, Rotkirch A, Lummaa V. 2012. ‘Natural and sexual selection in a historical polygynous population’. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 109.21: pp. 8044–49. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1118174109
  45. Crook JH, Crook SJ. 1988. ‘Tibetan polyandry: Problems of adaptation and fitness’. Pp. 97–114 in Betzig L, Borgerhoff Mulder M, and Turke P, editors. Human reproductive behavior: A Darwinian perspective. Cambridge University press, Cambridge.
  46. Daly M, Wilson M 1978. Sex, Evolution, and Behavior. Duxbury Press, North Scituate.
  47. Daly M, Wilson M 1998. The Truth about Cindarella. Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London.
  48. Dewsbury DA. 2005. ‘The Darwin-Bateman paradigm in historical context’. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 45.5: pp. 831–37. https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/45.5.831
  49. Dickemann M. 1979. ‘The ecology of mating systems in hypergynous dowry systems’. Social Science Information. 18.2: pp. 163–95. https://doi.org/10.1177/053901847901800201
  50. Dupaquier J, Helin E, Laslett P, Livi-Bacci M, Sogner S, editors. 1981. Marriage and REmarriage in Populations of the Past. Academic Press, London.
  51. Eagly AH, Wood W. 1999. ‘The origins of sex differences in human behavior – Evolved dispositions versus social roles’. American Psychologist, 54.6: pp. 408–23. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066x.54.6.408
  52. Eberhard WG 1996. Female control: sexual selection by cryptic female choice. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
  53. Fisher ML, Garcia JR, Chang RS 2013. Evolution’s empress: Darwinian perspectives on the nature of women. Oxford University Press.
  54. Flinn MV, Low BS. 1986. ‘Resource distribution, social competition, and mating patterns in human societies’. Pp. 217–43 in Rubenstein DI, and Wrangham RW, editors. Ecological aspects of social evolution: birds and mammals. Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J.
  55. Folbre N. 1983. ‘Of patriarchy born: The political economy of fertility decisions’. Feminist Studies, 9.2: pp. 261–84. https://doi.org/10.2307/3177490
  56. Forsberg AJL, Tullberg BS. 1995. ‘The relationship between cumulative number of cohabiting partners and number of children for men and women in modern Sweden’. Ethology and Sociobiology, 16.3: pp. 221–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/0162-3095(95)00003-4
  57. Fortunato L, Archetti M. 2009. ‘Evolution of monogamous marriage by maximization of inclusive fitness’. Evolutionary Biology, 23.1: pp. 149–56. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2009.01884.x
  58. Gagnon M-C, Duchesne P, Turgeon J. 2012. ‘Sexual conflict in Gerris gillettei (Insecta: Hemiptera): influence of effective mating rate and morphology on reproductive success’. Canadian journal of zoology, 90.11: pp. 1297–1306. https://doi.org/10.1139/z2012-098
  59. Gasparini C, Evans JP. 2018. ‘Female control over multiple matings increases the opportunity for postcopulatory sexual selection’. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 285.1888: p. 20181505. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2018.1505
  60. Gaulin SJC, Schlegel A. 1980. ‘Paternal confidence and paternal investment: a cross cultural test of a sociobiological hypothesis’. Ethology and Sociobiology, 1.4: pp. 301–09. https://doi.org/10.1016/0162-3095(80)90015-1
  61. Gerlach N, McGlothlin J, Parker P, Ketterson E. 2012. ‘Reinterpreting Bateman gradients: multiple mating and selection in both sexes of a songbird species’. Behavioural ecology, 23.5: pp. 1078–88. https://doi.org/10.1093/beheco/ars077
  62. Gowaty P, Steinichen R, Anderson WW. 2002. ‘Mutual interest between the sexes and reproductive success in Drosophila pseudoobscura’. Evolution, 56.12: pp. 2537–40. https://doi.org/10.1554/0014-3820(2002)056[2537:mibtsa]2.0.co;2
  63. Gowaty PA. 1997. ‘Sexual dialectics, sexual selection, and variation in reproductive behavior’. Pp. 351–84 in Gowaty PA, editor. Feminism and evolutionary biology. Chapman and Hall, New York.
  64. Gowaty PA, Hubbell SP. 2005. ‘Chance, time allocation, and the evolution of adaptively flexible sex role behavior’. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 45.5: pp. 931–44. https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/45.5.931
  65. Gowaty PA, Kim Y-K, Anderson WW. 2012. ‘No evidence of sexual selection in a repetition of Bateman’s classic study of Drosophila melanogaster’. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109.29: pp. 11740–11745. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1207851109
  66. Guzzo KB. 2014. ‘New partners, more kids: Multiple-partner fertility in the United States’. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 654.1: pp. 66–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/0002716214525571
  67. Harknett K, Knab J. 2007. ‘More kin, less support’. Journal of Marriage and Family, 69.1: pp. 237–53. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2006.00356.x
  68. Hartung J. 1982. ‘Polygyny and the inheritance of wealth’. Current Anthropology, 23.3: pp. 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1086/202775
  69. Hauber ME, Lacey EA. 2005. ‘Bateman’s principle in cooperatively breeding vertebrates: the effects of non-breeding alloparents on variability in female and male reproductive success’. Integrative and Comparative Biology 45.5: pp. 903–14. https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/45.5.903
  70. Hawkes K, Rogers AR, Charnov EL. 1995. ‘The Males Dilemma – Increased Offspring Production Is More Paternity to Steal’. Evolutionary Ecology, 9.6: pp. 662–77. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf01237661
  71. Henrich J, Boyd R, Richerson PJ. 2012. ‘The puzzle of monogamous marriage’. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society (B), 367.1589: pp. 657–69. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2011.0290
  72. Henshaw JM, Jennions MD, Kruuk LE. 2018. ‘How to quantify (the response to) sexual selection on traits’. Evolution, 72.9: pp. 1904–17. https://doi.org/10.1111/evo.13554
  73. Hill K, Hurtado AM 1996. Aché life history: the ecology and demography of a foraging people. Aldine de Gruyter, New York.
  74. Hill K, Hurtado AM. 2009. ‘Cooperative breeding in South American hunter-gatherers’. Proceedings of Royal Society B. 276.1674: pp. 3863–70. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2009.1061
  75. Hooper PL, Gurven M, Kaplan H. 2014. ‘Social and economic underpinnings of human biodemography’, in Weinstein M, and MA. L, editors. Sociality, Hierarchy, Health: Comparative Biodemography. National Academies Press.
  76. Hrdy S. 1997. ‘Raising Darwin’s consciousness: female sexuality and the prehominid origins of patriarchy’. Human Nature, 8.1: pp. 1–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-997-1003-9
  77. Hrdy SB. 1986. ‘Empathy, polyandry, and the myth of the coy female’. Pp. 119–46 in Bleier R, editor. Feminist approaches to science. Pergamon Press, New York.
  78. Hrdy SB. 2005. ‘Cooperative breeders with an ace in the hole’. Pp. 295–317 in Voland E, Chasiotis A, and Schiefenhoevel W, editors. Grandmotherhood: the evolutionary significance of the second half of female life. Rutgers University Press, New Brunswick.
  79. Irons W. 1979. ‘Cultural and biological success’. Pp. 252–72 in Chagnon NA, and Irons W, editors. Evolutionary Biology and Human Social Behavior: An Anthropological Perspective. Duxbury Press, North Scituate.
  80. Janicke T, David P, Chapuis E. 2015. ‘Environment-dependent sexual selection: Bateman’s parameters under varying levels of food availability’. The American Naturalist, 185.6: pp. 756–68. https://doi.org/10.1086/681128
  81. Janicke T, Häderer IK, Lajeunesse MJ, Anthes N. 2016. ‘Darwinian sex roles confirmed across the animal kingdom’. Science Advances, 2.2. https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.1500983
  82. Jennions MD, Fromhage L. 2017. ‘Not all sex ratios are equal: the Fisher condition, parental care and sexual selection’. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B, 372.1729: p. 20160312. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2016.0312
  83. Jennions MD, Petrie M. 2000. ‘Why do females mate multiply?’ Biological Reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society, 75.1: pp. 21–64. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0006323199005423
  84. Jokela M, Rotkirch A, Rickard I, Pettay J, Lummaa V. 2010. ‘Serial monogamy and reproductive success in a contemporary human population’. Behavioural ecology, 10: pp. 906–12.
  85. Jones AG. 2009. ‘On the Opportunity for Sexual Selection, the Bateman Gradient and the Maximum Intensity of Sexual Selection’. Evolution, 63.7: pp. 1673–84. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2009.00664.x
  86. Jones AG, Rosenqvist G, Berglund A, S.J. A, J.C. A. 2000. ‘The Bateman gradient and the cause of sexual selection in a sex-role-reversed pipefish’. Proc. R. Soc. B, 267.1444: pp. 677–80. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2000.1055
  87. Käär P, Jokela J, Merilä J, Helle T, Kojola I. 1998. ‘Sexual conflict and remarriage in preindustrial human populations: Causes and fitness consequences’. Evolution and Human Behavior, 19.3: pp. 139–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1090-5138(98)00007-5
  88. Kaplan H. 1996. ‘A theory of fertility and parental investment in traditional and modern human societies’. Yearbook of Physical Anthropology, 101.S23: pp. 91–135. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1096-8644(1996)23+%3C91::AID-AJPA4%3E3.0.CO;2-C
  89. Kaplan H, Hill K. 1985. ‘Hunting ability and reproductive success among male Ache foragers: preliminary results’. Current anthropology, 26.1: pp. 131–33. https://doi.org/10.1086/203235
  90. Kaplan HS, Hooper PL, Gurven M. 2009. ‘The evolutionary and ecological roots of human social organization’. Phil. Trans. R. Soc Lond. B, 364.1533: pp. 3289–99. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2009.0115
  91. Kaplan HS, Lancaster JB. 2003. ‘An evolutionary and ecological analysis of human fertility, mating patterns, and parental investment’. Pp. 170–223 in Wachter KW, and Bulatao RA, editors. Offspring: Human Fertility Behavior in Biodemographic Perspective. National Academies Press, Washington DC.
  92. Ketterson ED, Parker PG, Raouf SA, Nolan Jr V, Ziegenfus C, Chandler CR. 1998. ‘The relative impact of extra-pair fertilizations on variation in male and female reproductive success in dark-eyed juncos (Junco hyemalis)’. Ornithological Monographs, 49: pp. 81–101. https://doi.org/10.2307/40166719
  93. Klug H, Alonsi SH, Bonsall MB. 2012. ‘Theoretical Foundations of Parental Care’ in Royle NJ, Smiseth PT, and Kölliker M, editors. The Evolution of Parental Care. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  94. Klug H, Heuschele J, Jennions MD, Kokko H. 2010. ‘The mismeasurement of sexual selection’. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 23.3: pp. 447–62. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2009.01921.x
  95. Kokko H, Booksmythe I, Jennions MD. 2013. ‘Causality and sex roles: prejudice against patterns? A reply to Ah-King’. Trends in ecology & evolution. 28.1: pp. 2–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2012.08.008
  96. Kokko H, Jennions MD. 2008. ‘Parental investment, sexual selection and sex ratios’. Journal of Evolutionary Biology, 21.4: pp. 919–48. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2008.01540.x
  97. Kokko H, Jennions MD. 2012. ‘Sex Differences in Parental Care’ in Royle N, Smiseth PT, and Kölliker M, editors. The Evolution of Parental Care. Oxford University Press, Oxford.
  98. Koster J. 2018. ‘Family ties: the multilevel effects of households and kinship on the networks of individuals’. R. Soc. Open Sci, 5.4: p. 172159. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.172159
  99. Krakauer AH, Webster MS, Duvall EH, Jones AG, Shuster SM. 2011. ‘The opportunity for sexual selection: Not mismeasured, just misunderstood’. Journal of Evolutionary Biology 24.9: pp. 2064–71. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1420-9101.2011.02317.x
  100. Kramer KL, Ellison PT. 2010. ‘Pooled Energy Budgets: Resituating Human Energy Allocation Trade-offs’. Evolutionary Anthropology, 19.4: pp. 136–47. https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.20265
  101. Kuijper B, Pen I, Weissing FJ. 2012. ‘A guide to sexual selection theory’. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics, 43.1: pp. 287–311. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-110411-160245
  102. Lahdenpera M, Gillespie DOS, Lummaa V, Russell AF. 2012. ‘Severe intergenerational reproductive conflict and the evolution of menopause’. Ecology Letters, 15.11: pp. 1283–90. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1461-0248.2012.01851.x
  103. Lappegård T, Rønsen M. 2013. ‘Socioeconomic differences in multipartner fertility among Norwegian men’. Demography, 50.3: pp. 1135–53. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-012-0165-1
  104. Lawson DW, James S, Ngadaya E, Ngowi B, Mfinanga SGM, Hartwig K, Borgerhoff Mulder M. 2015. ‘No evidence that polygynous marriage is a harmful cultural practice in northern Tanzania’. Proceedings of the National Academies of Sciences, 112.45: pp. 13827–13832. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1507151112
  105. Leonetti DL, Nath DC, Hemam NS. 2007. ‘In-law conflict: Women’s reproductive lives and the roles of their mothers and husbands among the matrilineal Khasi’. Current Anthropology, 48.6: pp. 861–90. https://doi.org/10.1086/520976
  106. Lovejoy CO. 1981. ‘The Origins of Man’. Science, 211.4480: pp. 341–50. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.211.4480.341
  107. Low BS, Clarke AL, Lockridge KA. 1992. ‘Toward an Ecological Demography’. Population and Development Review, 18.1: pp. 1–31. https://doi.org/10.2307/1971857
  108. Low BS, Simon CP, Anderson KG. 2002. ‘An evolutionary ecological perspective on demographic transitions: modeling multiple currencies’. American Journal of Human Biology, 14.2: pp. 149–67. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajhb.10043
  109. Mace R, Alvergne A. 2012. ‘Female reproductive competition within families in rural Gambia’. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 279.1736: pp. 2219–27. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2011.2424
  110. McNamara JM, Székely T, Webb JN, Houston AI. 2000. ‘A dynamic game-theoretic model of parental care’. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 205.4: pp. 605–23. https://doi.org/10.1006/jtbi.2000.2093
  111. Moorad JA, Promislow DEL, Smith KR, Wade MJ. 2011. ‘Mating system change reduces the strength of sexual selection in an American frontier population of the 19th century’. Evolution and Human Behavior, 32.2: pp. 147–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.10.004
  112. Moya C, Snopkowski K, Sear R. 2016. ‘What do men want? Re-examining whether men benefit from higher fertility than is optimal for women’. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 371.1692: p. 20150149. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2015.0149
  113. Nettle D, Pollet TV. 2008. ‘Natural selection on male wealth in humans’. American Naturalist, 172.5: pp. 658–66. https://doi.org/10.1086/591690
  114. Oh S-Y, Bowles S, Borgerhoff Mulder M, Ross CT. Under review. The Decline of Polygyny: An Interpretation.
  115. Orians GH. 1969. ‘On the evolution of mating systems in birds and mammals’. American Naturalist, 103.934: pp. 589–603. https://doi.org/10.1086/282628
  116. Parker GA, Birkhead TR. 2013. ‘Polyandry: The history of a revolution’. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 368.1613 p. 20120335. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2012.0335
  117. Pélissié B, Jarne P, Sarda V, David P. 2014. ‘Disentangling precopulatory and postcopulatory sexual selection in polyandrous species’. Evolution, 68.5: pp. 1320–31. https://doi.org/10.1111/evo.12353
  118. Penn DJ, Smith KR. 2007. ‘Differential fitness costs of reproduction between the sexes’. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104.2: pp. 553–58. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0609301103
  119. Perls TT, Bubrick E, Wager CG, Vijg J, Kruglyak L. 1998. ‘Siblings of centenarians live longer’. Lancet, 351.9115: pp. 1560–60. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(05)61126-9
  120. Perusse D. 1993. ‘Cultural and reproductive success in industrial societies: Testing relationship at the proximate and ultimate levels’. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 16.2: pp. 267–322. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0140525x00029939
  121. Puts D. 2016. ‘Human sexual selection’. Current Opinion in Psychology, 7: pp. 28–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copsyc.2015.07.011
  122. Quisumbing AR, Maluccio JA. 2003. ‘Resources at marriage and intrahousehold allocation: Evidence from Bangladesh, Ethiopia, Indonesia, and South Africa’. Oxford Bulletin of Economics and Statistics, 65.3: pp. 283–328. https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0084.t01-1-00052
  123. Randall S, Coast E, Leone T. 2011. ‘Cultural constructions of the concept of household in sample surveys’. Population studies, 65.2: pp. 217–29. https://doi.org/10.1080/00324728.2011.576768
  124. Ross CT, Borgerhoff Mulder M. ‘In revision. Humans have small sex differences in reproductive skew compared to non-human mammals’. Proceeding of the National Academies of Sciences.
  125. Ross CT, et al. 2018. ‘Greater wealth inequality, less polygyny: rethinking the polygyny threshold model’. Journal of The Royal Society Interface, 15.144. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2018.0035
  126. Scelza BA. 2012. ‘Female choice and extra-pair paternity in a traditional human population’. Biology Letters, 7.6: pp. 889–91. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsbl.2011.0478
  127. Scelza BA. 2013. ‘Choosy But Not Chaste: Multiple Mating in Human Females’. Evolutionary Anthropology, 22.5: pp. 259–69. https://doi.org/10.1002/evan.21373
  128. Scelza BA, Prall SP. 2017. ‘Partner preferences in the context of concurrency: What Himba want in formal and informal partners’. Evolution and Human Behavior, 39.2: pp. 212–19. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2017.12.005
  129. Schacht R, Borgerhoff Mulder M. 2015. ‘Sex ratio effects on reproductive strategies in humans’. R. Soc. Open Sci, 2.1: p. 140402. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsos.140402
  130. Schacht R, Rauch K, Borgerhoff Mulder M. 2014. ‘Too Many Men? The Violence Problem’. Trends in Ecology and Evolution, 29.4: pp. 214–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2014.02.001
  131. Schärer L, Rowe L, Arnqvist G. 2012. ‘Anisogamy, chance and the evolution of sex roles’. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 27.5: pp. 260–64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2011.12.006
  132. Sear R, Mace R. 2008. ‘Who keeps children alive? A review of the effects of kin on child survival’. Evolution and Human Behavior, 29.1:1-18. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.10.001
  133. Sear R, Steele F, McGregro IA, Mace R. 2002. ‘The effects of kin on child mortality in rural Gambia’. Demography, 39.1: pp. 43–63. https://doi.org/10.1353/dem.2002.0010
  134. Simmons LW. 2005. ‘The evolution of polyandry: sperm competition, sperma selection, and offspring viability’. Annual Reviews of Ecology, Evolution and Systematics, 36.1: pp. 125–46. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.36.102403.112501
  135. Smith EA. 2004. ‘Why do good hunters have higher reproductive success?’ Human Nature, 15.4: pp. 343–64. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-004-1013-9
  136. Smith EA, Borgerhoff Mulder M, Hill K. 2001. ‘Controversies in the evolutionary social sciences: a guide for the perplexed’. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 16.3: pp. 128–35. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-5347(00)02077-2
  137. Snopkowski K. 2016. ‘Marital Dissolution and Child Educational Outcomes in San Borja, Bolivia’. Human Nature, 27.4: pp. 395–421. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-016-9265-8
  138. Snopkowski K, Sear R. 2013. ‘Kin influences on fertility in Thailand: Effects and mechanisms’. Evolution and Human Behavior, 34.2: pp. 130–38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2012.11.004
  139. Snowdon CS. 1997. ‘The “nature” of sex differences: Myths of male and female’. Pp. 276–93 in Gowaty PA, editor. Feminism and evolutionary biology: Boundaries, intersections, and frontiers. Chapman & Hall, New York.
  140. Snyder BF, Gowaty PA. 2007. ‘A reappraisal of Bateman’s classic study of intrasexual selection’. Evolution, 61.11: pp. 2457–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1558-5646.2007.00212.x
  141. Starks PT, Blackie CA. 2000. ‘The relationship between serial monogamy and rape in the United States (1960-1995)’. Proceedings of the Royal Society Biological Sciences Series B, 267.1449: pp. 1259–63. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2000.1136
  142. Starkweather KE, Hames R. 2012. ‘A survey of non-classical polyandry’. Human Nature, 23.2: pp. 149–72. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-012-9144-x
  143. Stewart-Williams S, Thomas AG. 2013. ‘The ape that thought it was a peacock: Does evolutionary psychology exaggerate human sex differences’. Psychological Inquiry, 24.3: pp. 137–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047840x.2013.804899
  144. Stockley P, Bro-Jørgensen J. 2011. ‘Female competition and its evolutionary consequences in mammals’. Biological Reviews, 86.2: pp. 341–66. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-185x.2010.00149.x
  145. Stulp G, Sear R, Schaffnit SB, Mills MC, Barrett L. 2016. ‘The Reproductive Ecology of Industrial Societies, Part II’. Human Nature, 27.4: pp. 445–70. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-016-9272-9
  146. Sutherland WJ. 1985. ‘Chance can produce a sex difference in variance in mating success and account for Bateman’s data’. Animal Behavior, 33.4: pp. 1349–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0003-3472(85)80197-4
  147. Symons D 1979. The evolution of human sexuality. Oxford University Press, New York.
  148. Tang-Martínez Z. 2012. ‘Repetition of Bateman challenges the paradigm’. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109.29: pp. 11476–11477. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1209394109
  149. Tang-Martínez Z. 2016. ‘Rethinking Bateman’s Principles: Challenging Persistent Myths of Sexually Reluctant Females and Promiscuous Males’. The Journal of Sex Research, 53.4–5: pp. 532–59. https://doi.org/10.1080/00224499.2016.1150938
  150. Tarrant S. 2006. When sex became gender. Routledge, New York.
  151. Taylor ML, Wigmore C, Hodgson DJ, Wedell N, Hosken DJ. 2008. ‘Multiple mating increases female fitness in Drosophila simulans’. Animal Behaviour, 76.3: pp. 963–70. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anbehav.2008.05.015
  152. Thornhill R, Thornhill NW. 1983. ‘Human Rape: An Evolutionary Analysis’. Ethology and Sociobiology, 4.3: pp. 137–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/0162-3095(83)90027-4
  153. Thornton A. 1978. ‘Marital dissolution, remarriage, and childbearing’. Demography, 15.3: pp. 361–80. https://doi.org/10.2307/2060656
  154. Trivers R. 1972. ‘Parental investment and sexual selection’. Pp. 139–79 in Campbell B, editor. Sexual Selection and the Descent of Man 1871–1971. Aldine Press, New York.
  155. von Rueden C, Gurven M, Kaplan H. 2011. ‘Why do men seek status? Fitness payoffs to dominance and prestige’. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B, 278.1715: pp. 2223–32. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2010.2145
  156. Wade M, J., Arnold SJ. 1980. ‘The intensity of sexual selection in relation to male sexual behavior, female choice and sperm precedence’. Animal Behavior, 28.2: pp. 446–61. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0003-3472(80)80052-2
  157. Wade MJ, Shuster SM. 2005. ‘Don’t throw Bateman out with the bathwater’. Integrative and Comparative Biology, 45.5: pp. 945–51. https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/45.5.945
  158. Walker RS, Flinn MV, Hill KR. 2010. ‘Evolutionary history of partible paternity in lowland South America’. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107.45: pp. 19195–19200. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1002598107
  159. Wedell N, Gage MJG, Parker GA. 2002. ‘Sperm competition, male prudence and sperm-limited females’. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 17.7: pp. 313–20. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0169-5347(02)02533-8
  160. Winking J, Gurven M. 2011. ‘The total cost of father desertion’. American Journal of Human Biology, 23.6: pp. 755–63. https://doi.org/10.1002/ajhb.21207
  161. Wood W, Eagly AH. 2012. ‘Biosocial Construction of Sex Differences and Similarities in Behavior’. Advances in experimental social psychology, 46: pp. 55–123. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-12-394281-4.00002-7
  162. Zerjal T. 2003. ‘The Genetic Legacy of the Mongols’. The American Journal of Human Genetics, 72.3: pp. 717–21. https://doi.org/10.1086/367774