Evolution & Human Behavior
Volume 22, Issue 5 , Pages 343-360 , September 2001

The Trivers–Willard hypothesis of parental investment: No effect in the contemporary United States

  • Matthew C Keller

      Affiliations

    • Department of Psychology, University of Michigan, East Hall, 525 East University Avenue, Ann Arbor, MI 48109, USA
    • Corresponding Author InformationCorresponding author
    • ,
  • Randolph M Nesse

      Affiliations

    • Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA
    • ,
  • Sandra Hofferth

      Affiliations

    • Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA

Received 5 July 2000 ,Accepted 25 May 2001.

References 

  1. Abernathy V, Yip R. Parent characteristics and sex differential infant mortality: the case in Tennessee. Human Biology. 1990;62:279–290
  2. Anderson JL, Crawford CB. Trivers–Willard rules for sex allocation: when do they maximize expected grandchildren in humans?. Human Nature. 1993;4:137–174
  3. Belsley DA. Conditioning diagnostics: collinearity and weak data in regression. New York: Wiley; 1991;
  4. Bereczkei T, Dunbar RM. Female-biased reproductive strategies in a Hungarian Gypsy population. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B: Biological Sciences. 1997;264:17–22
  5. Betzig LL, Turke PW. Parental investment by sex on Ifaluk. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1986;7:29–37
  6. Borgerhoff Mulder MB. Brothers and sisters: how sibling interactions affect optimal parental allocations. Human Nature. 1998;9:119–162
  7. Brittain AW, Morrill WT, Kurl JA. Parental choice and infant mortality in a West Indian population. Human Biology. 1988;60:679–692
  8. Buss D. Sex differences in human mate preferences: evolutionary hypotheses testing in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 1989;12:1–49
  9. Byers JA, Moodie JD. Sex-specific maternal investment in pronghorn and the question of a limit on differential provisioning in ungulates. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 1990;26:157–164
  10. Chacon-Puignau GC, Jaffe K. Sex ratio at birth deviations in modern Venezuela: the Trivers–Willard effect. Social Biology. 1996;43:257–270
  11. Charnov EL. Simultaneous hermaphroditism and sexual selection. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 1979;76:2480–2484
  12. Clark MM, Bone S, Galef BG. Evidence of sex-biased postnatal maternal investment by Mongolian gerbils. Animal Behaviour. 1990;39:735–744
  13. Clutton-Brock TH. The evolution of parental care. Princeton, NJ: Princeton Univ. Press; 1991;
  14. Clutton-Brock TH, Albon SD, Guinness FE. Maternal dominance, breeding success and birth sex ratios in red deer. Nature. 1984;308:358–360
  15. Cronbach LJ. Statistical tests for moderator variables: flaws in analyses recently proposed. Psychological Bulletin. 1987;102:414–417
  16. Cronk L. Low socioeconomic status and female-biased parental investment: the Mukogodo example. American Anthropologist. 1989;91:414–429
  17. Dickemann M. Female infanticide, reproductive strategies, and social stratification: a preliminary model. In:  Chagnon NA,  Irons W editor. Evolutionary biology and human social behavior: an anthropological perspective. North Scituate, MA: Duxbury Press; 1979;p. 321–367
  18. Festa-Bianchet M. Offspring sex ratio studies of mammals: does publication depend on the quality of research or the direction of the results?. Ecoscience. 1996;3:42–44
  19. Fisher RA. The genetical theory of natural selection. New York: Dover; 1958;
  20. Frank SA. Sex allocation theory for birds and mammals. Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 1990;21:13–55
  21. Freese J, Powell B. Sociobiology, status, and parental investment in sons and daughters: testing the Trivers–Willard hypothesis. American Journal of Sociology. 1999;106:1704–1743
  22. Gaulin SJ, Robbins CJ. Trivers–Willard effect in contemporary North American society. American Journal of Physical Anthropology. 1991;85:61–69
  23. Hill J. Prestige and reproductive success in man. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1984;5:77–95
  24. Irons W. Monogamy, contraception and the cultural and reproductive success hypothesis. Commentary on the journal article “Cultural and reproductive success in industrial societies: testing the relationship at the proximate and ultimate levels” Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 1993;16:295–296
  25. Judge DS, Hrdy SB. Allocation of accumulated resources among close kin: inheritance in Sacramento, California, 1890–1984. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1992;13:495–522
  26. Juster F, Stafford F. The allocation of time — empirical findings, behavioral models, and problems of measurement. Journal of Economic Literature. 1991;29:471–522
  27. Kaiser HF. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika. 1974;39:31–36
  28. Labov JB, Huck UW, Vaswani P, Lisk RD. Sex ratio manipulation and decreased growth of male offspring of prenatally and postnatally undernourished golden hamsters (Mesocricetus auratus). Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 1986;18:241–249
  29. Low BS. Reproductive life in 19th century Sweden: an evolutionary perspective on demographic phenomena. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1991;12:411–448
  30. Mace R. Biased parental investment and reproductive success in Gabbra pastoralists. Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology. 1996;38:75–81
  31. Mackey W, Coney N. Human sex ratios as a function of the woman's psychodynamics — a preliminary study. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1987;8:49–60
  32. Mattingly DK, McClure PA. Energy allocation during lactation in cotton rats Sigmodon hispidus on a restricted diet. Ecology. 1985;66:928–937
  33. Maynard Smith J. A new theory of sexual investment. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 1980;7:247–251
  34. Maynard Smith J. The economics of sex. review of E. Charnov's “The theory of sex allocation” Evolution. 1983;37:872–873
  35. McClure PA. Sex-biased litter reduction in food-restricted wood rats (Neotoma floridana). Science. 1981;211:1058–1060
  36. Neter J, Kutner MH, Nachtsheim CJ, Wasserman W. Applied linear statistical models. 4th ed.. Chicago: Irwin; 1996;
  37. Pérusse D. Cultural and reproductive success in industrial societies: testing the relationship at the proximate and ultimate levels. Behavioral and Brain Sciences. 1993;16:267–322
  38. Sikes RS. Maternal response to resource limitations in eastern wood rats. Animal Behaviour. 1995;49:1551–1558
  39. Sikes RS. Tactics of maternal investment of northern grasshopper mice in response to postnatal restriction of food. Journal of Mammalogy. 1996;77:1092–1101
  40. Smith MS, Kish BJ, Crawford CB. Inheritance of wealth as human kin investment. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1983;8:171–182
  41. Symons D. A critique of Darwinian anthropology. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1989;10:131–144
  42. Townsend JM. Mate selection criteria: a pilot study. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1989;24:241–253
  43. Trivers R, Willard D. Natural selection of parental ability to vary the sex ratio of offspring. Science. 1973;179:90–92
  44. Turke P. Which humans behave adaptively, and why does it matter?. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1990;11:305–340
  45. Voland E, Siegelkow E, Engel C. Cost/benefit oriented parental investment by high status families: the Krummhorn case. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1991;12:105–118
  46. Wiederman MW, Allgeier ER. Gender differences in mate selection criteria: sociobiological or socioeconomic explanation?. Ethology and Sociobiology. 1992;13:115–124
  47. Wright SL, Crawford CB, Anderson JL. Allocation of reproductive effort in Mus domesticus: responses of offspring sex ratio and quality to social density and food availability. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology. 1988;23:357–365
  48. Zaldivar ME, Lizarralde R, Beckerman S. Unbiased sex ratios among the Bari: an evolutionary interpretation. Human Ecology. 1991;19:469–498

PII: S1090-5138(01)00075-7

Evolution & Human Behavior
Volume 22, Issue 5 , Pages 343-360 , September 2001

Article Tools