Journal article
Authors list: Ross, Cody T.; Mulder, Monique Borgerhoff; Oh, Seung-Yun; Bowles, Samuel; Beheim, Bret; Bunce, John; Caudell, Mark; Clark, Gregory; Colleran, Heidi; Cortez, Carmen; Draper, Patricia; Greaves, Russell D.; Gurven, Michael; Headland, Thomas; Headland, Janet; Hill, Kim; Hewlett, Barry; Kaplan, Hillard S.; Koster, Jeremy; Kramer, Karen; Marlowe, Frank; McElreath, Richard; Nolin, David; Quinlan, Marsha; Quinlan, Robert; Revilla-Minaya, Caissa; Scelza, Brooke; Schacht, Ryan; Shenk, Mary; Uehara, Ray; Voland, Eckart; Willfuehr, Kai; Winterhalder, Bruce; Ziker, John
Publication year: 2018
Journal: Journal of the Royal Society Interface
Volume number: 15
Issue number: 144
ISSN: 1742-5689
eISSN: 1742-5662
Open access status: Hybrid
DOI Link: https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2018.0035
Publisher: The Royal Society
Abstract:
Monogamy appears to have become the predominant human mating system with the emergence of highly unequal agricultural populations that replaced relatively egalitarian horticultural populations, challenging the conventional idea-based on the polygyny threshold model-that polygyny should be positively associated with wealth inequality. To address this polygyny paradox, we generalize the standard polygyny threshold model to a mutual mate choice model predicting the fraction of women married polygynously. We then demonstrate two conditions that are jointly sufficient to make monogamy the predominant marriage form, even in highly unequal societies. We assess if these conditions are satisfied using individual-level data from 29 human populations. Our analysis shows that with the shift to stratified agricultural economies: (i) the population frequency of relatively poor individuals increased, increasing wealth inequality, but decreasing the frequency of individuals with sufficient wealth to secure polygynous marriage, and (ii) diminishing marginal fitness returns to additional wives prevent extremely wealthy men from obtaining as many wives as their relative wealth would otherwise predict. These conditions jointly lead to a high population-level frequency of monogamy.
Citation Styles
Harvard Citation style: Ross, C., Mulder, M., Oh, S., Bowles, S., Beheim, B., Bunce, J., et al. (2018) Greater wealth inequality, less polygyny: rethinking the polygyny threshold model, Journal of the Royal Society Interface, 15(144), Article 20180035. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2018.0035
APA Citation style: Ross, C., Mulder, M., Oh, S., Bowles, S., Beheim, B., Bunce, J., Caudell, M., Clark, G., Colleran, H., Cortez, C., Draper, P., Greaves, R., Gurven, M., Headland, T., Headland, J., Hill, K., Hewlett, B., Kaplan, H., Koster, J., ...Ziker, J. (2018). Greater wealth inequality, less polygyny: rethinking the polygyny threshold model. Journal of the Royal Society Interface. 15(144), Article 20180035. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2018.0035
Keywords
behavioural ecology; evolutionary anthropology; FEMALE CHOICE; FOOD-SHARING NETWORKS; marriage systems; MATING SYSTEMS; MONOGAMOUS MARRIAGE; MONOGAMY; MUTUAL MATE CHOICE; POLYGYNY; SERIAL MONOGAMY; SOCIETIES; wealth inequality
