Hostname: page-component-6bb9c88b65-vmslq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-07-20T02:29:14.961Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Continuity between pre- and post-demographic transition populations with respect to grandparental investment

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 April 2010

Brad R. Huber
Brad R. Huber
Affiliation:
Department of Sociology and Anthropology, College of Charleston, Charleston, SC 29424. HuberB@cofc.eduhttp://huberb.people.cofc.edu/
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This commentary suggests that there is more continuity in pre- and post-demographic transition populations with respect to grandparental investments than is assumed by Coall & Hertwig (C&H). Recent research employing high-quality data supports the claim that sex-biased grandparental investments are likely to exist in industrialized societies, and that the economic status of grandparents is related to their long-term fitness.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 33 , Issue 1 , February 2010 , pp. 28 - 29
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Clarke, A. L. & Low, B. S. (2001) Testing evolutionary hypotheses with demographic data. Population and Developmental Review 27:633–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Goodman, A. & Koupil, I. (2009) Social and biological determinants of reproductive success in Swedish males and females born 1915–1929. Evolution and Human Behavior 30:329–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hill, K. & Kaplan, H. S. (1999) Life history traits in humans: Theory and empirical studies. Annual Review of Anthropology 28:397–430.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopcroft, R. L. (2005) Parental status and differential investment in sons and daughters: Trivers–Willard revisited. Social Forces 83(3):1111–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hopcroft, R. L. (2006) Sex, status, and reproductive success in the contemporary United States. Evolution and Human Behavior 27:104–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Low, B. S. (2000) Why sex matters. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar