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.
| Original language | English (US) |
|---|---|
| Article number | 20180035 |
| Journal | Journal of the Royal Society Interface |
| Volume | 15 |
| Issue number | 144 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jul 1 2018 |
Fingerprint
Keywords
- behavioural ecology
- evolutionary anthropology
- marriage systems
- monogamy
- Polygyny
- wealth inequality
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Biotechnology
- Biophysics
- Bioengineering
- Biomaterials
- Biochemistry
- Biomedical Engineering
Cite this
Greater wealth inequality, less polygyny : Rethinking the polygyny threshold model. / 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; Willfuhr, Kai; Winterhalder, Bruce; Ziker, John.
In: Journal of the Royal Society Interface, Vol. 15, No. 144, 20180035, 01.07.2018.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article
}
TY - JOUR
T1 - Greater wealth inequality, less polygyny
T2 - Rethinking the polygyny threshold model
AU - Ross, Cody T.
AU - Mulder, Monique Borgerhoff
AU - Oh, Seung Yun
AU - Bowles, Samuel
AU - Beheim, Bret
AU - Bunce, John
AU - Caudell, Mark
AU - Clark, Gregory
AU - Colleran, Heidi
AU - Cortez, Carmen
AU - Draper, Patricia
AU - Greaves, Russell D.
AU - Gurven, Michael
AU - Headland, Thomas
AU - Headland, Janet
AU - Hill, Kim
AU - Hewlett, Barry
AU - Kaplan, Hillard S.
AU - Koster, Jeremy
AU - Kramer, Karen
AU - Marlowe, Frank
AU - McElreath, Richard
AU - Nolin, David
AU - Quinlan, Marsha
AU - Quinlan, Robert
AU - Revilla-Minaya, Caissa
AU - Scelza, Brooke
AU - Schacht, Ryan
AU - Shenk, Mary
AU - Uehara, Ray
AU - Voland, Eckart
AU - Willfuhr, Kai
AU - Winterhalder, Bruce
AU - Ziker, John
PY - 2018/7/1
Y1 - 2018/7/1
N2 - 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.
AB - 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.
KW - behavioural ecology
KW - evolutionary anthropology
KW - marriage systems
KW - monogamy
KW - Polygyny
KW - wealth inequality
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85051423672&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85051423672&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1098/rsif.2018.0035
DO - 10.1098/rsif.2018.0035
M3 - Article
C2 - 30021924
AN - SCOPUS:85051423672
VL - 15
JO - Journal of the Royal Society Interface
JF - Journal of the Royal Society Interface
SN - 1742-5689
IS - 144
M1 - 20180035
ER -