Search results for 'Language and languages Sex differences' (try it on Scholar)

1000+ found
Order:
  1.  22
    Heiko Motschenbacher (2010). Language, Gender and Sexual Identity: Poststructuralist Perspectives. John Benjamins Pub. Co..
    chapter Introduction Poststructuralist perspectives on language, gender and sexual identity Since the inception of the field of language and gender in the, ...
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2.  2
    R. Wood (2006). Sex Differences in Answers to English Language Comprehension Items. Educational Studies 4 (2):157-165.
    No categories
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  3. Sally McConnell-Ginet (2010). Gender, Sexuality, and Meaning: Linguistic Practice and Politics. Oxford University Press.
    Preface and acknowledgments -- Prelude -- 1. Gender, sexuality, and meaning: An overview -- Part I. Politics and scholarship: 2. Language and gender -- 3. Feminism in linguistics -- 4. Difference and language: A linguist's perspective -- Part II. Social practice, social meanings, and selves: 5. Communities of practice: Where language, gender, and power all live -- 6. Intonation in a man's world -- 7. Constructing meaning, constructing selves: Snapshots of language, gender, and class from Belten (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4.  1
    Jennifer Fugate, Harold Gouzoules & Lisa Feldman Barrett (2009). Separating Production From Perception: Perceiver-Based Explanations for Sex Differences in Emotion. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (5):394-395.
    In this commentary, we review evidence that production-based (perceiver-independent) measures reveal few consistent sex differences in emotion. Further, sex differences in perceiver-based measures can be attributed to retrospective or dispositional biases. We end by discussing an alternative view that women might appear to be more emotional because they are more facile with emotion language.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5.  23
    Xiaomei Yang (2011). Do Differences in Grammatical Form Between Languages Explain Differences in Ontology Between Different Philosophical Traditions?: A Critique of the Mass-Noun Hypothesis. Dao: A Journal of Comparative Philosophy 10 (2):149-166.
    It is an assumed view in Chinese philosophy that the grammatical differences between English or Indo-European languages and classical Chinese explain some of the differences between the Western and Chinese philosophical discourses. Although some philosophers have expressed doubts about the general link between classical Chinese philosophy and syntactic form of classical Chinese, I discuss a specific hypothesis, i.e., the mass-noun hypothesis, in this essay. The mass-noun hypothesis assumes that a linguistic distinction such as between the singular terms (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6.  5
    Anna Wierzbicka (2005). Empirical Universals of Language as a Basis for the Study of Other Human Universals and as a Tool for Exploring Cross‐Cultural Differences. Ethos: Journal of the Society for Psychological Anthropology 33 (2):256-291.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  7.  4
    Hiroko Itakura (2014). Femininity in Mixed-Sex Talk and Intercultural Communication: Are Japanese Women Polite and Submissive? Pragmatics and Society 5 (3):455-483.
    Previous studies of language and gender discuss how men and women use gender-specific conversational styles mainly in relation to English, whereas similar studies for Asian languages remain comparatively few. Moreover, little is known about gender and conversational styles during intercultural communication. This paper explores whether speakers follow similar norms of politeness in mixed-sex talk in their L1 and in intercultural conversations in L2 English, and if femininities are modified, what factors may be involved. It reports findings from a (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8.  8
    Stefan L. Frank, Thijs Trompenaars & Shravan Vasishth (2016). Cross‐Linguistic Differences in Processing Double‐Embedded Relative Clauses: Working‐Memory Constraints or Language Statistics? Cognitive Science 40 (3):554-578.
    An English double-embedded relative clause from which the middle verb is omitted can often be processed more easily than its grammatical counterpart, a phenomenon known as the grammaticality illusion. This effect has been found to be reversed in German, suggesting that the illusion is language specific rather than a consequence of universal working memory constraints. We present results from three self-paced reading experiments which show that Dutch native speakers also do not show the grammaticality illusion in Dutch, whereas both (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  9.  24
    Jacob Miguel Vigil (2009). A Socio-Relational Framework of Sex Differences in the Expression of Emotion. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (5):375.
    Despite a staggering body of research demonstrating sex differences in expressed emotion, very few theoretical models (evolutionary or non-evolutionary) offer a critical examination of the adaptive nature of such differences. From the perspective of a socio-relational framework, emotive behaviors evolved to promote the attraction and aversion of different types of relationships by advertising the two most parsimonious properties of reciprocity potential, or perceived attractiveness as a prospective social partner. These are the individual's (a) perceived capacity or ability to (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   13 citations  
  10.  43
    David M. Buss (1989). Sex Differences in Human Mate Preferences: Evolutionary Hypotheses Tested in 37 Cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 12 (1):1.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   185 citations  
  11.  11
    Daniel J. Kruger & Randolph M. Nesse (2006). An Evolutionary Life-History Framework for Understanding Sex Differences in Human Mortality Rates. Human Nature 17 (1):74-97.
    Sex differences in mortality rates stem from genetic, physiological, behavioral, and social causes that are best understood when integrated in an evolutionary life history framework. This paper investigates the Male-to-Female Mortality Ratio (M:F MR) from external and internal causes and across contexts to illustrate how sex differences shaped by sexual selection interact with the environment to yield a pattern with some consistency, but also with expected variations due to socioeconomic and other factors.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  12.  13
    John Archer (2009). Does Sexual Selection Explain Human Sex Differences in Aggression? Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):249-266.
    I argue that the magnitude and nature of sex differences in aggression, their development, causation, and variability, can be better explained by sexual selection than by the alternative biosocial version of social role theory. Thus, sex differences in physical aggression increase with the degree of risk, occur early in life, peak in young adulthood, and are likely to be mediated by greater male impulsiveness, and greater female fear of physical danger. Male variability in physical aggression is consistent with (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  13.  24
    Dario Maestripieri & Suzanne Pelka (2002). Sex Differences in Interest in Infants Across the Lifespan. Human Nature 13 (3):327-344.
    This study investigated sex differences in interest in infants among children, adolescents, young adults, and older individuals. Interest in infants was assessed with responses to images depicting animal and human infants versus adults, and with verbal responses to questionnaires. Clear sex differences, irrespective of age, emerged in all visual and verbal tests, with females being more interested in infants than males. Male interest in infants remained fairly stable across the four age groups, whereas female interest in infants was (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14.  14
    Judith A. Easton & Todd K. Shackelford (2009). Morbid Jealousy and Sex Differences in Partner-Directed Violence. Human Nature 20 (3):342-350.
    Previous research suggests that individuals diagnosed with morbid jealousy have jealousy mechanisms that are activated at lower thresholds than individuals with normal jealousy, but that these mechanisms produce behavior that is similar to individuals with normal jealousy. We extended previous research documenting these similarities by investigating sex differences in partner-directed violence committed by individuals diagnosed with morbid jealousy. The results support some of our predictions. For example, a greater percentage of men than women diagnosed with morbid jealousy used physical (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15.  18
    Paul W. Andrews, Steven W. Gangestad, Geoffrey F. Miller, Martie G. Haselton, Randy Thornhill & Michael C. Neale (2008). Sex Differences in Detecting Sexual Infidelity. Human Nature 19 (4):347-373.
    Despite the importance of extrapair copulation (EPC) in human evolution, almost nothing is known about the design features of EPC detection mechanisms. We tested for sex differences in EPC inference-making mechanisms in a sample of 203 young couples. Men made more accurate inferences (φmen = 0.66, φwomen = 0.46), and the ratio of positive errors to negative errors was higher for men than for women (1.22 vs. 0.18). Since some may have been reluctant to admit EPC behavior, we modeled (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16.  4
    Deborah S. Mower (2009). Sex Differences in Moral Interests: The Role of Kinship and the Nature of Reciprocity. Journal for the Theory of Social Behaviour 39 (1):111-119.
    Although moral psychologists and feminist moral theorists emphasize males’ interest in justice or fairness and females’ interest in care or empathy, recent work in evolutionary psychology links females’ interests in care and empathy for others with interests in fairness and equality. In an important work on sex differences in cognitive abilities, David Geary (1998) argues that the evolutionary mechanism of sexual selection drives the evolution of particular cognitive abilities and selection for particular interests. I mount two main challenges to (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17.  35
    David P. Schmitt (2005). Sociosexuality From Argentina to Zimbabwe: A 48-Nation Study of Sex, Culture, and Strategies of Human Mating. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28 (2):247-275.
    The Sociosexual Orientation Inventory (SOI; Simpson & Gangestad 1991) is a self-report measure of individual differences in human mating strategies. Low SOI scores signify that a person is sociosexually restricted, or follows a more monogamous mating strategy. High SOI scores indicate that an individual is unrestricted, or has a more promiscuous mating strategy. As part of the International Sexuality Description Project (ISDP), the SOI was translated from English into 25 additional languages and administered to a total sample of (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  18.  20
    Jeannette McGlone (1980). Sex Differences in Human Brain Asymmetry: A Critical Survey. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3 (2):215.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   186 citations  
  19.  27
    Sascha Schwarz & Manfred Hassebrauck (2012). Sex and Age Differences in Mate-Selection Preferences. Human Nature 23 (4):447-466.
    For nearly 70 years, studies have shown large sex differences in human mate selection preferences. However, most of the studies were restricted to a limited set of mate selection criteria and to college students, and neglecting relationship status. In this study, 21,245 heterosexual participants between 18 and 65 years of age (mean age 41) who at the time were not involved in a close relationship rated the importance of 82 mate selection criteria adapted from previous studies, reported age ranges (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  20.  45
    David I. Miller & Diane F. Halpern (2014). The New Science of Cognitive Sex Differences. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 18 (1):37-45.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  21.  66
    Robyn Bluhm (2013). New Research, Old Problems: Methodological and Ethical Issues in fMRI Research Examining Sex/Gender Differences in Emotion Processing. Neuroethics 6 (2):319-330.
    Neuroscience research examining sex/gender differences aims to explain behavioral differences between men and women in terms of differences in their brains. Historically, this research has used ad hoc methods and has been conducted explicitly in order to show that prevailing gender roles were dictated by biology. I examine contemporary fMRI research on sex/gender differences in emotion processing and argue that it, too, both uses problematic methods and, in doing so, reinforces gender stereotypes.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  22.  10
    Camilla Persson Benbow (1988). Sex Differences in Mathematical Reasoning Ability in Intellectually Talented Preadolescents: Their Nature, Effects, and Possible Causes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 11 (2):169.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   39 citations  
  23.  3
    Joyce F. Benenson, Tamara Morganstein & Rosanne Roy (1998). Sex Differences in Children's Investment in Peers. Human Nature 9 (4):369-390.
    It is hypothesized from within an evolutionary framework that females should be less invested in peer relations than males. Investment was operationalized as enjoyment in Study 1 and as preference for interaction in Study 2. In the first study, four- and six-year-old children’s enjoyment of peer interaction was observed in 26 groups of same-sex peers. Girls were rated as enjoying their interactions significantly less than boys. In the second study, six- and nine-year-old children were interviewed about the individuals with whom (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  24. Xinli Wang (2003). Presuppositional Languages and the Failure of Cross-Language Understanding. Dialogue 42 (01):53-77.
    Why is mutual understanding between two substantially different comprehensive language communities often problematic and even unattainable? To answer this question, the author first introduces a notion of presuppositional languages. Based on the semantic structure of a presuppositional language, the author identifies a significant condition necessary for effective understanding of a language: the interpreter is able to effectively understand a language only if he/she is able to recognize and comprehend its metaphysical presuppositions. The essential role of (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25.  14
    Roberta Bivins (2000). Sex Cells: Gender and the Language of Bacterial Genetics. [REVIEW] Journal of the History of Biology 33 (1):113 - 139.
    Between 1946 and 1960, a new phenomenon emerged in the field of bacteriology. "Bacterial sex," as it was called, revolutionized the study of genetics, largely by making available a whole new class of cheap, fast-growing, and easily manipulated organisms. But what was "bacterial sex?" How could single-celled organisms have "sex" or even be sexually differentiated? The technical language used in the scientific press -- the public and inalienable face of 20th century science -- to describe this apparently neuter organism (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  26.  7
    David C. Geary (1996). Sexual Selection and Sex Differences in Mathematical Abilities. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 19 (2):229.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  27.  15
    Frank Salter, Karl Grammer & Anja Rikowski (2005). Sex Differences in Negotiating with Powerful Males. Human Nature 16 (3):306-321.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  28.  2
    Jeffrey M. Gredlein & David F. Bjorklund (2005). Sex Differences in Young Children's Use of Tools in a Problem-Solving Task. Human Nature 16 (2):211-232.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  29.  2
    C. E. Buxton & D. A. Grant (1939). Retroaction and Gains in Motor Learning: II. Sex Differences, and a Further Analysis of Gains. Journal of Experimental Psychology 25 (2):198.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  30.  7
    H. D. Kimmel & E. Kimmel (1965). Sex Differences in Adaptation of the GSR Under Repeated Applications of a Visual Stimulus. Journal of Experimental Psychology 70 (5):536.
  31.  2
    R. W. Husband & M. J. Ludden (1931). Sex Differences in Motor Skills. Journal of Experimental Psychology 14 (4):414.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  32.  4
    Henryk Misiak (1947). Age and Sex Differences in Critical Flicker Frequency. Journal of Experimental Psychology 37 (4):318.
  33.  2
    Toine Lagro‐Janssen & Janja Grosicar (2010). Morbidity Figures From General Practice: Sex Differences in Traumatology. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice 16 (4):673-677.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34.  2
    Betsy Worth Estes, Louise Brightwell Miller & Mary Ellen Curtin (1962). Supplementary Report: Monetary Incentive and Motivation in Discrimination Learning--Sex Differences. Journal of Experimental Psychology 63 (3):320.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35.  1
    H. E. Burtt (1920). Sex Differences in the Effect of Discussion. Journal of Experimental Psychology 3 (5):390.
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36.  25
    Charles Darwin (2007/1981). The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex. Plume.
    The most accessible edition ever published of Darwin’s incendiary classic, edited by “as fine a science essayist as we have” ( New York Times ) The Descent of Man , Darwin’s second landmark work on evolutionary theory (following The Origin of the Species ), marked a turning point in the history of science with its modern vision of human nature as the product of evolution. Darwin argued that the noblest features of humans, such as language and morality, were the (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   606 citations  
  37.  34
    Cordelia Fine (2013). Is There Neurosexism in Functional Neuroimaging Investigations of Sex Differences? Neuroethics 6 (2):369-409.
    The neuroscientific investigation of sex differences has an unsavoury past, in which scientific claims reinforced and legitimated gender roles in ways that were not scientifically justified. Feminist critics have recently argued that the current use of functional neuroimaging technology in sex differences research largely follows that tradition. These charges of ‘neurosexism’ have been countered with arguments that the research being done is informative and valuable and that an over-emphasis on the perils, rather than the promise, of such research (...)
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  38.  17
    Karen J. Berkley (1997). Sex Differences in Pain. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 20 (3):371-380.
    Are there sex differences in pain? For experimentally delivered somatic stimuli, females have lower thresholds, greater ability to discriminate, higher pain ratings, and less tolerance of noxious stimuli than males. These differences, however, are small, exist only for certain forms of stimulation and are affected by many situational variables such as presence of disease, experimental setting, and even nutritive status. For endogenous pains, women report more multiple pains in more body regions than men. With no obvious underlying rationale, (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  39.  7
    Carlos Gil-Burmann, Fernando Peláez & Susana Sánchez (2002). Mate Choice Differences According to Sex and Age. Human Nature 13 (4):493-508.
    We used 7,415 advertisements published in Spain to analyze traits sought/offered by men and women from different age groups. Findings regarding age, socioeconomic status, and physical attractiveness requirements support evolutionary predictions about mate preferences. However, changes in trait preferences among women under 40 appear to be contingent on Spain’s socioeconomic transformation. Women under 40 seek mainly physical attractiveness in men, whereas those over 40 seek mainly socioeconomic status. The trait most sought by men in all age groups is physical attractiveness. (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  40.  15
    Robin I. M. Dunbar, Anna Marriott & Neil D. C. Duncan (1997). Human Conversational Behavior. Human Nature 8 (3):231-246.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  41.  7
    Fermín Moscoso del Prado Martín (2016). Vocabulary, Grammar, Sex, and Aging. Cognitive Science 40 (4).
    Understanding the changes in our language abilities along the lifespan is a crucial step for understanding the aging process both in normal and in abnormal circumstances. Besides controlled experimental tasks, it is equally crucial to investigate language in unconstrained conversation. I present an information-theoretical analysis of a corpus of dyadic conversations investigating how the richness of the vocabulary, the word-internal structure, and the syntax of the utterances evolves as a function of the speaker's age and sex. Although vocabulary (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  42.  87
    Cordelia Fine (2012). Explaining, or Sustaining, the Status Quo? The Potentially Self-Fulfilling Effects of 'Hardwired' Accounts of Sex Differences. Neuroethics 5 (3):285-294.
    In this article I flesh out support for observations that scientific accounts of social groups can influence the very groups and mental phenomena under investigation. The controversial hypothesis that there are hardwired differences between the brains of males and females that contribute to sex differences in gender-typed behaviour is common in both the scientific and popular media. Here I present evidence that such claims, quite independently of their scientific validity, have scope to sustain the very sex differences (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  43.  43
    Peggy DesAutels (2010). Sex Differences and Neuroethics. Philosophical Psychology 23 (1):95-111.
    Discussions in neuroethics to date have ignored an ever-increasing neuroscientific lilterature on sex differences in brains. If, indeed, there are significant differences in the brains of men versus women and in the brains of boys versus girls, the ethical and social implications loom very large. I argue that recent neuroscientific findings on sex-based brain differences have significant implications for theories of morality and for our understandings of the neuroscience of moral cognition and behavior.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  44.  16
    Nicholas Pound, Martin Daly & Margo Wilson (2009). There's No Contest: Human Sex Differences Are Sexually Selected. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):286-287.
    An evolutionary psychological perspective drawing on sexual selection theory can better explain sex differences in aggression and violence than can social constructionist theories. Moreover, there is accumulating evidence that, in accordance with predictions derived from sexual selection theory, men modulate their willingness to engage in risky and violent confrontations in response to cues to fitness variance and future prospects.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45.  21
    Eli J. Finkel & Erica B. Slotter (2009). An I3 Theory Analysis of Human Sex Differences in Aggression. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):279-279.
    According to I3 Theory, individuals enact aggressive behaviors when (a) instigating triggers are severe, (b) impelling forces are strong, and/or (c) inhibiting forces are weak. Archer's analysis of human sex differences in aggression could be bolstered by a careful analysis of male-female discrepancies in reactivity (or exposure) to instigating triggers, proneness toward impelling forces, and/or proneness toward inhibiting forces.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46.  5
    Michael J. Boulton, Mark Trueman & Ian Flemington (2002). Associations Between Secondary School Pupils' Definitions of Bullying, Attitudes Towards Bullying, and Tendencies to Engage in Bullying: Age and Sex Differences. Educational Studies 28 (4):353-370.
    A self-report questionnaire about involvement in different types of bullying, what behaviours were regarded as bullying, and attitudes towards bullying, bullies and victims was completed by pupils in Year 7 (aged 11/12) through to Year 10 (aged 14/15) ( n = 170). Overall, direct verbal assault was the most commonly reported, and stealing the least frequently reported, type of bullying. For six specific types of bullying investigated, and for a composite measure of all types of bullying, significantly fewer Year 9 (...)
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  47.  13
    Aaron Sell & John Archer (2009). Standards of Evidence for Designed Sex Differences. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3):289.
    At the heart of the debate between social role theorists and evolutionary psychologists is whether natural selection has designed the minds of the sexes differently to some interesting extent. In this commentary I describe the standards of evidence for both the positive and negative claims. In my opinion, Archer has met the standard for designed sex differences in intrasexual conflict.
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48.  10
    Dominic Dp Johnson & Mark van Vugt (2009). A History of War: The Role of Inter-Group Conflict in Sex Differences in Aggression. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 32 (3-4):280 - 281.
    Human aggression has two important dimensions: within-group aggression and between-group aggression. Archer offers an excellent treatment of the former only. A full explanation of sex differences in aggression will fail without accounting for our history of inter-group aggression, which has deep evolutionary roots and specific psychological adaptations. The causes and consequences of inter-group aggression are dramatically different for males and females.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  49.  19
    April L. Bleske & David M. Buss (2000). A Comprehensive Theory of Human Mating Must Explain Between-Sex and Within-Sex Differences in Mating Strategies. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 23 (4):593-594.
    Gangestad & Simpson make a major contribution by highlighting the importance of mate choice for good genes, the costs of alternative strategies, and tradeoffs inherent in human mating. By downplaying sex differences and ignoring the nongenetic adaptive benefits of short term mating, however, they undermine their goal of “strategic pluralism” by presenting a theory devoid of many documented complexities of human mating.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  50.  13
    J. Colette Berbesque, Frank W. Marlowe, Ian Pawn, Peter Thompson, Guy Johnson & Audax Mabulla (2012). Sex Differences in Hadza Dental Wear Patterns. Human Nature 23 (3):270-282.
    Among hunter-gatherers, the sharing of male and female foods is often assumed to result in virtually the same diet for males and females. Although food sharing is widespread among the hunting and gathering Hadza of Tanzania, women were observed eating significantly more tubers than men. This study investigates the relationship between patterns of dental wear, diet, and extramasticatory use of teeth among the Hadza. Casts of the upper dentitions were made from molds taken from 126 adults and scored according to (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
1 — 50 / 1000