Found 2505 Hypotheses across 251 Pages (0.006 seconds)
  1. Sexual division of foraging labor will be positively associated with seasonality (174).Marlowe, Frank W. - Hunting and gathering: the human sexual division of foraging labor, 2007 - 2 Variables

    This article explores the sexual division of labor among foragers, focusing on resource availability and constraints on women’s foraging activities. The authors conclude that “there is a greater division of foraging labor in more seasonal habitats where less gathering is possible and more extractive, tool-based foraging is required” (191).

    Related HypothesesCite
  2. The level of contribution by either gender is positively associated with flexibility in foraging activities (174).Marlowe, Frank W. - Hunting and gathering: the human sexual division of foraging labor, 2007 - 1 Variables

    This article explores the sexual division of labor among foragers, focusing on resource availability and constraints on women’s foraging activities. The authors conclude that “there is a greater division of foraging labor in more seasonal habitats where less gathering is possible and more extractive, tool-based foraging is required” (191).

    Related HypothesesCite
  3. The net primary productivity of agriculturalists’ will be greater than that of foragers’ land.Porter, Claire C. - How marginal are forager habitats?, 2007 - 2 Variables

    This article examines the quality of forager habitats to determine whether agriculturalists occupy the most productive areas while modern forager groups are relegated to poor habitats. Findings indicate that there are slight but insignificant differences in the net primary productivity of foragers’ land and agriculturalists’ land. Further analysis of types of agriculturalists suggest that horticulturalists live in the most productive habitats, followed by intensive agriculturalists and finally pastoralists.

    Related HypothesesCite
  4. The net primary productivity of intensive agriculturalists land will be greater than that of pastoralists and horticulturalists.Porter, Claire C. - How marginal are forager habitats?, 2007 - 2 Variables

    This article examines the quality of forager habitats to determine whether agriculturalists occupy the most productive areas while modern forager groups are relegated to poor habitats. Findings indicate that there are slight but insignificant differences in the net primary productivity of foragers’ land and agriculturalists’ land. Further analysis of types of agriculturalists suggest that horticulturalists live in the most productive habitats, followed by intensive agriculturalists and finally pastoralists.

    Related HypothesesCite
  5. "Holding population density constant, forager groups should increase the time they spend within a habitat as the rate of resource growth in a habitat declines (434)"Freeman, Jacob - Intensification, tipping points, and social change in a coupled forager-reso..., 2012 - 4 Variables

    The authors present a bioeconomic model of hunter-gatherer foraging effort to quantitatively represent forager intensification. Using cross-cultural data, the model is evaluated as a means to better understand variation in residential stability and resource ownership.

    Related HypothesesCite
  6. Productivity (a measure of subsistence type), is positively associated with the presence of High Gods (p. 2t5).Peoples, Hervey C. - Subsistence and the evolution of religion, 2012 - 2 Variables

    This study exmaines the presence of High Gods in societies as a function of subsistence type, population size, and stratification. High Gods are thought to be a mechanism to encourage collective action in the face of environmental challenges. Animal husbandry was found to be a strong predictor of High Gods, especially gods that are active in human affairs or morally supportive.

    Related HypothesesCite
  7. Male contribution to subsistence will be positively associated with female fertility (756, 758).Marlowe, Frank W. - Male contribution to diet and female reproductive success, 2001 - 2 Variables

    This article seeks to understand male-female bonding by testing the relationship between male contribution to subsistence (a proxy for male provisioning) and female reproductive success in foraging societies. Analysis supports a positive association.

    Related HypothesesCite
  8. Male contribution to subsistence will be positively associated with female reproductive success (756, 758).Marlowe, Frank W. - Male contribution to diet and female reproductive success, 2001 - 2 Variables

    This article seeks to understand male-female bonding by testing the relationship between male contribution to subsistence (a proxy for male provisioning) and female reproductive success in foraging societies. Analysis supports a positive association.

    Related HypothesesCite
  9. Number of residential moves per year will be negatively associated with percent contribution to diet through fishing and positively associated with percent contribution to diet through hunting and gathering (61).Marlowe, Frank W. - Hunter-gatherers and human evolution, 2005 - 4 Variables

    This article explores the relationships between habitat and social organization among humans and other species. Diet, technology, group size, home range, mobility, kinship, marital residence, sexual division of labor, mating system, central places, food sharing, and egalitarianism are all considered.

    Related HypothesesCite
  10. Male contribution to subsistence will be negatively associated with percent of polygynous women among foragers (292-3).Marlowe, Frank W. - The mating system of foragers in the standard cross-cultural sample, 2003 - 3 Variables

    This article examines variation in polygyny among foragers. Empirical analysis suggests that the level of male provisioning influences mating systems: higher male contribution to subsistence is associated with monogamy. The influences of pathogen stress, male-male competition, and male coercion are also considered.

    Related HypothesesCite