This paper tests the proximity hypothesis (used by Murdock [1949]) which posits that residential propinquity will be associated with parent-in-law avoidance and kin terminology. Several operational hypotheses are tested but none are supported. The author suggests that this finding may cast doubt other hypotheses that underlie Murdock’s findings, such as the participation hypothesis.

This paper tests the proximity hypothesis (used by Murdock [1949]) which posits that residential propinquity will be associated with parent-in-law avoidance and kin terminology. Several operational hypotheses are tested but none are supported. The author suggests that this finding may cast doubt other hypotheses that underlie Murdock’s findings, such as the participation hypothesis.

This paper tests the proximity hypothesis (used by Murdock [1949]) which posits that residential propinquity will be associated with parent-in-law avoidance and kin terminology. Several operational hypotheses are tested but none are supported. The author suggests that this finding may cast doubt other hypotheses that underlie Murdock’s findings, such as the participation hypothesis.

This paper tests the proximity hypothesis (used by Murdock [1949]) which posits that residential propinquity will be associated with parent-in-law avoidance and kin terminology. Several operational hypotheses are tested but none are supported. The author suggests that this finding may cast doubt other hypotheses that underlie Murdock’s findings, such as the participation hypothesis.

This paper tests the proximity hypothesis (used by Murdock [1949]) which posits that residential propinquity will be associated with parent-in-law avoidance and kin terminology. Several operational hypotheses are tested but none are supported. The author suggests that this finding may cast doubt other hypotheses that underlie Murdock’s findings, such as the participation hypothesis.

This paper tests the proximity hypothesis (used by Murdock [1949]) which posits that residential propinquity will be associated with parent-in-law avoidance and kin terminology. Several operational hypotheses are tested but none are supported. The author suggests that this finding may cast doubt other hypotheses that underlie Murdock’s findings, such as the participation hypothesis.

This article examines mother-in-law avoidance, theorizing it is "a device for distinguishing the son-in-law/mother-in-law relationship from the husband-wife relationship in societies where these relationships tend to be similar as far as their economic aspect is concerned” (71). The conditions that may give rise to economic interaction between son-in-law and mother-in-law, such as matrilocal residence, are also discussed.

This study re-examines patterns of cross-sex kin relationships using new ethnographic data. The author looks specifically at cross-sex kin relationship in relation to marriage rules.

This paper seeks to explain the presence of the incest taboo, and its occasional extension to first cousins. After considering prevailing theories logically, the author conducts tests of the three prevailing theories, and concludes that inbreeding theory is both the most logically sound and is best supported by ethnographic evidence. The author subsequently addresses possible exceptions to this theory, and includes a mathematical model which suggests that early expanding agricultural populations may have been able to notice the deleterious effects of inbreeding.

This article examines parent-in-law avoidance in non-industrial societies. The author suggests that in-law avoidance is associated with characteristics of kinship structure, such as lineality, residence and family type. A psychological interpretation is also offered. Results support hypotheses relating to kinship structure.