This study explores the research question: What socio-ecological factors are conducive to women’s hunting? Using life history theory and behavioral ecology as a base, the authors pose four hypotheses. The first hypothesis is that women will hunt when there are fewer conflicts with childcare. The second hypothesis is that women will hunt when there are fewer cultural restrictions regarding the use of hunting technology. The third hypothesis is that women will hunt when there are low-risk game within range of camp, dogs are used in hunting, or hunting is in groups. Lastly, the fourth hypothesis suggests that women will hunt when they play essential roles on informational tasks. There is enough evidence to support the third and fourth hypotheses. The study also shows that there is considerable evidence that women hunt cross-culturally.

This study explores the research question: What socio-ecological factors are conducive to women’s hunting? Using life history theory and behavioral ecology as a base, the authors pose four hypotheses. The first hypothesis is that women will hunt when there are fewer conflicts with childcare. The second hypothesis is that women will hunt when there are fewer cultural restrictions regarding the use of hunting technology. The third hypothesis is that women will hunt when there are low-risk game within range of camp, dogs are used in hunting, or hunting is in groups. Lastly, the fourth hypothesis suggests that women will hunt when they play essential roles on informational tasks. There is enough evidence to support the third and fourth hypotheses. The study also shows that there is considerable evidence that women hunt cross-culturally.

This study explores the research question: What socio-ecological factors are conducive to women’s hunting? Using life history theory and behavioral ecology as a base, the authors pose four hypotheses. The first hypothesis is that women will hunt when there are fewer conflicts with childcare. The second hypothesis is that women will hunt when there are fewer cultural restrictions regarding the use of hunting technology. The third hypothesis is that women will hunt when there are low-risk game within range of camp, dogs are used in hunting, or hunting is in groups. Lastly, the fourth hypothesis suggests that women will hunt when they play essential roles on informational tasks. There is enough evidence to support the third and fourth hypotheses. The study also shows that there is considerable evidence that women hunt cross-culturally.

After noticing that recent archaeological research has found evidence that women in pre-history were probably hunters, the authors use the ethnographic record from 63 foraging populations to explore the role of women in hunting. They explore what proportion of societies expect women to contribute to hunting, if women hunt, what proportion was opportunistic or intentional, whether women hunters were skilled, and whether women hunted with children.

After noticing that recent archaeological research has found evidence that women in pre-history were probably hunters, the authors use the ethnographic record from 63 foraging populations to explore the role of women in hunting. They explore what proportion of societies expect women to contribute to hunting, if women hunt, what proportion was opportunistic or intentional, whether women hunters were skilled, and whether women hunted with children.

In this article, the authors seek to understand dog-human coevolution by considering predictors of different aspects of dog-human relationships across cultures. In order to measure dog-human relationships, the researchers created three indexes: dogs' utility for humans (DUH), humans' utility for dogs (HUD), and the personhood of dogs (PD). Each of these indexes were tested against various pre-coded variables that were empirically and theoretically relevant to this subject.

In this article, the authors seek to understand dog-human coevolution by considering predictors of different aspects of dog-human relationships across cultures. In order to measure dog-human relationships, the researchers created three indexes: dogs' utility for humans (DUH), humans' utility for dogs (HUD), and the personhood of dogs (PD). Each of these indexes were tested against various pre-coded variables that were empirically and theoretically relevant to this subject.

In this article, the authors seek to understand dog-human coevolution by considering predictors of different aspects of dog-human relationships across cultures. In order to measure dog-human relationships, the researchers created three indexes: dogs' utility for humans (DUH), humans' utility for dogs (HUD), and the personhood of dogs (PD). Each of these indexes were tested against various pre-coded variables that were empirically and theoretically relevant to this subject.

This study explores the ways in which human deception has evolved using a sample of 145 societies from eHRAF. After noticing that most research has focused just on tactical deception on humans, this study delved into the categorization and prevalence of human aggressive mimicry. The authors suggest that deception evolved from the context of directing it toward prey. The presence of human aggressive mimicry supports that this is a near-universal cross-cultural practice among hunter-gatherers and the authors highlight the importance of further research on human-nonhuman interactions. The authors posit that this hypothesis could serve as a link between the Social Brain Hypothesis and the Foraging Brain Hypothesis.

This article is mainly concerned with understanding the motivators toward egalitarianism through modeling via a game that combined elements from both hawk-dove and prisoners dilemma. While most of the article is focused on this model, the researchers also tested their hypotheses cross-culturally on a sample of forager societies. In both cases, they found evidence that the benefits of cooperation drove egalitarianism.