Sex differences in political leadership in an egalitarian society

Rueden, Christopher von; Alami, Sarah; Kaplan, Hillard; Gurven, Michael

doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2018.03.005

Cited by 64 publications

(102 citation statements)

References 97 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thus, men may have evolved a stronger drive to acquire shareable resources. Support for this idea comes from anthropological studies that indicate sex differences in the division of labor, where men more often than women pursue highrisk activities to acquire resources (Hawkes, O'Connell, & Blurton Jones, 2001;Von Rueden, Alami, Kaplan, & Gurven, 2018). Obviously, the first transfer in the trust game and the second transfer in the gift-exchange game are excellent opportunities for resource acquisition as in both cases the initial number of resources is multiplied.…”

Section: Reconciling the Results From The Two Gamesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex Differences in Trust and Trustworthiness - A Meta-Analysis of the Trust Game and the Gift-Exchange Game

Akker¹,

Assen²,

Vugt³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Do men and women differ in trusting behavior? This question is directly relevant to social, economic, and political domains, yet the answer remains elusive. In this paper, we present a meta-analytic review of the literature on sex differences in the trust game and a variant, the gift-exchange game. Informed by both evolutionary and cultural perspectives, we predicted men to be more trusting and women to be more trustworthy in these games. The trust game meta-analyses encompass 77 papers yielding 174 effect sizes based on 17,082 participants from 23 countries, while the gift-exchange game meta-analyses covered 15 papers reporting 35 effect sizes based on 1,362 participants from 19 countries. In the trust game, we found men to be more trusting than women, g = 0.22, but we found no significant sex difference in trustworthiness, g = 0.09. In the gift-exchange game we found no significant sex difference in trust, g = 0.15, yet we did find that men are more trustworthy than women, g = 0.33. The results of the meta-analyses show that the behavior in both games is inconsistent. It seems that when monetary transfers are multiplied men behave more cooperatively than women, but that there are no sex differences when such a multiplier is absent. This “male multiplier effect” is consistent with an evolutionary account emphasizing men’s historical role as resource provider. However, future research needs to substantiate this effect and provide a theoretical framework to explain it.

show abstract

Section: Reconciling the Results From The Two Gamesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sex Differences in Trust and Trustworthiness - A Meta-Analysis of the Trust Game and the Gift-Exchange Game

Akker¹,

Assen²,

Vugt³

et al. 2018

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…If the results support Hypotheses 1 and 2, the next step is to provide evidence that demonstrates the potential role of evolutionary forces in gendered leadership preferences by establishing a link from intergroup threat through preferences for leader physical formidability to preferences regarding the biological sex of a preferred leader. Evidence suggests that part of the male advantage in leadership attainment is related to males' greater body size and physical strength (e.g., Handwerker and Crosbie, 1982;Glowacki and von Rueden, 2015;von Rueden et al, 2018; but see Low, 1992). Overall, the analyses presented here suggest:…”

Section: Evolutionarily Informed Demand Factorsmentioning

confidence: 57%

“…This, of course, includes humans. For instance, Brown (1991, 137) states that "In the public political sphere men form the dominant element among [every people or people in general]" (see also Ludwig, 2002;von Rueden et al, 2018). Archeological and anthropological data suggest that human males have been vastly over-represented in the public sphere dating back thousands of years to Egyptian pharaohs; Chinese, Japanese, and Roman emperors; Catholic Popes; and European monarchs (Murray and Murray, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Archeological and anthropological data suggest that human males have been vastly over-represented in the public sphere dating back thousands of years to Egyptian pharaohs; Chinese, Japanese, and Roman emperors; Catholic Popes; and European monarchs (Murray and Murray, 2011). This includes not just large-scale states or empires but also other forms of society including small-scale, egalitarian, and preindustrial and nonindustrial societies (Whyte, 1978;Collier and Rosaldo, 1981;Low, 1992;von Rueden et al, 2018). Ludwig concludes "this blanket prejudice against female rulers goes back to antiquity" (2002,29).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An Experimental Examination of Demand-Side Preferences for Female and Male National Leaders

Murray

Carroll

2020

Front. Psychol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Females constitute a far smaller proportion of political leaders than their proportion in the general population. Leading demand-and supply side explanations for this phenomenon account for some of the variance but leave a great deal unexplained. In an effort to account for additional variance, this research evaluates the issue informed by the biological theory of evolution by natural selection, a foundational explanation for the diversity and function of living organisms. It experimentally assesses how varying types of inter-and intragroup threat-a recurring ancestral problem-affect demand for female and male national leaders. This work analyzes data collected from individuals (N = 826) in the U.S. during the 2012 Cooperative Congressional Election Study. The results suggest the predominant preference for male over female leaders in some contexts may be the non-adaptive and non-functional but lingering outcome of an adaptive preference for physically formidable allies that was shaped by natural selection in ancestral environments.

show abstract

“…Turning to humans, von Rueden et al. () found that among the Tsimane—egalitarian forager‐farmers of the Bolivian Amazon—men's greater political influence stemmed in part from sex differences in body size, parental investment costs, and division of labor but was also due to the increased access to cooperative partners that these latter characteristics beget.…”

Section: Grounded In Evolutionary Theorymentioning

confidence: 99%

Biological Anthropology in 2018: Grounded in Theory, Questioning Contexts, Embracing Innovation

Martin

2019

American Anthropologist

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biological anthropology in 2018 encapsulated what past scholars envisioned for its future: a multidisciplinary approach to understanding human and nonhuman primate evolution and diversity using the most innovative techniques and rigorous standards available. This year also built on a tradition of introspection about what biological anthropology encompasses and by whom and how it is conducted. This review highlights research and movements in the field that reflect both of these pursuits. Studies drew on evolutionary theory to generate novel insights into human and nonhuman primate biology, behavior, and organization. Studies on hominin evolution and human biology have upended previous understandings by revealing more dynamic and context-dependent processes in our ancestry and phenotypic expressions. Across subdisciplines, biological anthropologists have advanced the use of new technologies and analytical techniques and begun to promote open, transparent, and reproducible science among a more diverse community of researchers. [year in review, evolutionary anthropology, context and variation, emerging technologies, transparent methods, researcher diversity] RESUMEN La biología antropológica en 2018 encapsuló lo que investigadores anteriores imaginaron para su futuro:una aproximación multidisciplinaria para entender la evolución de primates humanos y no humanos y diversidad utilizando las técnicas más innovadoras y los estándares rigurosos disponibles. Este año también desarrolló sobre una tradición de introspección acerca de lo que la antropología biológica abarca y por quién y cómo es llevada a cabo. Esta revisión resalta la investigación y los movimientos en el campo que reflejan estas búsquedas. Los estudios se basaron en la teoría evolucionaria para generar nuevos conocimientos en la biología de primates humanos y no humanos, comportamiento y organización. Los estudios sobre la evolución de los homíninos y la biología humana han cambiado drásticamente entendimientos previos al revelar procesos más dinámicos y dependientes del contexto en nuestra ascendencia y expresiones fenotípicas. A través de las subdisciplinas, los antropólogos biológicos han avanzado el uso de nuevas tecnologías y técnicas analíticas y empezado a promover una ciencia abierta, transparente y reproducible entre una comunidad más diversa de investigadores. [año en revisión, antropología evolucionaria, contexto y variación, tecnologías emergentes, métodos transparentes, diversidad de investigadores] T he history of biological anthropology has been underscored by attempts to properly situate the field in relation to other natural sciences and the discipline of anthropology as a whole (e.g., Calcagno

show abstract

Sex differences in political leadership in an egalitarian society

Cited by 64 publications

References 97 publications

Sex Differences in Trust and Trustworthiness - A Meta-Analysis of the Trust Game and the Gift-Exchange Game

Sex Differences in Trust and Trustworthiness - A Meta-Analysis of the Trust Game and the Gift-Exchange Game

An Experimental Examination of Demand-Side Preferences for Female and Male National Leaders

Biological Anthropology in 2018: Grounded in Theory, Questioning Contexts, Embracing Innovation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About