Increased Mortality Exposure within the Family Rather than Individual Mortality Experiences Triggers Faster Life-History Strategies in Historic Human Populations
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Life History Theory predicts that extrinsic mortality risk is one of the most important factors shaping (human) life histories. Evidence from contemporary populations suggests that individuals confronted with high mortality environments show characteristic traits of fast life-history strategies: they marry and reproduce earlier, have shorter birth intervals and invest less in their offspring. However, little is known of the impact of mortality experiences on the speed of life histories in historical human populations with generally higher mortality risk, and on male life histories in particular. Furthermore, it remains unknown whether individual-level mortality experiences within the family have a greater effect on life-history decisions or family membership explains life-history variation. In a comparative approach using event history analyses, we study the impact of family versus individual-level effects of mortality exposure on two central life-history parameters, ages at first marriage and first birth, in three historical human populations (Germany, Finland, Canada). Mortality experience is measured as the confrontation with sibling deaths within the natal family up to an individual's age of 15. Results show that the speed of life histories is not adjusted according to individual-level mortality experiences but is due to family-level effects. The general finding of lower ages at marriage/reproduction after exposure to higher mortality in the family holds for both females and males. This study provides evidence for the importance of the family environment for reproductive timing while individual-level mortality experiences seem to play only a minor role in reproductive life history decisions in humans.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".