MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2028583601 · doi:10.1080/19485565.2002.9989047

Social status and the secondary sex ratio: New evidence on a lingering controversy

2002· article· en· W2028583601 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Lee Ellis, Steven Bonin

Bibliographic record

VenueSocial Biology · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDemographic Trends and Gender Preferences
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOffspringSex ratioSocial statusDemographyPsychologySex selectionSocial psychologyDevelopmental psychologyBiologyPopulationPregnancySociologySocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Because women are more likely than men to use social status as a criterion in mate selection, evolutionary theory has led to the hypothesis that higher proportions of males will be born to parents of high social status than to parents of low status. To date, the research that has tested this deduction has not provided consistent support. This could be partly due to the small sample size in several of the studies. The present study tested the hypothesis using 6 different social status measures provided by more than 11,000 United States and Canadian college students. The offspring sex ratio was measured by asking the students their own sex plus that of each of their siblings. No evidence was found to support the hypothesis that parental social status has any significant effect on the sex ratio of offspring.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.684
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.094
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.254 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations16
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSocial BiologySame topicDemographic Trends and Gender PreferencesFrench-language works237,207