Factors influencing the allowance of cousin marriages in the standard cross cultural sample.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this study is to examine variance in the practice and acceptance of cousin marriage in select areas of the world. This study uses Murdock’s Standard Cross Cultural Sample (SCCS). The SCCS includes 186 societies ranging from contemporary hunter and gatherers to early historic states to contemporary industrial people. It is hypothesized that cousin marriages are more likely to occur in small, isolated communities, and in communities that experience high rates of pathogen prevalence. That is, the variance in the practice of cousin marriage may reflect functional responses to various local ecological and environmental pressures. The results demonstrate that geographic isolation and pathogen prevalence are both independent and significant positive predictors of whether or not a society practices cousin marriage. These findings suggest that consanguineous marriage may be an adaptive solution to the problem of mate selection, depending on the environment in which one lives. Consequently, the biological advantages may lead to and/or become an individual preference, which is then reinforced by the local culture. We contend that although social and cultural explanations are of obvious importance, they can only provide partial explanations, and much can be gained from incorporating an evolutionary perspective. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)<br/><br/>
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".