title: The Evolution of Altruistic Preferences: Mothers versus Fathers.
abstract: What can evolutionary biology tell us about male-female differences in preferences concerning family matters? Might mothers be more solicitous toward offspring than fathers, for example? The economics literature has documented gender differences-children benefit more from money put in the hands of mothers rather than fathers, for example-and these differences are thought to be partly due to preferences. Yet for good reason family economics is mostly concerned with how prices and incomes affect behavior against a backdrop of exogenous preferences. Evolutionary biology complements this approach by treating preferences as the outcome of natural selection. We mine the well-developed biological literature to make aprima faciecase for evolutionary roots of parental preferences. We consider the most rudimentary of traits-sex differences in gamete size and internal fertilization-and explain how they have been thought to generate male-female differences in altruism toward children and other preferences related to family behavior. The evolutionary approach to the family illuminates connections between issues typically thought distinct in family economics, such as parental care and marriage markets.
authors: TSE (LERNA, CNRS), IAST, IDEI, Université Toulouse 1 Capitole, F - 31 015 Toulouse Cedex 6.
authors: Ingela
authors: I
authors: Alger
authors: Donald
authors: D
authors: Cox
keywords: Altruism; evolution; parental care; paternity; reproductive success; sex ratios
references: J Evol Biol. 2010 Jan;23(1):149-56
references: 20069721
references: Am Nat. 2002 Sep;160(3):285-92
references: 18707439
references: J Theor Biol. 2012 Apr 21;299:42-54
references: 21624376
references: Nature. 1999 Aug 19;400(6746):766-8
references: 10466725
references: Science. 2003 Apr 25;300(5619):630-3
references: 12714743
references: Trends Ecol Evol. 2005 Jan;20(1):33-8
references: 16701338
references: Evol Hum Behav. 2000 Mar 1;21(2):79-95
references: 10785345
references: Nat Neurosci. 2012 Apr 15;15(5):681-8
references: 22504348
references: Biol Lett. 2007 Jun 22;3(3):234-6
references: 17389217
references: J Vis. 2009 Jun 30;9(6):23.1-10
references: 19761314
references: J Econ Behav Organ. 1986 Dec;7(4):415-24
references: 12314989
references: J Hered. 2001 Mar-Apr;92(2):150-8
references: 11396573
references: Horm Behav. 2001 Feb;39(1):48-58
references: 11161883
references: Hum Nat. 2002 Dec;13(4):437-55
references: 26193089
references: Mol Ecol. 2005 Jan;14(1):19-38
references: 15643948
references: Am Nat. 2004 Oct;164(4):E83-9
references: 15459886
references: Heredity (Edinb). 1948 Dec;2(Pt. 3):349-68
references: 18103134
references: Nature. 1995 Dec 14;378(6558):669
references: 7501010
references: Science. 2008 Nov 7;322(5903):900-4
references: 18988842
references: Neuroimage. 2005 May 1;25(4):1336-44
references: 15850750
references: Nature. 2003 Sep 11;425(6954):179-81
references: 12968180
references: Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2000 Apr;907:75-96
references: 10818622
references: Horm Behav. 2007 Nov;52(4):499-507
references: 17716675
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2008 Sep 16;105(37):14153-6
references: 18765804
references: Biol Psychiatry. 2010 Aug 15;68(4):377-82
references: 20359699
references: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2012 Jun 19;109(25):9923-8
references: 22645330
references: Q Rev Biol. 1993 Dec;68(4):495-532
references: 8115596
references: J Evol Biol. 2008 Jul;21(4):919-48
references: 18462318
references: Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2002 Mar 29;357(1419):351-62
references: 11958703