The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Food Sharing Among Ache Foragers: Tests of Explanatory Hypotheses [and Comments and Reply]
Abstract
This paper aims to describe and explain aspects of food sharing among Ache hunter-gatherers of eastern Paraguay. Food sharing has been widely held to be a fundamental feature of the hunting and gathering way of life and has been hypothesized to have played a major role in the evolution of language, intelligence, and the sexual division of labor. The very general question that guided the research is: What factors are responsible for the evolution of food sharing among adult conspecifics, and how can we account for the variation among groups in the extent to which food is shared? Five alternative hypotheses concerning the evolution of adult-adult food sharing are reviewed and analyzed in terms of the competing predictions they generate. These hypotheses invoke (1) kin selection, (2) tolerated theft, (3) temporal reciprocity, (4) cooperative acquisition of food resources, and (5) conservation of resources. For meat and honey, the resources the Ache share most, the data conform to the predictions of the tolerated-theft and temporal-reciprocity hypotheses, with some qualifications. Long-term differences in productivity between foragers suggest that reciprocity is not completely balanced. The implications of these results for a general theory of food sharing are discussed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
“Economic man” in cross-cultural perspective: behavioral experiments in 15 small-scale societies
Henrich, J., Boyd, R., Bowles, S., Camerer, C., Fehr, E., Gintis, H., McElreath, R., Alvard, M., Barr, A., Ensminger, J., et al. (2005) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x05000142 · Cited by 1,898
Self-citationTooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1990) · Ethology and Sociobiology · doi:10.1016/0162-3095(90)90017-z · Cited by 1,787
Sex differences and statistical stereotyping in attitudes toward financial risk
Eckel, C. C., & Grossman, P. J. (2002) · Evolution and Human Behavior · doi:10.1016/s1090-5138(02)00097-1 · Cited by 1,014
Bernhard, H., Fischbacher, U., & Fehr, E. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature04981 · Cited by 916
(2001) · doi:10.1006/jtbi.2000.2202 · Cited by 803
Metadata
- Authors
- Kaplan, H., Hill, K., Cadeliña, R. V., Hayden, B., Hyndman, D. C., Preston, R. J., Smith, E. A., Stuart, D. E., & Yesner, D. R.
- Venue
- Current Anthropology
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 1985-04
- Volume
- 26
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 223-246
- ISSN
- 0011-3204 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5382
- OpenAlex
- W2289228128
- Cited by
- 539
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 11.22
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Food Sharing Among Ache Foragers: Tests of Explanatory Hypotheses [and Comments and Reply]. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/203251
- The paper
- Kaplan, H., Hill, K., Cadeliña, R. V., Hayden, B., Hyndman, D. C., Preston, R. J., Smith, E. A., Stuart, D. E., & Yesner, D. R. (1985). Food Sharing Among Ache Foragers: Tests of Explanatory Hypotheses [and Comments and Reply]. Current Anthropology. https://doi.org/10.1086/203251
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.