Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 20

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

When does matriliny fail? The frequencies and causes of transitions to and from matriliny estimated from a de novo coding of a cross-cultural sample

Shenk, Mary K., Begley, Ryan O., Nolin, David A., Swiatek, Andrew·2019·Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences

Abstract

The question of when and why societies have transitioned away from matriliny to other types of kinship systems—and when and why they transition towards matriliny—has a long history in anthropology, one that is heavily engaged with both evolutionary theory and cross-cultural research methods. This article presents tabulations from a new coding of ethnographic documents from the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample (SCCS), tallying claims of transitions in kinship systems both away from and to matriliny using various levels of stringency. We then use our counts as the outcome variables in a set of Bayesian analyses that simultaneously estimate the probability of a transition occurring given societal covariates alongside the conditional probability of detecting a transition given the volume of ethnographic data available to code. Our goal is to estimate the cross-cultural and comparative frequency of transitions away from and to matriliny, as well as to explore potential causes underlying these patterns. We find that transitions away from matriliny have been significantly more common than ‘reverse transitions' to matriliny. Our evidence suggests that both rates may be, in part, an artefact of the colonial and globalizing period during which the data comprising much of the current ethnographic record were recorded. Analyses of the correlates of transitions away from matriliny are consistent with several of the key causal arguments made by anthropologists over the past century, especially with respect to subsistence transition (to pastoralism, intensive agriculture and market economies), social complexity and colonialism, highlighting the importance of ecological factors in such transitions. This article is part of the theme issue ‘The evolution of female-biased kinship in humans and other mammals’.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1098/rstb.2019.0006

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 90

  1. Morgan LH, 1877, Ancient society
  2. Murdock GP, 1949, Social structure
  3. Schneider DM, 1961, Matrilineal kinship, 1
  4. Stone L. 2014 Kinship and gender: an introduction. New York NY: Routledge.
  5. Schneider DM, 1961, Matrilineal kinship
  6. 10.2307/3772907 · DOI · Paper page
  7. 10.1002/9781444302714.ch3 · DOI
  8. Bachofen JJ, Myth, religion, and mother right: selected writings of J. J. Bachofen
  9. Gough K, 1961, Matrilineal kinship, 445
  10. Gough K, 1961, Matrilineal kinship, 631
  11. Douglas M, 1969, Man in Africa, 121
  12. Darwin CR, 1859, On the origin of species by means of natural selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life, 10.5962/bhl.title.82303 · DOI
  13. Tylor EB, 1871, Primitive culture: volume 1
  14. Tylor EB, 1871, Primitive culture: volume 2
  15. Morgan LH, 1871, Systems of consanguinity and affinity of the human family
  16. Engels F, 1884, The origins of the family, private property and the state
  17. Junod HA, 1927, Life of a South African tribe: Vol. 1
  18. 10.5479/sil.120833.39088000479063 · DOI
  19. Riasanovsky VA, 1937, Fundamental principles of Mongolian law
  20. Knight C, 2007, Émergence et évolution de la parenté, 25
  21. Boas F, 1897, The Social Organization and the Secret Societies of the Kwakiutl Indians. Washington: Report of the U.S. National Museum, 1895
  22. 10.1002/j.1834-4461.1931.tb00015.x · DOI
  23. Lowie RH, 1920, Primitive society
  24. Leach ER, 1961, Rethinking anthropology
  25. Malinowski B, 1927, Sex and repression in savage society
  26. Speck FG, 1922, Micmac hunting territories in Nova Scotia and Newfoundland
  27. 10.1525/ae.1977.4.3.02a00090 · DOI
  28. Radcliffe-Brown AR, 1952, Structure and function in primitive society
  29. Malinowski B, 1939, The group and the individual in functional analysis, AJS, 44, 938
  30. 10.1007/s12110-011-9107-7 · DOI
  31. Richards AI, 1950, African systems of kinship and marriage, 83
  32. Tylor EB, 1896, The matriarchal family system, Nineteenth Century, 40, 81
  33. 10.1098/rstb.2018.0080 · DOI
  34. 10.1098/rstb.2018.0072 · DOI
  35. 10.1525/aa.1971.73.3.02a00040 · DOI
  36. Labby D, 1976, The demystification of Yap: dialectics of culture on a Micronesian island
  37. Murdock GP, 1959, Evolution and anthropology: a centennial appraisal, 126
  38. Murdock GP, 1959, Africa: its peoples and their culture history
  39. 10.1525/aa.1956.58.3.02a00030 · DOI
  40. Gsell S, Histoire ancienne de l'Afrique du Nord
  41. Nicolaisen J, 1963, Ecology and culture of the pastoral Tuareg: with particular reference to the Tuareg of Ahaggar and Ayr
  42. Aberle D, 1961, Matrilineal kinship, 655
  43. 10.1098/rspb.2003.2535 · DOI
  44. 10.2307/586694 · DOI
  45. 10.1177/106939717400900201 · DOI
  46. 10.1007/s12110-011-9105-9 · DOI
  47. 10.1016/S1090-5138(02)00122-8 · DOI
  48. 10.1098/rstb.2010.0017 · DOI
  49. Gluckman M, 1950, African systems of kinship and marriage, 166
  50. 10.2307/1158464 · DOI
  51. 10.1525/aa.1989.91.3.02a00050 · DOI
  52. 10.1016/0162-3095(80)90015-1 · DOI
  53. 10.1525/ae.1978.5.1.02a00110 · DOI
  54. Flinn M, 1981, Uterine vs. agnatic kinship variability and associated cousin marriage preferences: an evolutionary biological analysis, Nat. Sel. Social Behav., 26, 439
  55. 10.1017/S0140525X00045520 · DOI
  56. 10.1016/0022-5193(64)90038-4 · DOI · Paper page
  57. 10.1016/0022-5193(64)90039-6 · DOI
  58. 10.1146/annurev.es.05.110174.001545 · DOI
  59. 10.1098/rspb.2012.1926 · DOI
  60. 10.1086/202775 · DOI
  61. 10.1126/science.179.4068.90 · DOI
  62. 10.1080/14442211003730736 · DOI
  63. 10.1098/rstb.2010.0017 · DOI
  64. 10.1098/rspb.2009.0088 · DOI · Paper page
  65. 10.1017/CBO9780511542466.019 · DOI
  66. 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2018.06.002 · DOI
  67. Opie C Shultz S Atkinson QD Currie T Mace R. 2014 Phylogenetic reconstruction of Bantu kinship challenges main sequence theory of human social evolution. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111 17 414-17 419. (doi:10.1073/pnas.1415744111) · DOI
  68. 10.1525/aa.1957.59.4.02a00090 · DOI
  69. White DR, 1986, Ethnographic bibliography of the standard cross-cultural sample, World Cultures, 2, 1
  70. Krippendorff K, 2018, Content analysis: an introduction to its methodology
  71. Holton J, 2016, Classic grounded theory: applications with qualitative and quantitative data
  72. 10.1371/journal.pone.0158391 · DOI
  73. 10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[2248:ESORWD]2.0.CO;2 · DOI · Paper page
  74. 10.1890/02-5078 · DOI
  75. 10.1111/ecog.02445 · DOI
  76. Neath AA, 1997, On the efficacy of Bayesian inference for nonidentifiable models, Am. Stat., 51, 225, 10.1080/00031305.1997.10473967 · DOI
  77. 10.1017/S0266466698144043 · DOI
  78. 10.1080/00031305.2013.778787 · DOI
  79. 10.3758/s13423-017-1272-1 · DOI
  80. 10.1214/06-BA116 · DOI
  81. R Core Team, 2018, R: A language and environment for statistical computing
  82. Murdock GP, 1967, Ethnographic atlas
  83. 10.1198/016214505000000105 · DOI
  84. Herlihy LH, 2007, Matrifocality and women's power on the Miskito coast, Ethnology, 46, 133
  85. Helms MW, 1971, Asang: adaptations to culture contact in a Miskito community
  86. Silverblatt IM, 1987, Moon, sun, and witches: gender ideologies and class in Inca and colonial Peru, 10.1515/9781400843343 · DOI
  87. Stearns ML, 1981, Haida culture in custody: The Masset Band
  88. Blackman MB, 1990, Handbook of North American Indians. Northwest, 240
  89. Blackman MB, 1977, Ethnohistoric changes in the Haida Potlatch complex, Arctic Anthropology, 14, 39
  90. 10.1098/rstb.2018.0077 · DOI

Cited by

See all 20

Metadata

Authors
Shenk, M. K., Begley, R. O., Nolin, D. A., & Swiatek, A.
Venue
Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
Published
2019-07-15
Volume
374
Issue
1780
Pages
20190006
ISSN
  • 0962-8436
  • 1471-2970
Cited by
20
References
0
Language
en

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: When does matriliny fail? The frequencies and causes of transitions to and from matriliny estimated from a de novo coding of a cross-cultural sample. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1098/rstb.2019.0006
The paper
Shenk, M. K., Begley, R. O., Nolin, D. A., & Swiatek, A. (2019). When does matriliny fail? The frequencies and causes of transitions to and from matriliny estimated from a de novo coding of a cross-cultural sample. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2019.0006