Advertisement

Beautiful British Parents Have More Daughters

Abstract

The generalized Trivers-Willard hypothesis proposes that parents who possess any heritable trait that increases male reproductive success at a greater rate than female reproductive success in a given environment will have a higher-than-expected offspring sex ratio (more sons), and parents who possess any heritable trait that increases female reproductive success at a greater rate than male reproductive success in a given environment will have a lower-than-expected offspring sex ratio (more daughters). One heritable trait that increases the reproductive success of daughters much more than that of sons is physical attractiveness. The generalized Trivers-Willard hypothesis therefore predicts that physically attractive parents have more daughters. Further, if beautiful parents have more daughters and physical attractiveness is heritable, then over evolutionary history women on average should gradually become more attractive than men. The analysis of the prospectively longitudinal National Child Development Study in the United Kingdom replicates earlier findings with an American sample and confirms both hypotheses. British children who are rated by their teachers as “attractive” at age 7 have 23% higher odds of having a daughter 40 years later (proportion sons = 0.50127); those who are rated by their teachers as “unattractive” at age 7 have 25% higher odds of having a son 40 years later (proportion sons = 0.56285).

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Access options

Buy single article

Instant unlimited access to the full article PDF.

US$ 39.95

Price includes VAT for USA

Subscribe to journal

Immediate online access to all issues from 2019. Subscription will auto renew annually.

US$ 510

This is the net price. Taxes to be calculated in checkout.

References

  1. 1.

    Trivers RL, Willard DE. Natural selection of parental ability to vary the sex ratio of offspring. Science. 1973;179 (68): 90–92.

  2. 2.

    Austad SN, Sunquist ME. Sex ratio manipulation in the common opossum. Nature. 1986;324 (6): 58–60.

  3. 3.

    Clutton-Brock TH, Albon SD, Guinness FE. Great expectations: maternal dominance, sex ratios and offspring reproductive success in red deer. Anim Behav. 1986;34 (2): 460–471.

  4. 4.

    Symington MM. Sex ratio and maternal rank in wild spider monkeys: when daughters disperse. Behav Ecol Sociobiol. 1987;20 (6): 421–425.

  5. 5.

    Ewen JG, Cassey P, Møller AP. Facultative primary sex ratio variation: a lack of evidence in birds?. Proc Biol Sci. 2004;271 (1545): 1277–1282.

  6. 6.

    Sheldon BC, West SA. Maternal dominance, maternal condition, and offspring sex ratio in ungulate mammals. Am Nat. 2004;163 (1): 40–54.

  7. 7.

    Cameron EZ. Facultative adjustment of mammalian sex ratios in support of the Trivers-Willard hypothesis: Evidence for a mechanism. Proc Biol Sci. 2004;271 (1549): 1723–1728.

  8. 8.

    Dickemann M Evolutionary Biology and Human Social Behavior. Chagnon NA Irons W, ed. North Scituate, MA: Duxbury Press; 1978:321–367.

  9. 9.

    Dickemann M Soc Sci Inf. 1979;18(2):163–195.

  10. 10.

    Betzig L, Weber S Politics Life Sci. 1995;14(1):61–64.

  11. 11.

    Cameron EZ, Dalerum F. A Trivers-Willard effect in contemporary humans: male-biased sex ratios among billionaires. PLoS One. 2009;4 (1): e4195.

  12. 12.

    Cronk L. Preferential parental investment in daughters over sons. Hum Nat. 1991;2 (4): 387–417.

  13. 13.

    Gaulin SJC, Robbins CJ. Trivers-Willard effect in contemporary North American society. Am J Phys Anthropol. 1991;85 (1): 61–69.

  14. 14.

    Kanazawa S. Why we love our children. Am J Sociol. 2001;106 (6): 1761–1776.

  15. 15.

    Mueller U. Social status and sex. Nature. 1993;363 (6429): 490.

  16. 16.

    Koziel S, Ulijaszek S. Waiting for Trivers and Willard: do the rich really favor sons?. Am J Phys Anthropol. 2001;115 (1): 71–79.

  17. 17.

    Freese J, Powell B. Sociobiology, status, and parental investment in sons and daughters: testing the Trivers-Willard hypothesis. Am J Sociol. 1999;106 (6): 1704–1743.

  18. 18.

    Keller MC, Nesse RM, Hofferth S. The Trivers-Willard hypothesis of parental investment: no effect in the contemporary United States. Evol Hum Behav. 2001;22 (5): 343–360.

  19. 19.

    Ellis L, Bonin S. Social status and the secondary sex ratio: new evidence on a lingering controversy. Soc Biol. 2002;49 (1–2): 35–43.

  20. 20.

    Stein AD, Barnett PG, Sellen DW. Maternal undernutrition and the sex ratio at birth in Ethiopia: evidence from a national sample. Biol Lett. 2004;271 (S3): S37–S39.

  21. 21.

    Whiting JWM. The effect of polygyny on sex ratio at birth. Am Anthropol. 1993;95 (2): 435–442.

  22. 22.

    Guggenheim CB, Davis MF, Figueredo AJ. Sons or daughters: a cross-cultural study of sex ratio biasing and differential parental investment. J Arizona-Nevada Acad Sci. 2007;39 (2): 73–90.

  23. 23.

    Kanazawa S. Big and tall parents have more sons: further generalizations of the Trivers-Willard hypothesis. J Theor Biol. 2005;235 (4): 583–590.

  24. 24.

    Cagnacci A, Renzi A, Arangino S, Alessandrini S, Volpe A. Influences of maternal weight on the secondary sex ratio of human offspring. Hum Reprod. 2004;19 (2): 442–444.

  25. 25.

    Helle S. Height, weight, body mass index and offspring sex at birth in contemporary Finnish women. J Theor Biol. 2008;252 (4): 773–775.

  26. 26.

    Kanazawa S. Big and tall soldiers are more likely to survive battle: a possible explanation for the “returning soldier effect” on the secondary sex ratio. Hum Reprod. 2007;22 (11): 3002–3008.

  27. 27.

    Manning JT, Anderson R, Washington SM. Women’s waists and the sex ratio of their progeny: evolutionary aspects of the ideal female body shape. J Hum Evol. 1996;31 (1): 41–47.

  28. 28.

    Winkler EM, Kirchengast S. Body dimensions and differential fertility in !Kung San males from Namibia. Am J Hum Biol. 1994;6 (2): 203–213.

  29. 29.

    Gangestad SW, Simpson JA. Toward an evolutionary history of female sociosexual variation. J Pers. 1990;58:69–96.

  30. 30.

    Kanazawa S, Apari P. Sociosexually unrestricted parents have more sons: a further application of the generalized Trivers-Willard hypothesis (gTWH). Ann Hum Biol. 2009;36 (3): 320–330.

  31. 31.

    Kanazawa S. Violent men have more sons: further evidence for the generalized Trivers-Willard hypothesis (gTWH). J Theor Biol. 2006;239 (4): 450–459.

  32. 32.

    Tallal P, Ross R, Curtiss S. Unexpected sex-ratios in families of language/learning-impaired children. Neuropsychologia. 1989;27 (7): 987–998.

  33. 33.

    Kanazawa S, Vandermassen G. Engineers have more sons, nurses have more daughters: an evolutionary psychological extension of Baron-Cohen’s extreme male brain theory of autism and its empirical implications. J Theor Biol. 2005;233 (4): 589–599.

  34. 34.

    Buss DM. Sex differences in human mate preferences: evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behav Brain Sci. 1989;12 (1): 1–49.

  35. 35.

    Thornhill R, Møller AP. Developmental stability, disease and medicine. Biol Rev. 1997;72 (4): 497–548.

  36. 36.

    Gangestad SW, Simpson JA. The evolution of human mating: trade-offs and strategic pluralism. Behav Brain Sci. 2000;23 (4): 573–644.

  37. 37.

    Li NP, Kenrick DT. Sex similarities and differences in preferences for short-term mates: what, whether, and why. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2006;90 (3): 468–489.

  38. 38.

    McGovern RJ, Neale MC, Kendler KS. The independence of physical attractiveness and symptoms of depression in a female twin population. J Psychol. 1996;130 (2): 209–219.

  39. 39.

    Kanazawa S, Kovar JL. Why beautiful people are more intelligent. Intelligence. 2004;32 (3): 227–243.

  40. 40.

    Rowe DC, Clapp M, Wallis J. Physical attractiveness and the personality resemblance of identical twins. Behav Genet. 1989;17 (2): 191–201.

  41. 41.

    Weatherhead PJ, Robertson RJ. Offspring quality and the polygyny threshold: “The sexy son hypothesis.”. Am Naturalist. 1979;113 (2): 201–208.

  42. 42.

    Pérusse D. Cultural and reproductive success in industrial societies: testing the relationship at the proximate and ultimate levels. Behav Brain Sci. 1993;16 (2): 267–322.

  43. 43.

    Kanazawa S. Beautiful parents have more daughters: a further implication of the generalized Trivers-Willard hypothesis (gTWH). J Theor Biol. 2007;244 (1): 133–140.

  44. 44.

    Gelman A. Letter to the editors regarding some papers of Dr. Satoshi Kanazawa. J Theor Biol. 2007;245 (3): 597–599.

  45. 45.

    Fielder M, Huber S. The effects of sex and childlessness on the association between status and reproductive output in modern society. Evol Hum Behav. 2007;28 (6): 392–398.

  46. 46.

    Zebrowitz LA, Olson K, Hoffman K. Stability of babyfaceness and attractiveness across the life span. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1993;64 (3): 453–466.

  47. 47.

    Lazarus J Sex Ratios: Concepts and Research Methods. Hardy ICW, ed. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press; 2002:287–311.

  48. 48.

    Takahashi C, Yamagishi T, Tanida S, Kiyonari T, Kanazawa S. Attractiveness and cooperation in social exchange. Evol Psychol. 2006;4:315–329.

Download references

Author information

Correspondence to Satoshi Kanazawa PhD.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Kanazawa, S. Beautiful British Parents Have More Daughters. Reprod. Sci. 18, 353–358 (2011) doi:10.1177/1933719110393031

Download citation

Keywords

  • Evolutionary biology
  • generalized Trivers-Willard hypothesis
  • offspring sex ratios
  • physical attractiveness