Encyclopedia of Evolutionary Psychological Science

Living Edition
| Editors: Todd K. Shackelford, Viviana A. Weekes-Shackelford

Co-residence and Early Maternal Perinatal Association

  • Jan AntfolkEmail author
  • Helena Godenhjelm
Living reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-16999-6_1529-1



Co-residence and early maternal perinatal association are two important kinship cues for identifying siblings.


Although kin selection, inbreeding avoidance, and cooperation and conflict within the family do not necessitate an ability to identify another individual as a sibling, kin recognition is believed to be a central mechanism in the individual development of kin-directed social behavior in humans (e.g., Penn and Frommen 2004). Concerning siblings, two important kinship cues are co-residence and early maternal perinatal association.

The Westermarck Effect

Human kin recognition is thought to rest largely on environmental information, and this kin recognition can be direct (e.g., phenotype matching) or indirect. Co-residence and maternal perinatal association are two indirect kinship cues humans use to identify siblings. In 1891, Westermarck hypothesized that two individuals living closely together during...


Parental Investment Young Sibling Full Sibling Emotional Closeness Social Father 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.


  1. Alvergne, A., Faurie, C., & Raymond, M. (2007). Differential facial resemblance of young children to their parents: Who do children look like more? Evolution and Human Behavior, 28(2), 135–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Alvergne, A., Faurie, C., & Raymond, M. (2009). Father-offspring resemblance predicts paternal investment in humans. Animal Behaviour, 78, 61–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Antfolk, J., Karlsson, M., Bäckström, A., & Santtila, P. (2012). Disgust elicited by third-party incest: The roles of biological relatedness, co-residence, and family relationship. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33, 217–223.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Antfolk, J., Lindqvist, H., Albrecht, A., & Santtila, P. (2014). Self-reported availability of kinship cues during childhood is associated with kin directed behavior to parents in adulthood. Evolutionary Psychology, 12, 148–166.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Apicella, C. L., & Marlowe, F. W. (2004). Perceived mate fidelity and paternal resemblance predict men’s investment in children. Evolution and Human Behavior, 25(6), 371–378.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bevc, I., & Silverman, I. (1993). Early proximity and intimacy between siblings and incestuous behavior: A test of the Westermarck theory. Ethology & Sociobiology, 14, 171–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bressan, P., Coralelli, S., & Cavalieri, M. (2009). Biologically costly altruism depends on emotional closeness among step but not half or full sibling. Evolutionary Psychology, 7, 118–132.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Carlson, M., & Berger, L. (2011). What kids get from parents: Packages of involvement across complex family forms. Social Services Review, 87, 213–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. DeBruine, L. (2004). Facial resemblance increases the attractiveness of same–sex faces more than other–sex faces. Proceedings of the Royal Society B, 271, 1552.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Flinn, M. (1988). Step- and genetic parent/offspring relationships in a Caribbean village. Ethology and Sociobiology, 9, 335–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kruger, D. (2003). Evolution and altruism combining psychological mediators with naturally selected tendencies. Evolution and Human Behavior, 24(2), 118–125.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Lewis, D. M. G. (2011). The sibling uncertainty hypothesis: Facial resemblance as a sibling recognition cue. Personality and Individual Differences, 51(8), 969–974. Elsevier Ltd.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lieberman, D., & Billingsley, J. (2016). Current issues in sibling detection. Current Opinions in Psychology, 7, 57–60.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lieberman, D., & Lobel, T. (2012). Kinship on the Kibbutz: Coresidence duration predicts altruism, personal sexual aversions and moral attitudes among communally reared peers. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33(1), 26–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lieberman, D., Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (2007). The architecture of human kin detection. Nature, 445(7129), 727–731.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  16. McCabe, J. (1983). FBD marriage: Further support for the Westermarck hypothesis of the incest taboo? American Anthropologist, 85, 50–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Penn, D., & Frommen, J. (2004). Kin recognition: An overview of conceptual issues, mechanisms and evolutionary theory. In Animal behavior: Evolution and mechanisms, Springer, Heidelberg, pp. 55–85.Google Scholar
  18. Pollet, T. V. (2007). Genetic relatedness and sibling relationship characteristics in a modern society. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28(3), 176–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Rantala, M., & Marcinowska, U. (2011). The role of sexual imprinting and the Westermarck effect in mate choice in humans. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology, 65(5), 859–873.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Shepher, J. (1971). Mate selection among second generation kibbutz adolescents and adults: Incest avoidance and negative imprinting. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 1(4), 293–307.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. Spiro, M. (1958). Children of the Kibbutz. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  22. Stewart-Williams, S. (2007). Altruism among kin vs. nonkin: Effects of cost of help and reciprocal exchange. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28(3), 193–198.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Sznycer, D., De Smet, D., Billingsley, J., & Lieberman, D. (2016). Coresidence duration and cues of maternal investment regulate sibling altruism across cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 111, 159–177.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. Talmon, S. (1964). Mate selection in collective settlements. American Sociological Review, 29, 491–508.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Tooley, G. A., Karakis, M., Stokes, M., & Ozanne-Smith, J. (2006). Generalising the Cinderella effect to unintentional childhood fatalities. Evolution and Human Behavior, 27(3), 224–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Walter, A. (1997). The evolutionary psychology of mate selection in Morocco: A multivariate analysis. Human Nature, 8, 113–137.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. Westermarck, E. (1891). The history of human marriage. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  28. White, L. K., & Riedmann, A. (1992). When the Brady Bunch grows up: Step/half and full sibling relationships in adulthood. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 54, 197–208.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Williams, L., & Finkelhor, D. (1995). Paternal caregiving and incest: Test of a biological model. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 65, 101–113.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. Wolf, A. (1970). Childhood association and sexual attraction: A further test of the Westermarck hypotheses. American Anthropologist, 72(3), 503–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of PsychologyÅbo Akademi UniversityTurkuFinland

Section editors and affiliations

  • Minna Lyons
    • 1
  1. 1.University of LiverpoolLiverpoolUK