| Title |
Bargaining theory and cooperative fishing participation on ifaluk atoll
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Human Nature, June 1998
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12110-998-1002-5 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Richard Sosis, Sharon Feldstein, Kim Hill |
| Abstract |
In this paper we examine the merit of bargaining theory, in its economic and ecological forms, as a model for understanding variation in the frequency of participation in cooperative fishing among men of Ifaluk atoll in Micronesia. Two determinants of bargaining power are considered: resource control and a bargainer's utility gain for his expected share of the negotiated resource. Several hypotheses which relte cultural and life-course parameters to bargaining power are tested against data on the frequency of cooperative sail-fishing participation. Consistent with predictions generated from bargaining theory, we show that (1) age is negatively correlated with cooperative fishing participation, (2) men of highranking clans and men with high levels of education fish less than men of low-ranking clans and less-educated men, (3) men with high expected utility gains from fishing returns fish more than men with low expected utility gains, (4) number of dependents is positively correlated with cooperative fishing participation, and (5) the number of young genetic offspring residing with a man is positively correlated with cooperative fishing participation, whereas the number of genetic offspring more than 13 years old who are residing with a man is negatively correlated with cooperative fishing participation. |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 33 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 2 | 6% |
| Unknown | 31 | 94% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 11 | 33% |
| Researcher | 6 | 18% |
| Student > Bachelor | 3 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 3 | 9% |
| Professor | 3 | 9% |
| Other | 5 | 15% |
| Unknown | 2 | 6% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 10 | 30% |
| Social Sciences | 9 | 27% |
| Psychology | 4 | 12% |
| Environmental Science | 2 | 6% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 1 | 3% |
| Other | 4 | 12% |
| Unknown | 3 | 9% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 10 August 2023.
All research outputs
#7,453,126
of 22,785,242 outputs
Outputs from Human Nature
#338
of 513 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10,348
of 34,152 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Nature
#2
of 2 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,785,242 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 44th percentile – i.e., 44% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 513 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.5. This one is in the 24th percentile – i.e., 24% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 34,152 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 9th percentile – i.e., 9% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 2 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.