| Title |
With the Help of Kin?
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Human Nature, February 2015
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s12110-015-9222-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Paul P. P. Rotering, Hilde Bras |
| Abstract |
Relatives play an important role in human reproduction according to evolutionary theories of reproductive behavior, but previous empirical studies show large differences in the effects of kin on fertility outcomes. In our paper we examine the effect of co-resident kin and non-kin on the length of birth intervals over the reproductive life course of Dutch women born between 1842 and 1920. We estimate Cox proportional hazard models for parity progression based on the presence of kin and non-kin in the household while controlling for a large number of individual and community-level characteristics. We find that couples living with their brothers experienced shorter birth intervals whereas couples residing with a widowed father had relatively longer birth intervals. The effects of these types of kin on reproduction were most pronounced up to the birth of the fifth child, but not thereafter. We found no effect for mothers or other types of kin. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Germany | 1 | 13% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 13% |
| Unknown | 6 | 75% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 5 | 63% |
| Scientists | 2 | 25% |
| Practitioners (doctors, other healthcare professionals) | 1 | 13% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 21 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 3 | 14% |
| Unknown | 18 | 86% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 5 | 24% |
| Professor > Associate Professor | 5 | 24% |
| Researcher | 3 | 14% |
| Professor | 1 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 0 | 0% |
| Unknown | 6 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Social Sciences | 6 | 29% |
| Arts and Humanities | 3 | 14% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 10% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 1 | 5% |
| Psychology | 1 | 5% |
| Other | 1 | 5% |
| Unknown | 7 | 33% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 24 October 2019.
All research outputs
#6,608,282
of 24,593,959 outputs
Outputs from Human Nature
#315
of 540 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#69,452
of 260,081 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Human Nature
#4
of 7 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,593,959 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 540 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 31.6. This one is in the 41st percentile – i.e., 41% 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 260,081 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 7 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 3 of them.