ReviewPhilosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences2013
Social competition and selection in males and females.
Review in Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 116 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
116 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 383 citations in OpenAlex.
- Evolutionary drivers of sex-specific parasite prevalence in wild birds.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2024Pooled it
- Social status and parasitism in male and female vertebrates: a meta-analysis.Scientific reports · 2018Pooled it
- Social Physiology: Human homeostasis is more efficient in social proximity.Science advances · 2026Article
- Elephant gestural communication during agonistic interactions: repertoire, intentionality, and goals.Animal cognition · 2026Article
- Sex Biases in Patterns of Parental Investment.Human nature (Hawthorne, N.Y.) · 2026Article
- Article
- Network analysis highlights socio-demographic patterns of stone tool-using primates.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- The legacy of privilege: Social inheritance reverses sex differences in reproductive inequality in the spotted hyena.Science advances · 2026Article
- Neural basis of social hierarchy across species.Nature reviews. Neuroscience · 2026Review
- Evolutionary basis of male same-sex sexual behavior by multiple pheromone switches in Drosophila.Current biology : CB · 2026Article
- Female Affiliation and Status in Semi-Free-Ranging Chimpanzees.American journal of biological anthropology · 2026Article
- The Effect of Social Rank on Reproductive Traits Depends on Rank Metric: Evidence From a Group-Living Carnivore.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Sociability is a Multidimensional Trait in Drosophila melanogaster.Behavior genetics · 2026Article
- Male Strategic Association With Mating Partners Under Varying Social Contexts in a Livebearing Fish.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Rapid Gamete Maturation and Social Modulation Shape Reproductive Dynamics in a Brood Parasitic Catfish.Ecology and evolution · 2026Article
- Male bonobo mating strategies target female fertile windows despite noisy ovulatory signals during sexual swelling.PLoS biology · 2025Article
- Evidence for the evolution of male and female cardinals' plumage colouration being affected by both natural and sexual selection.BMC ecology and evolution · 2025Article
- Avian hissing sounds: occurrence, mechanism, ontogeny, function and phylogeny.Royal Society open science · 2025Review
- Dominance rank, facial morphology and testes size in male white-faced capuchins: evidence for pre- and post-mating competition.Proceedings. Biological sciences · 2025Article
- Interplay of asexual and sexual reproduction in bifunctional insects.Journal of the Royal Society, Interface · 2025Article
56 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
During the latter half of the last century, evidence of reproductive competition between males and male selection by females led to the development of a stereotypical view of sex differences that characterized males as competitive and aggressive, and females as passive and choosy, which is currently being revised. Here, we compare social competition and its consequences for selection in males and females and argue that similar selection processes operate in both sexes and that contrasts between the sexes are quantitative rather than qualitative. We suggest that classifications of selection based on distinction between the form of competition or the components of fitness that are involved introduce unnecessary complexities and that the most useful approach in understanding the evolution and distribution of differences and similarities between the sexes is to compare the operation of selection in males and females in different reproductive systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.