ArticleScientific reports2020
No evidence for a relationship between MHC heterozygosity and life history strategy in a sample of North American undergraduates.
Article in Scientific reports, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Although allelic diversity at the major histocompatibility complex (MHC) has implications for adaptive immunity, mate choice, and social signalling, how diversity at the MHC influences the calibration of life history strategies remains largely uninvestigated. The current study investigated whether greater MHC heterozygosity was associated with markers of slower life history strategies in a sample of 789 North American undergraduates. Contrary to preregistered predictions and to previously published findings, MHC heterozygosity was not related to any of the psychological life history-relevant variables measured (including short- vs. long-term sexual strategy, temporal discounting, the Arizona life history battery, past and current health, disgust sensitivity, and Big Five personality traits). Further, no meaningful effects emerged when analysing women and men separately. Possible reasons for why the current results are inconsistent with previous work are discussed.
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.