It appears you don't have support to open PDFs in this web browser. To view this file, Open with your PDF reader
Abstract
Recently, a number of authors have claimed that sexual dimorphism in the second-to-fourth digit ratio (2D:4D) is simply dependent on digit length and is an artifact of allometry. The goal of our study is to verify the validity of these assumptions. The study sample comprised 7,582 individuals (3,802 men and 3,780 women) from three large world populations: Europeans (n = 3043), East Africans (n = 2844), and Central Asians (n = 1695). The lengths of the second and fourth digits on both hands were measured. Digit ratios were computed according to standard procedures. Analyses were conducted separately for each hand for the whole sample and in succession for the three large populations. Additionally, we separately tested four age cohorts (≤ 13, 14–18, 19–30, and 31 ≥ years) to test the effect of developmental allometry. The second and fourth digits showed strong positive linear relationships on both hands, and demonstrated an increase with age; digit length in women from the youngest age cohort was longer or equal to that of men, and shorter than men in older age cohorts. However, the 2D:4D magnitude and its sexual dimorphism remained stable throughout the ontogeny. To test for an allometric effect on 2D:4D, the average digit lengths were calculated. Both sex and population origin were permanent reliable predictors of 2D:4D, whereas average digit length was not. Height was applied as another measure of allometric effect on the limited sample (≤ 30 years) from the European population, along with sex and age. No allometric effect was observed in this case. We conclude that sex differences in 2D:4D are not an artifact of allometry.
You have requested "on-the-fly" machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Show full disclaimer
Neither ProQuest nor its licensors make any representations or warranties with respect to the translations. The translations are automatically generated "AS IS" and "AS AVAILABLE" and are not retained in our systems. PROQUEST AND ITS LICENSORS SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIM ANY AND ALL EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, ANY WARRANTIES FOR AVAILABILITY, ACCURACY, TIMELINESS, COMPLETENESS, NON-INFRINGMENT, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. Your use of the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in your Electronic Products License Agreement and by using the translation functionality you agree to forgo any and all claims against ProQuest or its licensors for your use of the translation functionality and any output derived there from. Hide full disclaimer
Details
1 Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Moscow, Russia (GRID:grid.4886.2) (ISNI:0000 0001 2192 9124); National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia (GRID:grid.410682.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 0578 2005); Russian State University for the Humanities, Moscow, Russia (GRID:grid.446275.6) (ISNI:0000 0001 2162 6510)
2 Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Moscow, Russia (GRID:grid.4886.2) (ISNI:0000 0001 2192 9124); National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia (GRID:grid.410682.9) (ISNI:0000 0004 0578 2005)
3 Russian Academy of Sciences, Institute of Ethnology and Anthropology, Moscow, Russia (GRID:grid.4886.2) (ISNI:0000 0001 2192 9124)
4 RAS, Institute of Geography, Moscow, Russia (GRID:grid.4886.2) (ISNI:0000 0001 2192 9124)
5 Yerevan State University, Yerevan, Armenia (GRID:grid.21072.36) (ISNI:0000 0004 0640 687X)
6 Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia (GRID:grid.14476.30) (ISNI:0000 0001 2342 9668)