IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v14y2003i3p301-310.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Should young ever be better off with one parent than with two?

Author

Listed:
  • John M. McNamara
  • Alasdair I. Houston
  • Zolta´n Barta
  • Jose´-Luis Osorno

Abstract

We analyze models of parental care, providing the first systematic comparison of the care given to young by one parent versus by two parents. In the Houston-Davies model of care, young always do better with two parents rather than with one parent. When one parent decides about its level of care before the other, then the young may do better with one parent when the costs of care for the parents are asymmetric. When the level of parental effort is reached by negotiation, there are cases in which young do better with one parent, even when costs are symmetric. The analysis suggests empirical ways to differentiate between different response rules. Copyright 2003.

Suggested Citation

  • John M. McNamara & Alasdair I. Houston & Zolta´n Barta & Jose´-Luis Osorno, 2003. "Should young ever be better off with one parent than with two?," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 14(3), pages 301-310, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:14:y:2003:i:3:p:301-310
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. James L. Savage & Andrew F. Russell & Rufus A. Johnstone, 2013. "Maternal costs in offspring production affect investment rules in joint rearing," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 24(3), pages 750-758.
    2. Jessica Meade & Ki-Baek Nam & Jin-Won Lee & Ben J Hatchwell, 2011. "An Experimental Test of the Information Model for Negotiation of Biparental Care," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 6(5), pages 1-7, May.
    3. Rufus A. Johnstone & Andrea Manica & Annette L. Fayet & Mary Caswell Stoddard & Miguel A. Rodriguez-Gironés & Camilla A. Hinde, 2014. "Reciprocity and conditional cooperation between great tit parents," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 25(1), pages 216-222.
    4. Tina A Barbasch & Rebecca Branconi & Robin Francis & Madison Pacaro & Maya Srinivasan & Geoffrey P Jones & Peter M Buston, 2021. "Negotiations over parental care: a test of alternative hypotheses in the clown anemonefish," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 32(6), pages 1256-1265.
    5. Daiping Wang & Wenyuan Zhang & Shuai Yang & Xiang-Yi Li Richter, 2023. "Sex differences in avian parental care patterns vary across the breeding cycle," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-12, December.
    6. Bram Kuijper & Rufus A. Johnstone, 2012. "How dispersal influences parent–offspring conflict over investment," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 23(4), pages 898-906.
    7. Alfréd Trnka & Tomáš Grim, 2013. "To compensate or not to compensate: testing the negotiation model in the context of nest defense," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 24(1), pages 223-228.
    8. Osnat Yaniv & Uzi Motro, 2003. "ESS in Symmetric Animal Conflicts with Time Dependent Strategy Sets," Discussion Paper Series dp339, The Federmann Center for the Study of Rationality, the Hebrew University, Jerusalem, revised Jul 2004.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:14:y:2003:i:3:p:301-310. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.