Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2012 Mar 1.
Published in final edited form as: Evol Hum Behav. 2011 Mar 1;32(2):79–89. doi: 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2010.08.002

Table 5.

General Linear Model of live births and surviving children by number of years father was alive.

Men Women
B St. Err. Sig B St. Err. Sig
Live Birthsa
 Years Father Alive 0.003 0.053 0.956 −0.008 0.045 0.862
 Age (Max 50) 0.244 0.015 <0.001 0.239 0.012 <0.001
 Community — — 0.035 — — 0.026
Surviving Childrenb
 Years Father Alive −0.014 0.046 0.756 −0.006 0.042 0.882
 Age (Max 50) 0.198 0.013 <0.001 0.197 0.011 <0.001
 Community — — 0.020 — — 0.001
a

For men, N=469, Model R2=0.389, p<0.001, sensitivity for Years Father Alive (power of 0.8) f2=0.017; for women, N=457, Model R2=0.492, P<.001, sensitivity for Years Father Alive (power=0.8) f2=0.016.

b

For men, N=469, Model R2=0.356, P<0.001, sensitivity for Years Father Alive (power of 0.8) f2=0.017; for women, N=457, Model R2=0.445, P<0.001, sensitivity for Years Father Alive (power=0.8) f2=0.016.

All individuals who were age 50 or over were assigned the age of 50. Ages over 50 accounted for less than 1% of the overall variance. While an age-squared term was significant for women, it was not for men. Its overall contribution to explaining variance was minimal, so it was excluded in final models to simplify interpretation.