The researchers test the relationship between global mandibular morphology variation and susbsistence economy, population history, geography, and climate. While some mandibular variation is significantly correlated with geography, the most significant relationship is with subsistence activity. The strength of the relationship leads the authors to speculate on how masticatory behavior might have affected jaw shape, either through stress, weaning behavior, or other demographic factors.

The authors use a comparative ethnoarchaeological model that seeks to test the applicability of Dynamical Systems Theory to modeling subsistence variation (namely the foraging-farming transition). The authors utilize the concepts of "attractors," which tend to stabilize a system, and "repellors," which tend to be destabilizing forces. Authors hope that this multidimensional approach, which assumes that several "controlling" variables disproportionately affect change within subsistence systems, will adequately model the nonlinearity and heterogeneity seen in the emergences of (and variations within) human subsistence systems throughout human history. Their model and premises regarding disproportionally-controlling variables appear to be supported.

Using a representative sample of 339 hunter-gatherer societies, researchers examine the relationship between hunter-gatherer use of space, size of population and supply of resources to see if they are similar to other organisms. By combining all factors into a single model, the authors claim to explain 86% of the variation in home range. Hunters have greater resource distribution than gatherers but both more so than aquatic foragers. Lastly, terrestrial foragers have more extensive home ranges than aquatic foragers.

Using a representative sample of 339 hunter-gatherer societies, researchers examine the relationship between hunter-gatherer use of space, size of population and supply of resources to see if they are similar to other organisms. By combining all factors into a single model, the authors claim to explain 86% of the variation in home range. Hunters have greater resource distribution than gatherers but both more so than aquatic foragers. Lastly, terrestrial foragers have more extensive home ranges than aquatic foragers.

Using a representative sample of 339 hunter-gatherer societies, researchers examine the relationship between hunter-gatherer use of space, size of population and supply of resources to see if they are similar to other organisms. By combining all factors into a single model, the authors claim to explain 86% of the variation in home range. Hunters have greater resource distribution than gatherers but both more so than aquatic foragers. Lastly, terrestrial foragers have more extensive home ranges than aquatic foragers.

Using a representative sample of 339 hunter-gatherer societies, researchers examine the relationship between hunter-gatherer use of space, size of population and supply of resources to see if they are similar to other organisms. By combining all factors into a single model, the authors claim to explain 86% of the variation in home range. Hunters have greater resource distribution than gatherers but both more so than aquatic foragers. Lastly, terrestrial foragers have more extensive home ranges than aquatic foragers.

Using a representative sample of 339 hunter-gatherer societies, researchers examine the relationship between hunter-gatherer use of space, size of population and supply of resources to see if they are similar to other organisms. By combining all factors into a single model, the authors claim to explain 86% of the variation in home range. Hunters have greater resource distribution than gatherers but both more so than aquatic foragers. Lastly, terrestrial foragers have more extensive home ranges than aquatic foragers.

Using a representative sample of 339 hunter-gatherer societies, researchers examine the relationship between hunter-gatherer use of space, size of population and supply of resources to see if they are similar to other organisms. By combining all factors into a single model, the authors claim to explain 86% of the variation in home range. Hunters have greater resource distribution than gatherers but both more so than aquatic foragers. Lastly, terrestrial foragers have more extensive home ranges than aquatic foragers.

The researchers examine associations between male status and various measures of reproductive success among foraging/non-foraging, and monogamous/polygynous societies in order to test the "egalitarian hypothesis" which predicts lower status effects in hunter-gatherer groups. Contrary to this hypothesis, they find that male social status is equally significantly associated with reproductive success in foraging and nonforaging societies. Additional support is found for the "mating effort" hypothesis, which predicts that male reproductive success will be more associated with fertility than offspring mortality in polygynous societies, leading the authors to make various suggestions regarding the evolutionary mechanisms at play.

The researchers utilize a GIS approach in order to examine the relationship between global linguistic distribution and various cultural and environmental factors. The resulting positive association between political complexity and both latitude and language range leads the researchers to propose that large, politically complex entities exert a homogenizing pressure on language. However, the causal link may also be in the other direction, with possession of common language facilitating the creation of more complex political institutions.