This page has been validated.
482
THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY
TABLE II
| Husband's Character | Wife's Character | Assortative Mating (Correlation and Probable Error) | |
| Direct correlations | Stature | Stature | +.2804 ±.0189 |
| Span | Span | +.1989 ±.0204 | |
| Forearm | Forearm | +.1977 ±.0205 | |
| Cross correlations | Stature | Span | +.1820 ±.0201 |
| Stature | Forearm | +.1403 ±.0204 | |
| Span | Stature' | +.2023 ±.0199 | |
| Span | Forearm | +.1533 ±.0203 | |
| Forearm | Stature | +.1784 ±.0201 | |
| Forearm | Span | +1545 ±.0203 |
Fig. 2. Scale of Husband's Stature.
We find a resemblance r = + .280.[1] Thus there is a very pronounced similarity in stature between husband and wife.[2] This is made clear by diagram 2, which shows the empirical and the (smoothed) mean statures of wives of husbands of different heights.
2. Other Bodily Characters
Data for physical characters other than stature are few;[3] the only
- ↑ From Mr. Galton's "Family Records," Pearson found the resemblance for man and wife to be +.09 ±.05, but between fathers and mothers of adult children, as in the case of his own material, it was +.18 ±.02. Considering the smallness of Mr. Galton's pioneer series, the results are not in bad agreement.
- ↑ Gallon's series of data ("English Men of Science," pp. 22-24, 1895) for the parents of English scientific men is too small (embracing only 62 cases) to give conclusive results for assortative mating. It indicates, however, no tendency towards contrast.
- ↑ I have omitted Galton's ("English Men of Science," p. 21, 1895) data for the "figure" of 71 pairs of parents of English scientific men, since the
