Are Your Siblings Really Your Siblings?

This Thanksgiving how can we be certain we're sitting down with our genetically related family? Evolutionary psychology provides some food for thought. Christie Nicholson reports

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

So if you’re American you’re probably eating Thanksgiving this Thursday with your close friends and family. And you’re probably pretty certain you can recognize your siblings right? But what makes you so certain they are genetically connected to you?

"We take it for granted how we know who are mother is, how we know who our father is, how we know who our brothers and sisters, aunts and uncles, cousins, etc."

That's David Lewis a PhD student in psychology at the University of Texas at Austin. And he recently completed a study specific to sibling recognition.


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


Evolutionary psychologists point to these two things to tell if you and your sibling share the same mom: witnessing your sibling having a maternal perinatal association otherwise known as “breastfeeding.”

"So if you're an older sibling, watching a younger individual nurse from your mother is a very reliable cue to being siblings with that individual because in mammals, mothers have 100 percent maternity certainty. That is to say that aside from modern inventions with surrogate mothers, mothers are 100 percent certain that the thing that they give birth to is their biological offspring."

And the other variable is length of co-habitation with your sibling and mother.

But sibling recognition also requires a known shared paternal connection.

"But there's a problem in mammals. And that is that for fathers they cannot be 100 percent certain that their mates' offspring are their genetic progeny. Unless they did a DNA test. But unfortunately during the course of human evolution they didn't have those handy DNA tests."

So if fathers cannot be certain that their offspring are theirs then siblings cannot be certain they share the same father. 

Lewis wanted to find out if facial resemblance could be a cue to genetic relatedness. Meaning that the more siblings resembled each other, the more certain they could be that they shared mom and pop genes, and so also more likely to have a close relationship. (Since past psychological studies have shown that blood is often thicker than water.)

He found that indeed the more closely siblings resembled each other (based on a third party rating) the more emotionally close they were and the less conflict between them.

"They'll do more favors for each other. They'll interact positively more frequently with one another. In hypothetical situations there is this idea that this individual is my best friend, I'll tell them a secret when I won't tell anyone else. Those are the individuals that they are sharing with. And the siblings that don't look like them precisely the opposite set of patterns." 

But ultimately then this concludes that..."facial resemblance is an indicator of kinship even when we believe we already have the kinship problem solved. And we're totally unconscious of it."

—Christie Nicholson

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe