The sloth bear, an insect-eating animal native to Nepal, exhibits only one behavior that is truly distinct from that of other bear species: the females carry their cubs (at least part-time) until the cubs are about nine months old, even though the cubs can walk on their own at six months. Cub-carrying also occurs among some other myrmecophagous (ant-eating) mammals; therefore, one explanation is that cub-carrying is necessitated by myrmecophagy, since myrmecophagy entails a low metabolic rate and high energy expenditure in walking between food patches. However, although polar bears' locomotion is similarly inefficient, polar bear cubs walk along with their mother. Furthermore, the daily movements of sloth bears and American black bears—which are similar in size to sloth bears and have similar-sized home ranges— reveal similar travel rates and distances, suggesting that if black bear cubs are able to keep up with their mother, so too should sloth bear cubs.

    An alternative explanation is defense from predation. Black bear cubs use trees for defense, whereas brown bears and polar bears, which regularly inhabit treeless environments, rely on aggression to protect their cubs. Like brown bears and polar bears (and unlike other myrmecophagous mammals, which are noted for their passivity), sloth bears are easily provoked to aggression. Sloth bears also have relatively large canine teeth, which appear to be more functional for fighting than for foraging. Like brown bears and polar bears, sloth bears may have evolved in an environment with few trees. They are especially attracted to food-rich grasslands; although few grasslands persist today on the Indian subcontinent, this type of habitat was once widespread there. Grasslands support high densities of tigers, which fight and sometimes kill sloth bears; sloth bears also coexist with and have been killed by tree-climbing leopards, and are often confronted and chased by rhinoceroses and elephants, which can topple trees. Collectively these factors probably selected against tree-climbing as a defensive strategy for sloth bear cubs. Because sloth bears are smaller than brown and polar bears and are under greater threat from dangerous animals, they may have adopted the extra precaution of carrying their cubs. Although cub-carrying may also be adoptive for myrmecophagous foraging, the behavior of sloth bear cubs, which climb on their mother's back at the first sign of danger, suggests that predation was a key stimulus.

In the two decades between 1910 and 1930, more than ten percent of the black population of the United States left the South, where the preponderance of the black population had been located, and migrated to northern states, with the largest number moving, it is claimed, between 1916 and 1918. It has been frequently assumed, but not proved, that the majority of the migrants in what has come to be called the Great Migration came from rural areas and were motivated by two concurrent factors: the collapse of the cotton industry following the boll weevil infestation, which began in 1898, and increased demand in the North for labor following the cessation of European immigration caused by the outbreak of the First World War in 1914. This assumption has led to the conclusion that the migrants’ subsequent lack of economic mobility in the North is tied to rural background, a background that implies unfamiliarity with urban living and a lack of industrial skills.

But the question of who actually left the South has never been rigorously investigated. Although numerous investigations document an exodus from rural southern areas to southern cities prior to the Great Migration, no one has considered whether the same migrants then moved on to northern cities. In 1910 more than 600,000 black workers, or ten percent of the black workforce, reported themselves to be engaged in "manufacturing and mechanical pursuits," the federal census category roughly encompassing the entire industrial sector. The Great Migration could easily have been made up entirely of this group and their families. It is perhaps surprising to argue that an employed population could be enticed to move, but an explanation lies in the labor conditions then prevalent in the South.

About thirty-five percent of the urban black population in the South was engaged in skilled trades. Some were from the old artisan class of slavery—blacksmiths, masons, carpenters—which had had a monopoly of certain trades, but they were gradually being pushed out by competition, mechanization, and obsolescence. The remaining sixty-five percent, more recently urbanized, worked in newly developed industries—tobacco, lumber, coal and iron manufacture, and railroads. Wages in the South, however, were low, and black workers were aware, through labor recruiters and the black press, that they could earn more even as unskilled workers in the North than they could as artisans in the South. After the boll weevil infestation, urban black workers faced competition from the continuing influx of both black and white rural workers, who were driven to undercut the wages formerly paid for industrial jobs. Thus, a move north would be seen as advantageous to a group that was already urbanized and steadily employed, and the easy conclusion tying their subsequent economic problems in the North to their rural background comes into question.