Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Why All Evolutionary Psychological Theories Must be Tested in WEIRD Societies

  • RESEARCH ARTICLE
  • Published:
Evolutionary Psychological Science Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Henrich et al. (Behavioral and Brain Science 33:61–135, 2010), with their call to increase the number of samples from non-WEIRD (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic) societies, represented a major roadblock in the steady progress of the science of evolutionary psychology and caused a significant detour. Whatever merit Henrich et al.’s (Behavioral and Brain Science 33:61–135, 2010) article might have had for social and behavioral sciences in general, it is the wrong call for evolutionary psychology. In this essay, I explain why evolutionary psychologists must continue to test their general theories about evolved human nature mainly in WEIRD societies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Apostolou, M. (2007). Sexual selection under parental choice: The role of parents in the evolution of human mating. Evolution and Human Behavior, 28, 403–409. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2007.05.007

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apostolou, M. (2010a). Sexual selection under parental choice: Evidence from sixteen historical societies. Evolutionary Psychology, 10, 504–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Apostolou, M. (2010b). Sexual selection under parental choice in agropastoral societies. Evolution and Hu Man Behavior, 31, 39–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2009.06.010

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Atran, S. (2002). In gods we trust: The evolutionary landscape of religion. Oxford University Press.

  • Awad, E., Dsouza, S., Kim, R., Schulz, J., Henrich, J., Shariff, A., ... & Rahwan, I. (2018). The moral machine experiment. Nature, 563, 59–64. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-018-0637-6

  • Awad, E., Dsouza, S., Shariff, A., Rahwan, I., & Bonnefon, J.-F. (2020). Universals and variations in moral decisions made in 42 countries by 70,000 participants. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 117, 2332–2337. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1911517117

    Article  ADS  CAS  Google Scholar 

  • Barabanova, S. V., Sanger, P. A., Ziyatdinova, J., Sokolova, A., & Ivanov, V. G. (2013). The decline of women in Russian engineering education: Historical and societal forces at play. Paper presented at the ASEE Annual Conference And Exposition, Atlanta, GA.

  • Barkow, J. H., Cosmides, L., & Tooby, J. (1992). The adapted mind: Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture. Oxford University Press.

  • Baron-Cohen, S. (2003). The essential difference. Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • Breton, D., & Prioux, F. (2009). The one-child family: France in the European context. Demographic Research, 20, 657–692. https://doi.org/10.4054/DemRes.2009.20.27

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buss, D. M., Abbott, M., Angleitner, A., Asherian, A., Biaggio, A., Blanco-Vilasenor, A., ... & Yang, K.-S. (1990). International preferences in selecting mates: A study of 37 cultures. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 21, 5–47.

  • Buss, D. M. (1989). Sex differences in human mate preferences: Evolutionary hypotheses tested in 37 cultures. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 12, 1–49.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cai, H., Kwan, V. S. Y., & Sedikides, C. (2012). A sociocultural approach to Narcissism: The case of modern China. European Journal of Personality, 26, 529–535. https://doi.org/10.1002/per.852

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cai, Y., & Feng, W. (2021). The social and sociological consequences of China’s one-child policy. Annual Review of Sociology, 47, 587–606. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-090220-032839

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cameron, L., Erkal, N., Gangadharan, L., & Meng, X. (2013). Little emperors: Behavioral Impacts of China’s one-child policy. Science, 339, 953–957. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1230221

    Article  ADS  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Cashdan, E., Marlowe, F. W., Crittenden, A., Porter, C., & Wood, B. M. (2012). Sex differences in spatial cognition among Hadza foragers. Evolution and Human Behavior, 33, 274–284. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2011.10.005

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Christakis, N. A. (2019). Blueprint: The evolutionary origins of a good society. Little, Brown Spark.

  • Dudová, R., Hašková, H., & Chaloupková, J. K. (2022). Disentangling the link between having one child and partnership trajectories: A mixed-methods life-course research. Journal of Family Studies, 28, 1466–1487. https://doi.org/10.1080/13229400.2020.1839534

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dutton, D. (2009). The art instinct: Beauty, pleasure, and human evolution. Bloomsbury.

  • Gaertner, L., Sedikides, C., Cai, H., & Brown, J. D. (2010). It’s not WEIRD, it’s WRONG: When researchers Overlook uNderlying Genotypes, they will not detect universal processes. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 93–94. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X10000105

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Geary, D. C. (2021). Now you see them, now you don’t: An evolutionarily informed model of environmental influences on human sex differences. Neuroscience and Biobehavioral Reviews, 125, 26–32. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neubiorev.2021.02.020

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Gebauer, J. E., Sedikides, C., Schönbrodt, F. D., Bleidorn, W., Rentfrow, P. J., ... & Gosling, S. D. (2017). The religiosity as social value hypothesis: A multi-method replication and extension across 65 countries and three levels of spatial aggregation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 113, e18–e39. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000104

  • Goldstein, J., Lutz, W., & Testa, M. R. (2003). The emergence of sub-replacement family size ideas in Europe. Population Research and Policy Review, 22, 479–496.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Guthrie, S. E. (1993). Faces in the clouds: A new theory of religion. Oxford University Press.

  • Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61–135. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X0999152X

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Jiao, S., Ji, G., Jing, Q., & (Ching, C. C.),. (1986). Comparative study of behavioral qualities of only children and sibling children. Child Development, 57, 357–361.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanazawa, S. (2003). Why productivity fades with age: The crime–genius connection. Journal of Research in Personality, 37, 257–272. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(02)00538-X

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kanazawa, S. (2015). Where do gods come from? Psychology of Religion and Spirituality, 7, 306–313.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kowal, M., Sorokowski, P., Pisanski, K., Valentova, J. V., Varella, M. A. C., Frederick, D. A., ... & Zumárraga-Espinosa, M. (2022). Predictors of enhancing human physical attractiveness: Data from 93 countries. Evolution and Human Behavior, 43, 455–474. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2022.08.003

  • Lang, M., Purzycki, B. G., Apicella, C. L., Atkinson, Q. D., Bolyanatz, A., Cohen, E., ... & Henrich, J. (2019). Moralizing gods, impartiality and religious parochialism across 15 societies. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 286, 20190202. https://doi.org/10.1098/rspb.2019.0202

  • Laudan, L. (1990). Science and relativism: Some key controversies in the philosophy of science. University of Chicago Press.

  • Leavens, D. A., Bard, K., & Hopkins, W. D. (2010). BIZARRE chimpanzees do not represent “the chimpanzee.” Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 100–101. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X10000166

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lippa, R. (1998). Gender-related individual differences and the structure of vocational interests: The importance of the people-things dimension. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 996–1009.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lippa, R. A., Collaer, M. L., & Peters, M. (2010). Sex differences in mental rotation and line angle judgments are positively associated with gender equality and economic development across 53 nations. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 990–997. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-008-9460-8

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maryanski, A. R. (1995). What is the good society for hominids? Critical Review, 9, 483–499.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Maryanski, A. (2010). WEIRD societies may be more compatible with human nature. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 103–104. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X10000191

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, G. F. (1999). Sexual selection for cultural display. In R. Dunbar, C. Knight, & C. Power (Eds.), The evolution of culture: An interdisciplinary view (pp. 71–91). Rutgers University Press.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Pick, C. M., Ko, A., Wormley, A. S., Wiezel, A., Kenrick, D. T., Al-Shawaf, L., ... & Varnum, M. E. W. (2022). Family still matters: Human social motivation across 42 countries during a global pandemic. Evolution and Human Behavior, 43, 527–535. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2022.09.003

  • Purzycki, B. G., Henrich, J., Apicella, C. L., Atkinson, Q. D., Baimel, A., Cohen, E., ... & Norenzayan, A. (2017). The evolution of religion and morality: A synthesis of ethnographic and experimental evidence from eight societies. Religion, Brain & Behavior, 8, 101–132. https://doi.org/10.1080/2153599X.2016.1267027

  • Rai, T. S., & Fiske, A. (2010). ODD (observation- and description-deprived) psychological research. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 106–107. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0140525X10000221

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Rosenthal, B. G. (1975). The role and status of women in the Soviet Union: 1917 to the present. In R. Rohrlich-Leavitt (Ed.), Women cross-culturally: Change and challenge (pp. 429–455). Aldine.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmitt, D. P., Realo, A., Voracek, M., & Allik, J. (2008). Why can’t a man be more like a woman? Sex differences in Big Five personality traits across 55 cultures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 94, 168–182. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.94.1.168

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Schultz, J. F., Bahrami-Rad, D., Beauchamp, J. P., & Henrich, J. (2019). The Church, intensive kinship, and global psychological variation. Science, 366, eaau5141. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aau5141

  • Sobotka, T., & Beaujouan, É. (2014). Two is best? The persistence of a two-child family ideal in Europe. Population and Development Review, 40, 319–419.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoet, G., & Geary, D. C. (2018). The gender-equality paradox in science, technology, engineering, and mathematical education. Psychological Science, 29, 518–593. https://doi.org/10.1177/095679761989289

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Stoet, G., & Geary, D. C. (2020). Sex-specific academic ability and attitude patterns in students across developed nations. Intelligence, 81, 101453. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.intell.2020.101453

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tay, P. K. C., Ting, Y. Y., & Tan, K. Y. (2019). Sex and care: The evolutionary psychological explanations for sex differences in formal care occupations. Frontiers in Psychology, 10, 867. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00867

  • Vashro, L., & Cashdan, E. (2015). Spatial cognition, mobility, and reproductive success innorthwestern Namibia. Evolution and Human Behavior, 36, 123–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2014.09.009

  • Vashro, L., Padilla, L., & Cashdan, E. (2016). Sex differences in mobility and spatial cognition: A test of the fertility and parental care hypothesis in northwestern Namibia. Human Nature, 27, 16–34. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12110-015-9247-2

  • Weinberg, S. (1992). Dreams of a final theory: The search for the fundamental laws of nature. Vintage.

  • Yong, J. C., & Li, N. P. (2022). Elucidating evolutionary principles with the traditional Mosuo: Adaptive benefits and origins of matriliny and “walking marriages.” Culture and Evolution, 19, 22–40. https://doi.org/10.1556/2055.2022.00017

Download references

Acknowledgements

I thank Simon S. Groome, Norman P. Li, Jose C. Yong, and anonymous reviewers for their comments on earlier drafts.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Management, London School of Economics and Political Science, Houghton Street, London, WC2A 2AE, UK

    Satoshi Kanazawa

Authors
  1. Satoshi Kanazawa
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

As the sole author, SK is responsible for all aspects of the work reported.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Satoshi Kanazawa.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Approval

Not applicable. There are no human or animal subjects involved.

Consent to Participate

Not applicable.

Consent for Publication

Not applicable.

Conflict of Interest

The author declares no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kanazawa, S. Why All Evolutionary Psychological Theories Must be Tested in WEIRD Societies. Evolutionary Psychological Science 10, 33–39 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-024-00383-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40806-024-00383-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation