The Origins of WEIRD Psychology, Government Effectiveness, and Economic Prosperity
A growing body of research suggests that populations around the globe vary substantially along important psychological dimensions. Yet, efforts to understand the origins of this variation and its impact on economic outcomes have only just begun. Here, we explore the hypothesis that kin-based institutions are a key determinant of this psychological variation and that they have strong downstream impacts on the effectiveness of political and economic organizations.
We’ll examine three questions. First, does the variation in kin-based institutions help account for extant psychological variation? Second, can differences in kin-based institutions, and in particular in Europe’s kinship systems, be traced back to the Medieval Christianity’s peculiar religious prohibitions? Third, have the differences in kin-based institutions influenced the effectiveness of political and economic institutions.
Methodologically, we plan to assemble and analyze new historical databases, comparative experimental data from diverse societies and genetic data (to infer kinship). In particular, our analysis of historical corpora will permit us to track psychological changes through space and over centuries. The proposed research holds the potential to profoundly impact how researchers in psychology, economics, and history tackle fundamental questions in their fields.
Identifying the Cultural Foundations of Human Cognition
Formal education is often assumed to influence the content of our minds—what we know—but several new lines of evidence increasingly suggest that the effect of education runs far deeper: raising our cognitive abilities, increasing analytic thinking, empowering selfregulation, and improving executive function. In other words, schooling not only transmits knowledge, but shapes core aspects of our cognition and behavior. For this project, Helen Davis, postdoctoral researcher, will focus on time-sensitive natural-experiments in two rural, substance-based economies within Africa and South America to examine the longitudinal effects of schooling on cognitive performance, analytical thinking, and executive function.
The Cultural Evolution of Epistemic Practices
Throughout history, people have used information from different sources and have evaluated the relative reliability of various kinds of information based on collectively accepted standards. Much research assumes the universality of epistemic practices, yet history presents plenty of cases where both the epistemic methods and epistemic evaluations exhibit significant variation. For example, an argument that consists of divine revelation, analogy, and words from wise sages would be viewed as convincing in ancient China but weak in most contemporary Western societies. Traditionally, anthropologists have documented indigenous epistemic methods through participant observation, psychologists have measured punitive attitudes towards norm violations, cognitive scientists have modeled belief-updating and decision making processes, and communication researchers have proposed criteria for good persuasive arguments. Yet there is no unified account that takes into consideration the cross-cultural and historical variations in the kind of information that people pay attention to, as well as how information is processed, presented, and evaluated. Kevin Hong, fourth year graduate student, will conduct a set of field studies to examine how individuals in small scale societies in SW China 1) gather information, 2) weigh contradictory information from different sources, and 3) evaluate arguments consisting of different kinds of information normatively. This field study is part of a larger project where he examines the change in rhetorical style in ancient China and the evolution of divination practices. Methodologically, he will combine participant observation, structured/semi-structured interviews, experiments, vignettes, and decision-making modelling. Funded by Mind, Brain and Behavior at Harvard University.