Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-14T10:24:59.741Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What is really wrong with a priori claims of universality? Sampling, validity, process level, and the irresistible drive to reduce

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  15 June 2010

Philippe Rochat
Philippe Rochat
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, Emory University, Atlanta, GA 30322. psypr@emory.eduhttp://www.psychology.emory.edu/cognition/rochat/lab/index.html
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Catchy acronyms such as “WEIRD population” are good mnemonics. However, they carry the danger of distracting us from deeper issues: how to sample populations, the validity of measuring instruments, the levels of processing involved. These need to be considered when assessing claims of universality regarding how the mind works “in general” – a dominant and highly rewarded drive in the behavioral and brain sciences.

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 33 , Issue 2-3 , June 2010 , pp. 107 - 108
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Arnett, J. (2008) The neglected 95%: Why American psychology needs to become less American. American Psychologist 63(7):602–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kent, M. M. & Haub, C. (2005) Global demographic divide. Population Bulletin 60(4):1–24.Google Scholar
Rozin, P. (2009) What kind of empirical research should we publish, fund, and reward? A different perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science 4:435–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP). (2006) Human development report, 2006. United Nations.Google Scholar