Cultural similarity among coreligionists within and between countries

On the role of analytic thinking in religious belief change: Evidence from over 50,000 participants in 16 countries

Religious beliefs are among the most ubiquitous ideological beliefs in the world and often critical to people's worldview. Nonetheless, there is a great deal of variability in the strength and persistence of such beliefs, both across and within cultures. Here, we are interested in what underlying cognitive processes are associated with the phenomena of religious belief change. Although previous research has linked the tendency to engage in analytic thinking with religious dis-belief, this work has missed the potentially larger relationship between analytic thinking and belief change more broadly - that is change in any/either direction over time. Using a cross-sectional correlational study across two large datasets, including 16 countries and 50,827 individuals, we found that roughly 25 % of individuals indicated having substantively changing their beliefs at least once. Further, the relationship between analytic thinking and belief change appears independent from the association between analytic thinking and reported level of belief. Therefore, although analytic thinking is generally associated with a decrease in religious belief, we find some evidence that it may also support an increase in belief among those indicating past change. In total, this work provides evidence for a robust link between analytic thinking and religious belief change over time.

Methodological concerns underlying a lack of evidence for cultural heterogeneity in the replication of psychological effects

The multi-site replication study, Many Labs 2, concluded that sample location and setting did not substantially affect the replicability of findings. Here, we examine theoretical and methodological considerations for a subset of the analyses, namely exploratory tests of heterogeneity in the replicability of studies between "WEIRD and less-WEIRD cultures". We conducted a review of literature citing the study, a re-examination of the existing cultural variability, a power stimulation for detecting cultural heterogeneity, and re-analyses of the original exploratory tests. Findings indicate little cultural variability and low power to detect cultural heterogeneity effects in the Many Labs 2 data, yet the literature review indicates the study is cited regarding the moderating role of culture. Our reanalysis of the data found that using different operationalizations of culture slightly increased effect sizes but did not substantially alter the conclusions of Many Labs 2. Future studies of cultural heterogeneity can be improved with theoretical consideration of which effects and which cultures are likely to show variation as well as a priori methodological planning for appropriate operationalizations of culture and sufficient power to detect effects.

Worldwide divergence of values

Social scientists have long debated the nature of cultural change in a modernizing and globalizing world. Some scholars predicted that national cultures would converge by adopting social values typical of Western democracies. Others predicted that cultural differences in values would persist or even increase over time. We test these competing predictions by analyzing survey data from 1981 to 2022 (n = 406,185) from 76 national cultures. We find evidence of global value divergence. Values emphasizing tolerance and self-expression have diverged most sharply, especially between high-income Western countries and the rest of the world. We also find that countries with similar per-capita GDP levels have held similar values over the last 40 years. Over time, however, geographic proximity has emerged as an increasingly strong correlate of value similarity, indicating that values have diverged globally but converged regionally.

Why cultural distance can promote - or impede - group-beneficial outcomes

Quantifying the distance between cultural groups has received substantial recent interest. A key innovation, borrowed from population genetics, is the calculation of cultural FST (CFST) statistics on datasets of human culture. Measuring the variance between groups as a fraction of total variance, FST is theoretically important in additive models of cooperation. Consistent with this, recent empirical work has confirmed that high values of pairwise CFST (measuring cultural distance) strongly predict unwillingness to cooperate with strangers in coordination vignettes. As applications for CFST increase, however, there is greater need to understand its meaning in naturalistic situations beyond additive cooperation. Focusing on games with both positive and negative frequency dependence and high-diversity, mixed equilibria, we derive a simple relationship between FST and the evolution of group-beneficial traits across a broad spectrum of social interactions. Contrary to standard assumptions, this model shows why FST can have both positive and negative marginal effects on the spread of group-beneficial traits under certain realistic conditions. These results provide broader theoretical direction for empirical applications of CFST in the evolutionary study of culture.

Cross-national analyses require additional controls to account for the non-independence of nations

Cross-national analyses test hypotheses about the drivers of variation in national outcomes. However, since nations are connected in various ways, such as via spatial proximity and shared cultural ancestry, cross-national analyses often violate assumptions of non-independence, inflating false positive rates. Here, we show that, despite being recognised as an important statistical pitfall for over 200 years, cross-national research in economics and psychology still does not sufficiently account for non-independence. In a review of the 100 highest-cited cross-national studies of economic development and values, we find that controls for non-independence are rare. When studies do control for non-independence, our simulations suggest that most commonly used methods are insufficient for reducing false positives in non-independent data. In reanalyses of twelve previous cross-national correlations, half of the estimates are compatible with no association after controlling for non-independence using global proximity matrices. We urge social scientists to sufficiently control for non-independence in cross-national research.

Paradox of diversity in the collective brain

Human societies are collective brains. People within every society have cultural brains-brains that have evolved to selectively seek out adaptive knowledge and socially transmit solutions. Innovations emerge at a population level through the transmission of serendipitous mistakes, incremental improvements and novel recombinations. The rate of innovation through these mechanisms is a function of (1) a society's size and interconnectedness (sociality), which affects the number of models available for learning; (2) fidelity of information transmission, which affects how much information is lost during social learning; and (3) cultural trait diversity, which affects the range of possible solutions available for recombination. In general, and perhaps surprisingly, all three levers can increase and harm innovation by creating challenges around coordination, conformity and communication. Here, we focus on the 'paradox of diversity'-that cultural trait diversity offers the largest potential for empowering innovation, but also poses difficult challenges at both an organizational and societal level. We introduce 'cultural evolvability' as a framework for tackling these challenges, with implications for entrepreneurship, polarization and a nuanced understanding of the effects of diversity. This framework can guide researchers and practitioners in how to reap the benefits of diversity by reducing costs. This article is part of a discussion meeting issue 'The emergence of collective knowledge and cumulative culture in animals, humans and machines'.

Cultural Evolution of Genetic Heritability

Behavioral genetics and cultural evolution have both revolutionized our understanding of human behavior-largely independent of each other. Here we reconcile these two fields under a dual inheritance framework, offering a more nuanced understanding of the interaction between genes and culture. Going beyond typical analyses of gene-environment interactions, we describe the cultural dynamics that shape these interactions by shaping the environment and population structure. A cultural evolutionary approach can explain, for example, how factors such as rates of innovation and diffusion, density of cultural sub-groups, and tolerance for behavioral diversity impact heritability estimates, thus yielding predictions for different social contexts. Moreover, when cumulative culture functionally overlaps with genes, genetic effects become masked, unmasked, or even reversed, and the causal effects of an identified gene become confounded with features of the cultural environment. The manner of confounding is specific to a particular society at a particular time, but a WEIRD (Western, educated, industrialized, rich, democratic) sampling problem obscures this boundedness. Cultural evolutionary dynamics are typically missing from models of gene-to-phenotype causality, hindering generalizability of genetic effects across societies and across time. We lay out a reconciled framework and use it to predict the ways in which heritability should differ between societies, between socioeconomic levels and other groupings within some societies but not others, and over the life course. An integrated cultural evolutionary behavioral genetic approach cuts through the nature-nurture debate and helps resolve controversies in topics such as IQ.