WEIRD Population

Question 1

What does WEIRD stand for?

Answer 1

Western, Educated, Industrialised, Rich, Democratic

Question 2

What did Henrich et al. (2010) find in their meta-analysis?

Answer 2

In their meta-analysis of studies between 2003-2007, 96% of studies used the WEIRD population

Question 3

Why is it a problem using a WEIRD sample?

Answer 3

It means a large proportion of the world’s population isn’t adequately represented. This is a problem as we are taking findings that may be culturally specific but interpreting them as universal traits.

Question 4

What do researchers assume when generalising WEIRD findings?

Answer 4

Assume there is little cultural variation, and subsequently WEIRD findings are said to be representative.

Question 5

What does Nielsen et al., (2017) argue is a problem using WEIRD samples?

Answer 5

Argues that the excessive quantity of studies containing WEIRD participants can also lead to a process of ‘othering’. Othering refers to a process of marginalisation whereby certain communities are treated as different and alien to the norm.

Question 6

What study is an example of using WEIRD sample in social psychology?

Answer 6

The Ultimatum Game originally created by Guth et al. (1982)

Question 7

What is the ultimatum game?

Answer 7

The game offers an opportunity for pairs of anonymous subjects to win real money during a interaction. Within each pair there is a proposer and a responder. The proposer will be given an amount of money, and they can decide how much of that money to offer to the responder.

Question 8

What did Camerer (2003) find with the Ultimatum Game?

Answer 8

In WEIRD populations, proposers usually offer between 40%-50% of the total sum. Offers under 30% were consistently rejected. It was concluded that the Ultimatum Game can be used to make claims on fair versus unfair behaviour.

Question 9

What did Henrich et al (2010) find with the Ultimatum Game?

Answer 9

Henrich et al. (2010) repeated Camerer (2003) study across 23 small-scale human societies including foragers and pastoralists. In non-WEIRD populations, participants tended to make low offers and they also did not tend to reject offers no matter how low they were.

It was concluded that the Ultimatum Game measured a specific set of social norms regarding interacting with money and strangers.

Question 10

What study can be used as an example of WEIRD sampling in developmental psychology?

Answer 10

Studies using the development of spatial reasoning

Question 11

What are the three types of frames of reference that can be used for spatial reasoning?

Answer 11

1. Viewpoint- dependent frames
2. Absolute frames of reference
3. Intrinsic frames of reference

Question 12

What is an example of a viewpoint-dependent frame of reference?

Answer 12

the ball is left to the tree (from my viewpoint)

Question 13

What is an example of an absolute frame of reference?

Answer 13

cardinal-like directions e.g., North, South, East, West

Question 14

What is an example of intrinsic frames of reference?

Answer 14

Refers to position in relation to faceted objects e.g., the ball is at the front of the house

Question 15

What do studies on spatial reasoning on children from WEIRD samples indicate?

Answer 15

Indicate that children use viewpoint dependent frames of reference. It was assumed that this was innate to all humans.

Question 16

What did Haun et al. (2006) show about spatial reasoning?

Answer 16

showed that spatial reasoning differs

Question 17

What did Haun et al. (2006) do in their study?

Answer 17

They examined children in a Dutch village or a hunter-gatherer tribe in Namibia called Haillom.

These cultures were used as their langauge differs in regard to how they describe the position of the objects in space. Most Western languages predominantly use viewpoint dependent frames of references while the langauge spoken in the Haillom Tribe predominantly employs and absolute frame of reference.

Results showed that spatial reasoning is not innate and common to all children but rather culturally dependent.

Question 18

What example can be used in cognitive psychology?

Answer 18

Many assume that basic cognitive processes such as visual perception do not vary across the human species

Question 19

What did Segall et al (1996) examine?

Answer 19

Looked at the susceptibility of both children and adults on standard illusions using Muller-Lyer illusion. It consists of 2 sticks, one with closed fins and the other open. It requires participants to try to guess what stick is longer. People see one stick as being longer than the other despite both being the same length. It was assumed that this was a result of an inborn processes in the visual system.

Question 20

What did Segall et al(1996) findings contradict?

Answer 20

They found that environmental factors play a crucial part in whether you are susceptible to the illusion. Visual exposure to “carpentered corners” was identified as a factor (e.g., straight lines, right angles etc). When this illusion was replicated in members of a Zulu Tribe in Southern Africa, who had less exposure to rectilinear objects such as buildings and streets, the participants viewed the horizontal lines as being the same lengths

Question 21

What conclusions can be drawn from the problems associated with the WEIRD population?

Answer 21

The potential for cultural variation needs to be acknowledged. The effects should not be assumed to be universal. Furthermore there needs to be an active effort to report sample characteristics such as ethnicity, religion, SES. Conclusions need to include info on the WEIRDness of a sample. Authors should also justify their choice of sample.

Question 22

What should discussion sections using WEIRD participants include?

Answer 22

A thoughtful discussion on the possible generalisability of their findings, authors should engage in relevant literature to discuss potential cultural impacts.

Question 23

What could journals do to help promote the use of non WEIRD samples?

Answer 23

Incentives replication of studies of non-WEIRD samples and use diverse subject pools. Furthermore, there should be a change in the way that we treat English proficiency with regards to publishing or not publishing. Instead of rejecting papers based on a lack of English proficiency alone, the merit and novelty of the research should be assessed, and instead we should be offering either help or a chance to edit the paper.