Does comparative cognition have a WEIRD problem?

Area of Science:

• Comparative cognition
• Cross-species psychology
• Cultural bias in research

Background:

• WEIRD-centrism is an unrecognized bias in comparative cognition research.
• This bias prioritizes the norms and behaviors of Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) populations as the standard.
• It influences the study of practices, capacities, and concepts across species.

Purpose of the Study:

• To identify and describe WEIRD-centrism in comparative cognition.
• To propose methods for mitigating this cultural bias in research.
• To enhance the understanding of interspecies similarities and differences.

Main Methods:

• Conceptual analysis of research biases.
• Proposal of a multi-baseline approach using non-human species as starting points.
• Application of philosophical analysis and conceptual engineering to define psychological capacities.

Main Results:

• WEIRD-centrism is a significant, yet unacknowledged, bias affecting comparative cognition.
• The multi-baseline approach offers a framework to decenter human-centric perspectives.
• Conceptual engineering aids in defining and comparing psychological capacities across diverse species.

Conclusions:

• Addressing WEIRD-centrism is crucial for advancing comparative cognition.
• A multi-baseline and conceptual engineering approach can lead to more objective cross-species comparisons.
• These methods promote a nuanced understanding of cognitive diversity within and between species.