Generic language and essentialist beliefs in Iran
One remarkable limitation of previous studies on the generics-essentialism link is that they have been almost exclusively conducted in English-speaking and Western countries (but see Segall et al. (2015) for a correlational study). Replication failures in psychological science have ignited concern and controversy about the cultural appropriateness of common research methodologies developed by researchers from developed countries and tested among primarily English-speaking, Western samples (Open Science Collaboration, 2015). Many have warned that psychologists should avoid making broad, universal claims based on studies conducted in a single–often WEIRD–population (Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic: Henrich et al., 2010). Within developmental psychology, fewer than 10% of participants in studies published in the top three developmental-psychology journals between 2006 and 2010, were from countries in Central or South America, Africa, Asia, or the Middle East (Nielsen et al., 2017). Research on the role of generics in the formation of social essentialism is not an exception. This is a significant limitation, especially given the assumed universal role that this specific linguistic form plays in the development of essentialism.
In the absence of research outside English-speaking Western samples, the role of generics, especially as a linguistic form, in the development of essentialist reasoning is not clear. Second, cross-cultural differences have been documented for a number of constructs related to the role of generic language in essential reasoning. Specifically, there are cross-cultural differences in intuitive biological thinking (Xu & Coley, 2022) and social explanation (Miller, 1984), as well as culture-specific patterns of social essentialism (e.g., Diesendruck & haLevi, 2006; Mahalingam, 2003); this raises two important questions about generics and essentialism: namely, do generic statements lead to essentialist reasoning in languages other than English at all? And if so, are the mechanisms similar to the mechanisms theorized and tested among English-speaking, Western samples? In the current study, we answer these two questions in a Persian-speaking sample of children and adults living in Iran.
Generics are prevalent in Persian. Particularly, generic language to describe differences in gender norms and social roles are very common and widespread. Children are especially exposed to generic language, particularly about gender, from a variety of sources, including school lessons, the media, and family members who might reinforce traditional gender norms in their everyday language. For example, though not a systematic study of generic language, Chanzanagh et al., (2011) review content of four educational books from the national 5th grade curriculum for all schools in Iran and report the overwhelming prevalence of descriptions of female characters in stereotypical “feminine” activities and roles (e.g., cooking, sewing) and male characters in stereotypical “masculine” roles (e.g., mathematician, firefighter). Children also commonly use generic language in their rhymes to describe differences between boys and girls (such as “Boys are like lions and swords! Girls are like mice and rabbits!”11پسرا شیر اند، مثل شمشیر اند.  دخترا موشند، مثل خرگوشند.). The prevalence of generic language to describe social groups, in addition to recent work by our team documenting social essentialist patterns among children and adults in Iran (anonymized for review ), makes the study of the role of generic language in social essentialism in an Iranian sample uniquely informative and impactful in extending the relevant literature to non-English speaking populations from understudied cultures.