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.