The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Folkbiology doesn't Come from Folkpsychology: Evidence from Yukatek Maya in Cross-Cultural Perspective
Open accessAbstract
Nearly all psychological research on basic cognitive processes of category formation and reasoning uses sample populations associated with large research institutions in technologically-advanced societies. Lopsided attention to a select participant pool risks biasing interpretation, no matter how large the sample or how statistically reliable the results. The experiments in this article address this limitation. Earlier research with urban-USA children suggests that biological concepts are (1) thoroughly enmeshed with their notions of naive psychology, and (2) strikingly human-centered. Thus, if children are to develop a causally appropriate model of biology, in which humans are seen as simply one animal among many, they must undergo fundamental conceptual change. Such change supposedly occurs between 7 and 10 years of age, when the human-centered view is discarded. The experiments reported here with Yukatek Maya speakers challenge the empirical generality and theoretical importance of these claims. Part 1 shows that young Maya children do not anthropocentrically interpret the biological world. The anthropocentric bias of American children appears to owe to a lack of cultural familiarity with non-human biological kinds, not to initial causal understanding of folkbiology as such. Part 2 shows that by age of 4-5 (the earliest age tested in this regard) Yukatek Maya children employ a concept of innate species potential or underlying essence much as urban American children seem to, namely, as an inferential framework for understanding the affiliation of an organism to a biological species, and for projecting known and unknown biological properties to organisms in the face of uncertainty. Together, these experiments indicate that folkpsychology cannot be the initial source of folkbiology. They also underscore the possibility of a species-wide and domain-specific basis for acquiring knowledge about the living world that is constrained and modified but not caused or created by prior non-biological thinking and subsequent cultural experience.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Wimmer, H. (1983) · Cognition · doi:10.1016/0010-0277(83)90004-5 · Cited by 6,305
Basic objects in natural categories
Rosch, E., Mervis, C. B., Gray, W. D., Johnson, D. M., & Boyes-Braem, P. (1976) · Cognitive Psychology · doi:10.1016/0010-0285(76)90013-x · Cited by 5,643
Mindblindness: An Essay on Autism and Theory of Mind
(1995) · Choice Reviews Online · doi:10.5860/choice.33-2412 · Cited by 3,670
Concepts, Kinds, and Cognitive Development
Keil, F. C. (1989) · doi:10.7551/mitpress/2065.001.0001 · Cited by 1,886
ToMM, ToBY, and Agency: Core architecture and domain specificity
Leslie, A. M. (1994) · Mapping the Mind · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511752902.006 · Cited by 1,105 · cited 1×
“…domains of cognition that are clearly evident by ages 4 or 5, and which may be innately differentiated (on folkbiology see Atran 1987, Keil 1989, Gelman & Wellman 1991, Hatano & Inagaki 1994; on folkpsychology see Wimmer & Perner 1983, Leslie 1994, Baron-Cohen 1995, Barrett et al. in press).”
Background
Cited by
The weirdest people in the world?
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010) · Behavioral and Brain Sciences · doi:10.1017/s0140525x0999152x · Cited by 12,641
On seeing human: A three-factor theory of anthropomorphism
Epley, N., Waytz, A., & Cacioppo, J. T. (2007) · Psychological Review · doi:10.1037/0033-295x.114.4.864 · Cited by 4,069
The Essential Child: Origins of Essentialism in Everyday Thought
Gelman, S. A. (2003) · doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780195154061.001.0001 · Cited by 1,247
Psychological universals: what are they and how can we know?
Norenzayan, A., & Heine, S. J. (2005) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.131.5.763 · Cited by 820
The cognitive foundations of cultural stability and diversity
Sperber, D., & Hirschfeld, L. A. (2004) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2003.11.002 · Cited by 624
Metadata
- Authors
- Atran, S., Medin, D., Lynch, E., Vapnarsky, V., Ucan Ek', E., & Sousa, P.
- Venue
- Journal of Cognition and Culture
- Publisher
- Walter de Gruyter GmbH
- Published
- 2001
- Volume
- 1
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 3-42
- ISSN
- 1567-7095 (ISSN-L)
- 1568-5373
- OpenAlex
- W2144478355
- Cited by
- 210
- References
- 5
- FWCI
- 29.36
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- hybrid
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Folkbiology doesn't Come from Folkpsychology: Evidence from Yukatek Maya in Cross-Cultural Perspective. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1163/156853701300063561
- The paper
- Atran, S., Medin, D., Lynch, E., Vapnarsky, V., Ucan Ek', E., & Sousa, P. (2001). Folkbiology doesn't Come from Folkpsychology: Evidence from Yukatek Maya in Cross-Cultural Perspective. Journal of Cognition and Culture. https://doi.org/10.1163/156853701300063561
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.