Hostname: page-component-76d6cb85b7-2r2wp Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-07-25T23:36:34.063Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Response to commentators on “Let’s go WILD: Increasing inclusivity in theories of developmental psychology”

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 July 2026

Kim A. Bard Open the ORCID record for Kim A. Bard [Opens in a new window] ,
Heidi Keller  and
David A. Leavens Open the ORCID record for David A. Leavens [Opens in a new window]
Kim A. Bard*
Affiliation:
Department of Behavioral Sciences, University of Michigan-Dearborn, Dearborn, USA kimabard@aol.com
Heidi Keller
Affiliation:
Department of Human Sciences, University of Osnabruck: Universitat Osnabruck, Germany heidi.keller@uni-osnabrueck.de
David A. Leavens
Affiliation:
School of Psychology, University of Sussex, UK davidl@sussex.ac.uk
*
*Corresponding author.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We were pleased to read the comments on our target article expressing views from diverse disciplines, including biology, philosophy, psychiatry, anthropology, and numerous branches of psychology (i.e., developmental, cultural, evolutionary, and comparative psychology). In this response, we discuss their ideas about routes to increasing inclusivity in theories of developmental psychology and present our disagreements with the few who argue that there is no need for change to theories. We highlight the commentators’ broad agreement with the main themes of the WILD (Worldwide, In situ, Local, & Diverse) approach and the practical guide of 5 Steps to Inclusivity, and we consolidate commentators’ views on infrastructural changes that are necessary to reach our collective goal of increasing inclusivity in theories of developmental psychology.

Information

Type
Authors’ Response
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 49 , 2026 , e284
Check for updates
Copyright
© The Author(s), 2026. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Anjum, G., & Aziz, M. (2024). Advancing equity in cross-cultural psychology: Embracing diverse epistemologies and fostering collaborative practices. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, 1368663.10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1368663CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bard, K. A., & Keller, H. (2024). Increasing inclusivity in developmental research. Journal of Cognition and Development, 25(2), 296–302. https://doi.org/10.1080/15248372.2024.2325016 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bard, K. A., & Leavens, D. A. (2014). The importance of development for comparative primatology. Annual Review of Anthropology, 43, 183–200. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-102313-030223 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bard, K.A., Keller, H., Ross, K., Hewlett, B., Butler, L., Boysen, S. T. & Matsuzawa, T. (2022). Joint attention in human and chimpanzee infants in varied socio-ecological contexts. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 86(4), Serial No. 343, 1–228. https://doi.org/10.1111/mono.12435 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bernstein, B. & Henderson, D. (1969). Social class differences in the relevance of language to socialization. Sociology, 3(1), 1–20.10.1177/003803856900300101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bischof, N. (1978). On the phylogeny of human flexibility. In von Cranach, M., Foppa, K., Lepenies, W., & Ploog, D. (Eds.), Human ethology (pp. 483–502). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dennett, D. C. (1983). Intentional systems in cognitive ethology: The “Panglossian paradigm” defended. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 6, 343–390.10.1017/S0140525X00016393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gould, S. J., & Lewontin, R. C. (1979). The spandrels of San Marcos and the Panglossian paradigm: A critique of the adaptationist programme. Proceedings of the Royal Society, Series B, 205, 581–598.Google ScholarPubMed
Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, N. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33(2–3), 61–83.10.1017/S0140525X0999152XCrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Keller, H. (2007). Cultures of Infancy. Erlbaum. Google Scholar
Keller, H. (2022). The myth of attachment theory. Routledge.Google Scholar
Keller, H. (2025). Decolonizing psychology as a scientific and ethical necessity. Online Readings in Psychology and Culture, 2(1), 16. https://doi.org/10.9707/2307-0919.1215 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Keller, H. & Kärtner, J. (2013). Development – The culture–specific solution of universal developmental tasks. In Gelfand, M. L., Chiu, C.-Y., & Hong, Y. Y. (Eds.), Advances in culture and psychology, Vol. 3 (pp. 63–116). Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199930449.003.0002CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kline, M. A., Shamsudheen, R., & Broesch, T. (2018). Variation in the universal: Making cultural evolution work in developmental psychology. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B, 373(1743), 20170059. https://doi.org/10.1098/rstb.2017.0059 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leavens, D. A., & Bard, K. A. (2011). Environmental influences on joint attention in great apes: Implications for human cognition. Journal of Cognitive Education and Psychology, 10, 9–31. https://doi.org/10.1891/1945-8959.10.1.9 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leavens, D. A., Bard, K. A., & Hopkins, W. D. (2019). The mismeasure of ape social cognition. Animal Cognition, 22, 487–504. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10071-017-1119-1 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Leavens, D. A., Elsherif, M., & Clark, H. (2023). What animals can tell us about attentional prerequisites of language acquisition. Language & Communication, 92, 55–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2023.06.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Littell, P. (1918). Introduction to Candide, by Voltaire. Boni & Liveright, Inc.Google Scholar
Moore, C., & Corkum, V. (1994). Social understanding at the end of the first year of life. Developmental Review, 14, 349–372. https://doi.org/10.1006/drev.1994.1014 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, R. (2017). Gricean communication and cognitive development. The Philosophical Quarterly, 267, 303–326.Google Scholar
Morelli, G., Quinn, N., Chaudhary, N., Vicedo, M., Rosabal–Coto, M., Murray, M., Gottlieb, A., Scheidecker, G., & Takada, A. (2018). Ethical challenges of parenting intervention in low– to middle-income countries. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 49(1), 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022022117746241 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newson, M., Buhrmester, M., Xygalatas, D. & Whitehouse, H. (2021). Go WILD, not WEIRD. Journal for the Cognitive Science of Religion, 6(1–2), 80–106.10.1558/jcsr.38413CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oppong, S. (2023a). Promoting global ECD top-down and bottom-up. Ethos, https://doi.org/10.1111/ethos.12393 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Oppong, S. (2023b). Epistemological allyship. Psychology and Developing Societies, 35(1), 69–86. https://doi.org/10.1177/09713336231152301 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Poortinga, Y. H. (2021). Concept and method in cross-cultural and cultural psychology. Cambridge University Press.10.1017/9781108908320CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scheidecker, G., Chaudhary, N., Keller, H., Mezzenzana, F., & Lancy, D. (2023). Poor brain development in the Global South: Challenging the evidence base of early childhood interventions. Ethos, 51(1), 3–26.10.1111/etho.12379CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, W. J., Keller, H., & Coto, M. R. (2023). The cultural specificity of parent-infant interaction: Perspectives of urban middle-class and rural indigenous families in Costa Rica. Infant Behavior and Development, 70, 101796.10.1016/j.infbeh.2022.101796CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Simons, D. J., Shoda, Y., & Lindsay, D. S. (2017). Constraints on generality (COG): A proposed addition to all empirical papers. Perspectives in Psychological Science, 12(6). https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617708630 CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tomasello, M. (2019). Becoming human: A theory of ontogeny. The Belknap Press of Harvard University.Google Scholar
Tuli, M. (2025). Ethics and Practice in the human sciences: A view from developmental psychology. In Tuli, M. and Negi, B. (Eds.) Ethical considerations for research and practice in the human sciences, Information Age Publishing.Google Scholar
Vogt, P., Mastin, J. D., & Schots, D. M. (2015). Communicative intentions of child-directed speech in three different learning environments: Observations from the Netherlands, and rural and urban Mozambique. First Language, 35, 341–358. https://doi.org/10.1177/0142723715596647 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Voltaire. (1759). Candide, ou l’Optimisme. Cramer.Google Scholar