Over the last ten years, Oosterhof and Todorov’s valence-dominance model has emerged as the most prominent account of how people evaluate faces on social dimensions. In this model, two dimensions (valence and dominance) underpin social judgments of faces. Because this model has primarily been developed and tested in Western regions, it is unclear whether these findings apply to other regions. We addressed this question by replicating Oosterhof and Todorov’s methodology across 11 world regions, 41 countries, and 11,570 participants. When we used Oosterhof and Todorov’s original analysis strategy, the valence-dominance model generalized across regions. When we used an alternative methodology to allow for correlated dimensions we observed much less generalization. Collectively, these results suggest that, while the valence-dominance model generalizes very well across regions when dimensions are forced to be orthogonal, regional differences are revealed when we use different extraction methods, correlate and rotate the dimension reduction solution.

Any act of measurement brings with it concerns about data quality and replication. Yet very little of this work has focused in detail on the specific measurement and data quality concerns related to conducting research in the Global South. Busara operates both remote and in-person data collection, employing everything from photovoice to laboratory ‘games’ to list experiments. Across both of these domains, we will build on our long tradition of careful testing of measures and techniques to ensure high levels of access, response, attention and comprehension. We will examine what methodological practices work best for various populations, especially those with the least social power, in the Global South, to maintain data quality (this differs from our closely related program of work on cross-cultural validation of behavioral science constructs). Busara is well-positioned to do this, and to disseminate protocols for the use of these methods.

The events of recent years have made especially plain the inequities between Global North and South. One such inequality is in the way some social groups are often missing from the data, so that knowledge, policies, services and products do not take proper account of them. This bias exists strongly in the conceptual development of the behavioral sciences, and it makes the research base fragile, with papers making claims of universality that do not stand up to scrutiny. In order to deal with concerns about replication, external validity and the strength of this research base, there are now many initiatives to improve experimentation in the social sciences. However, truly generalizable findings come about when institutions are present in the long term to aggregate across studies. That works even better when those institutions have a deep understanding of the contexts in which they seek to generalise from and to. Busara was founded as an institution to apply context-specific behavioral science literature, and this work has been a constant throughout our history. We now propose to launch a structured three-year Open Science investigation of the gaps in the understanding of canonical patterns of behavior, cognitive processes, preferences, beliefs, and decision-making processes in the Global South, comparing our work in multiple contexts and exploring variance across time, place, and demography. At the conclusion of this project, we will begin integrating our findings into wider theories of global cultural, psychological and microeconomic heterogeneity.

No abstract

The use of experiments in social science has brought huge gains in our knowledge of the world. However, in recent debates, sharp critiques of the power imbalances of the discipline have been made. There have been some responses on how we can improve our approach to be more ethical. These responses have often conceived of research ethics rather narrowly, and not included wider responsibilities beyond the protection of participants. Often missing from both sides has been empirical study of the preferences of those research participants, and the societies they belong to. As part of our commitment to racial, gender and wider social justice, commitment to advancing the voices of research participants, and under the banner of our values of respect and purpose, Busara proposes to organise and formalise its agenda on research ethics. We will combine past learnings with new studies over the next three years, to deeply understand the experiences of research participants, and find better ways of closing the loop in communication with those participants. From there, we will co-create, test and disseminate changes to research processes and practices that improve participant welfare and uphold ever-higher standards of ethical practice. We believe that this is both more just, and likely to produce better quality research.