Perspective | Published:

Bridging cultural sociology and cognitive psychology in three contemporary research programmes


Three prominent research programmes in cognitive psychology would benefit from a stronger engagement with the cultural context of cognition: studies of poverty focused on scarcity and cognitive bandwidth, studies of dual-process morality and studies of biases using the implicit association test. We address some limitations of these programmes and suggest research strategies for moving beyond an exclusive focus on cognition. Research on poverty using the cognitive bandwidth approach would benefit from considering the cultural schemas that influence how people perceive and prioritize needs. Dual-process morality researchers could explain variation by analysing cultural repertoires that structure moral choices. Research using the implicit association test can better explain implicit attitudes by addressing the variability in cultural schemas that undergird biases. We identify how these research programmes can deepen the causal understanding of human attitudes and behaviours by addressing the interaction between internal cognition and supra-individual cultural repertoires.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.


All prices are NET prices.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

A correction to this article is available online at

Change history

  • 29 November 2017

    Owing to a technical error, Bo Yun Park’s affiliation was incorrect in the originally published HTML version of this Perspective and should have read: Department of Sociology, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, USA. This has now been corrected. The PDF version is correct.


  1. 1.

    Perrin, A. J. & Lee, H. The undertheorized environment: sociological theory and the ontology of behavioral genetics. Sociol. Perspect. 50, 303–322 (2007).

  2. 2.

    Abend, G. The Moral Background: An Inquiry into the History of Business Ethics (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ, 2014).

  3. 3.

    Bruch, E. & Feinberg, F. Decision-making processes in social contexts. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 43, 207–227 (2017).

  4. 4.

    Lamont, M. & Small, M. L. in The Colors of Poverty: Why Racial and Ethnic Disparities Persist (eds Lin, A. C. & Harris, D. R.) 76–102 (Russell Sage Foundation, New York, NY, 2008).

  5. 5.

    Parsons, T. Societies: Evolutionary and Comparative Perspectives (Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1966).

  6. 6.

    Swidler, A. Culture in action: symbols and strategies. Am. Sociol. Rev. 51, 273–286 (1986).

  7. 7.

    Lamont, M. & Thévenot, L. Rethinking Comparative Cultural Sociology: Repertoires of Evaluation in France and the United States (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2000).

  8. 8.

    Thornton, P. H., Ocasio, W. & Lounsbury, M. The Institutional Logics Perspective: A New Approach to Culture, Structure, and Process (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 2012).

  9. 9.

    Willis, P. E. Learning to Labor: How Working Class Kids Get Working Class Jobs (Columbia Univ. Press, New York, NY, 1977).

  10. 10.

    Hays, S. The Cultural Contradictions of Motherhood (Yale Univ. Press, New Haven, CT, 1998).

  11. 11.

    Buchtel, E. et al. Immorality East and West: are immoral behaviors especially harmful, or especially uncivilized? Pers. Soc. Psychol. Bull. 41, 1382–1394 (2015).

  12. 12.

    Cole, M. Cultural Psychology: A Once and Future Discipline (Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA, 1996).

  13. 13.

    Markus, H. R. & Kitayama, S. Culture and the self: implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychol. Rev. 98, 224–253 (1991).

  14. 14.

    Shweder, R. A., Much, N., Mahapatra, M. & Park, L. in Morality and Health (eds Brandt, A. & Rozin, P.) 119–172 (Routledge, London, 1997).

  15. 15.

    Stephens, N. M., Markus, H. R. & Phillips, L. T. Social class culture cycles: how three gateway contexts shape selves and fuel inequality. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 65, 611–634 (2014).

  16. 16.

    Lamont, M. et al. Getting Respect: Responding to Stigma and Discrimination in the United States, Brazil, and Israel (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ, 2016).

  17. 17.

    Lewis, O. Five Families: Mexican Case Studies in the Culture of Poverty (Basic Books, New York, NY, 1975).

  18. 18.

    Mullainathan, S. & Shafir, E. Scarcity: Why Having Too Little Means So Much (Macmillan, New York, NY, 2013).

  19. 19.

    Bertrand, M., Mullainathan, S. & Shafir, E. A behavioral-economics view of poverty. Am. Econ. Rev. 94, 419–423 (2004).

  20. 20.

    Mani, A., Mullainathan, S., Shafir, E. & Zhao, J. Poverty impedes cognitive function. Science 341, 976–980 (2013).

  21. 21.

    Shah, A. K., Shafir, E. & Mullainathan, S. Scarcity frames value. Psychol. Sci. 26, 402–412 (2015).

  22. 22.

    Desmond, M. Severe deprivation in America: an introduction. RSF 1, 1–11 (2015).

  23. 23.

    Rao, V. Poverty and public celebrations in rural India. Ann. Am. Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci. 573, 85–104 (2001).

  24. 24.

    Desmond, M. Evicted: Poverty and Profit in the American City (Crown, New York, NY, 2016).

  25. 25.

    Waller, M. R. Viewing low-income fathers’ ties to families through a cultural lens: insights for research and policy. Ann. Am. Acad. Pol. Soc. Sci. 629, 102–124 (2010).

  26. 26.

    Daminger, A., Hayes, J., Barrows, A. & Wright, J. Poverty Interrupted: Applying Behavioral Science to the Context of Chronic Scarcity (ideas42, New York, NY, 2015).

  27. 27.

    Rosen, E. Horizontal immobility: how narratives of neighborhood violence shape housing decisions. Am. Sociol. Rev. 82, 270–296 (2017).

  28. 28.

    Blair-Loy, M. Cultural constructions of family schemas: the case of women finance executives. Gend. Soc. 15, 687–709 (2001).

  29. 29.

    Bandelj, N., Wherry, F. F. & Zelizer, V. A. Money Talks: Explaining How Money Really Works (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ, 2017).

  30. 30.

    Daniel, C. Economic constraints on taste formation and the true cost of healthy eating. Soc. Sci. Med. 148, 34–41 (2016).

  31. 31.

    Damasio, A. R. Descartes’ Error: Emotion, Rationality and the Human Brain (Norton, Boston, MA, 1994).

  32. 32.

    Greene, J. & Haidt, J. How (and where) does moral judgment work? Trends Cogn. Sci. 6, 517–523 (2002).

  33. 33.

    Haidt, J. The emotional dog and its rational tail: a social intuitionist approach to moral judgment. Psychol. Rev. 108, 814–834 (2001).

  34. 34.

    Cushman, F. Action, outcome, and value: a dual-system framework for morality. Pers. Soc. Psychol. Rev. 17, 273–292 (2013).

  35. 35.

    Greene, J. D. Why are VMPFC patients more utilitarian? A dual-process theory of moral judgment explains. Trends Cogn. Sci. 11, 322–323 (2007).

  36. 36.

    Greene, J. Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason and the Gap between Us and Them (Penguin Press, New York, NY, 2013).

  37. 37.

    Bartels, D. M. & Pizarro, D. A. The mismeasure of morals: antisocial personality traits predict utilitarian responses to moral dilemmas. Cognition 121, 154–161 (2011).

  38. 38.

    Conway, P. & Gawronski, B. Deontological and utilitarian inclinations in moral decision making: a process dissociation approach. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 104, 216–235 (2013).

  39. 39.

    Cushman, F., Young, L. & Hauser, M. The role of conscious reasoning and intuition in moral judgment: testing three principles of harm. Psychol. Sci. 17, 1082–1089 (2006).

  40. 40.

    Greene, J. D., Morelli, S. A., Lowenberg, K., Nystrom, L. E. & Cohen, J. D. Cognitive load selectively interferes with utilitarian moral judgment. Cognition 107, 1144–1154 (2008).

  41. 41.

    Greene, J. D. et al. Pushing moral buttons: the interaction between personal force and intention in moral judgment. Cognition 111, 364–371 (2009).

  42. 42.

    Hauser, M. D. Moral Minds: How Nature Designed Our Universal Sense of Right and Wrong (HarperCollins Publishers, New York, NY, 2006).

  43. 43.

    Xiang, X. Would the Buddha Push the Man off the Footbridge? Systematic Variations in the Moral Judgment and Punishment Tendencies of Han Chinese, Tibetans and Americans (Harvard University, Cambridge, MA, 2014).

  44. 44.

    Cushman, F., Young, L. & Greene, J. D. in The Moral Psychology Handbook (ed. Doris, J. M.) 47–71 (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 2010).

  45. 45.

    Henrich, J. et al. (eds) Foundations of Human Sociality: Economic Experiments and Ethnographic Evidence from Fifteen Small-Scale Societies (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 2004).

  46. 46.

    Flanagan, O. The Geography of Morals: Varieties of Moral Possibility (Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 2016).

  47. 47.

    Lamont, M. Money, Morals, and Manners: The Culture of the French and American Upper-Middle Class (Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago, IL, 1992).

  48. 48.

    Lamont, M. The Dignity of Working Men: Morality and the Boundaries of Race, Class, and Immigration (Russell Sage Foundation, New York, NY & Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA, 2000).

  49. 49.

    Boltanski, L. & Thévenot, L. On Justification: Economies of Worth (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ, 2006).

  50. 50.

    McAdams, D. P. et al. Family metaphors and moral intuitions: how conservatives and liberals narrate their lives. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 95, 978–990 (2008).

  51. 51.

    Keane, W. Ethical Life: Its Natural and Social Histories (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ, 2015).

  52. 52.

    Haidt, J., Bjorklund, F. & Murphy, S. M oral Dumbfounding: When Intuition Finds No Reason (Univ. Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, 2000); intuition finds no reason.pub603.doc.

  53. 53.

    Lowes, S., Nunn, N., Robinson, J. A. & Weigel, J. Understanding ethnic identity in Africa: evidence from the implicit association test (IAT). Am. Econ. Rev. 105, 340–345 (2015).

  54. 54.

    Nosek, B. A., Bar-Anan, Y., Sriram, N., Axt, J. & Greenwald, A. G. Understanding and using the brief implicit association test: recommended scoring procedures. PLoS ONE 9, e110938 (2014).

  55. 55.

    Greenwald, A. G., McGhee, D. E. & Schwartz, J. L. K. Measuring individual differences in implicit cognition: the implicit association test. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 74, 1464–1480 (1998).

  56. 56.

    Oswald, F. L., Mitchell, G., Blanton, H., Jaccard, J. & Tetlock, P. E. Using the IAT to predict ethnic and racial discrimination: small effect sizes of unknown societal significance. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 108, 562–571 (2015).

  57. 57.

    Blanton, H., Jaccard, J., Christie, C. & Gonzales, P. M. Plausible assumptions, questionable assumptions and post hoc rationalizations: will the real IAT, please stand up? J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 43, 399–409 (2007).

  58. 58.

    Kaufman, S. B. Does the implicit association test (IAT) really measure racial prejudice? Probably not. Psychology Today (28 January 2011);

  59. 59.

    Greenwald, A. G., Banaji, M. R. & Nosek, B. A. Statistically small effects of the implicit association test can have societally large effects. J. Pers. Soc. Psychol. 108, 553–561 (2015).

  60. 60.

    McConnell, A. R. & Leibold, J. M. Relations among the implicit association test, discriminatory behavior, and explicit measures of racial attitudes. J. Exp. Soc. Psychol. 37, 435–442 (2001).

  61. 61.

    Ziegert, J. C. & Hanges, P. J. Employment discrimination: the role of implicit attitudes, motivation, and a climate for racial bias. J. Appl. Psychol. 90, 553–562 (2005).

  62. 62.

    Bargh, J. A. & Chartrand, T. L. The unbearable automaticity of being. Am. Psychol. 54, 462–479 (1999).

  63. 63.

    Dunham, Y., Chen, E. E. & Banaji, M. R. Two signatures of implicit intergroup attitudes: developmental invariance and early enculturation. Psychol. Sci. 24, 860–868 (2013).

  64. 64.

    Banaji, M. R. & Greenwald, A. G. Blindspot: Hidden Biases of Good People (Delacorte Press, New York, NY, 2013).

  65. 65.

    Matthews, S. A. The salience of neighborhood: some lessons from sociology. Am. J. Prev. Med. 34, 257–259 (2008).

  66. 66.

    Clair, M., Daniel, C. & Lamont, M. Destigmatization and health: cultural constructions and the long-term reduction of stigma. Soc. Sci. Med. 165, 223–232 (2016).

  67. 67.

    Shepherd, H. The cultural context of cognition: what the implicit association test tells us about how culture works. Sociol. Forum 26, 121–143 (2011).

  68. 68.

    Dobbin, F. & Kalev, A. Why diversity programs fail. Harv. Bus. Rev. 94, 52–60 (2016).

  69. 69.

    DiMaggio, P. Culture and cognition. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 23, 263–287 (1997).

  70. 70.

    Zerubavel, E. Social Mindscapes: An Invitation to Cognitive Sociology (Harvard Univ. Press, Cambridge, MA, 1997).

  71. 71.

    Vaisey, S. Motivation and justification: a dual-process model of culture in action. Am. J. Sociol. 114, 1675–1715 (2009).

  72. 72.

    Martin, J. L. Social Structures (Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, NJ, 2009).

  73. 73.

    Mohr, J. W. Measuring meaning structures. Annu. Rev. Sociol. 24, 345–370 (1998).

  74. 74.

    Warikoo, N., Sinclair, S., Fei, J. & Jacoby-Senghor, D. Examining racial bias in education: a new approach. Educ. Res. 45, 508–514 (2016).

  75. 75.

    Sanyal, P. Credit to Capabilities: A Sociological Study of Microcredit Groups in India (Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2014).

  76. 76.

    Srivastava, S. B. & Banaji, M. R. Culture, cognition, and collaborative networks in organizations. Am. Sociol. Rev. 76, 207–233 (2011).

  77. 77.

    Babcock, E. D. Using Brain Science to Design New Pathways out of Poverty (Crittenton Women’s Union, Boston, MA, 2014).

  78. 78.

    Lamont, M. Addressing the Recognition Gap: Destigmatization and the Reduction of Inequality (Presidential Address, 112th Annual Meeting of the American Sociological Association, Toronto, ON, 2017);

  79. 79.

    Cushman, F. & Greene, J. D. Finding faults: how moral dilemmas illuminate cognitive structure. Soc. Neurosci. 7, 269–279 (2012).

Download references


We thank G. Abend, B. Bonikowski, K. Cerulo, C. Daniel, P. DiMaggio, F. Dobbin, H. Gardner, P. Hall, H. Haste, S. Lukes, J. Mijs, A. Perrin and A. Wilson for their helpful feedback on an earlier version of the paper. M.L. acknowledges support from the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research.

Author information

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Correspondence to Michèle Lamont.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark