This paper adds to a body of research which analyzes the persistence of institutional features in societies over time by testing for association between local democracy (succession by consensus among preindustrial groups) and various measures of democracy in contemporary societies. The researchers conclude that beliefs and values which perceive democracy as a viable political structure may be an important mediating mechanism in producing and maintaining democratic instututions over time.

This paper adds to a body of research which analyzes the persistence of institutional features in societies over time by testing for association between local democracy (succession by consensus among preindustrial groups) and various measures of democracy in contemporary societies. The researchers conclude that beliefs and values which perceive democracy as a viable political structure may be an important mediating mechanism in producing and maintaining democratic instututions over time.

This study takes an evolutionary approach to understanding cultural development. The author suggests that "the degree of regularity in the relative order of development of any two traits is directly proportional to the evolutionary distance between them." Scale analysis supports this proposition.

This study explores the relationship between level of legal evolution (measured on a Guttman scale that ranges from just mediation to counsel, police, and mediation) and level of societal complexity. Results suggest a significant association between level of legal evolution and level of societal complexity.

In this article, the authors explore cultural variables that they propose contribute to the maintenance of peace in non-warring societies. These variables are compared in 16 peaceful systems (as coded by the authors from anthropological and historical data) and in 30 warring societies taken from the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample (SCCS). Findings associate more peaceful cultures with peace systems, and non-peaceful cultures with warring societies.

The purpose of the present study is to provide insight on the debate concerning how best to organize societies: with more freedom (looseness) or with more constraint (tightness). In a comparison of 32 nations, Harrington, Boski, and Gelfand examine the relationship between tightness/looseness and three dimensions of societal well-being: psychosocial, health, and political/economic outcomes. Findings indicate that excessive constraint and/or freedom contribute to poorer psychosocial, health, and economic/political outcomes, as well as overall national-level well-being. These results suggest that a balance of freedom and constraint is associated with optimal societal well-being.

This study examines why conflict emerges and how societies resolve it. The authors posit that increasing societal scale and differentiation create more potential for conflict but also more complex forms of conflict resolution. Analysis supports this theory, showing that measures of cultural complexity are positively associated with legal mechanisms for conflict resolution.

In this article, the authors explore cultural variables that they propose contribute to the maintenance of peace in non-warring societies. These variables are compared in 16 peaceful systems (as coded by the authors from anthropological and historical data) and in 30 warring societies taken from the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample (SCCS). Findings associate more peaceful cultures with peace systems, and non-peaceful cultures with warring societies.

In this article, the authors explore cultural variables that they propose contribute to the maintenance of peace in non-warring societies. These variables are compared in 16 peaceful systems (as coded by the authors from anthropological and historical data) and in 30 warring societies taken from the Standard Cross-Cultural Sample (SCCS). Findings associate more peaceful cultures with peace systems, and non-peaceful cultures with warring societies.

The purpose of the present study is to provide insight on the debate concerning how best to organize societies: with more freedom (looseness) or with more constraint (tightness). In a comparison of 32 nations, Harrington, Boski, and Gelfand examine the relationship between tightness/looseness and three dimensions of societal well-being: psychosocial, health, and political/economic outcomes. Findings indicate that excessive constraint and/or freedom contribute to poorer psychosocial, health, and economic/political outcomes, as well as overall national-level well-being. These results suggest that a balance of freedom and constraint is associated with optimal societal well-being.