How did the differences between the north and Southern economies lead to the development of two distinct cultural regions?

A new cultural psychology study has found that psychological differences between the people of northern and southern China mirror the differences between community-oriented East Asia and the more individualistic Western world – and the differences seem to have come about because southern China has grown rice for thousands of years, whereas the north has grown wheat.

“It’s easy to think of China as a single culture, but we found that China has very distinct northern and southern psychological cultures and that southern China’s history of rice farming can explain why people in southern China are more interdependent than people in the wheat-growing north,” said Thomas Talhelm, a University of Virginia Ph.D. student in cultural psychology and the study’s lead author. He calls it the “rice theory.”

The findings appear in the May 9 issue of the journal Science.

Talhelm and his co-authors at universities in China and Michigan propose that the methods of cooperative rice farming – common to southern China for generations – make the culture in that region interdependent, while people in the wheat-growing north are more individualistic, a reflection of the independent form of farming practiced there over hundreds of years.

“The data suggests that legacies of farming are continuing to affect people in the modern world,” Talhelm said. “It has resulted in two distinct cultural psychologies that mirror the differences between East Asia and the West.”

According to Talhelm, Chinese people have long been aware of cultural differences between the north region and the southern, which are divided by the Yangtze River – the largest river in China, flowing west to east across the vast country. People in the north are thought to be more aggressive and independent, while people to the south are considered more cooperative and interdependent.

“This has sometimes been attributed to different climates – warmer in the south, colder in the north – which certainly affects agriculture, but it appears to be more related to what Chinese people have been growing for thousands of years,” Talhelm said.

He notes that rice farming is extremely labor-intensive, requiring about twice the number of hours from planting to harvest as does wheat. And because most rice is grown on irrigated land, requiring the sharing of water and the building of dikes and canals that constantly require maintenance, rice farmers must work together to develop and maintain an infrastructure upon which all depend. This, Talhelm argues, has led to the interdependent culture in the southern region.

Wheat, on the other hand, is grown on dry land, relying on rain for moisture. Farmers are able to depend more on themselves, leading to more of an independent mindset that permeates northern Chinese culture.

Talhelm developed his rice theory after living in China for four years. He first went to the country in 2007 as a high school English teacher in Guangzhou, in the rice-growing south.

A year later, he moved to Beijing, in the north. On his first trip there, he noticed that people were more outgoing and individualistic than in the south.

“I noticed it first when a museum curator told me my Chinese was clearly better than my roommate’s,” Talhelm said. “The curator was being direct and a little less concerned about how her statement might make us feel.”

After three years in China, including time as a journalist, he later went back as a U.Va. doctoral student on a Fulbright scholarship.

“I was pretty sure the differences I was seeing were real, but I had no idea why northern and southern China were so different – where did these differences come from?” Talhelm asked.

He soon found that the Yangtze was an important cultural divider in China. “I found out that the Yangtze River helped divide dialects in China, and I soon learned that the Yangtze also roughly divides rice farming and wheat farming,” he said.

He dug into anthropologists’ accounts of pre-modern rice and wheat villages and realized that they might account for the different mindsets, carried forward from an agrarian past into modernity.

“The idea is that rice provides economic incentives to cooperate, and over many generations, those cultures become more interdependent, whereas societies that do not have to depend on each other as much have the freedom of individualism,” Talhelm said.

He went about investigating this with his Chinese colleagues by conducting psychological studies of the thought styles of 1,162 Han Chinese college students in the north and south and in counties at the borders of the rice-wheat divide.

They found through a series of tests that northern Chinese were indeed more individualistic and analytic-thinking – more similar to Westerners – while southerners were interdependent, holistic-thinking and fiercely loyal to friends, as psychological testing has shown is common in other rice-growing East Asian nations, such as Japan and Korea.

The study was conducted in six Chinese cities: Beijing in the north; Fujian in the southeast; Guangdong in the south; Yunnan in the southwest; Sichuan in the west central; and Liaoning in the northeast.

Talhelm said that one of the most striking findings was that counties on the north-south border – just across the Yangtze River from each other – exhibited the same north/south psychological characteristics as areas much more distantly separated north and south.

“I think the rice theory provides some insight to why the rice-growing regions of East Asia are less individualistic than the Western world or northern China, even with their wealth and modernization,” Talhelm said.

He expects to complete his Ph.D. next year, and this year received an Arts, Humanities and Social Sciences Research Fellowship from U.Va.’s Office of the Vice President for Research and the Graduate School of Arts & Sciences for an in-depth study of people from the rice-wheat border in China’s Anhui province.

1. Whiten A., Hinde R. A., Laland K. N., Stringer C. B. 2011. Culture evolves. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 366, 938–948 10.1098/rstb.2010.0372 (doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0372) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

2. Bonner J. T. 1980. The evolution of culture in animals. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press [Google Scholar]

3. Richerson P., Boyd R. 2005. Not by genes alone: how culture transformed human evolution. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press [Google Scholar]

4. Foley R. A. 2001. Evolutionary perspectives on the origins of human social institutions. Proc. Br. Acad. 110, 171–195 [Google Scholar]

5. Collard M., Buchanan B., Morin J., Costopoulos A. 2011. What drives the evolution of hunter–gatherer subsistence technology? A reanalysis of the risk hypothesis with data from the Pacific Northwest. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 366, 1129–1138 10.1098/rstb.2010.0366 (doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0366) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

6. Currie T. E., Mace R. 2011. Mode and tempo in the evolution of socio-political organization: reconciling ‘Darwinian’ and ‘Spencerian’ evolutionary approaches in anthropology. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 366, 1108–1117 10.1098/rstb.2010.0318 (doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0318) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

7. Shennan S. 2011. Descent with modification and the archaeological record. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 366, 1070–1079 10.1098/rstb.2010.0380 (doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0380) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

8. Foley R. A., Lahr M. M. 2001. The anthropological, demographic and ecological context of human evolutionary genetics. In Genes, fossils and behavior: an integrated approach to modern human origins (eds Donnelly P., Foley R. A.), pp. 223–245 Omaha, NE: IOS Press [Google Scholar]

9. Gagneux P., et al. 1999. Mitochondrial sequences show diverse evolutionary histories of African hominoids. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 96, 5077–5082 10.1073/pnas.96.9.5077 (doi:10.1073/pnas.96.9.5077) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

10. Lewis M. P. 2009. Ethnologue: languages of the world, 16th edn. Dallas, TX: SIL International [Google Scholar]

11. Price D. 1990. Atlas of world cultures. London, UK: Sage [Google Scholar]

12. Nettle D. 1998. Explaining global patterns of language diversity. J. Anthropol. Archaeol. 17, 354–374 10.1006/jaar.1998.0328 (doi:10.1006/jaar.1998.0328) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

13. Mace R., Pagel M. 1995. A latitudinal gradient in the density of human languages in North America. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 261, 117–121 10.1098/rspb.1995.0125 (doi:10.1098/rspb.1995.0125) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

14. Collard I. F., Foley R. A. 2002. Latitudinal patterns and environmental determinants of recent human cultural diversity: do humans follow biogeographical rules? Evol. Ecol. Res. 4, 371–383 [Google Scholar]

15. Moore J. L., Manne L., Brooks T., Burgess N. D., Davies R., Rahbek C., Williams P., Balmford A. 2002. The distribution of cultural and biological diversity in Africa. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. B 269, 1645–1653 10.1098/rspb.2002.2075 (doi:10.1098/rspb.2002.2075) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

16. Lewontin R. C. 1972. The apportionment of human diversity. Evol. Biol. 6, 391–398 [Google Scholar]

17. Edwards A. 2003. Human genetic diversity: Lewontin's fallacy. Bioessays 25, 798–801 10.1002/bies.10315 (doi:10.1002/bies.10315) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

18. Rosenberg N. A., Pritchard J. K., Weber J. L., Cann H. M., Kidd K. K., Zhivotovsky L. A., Feldman M. W. 2002. Genetic structure of human populations. Science 298, 2381–2385 10.1126/science.1078311 (doi:10.1126/science.1078311) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

19. McElreath R., Boyd R., Richerson P. J. 2003. Shared norms and the evolution of ethnic markers. Curr. Anthropol. 44, 122–129 10.1086/345689 (doi:10.1086/345689) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

20. Gonder M. K., Mortensen H. M., Reed F. A., de Sousa A., Tishkoff S. A. 2007. Whole-mtDNA genome sequence analysis of ancient African lineages. Mol. Biol. Evol. 24, 757–768 10.1093/molbev/msl209:10.1093/molbev/msl209 (doi:10.1093/molbev/msl209:10.1093/molbev/msl209) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

21. Underhill P., Kivisild T. 2007. Use of Y chromosome and mitochondrial DNA population structure in tracing human migrations. Annu. Rev. Genet. 41, 539–564 10.1146/annurev.genet.41.110306.130407 (doi:10.1146/annurev.genet.41.110306.130407) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

22. Atkinson Q. D., Gray R. D., Drummond A. J. 2008. mtDNA variation predicts population size in humans and reveals a major southern Asian chapter in human prehistory. Mol. Biol. Evol. 25, 447–468 10.1093/molbev/msm277:10.1093/molbev/msm277 (doi:10.1093/molbev/msm277:10.1093/molbev/msm277) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

23. Lahr M. M., Foley R. A. 2001. Genes, fossils and behavior: when and where do they fit? In Genes, fossils and behavior: an integrated approach to modern human origins (eds Donnelly P., Foley R. A.), pp. 13–48 Omaha, NE: IOS Press [Google Scholar]

24. McDougall I., Brown F., Fleagle J. 2005. Stratigraphic placement and age of modern humans from Kibish, Ethiopia. Nature 433, 733–736 10.1038/nature03258 (doi:10.1038/nature03258) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

25. White T. D., Asfaw B., DeGusta D., Gilbert H., Richards G. D., Suwa G., Howell F. C. 2003. Pleistocene Homo sapiens from Middle Awash, Ethiopia. Nature 423, 742–747 10.1038/nature01669 (doi:10.1038/nature01669) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

26. Klein R. G. 2009. The human career. Chicago, IL: Chicago University Press [Google Scholar]

27. Foley R. A., Lahr M. M. 1997. Mode 3 technologies and the evolution of modern humans. Cambr. Archaeol. J. 7, 3–36 10.1017/S0959774300001451 (doi:10.1017/S0959774300001451) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

28. Barham L. S. 1998. Possible early pigment use in South-Central Africa. Curr. Anthropol. 39, 703–710 10.1086/204793 (doi:10.1086/204793) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

29. Whiten A., Goodall J., McGrew W. C., Nishida T., Reynolds V., Sugiyama Y., Tutin C. E. G., Wrangham R. W., Boesch C. 1999. Cultures in chimpanzees. Nature 399, 682–685 10.1038/21415 (doi:10.1038/21415) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

30. d'Errico F., Henshilwood C., Vanhaeren M., Karen van Niekerk K. 2005. Nassarius kraussianus shell beads from Blombos Cave: evidence for symbolic behaviour in the Middle Stone Age. J. Hum. Evol. 48, 3–24 10.1016/j.jhevol.2004.09.002 (doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2004.09.002) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

31. Bouzouggar A., et al. 2007. 82,000-Year-old shell beads from North Africa and implications for the origins of modern human behavior. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 104, 9964–9969 10.1073/pnas.0703877104 (doi:10.1073/pnas.0703877104) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

32. d'Errico F., Vanhaeren M., Barton N., Bouzouggar A., Mienis H., Richter D., Hublin J.-J., McPherron S. P., Lozouet P. 2009. Additional evidence on the use of personal ornaments in the Middle Paleolithic of North Africa. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 16 051–16 056 10.1073/pnas.0903532106 (doi:10.1073/pnas.0903532106) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

33. Henshilwood C. S., d'Errico F., Watts I. 2009. Engraved ochres from the Middle Stone Age levels at Blombos Cave, South Africa. J. Hum. Evol. 57, 27–47 10.1016/j.jhevol.2009.01.005 (doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2009.01.005) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

34. Henshilwood C. S., et al. 2002. Emergence of modern human behavior: Middle Stone Age engravings from South Africa. Science 295, 1278–1280 10.1126/science.1067575 (doi:10.1126/science.1067575) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

35. Jacobs Z., Roberts R. G., Galbraith R. F., Deacon H. J., Grün R., Mackay A., Mitchell P., Vogelsang R., Wadley L. 2008. Ages for the Middle Stone Age of southern Africa: implications for human behavior and dispersal. Science 322, 733–735 10.1126/science.1162219 (doi:10.1126/science.1162219) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

36. O'Connell J. F., Allen J. 2004. Dating the colonization of Sahul (Pleistocene Australia–New Guinea): a review of recent research. J. Archaeol. Sci. 31, 835–853 10.1016/j.jas.2003.11.005 (doi:10.1016/j.jas.2003.11.005) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

37. Vanhaeren M., d'Errico F. 2006. Aurignacian ethno-linguistic geography of Europe revealed by personal ornaments. J. Archaeol. Sci. 33, 1105–1128 10.1016/j.jas.2005.11.017 (doi:10.1016/j.jas.2005.11.017) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

38. Texier P. J., et al. 2010. A Howiesons Poort tradition of engraving ostrich eggshell containers dated to 60,000 years ago at Diepkloof Rock Shelter, South Africa. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 107, 6180–6185 10.1073/pnas.0913047107 (doi:10.1073/pnas.0913047107) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

39. Kuzmin Y. V., Burr G. S., Jull A. J. T., Sulerzhitsky L. D. 2004. AMS C-14 age of the Upper Palaeolithic skeletons from Sungir site, Central Russian Plain. Nucl. Instrum. Meth. B 223-224, 731–734 10.1016/j.nimb.2004.04.135 (doi:10.1016/j.nimb.2004.04.135) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

40. Bouquet-Appel J.-P., Demars P. Y. 2000. Population kinetics in the Upper Palaeolithic in Western Europe. J. Archaeol. Sci. 27, 551–570 10.1006/jasc.1999.0471 (doi:10.1006/jasc.1999.0471) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

41. Powell A., Shennan S., Thomas M. G. 2009. Late Pleistocene demography and the appearance of modern human behavior. Science 324, 1298–1301 10.1126/science.1170165 (doi:10.1126/science.1170165) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

42. Veth P. M. 1993. Islands in the interior. Ann Arbor, MI: International Monographs in Prehistory [Google Scholar]

43. Bellwood P., Renfrew A. C. 2003. Examining the farming/language dispersal hypothesis. Cambridge, UK: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research [Google Scholar]

44. Birdsell J. B. 1953. Some environmental and cultural factors influencing the structure of Australian aboriginal populations. Am. Nat. 87, 171–207 10.1086/281776 (doi:10.1086/281776) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

45. Currie T. E., Mace R. 2009. Political complexity predicts the spread of ethnolinguistic groups. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 106, 7339–7344 10.1073/pnas.0804698106:10.1073/pnas.0804698106 (doi:10.1073/pnas.0804698106:10.1073/pnas.0804698106) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

46. Foley R. A. 2004. The evolutionary ecology of linguistic diversity in human populations. In Traces of ancestry: studies in honour of Colin Renfrew (ed. Jones M.). Cambridge, UK: McDonald Institute for Archaeological Research [Google Scholar]

47. Hodder I. 1977. The distribution of material culture items in the Baringo Distrct, Western Kenya. Man 12, 239–269 10.2307/2800797 (doi:10.2307/2800797) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

48. Sahlins M. 1961. The segmentary lineage: an organization of predatory expansion. Am. Anthropol. 63, 322–345 10.1525/aa.1961.63.2.02a00050 (doi:10.1525/aa.1961.63.2.02a00050) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

49. Collard M., Shennan S. J., Tehrani J. J. 2006. Branching, blending, and the evolution of cultural similarities and differences among human populations. Evol. Hum. Behav. 27, 169–184 10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2005.07.003 (doi:10.1016/j.evolhumbehav.2005.07.003) [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

50. Cavalli-Sforza L. L., Piazza A., Menozzi P., Mountain J. 1988. Reconstruction of human evolution: bringing together genetic, archaeological and linguistic data. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 85, 6002–6006 10.1073/pnas.85.16.6002 (doi:10.1073/pnas.85.16.6002) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

51. Whiten A. 2011. The scope of culture in chimpanzees, humans and ancestral apes. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 366, 997–1007 10.1098/rstb.2010.0334 (doi:10.1098/rstb.2010.0334) [PMC free article] [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

52. Mitani J., Watts D., Amsler S. 2010. Lethal intergroup aggression leads to territorial expansion in wild chimpanzees. Curr. Biol. 20, R507–R508 10.1016/j.cub.2010.04.021 (doi:10.1016/j.cub.2010.04.021) [PubMed] [CrossRef] [Google Scholar]

Page 2

Comparative genetic diversity of apes and humans. The horizontal bars indicate the range and average pairwise difference between individuals in mtDNA sequence; the cartoon on the right is an unrooted tree of the ape/human clade, based on mtDNA, in which the branch lengths are equivalent to sequence divergence. Modified from Gagneux et al. [9].

Click on the image to see a larger version.