We agree with the basic tenets of Van de Vliert's argument that economic and climatic conditions of a country are closely linked to the levels of fundamental freedoms. In “climate–economic explanation of freedoms,” Van de Vliert argues that, depending on climatic conditions, greater economic resources should increase open-mindedness and risk-seeking. He seems to imply that these dispositions favor free choices and the development of more egalitarian societies. This hypothesis has some support in cross-cultural research on personality traits (McCrae et al. Reference McCrae and Terracciano2005). In 51 cultures from around the world, we obtained observer ratings of 12,156 individuals, and we found that individuals from wealthier countries are significantly more likely to be rated as more open to experience. Indeed, the correlation between the average openness from each country and the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita was r = .47, n = 51. The association was even stronger between GDP and openness to values (r = .65, n = 51), a facet that measures tolerance and openness to different social, religious, and political values (Costa & McCrae Reference Costa and McCrae1992). In turn, cultures with more open-minded individuals tend to be less conservative (r = −.70, n = 22) (Schwartz Reference Schwartz, Kim, Triandis, Kagitcibasi, Choi and Yoon1994), even after accounting for GDP. Cultures with high openness to values have also more democratic regimes (r = .65, n = 49; Unified democracy score) (Pemstein et al. Reference Pemstein, Meserve and Melton2010), even after accounting for GDP. Within the United States, states with higher openness are more likely to endorse liberal values, such as legalization of marijuana and same-sex marriage (Rentfrow et al. Reference Rentfrow, Gosling and Potter2008). At both individual and culture levels, openness is also associated with lower discrimination, as is the case for HIV (McCrae et al. Reference McCrae, Costa, Martin, Oryol, Senin and O'Cleirigh2007a).
We found mixed evidence regarding the hypothesis that individuals in wealthier countries are more willing to take risk. Although individuals in high GDP countries were rated as less cautious (deliberation: r = −.44, n = 51) and more impulsive (impulsiveness: r = .35, n = 51), GDP was unrelated to excitement-seeking and was positively associated with self-discipline (r = .29, n = 51). Furthermore, we found no support for the hypothesis that climatic demands (Van de Vliert Reference Van de Vliert2009) or average temperature contribute to the prediction of openness or risk-taking traits. In a hierarchical regression with GDP in a first step, there was no significant contribution of climatic demands or the interaction of economic resources with climatic demands on openness or risk-taking traits (p > .05).
Although we found little support for climate effects on individuals' personality traits, we have found that temperature has a profound effect on the perceptions of groups, or national character stereotypes (Terracciano et al. Reference Terracciano, Abdel-Khalek, Adam, Adamovova, Ahn, Ahn and McCrae2005). Indeed, we found that those living in warmer climates were perceived as interpersonally warmer (r = .54, n = 49), and temperature was associated with other aspects of national character stereotypes even after accounting for GDP (McCrae et al. Reference McCrae, Terracciano, Realo and Allik2007b). Especially for cultures from Southern Europe and South America, there seem to be a conflation of hot climate and hot temperament. In many languages, words such as “hot,” “warm,” and “cold” can be used to describe temperature and temperament, suggesting that the climate-temperament link has deep roots in human cultures. Perceptions of national character were also related to wealth, with those living in rich countries rating the typical member of their country as relatively more conscientious (r = .44), less interpersonally warm (r = −.60), and with more business-like traits, even after accounting for temperature. Consistent with this pattern, raters from poorer countries (e.g., Nigeria and Indonesia as compared to Germany and the United Kingdom) tend to perceive Americans as more competent (Chan et al. Reference Chan, McCrae, Rogers, Weimer, Greenberg and Terracciano2011; Terracciano & McCrae Reference Terracciano and McCrae2007). These national character stereotypes do not reflect the actual average traits of these groups (Terracciano et al. Reference Terracciano, Abdel-Khalek, Adam, Adamovova, Ahn, Ahn and McCrae2005), but they seem to shape a national identity that reflects economic strengths and helps distinguish a country from its neighbors. Thus, whether evaluating ingroup or outgroup members, there is a general tendency to attribute traits to groups based on climate-economic conditions, which has some commonality with Van de Vliert's theory.
As noted above, we found little evidence for an interaction between economic and climatic conditions in predicting personality traits (or national character stereotypes). Overall, the evidence for a climate-economic interaction seems weak, particularly the idea that people from wealthy countries in hot climates enjoy high levels of freedoms. Arab states (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman, Bahrain, Kuwait, and United Arab Emirates) and Singapore have high standards of living (e.g., low infant mortality). These wealthy countries in hot climates, however, score low on indices of democracy (Pemstein et al. Reference Pemstein, Meserve and Melton2010) and have limited freedoms of expression, press, and religion. In these countries, discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, and ethnicity is not uncommon. Much greater freedom can be found in wealthy countries with more temperate and colder climates. Van de Vliert's (2009) summer climate index seems also problematic: summer harshness is rated for Russia at 30 as for Nigeria, Bahrain, Iraq, and Kuwait; Canada at 27 as for Bangladesh and Brazil; and Estonia and Finland at 26 as for Ghana and Indonesia. Although climatic demand measures that improve over the average temperature would be desirable, the above examples call into question the face validity of Van de Vliert's (2009) summer index. Finally, some of the evidence in support for a role of climatic demands on discrimination is ambiguous. Indeed, the collectivism index (Vandello & Cohen Reference Vandello and Cohen1999) used for the 50 United States seems a poor proxy for discrimination and oppression of fundamental freedoms. According to Van de Vliert's reasoning, states such as Hawaii, Maryland, and California rank among the worst in fundamental freedoms along with states such as Louisiana, South Carolina, Mississippi, and Utah. These states differ drastically in political orientation, tax and economic policy, gun control, death penalty, same-sex marriage, and abortion rights. Furthermore, whether these 7 states have worse fundamental freedoms compared to the other 43 states is debatable. In particular, Maryland was the first state with a majority of voters supporting same-sex marriage and the “Dream Act” granting resident tuition status to undocumented immigrants, two laws aimed at reducing discrimination.
We agree with the basic tenets of Van de Vliert's argument that economic and climatic conditions of a country are closely linked to the levels of fundamental freedoms. In “climate–economic explanation of freedoms,” Van de Vliert argues that, depending on climatic conditions, greater economic resources should increase open-mindedness and risk-seeking. He seems to imply that these dispositions favor free choices and the development of more egalitarian societies. This hypothesis has some support in cross-cultural research on personality traits (McCrae et al. Reference McCrae and Terracciano2005). In 51 cultures from around the world, we obtained observer ratings of 12,156 individuals, and we found that individuals from wealthier countries are significantly more likely to be rated as more open to experience. Indeed, the correlation between the average openness from each country and the gross domestic product (GDP) per capita was r = .47, n = 51. The association was even stronger between GDP and openness to values (r = .65, n = 51), a facet that measures tolerance and openness to different social, religious, and political values (Costa & McCrae Reference Costa and McCrae1992). In turn, cultures with more open-minded individuals tend to be less conservative (r = −.70, n = 22) (Schwartz Reference Schwartz, Kim, Triandis, Kagitcibasi, Choi and Yoon1994), even after accounting for GDP. Cultures with high openness to values have also more democratic regimes (r = .65, n = 49; Unified democracy score) (Pemstein et al. Reference Pemstein, Meserve and Melton2010), even after accounting for GDP. Within the United States, states with higher openness are more likely to endorse liberal values, such as legalization of marijuana and same-sex marriage (Rentfrow et al. Reference Rentfrow, Gosling and Potter2008). At both individual and culture levels, openness is also associated with lower discrimination, as is the case for HIV (McCrae et al. Reference McCrae, Costa, Martin, Oryol, Senin and O'Cleirigh2007a).
We found mixed evidence regarding the hypothesis that individuals in wealthier countries are more willing to take risk. Although individuals in high GDP countries were rated as less cautious (deliberation: r = −.44, n = 51) and more impulsive (impulsiveness: r = .35, n = 51), GDP was unrelated to excitement-seeking and was positively associated with self-discipline (r = .29, n = 51). Furthermore, we found no support for the hypothesis that climatic demands (Van de Vliert Reference Van de Vliert2009) or average temperature contribute to the prediction of openness or risk-taking traits. In a hierarchical regression with GDP in a first step, there was no significant contribution of climatic demands or the interaction of economic resources with climatic demands on openness or risk-taking traits (p > .05).
Although we found little support for climate effects on individuals' personality traits, we have found that temperature has a profound effect on the perceptions of groups, or national character stereotypes (Terracciano et al. Reference Terracciano, Abdel-Khalek, Adam, Adamovova, Ahn, Ahn and McCrae2005). Indeed, we found that those living in warmer climates were perceived as interpersonally warmer (r = .54, n = 49), and temperature was associated with other aspects of national character stereotypes even after accounting for GDP (McCrae et al. Reference McCrae, Terracciano, Realo and Allik2007b). Especially for cultures from Southern Europe and South America, there seem to be a conflation of hot climate and hot temperament. In many languages, words such as “hot,” “warm,” and “cold” can be used to describe temperature and temperament, suggesting that the climate-temperament link has deep roots in human cultures. Perceptions of national character were also related to wealth, with those living in rich countries rating the typical member of their country as relatively more conscientious (r = .44), less interpersonally warm (r = −.60), and with more business-like traits, even after accounting for temperature. Consistent with this pattern, raters from poorer countries (e.g., Nigeria and Indonesia as compared to Germany and the United Kingdom) tend to perceive Americans as more competent (Chan et al. Reference Chan, McCrae, Rogers, Weimer, Greenberg and Terracciano2011; Terracciano & McCrae Reference Terracciano and McCrae2007). These national character stereotypes do not reflect the actual average traits of these groups (Terracciano et al. Reference Terracciano, Abdel-Khalek, Adam, Adamovova, Ahn, Ahn and McCrae2005), but they seem to shape a national identity that reflects economic strengths and helps distinguish a country from its neighbors. Thus, whether evaluating ingroup or outgroup members, there is a general tendency to attribute traits to groups based on climate-economic conditions, which has some commonality with Van de Vliert's theory.
As noted above, we found little evidence for an interaction between economic and climatic conditions in predicting personality traits (or national character stereotypes). Overall, the evidence for a climate-economic interaction seems weak, particularly the idea that people from wealthy countries in hot climates enjoy high levels of freedoms. Arab states (Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Oman, Bahrain, Kuwait, and United Arab Emirates) and Singapore have high standards of living (e.g., low infant mortality). These wealthy countries in hot climates, however, score low on indices of democracy (Pemstein et al. Reference Pemstein, Meserve and Melton2010) and have limited freedoms of expression, press, and religion. In these countries, discrimination based on sex, sexual orientation, and ethnicity is not uncommon. Much greater freedom can be found in wealthy countries with more temperate and colder climates. Van de Vliert's (2009) summer climate index seems also problematic: summer harshness is rated for Russia at 30 as for Nigeria, Bahrain, Iraq, and Kuwait; Canada at 27 as for Bangladesh and Brazil; and Estonia and Finland at 26 as for Ghana and Indonesia. Although climatic demand measures that improve over the average temperature would be desirable, the above examples call into question the face validity of Van de Vliert's (2009) summer index. Finally, some of the evidence in support for a role of climatic demands on discrimination is ambiguous. Indeed, the collectivism index (Vandello & Cohen Reference Vandello and Cohen1999) used for the 50 United States seems a poor proxy for discrimination and oppression of fundamental freedoms. According to Van de Vliert's reasoning, states such as Hawaii, Maryland, and California rank among the worst in fundamental freedoms along with states such as Louisiana, South Carolina, Mississippi, and Utah. These states differ drastically in political orientation, tax and economic policy, gun control, death penalty, same-sex marriage, and abortion rights. Furthermore, whether these 7 states have worse fundamental freedoms compared to the other 43 states is debatable. In particular, Maryland was the first state with a majority of voters supporting same-sex marriage and the “Dream Act” granting resident tuition status to undocumented immigrants, two laws aimed at reducing discrimination.
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This research was supported in part by the Intramural Research Program of the NIH, National Institute on Aging. The views expressed in the commentary do not necessarily represent those of the NIH.