Countering the biases of WEIRD science with the notion of WILD is much appreciated. But it does not go far enough. Here are three additional suggestions drawn from humanity’s evolutionary history.

First, species-typical child-raising practices need to be recognized by developmental science. Every species evolved a nest for its young that matches up with offspring maturational schedules, buffering adversity, and supporting optimal, species-normal development (Gottlieb, Reference Gottlieb2007; Narvaez et al., Reference Narvaez, Moore, Witherington, Vandiver and Lickliter2022; Tarsha & Narvaez, Reference Tarsha and Narvaez2022). Humanity’s evolved nest emerged from the social mammalian lineage, over 30 million years in existence (Konner, Reference Konner, Hewlett and Lamb2005). Egalitarian hunter-gatherer civilization, representative of hominin (our 99%) and Homo sapiens sapiens (our 95%) existence, follows evolved nest practices. For example, the San Bushmen, an egalitarian set of communities who carry humanity’s genetic inheritance, have been in existence for over 150,000 years (e.g., Suzman, Reference Suzman2017). They raise children with evolved practices that other hunter-gatherers also follow around the world which have been observed and summarized by anthropologists (e.g., Hewlett & Lamb, Reference Hewlett and Lamb2005).

Evolved nest practices for young children (a.k.a., hunter-gatherer childhood model, Konner, Reference Konner, Hewlett and Lamb2005; evolved developmental niche, Narvaez et al., Reference Narvaez, Gleason, Wang, Brooks, Lefever and Cheng2013; Narvaez & Bradshaw, Reference Narvaez and Bradshaw2023) include soothing perinatal experiences, a welcoming supportive community for mother and child, child-directed breastfeeding for several years, nearly constant positive touch, multiple responsive nurturers, self-directed social play, nature immersion and attachment, and immersion in inclusionary community healing rituals that connect to the spiritual world. Each practice has been shown to positively influence physiological, psychological, and/or social wellbeing (e.g., Bergman, Reference Bergman2014; Gleason et al., Reference Gleason, Tarsha, Narvaez and Kurth2021; Katz et al., Reference Katz, Biesele and St. Denis1997; Montagu, Reference Montagu1986; Narvaez et al., Reference Narvaez, Braungart-Rieker, Miller, Gettler and Hastings2016; Narvaez et al., Reference Narvaez, Gleason, Wang, Brooks, Lefever and Cheng2013; Narvaez et al., Reference Narvaez, Valentino, McKenna, Fuentes and Gray2014; Tarsha & Narvaez, 2023; 2024; Reference Tarsha and Narvaez2025; Yogman et al., Reference Yogman, Garner, Hutchinson, Hirsch-Pasek and Golinkoff2018).

Second, rather than taking any diversity in child raising as species-normal, evolved nest practices should be used as the baseline for species-normal child raising, recognizing that their implementation can vary by community (Narvaez & Witherington, Reference Narvaez and Witherington2018). The types of hierarchical civilization that have taken over the world in recent centuries have shifted priorities from species-normal child raising, fierce egalitarianism, and communal support of child wellbeing (Boehm, Reference Boehm1999; Hrdy, Reference Hrdy2009; Lee, Reference Lee2018) to emphasizing hierarchical control and accumulation at the expense of human wellbeing (Scheidler, Reference Scheidler2020; Weber, Reference Weber1904/2009; Wilkinson & Pickett, Reference Wilkinson and Pickett2011), undermining evolved nest provision (Narvaez, 2024; Reference Narvaez2025).

The anticipation of infant needs by multiple nurturers that the authors note among the rural Sri Lankan and rural Nso communities can be taken as species-typical communal child raising. In contrast, putting the onus on infants to signal a need before the need is met is species-atypical. Moreover, an infant cry is a late signal that comes after body tension and facial and body gestures. Waiting for a cry can put the child into a higher state of distress, potentially impairing growth if extended (Schore, Reference Schore2025).

Although evolved nest degradation has occurred over centuries, we can document more recent downturns in WEIRD societies – that is, more species-atypical diversity in child raising. For example, increased medicalized intrusions at birth over the course of the twentieth century (e.g., Davis-Floyd, Reference Davis-Floyd2003); the undermining of breastfeeding from medical practices as well as from the power of commercial formula corporations (The Lancet, 2023; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, 2011); cultural myths about spoiling babies if they are responded to too quickly and held too much (e.g., Watson, Reference Watson1928; Shonkoff et al., Reference Shonkoff, Garner, Dobbins, Earls, McGuinn and Wood2012); the shift away from extended family life to nuclear families (e.g., Sear, Reference Sear2021); the decrease in unstructured free play in recent decades due to parent anxiety diminishing outdoor free play (e.g., Skenazy, Reference Skenazy2010), instead emphasizing achievement (e.g., Gray, Reference Gray2011; Reference Gray2013), as well child preoccupation with screens (e.g., Council on Communications and Media et al., 2016; Turkle, Reference Turkle2011); “nature-deficit disorder” from decreased experience in nature (e.g., Louv, Reference Louv2005); and decreased community trust and participation (e.g., Putnam, Reference Putnam2001). Thus, WEIRD societies like the USA are exemplars of species-atypicality, suggesting perhaps that all studies with WEIRD humans, from developmental to neuroscience, should be taken with a grain of salt. Instead, one will need to utilize appropriate baselines for species-normal outcomes.

Third, then, species-typical outcomes of evolved nest practices should provide the baselines used to assess child and adult health and wellbeing. Practiced all over the world until recently, the evolved nest provides a cultural commons for promoting species-normal development and species-normal human nature (Darwin, Reference Darwin1871/1981). Darwin noted humanity’s species-typical moral sense as comprised of social pleasure, social concern, and empathy, along with habit control. These qualities are apparent in small-band hunter-gatherer communities around the world, along with flexible cooperation, generosity, and hospitality (Bird David, Reference Bird-David2017; Fry, Reference Fry2006; Ingold, Reference Ingold, Lee and Daly2005; Reference Ingold2011; Kelly, Reference Kelly2007; Martin, Reference Martin1999). Such characteristics may be less apparent in societies that limit evolved nest provision (Narvaez, Reference Narvaez and Joyce2017; Reference Narvaez, Graham and Gray2018). The WEIRD prioritization of the mother–child dyad is species-atypical and is associated with less openness and flexibility (Hrdy, Reference Hrdy2009).

Several ethical concerns arise from these and the authors’ WILD suggestions. Although collecting data in situ is appropriately attractive, there must be precautions taken. Interfering in a preconquest hunter-gatherer community’s way of being with postconquest (colonizer worldview) questioning has been documented to disrupt the community’s wellbeing for the long term (Sorenson, Reference Sorenson and Wautischer1998). Even within WEIRD science, one cannot ethically conduct randomized controlled experiments on how child-raising practices affect child outcomes. Instead, the common personalities and capabilities of hunter-gatherers documented by ethnographers (e.g., Ingold, Reference Ingold, Lee and Daly2005) may be used as outcome baselines.

A responsible developmental science would take into account the species’ basic needs and evolved practices for fulfilling those needs. We know from Harry Harlow’s (Reference Harlow1958) experiments that violating an offspring’s evolved expectations of care leads to species-atypical outcomes. It is time to apply that knowledge to studies of human development.