H. Clark Berrett

H. Clark Barrett is Professor of Anthropology at UCLA, and a member of the UCLA Center for Behavior, Evolution, and Culture. He has conducted field work among the Shuar of Ecuador for twenty years, and uses cross-cultural comparisons to explore the nature of human cognition. He collaborates with anthropologists, psychologists, philosophers, and economists to conduct large-ClarkBarrettscale cross-cultural studies of universals and variation in human psychology and development, and has published articles in numerous professional journals including Child Development, Cognition, Current Anthropology, Mind and Language, Psychological Review, Psychological Science, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, and Science. He is the author of The Shape of Thought: How Mental Adaptations Evolve, published by Oxford University Press.


Representative publications: 
Barrett, H.C. (2015). The Shape of Thought: How Mental Adaptations Evolve. New York: Oxford University Press.

Barrett, H.C., Bolyanatz, A., Crittenden, A.N., Fessler, D.M.T., Fitzpatrick, S., Gurven, M., Henrich, J., Kanovsky, M., Kushnick, G., Pisor, A., Scelza, B.A., Stich, S., von Rueden, C., Zhao, W., & Laurence, S. (2016). Small-scale societies exhibit fundamental variation in the role of intentions in moral judgment. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 1522070113v1-201522070.

Barrett, H.C., Peterson, C.D., & Frankenhuis, W.E. (2016). Mapping the cultural learnability landscape of danger. Child Development, 87(3), 770–781.

Barrett, H.C., Broesch, T., Scott, R.M., He, Z., Baillargeon, R., Wu, D., Bolz, M., Henrich, J., Setoh, P., Wang, J., & Laurence, S. (2013). Early false-belief understanding in traditional non-Western societies. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London, Series B. 280(1755): 20122654.

Barrett, H.C. (2012). A hierarchical model of the evolution of human brain specializations. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 109, 10733–10740.

Barrett, H. C., and Kurzban, R. (2006). Modularity in cognition: Framing the debate. Psychological Review, 113, 628-647.