From savannah to screen
Mark van Vugt researches how evolutionary psychology helps us understand why people behave the way they do – at work, in politics and in society. He explains: “The human brain evolved at a time when we lived in small, close-knit groups of 30 to 150 people at most. In that context, we knew who could be trusted, who deserved to lead and how to survive together. But in modern society, everything is bigger, faster and more anonymous. That creates friction.” He refers to this friction as an evolutionary mismatch: we are biologically programmed for a very different environment from the one we live in today.
Van Vugt sees a clear example of such mismatch in the mental health of employees. In a project funded by the European Commission, he’s researching the impact of digitalisation and workload on stress levels. “More and more people are experiencing chronic stress at work, partly because our brains aren’t equipped to cope with the pace of our current environment. Managers often don’t know how to deal with this. So we’re developing interventions for employees, such as cognitive behavioural therapy, but also training sessions for managers: what exactly is mental health, and how do you talk about it with an employee? Self-care is also a key component here.”
The appeal of the authoritarian leader
In the political sphere, too, Van Vugt sees our behaviour being driven by evolutionary reflexes. As director of the Amsterdam Leadership Lab, he researches how disasters and crises influence our preferences for leadership. “In times of uncertainty or danger, such as natural disasters or war, support for authoritarian leadership increases. People look for reassurance and rally behind strong leaders. That’s not new. From an evolutionary perspective, dominant leaders were often effective in times of crisis. But in a complex democratic society, this can go too far. Across Europe, we’re seeing growing support for leaders who disregard parliaments or the rule of law. That undermines democracy,” according to Van Vugt.
So why do we still fall for it? Van Vugt: “In a hunter-gatherer group, you knew your leader personally. You knew whether someone was competent and fair. In modern society, you have to make that judgment based on limited or inaccurate information. We tested this in 25 countries using scenarios and images of faces adjusted to match the ethnicity of the country. In war scenarios in particular, people more often choose leaders who look dominant.”
Solidarity has its limits
Humans are social creatures, but our solidarity has limits, Van Vugt explains. “In times of scarcity, people show solidarity – but mostly with their own group: family, friends, acquaintances. Evolution hasn’t given us an ‘I love everyone’ instinct. We can stretch the group that ‘we’ encompasses – by saying ‘we are all Dutch’, for example. But that becomes harder as the group grows and becomes more diverse.”
According to Van Vugt, a key to fostering cooperation is creating shared interests. “In a neighbourhood, for example, parents with young children often have a lot of contact with one another. They share a common interest. When that’s in place, solidarity grows. But if you can arrange everything yourself – a nanny, tools for DIY – you no longer need others. That undermines social cohesion.” He also warns of the individualism that comes with wealth and status-seeking: “We all want to be unique and successful, but that often comes at the expense of cooperation and mutual trust.”
Crisis leads to connection
Strikingly, solidarity often strengthens during times of crisis. “During the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine, we saw people suddenly stepping up to support others. But as the crisis drags on or becomes more complex, solidarity fades and people want to reclaim their autonomy.” His advice: start small. “If you want to strengthen solidarity, do it at the level of an organisation or neighbourhood. That’s where it’s clear who belongs and what the shared interest is. Solidarity is a social strategy that’s constantly being put to the test.”
Van Vugt concludes by pointing to a paradox in human nature: “You can strengthen solidarity within a group through competition between groups. In Indonesia, I saw neighbourhoods with perfectly manicured gardens. They turned out to be competing in a ‘most beautiful garden’ contest, with a subsidy as a prize. At the same time, competition can also lead to hatred and exclusion. It’s a delicate balance.”
He advocates for looking more often to our evolutionary heritage when dealing with social and organisational challenges. “As long as we don’t understand how our brains were shaped and what reflexes they trigger, we’ll keep treating the symptoms instead of the root cause. The good news is: we can learn, adapt and make conscious choices. But first we need to understand where we come from.”