Thinking Liveability, Motivation, and Needs | Maslow: Often Cited, Scientifically Outdated!
Popular ideas such as Maslow’s Hierarchy deemphasize context and spread the hope for universally applicable solutions. However, when making cities more liveable, there is no one-fits-all solution, and that’s important to bear in mind.
When talking about Liveability, changemakers often utilize Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs to describe human needs. Just as often, you will find a reference to Maslow in marketing to explain motivation. Indeed, Maslow proposed one of the most famous conceptualizations of the necessities for a happy life.
However, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs is scientifically outdated.
Why do we still support our arguments with an outdated model? Because we don’t know it’s outdated. Let’s change that!
In short: What did Maslow propose?
In 1943 (revised 1970), Maslow proposed five hierarchical stages of needs, which all humans desire to climb. Step by step, an unfulfilled need at the bottom of the pyramid motivates us to find fulfillment on a particular level. Only once we satisfy our basic requirements, we aspire to higher-level needs. Once all our needs are met, we engage in self-actualization.
According to Maslow, we’re motivated by two factors, mainly; by what we lack and our desire to grow (Buttle, 1989).
Importantly, Maslow did not base his theory on empirical evidence but on his personal, humanistic perspective. That’s okay since a hypothesis lays the foundations for further examinations. Later empirical research, however, did not support Maslow’s ideas (Soper et al., 1995).
Read more about Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs on simplypsychology.org.
Why is Maslow’s Hierarchy outdated?
- Motivation is not rankable. Research showed that people find satisfaction on higher levels, even when someone’s environment does not satisfy Maslow’s basic needs. Individual differences also influence what is most important to us.
- Maslow’s ideas are not universally valid. Many interpret Maslow’s theory as universally applicable without considering the differences between individualist and collectivist cultures and the nuanced differences within (Kenrick et al., 2010). Research showed, however, that there are both geographical and temporal differences regarding needs and motivation (Harre, 1986a; as cited in Buttle, 1989).
- We must consider the context. When looking at the well-being of the residents in European cities, we must consider cultural differences to ensure the well-being of all our citizens, including cultural minorities. An unsupported theory won’t be able to help us.
Read more: How Liveable is my City? Part 4 | Abandon Indifference; Think Context-Specifically!
Are there better alternatives for changemakers?
Yes! Verywellmind.com discussed an indeed interesting update of Maslow’s Hierarchy, proposed by Kenrick and colleagues in 2010. If you’re looking for an update of your references without losing the benefit of Maslow’s popularity in the mainstream, this one will be interesting for you. This approach emphasizes the desire to reproduce instead of self-actualization and takes an evidence-based evolutionary perspective.
The strength of this approach is that it doesn’t describe the stages as hierarchical. It sees human motivations as flexible and variable, a notion we should stress when discussing people’s needs.
Moreover, we should well consider the sociocultural context in which we seek to describe humans. A valuable tool for that is Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model.
Technically, Bronfenbrenner is playing in a different ballpark than Maslow. Maslow seeks to explain motivation and needs, while Bronfenbrenner’s model describes the various sociocultural levels through which the environment influences development. Nonetheless, Bronfenbrenner’s emphasis on context may also provide a comprehensive view of urban Liveability.
Why should we care when discussing Liveability?
Our cities of tomorrow must be more ethical to accommodate those moving into cities. Independent of heritage, culture, or beliefs, a smart city provides for everyone. Demographic developments and the effects of the climate crisis require us to consider the context in which people live to improve the lives of all our citizens. Popular ideas such as Maslow’s Hierarchy deemphasize context and spread the hope for universally applicable solutions. However, when making cities more liveable, there is no one-fits-all solution, and that’s important to bear in mind.
What’s next?
Next week, we will start examining trends of segregation and inequality in Europe’s cities. With the idea of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model in mind, you’re well prepared to join us on our next QLab-deep dive. Stay tuned!
Be sure to subscribe and never miss QLab’s blog articles!
Finn Faust, Webdesign & Research at QLab Think Tank GmbH
References
Buttle, F. (1989). The social construction of needs. Psychology & Marketing, 6(3), 197–210. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.4220060304
Cherry, K. (2020, November 23). Updating Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs. Verywellmind.com. https://www.verywellmind.com/updating-maslows-hierarchy-of-needs-2795269#citation-3
Soper, B., Milford, G., Rosenthal, G., Milford, G. E., & Rosenthal, G. T. (1995). Belief when evidence does not support theory. Psychology & Marketing, 12(5), 415–422. https://doi.org/10.1002/mar.4220120505
Kenrick DT, Griskevicius V, Neuberg SL, Schaller M. Renovating the pyramid of needs: Contemporary extensions built upon ancient foundations. Perspect Psychol Sci. 2010;5(3):292–314. doi:10.1177/1745691610369469
