The Maslow Hierarchy of Needs vs. MacLean’s Triune Brain

Author(s):  
Gerald A. Cory
Keyword(s):  
2015 ◽  
Vol 27 (1) ◽  
pp. 5-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Scott D. Weingart ◽  
Brent Thoma

2015 ◽  
Vol 113 (7) ◽  
pp. 1139-1147 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank J. van Lenthe ◽  
Tessa Jansen ◽  
Carlijn B. M. Kamphuis

Socio-economic groups differ in their material, living, working and social circumstances, which may result in different priorities about their daily-life needs, including the priority to make healthy food choices. Following Maslow's hierarchy of human needs, we hypothesised that socio-economic inequalities in healthy food choices can be explained by differences in the levels of need fulfilment. Postal survey data collected in 2011 (67·2 % response) from 2903 participants aged 20–75 years in the Dutch GLOBE (Gezondheid en Levens Omstandigheden Bevolking Eindhoven en omstreken) study were analysed. Maslow's hierarchy of human needs (measured with the Basic Need Satisfaction Inventory) was added to age- and sex-adjusted linear regression models that linked education and net household income levels to healthy food choices (measured by a FFQ). Most participants (38·6 %) were in the self-actualisation layer of the pyramid. This proportion was highest among the highest education group (47·6 %). Being in a higher level of the hierarchy was associated with a higher consumption of fruits and vegetables as well as more healthy than unhealthy bread, snack and dairy consumption. Educational inequalities in fruit and vegetable intake (B= − 1·79, 95 % CI − 2·31, − 1·28 in the lowest education group) were most reduced after the hierarchy of needs score was included (B= − 1·57, 95 % CI − 2·09, − 1·05). Inequalities in other healthy food choices hardly changed after the hierarchy of needs score was included. People who are satisfied with higher-level needs make healthier food choices. Studies aimed at understanding socio-economic inequalities in food choice behaviour need to take differences in the priority given to daily-life needs by different socio-economic groups into account, but Maslow's pyramid offers little help.


1995 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 9-15 ◽  
Author(s):  
Doug Schaffer
Keyword(s):  

Author(s):  
Nareeman Jabbar Rasheed

The present study aims at studying the psychopathic speech of offenders and analyzing their behavior by using psycholinguistics. The following study involved a psycholinguistic analysis of psychopathic offenders’ speech. The research design was chosen to be descriptive and involved an observation of three offenders based on interviews done with them on YouTube. The descriptive model to be followed in analyzing the psychopathic offenders personality features is that of Hare (2003), and Hare et al's (1988).The first finding was that psychopaths were more likely than their counterparts to use explanatory and causally framed language concerning their criminal actions, with a relatively high level of subordinating conjunctions, indicating more cause and effect statements. This pattern suggested that psychopaths were more likely to have viewed the crime as a logical outcome of a plan (something that ‘had’ to be done to achieve a goal), their violence is indeed more instrumental and goal driven than that of other offenders. Secondly, we found that psychopaths used approximately twice as many words related to basic physiological and self-preservation needs, including eating, drinking, and money when describing their violence. This pattern is consistent with conceptualizations of psychopaths as being focused on a lower level of necessities, hierarchy of needs or in an earlier stage of ego development. Psychopaths generally lack the capacity for bonds and, presumably, the capacity for religious experience or spiritual enlightenment. As such, they continue to describe the crime in a cool, detached manner and in terms of the basic physiological needs they met at the time.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document