Some researchers have suggested that the uncritical acceptance of Maslow’s hierarchy needs to be addressed by further research.
One older review of the research available at the time found little support for the accuracy of the hierarchy.
More recent research has offered some support for Maslows original hierarchy.
Gary Waters / Ikon / Getty Images
Does the Hierarchy of Needs Hold Up?
Other researchers have noted that Maslow’s theory does not account for cultural differences.
The theory doesn’t account for the differing motivations and needs of people inindividualistandcollectivist cultures.
He did not view these needs as levels or stages you reach before moving on to the next.
Maslow instead believed that people move within the hierarchy and that we are often driven by multiple needs simultaneously.
Perhaps the most surprising change was that it eliminated the very highest levels of the original versionthat of self-actualization.
The Updated Hierarchy of Needs
So what replaces self-actualization at the top of this revised hierarchy?
According to the researchers, reproduction is the most fundamental biological imperative.
For that reason, they placed parenting at the top of their hierarchy.
The proposed revisions to Maslow’s original hierarchy did not come without controversy, however.
While some aspects of their findings are consistent with Maslow’s theory, there were also some notable departures.
The needs described in Maslow’s theory appear to be universal.
In other words, sometimes your needs may change based on the situation.
This may then affect your needs and motivations in other areas of your life as well.
When climbing a ladder, your feet and hands are on different rungs, each representing a different level.
2010;5(3):292-314. doi:10.1177/1745691610369469
Scientific American.Who created Maslow’s iconic pyramid.
Arizona State University.Maslow updated: Reworking of the famous psychological pyramid of needs puts parenting at the top.ScienceDaily.
Tay L, Diener E.Needs and subjective well-being around the world.J Pers Soc Psychol.
2022;44(1):98-100. doi:10.1177/02537176211060435
