<p><a href="http://lib-edpsy.alzahra.ac.ir/documents/10157/40405/Perspectives+on+Psychological+Science-2010-Peterson-320-2.pdf" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Peterson &amp; Park (2010)</a> provided a commentary on Kenrick et al (2010) whereby they pointed out that although the revision makes an important contribution by grounding the hierarchy in modern evolutionary thought, it may be premature to remove self-actualization from the hierarchy by reducing it to other needs associated with status and reproduction.</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>We suggest that it is premature to jettison self-actualization from this revised version of Maslow’s hierarchy. We write from the perspective of positive psychology, which regards what is good in life to be as genuine as what is bad (Peterson &amp; Park, 2003). What is good is not secondary, derivative, illusory, epiphenomenal, or otherwise suspect—at least until the data show otherwise. In their revision of Maslow’s hierarchy and their dismissal of self-actualization as a motive in its own right, Kenrick et al. seemed to reflect business-as-usual psychology by reducing what is good to something more mundane and perhaps not so good.</p>
  
  <p>However, Kenrick et al. mentioned positive psychology in their article and concluded that their evolutionary perspective is consistent with the view that human nature indeed has positive aspects. So, their revised pyramid may well accommodate the various emphases of positive psychology. And someday, if we take the pyramid metaphor literally, psychologists may follow the earlier examples of Egypt and Mexico and build several, including one that reflects Maslow’s (1971) deficiency needs and another one that reflects his growth needs.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>It is important to note that Maslow's (1943, 1954) five-stage model was expanded to include cognitive and aesthetic needs (Maslow, 1970a) and later transcendence needs (Maslow, 1970b).</p>

<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/7jbXw.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/7jbXw.jpg" alt="revised hierarchy"></a></p>

<p>More can be read on that in an article by <a href="https://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">McLeod (2018)</a>.</p>

<p>So answering your question on generalizing the top portion of the pyramid by Kenrick et al. beyond peaking out at parenting may not be relevant as Maslow went beyond parenting with his expanded pyramid.</p>

<h2>References</h2>

<p>Maslow, A. H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. <em>Psychological Review, 50</em>(4), 370-96. doi: <a href="https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346" rel="nofollow noreferrer">10.1037/h0054346</a></p>

<p>Maslow, A. H. (1954). <em>Motivation and personality</em>. New York: Harper and Row.</p>

<p>Maslow, A. H. (1970a). <em>Motivation and personality</em>. New York: Harper &amp; Row.</p>

<p>Maslow, A. H. (1970b). <em>Religions, values, and peak experiences</em>. New York: Penguin. (Original work published 1966)</p>

<p>McLeod, S. A. (2018). <em>Maslow's hierarchy of needs</em>. Retrieved from: <a href="https://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">https://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html</a></p>

<p>Peterson, C., &amp; Park, N. (2003). Positive psychology as the evenhanded positive psychologist views it. <em>Psychological Inquiry, 14</em>(2), 141–146. Retrieved from: <a href="http://www.jstor.org/stable/1449822" rel="nofollow noreferrer">http://www.jstor.org/stable/1449822</a></p>

<p>Peterson, C., &amp; Park, N. (2010). What happened to self-actualization? Commentary on Kenrick et al.(2010). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(3), 320-322. doi: <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610369471" rel="nofollow noreferrer">10.1177/1745691610369471</a></p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-07-09T08:05:03.383Z
2019-07-09T08:05:03.383Z
Chris Rogers
<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/4h6p9.png" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/4h6p9.png" alt="updated version of Maslow's hierarchy of fundamental human motives" /></a></p>
<p>The above reinterpretation of the hierarchy by <a href="https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3161123/" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Kendrick et. al (2010)</a> is straightforward enough. I am trying to see if there is any work done on generalizing the top portion there beyond peaking out at parenting e.g. mate acquisition-retention and parenting applied for life pursuits like academic or professional accomplishments. Maybe subject-acquisition-retention and progeny?</p>
<h2>References</h2>
<p>Kenrick, D. T., Griskevicius, V., Neuberg, S. L., &amp; Schaller, M. (2010). Renovating the Pyramid of Needs: Contemporary Extensions Built Upon Ancient Foundations. <em>Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 5</em>(3), 292–314. doi: <a href="https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610369469" rel="nofollow noreferrer">10.1177/1745691610369469</a></p>

<cognitive-psychology><needs>
Kendrick et. al version of Maslow's Hierarchy
Layman
# Kendrick et. al version of Maslow's Hierarchy

(Asked by: username_0 on 2019-07-07)

[![updated version of Maslow's hierarchy of fundamental human motives](https://i.sstatic.net/4h6p9.png)](https://i.sstatic.net/4h6p9.png)

The above reinterpretation of the hierarchy by [Kendrick et. al (2010)](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3161123/) is straightforward enough. I am trying to see if there is any work done on generalizing the top portion there beyond peaking out at parenting e.g. mate acquisition-retention and parenting applied for life pursuits like academic or professional accomplishments. Maybe subject-acquisition-retention and progeny?

## References

Kenrick, D. T., Griskevicius, V., Neuberg, S. L., & Schaller, M. (2010). Renovating the Pyramid of Needs: Contemporary Extensions Built Upon Ancient Foundations. *Perspectives on psychological science : a journal of the Association for Psychological Science, 5*(3), 292–314. doi: [10.1177/1745691610369469](https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610369469)

**Tags:** cognitive-psychology, needs


---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_1 on 2019-07-09. Score: 1 | Accepted answer

[Peterson & Park (2010)](http://lib-edpsy.alzahra.ac.ir/documents/10157/40405/Perspectives+on+Psychological+Science-2010-Peterson-320-2.pdf) provided a commentary on Kenrick et al (2010) whereby they pointed out that although the revision makes an important contribution by grounding the hierarchy in modern evolutionary thought, it may be premature to remove self-actualization from the hierarchy by reducing it to other needs associated with status and reproduction.

> We suggest that it is premature to jettison self-actualization from this revised version of Maslow’s hierarchy. We write from the perspective of positive psychology, which regards what is good in life to be as genuine as what is bad (Peterson & Park, 2003). What is good is not secondary, derivative, illusory, epiphenomenal, or otherwise suspect—at least until the data show otherwise. In their revision of Maslow’s hierarchy and their dismissal of self-actualization as a motive in its own right, Kenrick et al. seemed to reflect business-as-usual psychology by reducing what is good to something more mundane and perhaps not so good.
>
> However, Kenrick et al. mentioned positive psychology in their article and concluded that their evolutionary perspective is consistent with the view that human nature indeed has positive aspects. So, their revised pyramid may well accommodate the various emphases of positive psychology. And someday, if we take the pyramid metaphor literally, psychologists may follow the earlier examples of Egypt and Mexico and build several, including one that reflects Maslow’s (1971) deficiency needs and another one that reflects his growth needs.

It is important to note that Maslow's (1943, 1954) five-stage model was expanded to include cognitive and aesthetic needs (Maslow, 1970a) and later transcendence needs (Maslow, 1970b).

[![revised hierarchy](https://i.sstatic.net/7jbXw.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/7jbXw.jpg)

More can be read on that in an article by [McLeod (2018)](https://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html).

So answering your question on generalizing the top portion of the pyramid by Kenrick et al. beyond peaking out at parenting may not be relevant as Maslow went beyond parenting with his expanded pyramid.

## References

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A Theory of Human Motivation. *Psychological Review, 50*(4), 370-96. doi: [10.1037/h0054346](https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346)

Maslow, A. H. (1954). *Motivation and personality*. New York: Harper and Row.

Maslow, A. H. (1970a). *Motivation and personality*. New York: Harper & Row.

Maslow, A. H. (1970b). *Religions, values, and peak experiences*. New York: Penguin. (Original work published 1966)

McLeod, S. A. (2018). *Maslow's hierarchy of needs*. Retrieved from: <https://www.simplypsychology.org/maslow.html>

Peterson, C., & Park, N. (2003). Positive psychology as the evenhanded positive psychologist views it. *Psychological Inquiry, 14*(2), 141–146. Retrieved from: <http://www.jstor.org/stable/1449822>

Peterson, C., & Park, N. (2010). What happened to self-actualization? Commentary on Kenrick et al.(2010). Perspectives on Psychological Science, 5(3), 320-322. doi: [10.1177/1745691610369471](https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691610369471)


---

