Your statement in itself is a hypothesis to be proved. There are psychology experiments designed specifically to ascertain what parts of the mind are hard-wired and which are depended on nurture/culture.

I am not a Psychologist but I can give one example: Piaget hypothesized that the mind developed by first accumulating low-level sensory/motor data, and then progressively building higher levels of abstraction on that foundation. If that is true, then that process itself is not related to society or culture and should be observable so long as the biology underpinning cognitive development doesn't radically change.

The mind is mutable.

Psychology is different than other "hard" sciences.

I only say "results _may_ no longer be valid" and I'd say this study proves that.

If you go deep enough into the mind to the point where social environment no longer influences the behavior you may be getting closer to biology than psychology but point taken.

>This makes it different than many other science experiments where concrete parts of reality are tested. //

Maybe, or maybe immutability is axiomatic in those other areas.