Well, the archeologists can't answer this. I don't believe the psychologists can either. Is it a turf battle between hard science and social science. In fact, archeology combines hard sciences and social science to come to logical conclusions. Just like psychologists of today, archeologists sometimes come to the wrong conclusions.
If we wanted to live a nomadic stone age existence, we can, however once our psyche passes a certain psychological age and we have knowledge of the way we lived before, adapting to a stone age nomadic life style is difficult. We wouldn't be able to fully adapt to the life style as we would desire creature comforts we had before our attempt at adaptation. Also, physiologically, we would have problems. The Bushmen of the Kalahari Desert have evolved to be excellent cursorial hunters. In the heat of the Kalahari, most of us would give up pursuing an antelope for a cold beer. But thinking about it and doing a few internet searches of the question, "do or did hunter/gatherer societies suffer from depression", I come to the logical conclusion that even stone age societies had social hierarchies and logically one has to assume that social hierarchies lead to powerlessness of lower classes and powerlessness leads to overwhelming feelings of helplessness and hopelessness.