A - cultural variations in attachment (AO3)

Question 1

What is a strength of the Strange Situation test? - Standardised procedure

Answer 1

===> Consistent implementation across various cultural contexts. Enhances reliability of the test and how it can be replicated in different settings. Data collected in Japan adheres to same protocol as in Israel. Fair comparison of results so researchers can draw objective conclusions - instrumental in identifying trends (secure attachment prevalent across diverse cultures)

Question 2

What is a limitation of Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s research? - Bias towards individualistic cultures

Answer 2

===> 27/32 countries were individualistic, so findings mainly reflect norms and values associated with these societies. Conclusions drawn may not be generalisable to collectivistic cultures. Cultural bias could explain why secure attachment was dominant style, reducing population validity. However, important to note large sample size (1990 infants) provides foundation for exploring attachment styles across different cultural contexts

Question 3

What is a limitation of their research? - Overly broad generalisations about entire countries

Answer 3

===> Compared Great Britain to Israel but overlooks diverse sub-cultures within each country. Variations within countries 1.5x greater than those between countries. Future research could focus on collecting more data on subcultures within countries to better understand diversity of child-rearing practices and their impact on attachment styles

Question 4

What is a limitation of the Strange Situation test? - Cultural bias

Answer 4

===> Theory and methods developed based on Western ideas of infant behaviour, making it ethnocentric. Assumes secure attachment is ‘gold standard’, misjudging other cultural practices. Japan and Germany have different child-rearing practices that mean their ‘gold standard’ is different.. Fail to consider cultural relativism. Applying SS across cultures may represent an imposed etic (Western standards inappropriately imposed on non-Western populations, undermining validity in cross-cultural contexts)