attachment: cultural variations Flashcards
define culture
the norms and values within a group or society
define cultural variations in attachment.
differences in morns + values between different groups of people
what is an individualist culture? give an example.
emphasises personal independence and achievement at expenses of group goals, resulting in a strong sense of competition e.g the united states
what is a collectivist culture? give an example.
culture is one which emphasises family and work goals above individual needs and desires, there is a high degree of independence between people e.g. Korea
what does ethnocentric mean?
the attitude that one’s own group, ethnicity, or nationality is superior to other
what was the procedure of van ljzendoorn + Kroonenberg’s (1988) meta-analysis? (which countries, how many sampled, what methodology was used)
they used and analysed data from other studies through using meta-analysis (8 countries) , all studies used the strange situation, and observed mother - infant pairs and classified attachment types
outline the key findings from van ljzendoorn + Kroonenberg’s (1988) meta-analysis.
- the average findings were consistent with Ainsworth (secure-65%, avoidant-21%, resistant-14%)
- inter-cultural variations almost 15x greater than cross-cultural variations
- in all countries, secure attachment = most common type (75-50%)
what does intra-cultural and inter-cultural variation mean? Why is this relevant to van ljzendoorn + Kroonenberg’s (1988) meta-analysis?
intra = cultural differences between individuals, all of whom belong to the same, larger cultural group
inter = cultural differences between cultures
explain Takahashi’s (1990) findings into cross-cultural variations in attachment in Japan.
- 0% = insecure avoidant
- 32% = insecure resistant
- 68% = securely attached
- 90% of infant alone steps had to be stopped due to anxiety
explain Simonelli et al.’s (2014) findings into cross-cultural variations in attachment in Italy.
- 50% securely attached
- 30% insecure avoidant
explain Jin et al.’s (2012) findings into cross-cultural variations in attachment in Korea.
- overall proportions of insecure and secure babies were similar to those in other countries however more of those classified as insecurely attached were resistant and only one child was avoidant
why is cultural variations a limitation of findings into cross-cultural variations in attachment?
the variations within a culture are 15x greater than variations between cultures, suggests we need to avoid focusing too much on cultural variations and focus on what are common features of a secure attachment worldwide
how can you criticise the research methodology of the strange situation? why is this a limitation of research into cross-cultural variations of attachment?
the strange situation is an assessment method used to measure attachment of infants in the UK, this may therefore not be accurate (valid) measure of attachment in other countries/cultures as it is culture bound, making research face criticism for being imposed and may be more of a measurement of anxiety due to how the child is raised rather than attachment type.
how is it a strength that most of the research used in van ljzendoorn + Kroonenberg’s (1988) meta-analysis used indigenous researchers?
(Takahasi et al in Japan etc.) , strength as reduces chance of researcher not being understood, successful communication increases validity
how is the large sample size a strength of van ljzendoorn + Kroonenberg’s
(1988) meta-analysis?
in the van Ijzendoorn meta-analysis there was a total of nearly 2000 babies and their primary attachment figures. Even studies like those of Simonella et al. and Jin et al. had large comparison groups from previous research, although their own samples were smaller.
This overall sample size is a strength because large samples increase internal validity by reducing the impact of anomalous results caused by bad methodology or very unusual participants.
