Cultural Variation

Question 1

What did ijzendoon and kroonenberg do in 1988?

Answer 1

Looked at the proportions of the 3 attachment types across a range of countries and meta-analyses data.

Question 2

Ijzendoon and kroonenberg (1988) results

Answer 2

Secure - most common in all

Resistant - least common in individualist countries. More common in collectivist countries.

Question 3

Ijzendoon and kroonenberg (1998) conclusion

Answer 3

This suggests there is cultural differences in distribution of insecure attachment

Question 4

What did simonelli do in 2014?

Answer 4

Assess 76 1 year olds using the strange situation to see if proportion of attachment types in Italy had changed since previous studies.

Question 5

Simonelli (2014) results

Answer 5

50% secure - much lower than before

36% avoidant

Question 6

Simonelli (2014) conclusions

Answer 6

Lower secure attachment may be results of more mothers working long hours and using child care services

Question 7

STRENGTH: large sample

Answer 7

Meta-analysis results in large samples. This increases internal validity by reducing impact of unusual participants.

Question 8

LIMITATION: not representative of cultures

Answer 8

Made comparisons between countries and not cultures, little meaning.

Question 9

LIMITATION: bias towards USA / UK

Answer 9

Strange situation states that lack of pleasure on reunion signifies insecure attachment, however in Germany this is seen as independence. Imposed Eric is when a technique designed for one culture is applied to another.

Question 10

LIMITATION: confounding variable

Answer 10

Kagan (1982) suggets temperament influences behaviour in the strange situation, not attachment.