cultural variations

Question 1

Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988)

Answer 1

• conducted a study to look at proportions of secure, insecure avoidant & insecure-resistant across a range of cultures

Question 2

Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988): procedure

Answer 2

• Meta-analysis of 32 studies from 8 countries (15 from the USA)
• total of 1990 children

Question 3

UK: findings

Answer 3

secure = 75%
insecure-resistant = 5%
insecure-avoidant = 20%

Question 4

USA: findings

Answer 4

secure = 65%
insecure-resistant = 15%
insecure-avoidant = 20%

Question 5

Israel: findings

Answer 5

secure = 65%
insecure-resistant = 25%
insecure-avoidant = 10%

Question 6

Japan: findings

Answer 6

secure = 70%
insecure-resistant = 25%
insecure-avoidant = 5%

Question 7

Sweden: findings

Answer 7

secure = 75%
insecure-resistant = 7%
insecure-avoidant = 18%

Question 8

Netherlands: findings

Answer 8

secure = 70%
insecure-resistant = 10%
insecure-avoidant = 20%

Question 9

Germany: findings

Answer 9

secure = 55%
insecure-resistant = 10%
insecure-avoidant = 35%

Question 10

China: findings

Answer 10

secure = 50%
insecure-resistant = 25%
insecure-avoidant = 25%

Question 11

Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988): conclusions

Answer 11

• most common was secure attachment in all countries ( varied from 75% in UK to 50% in China)
• least common was insecure-resistant ( varied from 3% in UK to 30% in Israel)
• insecure-avoidant were observed most common in Germany & least in Japan

Question 12

Variations within cultures

Answer 12

one study in the US found 46% securely attached and others found 90%

Question 13

Simonella et al (2014): procedure & aim

Answer 13

• investigated if proportions of babies of different attachment types still matches previous study in Italy
• 76 infants at 12mnths were assessed using the strange situation

Question 14

Simonella et al (2014): findings

Answer 14

• 50% were secure which was lower than previous
• may be as more mums are working and using childcare
• 36% insecure-resistant
• suggests cultural changes may make a difference to patterns of secure & insecure attachment

Question 15

Jin et al (2012)

Answer 15

• strange situation in korean
  insecure and secure were similar, but there was only one a avoidant- the rest were resistant
• Similar to japan as they have similar child rearing styles
  conclusions about cultural variations
• secure attachments seem to be the norm
• supports the idea tht attachment is innate and universal
• research shows that cultural practices influence attachment type

Question 16

AO3: indigenous researchers (strength)

Answer 16

T- studies been carried out by psychologists in the same cultural background
- Ijendoorn & Kroonenberg included research by a German team (Grossman) & Japanese (Takahashi)
- Problems from cross-culture are avoided such as misunderstanding language
- high chance that the researcher and ppt communicated successfully which increases the validity

Question 17

AO3: confounding variables (weakness)

Answer 17

• studies aren’t matched for methodology in each country in a meta-analysis
• characteristics such as poverty/social class can confound results
• environmental variables can also differ such as room size & availability of toys
• babies may explore more a smaller room with toys rather than a large bare room
• looking at attachment behaviours in different non-matched studies may not tell us anything about cross-culture patterns

Question 18

AO3: strange situation has imposed etic (weakness)

Answer 18

• researchers try to apply a theory from their culture on to another culture
• e.g = response to reunion
  UK & USA = lack of affection can indicate avoidant attachment
  Germany - independence not insecurity
• means that behaviours measured may not have the same meanings in different cultural contexts

Question 19

AO3: competing explanations (weakness)

Answer 19

• Bowlby suggests that the similarity is due to the fact that attachment is innate & universal
  -ijendoorn & Kroonenberg suggests it is due to that media presents a particular view to parenting