Cultural variations in attachment Flashcards
Who conducted a meta-analysis of the findings from 32 studies of attachment behaviour?
van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988)
Which is the most common attachment?
Secure attachment
What was the second most common type of attachment?
Insecure-resistant
Where were the exceptions for insecure-attachment not being seconf most common?
Israel and Japan
Studies that support van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg
Tronick et al (1992)
What did Tronick et al study?
An African tribe
What did Tronich et al find?
The african tribe lived in extended family groups
the child was nurtured by many other women
However there was still one primary attachment
What did Grossmann and Grossmann find?
Higher levels of insecure attachment amongst German infants that other cultures
Why might there be higher levels of insecre attachment?
German culture involved keeping some interpersonal distance between parents and children
What did Takahashi (1990) find?
- 60 middle class Japanese infants
- Similar rates of secure attachment
- However no evidence of insecure-avoidant
- Higher rates of insecure resistant
- Japanese infants distressed when left alone
Why might Takahashi find these results?
Japanese culture rarely experience separation from their mothers
What can we conclude from these studies?
Despite culture variations, strongest attachments are still formed with the mother
However there are differences in cultural attitudes and practices
Similarities may be due to global culture
Attachment may be seen as an innate mechanism, unmodified by culture
- Van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg carried out a metanalysis of 32 studies and concluded that at least some cultural similarities is caused by mass media
Not due to biological influences but global culture
Cross-cultural research
Tools used to measure are different in each country
Methods such as the ones in the Strange situation are related to culture assumptions of the designer
Using the strange situation may effect validity in other cultures
Culture bias
Rothbaum et al. (2000) argued that it isn’t just the methods used in attachment research that are not relevant to other cultures, but also th theiry because it is so rooted in American culture
More specifically differences in American and Japanese cultures
