Cultural variations in attachment Flashcards
Who investigated cultural variations in attachment?
Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg
What was the sample size of Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s meta-analysis.
Meta-analysis of 32 studies - 2000 strange situations in 8 different countries.
What did they find about inter-cultural differences in attachment?
Small differences between countries. Secure always most common, insecure-avoidant second most common in every county apart from Israel and Japan (collectivist).
What did they find about intra-cultural differences in attachment?
1.5 times greater than the variation between cultures.
What conclusions could be drawn from their meta-analysis?
Global patterns of attachment appear to be similar to that of the US. Supports idea that secure attachment is most healthy. Supports view that attachment is innate.
(AO3) What did Takahashi find about middle-class Japanese infants’ attachment types?
Similar rates of secure attachments to US. Almost no insecure-avoidant, high rates of insecure-resistant. Particulary distressed when left alone.
(AO3) How can Takahashi’s findings be explained by different childcare practices in Japan?
Infants rarely experience separation from mothers or other attachment figures. More distressed in SS than US infants. Appear to be insecurely attached.
(AO3) Why is the meta-analysis culturally biased?
US is individualist, Japan is collectivist. Continuity hypothesis different: Americans define social competence as independence and regulation of emotions. Japanese believe it is inhibition of emotional expression and being group-oriented. Japanese infants appear to be insecurely attached in SS when this is not necessarily true. It is due to cultural bias in attachment theory and the methodology of the SS.
(AO3) How else can you evaluate cultural differences in attachment?
Evaluations of the original strange situation:
high reliability. Overlooking another attachment type. Meta-analysis strengths and weaknesses.
