Cultural Variations in Attachment Flashcards
Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg - Meta-analysis
1) Looked at proportions of secure, insecure-avoidant, insecure-resistant attachments across a range of countries.
2) Also looked at differences within same countries to get idea of variations within a culture.
3) Found 32 studies of attachment where ‘SS’ was used - conducted in 8 countries & data was meta-analysed, results being combines & weighted to sample size.
I&K - Findings
1) Secure attachment most common in all countries - but ranged from 50% in China to 75% in Britain.
2) Individualist cultures rates of insecure-resistant attachment was similar to Ainsworth’s og sample (14%) - BUT Collectivist samples from China, Israel, Japan had increased rates (25%) —> suggesting there were cultural differences in distribution of insecure attachment.
Strength of Studies
USE OF INDIGENOUS RESEARCHERS –> Validity
1) Indigenous researchers are from same cultural background as pps - e.g. Grossmann et al. Germans working with German pps —> using them aids communication between researchers & pps and helps prevent misunderstandings e.g. instructions.
—> higher chance researchers & pps communicated successfully –> increasing validity of study.
Limitation of Studies
CONFOUNDING VARIABLES
1) Studies conducted in different countries may not be matched for sample characteristics e.g. different ages/ social classes.
2) Environmental variables may also differ e.g. using smaller rooms may encourage babies to explore more –> means studies assessing attachment types carried out in different countries may tell us little about cultural differences in attachment.
Limitation of Studies
IMPOSED ETIC
1) Using Strange Situation in a different cultural context from which it was designed for may be meaningless - ‘SS’ was designed in US where lack of affection at reunion represents insecure attachment BUT in Ger it could be a sign of independence –> means it may be meaningless to compare attachment behaviours across countries.
