Cultural variations in attachment

Question 1

Van IJzendoorn & Kroonenberg procedure

Cultural variations in attachment

Answer 1

Researchers located 32 studies of attachment where SS was used to investigate proportions of babies w/ diff attachment types
These were conducted in 8 countries - 15 in USA
Overall studies yielded results for 1990 children
Data for these 32 studies was meta-analysed

Question 2

Van IJzendoorn & Kroonenberg’s findings

Cultural variations in attachment

Answer 2

In all countries secure was most common
However, proportion varied from 75% in UK to 50% in China
In individualist cultures rates of I-R were similar to Ainsworth’s OG (under 14%)
In collectivist cultures rates were above 25% & I-A was reduced compared to individualist cultures
Variations between results of studies w/in same country were 150% greater than those between
In USA, one study found 46% securely attached compared to another which had 90% securely attached

Question 3

Simonelli et al - Italian study

Cultural variations in attachment

Answer 3

Researchers assessed 76 babies aged 12 months using SS
50% were secure & 36% I-A - lower rate of secure & higher rate of I-A found in many studies
Researchers suggest this is because of increasing numbers of mothers of young children working long hours & using childcare
These findings suggest patterns of attachment types are not static but vary in line w/ cultural change

Question 4

Jin et al - Korean study

Cultural variations in attachment

Answer 4

SS used to asses 87 babies
Overall proportions of insecure & secure babies were similar to those in most countries, w/ most babies being secure
More classified as insecure were resistant w/ only 1 baby being avoidant
This distribution similar to that of Japanese babies
Since Japan & Korea have similar child-rearing style this similarity may be explained in terms of child-rearing style

Question 5

Conclusions

Cultural variations in attachment

Answer 5

Secure attachment seems to be norm in wide range of cultures supporting Bowlby’s idea that attachment is innate & universal and this type is universal norm
However, research clearly shows cultural practises have influence on attachment type

Question 6

Evaluation: Indigenous researchers

Cultural variations in attachment

Answer 6

Strength: Most studies conducted by indigenous psychologists
Van IJzendoorn & Kroonenberg included research by German team (Grossmann et ak) & Takahashi who is Japanese
This means many potential problems in cross-cultural research can be avoided (i.e. language barriers/communication)
Difficulties also include bias because of one nation’s stereotypes of another
Therefore, there’s excellent chance researchers & ppts communicated successfully - enhancing validity of data collected

Question 7

Evaluation: Indigenous researchers (Counterpoint)

Cultural variations in attachment

Answer 7

However, this is not true of all cross-cultural attachment research
E.g. Morelli & Tronick were outsiders from USA when studying child-rearing & patterns of attachment in the Efe of Zaire
Their data might have been affected by difficulties in gathering data from ptts outside their own culture
Therefore, data from some countries may be affected by bias & difficulty in cross-cultural communication

Question 8

Evaluation: Confounding variables

Cultural variations in attachment

Answer 8

Limit: impact of confounding variables on findings
Studies conducted in diff countries are not usually matched for methodology when compared in reviews/meta-analyses
Sample characteristics (i.e. poverty) can confound results
Environmental variables may also differ between studies & confound results
E.g. size of room - babies may explore more in studies conducted in small rooms w/ attractive toys compared to large, bare rooms
Less proximity seeking due to room size means child more likely to be classified as avoidant
Therefore, looking at attachment behaviour in diff non-matched studies conducted in diff countries may not tell us anything about cross cultural patterns of attachment

Question 9

Imposed etic

Cultural variations in attachment

Answer 9

Limit: trying to impose a test designed for one cultural context to another context
Imposed etic occurs when we assume an technique that works in one culture will work in another
E.g. reunion behaviour in SS
In UK & USA, lack of affection on reunion may indicate avoidant attachment
In Germany, this would be interpreted as independence rather than insecurity
Therefore that part of SS may not work in Germany
Therefore, behaviours measured by SS may not have same meanings in diff cultures & comparing them across cultures is meaningless