Cultural Variations in Attachment - van Ijzendoorn Flashcards
what are cultural variations
Cultural variations: differences between cultures
e.g. differences in attachment types between different cultural groupings.
what is culture
The rules, customs, morals and ways of interacting that bind together members of a society or some other collection of people.
what is subculture
A group within a country that, although it shares many of the dominant cultural characteristics of that country, may also have some special different characteristics.
what is an individualist cultures
Importance is placed on the individual and achieving your own personal goals.
Being able to stand on your own two feet (independence) is valued.
E.g. USA, UK, Germany, Netherlands, Sweden.
what is a collectivist culture
Importance is placed on the group as a whole.
e.g. Groups live and work together sharing tasks, belongings and child bearing
They aspire to be dependent on each other rather than function as individuals.
E.g. China, Israel, Japan.
van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) procedure
Procedure:
They conducted a meta-analysis of 32 studies from 8 countries that used the Strange Situation procedure, to assess similarities and differences in patterns of attachment types between (inter-cultural) and within (intra-cultural) cultures.
In total, the 32 studies examined 1,990 Strange Situation classifications (infants).
All studies comprised at least 35 mother-infant pairs with infants below 2 years of age.
what is a meta-analysis
A META-ANALYSIS is a research method which collates and analyses data from many studies carried out by different researchers, gaining a broad overview of findings.
What was the most common attachment type across the 8 countries studied?
secure
Which 3 countries had the highest levels of insecure-resistant attachment types?
Japan (middle) - 27%
China (lowest) - 25%
Israel (highest) - 29%
Which country had the highest level of insecure-avoidant types?
Germany - 35%
Key Findings: van Ijzendoorn & Kroonenberg (1988)
Secure attachment was the most common classification in every country.
Insecure-avoidant attachment was the next most common in individualistic countries e.g. UK, USA.
Insecure-resistant attachment was more common in Israel, Japan and China (collectivist countries).
Intra-cultural (within cultures) differences were 1.5x greater than inter-cultural differences; Inter-cultural (between cultures) differences were small.
Conclusions: van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg
The global pattern across cultures appears to be similar to that found in the USA, in that secure attachment is the ‘norm’- it is the most common form of attachment in all countries
These cultural similarities therefore support the view that attachment is a innate. who’s theory does this support
This supports Bowlby’s monotropic theory.
what does research suggest about some cultures
The researchers suggest that at least some cultural similarities might be explained by the effects of mass media (e.g. TV and books), which spread ideas about parenting norms (e.g. the need for sensitivity and responsiveness), so children throughout the world are exposed to similar influences.
This means that cultural similarities may not be due to innate biological influences, but are because of our increasingly global culture.
What could explain the variation found within cultures?
Some intra-cultural differences may be due to socio-economic differences or the different child-rearing practices across sub-cultures.
e.g. some USA samples were of middle-class pairings, while other USA samples used pairings from poorer socio-economic backgrounds.
Cultural Variations in Attachment: Further Research
Grossmann and Grossmann (1991) studied German infants and found that these infants were more likely to be classified as insecurely attached, specifically insecure-avoidant.
how could Grossmann and Grossmann (1991) study be explained
This may be due to different child-rearing practices, as German culture involves keeping some interpersonal distance between parents and children.
Therefore, German infants do not engage in proximity-seeking behaviours in the Strange Situation in the same way that American infants were found to in Ainsworth’s original study and appear to be insecurely attached, despite perhaps being securely attached according to German standards.
:( Nation rather than culture
The meta analysis drew conclusions about cultural differences yet they were not comparing cultures but countries.
Within each country, there are many different subcultures, each of which may have different child-rearing practices, which was not acknowledged by van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg. This means that comparisons between countries may have little meaning.
:(Sample bias -> lowers the population validity of the findings
van Ijzendoorn’s research can be criticised with regard to the size of samples drawn from each of the 8 countries, as some countries were poorly represented within their meta-analysis. For example, there was only one study reviewed from China, with a small sample of 36 infants.
Also, many cultures were not represented at all in their meta-analysis – no samples were drawn from any African or South American countries.
:( Culture bias in attachment theory
Rothbaum et al. (2000) argued that attachment theory is not relevant to other cultures because it is so rooted in American and British culture.
For example, the continuity hypothesis does not have the same meaning in America and Japan:
Bowlby (British) and Ainsworth (American) proposed that securely attached infants develop into more socially and emotionally competent children and adults.
However, social and emotional competence is defined in terms of individuation i.e. being able to explore, being independent and able to regulate one’s own emotions.
On the other hand, in Japan, competence is represented by the inhibition of emotional expression (not showing feelings) and being group-oriented rather than self-oriented.
Therefore, Bowlby’s theory fails to account for different cultural norms. Arguably, Anglo-American theories and assessments should not be applied to other cultures.
Cross-cultural studies can suffer from an imposed etic
Imposed etic means that researchers use techniques e.g. the Strange Situation, designed in one culture but imposed on another, to study and/or draw conclusions about human behaviour.
In the Strange Situation (designed by an American and based on a British theory) it is assumed that willingness to explore is a sign of secure attachment. However, in traditional Japanese culture dependence is the sign of secure attachment.
The result of using an imposed etic to measure attachment is that Japanese children may appear to be insecurely attached according to Western criteria, whereas they are securely attached by Japanese standards.
This means that research using the Strange Situation may lack validity when assessing attachment types cross-culturally.
Aim of Takahashi (1990) research
To assess whether the Strange Situation is a valid procedure when assessing the attachment types of children from other cultures, specifically Japanese children.
Procedure of Takahashi (1990) research
60 middle-class, Japanese infants, aged 1 year, both boys and girls, and their mothers were assessed using the Strange Situation.
Findings of Takahashi (1990) research
Securely Attached - 68%
Insecure-resistant - 32%
Insecure-avoidant - 0%
Separation anxiety: The Japanese infants were particularly distressed on being left alone; their response was so extreme that for 90% of the infants the study was stopped at this point.
Conclusions: Takahashi (1990)
What could explain the high levels of separation anxiety?
This may be because Japanese infants rarely experience separation from their mothers i.e. they generally sleep with their parents until 2+ years of age, are carried around on their mothers’ backs and bathe with parents.
This would explain why they were more distressed in the Strange Situation than their American counterparts, as it would have been more than mildly stressful for them. Therefore, the behaviours observed were reactions to extreme stress.
Conclusions: Takahashi (1990)
What does this suggest about the validity of the Strange Situation as a measure for assessing the attachment types of children in cultures outside of America?
This suggests that the Strange Situation does not have the same meaning for the Japanese as it does for American participants. Therefore, it is arguably not a valid measure for assessing the attachment types of infants in that culture.
Child-rearing practices need to be closely examined first in order to interpret findings based on the Strange Situation, as it is evident from Takahashi’s research that children may be incorrectly classified if not
:( Evaluating Takahashi’s research
Ethical Issues
Research with children, especially infants, needs to be careful in terms of potential psychological harm to participants.
The Strange Situation was more than mildly stressful for Japanese infants.
Takahashi showed sensitivity by stopping the observations when infants became too distressed. However, the study itself was not stopped, even though it became obvious that extreme distress was likely.
:( Evaluating Takahashi’s research
Sample bias
Takahashi used a limited sample of only middle-class, home-reared infants. It may, therefore, not be appropriate to generalise these findings to all Japanese infants.
