Cultural Variations In Attachment: Van Ijzendoorn

Question 1

What did Van Ijzendoorn do in 1988?

Answer 1

They carried out a meta-analysis looking at the results of 32 studies that all used the strange situation to assess attachment type of over 2000 children in 8 countries.

Question 2

What were the findings of their meta-analysis?

Answer 2

West Germany- 3 studies- 57% secure- 35% insecure-avoidant- 8% insecure-resistant
Great Britain- 1 study- 75% secure- 22% insecure-avoidant- 3% insecure-resistant
Netherlands- 4 studies- 67% secure- 26% insecure-avoidant- 7% insecure-resistant
Sweden- 1 study- 74% secure- 22% insecure-avoidant- 4% insecure-resistant
Israel- 2 studies- 64% secure- 7% insecure-avoidant- 29% insecure-resistant
Japan- 2 studies- 68% secure- 5% insecure-avoidant- 27% insecure-resistant
China-1 study- 50% secure- 25% insecure-avoidant- 25% insecure-resistant
United States- 18 studies- 65% secure- 21% insecure-avoidant- 14% insecure-resistant

Question 3

What are the figures to be remembered?

Answer 3

-secure is the dominant attachment type in all countries
-differences between attachment styles cross culturally are small
-Germany has an unusually large number of insecure-avoidant
-Israel and Japan have an unusually large number of insecure-resistant
-There was a greater variation of attachment types within cultures rather than between them

Question 4

What are the strengths of this meta-analysis?

Answer 4

1. The findings correlate strongly with Bowlby’s ideas as secure attachments were dominant across all cultures- perhaps Bowlby was correct that attachments serve an evolutionary advantage- adds credibility suggesting a biological basis for attachment
2. It can explain why different cultures vary in terms of their insecure attachment types- Germany has lots of insecure-avoidants because independence is valued- Israel and Japan- lots of insecure-resistants because infants are raised communally in Israel and Japanese children are rarely way from their parents in their first year of life.- childrearing norms influence attachment types having important implications for parents

Question 5

What are the limitations of this meta-analysis?

Answer 5

1. Cultural differences highlight how it’s inappropriate to use the strange situation in other cultures- some behaviours are seen as desirable in some countries and not on others- so this research suffers with imposed etic- this American technique has different meanings in other cultures- maybe if a different strategy was developed to suit other cultural norms
2. It didn’t look at a wide enough range of cultures and studies- even though it used studies from 8 countries, 18/32 of the studies were American- and al countries were western or westernised/ exposed to western ideals and media- Van Ijzendoorn and Sagi (2001)-compared children from Tokyo and rural Japan- more resistants in rural areas- could be argued that the conclusion that attachment styles are fairly stable cross culturally is flawed.