Cultural variations in attachments Flashcards
Individualistic cultures
Western cultures that value independence and the importance of the individual
Collectivist cultures
Non western countries that emphasise the importance of the group or collective
Ainsworth in Uganda (1967)
Two year naturalistic study of mother infant interactions in uganda, 1954. Participants were 26 mothers and infantssome mothers were more âsensitiveâ to their infants needs and these mothers tended to have âsecurely attachedâ infants. Secure attachment then led the infant to have increasing competence and independence.
Simonella et al (2014)
Italian study in a sample of 76 12 month olds using the strange situation 50% were found to be securely attached and 36% insecure-avoidant. This is a lower rate of secure attachments than found in other studies.
Why were there less secure attachments in italy?
increase of women in work and are using professional childcare. Simonella (2014) findings suggest that cultural changes can make a dramatic difference to patterns of secure and insecure attachment.
Jin et al (2012)
A Korean study on 87 children using the strange situation, it showed similar proportions of attachments as Japan. Probably due to similar child rearing techniques in collectivist cultures
Tronick et al (1992)
Studied an African tribe, the Efe, from Zaire who live in extended family groups which means that the infants were looked after and breastfed by different women (slept with mothers at night). The infants at 6 months, still showed 1 primary attachment - supports idea of monotropy
Takahashi (1990)
Japanese study on 60 middle class infants and found similar rates of secure and insecure attachments to the US but they showed no insecure-avoidant attachment and high rates of insecure-resistant attachment (32%). Also, infants were distressed on being left alone and their response was so extreme that for 90% of the infants the study was stopped.
Grossman and Grossman (1991)
German infants tended to be classified as insecurely attached rather than securely attached and this may be due to child-rearing practices where parents and children tend to maintain some interpersonal distance
Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988)
Meta analysis of 32 studies and 2000 strange situations in 8 countries
What were the countries in Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988)
China, Netherlands, UK, Japan, Israel, Sweden, US, West germany
Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) results (Secure attachments)
Secure attachments was the most common. China had the lowest amount of secure attachments (only 50%) but an equal amount of Type A and Type B attachments
Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) results (Insecure avoidant attachments)
Insecure avoidant attachments were the next most common except in Israel and Japan. Insecure-avoidant was particularly high in individualist cultures like West Germany which put greatest emphasis on independence.
Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) results (Insecure resistant attachments)
Insecure-resistant is most common in collectivist cultures such as Japan and Israel.
Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) results (variations)
Variations between results of studies within the same country were actually 150% greater than those between countries. In the USA for example, one study found only 46% securely attached compared to one sample as high as 90%
What did they conclude from Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenbergâs (1988) study?
Secure attachment is most common, suggesting that most babies, regardless of the culture form secure attachments. This supports the idea that secure attachment is âbestâ for social and emotional development and that attachment is an innate and biological process. However, cultural practises can have a significant impact on the likelihood of a baby forming either an insecure-avoidant or insecure-resistant attachment.
What is an advantage of Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenbergâs (1988) study?
Large sample and this increases internal validity by reducing the impact of anomalous results caused by bad methodology or very unusual participants
What are the disadvantages of Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenbergâs (1988) study?
- Samples can be unrepresentative of culture
- Method of assessment is biased
How are the samples in Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenbergâs study unrepresentative of culture?
Meta-analysis studied cultural variation but the comparisons were between countries and not cultures. Within any country there are many cultures and one sample could over represent poor people or even rich people
How was the method of assessment biased in Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenbergâs study?
cross cultural psychology includes the ideas of emic and etic. Strange Situation was designed by an American researcher, Ainsworth, based on a British theory by Bowlby. âCan western based theories be applied to other cultures?â
Emic
the uniqueness of each culture
Etic
related to cultural universality
Rothbaum et al (2000)
Argued that attachment theory and research is not relevant to other cultures because it is so rooted in American culture. Looked in particular at the contrasts between American and Japanese culture. He considered 3 major differences
What are the 3 major differences Rothbaum found?
Sensitivity hypothesis, Continuity Hypothesis and Secure base hypothesis
sensitivity hypothesis
Bowlby and Ainsworth promoted the view that a sensitive mother encourages her child to become independent. However in collectivist cultures like Japan, sensitivity is about promoting dependence rather than independence.
Continuity hypothesis
Bowlby and Ainsworth said that infants who are securely attached become more socially and emotionally competent people. But in Western cultures âemotionally competentâ has a different meaning (individuals are expected show their emotions). In others cultures-including Japan- individuals are not expected to show and share their emotions.
secure base hypothesis
In the West, secure attachments are seen as providing an infant with a secure base from which to explore, thus promoting independence. Attachment relationships in Japan are dependence-oriented