cultural variations, van izjendoorn

Question 1

procedure

Answer 1

• meta analysis of 32 studies in 8 countries, where ss was used to measure attachment types
• 15 was done ein usa
• looked at results of 1990 children in total

Question 2

aim

Answer 2

wanted to look at proportions of attachment types across range of countries

Question 3

findings

Answer 3

• most common in all 8 countries = secure attachment , varied from 75% in Britain to 50% in china
• least common in all 8 countries. = insecure resistant , varied from 3% in Britain to 30% in Israel
• insecure avoidant was most common in Germany, east common in Japan
• variations WITHIN. a country has a gereater difference than BETWEEN countries e.g usa, one study was secure 45% and another study was 90%

Question 4

conclusion

Answer 4

• cultural practices have influence on attachment type

Question 5

different Italian study-

Answer 5

• simonelli et al 2014
• found 50% secure and 36% avoidant,

could be due to mothers working long hours and putting children into professional care

Question 6

different Korean study

Answer 6

jin et al 2012
- found more insecure resistant than avoidant
- similar to Japan, could be because of mothers rarely separating from infants

Question 7

strength of van ijzendoorn

Answer 7

P - large sample size in meta analysis

E- analysed data from over 2000 children, increases reliability of their findings

E - large sample size = reduces chances of outliers = meaning results are more generalisable

L - increases external validity of study, making conclusions more robust and reliable

Question 8

limitation of van ijzendoorn

Answer 8

P - might be ethnocentric

E - method made in us, based of western ideas on attachment

E - when used in other cultures, might not accurately measure attachment, could misinterpret cultural practices, e.g behaviours seen as clingy in Japan might be seen as normal there due to cultural expectations

L - means findings might not apply well to all cultures, reducing validity