L4 - Cross Cultural Variations in Attachment

Question 1

What did Van Ijzendoorn + Kroonenberg (1988) do?

Answer 1

• Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) conducted a meta-analysis of 32 studies into attachment to see if it occurs in same way across all cultures
• all studies they included had used strange situation to measure attachment - studies looked at relationships between mothers + and their babies (under 24 months of age)
• conducted in 8 countries - some individualistic cultures (USA/ UK/ Germany) + some collectivist (Japan/ China/ Israel)

Question 2

What were the findings of Van Ijzendoorn + Kroonenberg (1988)

Answer 2

• secure attachent was most common attachment style in all 8 countries - lowest % of secure attachments in China - highest % of secure attachments in GB
• 2nd most common was avoidant except in Israel + Japan where avoidant rare but resistant more common
• Highest % of insecure- avoidant attachments in West Germany
• Variation within cultures 1.5 times greater than variation between cultures

Question 3

What was the analysis of the findings?

Answer 3

• similarities between cultures suggest that caregiver + infant interactions have universal characteristics - so may be partly instinctive
• However variations between cultures show that cultural differences in child rearing practices also play an important role in attachment styles
• variations within cultures indicate that sub-cultural differences, such as social class, play an important role in infant’s attachment style - these factors possibly more important than culture

Question 4

What were the strengths of studies on Cultural Variation in Attachment?

Answer 4

• meta analysis so includes very large sample - increases validity of findings

Question 5

What were the weaknesses of studies on Cultural Variation in Attachment?

Answer 5

• strange situation methodology developed in US - may not be valid for other cultures. E.g, Ainsworth assumed that willingness to explore means child securely attached but may not be the case in other cultures - methodology culturally biased
• infants from Israel - Kibbutz (closed community) + did not come into contact with strangers - could be the reason why these children showed severe distress when confronted with strangers and so classed as resistant
• study compares countries not cultures - comparison of US with Japan - both countries have many diff sub-cultures and have diff child rearing practices. One attachment study in Tokyo found similar attachment style distributions to the USA, whereas studies in more rural areas of Japan found many more insecure- resistant infants
• all studies used in meta-analysis looked at infants’ attachments to their mothers. Children may be insecurely attached to their mothers but securely attached to their fathers. Strange situation therefore not measuring child’s attachment style but their attachment to one individual. Main + Weston (1981) found that children behave diff depending on which parent they are with.