Cultural Variaions In Attachment (booklet 4)

Question 1

Strange situation procedure in other cultures

Answer 1

Same results not always found
Different cultures accept different behaviours as normal
Eg in Germany child being happy when left alone would be seen as independence- a positive characteristics- so would be seen as secure attachment
However in America, would be seen as insecure attachment

Question 2

Takahashi (1990)

Answer 2

Did strange situation procedure on 60 japanese infants and compared to American results
Found 68% securely attached, 32% insecure resistant, and none were insecure avoidant
When left alone infants became so distressed had to be removed from procedure
Perhaps due to fact hardly ever separated from parents- incorrectly labelled insecure resistant
No insecure avoidant as children taught is very impolite to void interacting with other people

Question 3

Van Ijzendoorn (1988) procedure

Answer 3

Meta analysis of 32 SSP studies from 8 countries
15 studies from US
Large sample size- total of 1990 mother infant pairs

Question 4

Van Ijzerdoorn (1988) findings

Answer 4

Intercultural differences- some variation in attachment patterns between countries, most common attachment type in all countries secure-> 75% in Britain, 50% in china
Next insecure avoidant (except Israel and Japan- collectivist cultures)
Intracultural differences- greater variation in attachment types within one culture than between cultures

Question 5

Van Ijzerdoorn (1988) conclusion

Answer 5

Main pattern of attachment type same in other cultures as in US
Secure attachment most common type in all cultures
Suggests drive to form an attachment in infancy is innate
However cultural variation in child rearing practices do exist

Question 6

Simonella et al (2014)

Answer 6

Study in Italy assessing if proportions of attachment types still match
Found 50% secure, 36% insecure avoidant
Lower rate f secure attachment, perhaps due to increasing childcare as mothers work long hours
Suggests cultural changes make a dramatic difference to patterns of secure and insecure attachment

Question 7

Evaluate cross cultural research- unrepresentative samples

Answer 7

Meta analysis by van Ijzerdoorn claimed to study cultus variation whereas comparisons were actually between countries
Within any country there are different child rearing practices
Eg in Tokyo distribution of attachment types similar to western studies whereas a rural sample had an over representation of insecure resistant individuals
So comparisons between countries may have little meaning

Question 8

Evaluate cross cultural research- large samples

Answer 8

By combining multiple studies eg in meta analysis by van Ijzerdoorn leads to very large samples
Strength as increases internal validity by reducing impact of anomalies in results