Cultural Variations

Question 1

Define cultural variations.

Answer 1

cultural variations are the differences in norms and values that exist between people in different groups.

in attachment research we are concerned with the differences in the proportion of children of different attachment types.

Question 2

what did van ljzendoorn and kroonenberg (1988) study look at?

Answer 2

the researchers looked at the proportions of secure, insecure avoidant and insecure resistant attachments across a range of countries.

they also looked at the differences within the same countries to get an idea of variations within a culture.

Question 3

ljzendoorn and kroonenberg - procedure

Answer 3

found 32 studies of attachment where the strange situation had been used. these were conducted in eight countries, 15 in the US. overall the studies yielded results for 1,990 children.

the data was meta-analysed - results being combined and weighted for sample size.

Question 4

ljzendoorn and kroonenberg - findings on secure attachment

Answer 4

secure attachment was the most common classification in all countries but ranged from 50% in china to 75% in britain.

Question 5

ljzendoorn and kroonenberg - findings in individualistic and collectivist cultures

Answer 5

individualist cultures rates of insecure resistant attachment were similar to ainsworths original sample (all under 14%).

not true for the collectivist samples from china, japan and israel where rates were above 25% (and where rates of insecure avoidant attachmer were reduced).

this suggests that there were cultural differences in the distribution of insecure attachment.

Question 6

ljzendoorn and kroonenberg - findings on variations within and between counties

Answer 6

variations between results of studies within the same country were actually 150% greater than those between countries.

in the US one study found 46% securely attached compared to one sample as high as 90%.

Question 7

simonelli (2014) - procedure

Answer 7

assessed 76 babies aged 12 months in italy using the strange situation to see whether the proportion of attachment types still matched previous studies in italy.

Question 8

simonelli (2014) - findings

Answer 8

found that 50% were secure, with 36% insecure avoidant. this lower rate of secure attachment may be because increasingly mothers work long hours and use more childcare. this shows that cultural changes can affect patterns of attachment.

Question 9

jin (2012) - procedure

Answer 9

compared the attachment types of 87 korean babies to proportions in other studies.

Question 10

jin (2012) - findings

Answer 10

found similar patterns of secure and insecure attachment to other studies.

however within insecure categories there were differences - only one baby was avoidant. this pattern is similar to japan and may be because both countries have similar child-rearing practices.

Question 11

what conclusions have been drawn from other studies?

Answer 11

secure attachment seems to be the norm in a wide range of cultures supporting bowbly’s idea that attachment is innate and universal and this type is the universal norm.

however the research also clearly shows that cultural practices have an influence on attachment type.

Question 12

strength - indigenous researchers

Answer 12

indigenous researchers are those from the same cultural background as the participants. for example, grossmann et al (1981) - germans working with german participants.

using indigenous researchers aids communication between researchers and participants and helps prevent misunderstandings (of instructions). difficulties can also include bias because of one nations stereotypes of another.

this means there is an excellent chance that researchers and participants communicated successfully - enhancing the validity of the data collected.

Question 13

counter - indigenous researchers

Answer 13

however this has not been true of all cross cultural attachment research.

for example tronick (1991) were outsiders from america when they studied child rearing and patterns of attachment in the efé of zaire.

the data might have been affected by difficulties in gathering data from participants outside their own culture.

this means that the data from some countries might have been affected by bias and difficulty in cross cultural communication and hence lacks validity.

Question 14

limitation - confounding variables

Answer 14

studies conducted in different countries may not be matched for sample characteristics. for example studies in different countries may use children of different ages and social classes.

environmental variables may also differ. for example availability of smaller rooms and availability of toys which might encourage babies to explore more.

this means that studies assessing attachment types carried out in different countries may tell us little about cultural differences in attachment.

Question 15

limitation - imposing etic

Answer 15

using a test (the strange situation) in a different cultural context from the one for which is was designed may be meaningless.

the strange situation was designed in the US where lack of affection at reunion represents insecure attachment. however in germany it would be seen as a sign of independence.

this means that it may be meaningless to compare attachment behaviours across countries as behaviours measured by the strange situation may not have the same meanings in different cultural contexts.

Question 16

limitation - competing explanations

Answer 16

the reasons for similar patterns of attachment across cultures is explained by bowbly theory that attachment is innate so secure attachment is the universal norm.

however van IJzendoorn and kroonenberg suggest this similarity may be more a product of media representations of correct parenting.

this means that it is hard to know whether bowbly theory is true as there is a credible alternative explanation.