Cultural Variations In Attachment Flashcards
(25 cards)
What is cultural variation
The ways that different groups of people vary in terms of social practices (including children rearing practices) and the effects these practices have on development and behaviour.
Key features of an individualistic culture
-Emphasis on the individual rather than the group.
-Key value: independent autonomy – children are encouraged to be self-reliant and make decisions on their own.
-Self-actualisation (Maslow) is often a cultural goal – individuals strive to achieve their personal potential.
What is an individualistic culture
Individualistic cultures are societies that prioritize the rights, goals, and independence of the individual over the needs or goals of the group or community. These cultures emphasize personal autonomy, self-expression, and personal achievement.
Examples of countries with individualistic cultures
Germany, USA,UK
Key features of a collectivist culture
• Group emphasis – the needs of the group, community, or family are placed above individual desires.
• Key value: interdependence – people are expected to work together, support each other, and maintain strong group cohesion.
• Co-operation and group goals are highly valued.
• Children are often raised to be obedient, respectful, and closely connected to their family or community.
What is a collectivist culture
A collectivist culture is one where people prioritize the needs, goals, and well-being of the group—such as family, community, or society—over individual desires and independence.
Examples of countries with collectivist cultures
Japan, Israel, China
Aim of Van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s study (1988)
To find out whether the proportions of secure (B), insecure avoidant (A), and insecure resistant (C), children were the same in all cultures
Procedure of Van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s (1988) study
They conducted a meta analysis (combines results of multiple studies) of the findings from 32 studies of attachment behaviour in 8 countries based on Ainsworth’s ‘strange situation’ procedure. The combined sample size was 1990 children.
What did the results show about secure attachment types
-Secure attachment is the ‘norm’ (most common attachment type across all 32 studies), supporting Bowlby’s view that attachment is innate.
-Varied from 75% in the UK to 50% in China (highest in Sweden and UK)
What did results show about insecure avoidant attachments
Insecure-avoidant was more common in individualistic cultures such as Germany,where parents seek independent and no clingy children .
What did results show about insecure resistant attachment
-Insecure-resistant was most common in collectivist cultures such as Israel and Japan, where children may experience less separation from their mothers.
-It was the least common type of attachment in most studies varying from 3% in UK to 30% in Israel
Was there more variation within cultures or more between cultures and what does this suggest
-There was more variation within cultures than between cultures. Variation within a culture was 1.5X greater than variation between cultures
-This suggests that individual differences and subcultural factors play a significant role.
Other researchers who studied cross cultural attachment
-Tronick et al (1992)- African Tribe
-Takahashi (1990)- Japan
-Simonelli (2014)- Italy
Tronick et al study (1992)- Further research support
-Studied an African tribe that lived in extended family groups
-Infants were looked after and even breastfed by different women but usually they slept with their own mother at night, still forming a primary attachment to one caregiver.
-This supports the idea that secure attachment is a universal, biologically-based pattern, found even in cultures with very different parenting styles.
Takahashi (1990)-Further research support
-Conducted a study in Japan
-He found a high rate of insecure-resistant attachment (32%) among Japanese infants, likely due to cultural practices like close mother–child bonds and rare separation. In 90% of cases infants became very distressed, resulting in the study being stopped.
-This shows how subcultural factors, such as parenting style, can influence attachment — not just national culture.
Simonelli (2014)-Further research support
-investigated attachment types in Italy using the Strange Situation with 76 infants. They found 50% were securely attached, 36% insecure-avoidant, and 14% insecure-resistant.
-This showed a lower rate of secure attachment compared to previous Italian studies.
-The researchers suggested that increased use of childcare and changing family dynamics (like more parents working) may explain this shift.
Evaluation of cross cultural variations of attachment
-Research support
-Similarities between cultures may be due to globalisation instead of innate factors
-The meta analysis assesses countries not cultures
-Cultural bias
One limitation is that Similarities between cultures may be due to globalisation instead of innate factors
Bowlby suggested that attachment is a universal, innate behaviour, which would explain why secure attachment was the most common classification across all cultures. However, it is also possible that these similarities are the result of globalisation.
-As Western values and parenting practices spread through media, education, and international communication, parenting styles may become increasingly similar across the world.
-This means the consistency in attachment types may reflect shared global influences rather than natural, universal behaviours, which reduces the cultural validity of the findings.
What limitations are there with Van Ijzandoorn and Kroonenberg’s meta analysis.
-It assesses countries rather than individual cultures. This is problematic because it assumes that everyone within a country shares the same culture, overlooking important differences in child-rearing practices.
-E.G research has shown that insecure-resistant attachments are more common in rural areas of Japan, where parenting styles tend to emphasize dependence and close proximity. In contrast, urban areas like Tokyo, which are more influenced by Western values, report higher levels of secure attachment.
-Therefore, the meta-analysis may oversimplify the complexity of cultural influences by assuming that a single country represents a single culture, when in reality there can be wide variation within a nation.
Which part of Japan were resistant attachments more common in
Rural japan -where parenting styles tend to emphasize dependence and close proximity
Which parts of Japan were secure attachments more common in
Urban areas like Tokyo- which are more influenced by Western values
Why is there issues with cultural bias in Van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s meta analysis
-it is culturally biased and ethnocentric. The Strange Situation, which they used to measure attachment, was developed in the USA and reflects Western ideals about child-rearing, such as independence. This test is based on an etic approach, meaning it applies one culture’s standards (in this case, American) to judge all others. This is known as an imposed etic.
-E.G, children in Germany or Japan may be wrongly labelled as insecure simply because their behaviours differ from what is considered “secure” in the USA. These differences are often due to cultural child-rearing practices, not actual attachment issues.
-Therefore, the study may misclassify attachment types, making its findings less valid across cultures.
What is meant by ethnocentric
the tendency to view one’s own culture as superior and to use it as the standard for judging other cultures.
(In psychology, it often means assuming that behaviours or norms from one culture (usually Western) are ‘normal’ or universal.)
