Cultural Variations in Attachment Flashcards
(12 cards)
What was the aim of van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg’s study?
To investigate inter-cultural (between countries) and intra-cultural (within countries) variations in attachment.
How many studies and countries were involved in the meta-analysis?
32 Strange Situation studies across 8 countries, involving over 2,000 children.
What was the most common attachment type across all countries?
Secure attachment.
Which cultures had higher rates of insecure-avoidant attachment?
Individualist cultures (e.g., UK, Germany).
Which cultures had higher rates of insecure-resistant attachment?
Collectivist cultures (e.g., Japan, Israel).
What key finding was made about intra-cultural variation?
Variation within countries was greater than between countries (e.g., US had 46% secure in one sample vs. 90% in another).
What is a strength of using indigenous researchers?
They avoid miscommunication and increase validity by understanding cultural context (e.g., Grossman in Germany, Takahashi in Japan).
What is the problem with imposed etic in cross-cultural studies?
Applying tools like the Strange Situation from one culture (US) to another can be inappropriate due to cultural differences in child-rearing.
Give an example of imposed etic.
Japanese children may appear distressed not due to insecure attachment, but because they are rarely separated from their caregivers.
How do confounding variables limit the findings?
Factors like poverty, education, or class can affect attachment and may explain cross-cultural differences more than culture itself.
Why might the Strange Situation have low validity in some cultures?
It wasn’t always standardized (e.g., Efe tribes in Africa), making it less reliable across cultures.
What is an alternative explanation for similar results across cultures?
Increasing global media influence may explain similarities rather than universal attachment patterns.
