Cross cultural influence

• What was the aim of the meta-analysis conducted by Van Ijzendoorn & Kroonenberg in 1988?


  To investigate cross-cultural variation in attachment types
• What does finding cross-cultural similarities in attachment types support?


  It supports the genetic explanation of attachment
• What does finding cross-cultural differences in attachment types suggest?


  It supports the environmental drive of attachment
• What methodology did Van Ijzendoorn & Kroonenberg use in their study?


  • Conducted a meta-analysis
  • Compared findings of 32 studies
  • Focused on infants below 2 years old
• How many pairings of caregiver and infant were used in the meta-analysis?


  1990 pairings
• Which countries were compared in the study?

  West Germany, Great Britain, Netherlands, Sweden, Israel, Japan, China, United States
• Which country had the highest percentage of insecure-avoidant attachment?


  West Germany
• Which country had the lowest percentage of insecure-avoidant attachment?


  Japan
• Which country had the highest percentage of securely attached infants?


  Great Britain
• Which country had the lowest percentage of securely attached infants?


  China
• Which countries had the highest percentage of insecure-resistant attachment?


  Israel and Japan
• Which country had the lowest percentage of insecure-resistant attachment?


  Great Britain
• What are the overall percentages of attachment types found in the study?

  • Type A (insecure-avoidant): 21%
  • Type B (secure): 65%
  • Type C (insecure-resistant): 14%
• What was the modal attachment type found in almost all samples?


  Secure attachment
• How do insecure attachment types differ between Western and Eastern cultures?


  Western cultures have more insecure-avoidant, while Eastern cultures have more insecure-resistant
• What was concluded about secure attachment across cultures?


  It seems to be the norm, supporting Bowlby’s theory of innate attachment
• What alternative explanation was provided for secure attachment patterns?


  Mass media influences on child-rearing practices
• What are the strengths and weaknesses of the meta-analysis conducted by Van Ijzendoorn & Kroonenberg?


  Strengths:

  • Large cross-cultural sample (nearly 2000 babies)
  • Decreases chance of anomaly results

  
  

  Weaknesses:

  • Limited to 8 countries
  • High number of studies from the USA distorts findings
  • Criticism of the Strange Situation's validity
  • Imposed etic issues
  • Comparison of countries rather than cultures
• What is a criticism of the Strange Situation design used in the study?


  It may not accurately measure general attachment style
• What does the term "imposed etic" refer to in the context of this study?


  Applying a Western assessment to other cultures
• How did urban and rural samples from Japan differ in attachment types?


  Urban samples were similar to Western samples, while rural samples had higher insecure-resistant percentages
• What did Simonella (2014) find regarding attachment types in Italy?


  50% secure and 36% insecure-avoidant
• What reason did Simonella (2014) suggest for the change in attachment types in Italy?


  High numbers of mothers working long hours using childcare
• What implication does Simonella's (2014) study have on older studies of the Strange Situation?


  It suggests they may lack temporal validity