Cultural variation in attach

• Outline procedures into cultural variations in attach - Van Ijzendoorns

  Van Ijzendoorn conducted a meta-analysis of 32 studies across 8 different countries including Great Britain, Germany, Japan etc. All of these studies had used the strange situation to assess infants’ attachment types. Van Ijzendoorn compared variations in attachment both within and between cultures.
• Outline findings into cultural variation - van Izjendoorns

  Van Ijzendoorn found that the secure attachment type was the most common in all of the countries studied while the insecure-resistant attachment type

  was the least common. Great Britain had the highest rates of secure attachments, Japan had the highest rates of insecure-resistant attachments, and Germany had the highest rates of insecure-avoidant attachments – suggesting that attachments do vary across cultures. Van Ijzendoorn also found that variations within cultures were 1.5x greater than variations between cultures.
• Strength - cultural variation - relied on meta-analysis

  Van ljzendoorn's research involved collecting the findings from over 32 studies. This is a strength because by considering the findings of multiple studies, the sample sizes/data are larger and, as a result, the conclusions about cultural variations in attachment are more likely to be generalisable. Therefore adds credibility.
• Strength - cultural variation - conducted in highly controlled environment

  Van collected the findings of studies that had used the strange situation procedure - a standardised controlled observation consisting of operationalised behavioural categories such as separation and stranger anxiety. This is a strength because it means that the findings across the different studies can be effectively compared without the risk of methodological flaws/extraneous variables impacting the conclusions. Therefore adds credibility.
• Cultural variation - limitation. - relied on American methods of assessing attachment types - point

  This is because a lot of the research (e.g. Van ljzendoorn) have used the strange situation procedure which was developed in the USA. This is a limitation because it means its analysis of attachment types may be based on American culture and so may not be an appropriate way of assessing attachment types

  in different cultures. 
• Cultural variation - limitation - relied on American methods on assessing types of attach. - German mothers

  Van ljzendoorn's research found that Germany had the highest rates of insecure-avoidant attachments and this led to German mothers being labelled as insensitive when in reality they just encourage independence (so infants are less likely to display separation anxiety).
• Cultural variation - limitation - relied on American methods of assessing types of attach - Japanese mothers

  Japan had the highest rates of insecure-resistant attachments and this led to Japanese mothers being labelled as inconsistent with their care when in reality it is just because they are rarely separated from their infants (and so they are likely to show extreme stranger anxiety). false conclusions may be drawn about parenting styles in different cultures. Therefore questions credibility
• Limitation - cultural variation - criticism measuring by countries not cultures

  Vans research claimed to measure cultural variations in attach when in reality - were just making comparisons between countries. This is a limitation because there can be many cultures within a country that all have their own child-rearing practices. Tokyo (an urban setting in Japan) had attachment types similar to Western countries while a more rural setting in Japan had more insecure-resistant attachment types. explains why there was greater variation within a country than there was between countries. ? Cred