AO3 - cultural variations

• Why is the use of indigenous researchers a strength in cultural variation studies?

  Because researchers share the same cultural background as participants, reducing the risk of miscommunication, language barriers, and cultural bias — enhancing the validity of the findings.
• Give an example of how indigenous psychologists were used

  van Izendoorn and Kroonenberg included research done by psychologists from the same cultural background as the participants

  • German team (Grossmann et al. 1981)
  • Japan, Takahashi (1986)
• What is a limitation of some cross-cultural attachment research?

  Not all studies used indigenous researchers—e.g., Morelli and Tronick (1991), who were American researchers studying child-rearing and patterns of attachment in the Efé in Zaire—which may have led to communication issues and cultural misunderstandings.
• How could not using indigenous researchers affect the findings?

  It could reduce the validity of the data due to bias or difficulty accurately interpreting behaviours across cultures.
• Why are confounding variables a limitation in cross-cultural attachment research?

  Studies often differ in methodology and participant characteristics (e.g. poverty, social class, room size, toys), which can affect results and lead to inaccurate comparisons.
• How can environmental differences confound attachment results?

  For example, a child may appear more avoidant in a large, bare room compared to a small room with engaging toys, due to differences in how proximity-seeking and exploration are expressed.
• What does this mean for interpreting cross-cultural patterns of attachment?

  Differences in study conditions may distort findings, so the results may not accurately reflect cultural differences in attachment.
• What is an imposed etic in cross-cultural research?

  When a method or concept from one culture is inappropriately applied to another, assuming it has the same meaning everywhere.
• How does the Strange Situation demonstrate imposed etic?

  In the UK/US, lack of reunion affection suggests avoidance, but in Germany it may reflect healthy independence, so interpreting it the same way is misleading.
• Why is imposed etic a problem in attachment research?

  Behaviours may have different cultural meanings, comparing them across cultures using the same test may lead to invalid conclusions.
• Cross-Cultural Attachment – Strengths

  • Indigenous researchers
  • Cultural comparisons
• Cross-Cultural Attachment - Limitations

  • Not always indigenous
  • Confounding variables
  • Imposed etic
• Using indigenous researchers is an example of an emic approach, because it involves studying behaviour from within the cultural context
• How is using indigenous researchers a strength?

  • emic approach
  • shared culture reduces bias & miscommunication
  • reflects cultural understanding from within
• How is cultural comparisons a strength?

  • Shows universal patterns e.g. secure attachment most common
  • Cultural differences e.g. higher insecure-resistant in collectivist cultures, highlights influence of child-rearing
• How is not always having indigenous researchers a limitation?

  Outsider researchers (e.g. Morelli & Tronick) risk bias and misunderstandings
• How are confounding variables a limitation?

  Differences in sample, setting, or methods (e.g. room size, toy availability)
• How is imposed etic a limitation?

  Western-designed tests (e.g. Strange Situation) may misinterpret culturally appropriate behaviour