Culture bias

• Cultural bias – a tendency to interpret all phenomena through the ‘lens’ of ones own culture, ignoring the effects that cultural differences might have on behaviour
• Ethnocentrism – judging other cultures by the standards and values of ones own culture. In its extreme form it is the belief in the superiority of ones own culture which may lead to prejudice and discrimination towards other cultures
• Cultural relativism – the idea that norms and values as well as ethics and moral standards can only be meaningful and understood within specific social and cultural contexts.
• Cultural bias – universality and bias

  Henrich et al 2012, reviewed hundreds of studies in leading psychology journals and found at 68% of research participants came from the united states and 96% from industrialised nations. Another review found that 8-% of research participants were undergraduates studying psychology (Arnett 2008).

  These findings suggest that what we know about human behaviour has a strong cultural bias. Psychologists routinely claim to have discovered facts about universal human behaviour.
• Henrich et al coined the term WIERD to describe the group of people most likely to be studied by psychologists – Westernised, Educated people from Industrialised, Rich Democracies.

  If the norm of standard for a particular behaviour is set by WEIRD people, then the behaviour of people from non-Westernised, less educated, agricultural and poorer cultures is inevitably seen as abnormal/inferior/unusual
• Ethnocentrism results in a view that other behaviours are deficient

  Ethnocentrism refers to particular form of cultural bias and is a belief in the superiority in ones own cultural group. In psychological research this may be communicated through a view that any behaviour that does not conform to the (usually western) model is somehow deficient or underdeveloped.
• Ainsworth + Bell 1970, - criticised for only reflecting the norms and values of western/American culture in attachment. Suggested that ‘ideal’ attachment was characterised by the baby showing moderate amounts of distress when left alone by their mother-figure (typical of secure attachment). Led to misinterpretation of child rearing practices in countries which deviated from American ‘norm’. Japanese infants were much more likely to be classes as I/A or I/R attached because they showed considerable distress on separation (Takahashi 1986). Japanese babies rarely separated from their mother.
• Cultural relativism

  Respecting cultural relativism helps to avoid cultural bias

  The ‘facts’ and ‘things’ that psychologists discover may only make sense from the perspective of the culture within which they were discovered. Being able to recognise this is one way of avoiding cultural bias in research.
• Berry 1969, has drawn a distinction between etic and emic approaches in the study of human behaviour. An etic approach looks at behaviour from outside of a given culture and attempts to describe those behaviours as universal. An emic approach functions from inside a culture and identifies behaviours that are specific to that culture.
• Ainsworth and Bell’s research is an example of an imposed etic – they studied behaviour inside one culture (America) and then assumed their ideal attachment type (and the method for assessing it) could be applied universally. Another example of an imposed etic can be considered in relation to how we define abnormality.
• Berry argues that psychology has often been guilty of an imposed etic approach – arguing that theories, models, concepts etc are universal, when they actually came through emic research inside a single culture. The suggestion is that psychologists should be much more mindful of the cultural relativism of their research – that the things they discover may only make sense from the perspective of the culture within which they were discovered – and being able to recognise this is one way of avoiding cultural bias in research
• One strength is the recognition of both cultural relativism and universals.

  The ‘imposed etic’ shows the culturally-specific nature of psychology. But we should not assume all psychology is culturally relative and that there is no such thing as universal behaviour. Ekman 1989 suggests basic facial expressions for emotions are the same all over the human and animal world. Some features of human attachment (e.g. imitation and interactional synchrony are universal). A full understanding of human behaviour requires the study of both universals and variation among individuals and groups.
• Another strength is cross-cultural research challenges western assumptions.

  One of the great benefits of conducting cross-cultural research is that it may challenge our typically Western ways of thinking and viewing the world. Understanding that the knowledge and concepts we take for granted are not shared by others may promote greater sensitivity to individual differences and cultural relativism. This means the conclusions psychologists draw are likely to have more validity if they recognise the role of culture in brining them about.
• -ve = distinction between individualism and collectivism.

  Psychologists refer to cultures in terms of individualism vs collectivism. Individualist cultures value the individual + independence. Collectivist cultures (e.g. India) value the group + interdependence. Critics argue this is a lazy + simplistic distinction that doesn't apply. Takano + Osaka (1999) found 14/15 studies comparing the US + Japan found no evidence of a distinction between the types of culture. Suggests that this form of cultural bias (seeing the world as individualist vs collectivist) is less of an issue than before.
• Another limitation is cross-cultural research prone to demand characteristics.

  When conducting research in Western culture the participants familiarity with the general aims and objectives of scientific enquiry is assumed. In cultures without historical experience of research local populations may be more affected by demand characteristics than western participants. This is a particular form of cultural bias where unfamiliarity with the research tradition threatens the validity of the outcome.
• A further limitation is difficulties with the interpretation of variables.

  Another issue with conducting research in different cultures is that the variables under review may not be experienced in the same way by all participants. Emotions may give rise to different behaviours within an indigenous population compared to the West (e.g. an invasion of personal space is normal in China, but threatening in the West). Issues like these may affect interactions between the researcher and participants in cross-cultural studies and this may reduce the validity of the findings