Cultural variations in attachment

• Cultural variations in attachment

  van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988)

  Procedure- Conducted a meta analysis on 32 strange situation studies. Involved studies from 8 countries (15 were in the USA) and they looked at the inter-cultural differences (between countries) and intra-cultural differences (within countries).
• Cultural variations in attachment 2

  van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) 2

  Findings- In all countries secure attachment was most common classification. However proportion varied from 75% in Britain to 50% in China. Insecure-resistant was overall least common type but proportions ranged from 3% in Britain to 30% in Israel. Insecure-avoidant observed most commonly in Germany and least in Japan. Variations within cultures were 150% greater than between cultures. E.g., in USA on study found only 46% securely attached compared to one sample as high as 90%.
• Cultural variations in attachment 3

  Other studies

  An Italian study Simonella et al. (2014) assessed 76 12-month olds using Strange Situation. Found 50% were secure, w/ 36% insecure-avoidant. Lower rate of secure attachment than has been found in many studies. Researchers suggest is cos increasing no. of mothers of very young children work long hours and use professional childcare. Findings suggest that cultural changes can make a dramatic difference to patterns of secure and insecure attachment.
• Cultural variations in attachment 4

  Other studies 2

  A Korean study Jin et al. (2012) assessed 87 children using the Strange Situation and found that more of those classified as insecurely attached were resistant and only one was avoidant. Distribution is similar to Japan (van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg 1988). Similarity might be explained due to similar child-rearing styles.
• Cultural variations in attachment 5

  Conclusions

  Secure attachment seems to be the norm in wide range of cultures, supporting Bowlby's idea that attachment is innate and universal. However, research also clearly shows that cultural practices have an influence on attachment type.
• Cultural variations in attachment- evaluation

  Combining results of attachment studies gives you a very large sample. E.g., in the van IJzendoorn meta-analysis there was a total of nearly 2000 babies and their primary attachment figures. Large samples increase internal validity by reducing impact of anomalous results caused by bad methodology or very unusual ppts.
• Cultural variations in attachment- evaluation 2

  Samples tend to be unrepresentative of cultures. In van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg's study, comparisons were between countries not cultures. Within any country there are many diff cultures each w/ diff child-rearing practices. van IJzendoorn and Sagi (2001) found that distributions of attachment type in Tokyo were similar to Western studies, whereas a more rural sample had an over-representation of insecure-resistant individuals.
• Cultural variations in attachment- evaluation 3

  Method of assessment is biased. Cross cultural psychology includes ideas of etic (cultural universals) and emic(cultural uniqueness). Strange Situation was designed by American researcher (Ainsworth) based on British theory (Bowlby's). Question whether Anglo-American theories and assessments can be applied to other cultures. Trying to apply a theory or technique designed for one culture to another is known as imposed etic. E.g., lack of separation anxiety indicate insecure attachment in Strange Situation (but in Germany is seen as independence).