Cultural variations

• who conducted the cultural variations meta analysis?

  Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988)
• what was the procedure - Van ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg

  they conducted a meta analysis of 32 studies and examined over 2000 strange situations from 8 different countries. they wanted to see whether differences in attachment occurred between cultures, and what differences there were within cultures.
• what were the findings - Van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg?

  The differences were small. secure attachment was the most common in every country. Insecure avoidant was next most common in every country apart from Israel and Japan who were collectivist cultures at the time. Cross-cultural differences in attachment styles:

  
• what was the conclusion - Van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg?

  Global patterns across cultures appear to be similar to those found in the US. Secure attachment is the most common which supports the idea that it is 'best' for healthy social and emotional development. these cultural similarities support the view that attachment is an innate biological process.
• Cultural similarities - Tronick et al (1992)

  They studied an African Tribe, Efe, who lived in extended family groups, where an infant is looked after and breastfed by many adults, but usually sleeps with their mother. despite these differences in child rearing, infants still showed one primary attachment to their biological mother, at the age of 6 months.
• Cultural differences - Jin et al

  Jin et al used the strange situation in Korea and found similar rates of secure attachment as found by Ainsworth et al.

  However, there was no evidence of the existence of an insecure-avoidant attachment and high rates of insecure-resistant.
• Cultural differences - Grossman and Grossman

  They found infants tend to be classified as insecurely attached than securely attached in Germany.

  This may be due to differences in child rearing as the German culture involves keeping some interpersonal difference between infants and parents.
• Cultural differences - Takahashi

  Takahshi studied 60 middle class infants and found similar rates of secure attachment to Ainsworth, but there was no evidence of an insecure avoidant attachment and high rates of insecure-resistant (32%). 90% of infants were very distressed when separated from their caregiver, so the study had to be stopped. In line with Japanese culture, infants are very rarely without their mother which would explain why they were so distressed, which would make them seem insecurely attached.
• Strength - large sample size

  within their study nearly 2,000 babies were studied. large sample sizes increase the validity and reduce the impact anomalous can have.
• Limitation - nation rather than culture

  each country has sub-cultures within them and these will have their own child rearing practices. for example, in urban Tokyo attachment styles are similar to western studies, but in rural Tokyo there is a higher percentage of insecure resistant attachment. subcultures can explain why the key study found more variation within countries then between.
• Limitation - methodology issues

  mass media may explain why there are so many similarities across cultures, not that it is an innate biological feature. many types of media like books and TV's spread ideas about parenting so children all over the world are exposed to all types of parenting. this promotes a global culture.
• Limitation - cultural bias

  Rothbaum argued that it isn't just the methodology that is the issue but also the theory itself as it is so rooted by American culture. for example, the continuity hypothesis does not have the same meaning in American and Japanese cultures. Bowlby and Ainsworth said that infants who are securely attached go on to develop into more socially competent adults, with this competence is described as being able to explore and be independent. however, this isn't true in Japan. being competent is being group orientated and not showing feelings.