Cultural variations (Van Ijzendoorn)

Which technique did Van Ijzendoorn study & who originally designed this?

Strange Situation - Ainsworth

What two types of cultural variations did Van Ijzendoorn study?

Inter-cultural & intra-cultural

What is the difference between inter-cultural & intra-cultural variations?

• Inter-cultural: differences between cultures

• Intra-cultural: differences within a culture

What technique did Van Ijzendoorn adopt?

Meta-analysis

How many studies were examined & from how many countries?

32 studies from 8 countries

What did Van Ijzendoorn find was the dominant attachment type?

Secure

Which attachment types varied across the different countries?

Insecure-avoidant & insecure-resistant

What are the two countries that had a high rate of insecure-resistant attachments compared with Ainsworth’s original findings?

Israel & Japan

Which country had a higher rate of insecure-avoidant attachment types than other countries in the sample?

Germany

Who completed a study in Japan & found different rates within the country?

Takahashi

What differences did Takahashi identify?

In one study, 20% were insecure-avoidant & in another, the rate was 0%

What did Van Ijzendoorn find was less significant than Ainsworth initially proposed?

Sensitive responsiveness

Outline and evaluate research into cross-cultural variations in attachment (16 marks)

Write your AO1 paragraph

• Van Ijzendoorn & Kroonenberg conducted a cross-cultural investigation of Ainsworth’s Strange Situation technique to investigate inter-cultural & intra-cultural variations in attachments. They used a meta-analysis to compile data from 32 studies in 8 different countries from a combination of individualistic & collectivist societies.

• Similar to Ainsworth, results found the secure attachment type was the dominant category & this was consistent amongst all of countries in the sample. However, the percentages of the remaining two attachment types varied. Studies in Israel & Japan revealed higher percentages of the insecure-resistant type (29% & 27% respectively). While, Germany had a higher percentage of the insecure-avoidant type (35%).

• Van Ijzendoorn & Kroonenberg found there was greater intra-cultural variation than inter-cultural variation in attachment. For example, when Takahashi replicated the Strange Situation in Japan, he found in one study, 20% of children were insecure-avoidant, whilst another study found this type to be 0%.

• Additionally, Van Ijzendoorn didn’t find a strong link between sensitive responsiveness & attachment type, suggesting it isn’t as significant as Ainsworth proposed.

Outline and evaluate research into cross-cultural variations in attachment (16 marks)

Write your strength AO3 PEEL (cross-cultural research)

• Point: One strength of Van Ijzendoorn’s meta-analysis is that it highlights the existence of inter-cultural variations in attachments.

• Evidence: For example, 32 studies were analysed from 8 countries including China, Israel, Japan, Germany, UK & the US. Results found Israel & Japan had higher rates of insecure-resistant attachment types, whilst Germany had higher rates of insecure-avoidant children.

• Explain: This is beneficial as it includes data from both collectivist & individualistic societies, compared to Ainsworth’s Strange Situation which was based solely on 100 middle-class US mother-infant pairs.

• Link: Overall, by using a meta-analysis, Van Ijzendoorn achieved the aims of the study, showing the research was effective in furthering our psychological understanding of attachments.

Outline and evaluate research into cross-cultural variations in attachment (16 marks)

Write your strength AO3 PEEL (sample size)

• Point: One strength of Van Ijzendoorn’s research is that it had good population validity, as it had a large sample size.

• Evidence: For example, a total of nearly 2,000 babies & their primary attachment figures were studied.

• Explain: This is advantageous as large sample sizes increase the internal validity by reducing the impact of anomalous results caused by a poor methodology or unusual participants.

• Link: Therefore, this increases the validity of the conclusions reached by Van Ijzendoorn about cross-cultural attachments.

Outline and evaluate research into cross-cultural variations in attachment (16 marks)

Write your limitation AO3 PEEL (cultural bias)

• Point: One limitation of Van Ijzendoorn’s research is that it used the Strange Situation technique, which is ethnocentric & suffers from an imposed etic.

• Evidence: For example, German mothers were seen as lacking affection due to higher rates of insecure-avoidant children in their samples. However, in German culture, a lack of separation anxiety is viewed as independence rather than insecurity.

• Explain: This is problematic as it means the method itself may not be suitable for other cultures & researchers can analyse findings in a biased manner in terms of their own cultural beliefs.

• Link: As such, this makes us question whether Ainsworth’s American methodology can be applied cross-culturally due to its cultural bias.