cultural variations in attachment

Van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) aim

investigate whether there would be evidence that inter-cultural and intra-cultural differences in attachments exist

Van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) procedure

meta analysis of findings from 32 studies of attachment behaviour

2000 strange situation classifications in 8 countries

Van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) findings

there are small differences between countries

secure attachment was the most common classification in every country, avoidant attachment being the second most common attachment type except for Japan and Israel (collectivist cultures)

1.5x greater variation within cultures than between cultures

Van IJzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) conclusion

the global pattern across cultures is similar to that found in the US

secure attachment is the norm = best for healthy social/emotional development

supports view that attachment is innate/ a biological process

Tronick et al (1992)

studied an African tribe who live in extended family groups

infants looked after/ breastfed by different women but slept with their own mother at night

infants still showed one primary atttachment at 6 months old

shows inter-cultural similarities

Grossman & Grossman (1991)

found higher levels of insecure attachments amongst German infants than in other cultures

maybe be due to different childrearing practices = involved keeping some interpersonal distance between parents and infants = infants do not engage in proximity-seeking behaviours in the Strange situation = appear insecurely attached

shows inter-cultural differences

Takashi (1990)

used the strange situation to study 60 middle-class Japanese infants and mothers = found similar rates of secure attachment to those found by Ainsworth

Japanese infants showed no evidence of insecure-avoidant attachment

high rates of insecure-resistant attachment (32%)

found infants were very distressed when left alone = infants in Japan rarely experience separation from their mothers

shows inter-cultural differences

one limitation is that inter-cultural similarities may be due to global culture rather than biological factors

Van Ijzerdoorn and Kroonenberg carried out a meta-analysis of 32 studies and concluded that at least some cultural similarities might be explained through the effects of mass media (TV and books) which spread ideas about parenting = children globally are exposed to similar influences

cultural similarities may not be due to innate biological influences but rather increasingly global culture

one limitation with the conclusions drawn by Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg is that they were comparing countries rather than cultures

Van Ijzendoorn and Sagi (2001) did one study of attachment in Tokyo (urban setting) and found similar distributions of attachment to the western studies, whereas a more rural sample found an over-representation of insecure-resistant individuals

Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg found more variation within cultures than between cultures because the data was collected on different subcultures within each country

suggests the term “cultural variations” is not always appropriate when assessing whether an individual sample is representative of a particular culture

a limitation is that the tools used to determine attachment types may not be valid in different countries

observational methods (strange situation) are related to cultural assumptions of Ainsworth who was American = assumed that willingness to explore is a sign of secure attachment

not always the case = in traditional Japanese culture, dependence rather than independence would be the sign of secure attachment

Japanese children may appear to be insecurely attached according to Western criteria, but securely attached by Japanese standards

example of imposed etic

means that research using the strange situation may lack validity in other cultures