LT5 - Cultural Variations in Attachment

LT5 - Cultural Variations in Attachment

1. AO1

   • Van Ijxendoorn & Kroonberg
     • Procedures
       • Meta-analysis
         • 32 Studies
           • 15 in US
         • 8 COuntries
         • 1990 Infants
     • Findings
       • Similarities
         • Secure most common
       • Differences
         • Insecure Resistance = Least common
           • GB 3%, 30% Israel
         • Insecure Avoidance
           • Most common Germany, Least Common Japan
       • Within > Between
         • 90% in US, 45% as well
   • Jin et al
     • 87 Korean Infants
     • Type B? Same Proportion
     • Type A? America Wins!
     • Type C? America loses
     • Korean infants showed less proximity
     • Korean mothers reunion
   • conclusions
     • Type B is the most common
       • Supports Bowlby's idea that attachment is innate and universal
     • Cultural influences do have an impact on attachment type
   • Simonella et al
     • 76 Italian Infants
       • 50, 36, 14
     • A lot less type B
       • More work, use of childcare services

2. AO3

   • Weaknesses
     • P: Samples are not representative of culture
       • E1: Van and Kroon were acc studying variation by country
         • E2: There's a lot of variation within a country
           • E3: Van and Sagi - Urban similar, rural higher IR
             • L: Low internal validity
     • P: Biased assessment method
       • E1: SS made by a US researcher upon a british theory
         • E2: Imposed Etic
           • E3: In Germany, IA = Independence, but IA in US = Separation anxiety
             • L: Lowers internal validity
   • Strengths
     • P: Large Sample Sizes
       • E1: Van looked at almost 200 infants
         • E2: Simonella and Jin had very large comparable group sizes
           • E3: Increase Pop Validity, decrease anonymous effects
             • L: Generalisability