Cross Cultural Variation

Cross Cultural Variation

1. Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg

   • Met analysis of 32 attachment studies with 2000 strange situations in 8 countries
   • All of the selected studies had observed only mother infant pairs.
     • They excluded studies that looked at children with special needs, any with less than 35 mother infant pairs and any using children older than 2.
   • Secure attachments were the most common attachment types in all cultures
   • Avoidant was the second most common expect in Japan, Israel and China
     • Found 1.5 times more variation within a culture than between cultures

2. Jin et al

   • They used the strange situation with 87 Korean infants
   • Overall proportion of secure and insecure similar to other countries, with most being secure
   • Most of those who were insecure were resistant, with only 1 being avoidant
   • This is quite different to the US due to different child bearing practices
   • Mothers in Korea rarely leave their babies

3. Simonella et al

   • Studied 76 12 month old Italian infants using the strange situation
   • Found 50% were secure and 36% insecure avoidant
     • Lower rate of secure than in previous studies
   • The researchers suggest is because more mothers are working longer hours and employing professional childcare
   • The implication is that cultural changes can have a huge impact on levels of secure attachment

4. Evaluation

   • Strange Situation measures in US centric and is used in other countries. Its an example of imposed metic and results in cultural bias. E.g.it may not be a valid measurement of attachment in Japan.
   • Rothbaum et al: suggests there should be a small set of principles applied to defining attachment and it should be measured differently in different cultures.
   • It is criticised for containing very few studies outside US e.g. 1 in china with 36 infants vs. 18 in USA with 1230 infants.
   • A strength is that large samples are used e.g. there were 2000 babies used in Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg's met analysis. This improves its internal validity.