Cultural Variations in Attachment

Cultural Variations in Attachment Psychology

The investigation of cultural variations of attachments in psychology involves using research to investigate whether attachments and their styles are universal across cultures or whether differences exist.

What Are Cross-Cultural Variations in Attachment?

When Bowlby proposed his Monotropic Theory of Attachment, he argued that attachment is an innate mechanism and that babies are biologically pre-programmed to form secure bonds with caregivers.

This mechanism is considered adaptive, enabling infants to survive by prompting caregivers to respond to their needs. Bowlby also suggested that the attachment infants form to their primary caregiver acts as a prototype for future relationships. This concept is known as the internal working model.

However, critics of Bowlby's theory have pointed out that he failed to account for cultural variations in attachment styles. If different patterns of attachment styles are found cross-culturally, it would indicate that infants' attachment styles are not innate like Bowlby suggested but learned through exposure to cultural child-rearing styles.

To test the assumptions behind Bowlby's theory, we need to establish whether attachment styles are shared across cultures and what the potential cross-cultural variations are.

How is attachment assessed?

Mary Ainsworth (1978) developed a procedure that classified infants into one of the three attachment styles based on their behaviour with their caregiver and a stranger. The procedure is called the Strange Situation, and it has been developed based on research on White, middle-class mother-infant dyads from the US.

Based on the infant's behaviour, they are classified as having secure, insecure-avoidant or insecure-resistant attachment styles.

Outline what research has shown about Cultural Variations in Attachment

Early research conducted by Takahashi (1986) has raised concerns about the generalisability of the Strange Situation procedure and Ainsworth's classification. Among the insecurely attached Japanese infants, almost all children showed insecure-resistant attachment; however, their behaviour was inconsistent compared to the Western children.

The author explains that the procedure might cause mild distress in American children that have already experienced being left alone or with strangers. But, it causes a severe amount of distress in Japanese children.

Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg Study

Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg (1988) conducted a meta-analysis of studies around the world that used the Strange Situation procedure. In total, their analysis included 32 cross-cultural studies of attachment behaviour.

Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg aimed to investigate whether attachment styles were universal across cultures. They only included studies that used the Strange Situation procedure to compare the findings between studies reliably.

The researchers also wanted to assess the extent of intercultural (between cultures) and intracultural (within cultures) differences in attachment styles.

The meta-analysis was conducted using 32 studies from 8 countries that used the Strange Situation procedure. The method compared Western cultures to Eastern ones, such as Japan and China. For each country, an average percentage for the different attachment styles was calculated as part of this method.

Discuss Findings of Research into Cultural Variations in Attachment

Researchers found that most infants across cultures were securely attached (70%). China and Great Britain showed the lowest percentage of secure attachments.

Also, Western countries that value independence, such as the US and European countries, had high levels of insecure-avoidant infants.

Eastern countries with collectivist cultures that value close family relationships and cooperation had higher levels of insecure-resistant infants. An example of this type of country is Japan.

The findings of the meta-analysis are reflected in the table below.

The difference between Western and Eastern countries can also be attributed to cultural child-rearing practices, as highlighted by Takahashi (1986). Mother-infant separation is much more common in Western countries, where the mother is likely to return to work sooner after having the baby.

Interestingly, the researchers reported that attachment variations within each culture were greater than those found between cultures. Intracultural variation is more likely in larger countries such as the US and China. There were differences in each culture across races and economic classes.

Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg: Conclusion

Overall, the secure attachment style was the most common attachment type cross-culturally. This supports the findings of Mary Ainsworth's initial study and Bowlby's theory of attachment. This also suggests universal characteristics among infants underlie mother-child attachment, and secure attachment is likely to develop with a secure caregiver.

However, as the meta-analysis found, there are also cross-cultural variations in attachment styles. This suggests that cultural differences in child-rearing practices can influence children's outcomes of the Strange Situation procedure.

Cross Cultural Variations in Attachment Evaluation

Let's consider the following evaluation points of the Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg meta-analysis.

Strengths of the Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg Study

• The meta-analysis used a large and varying sample size, allowing for cross-cultural conclusions.

• Researchers could reliably compare the findings by choosing studies that employed the same procedure (Strange Situation).

• The study had minimum ethical issues as it utilised secondary data collection that required no direct participant contact.

• The study's objectivity is high as it was a collection of established data; there was no data interpretation or researcher bias.

Limitations of the Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg Study

• Using the Strange Situation and Ainsworth's classification of attachment styles is an example of an imposed etic. This classification reflects the Western understanding of the concept of attachment. By using the etic approach to cross-cultural research, the reasons for cross-cultural differences might be overlooked.

• Ethnocentrism: since the classification of attachment styles was developed in an American study; it may reflect American values and practices. As such, ethnocentrism may undermine the validity of the study.

• The samples representing each country in the meta-analysis were small and taken from Western cultures. This poses an issue with generalisability, as significant variations in attachment styles can exist within each culture.