Cultural Differences in Attachment

Q: Cultural Variations in Attachment

If __Bowlby__ is correct in his belief that attachment evolved because it has a survival value, we would expect to see the same patterns across different cultural groups.

Q: Cultural Variations in Attachment (Cont.)

If __Bowlby__ is correct in his belief that attachment evolved because it has a survival value, we would expect to see the same patterns across different cultural groups.

Test yourself on Cultural Differences in Attachment

Test your knowledge with free interactive questions on Seneca — used by over 10 million students.

Cultural Variations in Attachment

If Bowlby is correct in his belief that attachment evolved because it has a survival value, we would expect to see the same patterns across different cultural groups.

Belsky (1999)

Bowlby’s theory suggests that secure attachments should dominate in all cultures, with equal amounts of insecure-avoidant and insecure-resistant types.
Belsky (1999) has proposed an evolutionary explanation for the existence of similar attachment types in different cultures.
Belsky proposes that insecure attachment types are associated with weak adult relationships and early sexual activity, which could be useful in circumstances such as famine where the need for rapid reproduction arises.

Child-rearing impact

If different patterns of attachment types are found across cultures, it would indicate that attachment types are learned and not biological.
This would mean that attachment types are learned through exposure to different cross-cultural child rearing practices.
Child rearing styles vary across cultures - for example, who has the primary responsibility for child care or the age at which a baby is expected to be parted from the primary caregiver.

Cultural Variations in Attachment (Cont.)

If Bowlby is correct in his belief that attachment evolved because it has a survival value, we would expect to see the same patterns across different cultural groups.

Mi-Kyoung (2005)

Mi-Kyoung (2005) used the Strange Situation to compare 87 Korean and 113 American families.
Korean infants did not stay close to their mothers and when their mothers returned, they were more likely to play with their infants.
The proportion of securely attached infants was similar in both cultures. This indicates that different child rearing practices could lead to secure attachment.

Malin (1997)

Malin (1997) observed Australian aboriginal infants who are discouraged from exploring because of the threats and distractions of food. So they tend to stay close to their mothers, and use them as secure bases.
Because of the differences in Australian aboriginal child-rearing practices, these infants were incorrectly labelled as insecurely attached and many were placed in care.

Evaluation

Findings from the Strange Situation procedure reflects cultural values and practices rather than identifying the ‘right’ kind of attachment.
Rogoff (2003) found that because black American infants are encouraged to be friendly to strangers, the Strange Situation procedure activates their instincts to explore. This indicates that the strange situation procedure has different meaning for different cultures.