Attachment styles are psychological frameworks that describe how we form and maintain emotional bonds with others, particularly in close relationships.
These styles are typically developed in early childhood through interactions with caregivers and can significantly influence how we relate to others throughout our lives.
A 1986 study by Takahashi found that, when using Western attachment style classifications, double the number of Japanese infants were categorized as insecure-resistant when compared with American babies.
This raises an important question: Are Japanese infants more prone to forming unhealthy attachments, or is the classification system skewed by ethnocentricity?
This issue highlights the need to understand cultural variations in attachment and the complexities involved in studying attachment across different cultures.
Attachment Varies by Culture
Attachment theory in psychology investigates whether attachment styles differ based on cultural practices or whether they are universal.
According to Bowlby’s Monotropic Theory of Attachment, attachment is an inherent mechanism that ensures infants bond with their caregivers for survival.
He argued that this attachment serves as a template, or “internal working model,” for all future relationships.
Bowlby’s theory suggests that the drive to develop a secure attachment is a biological, universal trait found in all human infants.
However, many scholars have criticized Bowlby for failing to consider cultural variations in child-rearing practices.
These cultural differences can significantly influence attachment styles, suggesting that attachment may not be as biologically determined as Bowlby proposed.
In cultures where different social norms around caregiving exist, attachment behaviors may reflect those norms rather than innate patterns.
For instance, some cultures might encourage more physical closeness or independence, which could lead to different attachment behaviors.
Assessing Attachment
Mary Ainsworth’s “Strange Situation” is the primary method for assessing attachment styles in infants.
In this procedure, an infant’s behavior is observed during a series of interactions, such as when a caregiver exits the room, when the infant is left with a stranger, and when the caregiver returns.
Based on their responses, infants are classified into three categories: secure, insecure-avoidant, or insecure-resistant.
While the Strange Situation has been extensively used in the U.S. and Europe, it was developed based on middle-class, Western family dynamics, which may not capture the nuances of attachment in non-Western cultures.
For instance, behaviors classified as insecure-resistant in Japan, such as clinging to a parent, might simply reflect cultural norms of close physical proximity between mother and child.
Cross-Cultural Studies
To explore the validity of Bowlby’s claims, studies have been conducted to compare attachment styles across cultures.
Cultural variations in attachment refer to differences in social norms around caregiving and how these influence attachment styles.
These variations can challenge the idea that all infants form attachments in the same way.
For example, research by Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg compared attachment styles across eight countries, showing significant cross-cultural differences.
While American infants predominantly exhibited secure attachments (as defined by Western standards), other cultures displayed different attachment patterns without negative consequences for children’s emotional development.
Cultural variations in attachment challenge the assumption that attachment styles are universal.
We’ll explore this further next week.
Success Across Cultures 