Tag: studies

Attachment Styles & Culture: Are You Secure?

Posted on by Leave a comment

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.

Religion’s Influence on Cultural Drinking Behaviors

Posted on by Leave a comment

Culture and religion are inevitably intertwined.

Today, we’ll discuss some studies that demonstrate this exchange.

Our first study comes out of America and Canada, in which researchers analyzed whether culture or religion more greatly influenced drinking behaviors.

Canadian Versus American Drinking Behaviors

Past studies had shown that drinking patterns amongst college students differed across countries. 

The difference in behaviors suggests that anything from a country’s public policies to their politics, values, or economy influences alcohol consumption levels and produces different alcohol-related problems within each country.

For example, one study showed that while more Canadian students drink alcohol than American students, heavy alcohol use (5+ drinks in a row for men / 4+ for women) was much more prevalent amongst Americans than Canadians in both past-year and past-week stats. 

41% of American students had drunk heavily within the past year versus 35% of Canadian students, and 54% of American students had drunk heavily within the past week compared to 42% of their Canadian counterparts.

One reason for this may be the drinking age disparity. In Canada, 18 (in some provinces) and 19 are legal drinking ages, while in the U.S., drinking is legal at 21. 

The study concluded that a student’s place of residence may also influence the difference in drinking behaviors:

“In our sample, 52% of Canadian college respondents lived off-campus with parents while only 15% of the US college respondents did so. Our study suggests that students who live off-campus with their parents are less likely to use alcohol and to be heavy alcohol drinkers in both countries.”

While this study identified different cultural drinking habits, researchers in the ‘90s wanted to delve into religious influence on those same habits.

Religious Influence on Drinking Habits

The drinking behaviors of non-abstinent Catholics, moderately abstinent Protestants, and abstinent Jews in both America and Canada were put under the microscope.

Researchers discovered that the absence or presence of conflicting values between the country’s culture and the religion’s drinking norms predicted the drinking habits of each group. 

For instance, the drinking habits of non-abstinent Catholics generally aligned with those of the country’s culture; however, the drinking habits between abstinent Canadian Jews and American Jews were the same, as most follow the religion’s strict law in lieu of the broader cultural drinking norms.

The study concludes:

“Among this sample it was concluded that religious norms have a greater influence in cohesive religious groups while cultural norms are more influential among less cohesive groups. The results also support the Canadian ‘Mosaic’ and American ‘Melting Pot’ assumption.”

This indicates that the norms of religious-based sub-cultures are more adherent to the group norms than national ones.

When Religious Norms Become National Culture

Religious norms regarding alcohol consumption can, at times, even imbed into the national culture.

It’s not unusual to see a glass of wine or pint of beer drank with lunch in a Catholic country, while abstinence from such habits would be the norm in a Protestant country. 

In fact, in the “Bible Belt” of America, which is predominantly Protestant, you may even see alcohol norms written into law. A number of counties in this region are “dry.”

In some parts of the world, drinking norms are legally bound, nationwide. For instance, some Islamic countries follow strict drinking norms (abstaining from alcohol) and expect outsiders to, as well. In countries like Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, there are laws enforcing such norms.

In such cases, adapting or adopting as an outsider is required, in order to avoid legal issues or imprisonment.

All of this is to say that a country’s dominant religion(s) influence the culture’s norms and values, whether an individual is a believer or not.

In order to understand the culture of a country, therefore, you must get to know the ideology and rules/laws of its religion(s). 

We’ll discuss how religion may imprint on business next week.

The Hospitality Index: A Hypothetical Example of Ethnocentricity

Posted on by Leave a comment

Not long after the fall of the Berlin Wall in ’91, I traveled as a journalist to a region near the former Yugoslavian border of Albania. In many of the remote, mountainous villages to which I traveled, I was the first foreigner seen by locals since the Germans of WWII.

As I explored the region, one of the impressions I had about the people was that they were unconditionally hospitable. They treated this stranger, this foreigner, as an esteemed guest, preparing generous meals for me, despite not having a lot themselves.

One village had only three sheep, and they killed one of them to serve me, though I attempted to discourage such a sacrifice on my account.

Hospitality exceeding no bounds was their cultural norm.

Not only did this manifest in the meals they served, but also in the accommodation. In each house, there was a guest room, fitted with a bed to welcome visitors at any time.

While this region isn’t alone in this cultural norm, as I’ve been so graciously treated with such hospitality in other parts of the world as well, one conclusion that I’ve come to in my travels is this:

Hospitality is best wherever there is no telephone.

Lack of Connection Improves Quality of Connection

People often arrive unannounced to places with no telephone. This may be one reason cultural norms require those who live in remote places to be prepared to accommodate at any time.

The pop-in is inevitable (Seinfeld would hate to be a member of these cultures). Hosts must provide guests a place to stay and a bite to eat last-minute because they have nowhere else to go. And these hosts are more than happy to.

In such open-door cultures, active hospitality – and lavish hospitality, at that – is adopted and valued.

Ethnocentricity’s Bias in the Reverse

Last week, we talked about ethnocentricity: the innate bias we have about our culture being “right” and another being “wrong” and evaluating cultures according to our own values.

My personal example is one case in which ethnocentricity’s bias might work in the reverse.

Sometimes, we see other’s values and norms as more “right” than our own. This may be one of those cases.

Most Westerners would never think to invite themselves over to a neighbor’s home, nor would they expect to accommodate a stranger. Even showing up on an acquaintance’s doorstep without a moment’s notice would be questionable.

Some Westerners might even choose to stay at a hotel rather than with family or friends when they’re visiting. Not only because they don’t want to impose on another’s space, but likely because they’d prefer their own space and privacy.

But most Westerners would surely see the value in such open-door hospitality. It’s universally a beautiful thing.

In Albania – and in other world regions that are less connected – there is no imposition and space is not valued as it is in the West. It would be a dishonor to the people if you rejected their hospitality.

Ethnocentricity in Albania

As I’ve highlighted, hospitality is a deeply entrenched value in these regions.

With that bit of background in mind, imagine Albanian researchers studying cross-cultural differences.

The researchers, no doubt, would consider the hospitality-index as an important cultural categorization.

Generosity and accommodation are the glue that holds society together in their minds, allowing communal ties and free travel.

Should they research other country’s hospitality norms and values, they would find other’s hospitality doesn’t meet the same standard as theirs.

They might see that in some countries unconditional hospitality is restricted to those one knows well. Strangers can find somewhere else to eat and sleep.

In other countries, only family members are provided with hospitality.

And in some, forget it. You have to find your own accommodation.

During their research, the Albanians might then conclude that their own country is on the higher end of the spectrum when it comes to the hospitality index. And they would view this as a positive thing, as their values are validated.

This is just one example of how ethnocentrism might influence research. It comes naturally to most. Even professional researchers and experts in the field, no matter how objective they attempt to be, will inevitably reveal their own values when evaluating other cultures.