Chapter 4 Culture PDF

Culture and Developmental Processes Chapter...

Culture and Developmental Processes Chapter 4 Chapter Contents 4-3 Cognitive Development 97 4-1 Culture and Temperament 87 Piaget’s Theory 97 Piaget’s Theory in Cross-Cultural Perspective 99 What Is Temperament? 87 Piaget’s Theory: Summary and Discussion 101 The Goodness of Fit between Temperament Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory of and Culture 87 Cognitive Development 102 Cross-Cultural Studies on Temperament 89 Comprehension Check 103 Temperament and Learning Culture 89 Dimensions of Temperament: A Focus on 4-4 Moral Reasoning 104 Behavioral Inhibition 90 What Is Moral? 104 Sources behind Temperamental Differences 91 Kohlberg’s Theory of Morality 105 Comprehension Check 93 Cross-Cultural Studies of Moral Reasoning 106 4-2 Culture and Attachment 93 Three Ethics Approach to Moral Reasoning 107 Moral Concepts Develop Early 107 Traditional View of Attachment: Bowlby and Ainsworth93 Comprehension Check 108 Cross-Cultural Studies and a Contemporary Conclusion 108 View on Attachment 94 Temperament and Attachment: A Summary 97 Key Terms 109 Comprehension Check 97 Exploration and Discovery 109 Why Does This Matter to Me? 109 Suggestions for Further Exploration 109 Learning Objectives 4.1 Contrast development with change. 4.4 Describe aspects of cognitive development that seem to be 4.2 Describe similarities and differences regarding universal and aspects that are culture specific. temperament cross-culturally. 4.5 Explain different moral belief systems that various cultures 4.3 Describe similarities and differences regarding attachment may adopt. cross-culturally. 85 Copyright 2023 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. 86  Chapter 4 Are people born with inherent, biological predispositions to behavioral and cultural differences, or are such differences due entirely to environment and upbringing? What psychological differences are there in childhood and development when people are raised in different cultures? This chapter examines the main question of what kind of developmental differences exists across cultures during infancy and childhood, and beyond. A considerable amount of cross-cultural research has been conducted on topics such as temperament, attachment, and cognitive and moral development; in this chapter, we review that literature. The information presented complements that in the previous chapter (Chapter 3); together they provide an in-depth view of the role of culture on developmental processes. First, we define what “development” is. Human development is how people change over time on many different levels—biological, physical, cognitive, emotional, and social. Development, however, is more than just change. Development refers to changes that show greater complexity, organization, and competencies. Dyeing your hair from brown to purple is an example of change. Accruing greater perception, bal- ance, and spatial skills as a young child that enable you to go from crawling to walking is an example of development. One important issue in understanding human development is whether develop- mental pathways are universal or culture specific. Earlier theories of human devel- opment, for example, assumed a “universal child.” In-depth observational studies conducted by Arnold Gesell in the 1930s and 1940s established a normative timetable for motor development milestones among infants (when do babies start grasping, rolling over, sitting, crawling, walking). The timing of these milestones was assumed to be the same for children all over the world. Cross-cultural studies have shown, however, that the timing also depends on culture (Cole, 2006). Contemporary the- orists of human development recognize there are universal developmental path- ways (e.g., all children undergo puberty) as well as culture-specific developmental pathways (e.g., the experience, meaning, and implications for undergoing puberty vary across cultures). In this chapter, we will discuss what aspects of temperament, attachment, and cognitive and moral development appear to be universal, and what aspects appear to be culture specific. Another important issue for understanding human development is to explain what drives development. In other words, how do we become the people that we are? Is it because of nature (our genetic and biological predispositions) or nurture (the developmental environment in which we grew up)? Contemporary theorists of human development contextualism A agree that development is not primarily driven by nature or nurture, but of nature’s contemporary theoretical close interaction with nurture—the two cannot be separated. Thus, development is the perspective that proposes result of the interaction between the characteristics that children are born with (such that the multiple levels of a developing child—ranging as temperament) and children’s relations to their unique environment—the people, from the inner biological to settings, institutions, and culture in which they grow up (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; the psychological, social Lerner, 2006). This developmental contextualism perspective proposes that the mul- relational, and sociocultural tiple levels of a developing child—ranging from the inner biological to the psycho- —are inextricably inter- twined and function as an logical, social relational, and sociocultural—are inextricably intertwined and function integrated system. Devel- as an integrated system. Developmental contextualism stresses that it is the relation opmental contextualism between these changing multiple levels that constitutes human development. This stresses that it is the relation contemporary view of development is complex, dynamic, and counters traditional between these changing multiple levels that consti- views of development where either nature or nurture was emphasized to a greater tutes human development. degree than the other. Copyright 2023 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.  Culture and Developmental Processes   87 4-1 Culture and Temperament As discussed in Chapter 3, the process of socialization starts early, from the very first day of life. The biological temperament and predispositions we bring with us into the world at birth are an integral part of the socialization process. In other words, the characteristics we are born with determine, to some extent, how our caregivers react and interact with us, initiating the lifelong process of socialization. We begin this review by examining the possibility that children of different cultures are born with different biological predispositions to learn certain cultural practices— that is, the issue of temperament. temperament Qualities of responsiveness to the environment that exist from What Is Temperament? birth and evoke different reactions from people in the Any parent can tell you that no two babies are alike. It is not simply that they look baby’s world. Temperament is generally considered to be different but that they differ from the very beginning in temperament. Each baby a biologically based style of has its own way of being in the world—easygoing or fussy, active or quiet. These interacting with the world. qualities of responsiveness to the environment evoke different reactions from people in the baby’s world. Temperament is a biologically based style of interacting with the world that exists from birth. Although it is biologically based, it does not mean that temperament is fixed at birth or impervious to experience. Instead, tempera- ment reflects an interaction between a child’s predispositions and experiences in life. And while temperament is relatively stable, it can be modified over time (Rothbart & Bates, 2006). Thomas and Chess (1977), pioneers in the study of temperament, described three major categories: easy, difficult, and slow-to-warm-up (refer to Figures 4.1-4.3). 1. Easy temperament is defined by a very regular, adaptable, mildly intense style of easy temperament A behavior that is positive and responsive. type of temperament that is defined by a very regular, 2. Difficult temperament is an intense, irregular, withdrawing style, generally adaptable, mildly intense marked by negative moods. style of behavior that is positive and responsive. 3. Slow-to-warm-up children need time to make transitions in activity and experi- difficult temperament ences. Though they may withdraw initially or respond negatively, given time A type of temperament and support they will adapt and react positively. A child’s temperamental style is that is characterized by an believed to provide a foundation for later personality (refer to Chapter 6). intense, irregular, withdraw- ing style that is generally marked by negative moods. The Goodness of Fit between Temperament and Culture slow-to-warm-up A type of temperament in Thomas and Chess (1977) developed an important concept in temperament research which infants need time to make transitions in activity —the notion of goodness of fit. Goodness of fit refers to how well the child’s tempera- and experiences. Though ment matches the expectations and values of the parent, environment, and culture. If they may withdraw initially there is a mismatch, more negative child outcomes are expected. Conversely, if there is or respond negatively, given a good match, better child outcomes are expected. time and support they will adapt and react positively. Research on Masai infants in Kenya has corroborated the importance of the good- ness of fit between an infant’s temperament and their environment. Based on Thomas goodness of fit How well a child’s temperament and Chess’s (1977) temperament classifications, DeVries (1984, 1989) identified diffi- fits into the expectations and cult and easy Masai infants and followed them for several years. What was considered values of the parents, a “difficult” temperament by Western standards actually became a protective factor environment, and culture. Copyright 2023 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. 88  Chapter 4 Figure 4.1 Easy Temperament Is Defined by a Very Regular, Adaptable, Mildly Intense Style of Behavior That Is Positive and Responsive Source: Take A Pix Media/Shutterstock.com Figure 4.2 A Difficult Temperament Is an Intense, Irregular, Withdrawing Style, Generally Marked by Negative Moods Source: Shanta Giddens/Shutterstock.com Figure 4.3 Slow-to-Warm-Up Infants Need Time to Make Transitions in Activity and Experiences Source: Steffen Foerster/Shutterstock.com Copyright 2023 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.  Culture and Developmental Processes   89 against malnutrition during a time of drought. Those infants who were classified as difficult had a greater chance of survival compared with their easy counterparts. DeVries explained this surprising finding by suggesting that the difficult infants, who were very active and fussy, demanded and consequently received more feeding and caring from their mothers. Thus, a particular type of temperament may be adaptive in one culture and maladaptive in another. His findings demonstrated that the way we interpret an infant’s dispositions and behaviors must be considered in relation to the specific culture; the same dispositions and behaviors may have different meanings when placed in a different cultural context. Cross-Cultural Studies on Temperament The implications of cross-cultural differences in temperament, if they exist, are large. If children of various cultures have different temperaments at birth, they will respond to the environment differently. Moreover, they will evoke different responses from caregivers and their environment. These two fundamental differences—in tempera- ment and environmental response—should produce variations in the learning and social experiences of those children, and consequently in their worldview and culture as they grow older. In general, most of the early literature on temperament has compared North American or Western European infants to Asian infants, with the conclusion that Asian infants seem to have a predisposition to be less irritable compared to North American or Western European infants. For instance, Freedman (1974) found that Chinese American babies were less reactive than European American babies or African American babies. When a cloth was placed on their faces covering their noses, the Chinese American babies lay quietly and breathed through their mouths. The other babies turned their heads or tried to pull the cloth off with their hands. In other studies, Chinese, Japanese, and Hmong infants were significantly less active, less irritable, and less vocal than European American infants (Caudill & Frost, 1974; Kagan et al., 1994; Muret-Wagstaff & Moore, 1989). Variations among Asian countries are important to note as well. A study comparing newborns from China and Japan demonstrated that Chinese newborns were more irritable compared to Japanese newborns (Loo et al., 2005). Taken together, studies of newborns show that very early on in life, temperamental differences are evident across cultures. Temperament and Learning Culture Differences in infant temperament may make it easier for parents of different cultures to engage in parenting styles and behaviors that teach and reinforce their cultural practices. Temperament, therefore, may serve as a baseline biological predisposition of the infant that allows this type of learning to occur. Cultural variations that we find concerning temperament, evident very early in life, give us a clue to what kinds of personalities and behaviors are valued in a culture as an adult. For instance, in Japan, nonreactivity (which is related to not expressing emotionality) is more valued than in Western cultures, where higher levels of reac- tivity (expression of emotionality) are more acceptable. Thus, when Japanese infants express negative emotionality, the cultural meaning of these emotions may prompt their caregivers to respond in a way to discourage such expression. Through many interactions between infants and caregivers that are infused with what is culturally acceptable and desired, the differences in temperament observed in the first few days Copyright 2023 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. 90  Chapter 4 of life reflect what each culture values concerning appropriate ways of acting and being (Han et al., 2019). Children’s temperament and the environmental response to their temperamental style will most likely result in differences in the learning and social experiences of those children, and consequently in their behaviors, personali- ties, and worldviews as they become adults. Dimensions of Temperament: A Focus on Behavioral Inhibition Research on temperament has included a wider range of samples beyond North American and Asian countries, including infants from Poland, Russia, Israel, Spain (Gartstein et al., 2010), Australia, South Korea, and Italy (Rubin et al., 2006). In contrast to earlier studies, research has also focused on specific temperamental dimensions as opposed to general temperamental styles such as Thomas and Chess’s approach. At least six temperament dimensions have been identified: 1. Activity level (gross motor activity such as moving arms and legs and squirming); 2. smiling and laughter (being sociable); 3. fear (showing distress in novel situations, also known as behavioral inhibition); 4. distress to limitations (levels of distress when an infant’s goal is blocked); 5. soothability (how easy it is to soothe an infant when distressed); and 6. duration of orienting (how long an infant pays attention to an object when no other stimulations are introduced) (Rothbart, 1981; Rothbart, Sheese, & Conradt, 2009). Of these six dimensions, the one that has received the most attention cross-culturally is behavioral inhibition. behavioral inhibition Behavioral inhibition refers to when a child shows signs of wariness, discom- An aspect of temperament fort, or distress when confronted with novel, challenging, or unfamiliar situations where a child shows signs of wariness, discomfort, or (Kagan et al., 2007). Kagan and colleagues have studied this aspect of temperament distress when confronted longitudinally, by testing infants early in life, at four months of age, and following with novel, challenging, or them to young adulthood. To study behavioral inhibition, the infants sat in a chair unfamiliar situations. Also (like a car seat) and various stimuli were introduced—an interesting mobile, a noise, known as fearfulness or shyness. or a scent. The researchers found that infants who reacted more negatively to new stimuli by becoming very agitated—balling up their fists, squirming around, crying —were more likely to become anxious and worrisome young adults compared to those who remained calm and relaxed when exposed to the same stimuli. The researchers were able to show that even as infants, children display variations in temperamental characteristics such as behavioral inhibition, and these characteristics may be early indicators of underlying personalities later in life. A child who displays behavioral inhibition in novel social situations is consid- ered “shy.” This temperamental aspect has received much attention because it has been clearly linked to children’s adjustment and social competence. In some cultures, such as in North America, shyness is not a desirable trait. Shy children are considered socially immature and are less liked by their peers in North America than assertive children (Chen, Rubin, & Sun, 1992). Shyness in North America has also been linked to greater anxiety, loneliness, and a more negative and stressful family environment in childhood (Rubin et al., 1995; Volbrecht & Goldsmith, 2010). In other cultures, however, shyness is a highly desirable trait. Shy children in China are considered mature, well-behaved, and understanding (Chen et al., 1992). Copyright 2023 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.  Culture and Developmental Processes   91 They also tend to have high self-esteem and do well in school (Chen et al., 1992; Chen et al., 2006; Chen et al., 1999). In fact, in sharp contrast to children in North America, shy children in China are more socially accepted by their peers than assertive children (Chen et al., 1992). Thus, the same temperamental disposition will be discouraged and provoke negative responses from parents and peers in one culture, while in another, it will be encouraged and positively reinforced. If a child’s temperament matches what is valued in that cultural context (an example of “goodness of fit”), then more positive developmental outcomes are expected. If a child’s temperament does not match what is valued in that cultural context (a “poor fit”), then negative developmental outcomes are expected (Rubin et al., 2006). Culture provides the meaning and consequences related to particular temperamental traits. Interestingly, cultures and communities may change in terms of which tempera- mental traits are desirable. Chen and colleagues’ study of urban and rural Chinese children demonstrated how cultural ideals concerning shyness are changing in the context of globalization (Chen, Wang, & Li, 2009). In their study of almost 1,000 school-aged children, they found that shyness was associated with leadership, social competence, and academic achievement—but only for children living in rural areas in China. In urban areas, shyness was associated with more depression and more social and school problems for children—similar to what has been found in North American studies. The authors noted that China has undergone many significant social and eco- nomic changes in the last several decades such that competition, individual freedom, and self-expression are increasingly emphasized. Subsequently, characteristics such as assertiveness are increasingly valued and deemed necessary to be successful—at least in urban areas. This is a rather startling change in just 30 years. Sources behind Temperamental Differences The research reviewed thus far shows cross-cultural differences in which tempera- mental styles may be more common in a culture and how temperamental styles are related to children’s adjustment. Why does temperament differ across cultures? From a developmental contextualism perspective, differences in temperament reflect differences in genetics and in reproductive histories as well as environmental and cultural pressures over generations that may have helped to produce minor biological differences in infants through a functionally adaptive process. Saco-Pollit (1989), for instance, investigated how altitude may relate to newborn behaviors. She compared Peruvian infants who were raised in high-altitude (in the Andes) and low-altitude (Lima) environments. She reported that in comparison with low- altitude infants, those raised in the Andes were less attentive, less responsive, and less active, and had a more difficult time quieting themselves. The harsh environ- ment of living in the high Andes may have contributed to these differences. Another study of Nepalese infants, who by Western standards were undernourished, found that they were actually more alert and had better motor performance compared with a sample of U.S. infants (Walsh Escarce, 1989). The researcher hypothesized that these findings may reflect an adaptation on the part of the Nepalese infant to years of poverty. She also noted that the cultural practice of daily massaging the infant, along with special rituals surrounding the baby, may have contributed to their higher alertness and motor performance. In addition to environmental pressures, the cultural experiences of the mother during pregnancy, including diet and other culture-related practices, may contribute to a prenatal environment that modifies an infant’s biological composition. The fetal Copyright 2023 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. 92  Chapter 4 environment is one context in which significant stimulation occurs. Chisholm (1983) argued that cross-cultural differences between Navajo and European American infants (Navajo infants were less irritable than European American infants) can partly be attributed to the prenatal environment. Mothers with higher blood pressures dur- ing the second and third trimesters had infants who were more irritable—and Navajo mothers, on average, reported lower blood pressure than the European American mothers. This connection between maternal blood pressure and infant irritability has also been found in Malaysian, Chinese, and Aboriginal and white Australian infants (Chisholm, 1981; Chisholm, Woodson, & da Costa Woodson, 1978). Mothers who reported high anxiety during pregnancy were more likely to have newborns who spent less time being quietly and actively alert and showed poorer motor per- formance compared to newborns whose mothers reported low anxiety (Field et al., 2003). Although the prenatal environment has been linked to aspects of infant tem- perament, there are still very few studies that examine this link and even fewer that examine this link cross-culturally. Subsequently, the nature and consequences of pre- natal stimulation, and possible variations across cultures, are still largely unknown (Talge, Neal, & Glover, 2007). The importance of temperament to understanding human development can be seen in an exciting international collaboration—the Joint Effort Toddler Temperament Consortium. The consortium brings together researchers from 14 different countries (the United States, Brazil, Spain, Mexico, Italy, Russia, Finland, Romania, Belgium, the Netherlands, China, South Korea, Turkey, and Chile) to study culture and tem- perament by merging the ideas of the developmental niche (Chapter 3) with the systematic study of temperament through a cross-cultural lens. Doing so will allow for greater insight into how children’s variations in temperament and subsequent behaviors are rooted in their cultural contexts (Gartstein et al., 2019). This research group is systematically testing whether, for instance, cultural characteristics based on Hofstede’s dimensions (described in Chapter 1) are related to temperament dimen- sions such as negative emotionality (Desmarais et al., 2021) and approach behaviors (Pendergast et al., 2018). This important work is providing new perspectives on how parental goals and actions, embedded within cultural norms and values, contribute to the expression and consequences of temperament dimensions. In sum, temperamental variations that are evident from birth contribute to the personality differences we observe in adults of different cultures (refer to Chapter 6). Therefore, it is important to understand the magnitude of their contributions as building blocks in the development of adult members in cultures around the world. These variations are the result of the complex interplay between multiple factors such as what temperamental styles are valued in each culture, specific environmen- tal demands (such as living in poverty or in a high-altitude environment), physi- ological aspects of the mother (e.g., higher blood pressure), and developmental niche (e.g., parenting goals, beliefs, and actions). Some aspects of temperament appear to be universal. Studies of behavioral inhibition find infants from around the world who exhibit a higher level of fear or discomfort when confronted with a novel stimulation. However, the developmental consequences associated with this aspect of temperament vary by the specific culture. Future research should continue to examine the interaction between children’s temperament and the care- giving environment into which they are born to better understand the process of how children eventually learn to internalize the values, attitudes, and behaviors appropriate to their culture. Copyright 2023 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.  Culture and Developmental Processes   93 Comprehension Check 1. Describe Thomas and Chess’s three temperamental styles. 2. What does the concept of “goodness of fit” refer to? 3. Why might babies from different cultures show variations in temperament? 4. Describe at least two cross-cultural findings regarding behavioral inhibition. 4-2 Culture and Attachment Traditional View of Attachment: Bowlby and Ainsworth Attachment refers to the special bond that develops between infants and their pri- attachment The special mary caregivers and provides infants with emotional security. Once attached, babies bond that develops between infants and their primary are distressed by separation from their caregiver (separation distress or anxiety). caregiver and provides There is evidence that seven- to nine-month-old infants in many different cultures infants with emotional show distress when they are separated from their primary caregiver (Grossman & security. The quality of Grossman, 1990). Many psychologists believe that the quality of attachment with attachment has lifelong effects on our relationships caregivers during childhood has lifelong effects on our relationships with loved with loved ones. ones later. Bowlby’s (1969) evolutionary theory of attachment proposed that infants have a preprogrammed, biological basis for becoming attached to their caregivers. This innate behavioral repertoire includes smiling and cooing to elicit physical attachment behaviors on the part of the caregiver. Bowlby argued that the attachment relationship between caregiver and child functioned as a survival strategy: Infants had a greater chance of survival if they remained close to the caregiver for comfort and protection. Attachment as a survival strategy is illustrated in a study in Nigeria of Hausa secure attachment A infants and their caregivers (Marvin et al., 1977). The researchers reported that the style of attachment in which attachment relationship protected infants from the dangers of their environment, infants are described as which included open fires, tools, and utensils that were easily accessible. Infants warm and responsive to their caregiver. explored their environment, but only when they were in close proximity to an attachment figure. Similarly, among the Dogon of Mali, infants were always kept in ambivalent attachment A style of attachment in close proximity with the mother (being held most of the time) and infants did not which children are uncertain roam freely, thus avoiding dangers such as open fires, snakes, and animal droppings in their response to their (True, Pisani, & Oumar, 2001). mothers, going back and forth between seeking and Based on Bowlby’s attachment theory, Ainsworth’s (1967, 1977) study of mothers shunning her attention. and infants in Uganda led to the tripartite classification system of attachment relation- These mothers have been ships. Based on her careful observations of 26 mother–infant pairs over a span of one characterized as insensitive year, she described three attachment styles: secure, ambivalent, and avoidant. The latter and less involved. two attachment styles she labeled as “insecurely attached.” The secure style described avoidant attachment infants who became distressed when their mother left but were easily comforted by A style of attachment in which children shun their her when she returned. The ambivalent style described infants who also experienced mothers, who are suspected distress when their mother left but when she returned, they sent mixed signals—they of being intrusive and wanted to be comforted by her, yet, at the same time, appeared to have a difficult time overstimulating. Copyright 2023 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. 94  Chapter 4 letting her soothe them. The avoidant style described infants who did not seem to be distressed when their mother left, and when she returned these infants actively avoided reuniting with their mother and instead focused their attention elsewhere. Ainsworth later replicated her results in a sample of U.S. (from Baltimore, Maryland) mothers and their infants. In her samples, she found that approximately 57% of mothers and infants were classified as securely attached, 25% as ambivalent, and 18% as avoidant (Ainsworth, 1967; 1977). Studies from other cultures have found a similar distribution of attachment clas- sifications; others have found considerable differences. And some attachment styles are not reported in certain cultures. For example, no avoidant infants were found in True et al.’s (2001) study of the Dogon of Mali. Mali mothers kept their infants close to them throughout the day and practiced constant, responsive nursing (nursing on demand when the infant is hungry or distressed). This type of caregiving, True et al. argued, “prevents” avoidant attachment to the mother. These findings highlight the importance of understanding the attachment system in the context of parenting prac- tices specific to each culture. Cross-Cultural Studies and a Contemporary View on Attachment Since Ainsworth’s early studies, hundreds of studies of attachment have been con- ducted in cultures all over the world. To measure attachment, the Strange Situation, developed by Ainsworth, has been the most widely used. In the Strange Situation, infants are brought into a research lab and separated from their mothers for a brief period of time. During this brief separation, a stranger comes into the room to interact with the infant. The separation and interaction with the stranger are thought to trigger the attachment system in the infant. The quality of attachment is derived partly from an assessment of the infant’s reaction to the separation, to the stranger, and subsequent reunion with the mother. Although this method has been used extensively across cultures, its cross-cultural validity and the meaning of the attachment classifications themselves have been ques- tioned for some time. One main issue is that the meaning of the separation may dif- fer across cultures (Takahashi, 1990). Japanese infants are rarely separated from their mothers, and the separation during the Strange Situation may represent a highly unusual situation that may imply something different for Japanese infants and their mothers than for U.S. infants and their mothers. Otto, Potinius, and Keller (2014) have argued that the attempt to standardize a test such as the Strange Situation cuts out key cultural features that are necessary for inter- preting attachment behaviors. Using modified Strange Situation procedures that are conducted not in a lab but in a natural environment such as the home, these research- ers showed that the interpretation of reactions and interactions with strangers—one of the key ways to measure attachment—heavily depended on the developmental goals of the culture. Studies of infants’ reactions to strangers in Cameroon versus Germany, for instance, showed very different patterns of behavior. In Cameroon, young children are cared for by multiple caregivers, and children are actively socialized to be comfortable with strangers. In the modified Strange Situation, when a stranger picks up the baby and the baby is uncomfortable, the mother may not intervene but allow the baby some time to get used to the stranger. In contrast, German children are usu- ally primarily cared for by the mother, so strangers look to the mother as an important point of reference on how to handle the baby and wait for cues from both the mother and infant on whether and how to approach (Otto, Potinius, & Keller, 2014). Otto and Copyright 2023 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.  Culture and Developmental Processes   95 colleagues argued that observing scripted parent–child interactions in a research lab that is void of the cultural context gives an inaccurate picture of the quality of attach- ment relationships. In addition to criticisms leveled at the traditional measurement of attachment, cross-cultural researchers have questioned how secure attachment is developed. In other words, what must caregivers do to promote secure attachment? Mothers of securely attached infants are described as sensitive, warm, and more positive in their emotional expression. Mothers of avoidant children are suspected of being intrusive and overstimulating. Mothers of ambivalent children have been characterized as being insensitive and uninvolved. Thus, according to Ainsworth, a major determinant of attachment security is having a caregiver who is sensitive and responsive to the child’s needs. In a review of 65 studies of attachment, however, caregiver sensitivity was related only modestly to security of attachment (De Wolff & van IJzendoorn, 1997). And studies with other cultures found an even weaker connection between parent sensitivity and security of attachment (van IJzendoorn & Sagi, 1999). One possible reason for why maternal sensitivity has not been consistently linked to secure attachment is that sensitivity may mean different things and be expressed in different ways across cultures. One study contrasted U.S. caregivers’ with Japanese caregivers’ sensitive responsiveness (Rothbaum et al., 2000). In the United States, par- ents tend to wait for their child to express and communicate a need and then respond to that need. In other words, sensitive parenting in the United States allows the child to express their individual needs to the parent so that the parent can appropriately address those needs. In contrast, in Japan, parents tend to anticipate their child’s needs instead of waiting for their child to communicate a need. This can be done by being aware of situations that may cause distress to a child and anticipating ways to minimize the stress. Rothbaum and colleagues argued that researchers need to pay more attention to how different cultures conceptualize and demonstrate sensitive parenting to better understand what type of parenting leads to secure attachment. Further, parenting behaviors that, from a Western perspective, may seem to promote insecure attachment may, in fact, do the opposite in other cultures. For example, Ainsworth suggested that parenting that is “intrusive,” namely, directive and controlling, leads to an insecure attachment. However, this type of parenting may have an entirely different meaning in non-Western cultures (Chao, 1996). What Westerners may consider as inappropri- ate and “intrusive,” parents in other parts of the world may think are appropriate and “guiding” (Keller, 2013; Otto et al., 2014). Indeed, even the idea of maternal sensitivity that Ainsworth described as necessary for secure attachment is based on the idea that infants are unique, separate, and autono- mous persons who participate in a somewhat equal interaction with their caregiver, a cultural framework that is not shared by other cultures (Keller, 2013; 2018). Cultures vary in conceptions of the self (refer to Chapter 5), which will shape how the self is perceived in relation to others, and subsequently, of attachment relationships. Thus, children in some cultures will have developed a different kind of “relational security” that is not defined by a close, emotional bond with one or a few specific caregivers, but a deep trust in a strong network of general, communal support (Keller 2013; 2018). Contemporary scholars of attachment such as Keller are leading the call for new approaches to theorizing about attachment, one that grounds attachment in specific cultures, communities, and contexts. To demonstrate, Keller (2013) proposed three cultural models that set the stage for different attachment relationships: psychological autonomy, hierarchical relatedness, and hybrid (refer to Figure 4.4). The psychological Copyright 2023 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. 96  Chapter 4 Three Cultural Models of Attachment Psychological Hierarchical Hybrid Autonomy Relatedness There are strong Infants in this cultural This cultural model emotional bonds environment have a emphasizes unique between infants and sense of security not attachment relationships one or a few caregivers. based on a specific with one or few Infants are caregiver or relationship, caregivers and at the conceptualized as but security within a same time, view the autonomous, unique network of community social community as individuals. members. another integral part of the network of attachment. Figure 4.4 The Form and Organization of Attachment Relationships between Infants and Their Caregivers May Differ Depending on Cultural Models Such as These Three Proposed by Keller (2013) autonomy model is the foundation for Bowlby and Ainsworth’s theories of attachment. In this cultural model, infants are conceptualized as autonomous, unique individuals. Caregiving that promotes a strong emotional bond between infants and one or a few caregivers is adaptive. In the hierarchical relatedness cultural model, infants are part of a network of attachment relationships that are hierarchical, where caregivers use a more directive approach in raising their children. The primary relationship for infants is not with one or a few caregivers, but with the entire social community. Infants in this cultural environment have a sense of security not based on a specific caregiver or rela- tionship, but security derived from being a part of a network of community members. The network is reliable and available, not just the parent. In the hybrid cultural model there is a blend of both, emphasizing autonomous relatedness. This type of model may emphasize both unique attachment relationships with one or a few caregivers and, at the same time, view the social community as another integral part of the network of attachment. Keller argued that other adaptive attachment conceptualizations may be derived from other cultural models. The task for the next generation of attachment researchers is to systematically study different cultural models and infant caregiver–community relationships that are adaptive for that particular culture. It is increasingly clear that the traditional view of attachment, as a primary relationship between mother and child, is just one of several possible models of attachment that is adaptive for a particular cultural context. The form and organization of attachment relationships between infants and their caregivers may differ depending on cultural models such as these three proposed by Keller (2013). In sum, traditional views of attachment proposed by Bowlby and Ainsworth priv- ileged the mother–infant relationship as necessary, primary, and unique for positive child development. The vast literature concerning attachment in different cultures has shifted slowly away from the notion that attachment between infants and one primary caregiver (usually the mother) is a universal phenomenon. The contemporary view of attachment argues that relationship security in the form of a strong bond between infants and a community of caregivers can also be developmentally adaptive. Further, attachment scholars have moved away from using the evaluative terms secure and insecure, replaced by terms such as adaptive and maladaptive (Crittenden, 2000; Keller, 2013). “Adaptive” attachments, then, would refer to relationships or a network of Copyright 2023 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.  Culture and Developmental Processes   97 relationships that promote the maximum level of safety for the child within a specific cultural context. Researchers could then define an “optimal” relationship between the infant and the caregiver or community of caregivers as one that may be achieved in different ways, under different circumstances, in different cultures. Temperament and Attachment: A Summary Much still needs to be done to understand the attachment patterns in various cultures and the relationship among cultural environment, infant temperament, and infant– caregiver relationships. Notions about what type of relationship in the early years of life is necessary and optimal to ensure survival in different cultures and communities are still being discovered. The contemporary attachment literature acknowledges how the predominant theory of attachment laid down by Bowlby and Ainsworth is very much culturally bound. The information presented so far concerning temperament and attachment rela- tionships reveals just a few of the many ways in which enculturation occurs around the world. Children may be born with differences in biological predispositions or temperament that may make it easier for them to engage in the cultural learning that occurs throughout socialization and enculturation. Differences in attachment provide learning platforms for children that allow them to achieve developmental goals fostered by their particular cultures. Thus, the temperamental characteristics with which you were born, your caregivers’ responses to your temperamental style, and the resultant attachment relationship you develop with your caregiver or com- munity together play important roles in how you come to acquire your culture. There is a close interaction among children’s temperament, attachment relationship with their caregiver or community, and broader environment (e.g., cultural expectations of desirable temperament and attachment relationships) that contribute to children’s development. We turn now to examine culture’s role in two major developmental processes: cognitive and moral development. These topics are of great interest to developmental psychologists, both mainstream and cross-cultural. Comprehension Check 1. Define “attachment.” 2. According to Bowlby and Ainsworth, who is considered the primary attachment figure for all children? 3. How are Keller’s views on attachment different from those of Bowlby and Ainsworth? 4-3 Cognitive Development cognitive development Piaget’s Theory A specialty in psychology that studies how thinking skills develop over time. Cognitive development is a specialty in psychology that studies how thinking skills The major theory of cogni- and processes develop over time. In other words, psychologists interested in cogni- tive development is that of tive development focus on how children perceive and come to understand the world Piaget. Copyright 2023 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. 98  Chapter 4 Sensorimotor Preoperational Operational Formal Stage Stage Stage Operational Children Children use Children Stage Individuals understand symbols, develop the develop the the world such as ability ability to through their language, to to think think logically sensory understand logically about perceptions the world about abstract and motor around them. concrete concepts. behaviors. objects. Figure 4.5 Piaget’s Four Stages of Cognitive Development around them. Theories of cognitive development have traditionally focused on the period from infancy to adolescence. The theory that has dominated the field of cross-cultural studies of cognition is Piaget’s stage theory of cognitive development. Piaget based his theories on detailed, intensive observations of his own three children as well as other children. He found that children tended to solve problems quite differently at different ages. What was more interesting to Piaget was not why children solved problems correctly, but why children of similar ages tended to make the same mistake in solving problems incorrectly. To explain these differences, Piaget (1952) proposed that children progress through four stages as they grow from infancy into adolescence (refer to Figure 4.5). Piaget’s four stages of cognitive development are as follows. 1. Sensorimotor stage. This stage typically lasts from birth to about two years of age. In this stage, children understand the world through their sensory percep- tions and motor behaviors. In other words, children understand by perceiving and doing. The most important achievement of this stage is the capability to use mental symbols to represent objects and events. The acquisition of object perma- nence—that is, knowing that objects exist even when they cannot be seen—illus- trates this achievement. Early in this stage, children appear to assume that when a toy or other object is hidden (e.g., when a ball rolls under a sofa), it ceases to exist. Later in this stage, children will search under the sofa for the lost ball, dem- onstrating that they have come to understand that objects exist continuously. Other cognitive developments that also depend on the development of mental representation typical of this stage include deferred imitation and lan- guage acquisition. These developments have important implications for later cognitive development and enculturation. Imitation is an important cognitive component of observational learning, and language skills are necessary to ensure proper communication of verbal socialization processes. conservation An awareness that physical 2. Preoperational stage. This stage lasts from about two to six or seven years of age. quantities remain the same Piaget described children’s thinking at this stage in terms of five characteristics: even when they change conservation, centration, irreversibility, egocentrism, and animism. shape or appearance. centration The tendency Conservation is the awareness (or in this stage, the lack of awareness) to focus on a single aspect of that physical quantities remain the same even when they change shape or a problem. appearance. irreversibility The Centration is the tendency to focus on a single aspect of a problem. inability to imagine “undoing” a process. Irreversibility is the inability to imagine “undoing” a process. Copyright 2023 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it.  Culture and Developmental Processes   99 Egocentrism is the inability to step into another’s shoes and understand the egocentrism The inability other person’s point of view. to step into another’s shoes and understand the other Animism is the belief that all things, including inanimate objects, are alive. person’s point of view. For example, children in the preoperational stage may regard a book lying animism The belief that on its side as “tired” or “needing a rest,” or they may think that the moon is all things, including inani- following them. Children at this stage do not yet think in a logical and mate objects, are alive. systematic manner. 3. Concrete operations stage. This stage lasts from about 6 or 7 years until about 11 years of age. During this stage, children acquire new thinking skills to work with actual objects and events. They are able to imagine undoing an action, and they can focus on more than one feature of a problem. Children also begin to understand that there are points of view different from their own. This new awareness helps them master the principle of conservation. A child in the concrete operations stage will understand that six apples are always six apples, regardless of how they are grouped or spaced, and that the amount of clay does not change as a lump is molded into different shapes. This ability is not present in the preoperational stage. However, instead of thinking a problem through, children in this stage tend to rely on trial-and-error strategies. 4. Formal operations stage. This stage extends from around 11 years of age through adulthood. During this stage, individuals develop the ability to think logically about abstract concepts, such as peace, freedom, and justice. Individuals also become more systematic and thoughtful in their approach to problem solving. The transition from one stage to another is often gradual, as children develop new abilities alongside earlier ways of thinking. Thus, the behavior of some children may represent a “blend” of two stages when they are in a period of transition from one to the other. Piaget hypothesized that two primary mechanisms are respon- sible for movement from one stage to the next: assimilation and accommodation. Assimilation is the process of fitting new ideas into a preexisting understanding of assimilation The process the world. Accommodation refers to the process of changing one’s understanding of of fitting new ideas into a preexisting understanding the world to accommodate ideas that conflict with existing concepts. of the world. Piaget believed that the stages were universal, and that progression through accommodation The these stages was invariant in order. According to Piaget, knowledge is constructed process of changing one’s through the interactions between the biological maturation of children and their understanding of the world actions and experiences with the physical and social environment. Because there are to accommodate ideas similarities across cultures in how individuals mature physically and in how they that conflict with existing concepts. act on the physical world (e.g., in every culture individuals ask questions, exchange information, and work together), the stages are thought to be universal. The richness of Piaget’s theory has prompted a multitude of studies of cognitive development in cultures all over the world. Piaget’s Theory in Cross-Cultural Perspective Cross-cultural research on Piaget’s theory has focused on four central questions. The findings to date show an interesting blend of cultural similarities and differences in various aspects of cognitive development that parallel Piaget’s stages. Do Piaget’s stages occur in the same order in different cultures? Studies that have addressed this question have demonstrated that Piaget’s stages occur in the same order across various cultures. For instance, a study of Zinacantec children from Copyright 2023 Cengage Learning. All Rights Reserved. May not be copied, scanned, or duplicated, in whole or in part. Due to electronic rights, some third party content may be suppressed from the eBook and/or eChapter(s). Editorial review has deemed that any suppressed content does not materially affect the overall learning experience. Cengage Learning reserves the right to remove additional content at any time if subsequent rights restrictions require it. 100  Chapter 4 Mexico and children from Los Angeles, California, in the United States, showed similar movement from the preoperational to concrete operational stages (Maynard & Greenfield, 2003). We do not find cultures in which four-year-olds typically lack an awareness of object permanency or five-year-olds that under- stand the principle of conservation. Thus, we know that children from very different cultures do indeed learn groups of Piagetian tasks in a similar order. One thing that is l