Country | No of Studies | Type B (%) | Type A (%) | Type C (%) |
Great Britain | 1 | 75 | 22 | 3 |
Germany | 3 | 57 | 35 | 8 |
Netherlands | 4 | 67 | 26 | 7 |
Sweden | 1 | 74 | 22 | 4 |
Japan | 2 | 68 | 5 | 27 |
Israel | 2 | 64 | 7 | 29 |
United States | 18 | 65 | 21 | 14 |
China | 1 | 50 | 25 | 25 |
MEAN | 65 | 21 | 14 |
There are four main findings that come from the meta-analysis of Van Ijzendoorn and Kroonenberg:
The last finding means that the countries are all so relatively similar it is hard to tell them apart just by looking at a snapshot of findings.
Think about it this way
If the sound were turned down on the strange situation tapes and there were no clues as to the culture/country they were filmed in, would you be able to tell what the country was just by looking at the videos of the infants?
However, if you watched a day of strange situation films from say, Sweden, you would see all three attachment types and so there would be variety.
There is more diversity inside the cultures than between them.
Strengths
Limitations
If the examiner asks you for findings, it is very rare they will ask you for the results of individual countries. What they are referring to is the 4 findings listed above: The second most common attachment type in different cultures. You need to know the trends: i.e. Germany has the highest number of type A and Japan/Israel has the highest amount of Type C. But if the examiner asks for findings, place this in context by using Germany and Japan as examples of Individualist/Collectivist cultures. Remember not all collectivist cultures are the same, as is true for individualists, so give examples to qualify your statement.
转载自savemyexams
© 2024. All Rights Reserved. 沪ICP备2023009024号-1