APPLICABILITY OF ATTACHMENT THEORIES 1
finalSApplicability of Attachment theories in Different Cultures
Describethe two cultures you selected. Then, explain the similarities and differences in
attachment in these two cultures. Include whether the differences might impact infants’
well-being in the two cultures and why or why not. Be specific.
The applicability of Bowlby’s and Ainsworth’s theories of attachment varies in
different cultures. Various scholars and researchers have conducted studies to explore the
applicability of attachment among various cultures, including Gernhardt et al. (2016) in their
“Children's Family Drawings as Expressions of Attachment Representations across Cultures:
Possibilities and Limitations” study, and Keller (2018) in her “Universality claim of
attachment theory: Children’s socioemotional development across cultures” study, as used in
this paper. The two articles are based on two different cultural groups, including middle-class
families based in Berlin, Germany, and rural subsistence farming families based in Kumbo,
Cameroon.
Essentially, the middle-class families from Berlin are among the western, educated,
industrialized, rich, and democratic (WEIRD) society. It is so because the families have
adequate knowledge of psychology alongside high levels of formal education, few children,
and live in nuclear, two-generation households (Gernhardt et al., 2016; Keller, 2018). On the
other hand, the traditionally living families around Kumbo, Cameroon have relatively low
levels of formal education, with the prevalence of women siring their first children in their
mid-teenage years, and living in extended families contexts.
In the two cultural groups, the significant attachment partners are proximate family
members. Family members play a vital role in developing attachment with children, which
then shape the quality of future relationships, though every member has unique
responsibilities. However, in western middle-class families from Berlin, infants develop
APPLICABILITY OF ATTACHMENT THEORIES 2
attachment based on adequate emotional interactions, which vary with the nature of
situations, such as confronting strangers and reunion with caregivers (Gernhardt et al., 2016;
Keller, 2018. On the other hand, in subsistence farming families from Kumbo, attachment is
not based on emotional bonds. Children develop with emotional neutrality, hence do not
display stranger anxiety (Gernhardt et al., 2016; Keller, 2018. Therefore, the differences
might impact infants’ well-being in the two cultures. In that light, infants may express
varying emotions when exposed to the other cultural context. An infant from a middle-class
family in Berlin may express tremendous anxiety when confronting a stranger from a
Kumbo-based stranger, while an infant from Kumbo may maintain neutral emotional
expressions when confronting a stranger within the Berlin context.
APPLICABILITY OF ATTACHMENT THEORIES 3
References
Gernhardt, A., Keller, H., & Rübeling, H. (2016). Children’s Family Drawings as
Expressions of Attachment Representations across Cultures: Possibilities and
Limitations. Child Development, 87(4), 1069–1078.
https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12516
Keller, H. (2018). Universality claim of attachment theory: Children’s socioemotional
development across cultures. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences,
115(45), 11414–11419. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1720325115
