0% found this document useful (0 votes)

3 views27 pages

Chapter 3 Culture

This chapter explores the process of enculturation, which is how individuals learn and adopt the cultural norms and values of their society. It discusses the roles of parents, peers, and educational systems as key agents in this process, emphasizing the dynamic interactions between children and their environments as outlined by Bronfenbrenner's ecological systems theory. The chapter highlights that children are active participants in their own cultural development, influenced by various social contexts and interactions.

Uploaded by

naomihaizley

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

0% found this document useful (0 votes)

3 views27 pages

Chapter 3 Culture

Uploaded by

naomihaizley

We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.

Available Formats

Download as PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

Enculturation

Chapter
3
Chapter Contents 3-3 Culture and Peers 73
3-1 Humans Engage in Cultural Learning 59 Exposure to Peer Groups 75
Peers and Bullying 75
Unique Human Abilities 59
Summary77
Enculturation and Socialization 59
Comprehension Check 77
Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory 61
Comprehension Check 62 3-4 Culture and the Educational System 77
3-2 Culture, Parenting, and Families 62 School Systems 78
Parental and Familial Values 78
Whiting and Whiting’s Six Cultures Study 63 Attitudes and Appraisals of Students 79
Diversity in Parenting as a Function of Teaching Practices and School Environment 80
Economics63
Summary81
Parenting Goals and Beliefs 64
Comprehension Check 82
Global Parenting Styles 65
Parenting Behaviors and Strategies 67 Conclusion82
A Domain-Specific Approach to Parenting 69
Key Terms 83
Siblings70
Extended and Multigenerational Families 72 Exploration and Discovery 83
Summary73 Why Does This Matter to Me? 83
Comprehension Check 73 Suggestions for Further Exploration 83

Learning Objectives
3.1 Define enculturation. 3.4 Describe how peers contribute to how children learn the
3.2 Describe Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory. values and norms of their culture.

3.3 Describe how parents and other family members contribute 3.5 Describe the ways in which schools contribute to how
to how children learn the values and norms of their culture. children learn the values and norms of their culture.
3.6 Explain how children themselves contribute to the process
of enculturation.

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.
Enculturation 59

When the study of culture and psychology uncovers cultural differences among people,
some natural questions come to mind: How did these differences arise in the first place?
What happens during development that makes people of different cultures different?
What are the relative influences of parents, families, extended families, schools, and
other social institutions? Are people born with inherent, biological predispositions to
behavioral and cultural differences, or are such differences due entirely to environment
and upbringing? This chapter examines how the process of enculturation works. That
is, how do people come to acquire their cultures? Research in this area has focused on
parenting, peer groups, and institutions such as the educational system, each of which
will be discussed here. First, we discuss how humans are different from other animals in
their ability to acquire culture. Then we define and compare two important terms in this
area of study: enculturation and socialization.

3-1 Humans Engage in Cultural Learning

Unique Human Abilities

In Chapter 1, we learned that one of the most important thinking abilities that humans
have that other animals do not is the ability to share intentions with one another. In
other words, humans can get into another person’s mind, follow things from that
person’s point of view, understand the intentions of that person, and recognize that
the person understands our own intentions too. This unique ability of humans to
engage in shared intentionality allows us to engage in “cultural learning”—that is,
learning not only from others but through others (Tomasello, Kruger, & Ratner, 1993).
Tomasello at the Max Planck University in Leipzig, Germany, studied how humans
are unique from other animals in this aspect of cultural learning (Tomasello & Herrmann,
2010). In one study, he compared two types of great apes (chimpanzees and orangutans)
to two-year-old human children. In many ways, the great apes and children were similar
in terms of how they thought about space, quantities, and causality. But there was one
big difference. The children were much more sophisticated than the great apes in the
ways they thought about the social world. Children understood intentionality, social
learning, and social communication on a much deeper and more complex level than the
great apes. Tomasello proposed that this facility with social learning and communication
provides the foundation for cooperation with other humans; this fundamental ability to
cooperate is the basis for participating successfully in a cultural group. Because humans
are intrinsically able to learn from one another and collaborate together as a group on a
much more complex and larger scale than all other animals, only humans are capable of
creating and transmitting a culture that is more sophisticated and differentiated than any
other animal. From the moment they are born, children are ready to learn culture.

Enculturation and Socialization

Childhood in any society is a dynamic period of life. One aspect of childhood that
is constant across cultures is the expectation that people emerge from this period
with a wish to become competent, productive adults. Cultures differ, however, in
exactly what they mean by “competent” and “productive.” Despite similarities in the
overall goals of development, cultures exhibit a tremendous degree of variability in
their content.

Each culture understands the adult competencies needed for adequate function-
ing, but these competencies differ by culture and environment. For example, children
who need a formal education to succeed in their culture are likely to be exposed to
these values early in childhood. They are likely to receive books and instruction at a
young age. Children in another culture may be required to do spinning and weaving
as part of their adult livelihood and are likely to be exposed to those crafts at an early
age.
By the time we are adults, we have learned many cultural rules of behavior and
have practiced those rules so much that they are second nature to us. Much of our
behavior as adults is influenced by these learned patterns and rules, and we are so well
practiced at them that we engage in these behaviors automatically and unconsciously.
Culture involves so many different aspects of life that it is impossible to simply sit
somewhere and read a book and learn about, let alone thoroughly master, a culture.
Culture must be learned through a prolonged process, over a considerable period of
time, with much practice. This learning involves all aspects of the learning processes
that psychologists have identified over the years, including classical conditioning,
operant conditioning, and social learning. As we grow from babies into adults and learn
about culture, we make mistakes along the way, but people, groups, and institutions are
always around to help us, and in some cases force us, to correct those mistakes.
socialization The Socialization is a term that is generally used to describe the process by which
process by which we learn we learn about our societies, including its rules and patterns. In this book, however,
and internalize the rules and
patterns of behavior that
we prefer the term enculturation, which refers to the process by which individuals
are affected by culture. This learn about their cultures, that is, the meaning and information systems in the many
process, which occurs over a contexts of a person’s life. While there is little difference between the two terms, we
long time, involves learning prefer the term enculturation because of its focus on the learning of cultural contents as
and mastering societal and
cultural norms, attitudes,
we defined it in Chapter 1. (The term socialization has more of a nuance on the learning
values, and belief systems. of “society” rather than “culture.”) The process of learning about one’s culture occurs
enculturation The
over a long time and involves learning and mastering norms, attitudes, values, and
process by which belief systems—all the subjective elements of culture discussed in Chapter 1. This pro-
individuals learn and adopt cess starts early, from the very first day of life, leveraging the psychological toolkits
the ways and manners of with which humans come to the world (refer to Figure 3.1).
their specific culture.

• The process by which

we learn and internalize Socialization
Socialization the rules and patterns (and Enculturation)
of the society in which Agents
we live

• The people, institutions,

and organizations that
• The process by which help ensure that
we learn and adopt the socialization (and
ways and manners enculturation) occur
Enculturation
of our specific culture

Figure 3.1 We Learn Culture through Socialization and Enculturation

Enculturation (and socialization) agents are the people, institutions, and organi- enculturation (and
zations that help ensure that cultural learning occurs. The first and most important of socialization) agents The
people, institutions, and
these agents is parents, who help instill cultural mores and values in their children, organizations that exist to
reinforcing those mores and values when they are learned and practiced well and help ensure that encultura-
correcting mistakes in that learning. Parents, however, are not the only enculturation tion occurs.
agents. Siblings, extended families, and peers are important enculturation agents for
many people. Organizations such as school, church, and social groups such as Boy or
Girl Scouts also become important agents of these processes. In fact, as you learn more
about the enculturation process, you will find that culture is enforced and reinforced by
so many people and institutions that it is no wonder we all emerge from the process as
masters of our own culture.

Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory

Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory provides a useful framework for orga-
nizing the many dimensions of enculturation (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Bronfenbrenner
& Morris, 1998). In Bronfenbrenner ’s view, human development is a dynamic,
interactive process between individuals and various ecologies that range from the
proximal, immediate environment to the more distal. These environments include
the microsystem (the immediate surroundings, such as the family, school, peer
group, with which children directly interact), the mesosystem (the linkages between
microsystems, such as between school and family), the exosystem (the context that
indirectly affects children, such as parent’s workplace), the macrosystem (culture,
religion, society), and the chronosystem (the influence of time and history on the
other systems). Refer to Figure 3.2.
Bronfenbrenner argued that to understand how a child develops, we must
consider the experience of the child within each of these systems. In other words,
context matters. Who you are today is a result of interactions with the people in
your family, classmates in school, friends and neighbors in your community, poli-
cies and institutions of the country (or countries) that you were raised in, and the
particular point in history in which you live. In Bronfenbrenner ’s view, studying
children in relation to their particular contexts, on multiple levels, is key to under-
standing development.
An important tenet of ecological systems theory is that children are not simply
passive recipients of the enculturation process. That is, they do not simply absorb
cultural information from their families, peer groups, and educational institutions.
Rather, they also contribute to their own development by selecting, interacting with,
and influencing the people, groups, and institutions around them. Thus, children are
active producers and architects of their own culture and development.
Another useful framework to understand enculturation is Super and Harkness’s
notion of a developmental niche (Harkness & Super, 2021; Super & Harkness, 1986).
The developmental niche focuses on how the broader macrosystem structures the
child’s immediate microsystems. The developmental niche includes three major
components: the physical and social setting, the customs of child care and child rearing,
and the psychology of the caregivers. The developing child is influenced by all
three components, or more precisely by their interaction. In their niche, children are
influenced by the various enculturation agents and institutions around them, ensur-
ing their enculturation. At the same time, children also bring their temperamental
disposition, motivations, and cognitions to the interaction.

MACROSYSTEM CHRONOSYSTEM
Patterning of environmental
events and transitions
over the life course;
sociohistorical
EXOSYSTEM conditions

friends
MESOSYSTEM of family

(sociohistorical conditions and time since life events)

Mass media

Neighbors

Family
School
MICROSYSTEM

TIME
Health Peers
services The Individual

Legal
services
Church Neighborhood
group play area

Social
welfare
services

Figure 3.2 Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory of Human Development

Source: Reprinted with permission from Santrock, J. W. (2007). Child Development (11th ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill
Companies, Inc.

Comprehension Check
1. How are humans different from all other animals in how they learn?
2. Define enculturation.
3. How does Bronfenbrenner describe the different contexts of
enculturation?

3-2 Culture, Parenting, and Families

The most important microsystem to a child’s development is the family, and parents
are one of the most important enculturation agents (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Collins
et al., 2000). Margaret Mead, the famous anthropologist, proposed that by observing
parents, we are observing the essence of a culture. By examining the way that parents
interact with their children, we can understand how cultural rules and values are
reinforced and passed on from generation to generation (Mead, 1975). As such, a
study of parenting within a cultural context gives us a good idea of what is important
to that culture.

Whiting and Whiting’s Six Cultures Study

Beatrice and John Whiting conducted one of the most in-depth and well-known studies
of parenting, children, and culture—the Six Cultures Study (Whiting & Whiting, 1975).
In this ambitious cross-cultural project, anthropologists collected field data in Mexico,
India, Kenya, the United States, Okinawa, and the Philippines. The major focus of the
project was to systematically examine child-rearing and children’s behavior in these
varied cultural contexts. Based on in-depth, naturalistic observations and interviews,
the researchers documented how the natural environment shaped how households
were structured, which in turn shaped how parents raised their children to fit into that
particular society. A child who grew up in a society of hunters and gatherers versus
a society of urban dwellers had very different experiences regarding whom the child
spent time with, what activities the child was exposed to, and what behaviors and
personality traits were valued, emphasized, and encouraged. Importantly, by observ-
ing parenting and child development across different cultures, the Whitings could
show how a child’s behavior and personality are, in fact, intimately connected to char-
acteristics of the broader ecology.
Another major finding of the Six Cultures Study was that women’s work roles
contributed to children’s social behaviors. In cultures where women contributed
greatly to the subsistence base of the family—such as in sub-Saharan Africa, where
women were the major food providers—the children learned to share in family
responsibilities and scored low on dependence (e.g., seeking comfort and support,
seeking help and information, seeking approval, praise, or attention). In contrast,
in cultures in which women were not expected to substantially contribute to the
subsistence base of the family—such as for high-caste families in Khalapur, India—the
children scored high on dependence (Whiting & Edwards, 1988). The Six Cultures Study
clearly demonstrated that variations in the natural and cultural environment were
linked to variations in child-rearing patterns, and this, in turn, was linked to children’s
behaviors and personalities.

Diversity in Parenting as a Function of Economics

The Six Cultures Study brought attention to how the broader ecological context is tied
to child-rearing and, ultimately, to children’s development. Another important context
to consider is the economic conditions under which child-rearing takes place. Parenting
and child-rearing often occur in very different economic conditions in different countries
and cultures, and within one culture, such as the United States. These diverse conditions
produce enculturation processes that vary widely from culture to culture.
If a society has a high rate of infant mortality, parenting efforts may concentrate
on meeting basic physical needs. Parents may have little choice but to disregard
other developmental demands. Sometimes the response to harsh and stressful con-
ditions is parenting behavior that we might consider positive. In the Sudan, for
example, the mother traditionally spends the first 40 days after delivery entirely
with her baby. She rests while her relatives tend to her, and she focuses all her
energy on her baby (Cederblad, 1988). In other cultures, the response to harsh and
stressful conditions is parenting behavior that some might consider negative. For
example, the anthropologist Scheper-Hughes (1992) described an impoverished
community in northeast Brazil where, if the infant is weak, mothers show little
responsiveness and affection, and sometimes even neglect to the point of death,
to the infant. Some of these mothers think of their infants as temporary “visitors”

to their home. Scheper-Hughes writes that in this community, “mother love grows
slowly, tentatively, fearfully.” These mothers are adapting to the harsh environment
in which they must raise their children.
LeVine (1977, 1997) has theorized that the caregiving environment reflects a set of
goals that are ordered in importance. First are physical health and survival. Next is the
promotion of behaviors that will lead to self-sufficiency. Last are behaviors that promote
other cultural values, such as prestige. Families with adequate resources are fortunate in
that they can turn their attention to meeting the second two goals. In other families with
fewer resources, the primary goal of survival is all-important and often overrides the
other goals in the amount of parental effort exerted.

Parenting Goals and Beliefs

If the basic goals of physical health and survival are taken care of, parents can focus on
other goals, such as instilling cultural values important to that culture. Parenting goals
provide the motivation and framework for what parents think is the best way to raise
their children.
An example of how parenting goals may lead to variation in parenting behaviors
across cultures is seen by contrasting middle-class mothers in Berlin, Germany, with
middle-class mothers in New Delhi, India (Keller et al., 2010). In Germany, an impor-
tant goal of parenting is to raise children who are autonomous. During infancy, parents
recognize and emphasize that their child is a separate person with unique thoughts,
wishes, desires, and needs. In India, an important goal of parenting is to raise children
who are autonomous, but also closely interdependent with other people, especially the
family. During infancy, parents emphasize physical contact, emotional closeness, and
indulgence. Keller et al.’s study found that these different parenting goals translated
into differences in how Berlin and Delhi mothers talked and played with their infants.
When the mothers were videotaped engaging in free play with their three-month-
olds, Berlin mothers emphasized autonomy by talking about the infant’s intentions,
thoughts, emotions, and needs. They were also more likely than Delhi mothers to focus
their infants’ attention to objects and engage in face-to-face interactions. In contrast,
Delhi mothers emphasized relatedness by talking to their infant about other people,
the social context, social regulations, and how the child was acting together with some-
one else (mostly the mother) more so than Berlin mothers. Thus, differences in cultural
values and goals concerning autonomy and relatedness were evident in mothers’ con-
versational and play styles with their infants.
Parents’ beliefs concerning their role as caregivers also influence their behaviors.
Many parents in the United States believe that they play a very active, goal-directed role
in the development of their children (Coll, 1990). Traditional parents in Turkey, however,
believe that their children “grow up” rather than are “brought up” (Kagitcibasi, 1996b).
This range of parenting beliefs is reflected in how parents interact with their children,
such as whether parents share cultural knowledge primarily through verbalization and
direct instruction or by expecting their child to learn primarily through observation and
imitation.
parental Research has emphasized the importance of examining such parental ethnotheories,
ethnotheories Parental or parental cultural belief systems (Harkness & Super, 2006). Harkness and Super argue
cultural belief systems.
that parental ethnotheories serve as a basis for guiding parenting practices that structure
children’s daily lives. They identify ethnotheories by conducting in-depth interviews with
parents and asking them to keep a daily diary of what they do with their children. One
study using these methods compared the ethnotheories of middle-class U.S. American and

Dutch parents (Harkness & Super, 2006). The researchers found that U.S. American parents
hold an ethnotheory about the importance of spending special time with their children,
whereas Dutch parents hold an ethnotheory of spending family time with their children.
U.S. American parents talked extensively about creating time alone with their child in an
activity (usually outside the home) that was focused primarily on attending to the needs of
that particular child. Dutch parents talked extensively about the importance of spending
time together as a family, such as sitting down for dinner every night. In contrast to the
U.S. American parents, they did not believe it was necessary to create a special time for
each individual child. By studying parental ethnotheories, we see how parents’ cultural
belief systems motivate and shape what parents think is the “right” way to parent their
children.

Global Parenting Styles

Parenting styles are another important dimension of caregiving. Baumrind (1971)
identified three general patterns of parenting based on two key dimensions: warmth/
responsiveness and control. Authoritarian parents expect unquestioned obedience authoritarian parents
and view the child as needing to be controlled. They have also been described as being A style of parenting in
which the parent expects
low on warmth and responsiveness toward their children. Permissive parents are unquestioned obedience and
warm and responsive to their children; however, they allow their children to regulate views the child as needing
their own lives and provide few firm guidelines (low control). Authoritative parents to be controlled.
are sensitive to the child’s maturity and are firm, fair, and reasonable. They exhibit permissive parents A
higher levels of control, providing clear guidelines for their children combined with a style of parenting in which
high degree of warmth and affection. parents allow children to
regulate their own lives and
Maccoby and Martin (1983) identified a fourth type of parenting style, called provide few firm guidelines.
uninvolved. Uninvolved parents are often too absorbed in their own lives to respond
authoritative parents
appropriately to their children and may seem indifferent to them. They do not seem A style of parenting that is
committed to caregiving, beyond the minimum effort required to meet the physical viewed as firm, fair, and
needs of their child. An extreme form of this type of parenting is neglect. Parenting reasonable. This style is
styles are important because they set the tone for the family context (refer to Figure 3.3) seen as promoting psycho-
logically healthy, competent,
Which of the four parenting styles is optimal for a child’s development? In general, independent children who
research on U.S. American and European children indicates that children benefit are cooperative and at ease
from the authoritative parenting style. Compared to children of other parenting in social situations.
styles, children of authoritative parents demonstrate better school performance, uninvolved parents A
more positive mood, self-reliance, self-confidence, higher emotional and social style of parenting in which
parents are often too
skills, and secure attachment to caregivers (Baumrind, 1971; Karavasilis, Doyle, &
absorbed in their own lives
Markiewicz, 2003; Kerr, Stattin, & Ozdemir, 2012). This style appears to promote to respond appropriately to
psychologically healthy, competent, independent children who are cooperative and their children and may seem
at ease in social situations. Children of authoritarian parents, in contrast, are found indifferent to them.
to be more anxious and withdrawn, lacking spontaneity and intellectual curiosity.
Children of permissive parents tend to be immature; they have difficulty controlling
their impulses and acting independently. Children of uninvolved parents fare the
worst, being noncompliant and demanding.
However, because Baumrind’s parenting styles were originally based on
observations of a European American sample, others have argued that the benefits
of authoritative parenting may depend on the particular ethnic or cultural group.
For example, a study comparing several thousand U.S. adolescents from four
ethnic groups (European American, African American, Asian American, and
Hispanic American) found that authoritative parenting predicted higher school
achievement for European American, African American, and Hispanic American

High
Control

Authoritarian Authoritative

Low High
Warmth/ Warmth/
Responsiveness Responsiveness

Disengaged Permissive

Low
Control

Figure 3.3 Four Parenting Styles Based on Two Dimensions:

Warmth/ Responsiveness and Control

adolescents, but not for Asian Americans (Steinberg et al., 1992). This finding led
the researchers to argue that authoritative parenting may not consistently predict
positive outcomes for all ethnic groups.
Findings have expanded to include studies in other countries using the classifications
of parenting derived from Baumrind’s original research. A study of almost 3,000 Arab
adolescents from eight Arab societies revealed that authoritative parenting was associ-
ated with greater family connectedness and better adolescent mental health (Dwairy
et al., 2006). Studies in China, Taiwan, and Hong Kong found that authoritative parenting
was related positively, and authoritarian parenting negatively, to children’s adjustment
within the school and family (Chen, 2014; Chen, Dong, & Zhou, 1997; Pong, Johnston, &
Chen, 2010). These findings are inconsistent with Steinberg, Dornbusch, & Brown’s (1992)
assertion that the positive effects of authoritative parenting may be less pronounced for
children of diverse cultural backgrounds. Evidence is accumulating that the authoritative
style is linked to positive development for children of many different backgrounds.
Parenting styles have generated so much interest that a meta-analysis identified
and summarized findings of 428 studies around the world (Pinquart & Kauser, 2018).
The researchers wanted to know if parenting styles were related to children’s outcomes
differently depending on the ethnic group, geographic region, or level of individualism
and collectivism. The range of outcomes included internalizing and externalizing prob-
lems and academic achievement. Their review showed that there were more similarities
than differences. Although there were some regional variations, in general, authoritative
parenting was related to more positive outcomes and authoritarian parenting was

related to more negative outcomes around the world. The final recommendation from
these researchers was that parents should engage in authoritative parenting.
Nonetheless, to address the critique that Baumrind’s parenting styles may not
adequately capture parenting in other cultures, researchers have focused on iden-
tifying parenting styles indigent to a culture. Using Baumrind’s classifications,
Chinese parents have been often described as authoritarian. However, for Chinese
parents, the significance and meaning of this parenting style may originate from a
set of cultural beliefs that may differ greatly from the European American cultural
belief system (Chao, 1994, 2001). Based on Confucian philosophy, Chinese parenting
may be distinguished by the concept of chiao shun, or “training,” in child-rearing.
Training emphasizes very close parental supervision in order to promote children’s
obedience, discipline, and adherence to family obligation. To a European American
parent, this type of parenting may look overcontrolling and authoritarian. To a
Chinese parent, this type of parenting is culturally appropriate, reflecting love and
concern for their children. Chao argued that this training aspect, which is not con-
sidered in Baumrind’s styles of parenting, may be more useful in understanding
Chinese-heritage children’s development.
Parenting and culture have been hot topics in popular media. The term tiger mom
was popularized to describe Asian parenting (Chua, 2011). According to Chua, tiger
mothers are highly demanding and drive their children to high levels of academic
success, while Western parents are much less demanding and more concerned about
their children’s social and emotional development, such as fostering high self-esteem.
This public discussion sparked scholars to examine this notion of tiger mothering
more closely. Some studies appear to support aspects of tiger mothering. For instance,
Fu and Markus (2014) found that Asian American high school students reported that
their mothers did indeed pressure them more than European American high-school
students. Importantly, however, while this pressure was related to lower perceived
support for European American students, for Asian American students this pressure
was a source of motivation that did not relate to more strained relationships with
mothers. Other scholars, however, have found that although tiger mothering (defined
by researchers as harsh, highly demanding, and emotionally unsupportive) exists
among Asian heritage families, it is not common. Tiger mothering is also linked to
poorer child outcomes, both academically and socioemotionally. And finally, there is
much more variation in Asian-heritage parenting beyond the stereotypical depictions
of being strict, controlling, and demanding. Adolescents of Asian-heritage parents also
report that their mothers are supportive, loving, openly communicative, and warm
(Juang, Qin, & Park, 2013; Kim et al., 2013; Way et al., 2013). Discussions, debates, and
studies of parenting across cultures will persist as researchers continue to search for
what style of parenting is optimal in raising healthy and competent children in their
particular cultural context.

Parenting Behaviors and Strategies

A considerable amount of cross-cultural research has examined variations in par-
enting behaviors and how these variations contribute to different aspects of child
development. One of the most interesting cultural differences in parenting behaviors
concerns sleeping arrangements. One of the single greatest concerns of U.S. parents
is getting their baby to sleep through the night, and to do so in a room separate from
that of the parents. Traditionally, U.S. parents shun co-sleeping arrangements, with
the underlying assumption that sleeping alone will help develop independence.

Prominent pediatricians and medical doctors have proposed that co-sleeping fosters
children’s unhealthy dependence on parents. They argued that, developmentally, it
is better for babies to sleep alone to promote independence and autonomy (Ferber,
1985). To date, however, there is no evidence that sleeping alone actually does so
(McKenna & McDade, 2005). Some sleep experts have revised their stance on co-
sleeping by no longer explicitly opposing it (e.g., Ferber, 2006). Still, many U.S.
parents do not co-sleep with their babies. To help babies learn to fall asleep alone,
“security objects,” such as a special blanket or toy, and bedtime rituals, are often used.
Many other cultures do not share this notion of promoting independence in
children by learning to sleep alone, and comfort objects or bedtime rituals are not
common in other cultures. In Japanese families, infants and young children sleep
next to their parents on mattresses, or on futons on the floor, or all together in the
adult bed (Fukumizu et al., 2005). In China, it is common for school-age children
to sleep in the same bed or room as their parents (Li et al., 2009). Mayan mothers
allow their children to sleep with them for several years because of a commitment to
forming a very close bond with their children. When a new baby comes along, older
children move to a bed in the same room or share a bed with another member of the
family (Morelli et al., 1992). Again, these practices foster behaviors and values that
are consistent with the developmental goals of the culture.
Differences in infant sleeping arrangements can also be seen within cultures. A
national U.S. survey conducted from 1993 to 2000 revealed an overall increase in parents
reporting their infant “usually” slept in bed with them, from 5.5% to 12.8%. But there was
great variation across ethnic groups: African American caregivers reported the highest
percentage of co-sleeping (27.9%), followed by Asian Americans (20.9%), and lastly,
European American caregivers (7.2%) (Willinger et al., 2003). It is important to note, too,
that differences in sleeping arrangements are also based on economic as well as cultural
reasons. In this national study, households making less than $20,000 a year were more
likely to report co-sleeping (Willinger et al., 2003). And in eastern Kentucky, families who
had large houses were more likely to have their children sleep in another room (Abbott,
1992). Nonetheless, even when economic status was controlled for in this study in
eastern Kentucky, locally born mothers were more likely to have their babies sleep with
them compared to mothers who were born in another state, suggesting that there were
indeed cultural (as well as economic) reasons that led to different sleeping arrangements.
Overall, the literature on sleeping arrangements across cultures illustrates how parental
behaviors may vary depending on each culture’s developmental goals.
As with parenting styles, the high interest in global co-sleeping patterns has
generated many research studies. A review of 659 papers that included scientific
studies, editorials, and commentaries on the topic of parent–child co-sleeping con-
cluded that there is not enough strong evidence to say definitively that co-sleeping
is good or bad for children’s development (Mileva-Seitz et al., 2017). What we do
know is that there is variation around the world in the percentage of families who
co-sleep, and cultural and socioeconomic factors play a role in the prevalence and
attitudes toward co-sleeping.
In addition to sleeping arrangements, cross-cultural research has also shown
differences in how parents structure the home environment for their children. One of
the most widely used measures of the home environment is the Home Observation
and Measurement of the Environment Inventory (HOME Inventory) (Bradley,
Caldwell, & Corwyn, 2003). To administer the HOME Inventory, a researcher visits
a family in their home for about one hour. During this hour, the researcher makes
observations of parent–child interactions and also asks the parents a number of
questions concerning how they interact with their child.

In a summary of cross-cultural studies that have used the HOME Inventory,

Bradley and Corwyn (2005) described three general areas in which cultures vary:
warmth and responsiveness, discipline, and stimulation/teaching. For instance,
warmth and responsiveness are conveyed differently across cultures. In the United
States, one way parents show responsiveness is through physical affection. The
Yoruba of Nigeria, however, show responsiveness not by physical affection primarily,
but through their tone of voice or praising their child. In many Western industrial-
ized societies, responsiveness is also measured by how often the parent engages
in spontaneous conversations with their child. In India, however, where children
are expected to respect their elders, it is considered disrespectful to speak without
permission. Thus, the type of home environment parents create will depend on the
broader cultural belief systems.
Cross-cultural research has not only demonstrated cultural differences in parenting
behaviors; it has documented cultural similarities as well. As children grow older, both
European American and Chinese American mothers place more emphasis on manners,
school-related skills, and emotional adjustment when their children are six to eight years
old than when they were three to five (Kelley & Tseng, 1992). In China, Mexico, India, and
the United States, when parents allowed their adolescents greater behavioral autonomy
(such as choosing their own clothes and friends), adolescents reported greater perceptions
of parental support and higher motivation to do well in school (Supple et al., 2009). Across
12 different nations or ethnic groups from Africa, Australia, Asia, the Balkans, Europe, the
Middle East, North America, and South America, there was one thing in common that
parents did that made their children feel loved: providing a valuable commodity (McNeely
& Barber, 2010). What varied by culture was what was considered a valuable commodity.
In some cultures, it was emotional support and time, for others it was moral guidance and
advice, and for others it was material resources.
In sum, research suggests both differences and similarities across cultures in
parenting and child-rearing. All of the studies have shown that parenting beliefs and
practices tend to be congruent with developmental goals dictated by culture; that
is, cultural differences in specific values, beliefs, attitudes, and behaviors necessary
for survival are associated with different developmental goals so that developing
members of a society can carry on culture-relevant work related to survival. It seems
that all people are similar in that their developmental processes are designed to
meet cultural goals; people differ, however, in the specific nature of those goals and
how to get there.

A Domain-Specific Approach to Parenting

One exciting development in the parenting literature is a proposal that outlines a
domain-specific approach to understanding parent enculturation. This approach
counters the global parenting style approach (Baumrind, 1971) reviewed earlier. One
major criticism of global parenting styles is that it ignores the fact that parents tend to
act and respond differently depending on the particular child, the situation, and the
context (Turiel, 1998). Thus, scholars have proposed a domain-specific approach that
focuses on parenting behaviors rather than general styles to better understand the
enculturation process (Grusec & Davidov, 2010).
The domain approach emphasizes the complexity of the enculturation process by dis-
tinguishing between distinct types or domains of parent–child enculturation. One domain
is protection. Especially in the first years of life, children depend on their parents to protect
them from harm. When children are distressed, an appropriate parenting behavior is
to respond sensitively and offer comfort. In doing so, children learn to develop a sense

of security and, eventually, learn how to regulate their own distress. Another domain is
control. In order to function in society, children must learn how to live by culturally
defined rules. This means that children must sometimes suppress their own personal
desires that violate these rules. An appropriate parenting behavior would be to modify
children’s misbehavior using suitable levels of control or discipline. In doing so, children
eventually internalize cultural rules and no longer rely entirely on their parents’ control.
So depending on the particular situation—whether the child is distressed or whether the
child is misbehaving—a different type of parenting behavior will be required. From this
perspective, appropriate parenting behaviors should correspond to the relevant domain
of enculturation. If, for instance, your child was pushed by another child and started
crying, but you misinterpreted your child’s crying as fussiness and responded with
discipline and control, your parenting response, according to Grusec and Davidov (2010),
would probably not be very effective.
In addition to protection and control, other domains are reciprocity (learning
how to cooperate), guided learning (learning specific skills), and group participation
(learning to participate in social groups and cultural practices). Grusec and Davidov
(2010, p. 692) emphasized that these five domains of enculturation are universal (e.g.,
in every culture, children need to be protected and disciplined), but that there are
cultural variations.
First, there can be variation in the degree to which a given domain of interaction
is frequently engaged in or emphasized in different cultures. For example, guided
learning is more widespread in cultures that rely heavily on formal schooling,
whereas other cultures may utilize group participation processes to a greater extent
(observational learning, intent community participation; Odden & Rochat, 2004;
Rogoff et al., 2007). Second, culture can influence the nature of successful rearing in
a given domain of interaction: Certain practices that are successful in one cultural
context may appear to be less so in another culture, probably because of different
meanings attached to those practices or different goals of enculturation emphasized
by each cultural group. High levels of rigid control, for example, seem to be more
detrimental in Western cultures than in Asian cultures because, in the former, they
tend to be associated with parental rejection and lack of warmth, whereas in the
latter, they reflect parental care and a desire to instill the important values of hard
work, self-discipline, and obedience (Chao, 2002).
Despite cultural differences in what parents do, how often they do them, and what
specific behaviors mean, the important thing for parents in all cultures is that parenting
practices must be appropriate for the domain in which the child is functioning. This
domain-specific approach is a useful framework that will help researchers pinpoint
what specific parenting practices promote what specific child outcomes in what specific
context or culture.

Siblings
The longest relationship that many of us will have is with our siblings. Siblings play
an important role in the enculturation of children (Dunn, 1988). However, research
on family enculturation has focused predominantly on parents and, for a long time,
neglected the role of siblings (McHale, Updegraff, & Whiteman, 2012). This is unfortu-
nate, as siblings are an integral part of the social contexts of children’s lives in almost
every culture. In five of the cultures of Whiting and Whiting’s Six Cultures Study
(1975), other caretakers (which included mostly siblings) were observed to be present
an equal or greater amount of time with the young child compared with the mother.

In only one culture, the United States, were siblings less likely to be present with the
young child than the mother.
The definition of who is considered a sibling may differ across cultures (Economic
and Social Research Council, 2005). In many cultures, siblings refer to family members
who are biologically related. In other cultures, siblings refer to people who are bio-
logically and nonbiologically related. Changing family structures in many countries
are also redefining who is a sibling. Because of the high rates of divorce, separation,
remarriage, and creation of stepfamilies in industrialized countries, children can now
have full siblings (sharing both biological parents), half siblings (sharing one parent),
and stepsiblings (sharing no biological parent).
Siblings can fulfill many roles; they can be tutors, buddies, playmates, or caretakers
(Parke, 2004). In many cultures, it is common practice for older siblings to act as caretakers
for younger siblings, and in some cultures, siblings are the primary caretakers of young
children (but not infants) (Weisner & Gallimore, 1977). An autobiographical account by
Lijembe (1967), a Western Kenyan, described his role as a caretaker for his younger sister:
Because there was no older sister in the family, and my mother had to go off to work in
the shamba [gardens] every day, it wasn’t long before I obliged, though still a very young
child myself, to become the day-to-day “nurse” for my baby sister. For my mother to
make me succeed in this function, she had to train me—to give me instructions and to see
how well I carried them out. . . . As her shamba work increased, so did my nursing duties
. . . before moving off to the shamba, she would give me instructions: Do not leave the
home unguarded, she would tell me. . . . (as quoted in Weisner & Gallimore, 1977, p. 171)

In his account, Lijembe tells of the many important caretaking duties he was
responsible for: he plays with his younger sister, bathes her, feeds her, and toilet trains
her. Clearly, studies of caretaking in different cultures would be incomplete if they
focused solely on the mother and father and ignored the role of siblings.
Another example of siblings as highly involved caregivers can be seen among the
Kwara’ae in the Solomon Islands. In this culture, the responsibilities involved in care-
giving are viewed as a training ground for siblings to become mutually dependent on
one another in adulthood. For example, one sibling may be designated to go to school,
while the others combine their resources to support that sibling. In turn, this sibling
will support the family financially once they have finished their schooling and found
a job (Watson-Gegeo, 1992). Thus, cultural values such as family interdependence are
transferred through siblings (Zukow-Goldring, 1995).
Through our interactions with our siblings we learn skills important to all cultures,
such as perspective-taking, social understanding, and conflict negotiation (Parke, 2004).
Our sibling relationships provide a context to learn prosocial and antisocial behaviors
such as empathy and aggression (McHale, Updegraff, & Whiteman, 2012; Ostrov, Crick,
& Staffacher, 2006). Importantly, what children learn with siblings (the good and bad)
can transfer into relationships with other children (Parke, 2004).
One study of adolescents in the United States examined how older siblings
influenced younger siblings’ perspectives on gender (McHale et al., 2001). These
researchers followed a group of sibling pairs over one year. They found that
younger siblings tended to model their older siblings in terms of their gender-role
attitudes, gendered personality traits, and gender-stereotyped leisure activities.
Gender-role attitudes referred to how traditional their attitudes toward women
were; gendered personality traits referred to stereotypical traits such as “kind” and
“active”; and gender-stereotyped activities referred to activities such as sports and
craftwork. Interestingly, the study showed that it was the older siblings’, and not

parents’, gendered attitudes, personality, and activities that were a better predictor
of younger siblings’ attitudes, personality, and activities.
Another study of Dutch adolescents examined how older siblings’ delinquent
behaviors related to younger siblings’ delinquent behaviors including getting into
trouble with the law and using alcohol and cigarettes (Buist, 2010). The study showed
that if older siblings engaged in delinquent behaviors, their younger siblings were also
more likely to do so, and especially if they were of the same sex (brother–brother or
sister–sister sibling pairs). The researcher followed the siblings over a two-year period
and could also show that changes in older siblings’ delinquency (e.g., engaging in
increasing rates of delinquency) were related to similar changes in younger siblings’
delinquency. Because most siblings live in the same household throughout childhood
and adolescence, there are many opportunities for observing, modeling, and imitating
one other. This repeated and prolonged exposure and interaction means that older
siblings can be influential role models— for both positive and negative behaviors—to
their younger siblings. Taken together, these findings speak to the important role that
siblings play in children’s lives in areas such as gender identity and delinquency. More
research is needed to explore the ways in which siblings contribute to other areas of
children’s development across cultures.

Extended and Multigenerational Families

Extended families include members other than parents and children, such as aunts,
uncles, cousins, or grandparents. Multigenerational families include grandparents
in addition to both parents and children or just children (e.g., a grandmother rais-
ing her grandchild). In many cultures, such as in India (Chaudhary, 2004), extended-
and multigenerational-family child-rearing is an integral and important part of the
enculturation process. The extended family is an important means of transmitting
cultural heritage from generation to generation. Extended-family members can also
provide a buffer to stresses of everyday living. In these cultures, it is not only parents,
but a whole network of relatives, who provide the major context of enculturation for
children.
In the United States, multigenerational households have been steadily increasing.
In 2016, 29% of African Americans, 27% of Asian and Pacific-Islanders, 26% of Latino/
as lived in multigenerational families, compared with 16% of European American
families (Pew Research Center, 2018). As such, ethnic minority families in the United
States are more likely to include a broader array of family members. Of course, not all
ethnic minority families are extended or multigenerational, and caregiving between
nuclear and extended families may differ. For instance, African American extended
families tend to emphasize cooperation and moral and religious values more than
African American nuclear families do (Tolson & Wilson, 1990).
Although extended and multigenerational families are important contexts of
enculturation for children in the United States and other cultures, one difference is
that living with extended and multigenerational families in the United States is often
seen as a consequence of lower economic security. Indeed, the steadily increasing
percentage of multigenerational households in the United States has been partly
attributed to the financial crisis in 2008 (Pew Research Center, 2018). Limited
resources are a reality, with one out of five children (20%) living in poverty (U.S.
Census Bureau, 2013). Compounding this picture is the reality that ethnicity also
confounds social class: 16% of White, 10% of Asian, 33% of Latino/a, and 38% of
Black children live in poverty (U.S. Census Bureau, 2013).

A significant number of these children are born to single mothers, and here the
extended and multigenerational family plays an important role in the child-rearing
process, especially in the case of teenage parents. The presence of the maternal
grandmother in these families is a protective factor for risks associated with teen
mothering (Garcia-Coll, 1990; Leadbeater & Way, 2001). The grandmother often
serves as a valuable source of information about child development. She also tends
to be more responsive and less punitive with the child than the teen mother is. The
grandmother in these three-generation households plays a very important role as
teacher and role model to her daughter and can provide favorable, positive social
interaction for her grandchild.
Extended and multigenerational families differ in their composition from one
culture to another but have in common a sharing of resources, emotional support,
and caregiving (Crozier & Davies, 2006). The experiences of a child growing up in
these situations can be quite different from those of a child in a nuclear family. Future
research needs to focus on family members other than parents and siblings to describe
enculturation more accurately and comprehensively in the family context.

Summary
In a child’s life, family is one of the most important and influential sources of
enculturation, especially in the early years. Families, however, come in many forms.
Much of the research across cultures thus far has focused primarily on how parents’
goals, beliefs, styles, and practices relate to their child’s development. Other family
members, such as siblings, cousins, aunts, uncles, grandparents, and in-laws, also play
an essential role in children’s lives. Moving forward, it will be important to consider
a more diverse family constellation than has been studied up until now. Moreover,
researchers will need to continue to study family constellations not in isolation, but
within the broader economic, social, and historical settings in which families and
children are embedded. Doing so will provide a better picture of how families contrib-
ute to a child’s development, in a certain place and time.

Comprehension Check
1. What are characteristics of the four parenting styles that have been
studied around the world?
2. What does a “domain-specific” approach to parenting refer to?
3. How do siblings contribute to children’s development?

3-3 Culture and Peers

Peers are another powerful source of enculturation. Humans, especially, are highly
attuned to learning from their peers. A fascinating study asked the question: Do
chimpanzees, orangutans, and 2-year-old human children differ in how influential
peers are to solving a problem (Haun, Rekers, & Tomasello, 2014)? To test this, the
researchers first gave all three groups a task to solve. The task was to drop a ball
into a set of boxes that had three different holes. Dropping the ball into only one of

the holes would release a highly desirable reward—peanuts for the great apes and
chocolate chips for the human children. Once the three groups figured out which
hole released the food by dropping the ball themselves, they then watched similar
peers (either other chimpanzees, orangutans, or human children) drop the ball into a
different hole that also released food. The three groups were then given the chance to
go back to the set of boxes and to drop balls in again. The results clearly showed that
only human children were likely to switch by dropping the ball into the hole their
peers did. The great apes stuck with their original solution. In other words, human
children were more likely to conform to their peers’ behavior compared to the great
postfigurative apes. Moreover, human children were even more likely to conform if the peer was
cultures A culture in present in the same room. For the great apes, the presence of a peer did not influence
which change is slow
and enculturation occurs
their behavior. Importantly, it is the ability of humans to so easily conform and desire
primarily by elders trans- to conform to peers that facilitates the learning of norms and behaviors of specific
ferring their knowledge to social and cultural groups.
their children. Elders hold By comparing human children with great apes, Tomasello and others have offered
the knowledge necessary for
becoming a successful and valuable insight to how humans are fine-tuned to respond to peers, more so than
competent adult. other species. Across cultures, however, the extent to which peers contribute to child
cofigurative culture development may differ. It may depend on how rapidly the culture is changing. Mead
A culture in which change (1978) described three types of cultures with differing levels of peer influence on the
occurs rapidly. Both adults enculturation of its young people. In postfigurative cultures, in which cultural change
and peers socialize young
is slow, enculturation occurs primarily by elders transferring their knowledge to their
people. Young people may
have to turn to one another children. In this case, elders hold the knowledge necessary for becoming a successful
for advice and information and competent adult. In cofigurative cultures, in which cultural change occurs more
in this type of culture. rapidly, adults continue to socialize their children, but peers play a greater role in
prefigurative socializing each other. Young people may have to turn to one another for advice and
cultures A culture that is information. In prefigurative cultures, the culture is changing so rapidly that young
changing so rapidly that
people may be the ones to teach adults. The knowledge that adults hold may not be
young people may be the
ones to teach adults cultural sufficient for the next generation, and adults may need to look to younger people for
knowledge. advice and information (refer to Figure 3.4).

Postfigurative Cofigurative Prefigurative

Cultures Cultures Cultures

• Cultural change is • Cultural change • Culture is changing

slow, socialization occurs more rapidly, so rapidly that
occurs primarily by adults continue to young people may
elders transferring socialize their be the ones to
their knowledge children, but peers teach adults. The
to their children. play a greater role knowledge that
Elders hold the in socializing each adults hold may
knowledge other. Young people not be sufficient
necessary for may have to turn to for the next
becoming a one another for generation, and
successful and advice and adults may need
competent adult. information. to look to younger
people for advice
and information.

Low Peer Influence High

Figure 3.4 Differing Levels of Peer Influence on Enculturation

Exposure to Peer Groups

Cultures vary in the exposure that children have to their peer groups. In industrial-
ized countries, children spend a significant amount of time with same-aged peers. For
instance, U.S. American teenagers spend much more time per week (18 hours) with
their peers outside of school compared with Japanese (12) and Taiwanese (8) teenagers
(Fuligni & Stevenson, 1995). The nature and strength of peers as socializing agents
in these industrialized cultures will differ from other cultures. For instance, children
growing up in solitary farm settlements will have limited options to interact with a
wide range of potential playmates. Or children growing up in a hunting and gathering
society may be socialized by multiple-age peers instead of the same-age groups that
are characteristic of countries with formal education, where age-stratified schooling
is the norm (Krappmann, 1996). Thus, depending on the culture, the extent to which
children interact with their peers may be quite significant.

Peers and Bullying

Bullying by peers is recognized internationally as a serious public health and safety
issue. Olweus, a researcher in Norway, conducted the first large-scale scientific study
of bullying in the 1980s. His research has led an antibullying movement in countries
around the world to acknowledge peer bullying as a serious problem in schools and
develop interventions to combat bullying.
Olweus (1993) outlined three criteria to define bullying: (1) intentional physical
or psychological harm, (2) that is based on a power imbalance between the bully and
victim, and (3) which is repeated over time. The imbalance of power can refer to differ-
ences in age, physical size, having or not having a disability, or being of majority versus
minority status. Based on this definition, bullying can include hitting, name-calling,
spreading rumors, and social exclusion.
Using Olweus’s definition, researchers have found that the rate of bullying varies
across cultures. In one cross-national comparison, 41% of elementary school children
from Italy, 27% from England, 20% from Portugal, 18% from Spain, 11% from Japan,
and 9% from Norway reported being bullied (Smith et al., 1999). Before concluding
that children in Italy are much more likely to become bullies than children in Japan
or Norway, however, we have to recognize that cross-national comparisons may be
problematic if cultures define bullying in different ways.
To address this problem, Smith has explored how the definition and expres-
sion of bullying may differ across cultures. He and his colleagues studied children
(8-year-olds) and adolescents (14-year-olds) in 14 countries—Austria, China,
England, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Japan, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia,
Spain, and Thailand (Smith et al., 2002). To identify what was considered bullying, 25
stick-figure pictures of different situations were shown to children and adolescents in
each country (see Figure 3.5). They then had to decide which actions were considered
bullying. Twenty-three pictures depicted various forms of aggressive or exclusionary
behavior that might be considered bullying (such as excluding a child from playing
a game), and two pictures illustrated prosocial behaviors (such as offering a pencil
to another child who forgot to bring one).
Across all countries, there were few gender differences in what was considered
bullying. In other words, all children defined bullying in very similar ways. Another
similarity across countries was a general age difference in what was considered
bullying: at age 8, children distinguished between aggressive and nonaggressive
behaviors, but at 14, adolescents distinguished between different kinds of aggression:

Figure 3.5 Examples of Stick-Figure Cartoons in Smith et al. (2002) Cross-National

Study of Bullying in 14 Countries
Source: Smith, P. K., Cowie, H., Olafsson, R. F., Liefooghe, A. P. D., Almeida, A. Araki, H., del Barrio, C.,
Costabile, A., Dekleva, B., Houndoumadi, A., Kim, K., Olaffson, R. P., Ortega, R., Pain, J., Pateraki, L., Schafer,
M., Singer, M., Smorti, A., Toda, Y., Tomasson, H., & Wenxin, Z. (2002). Definitions of bullying: A comparison of
terms used, and age and gender differences, in a fourteen-country international comparison. Child Development,
73(4), 1119–1133.

physical aggression, verbal aggression, and social exclusion. There were also some
cultural differences. In England, for instance, bullying was commonly seen as occur-
ring between two individuals, happening usually on the playground. In contrast,
in Japan, bullying was commonly seen as an entire class excluding an individual,
happening usually within the classroom. Other studies of Asian countries have also
found that social exclusion, rather than physical or verbal aggression, is the main form
of bullying. In Korea, for instance, a distinction is made between wang-ta, referring to
exclusion by classmates, and jun-ta, referring to exclusion by the entire school (Koo,
Kwak, & Smith, 2008). In contrast to countries such as England and the United States,
in Korea, girls are more likely to be bullies than boys, and physical aggression is a
relatively rare form of bullying (Koo et al., 2008).
Although some progress has been made in studying culturally specific ways of
cyberbullying Bullying bullying, future research will also need to focus on new ways of bullying. Cyberbullying
through electronic means, is defined as hurting someone through electronic means, for example, using the Internet,
for example, using the
Internet, social media, or
social media, or through text messaging. A review of studies on cyberbullying around the
sending text messages. world shows that it is viewed as an international public health concern (Nixon, 2014). As
with in-person bullying, children exposed to cyberbullying also show greater depressive
and somatic symptoms, anxiety, and loneliness. What is worrisome is that children who
are cyberbullied are less likely to tell someone about being bullied than children who are
bullied in person. Further, unlike traditional bullying, children report being more likely
to experience cyberbullying outside, not inside, of school. Thus, new technologies have
created new contexts for social interactions. Children now have greater opportunities to
interact more frequently with a larger, more diverse set of peers, and for a much longer

period of time throughout the day. Future research needs to keep up with rapidly
changing technologies to better understand how new mediums of social interaction are
changing the way we are socialized by our peers.

Summary
From a very young age, we learn from our peers. We want to be like them and do what
they do. Our readiness to learn from our peers means that enculturation is driven to a
large extent also by the peer group, and not just family. What is important to remem-
ber, however, is that peer influence is not always one way. We select which peers to
spend time with, and over time, we influence each other. We learn our culture from
peers, but they also learn from us.
Peers are a large part of one important setting—the education system. Because
children in many parts of the world spend most of their time in school more so than
any other context (Eccles & Roeser, 2011), what happens in the school has been the
subject of intense research focus. In the next section, we look at various aspects of the
educational system as a major agent of enculturation.

Comprehension Check
1. What do the terms postfigurative, cofigurative, and prefigurative refer to?
2. Negative peer interactions in the form of bullying have been studied
extensively across cultures. How is bullying defined, and what are
some cultural variations with regard to bullying?

3-4 Culture and the Educational System

The single most important formalized mechanism of instruction in many societies
and cultures today is the educational system. Many of us think of a country’s edu-
cational system solely as an institution that teaches thinking skills and knowledge.
But a society’s educational system is probably the most important institution that
teaches and reinforces its cultural values. In this last part of the chapter, we review
key enculturation agents within an educational context to show how education
and culture are tightly linked (refer to Figure 3.6).

Education
School System
Important Agents
Parental and Familial Values of Enculturation
Attitudes and Appraisals of Students That Teach and
Teaching Practices Reinforce Cultural Values
School Environment

Figure 3.6 An Example of Enculturation within the Context of Education

School Systems
Educational systems in which children take part play an important role in impart-
ing cultural values. First of all, the content of what is taught in the schools reflects
a priori choices by that culture or society regarding what it believes is important to
learn. Different cultures believe different topics to be important for later success in
that society. By teaching a certain type of content, the educational system reinforces a
particular view of cognition and intelligence.
Another important factor to consider is the environmental setting in which
education occurs. Many industrialized societies have a formal educational system,
with identifiable areas and structures (schools) and identifiable education agents
(teachers) to “do” education. In other cultures, formalized education may take
place in small groups led by elders of the community. In yet other cultures, formal-
ized education may be a family task (e.g., the mother tutoring her own children
in cognitive and other skills necessary for members of their community). Regard-
less of the environmental setting, the vehicle by which education occurs reinforces
certain types of cultural values in its recipients.
The organization, planning, and implementation of lesson plans are other
important cultural socializers. Some cultures encourage a didactic model of
teaching, in which an expert teacher gives information to students, who are
expected to listen and learn. Other cultures view teachers as leaders through a
lesson plan, providing the overall structure and framework by which students
discover principles and concepts. Some cultures view the imparting of praise as
an important process. Other cultures focus on mistakes made by students in the
learning process. Some cultures have special classes and mechanisms to deal with
many different types of students—for example, students with learning disorders,
physical disabilities, and special gifts or talents. Other cultures tend to downplay
such differences among their students, treating them all as equals.
Once in school, children spend the majority of their waking hours away from
their parents. The enculturation process that began in the primary relationship with
the parents continues with teachers and peers in the classroom and school. School
institutionalizes cultural values and attitudes and is a significant contributor not only
to the intellectual development of the child but, just as important, to the child’s social
and emotional development.
To highlight the role of the educational system as an enculturation agent, one
need only recognize that not all cultures of the world rely solely on an institution-
alized school setting to teach math. For example, important math skills are taught
to Micronesian islanders in the Puluwat culture through navigation, and to coastal
Ghanaians by marketing fish (Acioly & Schliemann, 1986; Gladwin & Gladwin,
1971; see also the discussion of everyday cognition in Chapter 4).
Regardless of the way education occurs, the choices a society and culture make
concerning its structure, organization, planning, and implementation all encourage and
reinforce a certain view of culture. We are not always cognizant of our own cultural view
because we are in the middle of it. To recognize our own biases and choices, we need to
observe education in other cultures and compare what is done elsewhere to what we do.
Through such comparisons, the differences and the similarities often become clear.

Parental and Familial Values

Cultural differences in parenting beliefs about education have an impact on children’s
educational experiences. For example, Japanese and Chinese parents are more likely

to consider all children as equal, with no differences between them. U.S. parents are
more likely to recognize differences and find reasons to treat their children as unique.
U.S. parents are also more likely to consider innate ability more important than effort;
for Japanese and Chinese parents, however, effort is far more important than ability
(Stevenson & Zusho, 2002; Sun et al., 2021). These cultural variations among the three
countries have enormous implications for education.
U.S. parents tend to be more easily satisfied at lower levels of competence than
either Japanese or Chinese parents. Also, when problems arise, U.S. Americans tend
to be more likely to attribute the cause of the problem to something they cannot do
anything about (such as ability). These cultural differences in attribution of causality
are directly related to cultural differences in self-construals, discussed in Chapter 5.
Believing that ability is more important than effort has yet another side to it—a
belief that children are limited in their abilities. In a series of intriguing studies,
Dweck (2008) has found that children who believe that ability, rather than effort,
determines intelligence tend to give up faster when faced with a difficult or chal-
lenging problem. They also prefer easier tasks to more difficult ones. Once this
belief that ability determines intelligence becomes a cultural institution, it dictates
how the educational system should respond. The resulting emphasis in the case of
the U.S. system is to seek unique, innate differences among the students, to gener-
ate separate special classes for these unique groups of students, and generally to
individualize the process of education. As a result, more time is spent on individu-
alized instruction and less on whole-group instruction.
Research has documented other interesting effects of parental and familial values
related to achievement and academic success. Chao’s (1996) cross-cultural study
examined maternal beliefs regarding school success between Chinese and European
American mothers of preschoolers. She found that Chinese mothers of preschoolers
placed a very high value on education; believed they needed to engage in much time,
effort, and sacrifice in order for their children to succeed; believed in the importance
of direct intervention approaches to their children’s schooling; and believed that
they play a major role in their children’s school success. European American moth-
ers of preschoolers in her study also valued education and emphasized reading in
the home as important to school success. However, European American mothers also
believed in a less directive approach in instruction, showed greater concern for build-
ing their children’s social skills and self-esteem, and were concerned about “burnout”
if they pushed their child to excel academically. American parents’ early emphasis on
self-esteem, coupled with satisfaction at lower levels of academic performance
(Stevenson & Zusho, 2002), may partly explain why U.S. adolescents report far higher
beliefs in their mathematical competencies than Hong Kong Chinese adolescents,
and yet consistently score lower on math achievement (Liu, 2009). Taken together,
these findings suggest the importance of parental cultural values in understanding
academic success.

Attitudes and Appraisals of Students

A number of studies have examined cultural differences between Asian or Asian
American children and European Americans. Pang (1991), for example, studied the
relationships among test anxiety, self-concept, and student perceptions of parental
support in Asian American and European American middle-school students. This
study found that Asian American students tended to show a stronger desire to please
parents, reported greater parental pressure, but also higher levels of parental sup-
port, than did the European American students. Yan and Gaier (1994) looked at causal

attributions for college success and failure in Asian and U.S. college undergraduate
and graduate students; they found that U.S. students attributed academic achieve-
ment more often to ability than did Asian international students. U.S. students also
believed that effort was more important for success than lack of effort was for failure,
whereas Asian international students considered effort equally important for success
or failure. These results are consonant with similar tendencies in parental attitudes
described earlier, and with attributional biases discussed in Chapter 14.
Cross-national differences have been found in other samples as well. Studies
comparing U.S., German, Russian, and Japanese children’s beliefs about school per-
formance showed that U.S. children had the highest levels of personal agency and
control expectancy, but the lowest belief-performance correlations (Little et al., 1995;
Little et al., 2003). That is, U.S. children believed they had the most control over their
academic outcomes, but this degree of perceived control was unrelated to their actual
performance.
Together, these findings suggest that students around the world approach their
academic work with different worldviews, attitudes, and attributional styles; that
these differences are related to parental variations found in other research; that they
relate to how children do in school; and that the entire process is intimately related to
culture.

Teaching Practices and School Environment

Researchers have found that what happens in the classroom can vary greatly
across cultures. Japanese and Chinese school children spend more days per year
in school, more hours per day in school, a greater proportion of time in school
devoted to purely academic subjects, and a greater proportion of time devoted
to math (Takahashi & Takeuchi, 2006). In addition, Japanese and Chinese teach-
ers spend a greater proportion of time working with the whole class than do U.S.
teachers. As a result, U.S. students spend less time working under the supervision
and guidance of a teacher.
During class, U.S. teachers tend to use praise to reward correct responses. Teachers
in Japan, however, tend to focus on incorrect answers, using them as examples to lead
into discussion of the computational process and math concepts. Teachers in Taiwan
tend to use a process more congruent with the Japanese approach. These teaching
differences speak to the cultural emphasis in the United States on rewarding unique-
ness and individualism and the emphasis in Japan and China on finding ways to
engage in group process and sharing responsibility for mistakes with members of the
group. Praise, while nice, often precludes such discussion.
Finally, cross-cultural differences in the school environment have also been found.
In Japan, principals of eighth-graders reported far fewer behaviors threatening a
safe and orderly learning environment (e.g., intimidation or verbal abuse occurring
between students and classroom disturbances) than in the United States (National
Center for Education Statistics, 2009; Trends in the International Mathematics and
Science Study, 2007: OECD, 2019) (refer to Figure 3.7).
Interestingly, although Japanese principals reported far fewer disturbances, they
were much more likely than U.S. principals to see these disturbances as serious problems
(refer to Figure 3.8). Taken together, these studies highlight important differences in the
classroom in terms of how teaching style, expectations, and actual behaviors contribute
to children’s academic achievement.

Intimidation/verbal abuse of teachers/staff Japan

United States
Intimidation/verbal abuse of other students
Physical injury to other students
Theft
Vandalism
Cheating
Classroom disturbance

0 20 40 60 80 100
Percent

Figure 3.7 Percentage of Eighth-Grade Students Whose Principals Reported That

Behavior Threatening a Safe and Orderly Environment Occurs at Least Weekly
Source: Trends in the International Mathematics and Science Study, (2007); National Center for Education
Statistics, (2009).

Intimidation/verbal abuse of teachers/staff Japan

Intimidation/verbal abuse of other students United States

Physical injury to other students

Theft
Vandalism
Cheating
Classroom disturbance

0 20 40 60 80 100
Percent

Figure 3.8 Percentage of Eighth-Grade Students Whose Principals Reported That

Behavior Threatening a Safe and Orderly Environment Is a Serious Problem
Source: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA) & Trends in Mathematics
and Science Study (TIMSS), (2007).

Summary
Research highlights the role of the educational system as an important enculturation
agent. Parents’ and children’s attitudes, educational practices and curricula, teacher
behaviors, and all other associated factors are important transmitters of culture. They
impart important cultural knowledge to the students, and thus play a major role in
the enculturation of children in many societies of the world. Differences in these insti-
tutions not only reflect but reinforce cultural differences in values, beliefs, attitudes,

norms, and behaviors and help transmit this important cultural information from one
generation to the next.

Comprehension Check
1. Name three cultural variations in how educational contexts are
organized.
2. Describe at least two cultural variations in terms of how parent and
familial values are related to academic success.
3. Describe at least two cultural variations in terms of the classroom
environment.

Conclusion
The information presented so far speaks to just a few of the many ways in which encul-
turation occurs around the world. Variations in parenting styles and child-rearing
provide learning platforms for children that allow them to achieve developmental goals
fostered by their particular cultures. Each culture’s way of raising children—through
parenting behaviors, sleeping arrangements, educational systems, and other concrete
mechanisms—represents that culture’s way of ensuring that its values and norms
are transmitted to those children. In all cultures, these practices are ritualized so that
this transmission of information can occur generation after generation. Learning
cultural values is as much a part of the process of enculturation as it is an outcome of
enculturation.
Early cross-cultural work in development (e.g., Caudill & Weinstein, 1969)
focused primarily on the role of culture in “driving” parenting behaviors that
resulted in changes in the infant and young child. This model suggests that culture
unidirectionally provides the structure and environment for parents to affect their
children in culturally appropriate ways: culture → parent → infant. Others (e.g.,
Shand & Kosawa, 1985) have focused on biology, proposing a developmental model
that starts with the effects of genes, biology, and heredity on infant temperament,
which then affects a parent’s behaviors, which in turn produce cultural differences:
genes → infant → parent → culture.
Contemporary theories of child development incorporate elements of both, rec-
ognizing that communities, caregivers, and children are dynamic, interactive partners
—all contributing to how children develop (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Lerner, 2006; Super
& Harkness, 2002). This view suggests that children’s active processing of information
results in the reproduction of culture and the production of new elements of culture.
The interaction of language between parent and child provides the platform on which
divergent points of view construct new realities. These theories also attempt to dis-
cover cultural meanings held in common between parents and children, rather than
assuming a common understanding “imposed” by an outside culture.

Future research on the enculturation process will hopefully bridge the gaps among
all of these various components, assessing the interplay among children’s character-
istics (such as temperament, refer to Chapter 4), parenting styles, institutions, and
psychological culture in their environment. Although we have focused primarily on
children in this chapter, it is important to remember that enculturation occurs through-
out our entire lives. On an individual level, we are continually learning and being
socialized into new roles and contexts as we grow older. On a cultural level, cultures
are also changing, creating new contexts for enculturation. We must continually adapt
to ongoing technological innovations and social changes in norms, attitudes, and
behaviors in each culture. Enculturation, therefore, is a lifelong process. Ideally, future
research will include longitudinal studies that will enable researchers to examine
the interactions among various components of the enculturation process, in the same
individuals, in different contexts, across time.

Key Terms
authoritarian parent parental ethnotheories enculturation (and socialization)
authoritative parent permissive parents agents
cofigurative culture postfigurative culture uninvolved parents
cyberbullying prefigurative culture
enculturation socialization

Exploration and Discovery

Why Does This Matter to Me?

1. What are some life values that are important to upbringing influenced the way they have
you (e.g., treat others with respect, work hard to parented you?
succeed in life)? How did you come to hold those 3. You are now studying in a college/university.
values? Who did you learn them from? Think about different experiences in your life that
2. For those of you who grew up in a different coun- made this possible. Why did you decide to con-
try than your parents/caregivers, in what ways tinue onto higher education? What role did your
do you differ from them in terms of life values, parents, peers, and teachers play in your decision
behaviors, and/or worldviews? In what ways to continue on to higher education?
are you similar to them? How has their cultural

Suggestions for Further Exploration

1. Interview your parents/caregivers and ask them might find that it is difficult to describe how
what lessons in life they thought were important enculturation occurs because we are all so deeply
to teach you. Ask them what they did to pass immersed in the process.
on these lessons to you. Afterward, reflect on 2. Find someone from a different culture and ask
whether it easy or difficult for them to describe about the sleeping arrangements for babies in
how they taught you these life lessons. You

their culture. Are the sleeping arrangements study is Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems
similar or different from what is practiced in your perspective. According to this perspective,
culture? If they are different, what are the reasons you must consider children’s development on
behind this difference? several levels—the microsystem, mesosystem,
3. Imagine you are an education researcher exosystem, macrosystem, and chronosystem.
interested in understanding why some Within each of these five systems, what are key
children do better in school than others. The factors you would focus on to find out why
theoretical framework you adopt for your some children do better in school than others?

Understanding Culture's Dynamics and Aspects
No ratings yet
Understanding Culture's Dynamics and Aspects
12 pages
Unit Three
No ratings yet
Unit Three
14 pages
Understanding Cultural Learning and Symbols
No ratings yet
Understanding Cultural Learning and Symbols
7 pages
Cultural Psychology and Values
No ratings yet
Cultural Psychology and Values
14 pages
Understanding Cultural Dynamics and Elements
No ratings yet
Understanding Cultural Dynamics and Elements
13 pages
Understanding Cultural Dynamism
No ratings yet
Understanding Cultural Dynamism
13 pages
Understanding Culture Through Socialization
No ratings yet
Understanding Culture Through Socialization
18 pages
Cultural Differences in Development
No ratings yet
Cultural Differences in Development
9 pages
Culture's Impact on Psychology Explained
No ratings yet
Culture's Impact on Psychology Explained
42 pages
Understanding Enculturation in Development
No ratings yet
Understanding Enculturation in Development
34 pages
Shared Intentionality in Cultural Learning
No ratings yet
Shared Intentionality in Cultural Learning
7 pages
Understanding Enculturation and Socialization
No ratings yet
Understanding Enculturation and Socialization
22 pages
CrossPsy Unit2 ExamNotes-2
No ratings yet
CrossPsy Unit2 ExamNotes-2
7 pages
Student Copy Module 5
No ratings yet
Student Copy Module 5
7 pages
Understanding Socialization and Enculturation
No ratings yet
Understanding Socialization and Enculturation
21 pages
Light Green Black Abstract Shape Group Project Presentation 20260112 230248 0000
No ratings yet
Light Green Black Abstract Shape Group Project Presentation 20260112 230248 0000
35 pages
Understanding Hadiba in Culture
100% (1)
Understanding Hadiba in Culture
30 pages
Understanding Socialization and Enculturation
No ratings yet
Understanding Socialization and Enculturation
21 pages
Culture's Impact on Psychology and Behavior
No ratings yet
Culture's Impact on Psychology and Behavior
16 pages
Understanding Culture: Key Aspects Explained
No ratings yet
Understanding Culture: Key Aspects Explained
38 pages
Understanding Cultural Learning and Symbols
No ratings yet
Understanding Cultural Learning and Symbols
5 pages
Understanding Socialization and Enculturation
No ratings yet
Understanding Socialization and Enculturation
22 pages
CCP-Unit 2
No ratings yet
CCP-Unit 2
9 pages
Understanding Enculturation and Endoculturation
No ratings yet
Understanding Enculturation and Endoculturation
7 pages
Understanding Culture and Psychology
No ratings yet
Understanding Culture and Psychology
13 pages
Socialization: Key Processes and Types
No ratings yet
Socialization: Key Processes and Types
21 pages
Cultural Variations in Socialization
No ratings yet
Cultural Variations in Socialization
8 pages
Understanding Socialization and Enculturation
No ratings yet
Understanding Socialization and Enculturation
33 pages
Understanding Culture: Definitions & Dynamics
100% (1)
Understanding Culture: Definitions & Dynamics
5 pages
Cross Culture Exam Notes
No ratings yet
Cross Culture Exam Notes
39 pages
Understanding Culture and Society in Sociology
No ratings yet
Understanding Culture and Society in Sociology
7 pages
Understanding Socialization and Enculturation
No ratings yet
Understanding Socialization and Enculturation
24 pages
Understanding Cultural Identity Learning
No ratings yet
Understanding Cultural Identity Learning
14 pages
Prelims Reviewer
No ratings yet
Prelims Reviewer
9 pages
Culture Intro Notes
No ratings yet
Culture Intro Notes
24 pages
Understanding Socialization and Culture
No ratings yet
Understanding Socialization and Culture
19 pages
Extract Book Child and Adolescent Dev in Cultural Context, Lansford Et Al. (2021)
100% (1)
Extract Book Child and Adolescent Dev in Cultural Context, Lansford Et Al. (2021)
213 pages
Understanding Enculturation and Socialization
No ratings yet
Understanding Enculturation and Socialization
22 pages
Ilovepdf Merged
No ratings yet
Ilovepdf Merged
20 pages
Understanding Cultural Properties
No ratings yet
Understanding Cultural Properties
17 pages
Understanding Culture and Society Dynamics
No ratings yet
Understanding Culture and Society Dynamics
7 pages
Culture's Role in Moral Development
No ratings yet
Culture's Role in Moral Development
6 pages
LESSON5
No ratings yet
LESSON5
21 pages
Understanding the Concept of Culture
No ratings yet
Understanding the Concept of Culture
19 pages
Aspects of Culture: Learning and Adaptation
No ratings yet
Aspects of Culture: Learning and Adaptation
9 pages
Understanding Culture and Socialization
No ratings yet
Understanding Culture and Socialization
10 pages
Key Aspects of Culture and Society
No ratings yet
Key Aspects of Culture and Society
2 pages
Enculturation: Meaning and Examples
No ratings yet
Enculturation: Meaning and Examples
3 pages
Dynamics of Culture and Socialization
33% (3)
Dynamics of Culture and Socialization
17 pages
Understanding Socialization and Identity
No ratings yet
Understanding Socialization and Identity
44 pages
Enculturation in Child Development
No ratings yet
Enculturation in Child Development
5 pages
Understanding the Nature of Culture
No ratings yet
Understanding the Nature of Culture
2 pages
Understanding Enculturation Dynamics
No ratings yet
Understanding Enculturation Dynamics
29 pages
Cultural Psychology: Socialization Insights
No ratings yet
Cultural Psychology: Socialization Insights
60 pages
Understanding Culture: Key Concepts
No ratings yet
Understanding Culture: Key Concepts
6 pages
Culture Transmission: Socialization Explained
No ratings yet
Culture Transmission: Socialization Explained
14 pages
Primary Agents of Socialization Explained
No ratings yet
Primary Agents of Socialization Explained
6 pages
Health System Management Overview
No ratings yet
Health System Management Overview
11 pages
How Apollo Moon Photos Were Faked
No ratings yet
How Apollo Moon Photos Were Faked
6 pages
Vedic Astrology: The Nakshatras Explained
No ratings yet
Vedic Astrology: The Nakshatras Explained
18 pages
Overview of Medical Microbiology
No ratings yet
Overview of Medical Microbiology
12 pages
TASK1
No ratings yet
TASK1
1 page
Handbook of Clinical Neurophysiology 1st Edition Christian Guilleminault (Eds.) Complete Ebook Version
100% (2)
Handbook of Clinical Neurophysiology 1st Edition Christian Guilleminault (Eds.) Complete Ebook Version
47 pages
WASH Programme Officer Application Call
No ratings yet
WASH Programme Officer Application Call
5 pages
Sequent Plug&Drive GLP Installation Guide
No ratings yet
Sequent Plug&Drive GLP Installation Guide
9 pages
TSCA Certification for Chemical Shipment
No ratings yet
TSCA Certification for Chemical Shipment
1 page
Bridge Bearing Types and Regulations
No ratings yet
Bridge Bearing Types and Regulations
60 pages
Pollution, Trade, and Environmental Impact
No ratings yet
Pollution, Trade, and Environmental Impact
25 pages
Tata Innovation Fellowship 2024-25 Call
No ratings yet
Tata Innovation Fellowship 2024-25 Call
1 page
Robot Construction Lesson Plan
No ratings yet
Robot Construction Lesson Plan
4 pages
Hydrogen Lead Markets Framework Study
No ratings yet
Hydrogen Lead Markets Framework Study
91 pages
Production Header Line Sizing Guide
No ratings yet
Production Header Line Sizing Guide
12 pages
Impact of Hearing Impairment on Learning
No ratings yet
Impact of Hearing Impairment on Learning
7 pages
Nigeria GFSI Global Markets Program Overview
No ratings yet
Nigeria GFSI Global Markets Program Overview
1 page
Hoek-Brown Model for Rock Mechanics
No ratings yet
Hoek-Brown Model for Rock Mechanics
53 pages
50% A446 Composite Dispersion SDS
No ratings yet
50% A446 Composite Dispersion SDS
7 pages
Overkill Instant Access 2025
No ratings yet
Overkill Instant Access 2025
93 pages
FL Bill Validator User's Guide
No ratings yet
FL Bill Validator User's Guide
6 pages
APSACS Class IV-VII Exam Dates 2023
No ratings yet
APSACS Class IV-VII Exam Dates 2023
2 pages
Environmental Ethics: Key Theories Explained
No ratings yet
Environmental Ethics: Key Theories Explained
7 pages
Acoustics and Lighting in Architecture
100% (1)
Acoustics and Lighting in Architecture
32 pages
Discrete Mathematics: Technical
100% (3)
Discrete Mathematics: Technical
518 pages
Intro to Differential Equations
No ratings yet
Intro to Differential Equations
22 pages
Compressed Air Dryer Operating Guide
No ratings yet
Compressed Air Dryer Operating Guide
21 pages
1989-Mark W. Spong - M. Vidyasagar - Robot - Dynamics and Control-Important
No ratings yet
1989-Mark W. Spong - M. Vidyasagar - Robot - Dynamics and Control-Important
347 pages
Determinants and Matrix Properties
No ratings yet
Determinants and Matrix Properties
3 pages
Formatting Maps and Treemaps in Power BI
No ratings yet
Formatting Maps and Treemaps in Power BI
23 pages

Chapter 3 Culture

Uploaded by

Chapter 3 Culture

Uploaded by

Enculturation

3-1 Humans Engage in Cultural Learning

Unique Human Abilities

Enculturation and Socialization

• The process by which

• The people, institutions,

Figure 3.1 We Learn Culture through Socialization and Enculturation

Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory

(sociohistorical conditions and time since life events)

Figure 3.2 Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems Theory of Human Development

3-2 Culture, Parenting, and Families

Whiting and Whiting’s Six Cultures Study

Diversity in Parenting as a Function of Economics

Parenting Goals and Beliefs

Global Parenting Styles

Figure 3.3 Four Parenting Styles Based on Two Dimensions:

Parenting Behaviors and Strategies

In a summary of cross-cultural studies that have used the HOME Inventory,

A Domain-Specific Approach to Parenting

Extended and Multigenerational Families

3-3 Culture and Peers

Postfigurative Cofigurative Prefigurative

• Cultural change is • Cultural change • Culture is changing

Low Peer Influence High

Figure 3.4 Differing Levels of Peer Influence on Enculturation

Exposure to Peer Groups

Peers and Bullying

Figure 3.5 Examples of Stick-Figure Cartoons in Smith et al. (2002) Cross-National

3-4 Culture and the Educational System

Figure 3.6 An Example of Enculturation within the Context of Education

Parental and Familial Values

Attitudes and Appraisals of Students

Teaching Practices and School Environment

Intimidation/verbal abuse of teachers/staff Japan

Figure 3.7 Percentage of Eighth-Grade Students Whose Principals Reported That

Intimidation/verbal abuse of teachers/staff Japan

Physical injury to other students

Figure 3.8 Percentage of Eighth-Grade Students Whose Principals Reported That

Exploration and Discovery

Why Does This Matter to Me?

Suggestions for Further Exploration

You might also like