The world is getting smaller and with this shrinkage comes great benefits and great problems. Culture defines the behavior of people and also separates groups across the globe. This separation has been the source of conflict throughout the history of humankind and seems to be a never ending struggle. A consideration of psychology has always been behavior within groups and the source of that behavior in relation to values, beliefs, ethnicity and gender. This is the essence of cultural psychology. In recent time this branch of psychology has developed the new arm of Cross-Cultural Psychology an extension of psychology covering the influence on behavior when cultural groups interact. This essay will address three specific areas: the relationship between cultural and Cross-Cultural Psychology, the role of Cross-Cultural Psychology, and the methodology in use in Cross-Cultural Psychology.
The Relationship Between Cultural and Cross-Cultural Psychology
According to Shiraev and Levy (2007) Cross-Cultural Psychology is “the critical and comparative study of cultural effects on human psychology.” (p. 3) In this definition the word comparative shows clearly the relationship of Cultural and Cross-Cultural Psychology. Any research done in Cross-Cultural Psychology is a comparison of two or more cultural groups. The comparison then must start with facts about each cultural group. Therefore, the roots of any research between cross-cultural group are taken from information gained in cultural studies.
Comparisons require critique and this is especially true in Cross-Cultural Psychology as this statement explains, “Because Cross-Cultural Psychology is all about comparisons, and the act of comparison requires a particular set of critical skills, this study is inseparable from critical thinking.” (Shiraev & Levy 2007, p. 3)
In cultural studies critical thinking applies in examining the links between behavior and culture. (Seagall et al. 1990 as cited by Shiraev & Levy 2007) Cross-Cultural Psychology takes this critical thinking about cultural behavior one step further to examine how social and cultural differences influence behavior. (Seagall et al. 1990 as cited by Shiraev & Levy 2007) For example, a comparison of positive emotional display is summed up in this quote, “Chinese
displayed the lowest frequency and intensity for all positive emotions including happiness (joy) compared to Australia and United States.” (Eid and Diener, 2001, p. 2 as cited by Shiraev & Levy 2007) Producing such a definitive statement requires a careful scientific comparison of the three cultural groups involved.
The Role of Cross-Cultural Psychology
Is Cross-Cultural research important? Walter Lonner (2000) of the center for cross-cultural research of Western Washington University sums this in one question, “How could anyone in psychology in the year 2000 not recognize the importance of culture to nearly every aspect of psychological theory, research, and applications?” (¶ 1)
Lonner (2000) explains that Cross-Cultural Psychology is not really a whole new area of psychology but that this branch is more an approach of methodology on the same level as clinical, physiological and experimental methods. An important point brought out by Lonner (2000) is that Cross-Cultural Psychology plays a role as a gauge of reliability by testing psychology theories on other cultures to see how far generalizations can go. One role of psychology is to find the base similarities in humans. Cross-Cultural Psychology plays this role in a broader arena to find similarities in cultural groups that transcend the differences. This has an obvious function to lower incident of conflict between groups by playing down differences and emphasizing similarities.
Similarities in cross-cultural studies may have a positive benefit of bridging gaps but this does not mean the differences have no positive application. In one study of Chinese and American children the findings show (in education settings) strong performing Chinese students are more likely to help weaker students than their American counterparts. (Heyman, Fu & Lee, 2008) If this trait is determined to be beneficial for American children the reasons for the behavior are important in improving educational development in children within the United States. The results of comparison studies then become important for improving life by adopting beneficial influences of behavior across different cultural groups.
The Methodologies in Cross-Cultural Psychology
Quantitative Research
Shiraev and Levy (2007) explain that comparisons between cultural groups require systems of measurement to study the variables through an empirical approach. Quantitative research performs this function with measures of central tendency being the most common form of data. The central tendency data shows the position of the most concentration of scores on the variable. The score of the most frequency is known as the mode. Comparing two groups on a test might show one group with a dominant score of 20 in one group and 15 in another. These two scores 20 and 15 would be the modes of the groups. Since mode comparison is not very accurate a second type of measurement known as the median is used in determining central tendency. The median being the fifty percentile, this again may not be accurate enough in some tests so the mean is also used, which is the central point in mathematics of a group of scores. Correlation coefficients are used to find relationships and what is different between groups.
Qualitative Approach
Dealing with abstract studies like dreams, pictures or songs may require the use of qualitative measurement or a combination of both qualitative and quantitative methods of measurement. (Shiraev & Levy, 2007) What is qualitative research? Shiraev and Levy (2007) explain through referencing Marsella (1998),
Psychologists try to detect and describe some illicit or unspoken aspects of culture, hidden rules, innuendo-the so-called contexts that are often difficult to measure by standard quantitative procedures. (p. 34)
When the results of the study become too subjective the researchers may combine both quantitative and qualitative methods to increase reliability. Using the different forms of measurement help to determine the truth when results may be inaccurate because of an extraneous influence.
Content-Analysis
Shiraev and Levy (2007) explain that content analysis is a summary and organization of what is discussed or in the writing from a research study and also the examination of all data to determine the true meaning. Transcripts of communication are analyzed (radio, TV, news, interviews and any others) Content-Analysis is often used when questionnaires are difficult because of sensitive legal grounds like obtaining information from illegal immigrants.
Focus-Group Methodology
Focus-Group Methodology is often of use in research in academic fields and marketing. (Shiraev & Levy, 2007) In marketing, Focus-Group Methodology is of use to determine how well a certain product will fare among different ethnic groups. (Shiraev & Levy, 2007) However, these studies are not done from random subject groups and so are problematic for psychologists. (Shiraev & Levy, 2007) The lack of tests on a variety of groups give only specific results that are not as useful as samples that are randomly chosen. (Shiraev & Levy, 2007)
Meta-Analysis
Meta-Analysis is described as research of research since large groups of data are analyzed to glean meaning that is useful. (Shiraev & Levy, 2007) Meta-Analysis has the distinct advantage of getting to the bottom of large amounts of diverse data that otherwise would be very difficult to make any kind of generalization. (Shiraev & Levy, 2007) One advantage to Meta-Analysis is the use of statistical formulas. Another advantage is studies are included regardless to how attractive or unattractive they may appear. (Shiraev & Levy, 2007) However, because Meta-Analysis covers such broad areas dissimilar groups may be lumped together resulting in less accuracy than might be achieved with separate measuring techniques. (Shiraev & Levy, 2007) In addition, researchers may have different definitions of variables producing results that are not reliable. (Shiraev & Levy, 2007)
Conclusion
Cross-Cultural Psychology has grown to cover more and more areas in the study of culture but to some this may not be enough. Lonner (2000) explains that if psychology is to raise to the same level as other sciences like chemistry or physics psychology must extend research to every corner of the planet. Extending research to every area of earth is logical since the research of Cross-Cultural Psychology helps eliminate or at the least fine tune theories consisting of over-generalizations. Further research needs to be moved outward for the simple fact that most investigation has occurred in the western world especially in America. This fact is well documented in Jeffrey J. Arnett’s article The Neglected 95% : Why American Psychology Needs to Become Less American. Arnett (2008) wrote that most research is done on Americans who make-up only 5% of the people in the world. Arnett (2008) further implies that the findings of the research are generalized to include all the earth’s population even though populations are extremely diverse and not included in the results. Since others agree with Arnett little doubt remains of the importance of Cross-Cultural Psychology. However, the level of importance may prove to be greater than all can imagine. Global warming, nuclear disaster and bio-hazards lend credit to the fact that getting to know each other is the number one priority.
References
Arnett, Jeffrey J., (2008). The neglected 95%: Why American psychology needs to become less American. American Psychologist, Vol 63(7), Oct 2008. pp. 602-614, University of Phoenix online library, EBSCOhost
Dwantes C.T., Kakai H., Matsumoto D., Saba S., Shigemasu E., Wolfgang F., Yoo S.H., (2009). Variations of emotional display rules within and across cultures: A comparison between Canada, USA, and Japan. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science/Revue canadienne des sciences du comportement, Vol 41(1), Jan 2009. pp. 1-10, University of Phoenix online library, EBSCOhost
Heyman G. D., Fu G., Lee K., (2008). Reasoning about the disclosure of success and failure to friends among children in the United States and China. Developmental Psychology, Vol 44(4), Jul 2008. pp. 908-918, University of Phoenix online library EBSCOhost
Lonner W. J., (2000). PSI CHI The national honor society in psychology: On the growth and continuing importance of Cross-Cultural Psychology. Retrieved February 15, 2009 from
http://www.psichi.org/pubs/articles/article_82.asp