History Of Cross-Cultural Psychology

The history of cross-cultural psychology, broadly defined, started with Herodotus in the fifth century BC. In fact, two excellent histories, Klineberg (1980), and Jahoda and Krewer (1996), note that Herodotus had the insight that all humans are ethnocentric. This is a basic aspect of the human condition, because most humans are limited to knowing only their culture and thus are bound to use it as the standard for comparisons with other cultures. It is only when they have experienced several ot

her cultures that they become sufficiently sophisticated to see both strengths and weaknesses in each and every culture.

These histories, and in more detail Gustav Jahoda’s Crossroads between Culture and Mind (Cambridge, Mass., 1993), discuss the Middle Ages; Vico and his emphasis on culture-specific competencies; the Enlightenment; the activities of the Societe des Observateurs de I’ Homme (1799-1805), which developed an excellent manual for carrying out cross-cultural studies; Alex­ander von Humboldt (1830-1835). reporting on his explorations of South America and Siberia; Darwin and his influence on evolutionary theories, not only for species of animals but also for cultures; Wundt and his 10-volume Volkerpsychologie (1900-1914); and the emergence of the culture and personality field.

Tylor (1889) provided a classic definition of the term “culture” and suggested that culture can be used as the unit of analysis to study the laws of human thought across cultures. Other early pioneers included Rivers (1901), who reported on the expedition to the Torres Straits and was the first to carry out systematic experimental cross-cultural studies, and Boas (1911), who emphasized replacing ethnocentrism with the appreciation of the ways of life of others.

The middle pioneers (roughly 1920s to 1950s) included Luria (1976) and his study of culture and cognition; Bartlett (1932) and his classic study of remembering; Benedict (1935, 1945) and her studies of Japan; Vygotsky (1978) on the way the mind is shaped by culture; Dennis (1943) and his study of Hopi children; Kluckhohn’s (1954) superb chapter on “Culture and Be­havior”; Klineberg’s (1954) social psychology text with its emphasis on ethnographic materials; and Jahoda’s (1961) African studies.

Cross-Cultural Psychology History after 1967

Cross-cultural psychology emerged in the late 1960s as a self-conscious discipline, separate from both anthropology and psychology yet closely linked to both. A major turning point was the Ibadan conference, during the Christmas-New Year vacation of 1966 and 1967, at a time when the Zeitgeist was ready for the emergence of a separate field.

The purpose of that conference was to stimulate research that would help the economic development of less developed countries and establish mechanisms of international cooperation in social psychological research. The aim was to establish long-term research relationships, and also to help develop the skills of indigenous social psychologists and provide them with resources that would permit them to do research. The results of the conference were published by Kelman and Smith (1968).

Concerns about “intellectual colonialism” were expressed at the conference by E Stambouli of Tunisia. He argued that collecting data in Africa and taking them to Europe or North America and publishing the results without the collaboration of indigenous scientists was morally reprehensible. Avoiding intellectual colonialism became important among cross-cultural psychologists and can be seen in books by Triandis (1972) and in the code of ethics for cross-cultural research proposed by Tapp, Kelman, Triandis, Wrights-man, and Coelho (1974). The avoidance of ethnocentrism, by searching for different perspectives on a phenomenon and developing an appreciation of culture-specific (emic) points of view, and the local standardization of psychological instruments, became central concerns of cross-cultural psychology. The development of methods that use both emic and etic (universally valid) items became one of the contributions of cross-cultural psychology. The use of multi-method approaches, the testing of rival hypotheses, and the testing of hypotheses by using data from the Human Relations Area Files (see Barry, 1980, for a description and history) as well as data obtained from participants, became important distinguishing features of cross-cultural psychology.

In the early phases of the development of the relationship of culture and psychology, a universalist viewpoint was widely used. That is, it was assumed that all psychological discoveries were valid universally, and culture provided only minor modifications of these discoveries. In the 1980s and later, however, a number of researchers assumed more relativistic positions, in some cases even denying the psychic unity of humankind. Cultural psychologies emphasized shared meanings in each culture, and these meanings may be very different from culture to culture.

During one of the sessions of the conference, we discussed the need for coordination of efforts and dissemination of information about research collaborations around the world. Thus, the Cross-Cultural News­letter (1967) was born and was first edited by Triandis. It eventually became the Cross-Cultural Bulletin. About the same time the Journal of Social Psychology, edited by Leonard Doob, and the international Journal of Psychology. edited by Germaine de Montmollin (1966), announced policies favoring cross-cultural papers. The Human Relations Area Files began publishing a journal in 1966, which in 1992 became Cross-Cultural Research. It is now the official organ of the Society for Cross-Cultural Research, founded by the anthropologist Peter Murdoch in 1972, but which now includes psychologists and other cross-cultural social scientists. The Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, founded by Walter Lonner, first appeared in 1970. It became the official journal of the International Association of Cross-Cultural Psychology (IACCP), established in 1972. The Association pour la Recherche interculturelle (ARIC) was established in 1984, and had a joint meeting with the IACCP in Liege, Belgium, in 1992.

The Annual Review of Psychology established chapters reviewing cross-cultural work in 1973. Significant publications included Handbook of Cross-Cultural Psychology (1980-1981). Significant texts included Segall (1972), Segall, Dasen, Berry, and Poortinga (1990), Berry, Poortinga, Segall, and Dasen (1992), Moghaddam, Taylor, and Wright (1992), Smith and Bond (1993), Triandis (1994).

Examples of Significant Work in Cross-Cultural Psychology

Lists of significant work in cross-cultural psychology can be found in two handbooks (Triandis. 1980-1981; Berry. 1997). Limitations of space in this entry permit only one example: Berry (1980) examined members of a culture (A) who come in contact with another culture (B), and may develop a culture that uses both cultural elements (A + B), or reject their own culture and adopt the other culture (use just B. assimilation): refuse to adopt any of the elements of the other culture and thus become separated from the other culture (use just A. separation): or reject both sets of cultural elements (neither A nor B. alienation or marginalization). In the case of cultural groups that have been conquered or forced to migrate, separation is sometimes linked to “cultural opposition” (i.e., if culture B has a particular element. the separated members adopt the opposite element).

Of course, these four patterns are ideal types, and there are several intermediate possibilities. Research on the mental health of samples who have adopted these four patterns, showed that the A + B pattern was more desirable than the others. In addition, Triandis discussed acculturation in terms of “accommodation” (members of culture A acquiring elements of culture B): “overshooting” (in some cases becoming more extreme users of elements of culture B than even the members of culture B); and “ethnic affirmation” (rejecting culture B and becoming more fanatic users of elements of culture A) (Triandis, Kashima, Shimada, & Villareal. 1986). Of course, these patterns have direct relevance for the kind of ethnic identity that people develop. In some cases they see themselves as both A and B, in other cases as one or the other or neither A nor B. What applies to ethnicity also applies to race, where some African Americans adopt behavior patterns (e.g., names. hair styles) that emphasize their African ancestry, and others dress even more like the mainstream than the majority of the population.

In societies where many people adopt elements from many cultures we find cultural pluralism. An issue then is how should the educational systems be constituted to accommodate the diverse cultural elements. Depending on ideology, the more enlightened commentators suggest that we should train schoolchildren to appreciate the cultural perspectives of all cultures that have a significant presence in their country. Others emphasize national and ethnic purity and reject this view.

Current Focus of Cross-Cultural Psychology

In recent years, excitement has been generated by work on the way the self is structured in different cultures and on the corresponding cultural patterns such as individualism and collectivism (Triandis. 1995: several chapters in Berry. Segall. & Kagitcibasi. 1997). There has been much work on stereotypes and gender, moral development, culture and schooling, on values, the way in which resources are distributed (equity, equality, need), social responsibility, and cultural differences on attributions. Other important work has been done on social responsibility, the culture of honor, intercultural communication, non-linguistic communication and behavior, emotion and culture, and culture and psychopathology. Applications of cross-cultural psychology have included work on cross-cultural training and handbooks on that topic: work on culture psychopathology as well as counseling, and the influence of culture on organizational behavior.

Graduate Training in Cross-Cultural Psychology

As preparation for professional cross-cultural work in the graduate training field, graduate training has mostly been in the areas of developmental and social psychology. Those who specialize in cross-cultural psychology are encouraged to master at least one other language.

The Future of Cross-Cultural Psychology

The field’s origins in the 1960s were for the most part North American. In the 1970s, Western European researchers began to make contributions, and in the 1980s and 1990s Asians did significant work. The next century will probably continue this trend, and will include creative integrations of cross-cultural, indigenous (e.g., Kim & Berry, 1993; Sinha, 1997) and cultural psychologies. It will profit from further contributions by psychologists from the Pacific Rim, whose work will further broaden Western psychology, and might make it a special case of the universal psychology that might be developed in the twenty-first century.

References:

1. Barry. H. III (1980). Description and uses of the Human Relations Area Files. In H. C. Triandis & J. W. Berry (Eds.). Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (Vol. 2. pp. 445-478). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
2. Bartlett. F. C. (1932). Remembering. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.
3. Benedict. R. (1935. 1945). Patterns of culture. London: Routledge.
4. Berry. J. W. (1980). Acculturation as varieties of adaptation. In A. Padilla (Ed.) Acculturation: theory, models and some new findings (pp. 9-25). Boulder. CO: Westview Press.
5. Berry. J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Segall, M. H., & Dasen, P. R. (1992). Cross-cultural psychology: Research and applica­tions. New York: Cambridge University Press.
6. Berry. J. W., Segall, M., & Kagitcibasi, C. (1997). Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (2nd ed., Vol. 3). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
7. Boas. F. (1911). The mind of primitive man. New York: Macmillan.
8. Dennis. W. (1943). Animism and related tendencies in Hopi children. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 38. 21-37.
9. Jahoda. G. (1961). White man. London: Oxford University Press.
10. Jahoda. G .. & Krewer. B. (1997). History of cross-cultural and cultural psychology. In J. W. Berry. Y. H. Poortinga. & J. Pandey (Eds.). Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (2nd ed., pp. 1-42). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. (Original work published 1980)
11. Kelman, H. C., & Smith, M. B. (1968). Social psychological research in developing countries. Journal of Social Is­sues. 24(2). 1-287.
12. Kim. U.. & Berry. J. W. (1993). Indigenous psychologies: Research and experience in cultural context. Newbury Park. CA: Sage.
13. Klineberg. O. (1954). Social psychology (2nd ed.). New York: Holt. Rinehart & Winston.
14. Klineberg. O. (1980). Historical perspectives: Cross-cultural psychology before 1960. In H. C. Triandis & W. W. Lam­bert (Eds.). Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (Vol. 1. pp. 1-14). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
15. Kluckhohn. C. (1954). Culture and behavior. In G. Lindzey (Ed.). Handbook of social psychology (Vol. 2. pp. 921­976). Cambridge. MA: Addison-Wesley.
16. Landis. D.. & Bhagat, R. S. (1996). Handbook of intercultural training (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage.
17. Moghaddam, F. M,. Taylor. D. M.. & Wright. S. C. (1993). Social psychology in cross-cultural perspective. New York: Freeman.
18. Rivers. W. H. R. (1901). Part I: Introduction and vision. In A. C. Haddon (Ed.). Reports of the Cambridge anthropo­logical expedition to Torres Straits. Vol. 2. Cambridge. England: Cambridge University Press.
19. Segall. M. H. (1972). Cross-cultural psychology: Human behavior in global perspective. Monterey. CA: Brooks/Cole.
20. Segall. M. H .. Dasen. P. R.. Berry. J. W., & Poortinga. Y. H. (1990). Human behavior in global perspective: An intro­duction to cross-cultural psychology. New York: Pergamon Press.
21. Shweder. R. A. (1990). Cultural psychology—what is it? In J. W. Stigler. R. A. Shweder. & G. Herdt (Eds.). Cultural psychology (pp. 1-43) New York: Cambridge University Press.
22. Smith. P. B.. & Bond. M. H. (1993). Social psychology across cultures. London: Prentice Hall Europe.
23. Smith. P. B .. & Bond. M. H. (1999). Social psychology across cultures. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
24. Tapp. J. L .. Kelman. H. C .. Triandis. H. C. Wrightsman. L.. & Coelho. G. (1974). Continuing concerns in cross-cultural ethics. International Journal of Psychology, 9. 231-249.
25. Triandis. H. C. (1972). The analysis of subjective culture. New York: Wiley.
26. Triandis. H. C. (1980). Introduction. In H. C. Triandis & W. W. Lambert (Eds.). Handbook of cross-cultural psy­chology (pp. 1-14). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
27. Triandis. H. C. (1994). Culture and social behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.
28. Triandis. H. C. (1995). Individualism and collectivism. Boul­der. CO: Westview Press.
29. Triandis. H. C.. Kashima, Y., Shimada. E., & Villareal. M. (1986). Acculturation indices as a means of confirming cultural differences. International Journal of Psychology, 21. 43-70.
30. Triandis, H. C.. & Lambert. W. W. (Eds.). (1980-1981). Handbook of cross-cultural psychology (Vols. 1-6). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
31. Tylor, E. B. (1889). On a method of investigating the development of institutions. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 18. 245-­272.
32. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind and society. Cambridge. MA: Harvard University Press.