Tamis-LeMonda-05-14-2021-7

Contexts of Attachment  273

hunting and gathering groups in Africa show separation anxiety at similar ages (Kagan, 1976). And, Ainsworth’s original attachment patterns—secure, avoidant, and resistant—are found in cultural communities across Africa, East Asia, and Latin America; in affluent and developing economies; and in hunter-gatherer communities where infants are often cared for by nonrela- tives (Mesman, van IJzendoorn, & Sagi-Schwartz, 2016). Furthermore, par- ents frommany different countries express similar views on the foundations of secure attachment—that infants should rely on parents in times of need, but be encouraged to explore the world (Posada et al., 1995). Still, differences in parental expectations and practices, the nature of infants’ early experiences with caregivers, the structure of infant care, and even the socioeconomic resources of families give rise to cultural differences in attachment (Gojman et al., 2012; Keller & Bard, 2017; Mesman et al., 2016). Parent Expectations and Practices Mary Ainsworth pioneered cross-cultural work in attachment (Ainsworth & Marvin, 1995). Ainsworth observed that Ugandan infants displayed more intense protest when separated from their mothers compared to U.S. infants in Baltimore, Maryland, perhaps because Ugandan infants were not accus- tomed to being separated from their mothers. Additionally, U.S. infants frequently accompanied their caregivers to out-of-home settings, such as the grocery store, post office, sibling’s school, and so forth, where they regularly encountered strangers. In Uganda, infants remained in or near their homes and rarely encountered strangers. Ainsworth speculated that such differences in experiences explained the different reactions of infants to the Strange Situation. Indeed, infants from different cultures express their attachment to caregivers in ways that align with the unique views and practices of their cultures. Consider how parents’ views about desirable and appropriate child behav- iors affect infants’ expressions of attachment. One caregiver might interpret a toddler’s reluctance to leave her side as a sign of loving affection; another might interpret the same behavior as immature clinginess. In her book, Culture and Attachment , Robin Harwood (1983) described how Anglo-American U.S. mothers and Puerto Ricanmothers differed in their views and practices around attachment. Harwood interviewed mothers about the qualities they desired in their infants and the characteristics they felt described securely attached infants. Anglo-Americanmothers ranked child self-confidence, autonomy, and independence as more important than did Puerto Rican mothers, who placed more emphasis on child obedience, child moods (being happy and calm), and the importance of remaining close to mother. In turn, Anglo-American and Puerto Rican infants fit the attachment profiles their mothers desired. Child-Care Structure and Arrangements Cultural differences in child-care arrangements may likewise affect infant attachment. In some cultural communities one or two parents raise infants in a nuclear family; whereas in others multiple caregivers may be involved, including grandparents and other relatives, siblings, and friends. This global reality challenges the matriarchal emphasis that has dominated the study of attachment.

The pioneer of fathering research, Michael Lamb, was the first to ask about infants’ attachment to the “other parent.” Lamb observed U.S. mother-infant and father-infant interactions at home when infants were at 15, 18, 21, and 24 months and in a laboratory context at 14 months (Lamb, 1977). Infants expressed similar attachment behaviors—smiles, looks, vocalizations, and seeking proximity—toward their mothers and fathers. Perhaps more PROPERTY OF OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS