Is It Important to Pay Attention to Cultural Differences in Psychological Research - Essay Example

? Is it always necessary to take into account cultural differences in psychology research? Is It Always Necessary To Take Into Account Cultural Differences In Psychology Research? Introduction Cross cultural psychology is a branch in psychology that endeavors to evaluate the boundaries of knowledge concerning human behavior by contrasting it with two or more cultures. Cross cultural psychology is a method of research, and an attitude that combines intrusive thinking with oddity and interest in culture. Research on culture and psychology may be categorized into three main groupings Spering (2001, p 7). These are the indigenous psychology, cross-cultural psychology. Cross-cultural psychology views culture as an antecedent variable that falls outside of an individual. Cultural psychology views culture as inside a person as a means of knowing and construing the world and other people. In this context, culture is defined as the shared awareness and meaning that is drawn from interaction and communication processes. Indigenous psychology perceives culture as subjectively created systems of meaning but goes an extra mile by capturing informal folk theories of psychological operation formalizing them into psychological hypotheses. Cross cultural psychology also refers to the scientific study of human conduct and its transmission, incorporating the ways in which behaviors are influenced and shaped by cultural and social forces. Berry (2000, p, 198) assert that the objectives of cross cultural psychology are to carry current theories and conclusions with regards to human conduct to other cultural contexts in order to assess their legitimacy, and to discover new cultural systems to ascertain psychological experiences not available in the first culture. It also entails generating a more pan-human psychology that would be valid for every person, as well as to assimilate psychosomatic awareness obtained from these two activities. Critical evaluation Conventional cross cultural studies centered on perception, cognition and language. In the contemporary world, cross cultural researchers are presented with challenges on how to carry out research in an ethical way. The reason is that there are specific challenges to be addressed. Some of them include the values and worldviews, informed consent, field entry, research design, definitions, data ownership, role definitions, confidentiality and representation and result dissemination. Batten & Marshall (2003, p 140) assert that there are numerous and intricate contextual and cultural differences among researchers, participants and between researchers and participants. With regards to all properly structured and internally reliable research, aspects associated with design are essential and have to be taken into account before contact is initiated with human participants and data are gathered. Among the critical issues and ethical predicaments facing cross cultural researchers is the possibility for their findings to be utilized to vindicate potent typecasts concerning cultural groups. In terms of ethical dilemma facing researchers, Matsumoto & Jones, (2008, p 324) note that testing differs from vindication when testing the validity of stereotypes. Testing entails the researcher’s conscious knowledge of labels and their endeavors to test their soundness and limits, which would also inform researchers of the need to be conscious of their likely influence on the process of research. Vindication, on the other hand, refers to the researcher’s unawareness of such stereotypes, and, therefore, their probable ignorance on how these labels might affect their choices about research unconsciously. Therefore, it is incumbent upon investigators to comprehend how this may be the case, and utilize research designs that may lessen this possibility. Evidence in favor and against Matsumoto (nd, para 2) notes that cross cultural research has unearthed numerous psychological processes that seem to be common. These are such as language acquisition processes, perception and language of color, gender differences in mate selection and labels, thinking, cognition, principles of learning, as well as the recognition and expression of facial looks of emotions. As such, these findings offer essential bases upon which people may find commonality with fellow humans. In addition, they enable people to speculate on their biological substrates, innateness, as well as the adaptive and evolutionary significance. Cross cultural research has also resulted in vital differences, in culture. These are such as child rearing, moral, cognitive and socioemotional development, temperament, the structure and operation of language, attachment, and rules for displaying and perceiving emotions. These differences show that culture plays a noteworthy role in shaping human experiences and worldviews. Taking into account cultural differences is essential in psychological research for various reasons. According to Matsumoto (nd, para 3) cultural differences helps in refining and revising theoretical comprehension of human behavior in formulating hypotheses that are pertinent to the largest audience feasible. For instance, research across cultures has helped psychologists refine their comprehension of child rearing and attachment practices. This helped in changing what the psychology field initially took as the best attachment and child nurturing, which was founded on research carried out exclusively in the United States to assimilate noteworthy differences in such practices across the globe. Secondly, unearthing differences across culture help psychologists to bring more valuable sensitively based services to the general public. Matsumoto says that these activities arise through aspects like counseling, psychotherapy and business consulting, majority of which depend on exact information and awareness on people obtained from research. For example, cross cultural research is influential in development of culturally sensitive modes of psychological evaluation and treatment that is significant in psychotherapeutic effectiveness. Thirdly, differences in culture offer noteworthy linkages and associations among people and psychologist around the globe. This is useful in helping forge fresh ways of global and intercultural cooperation among researchers and practitioners alike. Vijver and Matsumoto (nd, p 2) note that findings on cross cultural differences brings researchers in disparate and divergent cultures together for a common cause; the findings of which enhance intercultural exchange and cooperation. They further assert that cross cultural theories may offer frameworks that assimilate both personal and cultural sources of variation. Spering (2001, p 12) notes that prospective and merits come with some perils and liabilities like production of cultural knowledge that is inaccurate resulting from flawed methodological procedures. Cross cultural research brings with it a whole host of methodological elements that stretch far beyond monocultural studies, from issues regarding translation, measurement equivalence, sampling and data reporting. Numerous methodological elements emerge from inherent limitations and lack of perfect baseline of methodological skills by the cross-cultural researchers. The reason is that cultural science is a science like any other that requires observation of scientific concepts. Cross cultural research also results in several issues and problems that are peculiar to cross-cultural studies, and it is essential to be knowledgeable about and address such problems, as well. In addition, the risk of producing cultural facts that are inaccurate or not replicable is too powerful if these methodological pitfalls are not comprehended and addressed. Given the significance of cross cultural research in producing a global psychology that truly has the probability of aiding to make a better world; it is incumbent upon cultural scientists to be fully aware of these elements and their solutions. Additionally, Spering (2001, p 13) asserts that ethnocentrism may influence the results of a psychological research, where the researchers may use his or her culture as a standard for viewing other cultural groups. For instance, what may be taken for granted in one cultural group may be focal and objectified in another. Inclusion of numerous cultures in cross cultural studies may result in erroneous conclusions, especially when the researcher does not understand what is common among them culturally. Matsumoto & Jones, (2008, p 324) holds that prospective dangers of taking into account cultural differences in psychological research is that cross cultural research is comparative in nature, which necessitates data collection from two or more cultures and comparison of their data thereof. This operationalization of culture thus poses a serious challenge to researchers. For instance, researchers may operationalize culture on a different basis like by country, ethnicity, disabilities, and sexual orientation or by race. Researchers may be unaware of the consequences of their option of operationalization of culture in comparative research, which may result in an ethical dilemma. Matsumoto & Jones, (2008, p 324) further hold that researchers recognize that cultural differences exist when they operationalize cultural groups, yet they go on to conduct their studies to establish that those differences exist. Hopefully, this is done to fulfill the main goal of cross cultural comparison of examining whether or not those divergences exist in order for limits of knowledge to tested and explained. Nonetheless, the process of testing and documentation of cultural differences may be used for perpetuating stereotypes of differences by users of those research findings. For instance, documenting differences between Americans and African Americans, Native Americans and Latinos and making statements that over generalize those findings to every member of these groups result in typecasting of individuals into social categories. Cross cultural research, therefore tends to ignore the large extent of personal differences that subsists in human behavior. This calls for cross-cultural researchers to be aware of individual differences while designing their studies. Higuchi and Iwata (2000, p 58) illustrate this point. They established in their comparative research between Americans and Japanese using STAI (state –trait anxiety inventory) that Japanese were less likely to report positive feelings, and are more likely to report higher state and attribute anxiety than Americans. This interpretation makes numerous assumptions. One is that Japan is a collectivist society; the personal psychological welfare is secondary to the welfare of the group, and that sustainability of social harmony is among the most significant values. The interpretation also assumes that the Japanese underestimate their own virtues and avoid conducting themselves in an assertive manner. It becomes easy to generate such interpretation, and for people to use these differences to justifying stereotypes. Finally, cultural differences incorporation in psychology research fails to meet the challenges resulting from globalization. Spering (2001, p 15) notes that globalization results in increased interaction and interconnectedness, eventually resulting in cultural complexity. Complexity brought about by globalization present in three main forms. One is the shared modes of thought and ideas, (2) that are made accessible to the senses like computers and communicated to the public, and (3) are socially disbursed among a population using mass communication and technology. The hastening process of globalization and the mounting interconnections involving cultures present an unparalleled challenge to modern psychology. People now live in a world with enhancing demographic, ecological, educational, political and demographic connections. Tourists, immigration, sojourners, refugees and other global cooperation challenge the notion of culture as being restrained to ethnic groupings and/or national borders. This intricacy creates a defying predicament for cross-cultural concepts that perceive cultures in terms of homogenous categories. Conclusion Differences in culture exist across all spheres of life. Various aspects are used to operationalize culture, such as by country, by ethnicity, by race and gender differences. Different cross-cultural researchers employ different methods of operationalization while conducting psychology research and obtain different results. Taking into account differences in culture for the purposes of psychology is useful in helping psychologists revise and refine their theoretical comprehension of human beings behavior. This is vital when psychology researchers wish to have hypotheses that are relevant to the widest audience possible. Additionally, unmasking cross-cultural variances help deliver efficient psychologically based services to the general public. It also helps in bringing together psychologists around the globe. Nevertheless, incorporating cultural divergences in psychology research has inherent limitations resulting from overgeneralization. The reason is some elements tested in research vary from one person to the next. Thus, developing a theory based on over generalized findings will result in the wrong course of action. Additionally, if researchers use different operational variables to compare two cultures, they results may differ but not specifically as a result of culture. Cross cultural research findings may be utilized in a negative manner to oppress and stereotype members of a certain group. Another shortcoming of incorporating cross cultural differences in psychology research is that ethnocentrism may hinder the accuracy and legitimacy of the findings. There is hence the need for a paradigm change in cross cultural psychology to replicate the fresh characterization of culture, which views cultures as processes and vibrant open systems. Cross cultural comparisons are essential in comprehension of certain behaviors, but with the current era of globalization, increased interactions and cultural erosion, it is intricate to achieve justifiable and accurate results in psychology research. Researchers need to understand and be conscious of every element of a certain culture before undertaking any research across cultures. This can be achieved through the use of cultural informants. From the above observation; it is not always obligatory to take into account differences, in culture in psychology research. Bibliography Batten, S., & Marshall, A. (2003). Ethical issues in cross-cultural research. pp 140-147. Accessed on 7 March 2013 from: http://education2.uvic.ca/Research/conferences/connections2003/10Marshall105.pdf. Berry, J.W. (2000). Cross-cultural psychology. New York: sage. Iwata, N., & Higuchi, H. R. (2000). Responses of Japanese and American university students to the STAI items that assess the presence or absence of anxiety. Journal of Personality assessment, 74(1), 48–62. Jones, C.L & Matsumoto, D. (2008). Ethical issues in cross cultural psychology, pp 323-334. Accessed on 7 March 2013 from: http://www.davidmatsumoto.com/content/Ethical%20Issues%20in%20Cross%20Cultural %20Psych.pdf. Matsumoto, D. & Vijver, V.D. (nd). Cross-Cultural Research Methods in Psychology. England: Cambridge University Press Matsumoto, D. (nd). Cross-cultural psychology in the 21st century. Accessed on 7 March 2013 from: http://teachpsych.org/ebooks/faces/script/Ch05.htm. Spering, M. (2001). Current issues in cross cultural psychology: research topics, applications, and perspectives, pp 1-58. Accessed on 7 March 2013 from: http://www.psychologie.uni- heidelberg.de/ae/allg/mitarb/ms/cross-cultural%20psy.pdf. Read More