Relationships have been shown to differ cross-culturally. To what extent does
research support this?
Hofstede outlined the main differences between individualist and collectivist
cultures and suggests that relationships differ due to the different views these
cultures hold.
He suggests that individualist cultures (such as America and Europe) emphasize
self-interest and the interest of ones immediate family, independence, initiative and
achievement. Whereas collectivist cultures (such as India and Asia) are said to
emphasize loyalty to the group, interdependence and the belief that group decisions
are more important that individuals ones. The implications of this are; individualist
romantic relationships are based in being in love and the individual choses their
partner. Their attitude to love is seen as essential to happiness within a marriage.
Collectivist romantic relationships are arranged by family on a basis of social status
and their attitude to romantic love is not seen as the basis in which the decision to
marry is based upon.
Hofstede as well as many other researchers assume that there is a clear
divide between collectivist and individualist cultures. However this is not the case
as most of the time there is a mixture of individualist and collectivist traits in both
cultures. For example in collectivist cultures where marriages are arranged, the
potential bride and groom have a courting period in which they get to know each
other and when it comes down to making the decision to marry, they have a large
say in the matter. Likewise in individualist cultures, friends and family have strong
influence on the decision to marry. Nowadays individualist cultures use online
dating as a method of meeting a partner. This is where a database correlates
information against all other members singed up to the website and selects a
potential partner they see as best fit. This then leads to dating and potentially
marriage. Collectivist cultures use family as the computer and chose a partner they
see as best fit. They experience a period of dating and then get to chose to marry or
not. to assume what Hofstede suggests is correct would be to assume there is no
combination of the two cultures, which not only discredits Hofstede research as we
can see real life examples disproving this notion but it is also reductionist in its
views as it does not explore the combination of both. It over simplifies and
characterizes cultures into two very opposing categories when really a more likely
scenario is that cultures pick and chose various traits from both views of
relationships. This suggests that relationships do differ cross-culturally but not only
as a result of being a collectivist or individualist.
Gupta and Sing (1982) investigates the amount of love in Indian marriages, half of
which had been arranged, comparing these feeling in short-term and long-term
marriages. They found that initially love in arranged marriages was lower than that
in ‘love’ marriages. However love increased in arranged marriages and steadily
decreased in ‘love’ marriages until marriages that had been together for ten years,
after this, there was no difference in the levels of love. This research suggests that
arranged marriagesmight have more long-term success than ‘love’ marriages. This
also implies the success of relationships may vary in different cultures depending on
whether they believe in arranged marriages or ‘love’ marriages.
However these results may have been affected by social desirability in that
participants may not want to report being unhappy, as they would not want their
family to know. Not only that but to admit to being unhappy in a marriage is a big
deal and may potentially have negative consequences.
Opposing Gupta and Sings research is Yelsma and Athhappily (1988) who compared
Indian arranged marriages with Indian and north American marriages. They found
that in most respects there were no differences between the two types of marriage.
This does not discredit Gupta and Sings research so much as it suggests that there
are not only massive differences between cultures but there are also differences
within cultures. This suggests that we cannot take one set of finding and generalize
then to a culture as whole – therefore the theory lacks ecological and population
validity.
Anderson et al carried out research into preferred female body shape across
a variety of cultures and found that the most desired female body shape varied
drastically between cultures. He separated the 54 cultures into four groups
dependent upon how reliable the food supply was in that culture. He also divided
the female body shape into ‘heavy’, ‘moderate’ and ‘slender’. He found that the more
unreliable the food source the greater the preference for a heavier body shape. This
may be due to an adaptive evolutionary response as heavy women may be seen as
having easy access to food for themselves and a child. Regardless of the reasons
why, the research suggests that relationships vary according to a reliable food
source and female body shape.
However this research was conducted 20 years ago when social media was not as
easily accessible and didn’t have an influence over people’s opinions and
preferences. The countries that preferred heavier women may now prefer slender
women due to TV and magazines from western countries that portray slender
women to be more desirable. Likewise in cultures that used to prefer slender
women may now prefer heavier women as a result of current controversy to models
and anorexia.
When evaluating research, the findings have logical reasoning to explain why
relationships differ cross-culturally. For example, in countries that are poor may
find larger women more attractive - due to an adaptive evolutionary response to
ensure best possible survival of offspring – as it signals wealth and resources. Richer
counties did not need to develop this adaptive response as it was unnecessary –
hence relationships differences.
Cross cultural research helps us gain insight into relationships in different cultures,
but we cannot assume that the samples used in the research are representative of
that culture as a whole. Not only that but also all research was conducted over
twenty years ago. Westen found that women born in the middle of the 19th century
saw sex as vital for reproduction and not very pleasurable. Whereas those born near
the end of the century described sex in a more positive light and saw it as closely
linked to passionate love. These finding do not directly support my point, but they
do however suggest that people’s opinions towards relationships and such can
change overtime. This means that all prior research is subject a lack of time validity
and that research that may have been appropriate 20 years ago may no longer be
relevant.