Cultural Diversity Literature week 2 (Migration and multicultural society), Universiteit Utrecht

Hoe je dit kan lezen:
Zwart: informatie of vragen vanuit de 'reading guide'
Blauw: mijn uitwerkingen op de vragen
Rood: aanvullingen op mijn uitwerkingen n.a.v. de werkgroep

Reading guide cultural diversity, week 2:
This week’s readings consist of two articles about the question how culture could be studied in relation to development and one article about identity in relation to the multicultural society.

Henrich, J., Heine, S. J., & Norenzayan, A. (2010). The weirdest people in the world? Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 33, 61-83

The article of Henrich and colleagues is about the cultural bias of many studies and theories. Many studies are conducted in and applied to WEIRD societies, and are not universal, not applicable to people living in non-WEIRD societies. Results are representative for a specific group of people and not for all humans alive. The main part of this article consists of examples of how studies and research fits one group or culture, but not the other. You don’t need to know each example by heart, but you do need to know Contrast 1 to 4. Furthermore, given a specific example you should be able to relate the example to the questions of bias and WEIRD societies. It’s important that you recognize questions of representation. Some examples are easy to comprehend, like the part about perceiving colors in chapter 3.6. Some examples demand specific knowledge to understand, like the part in the same paragraph about false belief tasks. You can look it up or ask the teacher of your seminar about it. Some examples are a tough read, and very interesting the moment you catch the meaning of it, like the part on folkbiological reasoning in paragraph 3.3.

1. What is the main question?

Behavioral scientists routinely publish broad claims about human psychology and behavior in the world’s top journals based on samples drawn entirely from Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) societies. Researchers – often implicitly – assume that either there is little variation across human populations, or that these “standard subjects” are as representative of the species as any other population. Are these assumptions justified?

Ontwikkelende aspecten van menselijke psychologie van meer culturele aspecten van psychologie. Onevenredige afhankelijk van WEIRD mensen. Problematiek en feit dat veel ontwikkelingsonderzoek alleen weird participanten bekijkt.

2. In what way is the question answered?

We pursued this question by constructing an empirical review of studies involving large-scale comparative experimentation on important psychological or behavioral variables. The domains reviewed include visual perception, fairness, cooperation, spatial reasoning, categorization and inferential induction, moral reasoning, reasoning styles, self-concepts and related motivations, and the heritability of IQ.

Analyse van verschillende onderzoeken. Is weird inderdaad de norm?

3. Which theories and key concepts are described?

Keywords: behavioral economics; cross-cultural research; cultural psychology; culture; evolutionary psychology; experiments; external validity; generalizability; human universals; population variability

Western, Educated, Industrialized, Rich, and Democratic (WEIRD) societies

4. What are the main results and or conclusions?

Here, our review of the comparative database from across the behavioral sciences suggests both that there is substantial variability in experimental results across populations and that WEIRD subjects are particularly unusual compared with the rest of the species – frequent outliers. The domains reviewed include visual perception, fairness, cooperation, spatial reasoning, categorization and inferential induction, moral reasoning, reasoning styles, self-concepts and related motivations, and the heritability of IQ. The findings suggest that members of WEIRD societies, including young children, are among the least representative populations one could find for generalizing about humans. Many of these findings involve domains that are associated with fundamental aspects of psychology, motivation, and behavior – hence, there are no obvious a priori grounds for claiming that a particular behavioral phenomenon is universal based on sampling from a single subpopulation. Overall, these empirical patterns suggests that we need to be less cavalier in addressing questions of human nature on the basis of data drawn from this particularly thin, and rather unusual, slice of humanity. We close by proposing ways to structurally re-organize the behavioral sciences to best tackle these challenges.

Heel specifiek. Conclusies getrokken over mensen van alle culturen en achtergronden terwijl alleen weird participanten dus niet universele resultaten

Bij uitschieters problematisch om resultaten generaliseren naar bredere zin

5. How is the article related to the theme of the week? The theme of the course? To lectures and other articles?

The theme of this week is diversity, identity and culture. This article attributes tot his subject by emphasizing that culture effects study outcomes, which make these studies non generalisable to other cultures (diversity). It relates to other article as it warnes us tob e critical on other research. It relates tot he other articles of this week as they also deal with the interplay between  culture and the development of individuals.

Docent: 4 contrasten focus. Die contrasten zijn verder interessant bij kijken naar onderzoeksvraag, want ze noemen daar interessante contrasten bijv. voor westerse en niet-westerse culturen.

Velez‐Agosto, N. M., Soto‐Crespo, J. G., Vizcarrondo‐Oppenheimer, M., Vega‐Molina, S., & Coll, C. G. (2017). Bronfenbrenner's bioecological theory revision: Moving culture from the macro into the micro. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12, 900– 910. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691617704397

The article of Velez-Agosto and colleagues raises the question of how culture in relation to behavior could be conceptualized. The authors start with Bronfenbrenner’s model, which is also the model that is used by our department as a framework to study and to teach development and parenting. Students that are not familiar with the model can easily find a textbook or in an internet page about the model. On page 901, ‘To develop our arguments …’, the structure of this article is summarized: Bronfenbrenner’s model and its flaws, three theories about culture that could be a useful addition to the model, Weiser, Vygotsky and Rogoff, and a modified model. These are the things you need to know about the article.

Bronfenbrenner’s model: micro, meso, exo, macro en chrono system.
Flaws: The concept of blueprint is not further explained, but could be assumed to be associated with how culture gets reproduced from one setting to another. In its exposition, culture for Bronfenbrenner is homogenizing rather than diversifying the human experience. Culture has been situated in the macrosystem and said to play a role because of the interdependence of the systems. But how these transactions operate and how culture is operationalized and measured remain invisible in these models. No conceptual definition of culture has been elaborated. Without a proper conceptual definition, research and interpretation in human development and culture are negatively affected.

3 theories about culture that could be a useful addition tot he model

• Weiser Ecocultural Theory
  • From this theoretical perspective, the cultural community provides children with developmental pathways inside an ecocultural context (Weisner, 2002). Developmental pathways are internalized (or crystallized) in everyday routines (bedtime, video games, homework, cooking dinner, etc.). In this sense, culture is the routines we engage in.
  • From this perspective, the mentality of an individual’s culture includes shared and idiosyncratic beliefs, practices, and experiences that can be at conflict and could lead to contradictory actions (Tonyan, Mamikonian-Zarpas, & Chien, 2013). This phenomenon cannot be located in any of the systems of Bronfenbrenner’s theory, since it is the individual child or parent internalization or not of cultural scripts. The individual becomes an actor in its own development and not a total passive recipient of culture.
  • Weisner’s theory recognizes the importance of the ecological and cultural environment where the process of development is taking place, headlining the relationship between individual processes and sociocontextual conditions that have an effect on the processes and outcomes (McWayne, Limlingan, Melzi, & Schick, 2016). Because these processes are contextual, one has to determine where the person is developing, and what are the resources, practices, beliefs, goals, institutions, and so on in that cultural community. In a sense, what we are trying to know is the “developmental niche” the person is experiencing (Super & Harkness, 2002)
• Vygotsky’s Sociocultural Theory:
  
  • culture is not a separate entity operating from a higher outside macro system, but culture is the system in which every human daily activity is realized and eventually internalized.
  • Vygotsky’s account of culture suggests “human mental functioning, even when carried out by an individual acting in isolation, is inherently social, or socio cultural, in that it incorporates socially evolved and socially organized cultural tools
  • Vygotsky’s perspective contrasts with Bronfenbrenner’s notion of culture as part of a remote macrosystem, whose involvement in human activity and settings is by means of interdependence between concentric circles.
  • Aside from fundamental limitations in the notion of culture in Bronfenbrenner’s theory, methodological questions have arisen too. If culture enters developmental research as an external factor from another system, its analysis is reduced to describing the interaction with other systems. But as we have been arguing from Vygotsky’s perspective, culture is part of the articulation of the microsystems in research process, because developmental changes imply “mastery of devices and means of cultural behavior and thinking
• Rogoff: Transformation of Participation Perspective
  
  • Barbara Rogoff describes development as transformation of participation in sociocultural activities (Rogoff, 2003). Her conceptualization of cultural processes in human development originates from Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory. Rogoff et  al. (2007) places culture within “community routines” that provide guidelines “of engagement to cultural participation to build on in daily activities” (p. 2).; rather,
  • culture permeates all aspects of life (routines, habits, language) and therefore developmental outcomes and processes. Culture mediates development and learning since the child begins the process of socialization
  • The intent community participation approach emphasizes the inclusion and engagement of children in productive community activities (Rogoff, CorreaChávez, & Silva, 2009); this way children learn from listening and actively observing adults engaged in production activities (Rogoff et al., 2007). Also, this tradition attempts to carry out objectives by shared communicative efforts between children and adults (Rogoff et al., 2007). In contrast, the assembly line approach separates children from adult community activities and situates them in particular settings designed exclusively for them, such as schools and day care settings, which in turn structure communication differently (Correa-Chávez & Rogoff, 2005). In fact, following this type of instruction, communication is mainly dyadic since information is transmitted from experts to children without shared productive efforts and communication and even learning mostly relies on words. This exemplifies the importance of culturally defined institutions, traditions, and practices in establishing the settings and the everyday practices in which members of a community will participate, the microsystems in Bronfenbrenner’s model.

Modified model: Bronfenbrenner’s Bioecological Model Revision: Moving Culture From the Macro Into the Micro

• In contrast, see Figure 3 for a visual representation of the revised model. Instead of concentric circles, we depict a spiral moved by the chronos dimension in which culture exists within different settings, distal or proximal in relation to the individual. It seeks to represent settings as cultural practices (cultural pathways) that relate to the individual in mutually defining processes, emphasizing the transactional nature of human development.
  • See article for more elaboration

1. What is the main question?

How culture in relation to behavior could be conceptualized?

Artikel met kritiek op Bronfrenbrenner model. Bronfenbrenner. Gaat niet in op cultuur, die wordt nu in macrosysteem geduwd, en zij vinden dat het onderdeel moet zijn van het microsysteem. Het Bronfenbrenner model behandelt het individu en processen als aparte entiteiten terwijl cultuur product van menselijke activiteiten en dus bij microsysteem hoort en dichter bij kind moet staan.

2. In what way is the question answered?

Using the theoretical and empirical work of Rogoff and Weisner, and influenced as they are by Vygotsky’s sociocultural perspective, we reconceptualize Bronfenbrenner’s model by placing culture as an intricate part of proximal development processes.

This is why in this

article we unite Rogoff, Weisner, and Vygotsky’s sociocultural perspective to reconceptualize the role of culture as an intricate part of proximal developmental

processes. Following their critique and conceptualization of culture, we propose a revision to the model where culture has the role of operationalizing microsystems and therefore becomes part of the central processes of human development. Since various cultural legacies become part of everyday life, the diversity of human experience is emphasized in this new model.

Historisch overzicht van rol van cultuur in Bronfenbrenners model. Jaren 70 eerste model vrij simpel. Bestond uit 2 lagen: bovenste en ondersteunende. Bovenste: bestaande setting in directe omgeving kind. Ondersteunden: fysiek en institutionele contexten dus sociale systemen. Cultuur geïmpliceerd als vorm van sociale systemen. Eind jaren 90 2^e model zoals nu kennen. Binnen model cultuur de macrosystemen en meso. Concepten geassocieerd met cultuur zoals wetten in macrosystemen. Staat nu verst van kind af dus.

Na geschiedenis theoretische argumenten van andere theoretici.

Dan presenteren auteurs hervormde visie waarin cultuur toegevoegd.

3. Which theories and key concepts are described?

cultural microsystems, human development, Bronfenbrenner’s theory
zie voor uitleg bovenstaand

bronfrenbrener socioecologisch model
sociocutlure theory van vygotshky [Sociocultural theory is based on how culture mediates human experience and transforms human activity. One of its fundamental premises is that the external use of culturally defined tools and signs is later internalized in higher psychological functions. From this framework, culture is not a separate entity operating from a higher outside macro system, but culture is the system in which every human daily activity is realized and eventually internalized.]

ecoculture theorey weisner [From this theoretical perspective, the cultural community provides children with developmental pathways inside an ecocultural context (Weisner, 2002). Developmental pathways are internalized (or crystallized) in everyday routines (bedtime, video games, homework, cooking dinner, etc.). In this sense, culture is the routines we engage in.]

transformation of particpation perspective rogov [The intent community participation approach emphasizes the inclusion and engagement of children in productive community activities (Rogoff, CorreaChávez, & Silva, 2009); this way children learn from listening and actively observing adults engaged in production activities (Rogoff et al., 2007). Also, this tradition attempts to carry out objectives by shared communicative efforts between children and adults (Rogoff et al., 2007). In contrast, the assembly line approach separates children from adult community activities and situates them in particular settings designed exclusively for them, such as schools and day care settings, which in turn structure communication differently (Correa-Chávez & Rogoff, 2005). In fact, following this type of instruction, communication is mainly dyadic since information is transmitted from experts to children without shared productive efforts and communication and even learning mostly relies on words. This exemplifies the importance of culturally defined institutions, traditions, and practices in establishing the settings and the everyday practices in which members of a community will participate, the microsystems in Bronfenbrenner’s model.]

Cultuur moet van macro dat ver van kind af is door indirecte invloed naar microsysteem omdat dat direct invloed op kind heeft. Die dingen komen voort uit cultuur, zoals taal.

4. What are the main results and or conclusions?

In sum, the original conceptualization of how culture operates in Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological model is problematic because it is situated in a macrosystem, as if operating externally from everyday activities, actions, and routines in the microsystems. A revision of the model from Vygotskian and neo-Vygotskian approaches, like Rogoff’s and Weisner’s theories, led us to create a new framework that situates culture as a critical part of the microsystems as well as all other systems that the microsystems are part of. We propose that the bioecological paradigm should be revised with a conceptualization of culture operating as part of the microsystems. Evidence to support our revision includes theoretical definitions of culture as well as empirical studies where culture is observed as part of daily routines and practices in families, peer settings, and child care and school settings

Bronfenbrenner. Originele concept is problematisch, omdat cultuur daar gesitueerd in macro en extern opererend in microsysteem. Differentiëren tussen de systemen is niet nodig, aangezien culturele gebruiken deze relaties al bevatten dus de systemen vloeien in elkaar over en hebben transacties en zijn transactioneel. Daarnaast is cultuur wat verschillende instituties aan elkaar verbind. Daarom revisie met model dat cultuur noemt als kritiek deel van microsystemen en deel waar andere systemen deel van maken.

Hervormde model is spiraal waarin cultuur van kind bestaat. Settings als meerdere culturele paden waarmee individu kan identificeren in mutual processes.

5. How is the article related to the theme of the week? The theme of the course? To lectures and other articles?

Cultuur is transactioneel en contextueel. Model over hoe kinderen identiteit ontwikkelen.

Concept: niet per kritiek op macroniveau, want dat heeft bronfenbrenenr nooit gezegd, maar feit dat hij het niet erkend überhaupt is grootste kritiek. Tussen regels kan je lezen dat bij macro en meso hoort en zij vinden jammer dat die cirkels hiërarchische werking à van buiten invloed op individu, terwijl juist ook vanuit individu cultuur uitgedragen wordt. Daarom geen cirkels maar spiraal.

Verkuyten, M. (2006). Multicultural recognition and ethnic minority rights: A social identity perspective, European Review of Social Psychology, 17:1, 148-184, doi: 10.1080/10463280600937418

The article of Verkuyten is about identity, more specific about the relation between belonging to a specific group and aspects of identity like self-esteem, attitudes towards the multicultural society, attitudes toward minority groups and feelings of belonging. The author used Tajfel’s social identity perspective as a framework. You should know this theory that is presented on page 151. Four aspects of the theory are described in the next pages The first aspect is status position. The author describes on page 152 to 158 relations between being part of a minority or majority group and the view on multiculturalism and the view on minority rights, . The second aspect aspect is the perceived nature of a group. This is described on page 158 to page 163. Did members of a specific group migrate voluntary or involuntary? And is a group perceived as an a natural group, inherently different from other groups en homogeneous? How does the perceived nature influence the view on multiculturalism and on minority rights? On page 163 to 166 a third aspect is described that could influence attitudes toward multicultarism: beliefs about the social system. The fourth aspect is group identification, as you can read on page 165 to 167. From page 168 on the relation is reversed and Verkuyten describes how the view on multiculturalism influences group identification and self-esteem.

Tajfel’s social identity perspective

1. Status position
   1. These results indicate that the group position as well as the national context affects people’s views on minority rights.
2. Perceived nature of a group
   
   1. These two studies show that evaluations of multiculturalism and the endorsement of minority rights are influenced by the way categories of immigrants are defined (see also Augoustinos & Quinn, 2003), and that the question of ‘‘choice’’ and voluntarism is a central issue
   2. Ideas about the importance of cultural identity and group representation are more relevant when groups are perceived as more essentialist and entitylike. Hence, for ethnic minority groups, ingroup essentialism can be expected to be related positively to the endorsement of multiculturalism. In contrast, for the majority group, the perception of essentialist minority groups is more threatening. This perception may easily lead to a pattern of cultural racism (Barker, 1981; Hopkins, Reicher, & Levine, 1997) in which different cultures are assumed to be incompatible and their existence inherently problematic, leading to the rejection of multiculturalism in favour of assimilation of minority groups. Hence, for the majority group, ethnic outgroup essentialism can be expected to be related negatively to multiculturalism
3. Beliefs about the social system
   
   1. These results suggest that the recognition of inequalities indicating illegitimate status differences represents a more general argument for accepting multiculturalism and endorsing minority rights. Equality and equal opportunities is a central issue in debates on multiculturalism and minority rights, and seems to affect people’s views in similar ways, independently of group position and national context. However, in all of our studies it was also found that minority group members perceive higher levels of pervasive ethnic discrimination than majority groups.
   2. However, the extent to which cultural diversity is considered a threat to social cohesion may differ between majority and minority groups.
4. Group identification
   
   1. Thus, in agreement with intergroup theories and social identity theory (Tajfel & Turner, 1979) in particular, the findings of our studies show that the effect of ethnic group on multiculturalism and minority rights was moderated by ingroup identification. High minority group identifiers were more likely to favour cultural diversity and a multicultural society. For them, the possibility of maintaining their cultural heritage seems to be important in itself, and an emphasis on multiculturalism and minority rights may also represent a collective response to a negative group identity. In contrast, for the majority group, the more people identify with their ingroup, the more they seem to focus on the negative and threatening aspects of multiculturalism and minority rights

Consequences of multiculural recognition

• The multiculturalism hypothesis proposes that affirmation towards one’s ethnic group leads to a secure ethnic identity, positive self-feelings, and higher levels of acceptance towards ethnic out-groups
• Group identification:
  
  • Thus the results of both studies indicate that multiculturalism leads to stronger in-group identification among the minority group and weaker identification among the majority group. In contrast, assimilation leads to stronger identification among the majority group and weaker identification among the minority group.
  • Social identity theory argues that under identity-threatening circumstances people will try to restore a positive and distinct collective identity. Hence, the political changes described led us to the prediction that, compared to 2001, in 2002 the Dutch as well as the Turkish Dutch participants would show higher ingroup identification. The results were in agreement with these expectations for the two groups of participants.
• The self-esteem argument of multiculturalism :
  
  • The self-esteem argument states that the acceptance and recognition of cultural identities leads to more positive self-feelings. Based on social identity theory, Branscombe, Schmitt, and Harvey (1999) developed their rejection – identification model. The model states that prejudice and discrimination have costs for psychological well-being, but that these costs are suppressed by increased ingroup identification
  • This leads to the expectation that ethnic group identification moderates the relationship between multiculturalism and self-esteem
  • This indicates that multiculturalism, with its emphasis on acceptance and recognition of category memberships, provides a context in which people with a strong ethnic identity can feel good about themselves. However, it is also a context in which people with a low level of group identification feel less positive about themselves.

1. What is the main question?

Hoe beïnvloed de sociale identiteit van groepen hun perspectief (visie) op multiculturalisme en rechten van minderheden? 

Welke consequentie heeft multiculturalisme voor het zelfbeeld en de groepsidentificatie van individuen?

2. In what way is the question answered?

Verschillende studies naast elkaar gelegd. Kijken naar vershcillende aspecten van social identity perspective. 1^e status position. Midnerheid of meerderheidsgroep. 2^e perceived nature of the glrup. Vrijwillig of nonvrijwlig migrate. 3^e beliefs about social system. Opvaatingen omtrent sociale gelijkheid en cochese. 4^e group identification. Hoe verbonen voelen mensen met groepen waarin ze zich bevinden.

Daarnaast andere concepten: sensualisame, mutlictulral socitye, assimilatie etc….

3. Which theories and key concepts are described?

• Tajfel’s social identity perspective  

• Status position 
• Perceived nature of a group 
• Beliefs about the social system  
• Group identification 
• Assimilatie: hoge mate van contact nieuwe cultuur, actieve participatie en weinig behoud van eigen cultuur.  

• Multiculturalisme: hoge mate van behoud eigen cultuur en actieve  van participatie in de samenleving. 
• Identity 
• Multicultural society 
• Essentialisme: ?? 

- onderzoeken in hoeverre leden van etnische minderheden en meerderheidsgroepen een multiculturele samenleving en rechten van minderheden onderschrijven (goedkeuren) 

- in hoeverre goedkeuring verband houdt met de gepercipieerde aard van etnische groepen en de gepercipieerde aard van de intergroepscontext.  

-bespreken gevolgen van multiculturele herkenning op etnische identificatie en zelfgevoel.  

4. What are the main results and or conclusions?
   1. Status position (P. 157/158 studie van verkuyten & Yildiz, 2006)
      Minderheidsgroep: geeft voorkeur aan multiculturalisme 
      Meerderheidsgroep: geeft voorkeur aan assimilatie. Culturele diversiteit en rechten van minderheden worden vaak gezien als een bedreiging voor hun dominante positie en hogere sociale status. 
   2. Perceived nature of a group (P. 159 onderaan, tot P. 161 bovenaan)

Wanneer migranten als vrijwillige migranten worden beschouwd zijn mensen meer geneigd te zeggen dat integratie een eigen verantwoordelijkheid is door vrije keuze van migratie om hierheen te komen en dat ze zich maar moeten aanpassen.   

Onvrijwillige migranten (geen keuze): multiculturalisme, positiever naar behoud eigen cultuur, nadruk op rechten van minderheden   

Multiculturalisme en goedkeuring minderheden wordt gedefinieerd door de ‘keuze van migratie’ (vrijwillig/onvrijwillig). Onderscheid dat in de media, in het beleid en door politici wordt gemaakt tussen bijvoorbeeld ‘echte vluchtelingen’ en ‘gelukzoekers’, kunnen belangrijke gevolgen hebben voor intergroepsrelaties in cultureel meervoudige samenlevingen.  

Politici hebben de neiging om deze categorieën te manipuleren, bijvoorbeeld om bij verkiezingen publieke steun te krijgen door de nadruk te leggen op ‘gelukszoekers’. 

1. 3. Beliefs about the social system (P. 165 bovenaan)

Culturele verschillen kunnen worden gezien als een bedreiging:  angst voor de eenheid en stabiliteit van het land, centraal argument dat in het dagelijks leven wordt gebruikt om het multiculturalisme tegen te gaan 

Meerderheidsgroep: meer sociale cohesie en stabiliteit in de samenleving (willen meer assimilatie en minder multiculturalisme)

Juist het erkennen van die sociale ongelijkheid zorgt voor een verwelkomende houding tegenover  multiculturalisme

1. 4. group identification (P. 166)

Etnische minderheden – hoge mate van groepsidentificatie, voor het houden van eigen cultuur, voor multiculturalisme

Meerderheden - ook sprake van groepsidentificatie, tegen multiculturalisme. 

het effect van etnische groepen op multiculturalisme en minderheidsrechten werd gematigd door identificatie binnen de groep. 

Voor de meerderheidsgroep geldt daarentegen dat hoe meer mensen zich identificeren met hun ingroep, hoe meer ze lijken te focussen op negatieve en bedreigende aspecten van multiculturalisme en rechten van minderheden.

5. How is the article related to the theme of the week? The theme of the course? To lectures and other articles?

Multiculturele erkening. Etnische minderheden. En …

Docent: centraal artikel binnen thema van deze week: identiteit. Ze proberen aan te tonen dat met name gaat om context en dat die bepalend is hoe mensen zich verhouden tegenover multiculturalisme en hoe hun ingroup ties zijn.