The Relationship of Family Bonds to Family Structure and Function Across Cultures

This study, using a contextual approach, explores the relationship of family bonds to family structure and function across five cultures: Greece, Cyprus, the Netherlands, Britain, and Germany. Its long-term goal is the construction of measures of family structure and functioning that are useful in cross-cultural research. Differences in emotional closeness, geographic proximity to relatives, and frequency of telephone contacts and meetings were not found among the five cultures with respect to members of the nuclear family. Differences between Greece and Cyprus, selected as relatively collectivist cultures, and Britain, the Netherlands, Germany, individualist cultures, on these variables were found with respect to members of the extended family. By showing a pattern of cross-cultural similarity and differences, although moderate, among extended family members, this study shows that family structure and function are context variables that can explain variability between psychological variables and thus add to the explanatory power of cross-cultural psychology.

[1]  Harry C. Triandis,et al.  Individualism and collectivism: Theory, method, and applications. , 1996 .

[2]  Roy S. Malpass,et al.  Individualism-Collectivism , 1996 .

[3]  S. Georgiou,et al.  Family dynamics and school achievement in Cyprus. , 1995, Journal of child psychology and psychiatry, and allied disciplines.

[4]  James Georgas,et al.  An Ecocultural Taxonomy for Cross-Cultural Psychology , 1995 .

[5]  J. M. Salazar,et al.  An Etic-Emic Analysis of Individualism and Collectivism , 1993 .

[6]  Mark A. Fine,et al.  Family, Self, and Society: Toward a New Agenda for Family Research , 1993 .

[7]  Michael A. Hogg,et al.  The Social Psychology of Group Cohesiveness: From Attraction to Social Identity , 1992 .

[8]  J. Georgas.  Intrafamily Acculturation of Values in Greece , 1991 .

[9]  D. Sinha,et al.  Social values and development : Asian perspectives , 1990, The Journal of Asian Studies.

[10]  Y. Poortinga.  Equivalence of cross-cultural data: an overview of basic issues. , 1989, International journal of psychology : Journal international de psychologie.

[11]  M. Hogg,et al.  Rediscovering the social group: A self-categorization theory. , 1989 .

[12]  Michael Harris Bond,et al.  On the Empirical Identification of Dimensions for Cross-Cultural Comparisons , 1989 .

[13]  J. Georgas.  Changing Family Values in Greece , 1989 .

[14]  Cigdem Kagitcibasi,et al.  Cross-Cultural Psychology: Current Research and Trends , 1989 .

[15]  Ç. Kâğıtçıbaşı.  Family and socialization in cross-cultural perspective: a model of change. , 1989, Nebraska Symposium on Motivation. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation.

[16]  Chung-fang Yang.  Familism and development: An examination of the role of family in contemporary China mainland, Hong Kong and Taiwan. , 1988 .

[17]  J. Georgas.  AN ECOLOGICAL AND SOCIAL CROSS-CULTURAL MODEL: THE CASE OF GREECE , 1988 .

[18]  John W. Berry,et al.  Indigenous cognition : functioning in cultural context , 1988 .

[19]  M. Segalen.  Historical anthropology of the family , 1988 .

[20]  Harry C. Triandis,et al.  The measurement of the etic aspects of individualism and collectivism across cultures , 1986 .

[21]  H. Tajfel.  Social identity and intergroup relations , 1985 .

[22]  H. Tajfel.  The Social Dimension: European Developments In Social Psychology , 1984 .

[23]  More than we Need to Know about Culture, but are Afraid Not to Ask , 1984 .

[24]  John C. Turner,et al.  The social dimension: Social identification and psychological group formation , 1984 .

[25]  Ç. Kâğıtçıbaşı,et al.  Sex Roles, Family, and Community in Turkey. , 1983 .

[26]  N. Milburn.  To Dwell Among Friends: Personal Networks in Town and City. , 1983 .

[27]  J. Levine,et al.  Socialization in Small Groups: Temporal Changes in Individual-Group Relations1 , 1982 .

[28]  W. Peterson,et al.  Research instruments in social gerontology , 1982 .

[29]  G. Hofstede,et al.  Culture′s Consequences: International Differences in Work-Related Values , 1980 .

[30]  J. Blair,et al.  Parent-Child Relations , 1980 .

[31]  A. Uzoka.  The myth of the nuclear family: historical background and clinical implications. , 1979, The American psychologist.

[32]  A. Pitrou.  Le soutien familial dans la société urbaine , 1977 .

[33]  N. Warren.  Studies in cross-cultural psychology , 1977 .

[34]  Neki Js.  An examination of the cultural relativism of dependence as a dynamic of social and therapeutic relationships. I. Socio-developmental. , 1976 .

[35]  J. S. Neki.  An examination of the cultural relativism of dependence as a dynamic of social and therapeutic relationships. II. Therapeutic. , 1976, The British journal of medical psychology.

[36]  J. Berry.  Human ecology and cognitive style : comparative studies in cultural and psychological adaptation , 1976 .

[37]  J. Berry.  An ecological approach to cross-cultural psychology. , 1975 .

[38]  M. Osmond.  A Cross-Cultural Analysis of Family Organization. , 1969 .

[39]  K. Little,et al.  Cultural variations in social schemata. , 1968, Journal of personality and social psychology.

[40]  C. Vincent.  Familia Spongia: The Adaptive Function , 1966 .

[41]  Eugene Kamenka,et al.  Gemeinschaft and Gesellschaft , 1965 .

[42]  Edward T. Hall,et al.  A System for the Notation of Proxemic Behavior1 , 1963 .

[43]  T. Parsons.  THEORIES OF SOCIETY , 1961 .

[44]  R. Middleton,et al.  Types of Family and Types of Economy , 1960, American Journal of Sociology.

[45]  E. Litwak.  GEOGRAPHIC MOBILITY AND EXTENDED FAMILY COHESION , 1960 .

[46]  L. Fallers,et al.  The Family: Some Comparative Considerations1 , 1959 .

[47]  R. Winch.  The modern family , 1964 .

[48]  Talcott Parsons,et al.  THE KINSHIP SYSTEM OF THE CONTEMPORARY UNITED STATES , 1943 .