Experiences in infancy are acknowledged to affect the course and outcome of social and intellectual development in childhood, and they are credited for some of the distinctiveness of culture. More specifically, cross-cultural developmental studies have historically shown that differences in rearing styles typically have implications for children's later cognitive performance and social behavior. Home environments are thought to reflect larger cultural values, beliefs, and customs, and many social theorists have contended that the family generally, and the mother-infant relationship specifically, may be vital to development of the individual and basic to the organization of the culture. As a result, investigators have frequently studied infancy and mother-infant interaction in attempts to address questions about the origins and development of cultural identity. Of course, each society has evolved patterns of child-rearing adjusted to its own special demands. As one example, it is widely held that Japanese and Americans differ in prominent aspects of their psychological make-ups and that certain social and intellectual distinctions between members of these two cultures arise early in life. Previous study on the nature of infant development in Israeli Kibbutzim determined that many decisive aspects of infant care - particularly the close ties between infant and mother - vary markedly from the typical American experience. Contemporary France and America are relatively similar in terms of industrial level, educational attainment, and living standards, yet the two societies differ considerably in terms of history, sociology, and culture. Argentina contrasts middle with extremely poor rearing conditions, all in South American settings virtually unresearched. What differences exist in parenting and in infant activity across these cultures? The purpose of this project is to identify similarities and differences in the childrearing ecologies of Japanese, Israeli, French, Argentine, and American infants.

Project Start
Project End
Budget Start
Budget End
Support Year
3
Fiscal Year
1990
Total Cost
Indirect Cost
City
State
Country
United States
Zip Code