UNIVERSALITY OF RELATIONSHIP CHARACTERISTICS: A CROSS-CULTURAL COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF ATTACHMENT AND LONELINESS IN CANADIAN AND VISITING CHINESE STUDENTS, THE

Social Behavior and Personality, 2005 by DiTommaso, Enrico, Brannen, Cyndi, Burgess, Melissa

This study investigated the universality of loneliness and attachment in family, romantic and social relationships by comparing Canadian home students with Chinese visiting students. A total of 223 students completed measures assessing peer, parent and romantic attachment, and emotional and social loneliness. The results indicate significant main effects of culture and gender for both attachment and loneliness, as well as a significant two-way interaction for family loneliness. The findings support the universality of loneliness and attachment, but also lend credence to the notion that the expression, or intensity, of these constructs may differ among cultures and genders.

Relationship characteristics, such as attachment and loneliness, are often viewed as universal in nature, sometimes conceptualised as varying only in degree. Thus, scant attention is given to contextual considerations such as culture and gender. Scholars have argued, however, that culture needs to be the focal point of research, rather than an afterthought (Doherty, Hatfield, Thompson, & Choo, 1994; Segall, Lonner, & Berry, 1998; Smith & Bond, 1994).

There is a dearth of research supporting the cross-cultural applicability of attachment theory (van Ijzendoorn, 1990). The predominant view, labeled the universality hypothesis, states that attachment bonds develop similarly in a variety of cultural or family contexts (van Ijzendoorn & Sagi, 1999). In a review of over 30 samples, van Ijzendoorn and Sagi found relatively similar distributions of attachment classifications (i.e., secure, avoidant, anxious) across different cultural environments. The results are supported by other research which reports a lack of cross-cultural variability in attachment styles among older adolescents and adults (e.g., Doherty et al., 1994; Moreira et al., 1998; Soares, Fremmer-Bombik, Grossmann, & Silva, 2001). In contrast, You and Malley-Morrison (2000) found that Korean students scored higher on a measure of insecurity than did Caucasian Americans, as also do some minority group samples (e.g., Bliwise, 1999). Cross-cultural comparisons of gender differences in attachment are also lacking, although the universality hypothesis predicts, and research suggests, that gender differences should be found cross-culturally (e.g., Brannen & DiTommaso, 2001; Ross & Spinner, 2001).

Another area of research that has received minimal attention from attachment researchers is the cross-cultural effects of different types of relationship factors. According to the universality hypothesis, one would expect cross-cultural similarities in the pattern of associations among such factors. The results of a cross-cultural study of the relationship between attachment security and lowered perceived loneliness tend to support the hypothesis. DiTommaso, Brannen-McNulty, Ross, and Burgess (2003) reported that male university students had higher levels of romantic loneliness, while there were no significant gender differences for either social or family loneliness.

Unlike the attachment construct, however, support for the universality hypothesis for loneliness is more equivocal. For example, a handful of studies have demonstrated that higher levels of loneliness are associated with more Western cultural orientations which emphasize individualism (e.g., Bhogle, 1991; Rokach & Bacanli, 2001; Rokach & Neto, 2000). On the other hand, reports of higher levels of perceived loneliness among Chinese versus Westerners are not unknown (e.g., Anderson, 1999; Goodwin, Cook, & Yung, 2001). Such apparent contradictions may be a result of different measurement approaches, and could be clarified by specifically measuring different types of loneliness. As with the attachment literature, gender has not been a particular focus of cross-cultural loneliness investigations.

Geographical context is a second potential confound in examining both the attachment and loneliness constructs. The term "cross-cultural" is variously defined as different ethnic groups sharing the same environment, or groups from diverse cultures and geographical settings. Visiting students, who spend only brief periods in another culture, represent a convenient comparison sample.

Asian students studying in North America provide an opportunity to investigate how visiting students may differ from home students. A few studies have examined the relationships between this group and stay-at-home students. For example, Hsu, Hailey, and Range (1986) found that Chinese foreign students experience significantly more social loneliness than do Canadian students. Leung (2001) reported that Chinese students (both migrants and sojourners) experience more loneliness than do migrants from other cultural backgrounds or Australian home students.

Research has demonstrated that levels of loneliness and social isolation are key predictors of sojourner adjustment (Ward & Rana-Deuba, 2000; Ward & Searle, 1990). Furthermore, research has indicated that the quality of relationships with family, friends and romantic partners is a significant predictor of the degree of loneliness experienced by visiting students (Sam, 2001; Stone-Feinstein, & Ward, 1990; Ward & Kennedy, 1993; Ward & Searle 1990).