Considerations of Meta‐Method in Cross‐Cultural Studies
In: American anthropologist: AA, Band 66, Heft 3, S. 223-229
ISSN: 1548-1433
189 Ergebnisse
Sortierung:
In: American anthropologist: AA, Band 66, Heft 3, S. 223-229
ISSN: 1548-1433
In: Families in society: the journal of contemporary human services, Band 41, Heft 8, S. 427-428
ISSN: 1945-1350
In: Background, Band 6, Heft 1/3, S. 27
In: American anthropologist: AA, Band 62, Heft 5, S. 920-923
ISSN: 1548-1433
In: The international journal of social psychiatry, Band 5, Heft 4, S. 305-307
ISSN: 1741-2854
In: International social science bulletin, Band 4, S. 683-691
ISSN: 1014-5508
Area studies undertaken without sound knowledge of 'the entire body of established ways of the inhabitants of the area' must be looked upon with considerable reservation. Anthropology provides the area researcher with both concept and method. The concept of culture is involved as embodying 'a series of limits to sanctioned variation, rather than a single approved mode of thought and conduct.' Aspects of culture (economic, political, social, religious, aesthetic, etc.) represent responses to geographical and biopsychic needs of man. Such aspects represent cultural universals, unities which characterize all human groups. Through a knowledge of the culture learning process we may gain psychological insights important in the action programs of area studies. Such problems as acceptance of new forms of technology, political organization, etc., may be handled by an analysis of enculturative experience. The primary methodological contribution of cultural anthropoloty to area studies lies in the relativistic approach. Hence, cultural anthropology `because of the breadth of its conceptual system and the techniques of cross-cultural analysis has come to act as the integrating element in interdisciplinary area research and teaching. R. J. Murphy.
In: Social work: a journal of the National Association of Social Workers
ISSN: 1545-6846
In: The international journal of social psychiatry, Band 9, Heft 1, S. 74-74
ISSN: 1741-2854
In: American anthropologist: AA, Band 62, Heft 5, S. 867-877
ISSN: 1548-1433
In: World politics: a quarterly journal of international relations, Band 7, Heft 1, S. 119-132
ISSN: 1086-3338
In: American anthropologist: AA, Band 57, Heft 2, S. 393-395
ISSN: 1548-1433
In: Social studies: a periodical for teachers and administrators, Band 43, Heft 6, S. 238-242
ISSN: 2152-405X
In: Public opinion quarterly: journal of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, Band 24, Heft 2, S. 205-223
ISSN: 0033-362X
In cross-cultural studies of att's, the greatest progress has come from 3 basic approaches: (a) the identification & manipulation of cultural characteristics related to attitude formation & change; (b) the impact of one culture on another; & (c) the intervening factor of language & conceptual processes in the relation between attitude & behavior. Cross-cultural studies of nat character show promise of identifying att's that are most & least subject to cultural influence & establishing possible dimensions of culture. Studies of inter-cultural impact provide increased understanding of the function & origin of stereotypes; the role of reference groups in the process by which elements are selected from complex context for assimilation into attitude systems; the conditions under which interaction will produce specified changes of att's; & the impact of new experience on the characteristics of attitude change. Communication theory & attitude change theory are being integrated in studies of cultural diffusion. Despite formidable methodological problems, the crosscultural study of language & attitude processes is increasing understanding of the meanings of common concepts among cultures, of the relationship between concept formation & language, & of the adaptability of language in culture change. C. M. Coughenour.
In: International migration digest, Band 1_OS, Heft 2, S. 125-128
In: The journal of conflict resolution: journal of the Peace Science Society (International), Band 5, Heft 1, S. 82-108
ISSN: 0022-0027, 0731-4086
A detailed interview intended for use by anthrop'ts is presented. Topics covered include location of group boundaries, histories of intergroup conflict, cultural sharing, SD, hostility rankings, stereotypes of neighboring peoples of relevance (in 2 ways: free-response of traits to tribal names, & freeresponse of tribal names to traits), & background questions on child-rearing, authority patterns, etc. Literature review is provided on the universality of ethnocentrism & non-western studies of SD & stereotypes. The methodological problems of cross-cultural studies are discussed, including: the value of instances not interpretable as diffusion of European patterns; distribution of effort between more cultures vs more interviews within each culture (with a decision closer to anthrop'al methods than soc survey standards); uniformity problems within & across ethnographers (including a defense of non-uniformity where it produces a 'heterogeneity of irrelevancies'); location of group or system boundaries in ways not prejudicing the outcome of comparisons of ethnocentrism; public archiving of raw interview data; use of tribal reputations; etc. (Potential users should note that under support of a grant from the Carnegie Corp, the interview will be further revised during the period Jul 1962-Jul 1963, including the addition of questions designed to replicate extant cross-cultural findings of importance on other topics. Subsequently, the interviews will be applied to some 20 clusters of 5 adjacent non-European societies.) AA.