STEP 1. The imposed etic
The global researcher adopts a ‘transport and test’ approach to investi- gating behaviour across cultures. Theories, concepts and methods used for investigation are imported from Culture A into Culture B. For example, in researching ‘intelligence’, definitions of what this is and how it is measured are imported from Culture A and used, unchanged, to test participants in Culture B.
STEP 2. From the etic to the emic
Knowledge and experience gained in the field are used to adapt imported theories, concepts and methods to cultural circumstances. Efforts are made to ensure that the concepts being studied have equivalent meaning and function in Cultures A and B. Also, the researcher tries to ensure that the methods used in the study make sense in both cultural settings. For example, it is noted that definitions of ‘intelligent behaviour’ vary from one place to another. In Culture A it may refer to cognitive agility while in Culture B it may also include interpersonal awareness. An extended stay in the field helps to produce an understanding of local definitions and the development of intelligence tests that are familiar and user-friendly for local participants.
STEP 3. The derived etic
The researcher selects ‘shared concepts’ from Cultures A and B with the intention of drawing conclusions about universal human behaviour and experience. These can then be applied more globally. For example, aspects of intelligence that are shared or comparable in Cultures A and B are identified. This might aid the development of a universal concept of intelligence, derived from the influence of both cultures, rather than simply being imposed by one culture onto another. This concept of intelligence might then be used and further adapted elsewhere.
always a realistic option. Unearthing concepts (such as intelligence or schizophrenia) that are robust enough to translate across diverse meaning systems often proves elusive.
2 Even derived etics are too standardised. While deriving concepts and methods in part from the cultural groups being studied does show a desire to reduce ethnocentrism, ultimately the aim of the
‘derived etic’ is to produce a standardised concept or test that is then applicable across various cultures. For example, a definition of intel- ligence might be derived, following research in various locations, which can then be tested elsewhere. Arguably though, the estab- lishment of standardised, quantifiable phenomena, however
‘culture-fair’, should not be the aim of global research. Instead, more interpretive, qualitative, non-standardised methods for analysing behaviour in unique cultural contexts should take precedence (Berry et al., 2002).
3 Derived etics still begin life as imposed etics. Modifying original con- cepts and methods to the nuances of different cultures may be admirable, yet the process still originates with research questions that began life elsewhere. Rather than trying to make an originally imposed research question equally meaningful for different cultural groups, perhaps the best way to rid global psychology of culture bias would be to begin the research process by formulating research questions from diverse cultural settings. Such an approach prompts an examination of the indigenous psychology movement, where ideas for research and the methods for exploring them originate in diverse worlds.
Beyond ethnocentrism: Indigenous psychologies
Arguably global psychology’s strongest defence against accusations of ethnocentrism is that psychologists from all over the world are engaged in the research process. This global network reveals diverse regional traditions in psychological research, reflecting differing cultural con- cerns, which are often referred to as indigenous psychologies. The indigenous psychology movement illustrates the idea that psychology should reflect the realities and preoccupations of diverse cultures.
Indeed, it has been argued that indigenous psychologies in India, Japan, Latin America and other regions represent an explicit revolt against North American dominance of the field (Pawlik & Rosenzweig, 2000; Allwood, 2005). Practitioners in developing countries have lam- ented mainstream psychology’s apparent indifference to the psycho- logical consequences of phenomena that are especially pertinent to
KEY TERM
Indigenous psychologies.
Diverse regional traditions in psychological research, reflecting differing cultural concerns.
less affluent countries (poverty, illiteracy, civil war), and their ignorance of non-western philosophical traditions (Confucianism, Buddhism).
Markus and Kitayama’s (2003, p. 280) sentiments illustrate this critique:
Psychology as we knew it . . . appeared to be the indigenous psych- ology of America or perhaps, more specifically, the psychology of middle-class Anglo-America.
According to this view US research reflects US concerns, just as Ugandan research reflects Ugandan concerns, Australian Australian and so on. The problem with this scenario is that while each of these indigenous psychologies may represent distinct traditions, they don’t all have equal influence worldwide. We have already seen that a disproportionate amount of resources and research emanates from the US, whose citizens’ behaviour and experiences are therefore more widely documented than are those of others. This imbalance exacerbates the need for us to explore a wider range of indigenous traditions in psychology.
Indigenous psychology in the developing world
Indigenous researchers provide pictures from around the globe, painted by practitioners who have variously chosen to study human development in Cameroon (Nsamenang, 1992), psychopathology in New Guinea (Schieffelin, 1985), self-esteem in Brazil (Lane & Sawaia, 1991). Indigenous psychology is more established and autonomous in some nations than in others. India is acknowledged to have the longest established research tradition among all developing nations, its first psychology laboratory having opened at the University of Calcutta in 1915. Sub-Saharan Africa was a later starter. The University of Nigeria opened the doors of the region’s first psychology department in 1963.
In many countries psychology was initially introduced by outsiders, though indigenous interests and specialisations later emerged. Paki- stan and Bangladesh are examples of this. Though psychology arrived in the region with British colonialists in the first half of the twentieth century, ‘home-grown’ research interests have since followed distinct- ive paths. Bangladeshi researchers have investigated motivational issues surrounding agricultural development. Psychology in Pakistan has developed an interest in gender studies (Shouksmith, 1996). In the Middle East, though the overall impact of psychology isn’t extensive, it
has spurned an interest in special education. India meantime has seen a growth in applied clinical psychology in its urban centres, as a corol- lary of increasing numbers of professional psychologists across the country (Shouksmith, 1996). Within the indigenous psychology move- ment, adopted research questions tend to relate closely to cultural cir- cumstances and political realities. So in Bangladesh in the 1960s, since rural development was a pressing concern, no wonder psychologists were involved in studying motivational aspects of agricultural practice.
In Thailand in the 1950s, where the development of educational pro- grammes was especially high on the agenda, it is hardly surprising that psychologists ploughed their energies into the applied researching of child development (Shouksmith, 1996). In Costa Rica in the 1980s, where neighbouring El Salvador and Nicaragua were living through revolutionary upheavals, war and its psychological effects were a high priority (Dobles Oropeza, 2000).
Psychology is a relatively young phenomenon in many developing countries, yet we can see a growth in indigenous research interests.
Such indigenisation in response to local circumstances is a recurring theme in the indigenous psychology movement (Sinha, 1997).
Enriquez (1993) argues that the indigenisation process can be insti- gated from either ‘without’ or ‘within’. In the former, research questions and methods are imported into a region by outsider researchers before being modified in response to local concerns (a process reminiscent of the one described in the key concept on p. 70). Indigenisation from within involves the formulation of unique research questions in response to a cultural group’s norms, priorities and everyday realities.
Chinese research into behavioural aspects of Confucianism’s teachings (perseverance, thrift) is an example of this (Chinese Culture Connection, 1987). Indigenisation from within follows guidelines set out by Yang (2000), which are designed for anyone who is thinking of practising indigenous psychology (see Figure 4.3). Table 4.1 outlines indigenous psychologies from India, New Zealand and El Salvador.
1 Be indigenous to the culture being studied.
2 Allow the research question to emerge gradually from the context in which the research takes place.
3 When selecting topics for investigation, prioritise culturally unique phenomena.
4 Reject research questions and methods that have been imported from outside.
Figure 4.3 Tips for budding indigenous psychologists
TABLE 4.1 Indigenous psychologies from around the world Psychology in India (Jain, 2005)Calcutta University established India’s first psychology department in 1915. Before India’s independence in 1947 research interests mirrored those of British universities, as indigenous concepts (ayurvedic medicine, yoga) were subsumed under western scientific paradigms. Post-1947 this situation was tempered, though psychology continued as a largely ‘Anglo-American’ enterprise (Sinha, 1997). More recently, though the scientific paradigm continues to thrive, variables selected for research are increasingly selected indigenously and reflect burning Indian issues, such as •inter-group tensions •caste •prejudice •stereotyping. There has been a growth of research into a range of internationally recognised and indigenous fields, from social and forensic psychology to traditional Indian and cross-cultural issues. Courtesy of indigenisation, western scientific techniques rub shoulders with yogic and Hindu systems of thought. For example, cognitive behavioural therapy and meditation are combined in the treatment of depression. Psychology in New Zealand (Shouksmith, 2005)
The 1840 Treaty of Waitangi confirmed New Zealand as a British colony and the western scientific tradition held sway over indigenous (predominantly oral) Maori thought for many decades thereafter. Colonial administrations successively suppressed Maori culture until indigenous activism heralded increased recognition of the rights of their communities in the late twentieth century. In psychology these social changes now manifest themselves in an increasingly indigenised outlook. The community psychology movement encapsulates this. Its advocates reject the idea that a western paradigm can uncover objective truths with rigorous scientific research. Instead, community psychology promotes a socially constructed and locally instigated research agenda that is shaped by unique histories and culturally endorsed beliefs. Special research interests for community psychology include: •self-determination among minority groups •minority influence •multicultural integration •ethnocentrism in non-Maori psychometric tests. Community psychology is practised in numerous universities (beginning with the University of Waikato) alongside more globally mainstream, western approaches. Psychology in El Salvador (Martin-Baró, 1994)
Throughout the twentieth century El Salvador was racked by revolt, authoritarianism and inequality. Continual mismanagement of elections prompted violent demonstrations from opposition groups, and the 1970s saw a descent into civil war. Prominent thinkers of the time eked out an indigenous tradition in psychology whose goal was consciousness-raising among the poor and oppressed, and their ultimate liberation (Freire, 1971). The so-called Liberation Psychology movement in El Salvador, pioneered by Ignacio Martin-Baró (1996), was a broadside against western-dominated experimental psychology. It was a movement that aimed to tie the study of behaviour to the relief of oppression. Martin-Baró argued that laboratory-based objectivity denied local practitioners the chance to take a partial stand against oppression and inequality – the pressing concerns of Latin Americans. Liberation psychologists were, he urged, duty-bound to alter and improve human experience, not just study it. Furthermore, psychology should strive to take the viewpoint of the oppressed. The research agenda for a Liberation Psychology therefore eschewed the ‘inner workings of the mind’ in favour of •urban overcrowding •domestic violence •social deprivation. Though outside the mainstream of Latin American psychology, Liberation Psychology has had a key influence on the continued indigenisation of the subject.
Of course, the questions that indigenous psychologists investi- gate are not necessarily only of interest within their own cultures.
Increasingly, global psychology is recognising that questions that are first posed in diverse locations often turn out to be relevant and applic- able more widely. For example, Chinese research findings about the beneficial effects of calligraphy have been applied in the treatment of children with attention deficit disorders elsewhere (Kao et al., 1997). It seems that psychology’s ‘first world’ does not have a monopoly on the export of psychological concepts.
Indigenous methods
The distinctiveness of indigenous psychology goes beyond simply devising questions that have particular relevance. It extends to finding regionally relevant methods for investigating these questions. For example, a characteristically European methodological preference for naturalistic, qualitative data collection emerged out of the social representation approach to psychology (Moscovici, 1976). Though not used by all European psychologists, such methods are more common there than, say, in the US. The approach stresses the importance of communally shared aspects of identity, and often translates into research that asks how we define ourselves as members of some groups and not others (Catholics or Protestants, male or female).
So there is less interest here in studying human beings as individual units. Instead, the relationships between people are high on the research agenda. This difference in emphasis has spawned a Euro- pean indigenous methodological preference for contextualised (natural- istic), interview-based research, rather than quasi-experimental methods using artificial scenarios and high levels of control (Smith et al., 2006).
Indigenous psychology can complement the mainstream While indigenous psychologies are often seen as a challenge to mainstream cross-cultural psychology (see Chapter 1), the two approaches may be more compatible than they appear at a glance.
Diverse traditions from across the globe can complement the work of mainstream psychologists who try to uncover culturally universal phe- nomena (Allwood, 2005). True, research that is instigated by researchers who are indigenous to the cultural group under investiga- tion is naturally sensitive to local values and preoccupations. But this approach may also benefit from the unique perspective of outsiders
who are furnished with experience gained in the wider international research community.
Outsider contributions might include methodological expertise gained from working in different settings, as well as the ability to com- pare findings and variables with those gained elsewhere. Very often this kind of outsider knowledge is provided by so-called bicultural researchers: practitioners who are indigenous to the region, but who trained elsewhere before returning home to practise (Stevens & Gielen, 2007).
Indigenous and cross-cultural psychologists can form mutually beneficial partnerships that draw on the unique contributions of insiders and outsiders. Cross-cultural outsiders can offer a degree of objectivity that is encapsulated in their third-person accounts as they test their theories in ‘other cultures’. Insiders provide local knowledge and first-person accounts that afford the people they study a degree of meaningful involvement and human agency. They literally become active participants (not subjects) in research, with influence over what is to be studied. This combination of third-person objectivity and first- person insight arguably adds scientific rigour to the enterprise of global psychology (Stevens & Gielen, 2007): rigour that would probably elude cross-cultural psychologists and indigenous psychologists who work exclusively of one another.
Limitations of the indigenous psychology movement
1 Global inequality. Visions of a level global playing field on which psychological researchers in the developing world challenge the power imbalance between them and the west are destined to