Written by Dave Cornell (PhD)
Dr. Cornell has worked in education for more than 20 years. His work has involved designing teacher certification for Trinity College in London and in-service training for state governments in the United States. He has trained kindergarten teachers in 8 countries and helped businessmen and women open baby centers and kindergartens in 3 countries.
| May 24, 2024
Reviewed by Chris Drew (PhD)
This article was peer-reviewed and edited by Chris Drew (PhD). The review process on Helpful Professor involves having a PhD level expert fact check, edit, and contribute to articles. Reviewers ensure all content reflects expert academic consensus and is backed up with reference to academic studies. Dr. Drew has published over 20 academic articles in scholarly journals. He is the former editor of the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education and holds a PhD in Education from ACU.
➡️ Study Card
Sociocultural psychology is the study of how the individual is affected and shaped by society’s cultural attributes, and in turn how the individual affects society.
In a way, it is the combination of sociology and psychology. Sociology being the study of culture and psychology being the study of the individual, sociocultural psychology is then the study of how society and the individual affect each other.
It is sometimes referred to by various names, such as “cultural psychology,” “cross-cultural psychology,” and “psychological anthropology.”
Contents showAlthough an exact and widely accepted formal definition does not exist currently, it can be described reasonably well.
Markus and Hamedani (2007) offer an explanation as to its focus of study, which consists of both culture and the individual:
“…culture cannot be understood without a deep understanding of the minds of people who make it up and, likewise, the mind cannot be understood without reference to the sociocultural environment to which it is adapted and attuned” (p. xiii).
Sociocultural psychology has shed light on our understanding of human behavior in a wide range of domains, including education, health care, clinical practice, and general research (Chirkov, 2020).
Sociocultural psychology is becoming an established branch of psychology, just as the study of the work environment eventually became Industrial-Organizational psychology.
For instance, sociocultural psychology might look at how social media influences our self-esteem and idea of self-worth, while cognitive psychology would be more interested in how we process the likes and comments on a social media post.
| Sociocultural Psychology | Cognitive Psychology | |
|---|---|---|
| Scope | Sociocultural psychology focuses on the influence of social and cultural environments on behavior. It investigates how social interactions, societal norms, and culturally constructed beliefs shape individual behavior and cognitive processes. For instance, an example might be studying how societal norms shape individual perceptions of beauty (like in the case of the “thin ideal” in Western societies). | Cognitive psychology concentrates on the internal mental processes. It explores how individuals perceive, think, remember, and learn, primarily focusing on processes happening inside the individual’s mind. These processes can, for example, include studying how memory works (such as memory formation, storage, and retrieval). |
| Methods | The primary research methods in sociocultural psychology tend to be observation, interviews, and case studies to understand human behavior in specific societal and cultural contexts. Sociocultural psychologists may study parenting styles in different cultures, for example. | Cognitive psychologists often use laboratory experiments, cognitive research methods, and psychophysical methods to study the mental processes. An apt example would be conducting lab experiments to understand how human memory functions. |
| Perspective on Human Behaviour | Sociocultural psychology regards behavior as largely a product of culture and society. An individual’s knowledge, for example, is viewed as constructed through social interaction. | Cognitive psychology views behavior as a direct result of mental processes. It presupposes that our actions are determined by the way we process information we receive from our environment. |
| Professionals | Professionals in this field can include social workers, cross-cultural psychologists, cultural anthropologists, and others utilizing a sociocultural lens to effect change in societal behavior. | Professionals in cognitive psychology could be therapists, counselors, educators, or researchers, focusing on enhancing mental strategies and coping mechanisms. |
Just about any psychological phenomenon can be the subject of a cross-cultural analysis. Below is a sample of topics that have been examined from a sociocultural perspective.
To assimilate or not to assimilate, that is the question. When moving to another country for the long-term, there can be a large number of struggles and decisions.
One of those being whether the individual stays true to their native cultural identity or modifies their behavior and self-concept to be more aligned with their adopted homeland. In sociocultural psychology, this is referred to as psychological acculturation (Graves, 1967).
While psychological acculturation is focused on the individual’s actions and thought processes, it should not be confused with the most often cited definition of acculturation by Redfield et al. (1936):
“Those phenomena which result when groups of individuals having different cultures come into continuous first-hand contact, with subsequent changes in the original culture patterns of either or both groups” (p. 149).
This definition considers the effects of inter-group contact of two or more groups, although the effects are usually not symmetrical, as one group tends to be more dominant than the other (Berry & Sam, 1997).
Berry et al. (1992) have developed a model that describes the various paths the individual may pursue when being immersed in a new cultural setting:
Separation: the individual rejects the new culture and maintains their original identity.
Marginalization: this occurs when the individual is not interested or is not given the opportunity to become part of the new culture. This could be for reasons related to discrimination by members of the new cultural group.
With the spreading of American multinational corporations and the increasing popularity of U. S. business schools in attracting international students, some have expressed concern that this may lead to a reduction in cultural variance in the workplace (Hébert, 2005).
In sociocultural psychology, the term workway is defined as “…a culture’s signature pattern of workplace beliefs, mental models, and practices that embody a society’s ideas about what is true, good, and efficient within the domain of work” (Sanchez-Burks & Lee, 2007, p. 346).
Even before the emergence of sociocultural psychology, researchers in industrial-organizational psychology have been interested in how cross-cultural dynamics affect the work environment.
Perhaps one of the most well-known early studies on this matter was a study conducted at IBM (Hofstede, 1980). This study proposed that workways varied along four dimensions:
Despite the fact that Hofstede’s study has been so often cited that it has been classified as a “super-classic,” its utility has been less impressive (see Baskerville, 2003).
According to Sanchez-Burks and Lee (2007), researchers have more recently become focused on cognitive structures such as cultural schemas that moderate and mediate work behavior. This orientation has produced “more precise, richer models of cultural workways” (p. 349).
Attachment theory (Ainsworth & Bowlby, 1991) identifies the characteristics of maternal and infant behavior and personality that affect the quality of their emotional bond.
One indicator of a healthy bond between mother and infant is referred to as “base-touching” (Ainsworth, 1976; Ainsworth et al., 1978). This is the extent to which the infant uses the mother as a source of feeling secure when in an unfamiliar environment.
The early experiences of the infant play a fundamental role in the developing child’s “internal working model” regarding what to expect from others and their capacity to develop healthy interpersonal relationships (Bretherton,1992).
Despite the enormously meaningful insights which have been derived from attachment research, LeVine and Norman (2001) have criticized the theory on cultural grounds, stating: “The study of attachment . . . gave rise to an approach as blind to culture as any other in psychology” (p. 86).
Similarly, Morelli and Rothbaum (2007) suggest that conceptualizing secure base as a means to master the environment reflects a Western emphasis on independence. Independence is a highly valued attribute in individualistic cultures such as the U. S.
However, from a sociocultural perspective, this is a narrow frame from which to understand the bond between mother and child.
Japanese attachment researchers have pointed out that in Japan, “Mothers’ effectiveness in serving a secure base function well represents the quality of attachment only in the American culture, in which social independence or self-reliance is emphasized” (Takahashi, 1990, p. 29),
Harwood et al. (1995) also commented on the definition of secure attachment as being limiting due to its Western orientation. The conceptualization of secure and insecure attachment “…has become equated in U.S. psychology with a host of culturally valued qualities that are specific to the socialization goals of our highly individualistic society, thus limiting their cross-cultural meaningfulness” (p. 114).
Thus, we see that even one of the most respected and meaningful areas of psychological research in the last 50 years can lose relevance once those findings are viewed from a sociocultural perspective.
Sociocultural psychology is an emerging branch of psychology that is concerned with the reciprocating influences of the individual and cultural dynamics of society.
We can see how individuals are affected by their cultural experiences in a wide range of contexts. When traveling to another country, people are prone to act and sound like the locals. The longer they stay, the more culturally fluent the become.
If staying long enough, each individual must decide if they want to assimilate, integrate, or reject their newfound culture. In some cases, that may not be a choice, as marginalization can become their forced reality.
On a more micro level, the social environment, via teacher expectations and practices, can shape a child’s performance, for better or worse.
Definitions of leadership, defined role in an organization, and sense of teamwork are all shaped by culture.
At the same time, individuals can shape society’s definitions over time. Gender roles can evolve and stereotypes can be changed.
Although relatively new as a more formally recognized area of study in psychology, it is possible to apply a sociocultural analysis to just about any previously studied psychological phenomenon.
➡️ References and Further Reading
Ainsworth, M. D. (1976). Systems for rating maternal care behavior. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service Test Collection.
Ainsworth, M. D., Blehar, M. C., Waters, E., & Wahl, S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the Strange Situation. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Ainsworth, M. D., & Bowlby, J. (1991). An ethological approach to personality development. American Psychologist, 46(4), 333–341. doi: https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0003-066X.46.4.333
Baskerville, R. F. (2003). Hofstede never studied culture. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 28(1), 1-14. Doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0361-3682(01)00048-4
Berry, J. W., & Sam, D. L. (1997). Acculturation and adaptation. In J. W. Berry, M. H. Segall, & C. KaÈitçibaêi (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology: Vol. 3. Social behavior and applications (2nd ed., pp. 291– 326). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Segall, M. H., & Dasen, P. R. (1992). Cross-cultural psychology: Research and applications. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
Chirkov, V. (2020). The sociocultural movement in psychology, the role of theories in sociocultural inquiries, and the theory of sociocultural models. Asian Journal of Social Psychology, 23(2), 119-134. doi: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/ajsp.12409
Graves, T. D. (1967). Psychological acculturation in a tri-ethnic community. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology, 23(4), 337-350.
Harwood, R. L. (1992). The influence of culturally derived values on Anglo and Puerto Rican mothers’ perceptions of attachment behavior. Child Development, 63, 822–839. doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.1992.tb01664.x
Harwood, R. L., Miller, J. G., & Irizarry, N. L. (1995). Culture and attachment: Perceptions of the child in context. New York: Guilford Press.
Hébert, R. (2005). A world of difference. APS Observer, 18.
Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture and organizations. International Studies of Management & Organization, 10(4), 15-41.
LeVine, R. A., & Norman, K. (2001). The infant’s acquisition of culture: Early attachment reexamined in anthropological perspective. In C. C. Moore & H. F.
Matthews (Eds.), The psychology of cultural experience (pp. 83–103). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Markus, H. R., & Hamedani, M. G. (2007). Sociocultural psychology. Handbook of cultural psychology, 3-39.
Morelli, G., & Rothbaum, F. (2007). Situating the child in context. Handbook of cultural psychology, 500-527.
Redfield, R., Linton, R., & Herskovits, M. J. (1936). Memorandum for the study of acculturation. American Anthropologist, 38(1), 149-152.
Sam, D. L. (2006). Acculturation: Conceptual background and core components. The Cambridge handbook of acculturation psychology, 11-26.
Sanchez-Burks, J., & Lee, F. (2007). Cultural psychology of workways. Handbook of cultural psychology, 1, 346-369.
Takahashi, K. (1990). Are the key assumptions of the “Strange Situation” procedure universal? A view from Japanese research. Human Development, 33, 23–30.
Zittoun, T. (2016). A sociocultural psychology of the life-course. Social Psychological Review, 18(1).
