scholarly journals Insights From Evolutionary Anthropology on the (Pre)history of the Nuclear Family

2017 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 92-116 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Fortunato
Keyword(s):  
Nuclear Family ◽  
Social Systems ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Social Anthropology ◽  
Methodological Issues ◽  
Evolutionary Anthropology ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research ◽  
History Of

My aim in this article is to elucidate the relevance of the evolutionary paradigm to the study of kinship and marriage systems. I begin with a discussion of conceptual and methodological issues that arise in approaching human social systems from an evolutionary perspective. I then narrow the focus on key tools used in contemporary cross-cultural research within evolutionary anthropology. Next, as a case study, I provide an overview of work aimed at reconstructing the (pre)history of the nuclear family in Indo-European-speaking societies, focusing on the interplay between monogamous marriage and neolocal residence. I conclude with musings on the prospect of a biologically based social anthropology.

Sociocultural memory development research drives new directions in gadgetry science

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Penny Van Bergen ◽  
John Sutton
Keyword(s):  
Episodic Memory ◽  
Autobiographical Memory ◽  
Developmental Psychology ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Memory Development ◽  
Development Research ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
New Directions ◽  
Cross Cultural Research

Abstract Sociocultural developmental psychology can drive new directions in gadgetry science. We use autobiographical memory, a compound capacity incorporating episodic memory, as a case study. Autobiographical memory emerges late in development, supported by interactions with parents. Intervention research highlights the causal influence of these interactions, whereas cross-cultural research demonstrates culturally determined diversity. Different patterns of inheritance are discussed.

Methodological Issues in MIS Cross-Cultural Research

2011 ◽  
pp. 49-61 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Karahanna ◽  
Roberto Evaristo ◽  
Mark Srite
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Methodological Issues ◽  
Research Focus ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research ◽  
Methodological Problems ◽  
Methodological Considerations ◽  
Measurement Artifacts ◽  
Comparative Nature

This paper presents a discussion of methodological issues that are relevant and idiosyncratic to cross-cultural research. One characteristic that typifies cross-cultural studies is their comparative nature, i.e., they involve a comparison across two separate cultures on a focal phenomenon. When differences across cultures are observed, the question arises as to whether the results are true cultural differences or merely measurement artifacts. Methodological considerations in cross-cultural research focus on ruling out alternative explanations for these differences and thus enhancing the interpretability of the results. The paper presents an overview of key methodological issues in cross-cultural research and reviews methods of preventing or detecting methodological problems.

scholarly journals Perceiving those who are gone: Cultural research on post-bereavement perception or hallucination of the deceased

2020 ◽  
pp. 136346152096288
Author(s):  
Pablo Sabucedo ◽  
Chris Evans ◽  
Jacqueline Hayes
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Context ◽  
Case Study Research ◽  
Vantage Point ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Clinical Case Study ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research ◽  
The One ◽  
Felt Presence

Experiencing the continued presence of the deceased is common among the bereaved, whether as a sensory perception or as a felt presence. This phenomenon has been researched from psychological and psychiatric perspectives during the last five decades. Such experiences have been also documented in the ethnographic literature but, despite the extensive cross-cultural research in the area, anthropological data has generally not been considered in the psychological literature about this phenomenon. This paper provides an overview aimed at bridging these two areas of knowledge, and approaches the post-bereavement perception or hallucination of the deceased in cultural context. Ongoing debates are addressed from the vantage point of ethnographic and clinical case study research focusing on the cultural repertoires (in constant flux as cultures change) from which these experiences are labelled as desirable and normal, on the one hand, or as dangerous and pathological, on the other.

Methodological Issues in MIS Cross-Cultural Research

2011 ◽  
pp. 166-179 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elena Karahanna ◽  
Roberto Evaristo ◽  
Mark Srite
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Methodological Issues ◽  
Research Focus ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research ◽  
Methodological Problems ◽  
Methodological Considerations ◽  
Measurement Artifacts ◽  
Comparative Nature

This chapter presents a discussion of methodological issues that are relevant and idiosyncratic to cross-cultural research. One characteristic that typifies cross-cultural studies is their comparative nature, i.e., they involve a comparison across two separate cultures on a focal phenomenon. When differences across cultures are observed, the question arises as to whether the results are true cultural differences or merely measurement artifacts. Methodological considerations in cross-cultural research focus on ruling out alternative explanations for these differences and thus enhancing the interpretability of the results. The chapter presents an overview of key methodological issues in cross-cultural research and reviews methods of preventing or detecting methodological problems.

Toward a Theory-Based Measurement of Culture

2011 ◽  
pp. 61-82 ◽  
Author(s):  
Detmar Straub ◽  
Karen Loch ◽  
Roberto Evaristo ◽  
Elena Karahanna ◽  
Mark Srite
Keyword(s):  
Social Identity Theory ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Is Research ◽  
Cultural Research ◽  
Cross Cultural Research ◽  
Egyptian Culture ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Individual ◽  
Different Cultures ◽  
Insight Into

In reviewing the history of the conceptualization and measurement of “culture,” one quickly realizes that there is wide-ranging and contradictory scholarly opinion about which values, norms, and beliefs should be measured to represent the concept of “culture.” We explore an alternate theory-based view of culture via social identity theory (SIT), which suggests that each individual is influenced by plethora of cultures and sub-cultures–some ethnic, some national, and some organizational. In IS research, the culture of subjects and respondents is problematic because it is typically an overly simplistic categorization. IS research nearly always assumes that an individual living in a particular place and time belongs to a single “culture,” e.g., someone living in Egypt is automatically classified as being a member of the Egyptian culture, or, more broadly, the Arab culture. This dearth of clear concepts and measures for “culture” may explain why cross-cultural research has been so exceedingly difficult to conduct. It may also explain why it has been hard to develop and refine theories. Moreover, it may give insight into why reasonable explained variance in predictive models has not been higher. Finally, it is very possible that much cross-cultural business research could be rightly accused of advancing an “ecological fallacy” by not recognizing the individual makeup of persons with respect to culture. Using SIT (or other theory bases) as grounding for cultural research programs implies the use of certain methodological approaches. Each study would have to establish the salient “cultures” in each individual’s background and include these different “cultures” as independent variables in positivist research. In qualitative research, there would need to be an equally rigorous assessment of the cultural identifiers of each individual.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document