Cultural Psychology

Cultural psychology represents a multifaceted and interdisciplinary field that extends our understanding of psychological processes deeply intertwined with cultural influences. It serves as a bridge connecting various disciplines, including cultural anthropology, sociology, semiotics, language philosophy, and cultural studies, to the broader realm of psychology. This holistic approach enables us to explore the intricate interplay between culture and the human psyche across multiple dimensions within the field of psychology.

Interdisciplinary Nexus: Cultural psychology serves as a vital link between psychology and other social sciences, fostering collaboration and enriching our comprehension of human behavior. Drawing from cultural anthropology, it delves into the rich tapestry of cultures, examining how cultural norms, values, and traditions shape the ways individuals perceive, think, and behave. This interdisciplinary connection broadens the scope of inquiry, transcending traditional disciplinary boundaries.

Diverse Psychological Dimensions: Within the domain of psychology, cultural psychology intersects with various subfields, contributing unique insights and perspectives to the study of human behavior:

1. Cross-Cultural Psychology: Cultural psychology shares a symbiotic relationship with cross-cultural psychology, exploring how cultural variations influence psychological phenomena. It delves into the nuances of cultural diversity, shedding light on how individuals from different cultural backgrounds may exhibit distinct cognitive processes, emotions, and behaviors.
2. Social Psychology: Cultural psychology enriches our understanding of social dynamics by investigating how culture shapes interpersonal relationships, group dynamics, and social norms. It explores how cultural contexts influence social perceptions, identity, and conformity.
3. Developmental Psychology: Cultural psychology extends to developmental psychology, examining how cultural factors play a pivotal role in the formation of an individual’s identity and cognitive development. It explores the impact of culture on various stages of life, from infancy to adulthood.
4. Cognitive Psychology: Cultural psychology delves into the cultural dimensions of cognitive processes, such as perception, memory, and problem-solving. It explores how culture molds the way individuals process information, make decisions, and solve complex problems.

Culture as a Lens: In cultural psychology, culture is not just a backdrop but a dynamic lens through which we analyze and interpret psychological phenomena. It recognizes that cultural contexts are integral to understanding human behavior and cognition. By embracing this perspective, cultural psychology illuminates how culture is not merely an external influence but a fundamental aspect of the psychological processes that make us uniquely human.

Expanding Horizons: Cultural psychology’s reach extends far beyond academia. It has practical applications in fields such as education, healthcare, and international relations. Understanding the cultural underpinnings of behavior and cognition equips professionals with valuable insights for navigating diverse cultural landscapes, fostering cross-cultural communication, and promoting cultural sensitivity.

Cultural psychology is a multidimensional and interdisciplinary field that transcends conventional boundaries. It enriches our understanding of the intricate relationship between culture and psychology, offering profound insights into the diverse ways in which culture molds the human mind and behavior across a spectrum of psychological dimensions.

Systemic Focus of Cultural Psychology

Cultural psychology represents a diverse spectrum of perspectives united by a common goal: to unravel how human psychological processes are intricately intertwined with culture. It delves into the dynamic interplay between individuals and their sociocultural environments, seeking to explain the cultural underpinnings of the human mind. In contrast to cross-cultural psychology, cultural psychology adopts a systemic approach that places culture and its derivatives at the heart of its explanatory framework. Let’s delve deeper into this systemic focus and its distinctions from cross-cultural psychology.

A Systemic Lens: Cultural psychology views culture as more than just a backdrop; it is an integral part of the explanatory system. This perspective recognizes that culture permeates every facet of human cognition, emotion, and behavior. It seeks to unravel the intricate web of relationships between culture and psychological functioning, including the role of cultural meanings, semiotic mediating devices, folk models, and social representations.

Explanatory Emphasis: In cultural psychology, the emphasis lies on providing systemic explanations for how culture shapes psychological phenomena. This entails exploring the cultural dimensions of human experiences and delving into the ways in which cultural factors influence cognition, emotions, and behavior. While direct empirical comparisons between different societies can be valuable for such analysis, they are not always necessary to achieve a comprehensive understanding of cultural psychology.

Contrasting with Cross-Cultural Psychology: Cultural psychology diverges from cross-cultural psychology in its primary focus. Cross-cultural psychology is predominantly concerned with empirically investigating differences between societies across a wide range of psychological topics. It often exemplifies its findings through diverse psychological research methods. While cross-cultural psychology seeks to identify variations in psychological processes across cultures, cultural psychology takes a step further by providing explanatory frameworks that delve into the cultural roots of these variations.

Synthesizing Culture and Psychology: Cultural psychology serves as a bridge between culture and psychology, synthesizing insights from both disciplines. It recognizes that culture is not merely an external variable but an integral aspect of the psychological processes that define our humanity. By adopting a systemic perspective, cultural psychology fosters a deeper understanding of how culture and psychology are intertwined, offering profound insights into the complexities of the human experience.

In conclusion, cultural psychology’s systemic focus sets it apart as a field dedicated to unraveling the intricate relationships between culture and psychology. It embraces culture as a fundamental component of the human psyche and seeks to provide comprehensive explanations for how culture shapes our cognitive processes, emotions, and behaviors. While distinct from cross-cultural psychology, cultural psychology enriches our understanding of the profound impact of culture on the human experience.

History of Cultural Psychology

The origins of cultural psychology precede the inception of experimental psychology in 1879, marking a rich historical tapestry that draws from various intellectual traditions. This narrative of cultural psychology finds its roots in diverse thinkers and movements across the late 19th and early 20th centuries, highlighting the multifaceted journey that has led to the contemporary field of cultural psychology.

Nineteenth-Century German Tradition: Cultural psychology finds its early foundation in the 19th-century German tradition of Volkerpsychologie (folk psychology). In 1860, the University of Bern in Switzerland established the first professorship in folk psychology, reflecting the early academic recognition of the importance of cultural factors in psychology. Influential figures in this tradition include Moritz Lazarus, Heyman Steinthai, Hermann Paul, and Wilhelm Wundt. Additionally, the language philosophy of Wilhelm von Humboldt played a pivotal role in shaping cultural psychology’s early inquiries.

American Semiotics and French Action Theory: Across the Atlantic, cultural psychology was influenced by American semiotics, particularly the work of Charles Sanders Peirce, and the action theory of Pierre Janet in France. These intellectual currents expanded the horizons of cultural psychology by introducing semiotic perspectives and focusing on the dynamics of human action within cultural contexts.

Twentieth-Century Influences: The first half of the 20th century witnessed a vibrant confluence of ideas that enriched cultural psychology:

• Sociology: Cultural psychology intersected with the sociological inquiries of Georg Simmel and Emile Durkheim. Simmel’s exploration of social relationships and Durkheim’s studies on the impact of society on individual behavior contributed to the sociocultural dimension of cultural psychology.
• Anthropology: The anthropological perspectives of Richard Thurnwald and Lucien Levy-Bruhl offered insights into the cultural dimensions of human cognition and behavior. Their research illuminated how culture shapes thought patterns and societal structures.
• Pragmatism and Social Psychology: John Dewey’s pragmatism and George Herbert Mead’s social psychology provided crucial insights into the social construction of reality and the role of language and symbols in cultural processes.
• Constructionist Approaches: Frederick Bartlett’s constructionist approach, as applied to folk stories in 1920s England, and Muzafer Sherif’s analyses of the construction of social norms, laid the foundation for understanding how individuals reconstruct the social world around them. These approaches highlighted the malleability of cultural constructs.
• Cultural-Historical Theory: The cultural-historical theory of Lev Vygotsky and Alexander Luria in Russia emphasized the sociocultural aspects of cognition and language development. Their work highlighted the role of culture in shaping mental processes and the significance of interpersonal interactions.
• Communication and Personalistic Psychology: Karl Buhler’s communication theory in Germany and William Stern’s personalistic psychology further contributed to the evolving landscape of cultural psychology. Buhler’s emphasis on language as a cultural phenomenon and Stern’s focus on individual personality within cultural contexts enriched the field.

This historical journey from its German roots in the 19th century to its diverse influences in the 20th century laid the groundwork for the contemporary resurgence of cultural psychology. Today, cultural psychology stands as a dynamic and multidisciplinary field that continues to explore the intricate relationship between culture and the human mind, drawing from this rich tapestry of historical perspectives and intellectual traditions.

Contemporary Directions in Cultural Psychology

Cultural psychology is a vibrant field that encompasses a range of theoretical frameworks, each contributing to our understanding of how culture shapes human cognition, behavior, and identity. Let’s delve into some notable theoretical perspectives within cultural psychology, shedding light on their unique contributions.

Ernst E. Boesch’s Symbolic Action Theory

Ernst E. Boesch’s symbolic action theory, developed in 1991, represents a significant contribution to cultural psychology. His approach integrates elements from the developmental constructionism of Jean Piaget and Pierre Janet with psychoanalytic insights, resulting in a person-centered framework. Boesch’s work, rooted in his experiences in both Germany and Thailand since the mid-1950s, centers on complex psychological phenomena, such as aesthetic experiences. He explores how individuals engage with these phenomena through personal generalized symbols, known as “fantasms,” which are grounded in socially available myth stories. Boesch’s emphasis on the symbolic nature of action enables the analysis of how individuals transition from cultural myths to personal actions via relevant fantasms. His work aligns with the concept of social representation, pioneered by French social psychologist Serge Moscovici, while introducing new personal-subjective concepts like “Heimweh” (longing for home).

Lutz H. Eckensberger’s Action Theory

Lutz H. Eckensberger’s action theory is a direct descendant of Boesch’s symbolic action theory, initially developed in Saarbrucken. Eckensberger’s framework builds upon Boesch’s work, particularly within the context of cross-cultural psychology. He constructs a dynamic perspective within cultural psychology, emphasizing goal-directed actions and the emergence of reflexive abstraction in human thinking. Eckensberger retains Boesch’s agency concept, highlighting its role in both constructing “action barriers” and negotiating them within the realm of action and reflexive abstraction. His focus on the evolution of higher-order actions within the mental sphere offers valuable insights into the integration of intentionality within cultural psychology.

Gananath Obeyesekere’s (1990) “Work of Culture”

Gananath Obeyesekere’s “Work of Culture” draws from Freudian psychoanalysis and the cultural phenomena observed in South Asian societies. His work illustrates how individuals structure their life paths through active participation in cultural rituals and demonstrates that human behavior is heavily influenced by cultural meanings. Obeyesekere’s approach aligns with symbolic anthropology, akin to Boesch’s theoretical system, emphasizing the profound impact of cultural symbols and practices on human conduct.

Hubert Hermans’s (1995) Dialogic Self Theory

Hubert Hermans’s Dialogic Self Theory is rooted in the interplay of different meanings or “voices” within the self. Building upon motivational research and dialogical approaches by thinkers like Martin Buber and Mikhail Bakhtin, Hermans proposes a dynamic view of the self. In this framework, the self is seen as a multiplicity of voices, each representing various aspects of identity and experience. These voices engage in dialogues, ranging from agreement to disagreement, shaping one’s self-concept. Hermans’s theory finds applications in psychotherapy and valuation theory, which involves measuring personal valuations, providing valuable insights into the construction of the self within cultural contexts.

Alfred Lang’s Semiotic-Ecological Approach

Alfred Lang’s approach is rooted in historical thinking about the human condition, tracing its origins back to the work of Johann Gottfried Herder. It offers a unique synthesis by connecting the semiotics of C. S. Peirce with the Lewinian concept of the personal sense of the life space. Lang’s framework draws inspiration from Kurt Lewin’s notion of developmental lines and aligns with Ernst E. Boesch’s symbolic action theory. One of its primary achievements is transcending the dualism between the inner and outer psychological worlds by emphasizing the constant movement of sign processes between individuals and their environment. This perspective echoes the efforts of John Dewey, who sought to model dynamic relations between organisms and their surroundings.

Pablo del Rio’s Focus on the Dynamic Nature of Human Activity

Pablo del Rio’s theoretical perspective is deeply rooted in the analysis of human life environments and Vygotsky’s cultural-historical theory. Del Rio’s work has led to the development of the concept of the “zone of syncretic representation” (ZSR), which plays a pivotal role in understanding the dynamic nature of person-environment relations. The ZSR framework allows del Rio and Alvarez to conceptualize the continuous exchange between external and internal operators in an individual’s interaction with their culture. It highlights the dynamic nature of human actions, which are initiated freely on a personal level but organized syncretically within the shared territory of distributed operations in our internal and external minds. Del Rio also underscores the significance of general idea complexes, akin to Boesch’s fantasms, in structuring person-environment relations.

Ivana Markova’s Dialogical Approach

Markova’s approach integrates cognitive and language functions in the analytical process, drawing inspiration from the traditions of the Prague Linguistic Circle. Her work emphasizes the emergence of novelty in dialogues, employing a three-step analytic unit that tracks transformations in dialogue over time. This approach underscores the dynamic nature of interpersonal and intrapersonal dialogues, exploring how opposites evolve into novel forms through dialectical interactions.

Michael Cole’s Work

Michael Cole’s cultural psychology is rooted in the thought of Alexander Luria and Lev Vygotsky, focusing on cultural tools and the historical nature of cultural processes. His cultural practice theory explores the interweaving of culture and individual development. Cole highlights the mutual constitution of culture and cognition, where culture shapes individuals, and individuals, in turn, contribute to the evolution of culture. This perspective underscores the dynamic, bidirectional relationship between culture and personhood.

Richard A. Shweder

Shweder’s cultural psychology draws from his experiences with the moral reasoning of individuals in Orissa, India. He explores the intricate connection between personal intentional worlds and the cultural environments that shape them. Shweder’s work highlights the mutual influence of individuals and their cultural contexts, emphasizing that they set the conditions for each other’s existence and development. This perspective underscores the interpenetration of persons and their cultural worlds, leading to shared change through social interaction. (Shweder. 1990, p. 25).

James V. Wertsch

Wertsch’s cultural psychology is influenced by Dewey/Leontiev activity approaches, semiotic mediation through “voices of the mind,” (Wertsch, 1991)and Bakhtin’s concept of dialogicality. He analyzes the complexity of messages and the polyphony of voices within communicative acts. Wertsch explores the interplay and domination of different voices in dialogue, focusing on “privileging” in voice relations. His interest extends to macro-level dialogues in society, such as those found in school history textbooks, shaping various forms of national identity.

Barbara Rogoff’s Ethnography of Guided Participation

Rogoff’s ethnographic approach delves into the intricacies of culture-embedded mentality in action. She emphasizes sociocultural activity as the context for understanding human development (Rogoff, 1990, p. 14). . Rogoff’s perspective highlights active participation in socially constituted practices, where individuals engage in problem-solving within a cultural context. Her work emphasizes the role of social guidance in a person’s development, highlighting the active apprenticeship of individuals in socially guided activity settings.

International Representation of Cultural Psychology

Cultural psychology is a globally recognized discipline with diverse perspectives and international representation. While the field encompasses various directions and specific issues, its international nature is evident in the contributions and methodological innovations from scholars around the world.

In the United Kingdom, a significant methodological path has been paved by scholars like Michael Billig, Derek Edwards, Jonathan Potter, and David Middleton at Loughborough University, who have championed discursive analysis (Edwards, 1997). This approach has added a unique dimension to cultural psychology.

Russia has played a pivotal role in advancing activity-centered cultural psychology, building upon the German focus on activity, particularly through the work of Alexei N. Leontiev. Yrjo Engestrom’s contributions in Finland have further enriched this strand of cultural psychology.

Cultural psychology thought systems, not always explicitly labeled as such, have emerged in various countries. In Norway, Ragnar Rommetveit’s philosophy of communication has made substantial contributions, while Peeter Tulviste’s cultural-historical approach to human action has been influential in Estonia. Ronnie Miller’s semiotic approach in South Africa, Veena Das’s cultural sociology in India, and Anna Wierzbicka’s efforts to develop a universal semantics in Australia demonstrate the global reach of cultural psychology.

The sociological analysis of habitus by Pierre Bourdieu has left a mark on cultural psychology, as has Serge Moscovici’s exploration of social representations, which has informed social psychologists’ investigations into complex cultural phenomena. In Brazil, an extension of the Bakhtin-Wertsch line of thought has provided a fertile foundation for research in education (Smolka, Goes, & Pino, 1995).

In the United States, cultural psychology underwent a transformation in the 1980s, engaging in dialogue with cognitive science. The field shifted its focus from internal cognitive mechanisms to the study of human actions within culturally organized settings. Pioneered by scholars like Markus, Kitayama, and others, this shift led to empirical analyses of the cultural organization of human selves. William James’s analysis of the self has become a subject of recent empirical investigations in this context.

Jerome Bruner (1990) introduced his approach to meaning making, while Jaan Valsiner (1998) emphasized the semiotic regulation of human conduct. Semiotic regulation involves the use of signs as cultural regulators of behavior, creating temporary constraints on psychological processes. Human conduct is redundantly regulated through both action constraints and signs that constrain the meanings guiding behavior.

The international presence and diverse contributions within cultural psychology highlight its dynamic and collaborative nature, fostering a deeper understanding of how culture shapes human cognition and behavior on a global scale.

Methodological Challenges in Cultural Psychology

Cultural psychology deals with psychological phenomena which cannot easily be studied by the use of standard psychological methods. The focus on meaningfulness of psychological phenomena in cultural psychology requires the construction of new methodology, which is slowly appearing in the 1990s (Ratner, 1997; Valsiner. 1998). Since cultural psychology deals with systemic. complex phenomena, its contemporary methodological innovation continues the traditions of holistic traditions of the past (Gestalt psychologie, Ganzheitspsychologie) and rules out the primacy of statistical techniques in inference making.

Cultural Psychology Bibliography:

1. Boesch. E E. (1991). Symbolic action theory and cultural psychology. New York: Springer.
2. Bruner. J. (1990). Acts of meaning. Cambridge. MA: Harvard University Press.
3. Cole. M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge. MA: Belknap/Harvard. University Press.
4. Del Rio. P.. & Alvarez. A. (1995). Directivity: The cultural and educational construction of morality and agency. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 26. 4. 384-409.
5. Eckensberger. L. H. (1990). From cross-cultural psychology to cultural psychology. The Quarterly Newsletter of the Laboratory of Comparative Human Cognition. 12, 37-52.
6. Edwards. D. (1997). Discourse and cognition. London: Sage.
7. Hermans, H. J. M. (1995). Voicing the self: From information processing to dialogical interchange. Psychological Bulletin. 119. 31-50.
8. Hermans. H. J. M.. & Kempen. H. J. G. (1993). The dialogical self: Meaning as movement. San Diego. CA: Academic Press.
9. Lang. A. (1993). Non-Cartesian artifacts in dwelling activities: Steps towards a semiotic ecology. Schweizerische Zeitschrift fur Psychologie. 52. 138-147.
10. Markova. I. (1992). On the structure and dialogicity in Prague semiotics. In A. H. Wold (Ed.). The dialogic alternative: Towards a theory of language and mind (pp. 45-­63). Oslo: Scandinavian University Press.
11. Obeyesekere. G. (1990). The work of culture. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
12. Ratner. C. (1997). Cultural psychology and qualitative methodology: Theoretical and empirical considerations. New York: Plenum.
13. Rogoff. B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking. New York: Oxford University Press.
14. Shweder. R. A. (1990). Cultural psychology—What is it? In J. W. Stigler. R. A. Shweder. & G. Herdt (Eds.). Cultural psychology (pp. 1-43). Cambridge. UK: Cambridge University Press.
15. Smolka. A. L. B.. Goes. M. C ., & Pino. A. (1995). The con­stitution of the subject: A persistent question. In J. Wertsch & B. Rogoff (Eds.). Sociocultural studies of the mind. Cambridge. UK: Cambridge University Press.
16. Valsiner. J. (1998). The guided mind. Cambridge. MA: Harvard University Press.
17. Vygotsky. L. S.. & Luria. A. R. (1993). Studies on the history of behavior: Ape, primitive. and child. Hillsdale. NJ: Erl­baum. (Original work published 1930)
18. Vygotsky. L. S.. & Luria. A. R. (1994). Tool and symbol in child development. In R. van der Veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.). The Vygotsky reader (pp. 99-174). Oxford: Black-well. (Original work published 1930)
19. Wertsch. J. V. (1991). Voices of the mind. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.