Some psychologists believe American research is often generalized with other cultures, but others believe basic research is vital to understanding all cultures. American Psychological research is not generalizable to other cultures due to the main focus on Americans and not on culture-wide research. It takes more than an understanding of the human process to understand the science of humans. It has been argued that the study of culture is insignificant in research because it does not have a scientific basis. However, many aspects of human development are impacted by their culture and way of life. The importance of this issue is so high because we live in such a multicultural world. Some may say that humans around the world all need the same
…show more content…
Arnette believes that culture is central to the functioning of humans and therefore psychological findings; however, Haeffel believes that American’s generalize to other cultures, especially when basic processes are being studied. Haeffel’s article, “Theory, Not Cultural Context, Will Advance American Psychology” states that if we focus on cultural context instead of basic processes than American psychology will not be advanced. However, if we transport American-based theories to other cultures, research of those cultures may be lost. Haeffel also argues that this problem with generalizing American physiological research is overstated and he states that “studies using one sample of humans is often able to generalize to another sample of humans.” For example, most of other cultures are also fluent in English because of the influence America has on other cultures. Therefore, America has a major influence on the rest of the world. But Arnette beliefs differentiate with Haeffel’s …show more content…
I believe that most of the research found has been with Americans, not a variety of races. Arnett states, “A focus on falsifiable theories narrows psychology’s intellectual and scientific scope mainly to the laboratory, where experimental situations can be carefully controlled. The problem with this focus is that laboratory studies are often ecologically invalid and have little relation to how people actually live and how they experience their lives.” I believe this statement is true because if you only concentrate on lab results instead of real life results how will you understand what humanity is actually going through. You will never know how people experience their lives unless you focus on cultural beliefs, cultural practices, and social relations.
Arnett’s title of his article shows me how we are too focused on only 5 percent of today’s culture. We have neglected 95 percent of the human race. I believe this to be true because by only using American samples we cannot generalize with the rest of the world due to the differences in all cultures. Arnett’s two arguments state how we cannot generalize with the rest of the world if we are only focused on Americans and that basic process should be replaced with context and culture. Therefore, I agree with Arnett because I do not think if you research only
Arnette believes that culture is central to the functioning of humans and therefore psychological findings; however, Haeffel believes that American’s generalize to other cultures, especially when basic processes are being studied. Haeffel’s article, “Theory, Not Cultural Context, Will Advance American Psychology” states that if we focus on cultural context instead of basic processes than American psychology will not be advanced. However, if we transport American-based theories to other cultures, research of those cultures may be lost. Haeffel also argues that this problem with generalizing American physiological research is overstated and he states that “studies using one sample of humans is often able to generalize to another sample of humans.” For example, most of other cultures are also fluent in English because of the influence America has on other cultures. Therefore, America has a major influence on the rest of the world. But Arnette beliefs differentiate with Haeffel’s …show more content…
I believe that most of the research found has been with Americans, not a variety of races. Arnett states, “A focus on falsifiable theories narrows psychology’s intellectual and scientific scope mainly to the laboratory, where experimental situations can be carefully controlled. The problem with this focus is that laboratory studies are often ecologically invalid and have little relation to how people actually live and how they experience their lives.” I believe this statement is true because if you only concentrate on lab results instead of real life results how will you understand what humanity is actually going through. You will never know how people experience their lives unless you focus on cultural beliefs, cultural practices, and social relations.
Arnett’s title of his article shows me how we are too focused on only 5 percent of today’s culture. We have neglected 95 percent of the human race. I believe this to be true because by only using American samples we cannot generalize with the rest of the world due to the differences in all cultures. Arnett’s two arguments state how we cannot generalize with the rest of the world if we are only focused on Americans and that basic process should be replaced with context and culture. Therefore, I agree with Arnett because I do not think if you research only