Parental Acceptance-Rejection: Theory, Methods, Cross-Cultural Evidence, and Implications

Ethos ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 33 (3) ◽  
pp. 299-334 ◽  
Author(s):  
RONALD P. ROHNER ◽  
ABDUL KHALEQUE ◽  
DAVID E. COURNOYER
Keyword(s):  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Parental Acceptance

Parental Acceptance-Rejection and Parental Control: Cross-Cultural Codes

Ethnology ◽  
1981 ◽  
Vol 20 (3) ◽  
pp. 245 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ronald P. Rohner ◽  
Evelyn C. Rohner
Keyword(s):  
Parental Control ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Parental Acceptance ◽  
Cultural Codes

The Adult Parental Acceptance–Rejection Questionnaire: A Cross-Cultural Comparison of Italian and American Short Forms

Parenting ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 16 (4) ◽  
pp. 219-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincenzo Paolo Senese ◽  
Dario Bacchini ◽  
Maria C. Miranda ◽  
Cecilia Aurino ◽  
Fortuna Somma ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Parental Acceptance ◽  
Cultural Comparison ◽  
Short Forms ◽  
Cross Cultural Comparison

The sense of obligation is culturally modulated

2020 ◽  
Vol 43 ◽  
Author(s):  
Andrea Bender
Keyword(s):  
Cultural Studies ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Human Populations ◽  
Cultural Group ◽  
Target Article ◽  
Sense Of Obligation ◽  
Cross Cultural Studies

Abstract Tomasello argues in the target article that, in generalizing the concrete obligations originating from interdependent collaboration to one's entire cultural group, humans become “ultra-cooperators.” But are all human populations cooperative in similar ways? Based on cross-cultural studies and my own fieldwork in Polynesia, I argue that cooperation varies along several dimensions, and that the underlying sense of obligation is culturally modulated.

Cognitive gadgets: A provocative but flawed manifesto

2019 ◽  
Vol 42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marco Del Giudice
Keyword(s):  
Theory Of Mind ◽  
Cultural Differences ◽  
Twin Studies ◽  
Cross Cultural ◽  
Evolutionary Approach ◽  
Genetic Inheritance ◽  
Double Standards ◽  
Cross Cultural Differences ◽  
Cherry Picking ◽  
Dichotomous Thinking

Abstract The argument against innatism at the heart of Cognitive Gadgets is provocative but premature, and is vitiated by dichotomous thinking, interpretive double standards, and evidence cherry-picking. I illustrate my criticism by addressing the heritability of imitation and mindreading, the relevance of twin studies, and the meaning of cross-cultural differences in theory of mind development. Reaching an integrative understanding of genetic inheritance, plasticity, and learning is a formidable task that demands a more nuanced evolutionary approach.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document