SOCIALIZATION OF EMOTIONAL ADAPTATION IN JAPAN:

FUNDAMENTAL CONCEPTS

Presented in Partial Fulfillment of

the Requirements for the

Social Cognition Comprehensive Examination

BY

DONALD F. KILBURG III

APRIL, 1999

Advisor: Kathryn E. Grant, Ph.D.

Department of Psychology

College of Liberal Arts and Sciences

DePaul University

Chicago, Illinois

2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

I. Introduction...................................................................………. 3

II. A Cautionary Word......................................................……….. 4

III. Japanese Culture and Society..........................................…….. 6

Individualism-Collectivism........................................……... 6

Enryo (Hesitation)......................................................……. 8

Honne and Tatemae (Private Self and Public Self)........…… 9

Roles............................................................................…... 9

The Japanese Language..................................................…. 12

IV. The Japanese Child’s World...............................................….. 17

Authority.........................................................................… 17

Gakurekishakai (Academic Credentialism)....................…... 18

Achievement Motivation..................................................… 19

Gaman (Perseverence).………............................…………. 21

On (Duty) and Honor.....................................................….. 23

Ijime (Bullying) and other Social Problems......................… 24

V. Attaining the Socio-Emotional Ideal in Japan........……………. 27

Amae (Instrumental Dependency).................................…... 27

Primary and Secondary Control......................................….. 31

VI. Concluding Remarks............................................................… 37

References...................................................................................… 39

3

4

I. INTRODUCTION

In recent years, American psychologists have increasingly attempted to outline

culture-specific patterns in emotional adaptation. They are beginning to take considerable

interest in the Japanese. As a result of a largely isolated, 2000-year history, the Japanese

have become one of the most genealogically distinct and culturally homogenous

populations in the world. From a Western perspective, these characteristics make Japan

an intriguing if not mystical place, with rituals and customs very different from our own.

Unfortunately, this perception of exoticness has often allowed us to deny that Japanese

ways have any relevance for America. It comes as no surprise then that many Americans

do not realize the Japanese population is almost half that of the United States and

therefore outnumbers, by a factor of 2 to 1, all U.S. minority groups combined. Such

numbers surely merit consideration of Japan as more than a dismissible anomaly on the

world scene. Indeed, the pace of globalization demands that our quest to recognize

diversity not be limited to that within our own national borders.

The present paper attempts to link important issues in the emotional adaptation

and child-rearing literature with well-established concepts of U.S.-Japan cultural

comparisons. It addresses the American psychologist, with the goal of providing an

overview that might be of help in guiding future developmental, cross-cultural work in the

emotional adaptation domain of stress and coping, in particular. The assumption is that if

we are to fully understand this domain, broad comparisons must be undertaken with

attention to the wider patterns of socialization and enculturation. Such societal

comparisons are especially interesting for what they tell us about ourselves as a matter of

5

contrast. [For exhaustive reviews of Japanese history and culture, see Benedict (1946),

Beasley (1990), and Lebra & Sugiyama (1976).]

II. A CAUTIONARY WORD

In considering cross-cultural work in general, the importance of maintaining a

“beginner’s mind” cannot be understated. Extensive research on judgment, attribution,

and stereotyping has demonstrated the biasing power of preconceptions (for a review, see

Kuhn & Sieger, 1998). Withholding preconceptions may be especially important for

Americans studying Japan at a distance, due to the low level of cultural affinity

Americans generally feel toward the Japanese. Intuitive understanding of Japanese

behavior may be impalpable to such Americans mainly because of the difficulty of

imagining how a given behavior (e.g., bowing) could possibly have a different tone in

Japan than it does in America (Furnham & Bochner, 1986; Stening, 1979).

This researcher collected self-report data from both American and Japanese

psychology undergraduates who had no experience of direct contact with each others’

cultures (unpublished data, Kilburg, 1997). Students were simply asked to write the first

five things that came to mind about each others’ countries (responses were kept

anonymous). In a total of fifty students, the most common responses for Americans

about Japan were: “good education,” “family values/conservatism,” “hard-working,”

“tradition/politeness,” and “crowded.” The most common responses for Japanese about

America were: “freedom,” “large,” “dangerous/selfish,” “multi-racial,” and “nationalistic.”

Certainly the students’ ideas are grounded in some level of reality. Yet such ideas

6

about cultural features often defy rigid categorization (Berry, Poortinga, Segall, & Dasen,

1992). Mundane and anecdotal examples can be illustrative. For example, in Japan it

would not be unusual to encounter: people making loud noises while eating, nudity on

television, public urination in broad-daylight, customers yelling out for the attention of

waitresses, young women clothed in risqué fashion, photography of the deceased at

funerals, forthright comments about physical characteristics (e.g., being overweight),

people who enter residences without first knocking, men viewing pornographic magazines

on rush-hour trains, groups of adults bathing together, women cleaning men’s locker-

rooms when such men are naked, public restrooms wherein men and women coexist,

people smoking nearly anywhere, men dancing together, etcetera.

In summary, the cross-culturalist is cautioned to remember that cultures are often

“mixed bags” when viewed from the outside. This includes one’s own culture. Indeed,

many American ways appear to be at cross-purposes to the outsider, in spite of their

assumed logical coherence to Americans. For example, to many Americans, true freedom

includes permissible gun ownership. Conversely, to many Japanese, true freedom is

precisely what is compromised when strict gun control is lacking. That is, one cannot be

free from the fear that another citizen might be armed and dangerous.

Another example of American assumed consistency can be found in the American

regard for dispensing with formalities. To Americans, such formalities might “get in the

way” of efficient communication. However, to outsiders from Confucian heritage

cultures, efficient communication is often seen as requiring exactly those conventions that

Americans like to part with, such as the use of titles. Without such direct labeling and

7

overt acknowledgment, the Japanese cannot easily and comfortably know “where they

stand.” That is why the exchange of business cards is an integral part of introductions in

Japan. We now turn to a discussion of fundamental concepts and issues relevant to

emotional adaptation in Japan.

III. JAPANESE CULTURE AND SOCIETY

Individualism-Collectivism. Japanese culture has been described as collectivistic,

relative to the individualistic mainstream culture of the United States (Heider, 1958;

Markus & Kitayama, 1991). Hofstede (e.g., 1980) and Triandis (e.g., 1988) have argued

that individualistic cultures emphasize assertiveness, self-confidence, and freedom, while

collectivistic cultures emphasize communal feelings, social usefulness, and acceptance of

authority. These concepts are nicely illustrated by two contrasting metaphors: “the

squeaky wheel gets the oil” (America) and “the nail that stands up gets hammered down”

(Japan).

Americans are often puzzled by the individualism-collectivism distinction

(Bourne, 1975; Guthrie, 1979; Huang, 1977; Kim & Gundykunst, 1988; Oberg, 1960; for

reviews of the culture shock literature, see Barna, 1983; Berry, Kim, Minde, & Mok,

1987; Furnham & Bochner, 1986; Stening, 1979). They may interpret distinction in their

favor, to mean that Americans have more freedom and Japanese are mechanically

conformist (an assumption that is inaccurate, as we shall see). Conversely they may

interpret the distinction as being offensive, thinking America has somehow been

characterized as a place lacking in empathy or concern for social welfare (Huang, 1977;

8

Kim & Gundykunst, 1988). Such defensiveness would appear to be unnecessary,

considering the average American gives nearly 2 percent of his annual income to charitable

causes (Evans, 1999).

In spite of the seemingly elusive nature of the individualism-collectivism

distinction, evidence of a more collectivistic orientation may be found in very mundane

aspects of Japanese life. Consider that at group meetings in Japan it is grossly

inappropriate to pull out food for one’s own private consumption - something that is

very common in America. Consider that on Japanese television, talk shows are typically

hosted by panels, as opposed to solo-personalities like Jay Leno or Oprah Winfrey.

Consider that when drinking alcohol socially, one should both refrain from pouring one’s

own drink, as well as from taking a sip before the group. These examples may be trivial,

but they are certainly what one would expect to find in a society where participation in

groups is of prime emphasis. More rigorous examples will be discussed throughout the

paper. The important point is that the individualism-collectivism dimension is not one of

altruism per se. Rather this dimension refers to the degree to which a culture’s members

are inclined to seek out and function in groups, with at least overt attention to consensus

and accord.

Markus and Kitayama (1991) offer extensive discussion of individualism and

collectivism in America and Japan, as the concepts may relate to questions about culture-

free aspects of cognition, emotion, and motivation. These veteran cross-cultural

researchers present wide-ranging and fascinating evidence that makes a solid case for East-

West cultural differences more powerful than previously thought. Their main assertion is

9

that the Asian interdependent view must be more fully considered in research relating to

construals of the self. Research has in fact shown differential encouragement of self-

construals between Japanese and Americans from early childhood. Japanese mothers

encourage their children’s effective participation in groups, much more than do their

American counterparts. Conversely, American mothers tend to emphasize the

importance of their children’s verbal expression and leadership skills among their

children’s peers more so than do Japanese mothers (Hess, 1996; Azuma, 1996; and

Machida, 1996).

Azuma (1996) argues that this difference may have historical roots that stretch as

far back as the 16th century. America was a land deemed full of opportunities and

exploitable resources. Assertiveness and innovation were therefore immediately

rewarded. At the same time, Japan had become a closed society, with a “zero-sum” state

of resources (a state wherein one person’s gain is another’s loss). Azuma admits

competition has always existed inside Japan, but that the long-standing zero-sum state

has bred a system wherein the self-assertive personality is taboo. Whether that is true or

not, it is clear that Japanese history lacks clear individualism mythologies (Benedict,

1946).

Enryo. Consistent with an emphasis on community, Japanese people are often

remarkably sensitive to each other’s feelings, on a moment-to-moment basis (Markus and

Kitayama, 1991). The Japanese word enryo, has been used to describe a near paralyzing

hesitation Japanese people reportedly feel in certain social settings demanding group

harmony. There may be intense stress associated with the potential of offending others

10

in such cases. This offensiveness is not limited to affront; immodesty is included.

Americans who have traveled to Japan often note experiencing numerous interactions

between Japanese wherein the participants frequently avert eye-contact, pull air through

their teeth, and even visibly shake, in what would seem to be matters of casual conflict in

America (Benedict, 1946; Bourne, 1975; Guthrie, 1979; Huang, 1977; Kim &

Gundykunst, 1988; Oberg, 1960; Barna, 1983; Berry, Kim, Minde, & Mok, 1987;

Furnham & Bochner, 1986; Stening, 1979).

Honne and Tatemae. The previously discussed enryo (hesitation) may be partly

explained by another aspect of Japanese culture that appears to differ substantially, at

least in degree, from that of the United States: honne and tatemae. The former represents

private affect or cognition and the latter represents public affect or cognition (Doi, 1973).

Japanese people often feel they should keep their opinions to themselves, in the interests

of not offending others (Chen, 1996). Americans may conceive of this as unreasonable

timidity and even sheepish conformity. However, the Japanese are not as driven by

values of self-expression as are Americans (Barnlund, 1975; Markus and Kitayama,

1991). In this vein, Azuma (1996) argues that Japanese are socialized to be good

listeners, whereas Americans are socialized to listen “with a mind full of opinions (p.

239).”

Recent experimental evidence of the importance of the honne/tatemae

(private/public) distinction was provided by Iwao (1997). She examined cultural

differences in the inconsistency-reducing behaviors (i.e., those aimed at reducing cognitive

dissonance) of 110 Japanese and 169 American university students with regard to

11

differences of opinion with significant others on ego-involving issues. Americans had

more preference for active inconsistency-reducing responses than did Japanese. The

Japanese were evidently more tolerant of cognitive dissonance. In more positive terms,

the Japanese were more concerned with interpersonal harmony. This further relates to a

discussion of roles in Japan.

Roles. The importance of roles in governing nearly every aspect of Japanese life

cannot easily be understated. Asian societies, in general, are assumed to be highly

demarcated based on their common Confucian heritage (Benedict, 1946). The primary

social distinction made in Japan is between uchi (family, household, friends, and often

place of employment or study) and soto (strangers and those who are not uchi members).

Within the uchi/soto distinction, there exist many levels of status of permanent and semi-

permanent nature (Lebra & Sugiyama, 1976).

A discussion of Japanese roles is not solely limited to social status. It also

includes consideration of the shifting, often highly contrasting behavior of Japanese as

they make their way in and out of various social contexts. Certain activities represent

discrete roles of time and place. These include festivals, professional meetings, fine arts

classes, sports and martial arts classes, and nomikai (drinking parties). The behavior of

Japanese can take on a very different tone, depending on these contexts (Kitayama, et al.,

1997). Of course, the behavior of individuals of any culture may radically vary across

situations. However, in Japan what appears to be the basic presentation of personality

to an American can be very context-dependent. For example, American businessmen in a

Japanese office are often befuddled when Japanese salarymen do not revel in reminisce

12

with them about the previous night of drinking. The workplace is typically seen as a

place restricted to work. Moreover, such reminisce is likely to be very state-dependent in

Japan.

The extensive use of uniforms in Japan underscores role-specific behavior. Nearly

all students and workers wear uniforms. Uniforms serve to invoke a structured “frame of

mind” that is highly valued in Japan. Japanese people generally like wearing them too,

because it gives them a sense of belonging. Americans may tend to see the personality of

such highly role-specific behavior as being somehow superficial or insincere. Yet

Japanese tend to view expression of a more cross-role-consistent personality as being

highly disorganized and thus inappropriate. But again, the difference is relative, not

absolute.

Numerous other examples reflect highly role-specific behavior in Japan. For

instance, the public display of romantic affection one can observe in America is grossly

taboo in Japan. It is considered behavior that belongs in the context of the home or the

“rabu-hoteru,” which are anonymously-paid-for motels wherein a tryst can be discretely

arranged. This prohibition of public display of affection also extends to family members.

Americans are often perplexed when they see Japanese family members reunite with a

simple bow, after even a year’s time apart. Nevertheless, there are contexts in Japan

wherein, directed at family or not, expression of affection might seem excessive to

Americans. The “karaoke bokusu” (English: “kari-oki box”) is a definitive example.

While singing to their favorite tunes in semi-private booths, Japanese people young and

old alike might hang on one another in maudlin fashion.

13

Here a discussion of roles includes the issue of self-disclosure. In general,

Japanese roles (at least relative to American roles) limit self-disclosure of true feelings to

uchi members (family/friends). This is related to the honne/tatemae (private/public)

distinction and to enryo (hesitation). As Iwao (1997) demonstrated, Japanese are

reluctant to express ideas that might risk confrontation, the offending of sensibilities,

and/or the transferring or projecting of stress or so-called “dirty laundry.” To Americans,

“tightlippedness” of the Japanese degree is typically perceived as being too formal and

thus undesirable. Americans tend to disclose more, equating casualness with kindness

(Benedict, 1946; Bourne, 1975; Guthrie, 1979; Huang, 1977; Kim & Gundykunst, 1988;

Oberg, 1960; Barna, 1983; Berry, Kim, Minde, & Mok, 1987; Furnham & Bochner, 1986;

Stening, 1979).

Here it should be cautioned that the very definitions of “casual” and “formal” are

relative. Americans who interact with Japanese tend to think they are allowing the

Japanese to dispense with formality, and thereby doing them a favor. For example,

President Clinton probably thought he was easing the feelings of Japanese Prime Minister

Obuchi at their recent meeting by addressing him with his first name, Keizo. However,

even Japanese people who have known each other for decades do not call each other by

their first names. They nearly always use family names followed by one of several

honorific suffixes.

To an extent, formality is not seen in Japan as detracting from kindness, but rather

enhancing it. Japanese generally believe that explicit honor and humility serve to maintain

harmony. They also tend to believe that status/role distinctions and careful

14

communication are crucial for keeping relationships clear (Benedict, 1946). This kind of

attention allows for a high degree of predictability, something Japanese tend to value

(Lebra & Sugiyama, 1976). In this sense, the American style of communication can be

very indirect and challenging to the Japanese. It requires striking a delicate balance

between casualness and deference that is not clearly defined by fixed vocabulary as it is in

Japan.

The Japanese Language. A discussion of emotional adaptation in Japan would be

insufficient without consideration of the contribution of language. Human beings are

social animals and the ways in which they negotiate social reality through language surely

impact on the balance of affect. One example is deference. Students of Japanese as a

foreign language are quick to note that in order to convey the necessary level of deference

they have to learn three or four different versions of the same words (not including

conjugation for tense). Many Japanese verbs have at least four forms: “dictionary form,”

polite, humble, and honorific. Nouns are often accompanied by various prefixes,

depending on the status of the person to whom they belong. Proper names are typically

preferred over pronouns and even when they are not, use of the second person is highly

taboo. Rather than saying, “you...,” the appropriate way to speak to someone is to use

their family name (as if you were talking about someone who were not there). There is

also a multitude of words to indicate the actions of giving and receiving, depending upon

each actor’s status. All these politeness features of the Japanese language constrain and

impinge upon the flow of emotion between people, affecting their adaptation in various

ways.

15

When speaking to or about non-uchi members (i.e. people outside of their

household and close social circles) Japanese people are expected to use at least the polite

tense. They also almost always add the honorific suffix -san or -sama to non-uchi

members’ family names. Yet even within the household, each member addresses the

others according to their membership title. For example, one sibling would say to

another, “please come here oneisan (older-sister).” Husband and wife often use the terms

otousan (father) and okasan (mother) when addressing each other. Moreover, as man and

woman, they have various words and particles of their own - marking their gender clearly.

Even university students (who are often thought to be in the least restricted Japanese life

stage) refer to each other hierarchically as kohai (junior) or sempai (senior). According to

the Confucian framework, power and knowledge thereby run from top to bottom,

according to seniority.

Interestingly, one use of honorific terms that particularly surprises the foreigner in

Japan is that which accompanies the “royal treatment” that customers receive. The

customer is afforded a very high status in Japan. Clerks and waiters in Japan rarely make

self-disclosures or “chit-chat” as they often do in America. They are strictly bound to

very scripted roles of interaction that are essentially standardized nation-wide. Such

standardization is highly valued in Japan (some airline customer service representatives

are not even allowed to wear corrective glasses).

Perhaps the most crucial element in a discussion of how the Japanese language

might bear on emotional adaptation is the way in which the language is used. Very

seldom is it used in such a direct way as is English (Brown, 1987). Foreign “non-

16

initiates” of the Japanese ways, tend not to realize the extent to which this is true. The

following examples illustrate: (1) the Japanese word for “no” (ie) is generally restricted to

completely neutral subject matter, (2) the word order (subject-object-verb) is such that a

statement can be made affirmative or negative at the last moment, (3) subject assignment

is diffuse and often omitted altogether, (4) use of passive and intransitive tenses

predominates (thus very often agency is expressed as being not necessarily internal to

anyone), (5) use of hedge words permeates nearly all kinds of verbal interaction, for even

the most mundane topics (e.g., when a Japanese person answers the telephone, he/she

says “this is Tanaka, however.”), (6) use of “volley” words (such as the Canadian English

utterance “eh” or the American “ya know”) to keep conversation consensual is a hallmark

of moment-to-moment interaction - the utterance “neh” is particularly common, (7) there

are scripted phrases for seeking interdependence and conveying indebtedness (e.g.,

yoroshiku-onegaishimasu and o-sewani-narimashita). (8) use of a recitative style of

speaking is common and allows for a high degree of superficial conversational

predictability. In sum, if Japanese were a computer programming language it would be

composed of a very high percentage of statements that serve no overt function and have

no overt content. Such predisposition for indirection allows the Japanese speaker to be

highly circumspect, relative to the English speaker - perhaps especially the American

English speaker (Makino & Tsutsui, 1986).

Americans may wonder how real meaning is communicated, given such seeming

indirection. The answer is that communication between two Japanese people often

operates at two distinct levels; one highly superficial, the other rich with paralinguistic

17

information (Lebra & Sugiyama, 1976; Benedict, 1946; Brown, 1987). At the

paralinguistic level, a number of uniquely Japanese facial expressions, gestures, and other

actions have been noted (Lebra & Sugiyama, 1976; Furnham & Bochner, 1986; Furnham

& Bochner, 1986; Reischauer, 1987). Examples of these include: tilting the head, crinkling

the lips, averting eye-contact, pulling air through the teeth, nodding the head, and of

course bowing from the waist.

The use of understatement accompanies paralinguistic communication. Whereas

Americans will exclaim their love or hate for things as seemingly neutral as pizza or lima

beans, Japanese will report that something is suki (likable) or amari sukijanai (not

particularly likable). Again, this kind of understatement is connected to avoiding

disagreement, and thus risk of negative feelings. When Japanese interact with Americans

for the first time, they may not realize that Americans are not especially offended when

people hold views that oppose their own. Conversely, Americans in Japan are often

surprised at how sensitive Japanese can be in the face of negativity.

Expression of negativity is much more taboo in Japan than in America (Lebra &

Sugiyama, 1976). This writer once witnessed a Japanese who lost his wallet with his

identification, credit cards, and about 300 dollars worth of cash. His public expression

was simply to frown a little and put his head down. In another instance, a friend

inadvertently dropped her contact down the drain. Her response was a mere sigh. In

contrast, Americans may seem over-expressive, theatrical, and even unpredictably volatile

to Japanese. The caveat for researchers is that base-lines may vary, calling scales in

question.

18

Interestingly, Kitayama and Markus (1995) have pointed out that not only does

the base-line for what constitutes negative expression differ between Japan and America,

but so too does the actual experience of negative emotions like anger. The reasoning is

that anger stems from a highly independent self-construal, something less common in

Japan and other highly collectivistic countries than in America. Thus what Americans

often perceive as simply a facade can have real consequences for decreasing the actual

subjective experience of anger - not only by preventing the “spread” of it, but also by

virtue of the fact that anger is associated with affront to one’s identity at the level of

individual ego.

There are other ways strong negative emotion is minimized in Japan. Iwao (1997)

explains that Japanese speech and thought tend “to emphasize the inability to attain or

recognize absolutes (p. 331).” Essentially, the Japanese way is to hedge in such a manner

that equivocation is uncommon. Accordingly, “agreeable words” are used liberally. Two

of the most common words of scripted use are sumimasen (literally, “excuse me”) and

chotto (literally, “a little”). They are all-purpose, “smoothing” words and can serve to

make an excuse, apologize, get attention, say good-bye - or even express surprise or

disgust in a gentle way. Because these words and numerous other words are available for

stabilizing communication (and thereby relationships), Japanese are able to maintain

“face” in nearly every situation (maintaining “face” is not limited to one’s own).

Tannen (1998) points out that the Japanese apologize in conversation far more

than do Americans. She argues that such apologies help to diffuse negative feelings

without necessarily assigning blame. The fact that litigation for even minor accidents is

19

common in the U.S. and highly unusual in Japan is cited by Tannen as evidence that

Japanese typically employ non-confrontational means of conflict resolution. The use of

such words as sumimasen, gomenasai, and shitsurei are all ways to say “sorry” and

“excuse me.” Whereas Americans tend to use such expressions conservatively, a

Japanese may repeat them over and over in one short interaction. In fact, Japanese often

say “sorry” in cases where Americans say “thanks” - the notion is that the receiver is

taking the gift away from the giver. (Interestingly, the travel books Japanese read about

the U.S. warn them not to make apologies in their normal manner, for risk of being taken

advantage of.)

IV. THE JAPANESE CHILD’S WORLD

Authority. Given the tone of the previous sections, one might suppose respect

for authority is greater among Japanese children than American. This has in fact been

reported by Vaughn (1996). Vaughn examined projective stories Japanese adolescents

wrote in response to the TAT (Thematic Apperception Test). Compared to American

adolescents, Japanese showed little ambivalence to authority and little concern about

assertion of individual decision-making. This is not particularly surprising given previous

research. What is curious is that Japanese mothers have been found to de-emphasize their

authority role with children and instead give their children a high degree of respect

(Lanham & Garrick, 1996; Lewis, 1996). Thus, while authority is pervasive in wider

Japanese society, adult authority with children plays a very subtle role in the attaining of

behavioral compliance. Moreover, the importance of firm control of children as a cultural

20

ethic is considered by many researchers to be greater in the U.S. than in Japan (Lanham &

Garrick, 1996; Lewis, 1996). Americans who have been around children in their own

country as well as in Japan typically note that young Japanese children seem to be

allowed to “run around as they please.” That young Japanese children are in some sense

“let to learn” with a “hands off” approach was reported by Hara and Minagawa (1996,

p.17). Questions about the extent to which this is true remain for consideration in the

following sections.

Gakurekishakai (academic credentialism) has been characterized as rigid, fast-

paced, and highly competitive in Japanese society. From relatively early on, Japanese

parents, particularly mothers, are generally very involved and insistent in their children's

educational development, compared to American parents (Shwalb & Shwalb, 1996;

Shelley, 1993). This is reflected in the time children spend at school. The Ministry of

Education reported that Japanese students now have 29 class hours/week, 220 days/year.

This compares to 25.5 hours/week, 180 days/year in the U.S. (“Toward more creative

learning,” 1998).

In Japan it is not enough to study more than Americans. Japanese parents want

their children to gain an early edge over other Japanese children, against whom they must

directly compete. In fact, nearly 50% of Japanese preschoolers, 60% of elementary

school students, and 70% of junior high school students get some kind of formal

education outside of the home and after the regular school-day (“Nearly half of all

preschoolers,” 1996; Vaughn, 1996). Many such students attend private juku (“cram”

schools) every day. Well-known Japanologist Ezra Vogel (1996) has explained that these

21

cram schools provide supplementary education that can be of primary importance in

determining whether one passes or fails high school and university entrance examinations.

The outcomes of the entrance exams are crucial because employers are highly likely to

recruit university graduates based primarily on school name recognition (White, 1996).

There is, however, evidence that gakurekishakai (academic credentialism) is

changing, (“Toward more creative learning,” 1998). Japanese students currently attend

school two Saturdays a month. This is down from four Saturdays just a few years ago

and the Ministry of Education has reported that effective April 2002, a 5-day school

week will be instituted. There is also talk of consolidating the exam system such that

students compete for junior and senior high schools as a set, rather than taking a test for

each. This would certainly reduce the number of tests. Yet it would also likely shift the

intense preparation to even younger ages. It therefore remains a controversial

proposition.

Achievement Motivation. Formal education is the occupation of children in all

developed countries, but what is perhaps uniquely Japanese is the pervasiveness of

motivation to achieve academically (De Vos, 1996). Numerous studies have noted that

achievement motivation in Japan is intimately tied to both positive accomplishment and

to personal alienation or delinquency (De Vos, 1996; Stevenson, Azuma, & Hakuta, 1986;

Stevenson & Stigler, 1992). That is, Japanese children have been found to be highly

motivated to attain external recognition of their success and when they fail at this task,

maladaptiveness of some kind often results.

Other studies have found a greater appreciation for the value of effort and hard

22

work among Japanese children compared to American (Vaughn, 1996; Machida, Hess,

Azuma, 1996). Perhaps most interesting is the socialization link that has been established

in studies comparing patterns of mother-child communication in Japanese and Americans.

Japanese mothers have been found to put more emphasis on their children’s effort. In

contrast, American mothers put more emphasis on their children’s ability (Machida,

Hess, Azuma 1996).

Machida, et al. (1996) also found that mother-child communication accurately

predicts performance in mathematics in Japan and performance in vocabulary in the U.S.

In the Machida et al. study, Japanese mothers hassled their children less than American

mothers when mistakes were made at math problems. Conversely, American mothers

were shown to provide more verbal instructions. This difference may indicate Japanese

mothers are more likely than American mothers to provide their children with a learning

environment wherein their children’s efforts can pay off with optimal feelings of self-

efficacy on the part of the children. At the least, the difference is consistent with the

noted importance of paralinguistic communication in Japan.

Controlled experimental evidence has suggested the Japanese emphasis on effort

and achievement motivation may be detectable in even basic problem-solving tasks.

Smith & Caplan (1988) tested Japanese, Chinese-American, Israeli, and American

children’s performance on the Matching Familiar Figures Test (MFFT). The MFFT is a

test involving accuracy-speed tradeoffs that children make in problem-solving tasks. The

results of this test demonstrated that for all four cultures, error rates decreased much more

than latency increased, across ages 6-10. That is, the older children of all four cultures

23

(with no significant difference between them) were able to hold down the number of

errors without wasting as much time as the younger children. However, of all the younger

children, the Japanese were much more accurate, without compromising latency to the

same extent. The researchers suggested that Japanese children may be socialized along a

skill-ability dimension relatively early in their development.

Gaman. According to Lanham & Garrick (1996), gaman (perseverance) and

related gambaru (trying hard) are strongly emphasized in Japan, beginning in the first

grade. Indeed, anyone who has lived in Japan has heard versions of these words uttered

nearly every single day. In particular, Japanese people often say, ganbatte kudasai,

which means roughly “please try hard.” Ironically, Americans tend to use the fatalistic

“good luck” in similar circumstances. The word gaman is typically used in the context of

“can you gaman?” In other words, “can you make it through?” (for example, make it

through class without having eaten lunch). Interestingly, there are numerous “game”

shows on Japanese television wherein contestants must maintain gaman in the face of

various intimidating tasks. One show recently had bowling-balls rolling at adult

contestants’ heads (which were locked in frames resembling Medieval torture devices) to

see who could “play chicken” the best. Another show had contestants see who could

“last the longest” in a bath of scorching hot water. A final example of a gaman show used

child participants. The unwitting first graders had to make it through a “haunted” house

under timed conditions. If they cried, which many did, they were disqualified. This

writer suspects the show would have raised some protests in the U.S. Nevertheless,

in all these shows, a means of escaping the difficult situation is always provided, so the

24

mood is generally a humorous one.

To investigate the presupposed importance of gaman (perseverance) and

gambaru (trying hard) in Japanese culture, Blinco (1992) tested the hypothesis that

Japanese children would demonstrate higher task persistence than American children.

Utilizing a puzzle-like game, 193 first grade students were timed with a stopwatch.

Results strongly supported Blinco’s hypothesis, leading her to consider that Americans

might have lower thresholds than Japanese for abandoning work in the face of an inability

to attain completion of the work. Moreover, Blinco suggests that the mechanism for such

a cultural difference could be that Japanese mothers place more emphasis on effort than

ability, compared to American mothers. Of course, conclusions about the differential

worth of effort and ability should consider that at some point the marginal returns of task

persistence diminish. Thus, knowing “when to quit” has its own advantages.

In addition to being reputed to be academically motivated and persistent, Japanese

children are also sometimes criticized by the popular media for being less curious and less

creative than their American counterparts. It is certainly true that as students they must

meet strict conformity demands of behavior and appearance that serve to inhibit

individual expression (Shwalb & Shwalb, 1996). The Japanese junior high school, in

particular, is noted for its uniformity and discouragement of spontaneity (Shand, 1996).

Based on some practices, the Japanese junior high school might even be considered a kind

of cultural “basic training.” For instance, some schools require students with naturally

lighter hair to die it, so that it conforms to the acceptable standard of dark brown/black.

On and Honor. In reflecting on gaman/gambaru (perseverance/trying hard), it

25

would be inappropriate to overlook the importance of on (social indebtedness) and honor

in Japanese culture (De Vos, 1996). The value of persevering for the sake of on and honor

throughout Japanese history has been well-documented (Reischauer, 1987). Japanese

Samurai myths of endurance, courage, and duty are inculcated from early childhood. The

Samurai, it is told, enforced the code of conduct for centuries. Honor was his life. He

avoided disgrace and shame, and he avenged insults with his sword. Essentially for over

half a millennium, order was kept in Japan by these Samurai, and only this century by

politicians and bureaucrats. It makes sense then that the Samurai is still a deeply revered

symbol in the Japanese collective consciousness.

On is conceived of as a need to repay others. The word on is used in the sense of

“wearing an on to someone” or “having an on to repay” (Benedict, 1946; Lebra &

Sugiyama, 1976). On operates on a number of levels related to one’s identity and can

even stretch back to long-since-deceased ancestors. In regard to daily life, Japanese are

known for their practice of keeping highly organized “mental records” of the “balances” in

their social worlds and whether reciprocity is being maintained. When repayment of on

occurs, it is likely to exceed the debt, such that interdependence can continue if so desired.

Americans do not typically function this way (Althen, 1988). Generally speaking,

American repayment of “casual” debt may or may not occur in a timely fashion. On the

other hand, exchange of goods or services is likely to be an explicit, contractual matter - at

least among professionals.

In terms of child-rearing, De Vos (1996) argues that such a Japanese social

identity of indebtedness is highly related to socialization within the primary family.

26

Mothers foster a sense of hierarchy. This is coupled with a deep feeling of owing others,

especially members of the ie, or household - which ideally carries on in an unbroken chain

suggestive of a fraternity.

Ijime and other Social Problems. We now turn to a discussion of some common

stress responses in Japanese children that, in light of the proceeding concepts, may have a

decidedly Japanese character to them. As we noted before, school violence is on the rise

in Japan. The term ijime was thrust into the Japanese mainstream over a decade ago

(Schoolland, 1986). It is the Japanese word for “bullying.” Connections have been made

between ijime, child suicide, school refusal, delinquency, violence, and the rigid system of

academic credentialism (McClure & Shirataki, 1989).

The problem of ijime is perceived as being so threatening that recently a junior

high school in Hatogaya, Saitama-Ken issued all students special telephone cards that

would automatically connect to school counselors - for use by bullying victims who are

reluctant to seek consultation in person (“Students to get telephone cards,” 1996).

Although it is doubtful that this practice is very widespread, other unique measures are

being adopted. Recently Newsweek reported that Japanese mothers are even bugging

their kids with credit-card size transmitters, that can now be rented for about 100 dollars

a month (Howard & Tobias, 1998).

Novel precautions aside, bullying is a very serious concern in Japan. A recent

article in the Mainichi Daily Shimbun declared: “Survey: Violence running rampant in

elementary schools.” In a 92% response-rate study of 33,323 participants representing

58 schools, the Japanese Management and Coordination Agency reported that 36% of

27

elementary school students and 23% of junior high school students have been victims of

school-yard violence (“Survey,” 1998). To add to that, the Japanese Ministry of

Education found that violence is on the rise from first grade through twelfth. Violent

incidents among students topped 10,575 in 1997, up 32 percent from 1995 (“Too much

pressure too young,” 1998).

Chen (1996) has argued that gakurekishakai (academic credentialism) is one

culprit in the matter. Evidently the pressure to compete academically results in

frustration and anger that is in turn displaced on peers. Other researchers have implicated

the ethic of gaman/gambaru (perseverance/trying hard) and the kohai/sempai

(junior/senior) system, for the added compulsion and imposed hierarchical structure they

present, respectively (Stevenson, Azuma, Hakuta, 1986; Stevenson, H. & Stigler, 1992;

Schoolland, 1986). A former Japanese bullying victim, Hiroyuki Tamura, came out of the

closet recently with a book (“Why Bullying Won’t Die”) that corroborates this analysis.

He wrote that bullying would not stop “unless we have a society where people respect

other people for their character and not judge them by their test scores” (“Bullying won’t

die,” 1996). The use of social ostracism as a way to modify behavior is seen as a major

component of this (De Vos, 1996; Lanham & Garrick, 1996).

McClure & Shirataki (1989) reviewed the child psychiatry literature in Japan,

arguing that competition and social ostracism lead to school apathy, hatred of classes, and

eventually nonattendance and anger directed at the mother for returning the child to school

(parent-abuse is actually more common than child-abuse in Japan). Data from the

Japanese Central Council of Child Welfare implicates Japan’s rapid modernization.

28

Evidently, this modernization has undermined the traditional extended family structure,

particularly lessening the father’s role (McClure & Shirataki, 1989). Loss of the father’s

role is cited as a main factor in adjustment failure, but the precise mechanism is unclear.

One thing is evident - most school-refusers give bullying as a reason (equally in both

sexes). Moreover, bullied kids often report the reason for bullying is that they are: ugly,

different, even “too clever” (McClure & Shirataki, 1989; De Vos, 1996; Lanham &

Garrick, 1996). They also report having only superficial friendships. What is

particularly troublesome is that, as anger is displaced, bullying can spread downward

from older to younger children.

In extreme cases bullying in Japan leads to suicide. In 1985, the suicide and self-

inflicted injury rate of children under 14 was thought to be high at 0.5 per 100,000 people

(McClure & Shirataki, 1989). This problem is associated not only with bullying, but

with letting down parents. This stands in contrast to suicides in older groups and other

cultures, which often result from relationship problems with members of the opposite

sex. McClure & Shirataki cite a ”yearning for adoration,” as suicide is often calculated to

affect others - in terms of mourning and regret.

Certainly there is no shortage of romanticized ritualistic suicide in Japanese

history. Harakiri, as it is properly called, was an act of honor in the face of hardship

with no way out. It involved a set of highly circumscribed rituals that culminated with

insertion of a dagger into the abdomen (Benedict, 1946; Beasley, 1990; Lebra & Sugiyama,

1976). Indeed, even in modern Japan, suicide is an option many take. In fact, since 1971

the police annually search for suicide bodies in a forest north-west of Mt. Fuji, in

29

Yamanashi-Ken. The year’s total for that small forest alone was 58 (“Toll mounts in

‘suicide forest’,” 1998).

Other Japanese childhood problems include: solvent sniffing, spending an

excessive amount of time at game centers, and various psychosomatic and eating

disorders. Anorexia apparently occurs in the same form as in the West, but obesity is

much less common (perhaps because the Japanese menu is quite light). Therefore when

obesity is found it is likely to indicate psychological problems. Personality

abnormalities, in general, have been shown in many asthmatic children. Lastly, children of

alcoholic fathers have been shown to have a high incidence of psychosomatic disorders

(McClure & Shirataki, 1989).

In spite of the noted increases in Japanese childhood problems, most Japanese

young people evidence few problems compared to American young people. Crime,

divorce, and social unrest in wider Japanese society are also still very low when compared

with other technological societies (McClure & Shirataki, 1989). This sustained

“innocence” is likely related to homogeneity and isolation (Shwalb & Shwalb, 1996). Yet

it must surely be rooted, in part, in how the Japanese socialize their young to adapt,

emotionally.

V. ATTAINING THE SOCIO-EMOTIONAL IDEAL IN JAPAN

Amae. Of all the concepts presented so far, amae and its various derivatives are

perhaps best suited to delineate Japanese-American differences in the process of

socialization of emotional adaptation. De Vos (1996) built on the original work of Doi

30

(1986) to explain amae as a relationship whereby the “sacrificial” Japanese mother

stimulates her child in a kind of guilt-based manner. This relationship of “psychological

discipline” forms the basis of what can be called “instrumental dependency” (De Vos,

1996). It stretches far beyond the mother-child relationship.

At the outset of this paper, individualism and collectivism were put forth as

useful concepts in contrasting broad-based behaviors of Japanese with those of

Americans. Surely in America, maturity is viewed in relation to independence, a correlate

of individualism. That is, the mature American is one who has attained a high degree of

self-reliance and autonomy. In contrast, Japanese maturity is marked by knowledge of

“on whom to be dependent or not to be dependent.” In other words, in Japan, one must

learn how to amaeru (Hara & Wagatsuma, 1996).

Doi (1973, 1986) has argued that Japanese mothers tend to see their infants and

young children as being asocial. Their goal is then to bring them into attunement with

others, as opposed to encouraging them to “stand on their own,” per se. Thus emotional

nurturing is the focus, in contrast with assertiveness and independent self-control. The

Japanese image of the ii ko, or “good child,” therefore places an emphasis on “sweetness,”

receptivity, and acceptance of guidance in particular. The Japanese mother hopes her

child will carry these qualities into adulthood.

Interestingly, this may help to explain why, half a century ago, General Douglass

MacArthur declared Japan to be a “nation of 12-year-olds.” From the standpoint of a

member of a culture that reveres independence, Japanese receptivity surely appears

childish. To add to this, many Japanese (adults included) have a love of things kawai

31

(cute) that Westerners often find sophomoric. At the least, it is apparent that Japanese

children lead lives that are much more sheltered and supervised than do American children

(Gjerde, 1996). Japanese children’s lives are basically dominated by home and school, in

a society that is in many ways reminiscent of the American 1950s.

With the goal of dependence (more accurately, interdependence) in mind, children

under 7 years of age are often indulged more so than American children of 7 (Hara &

Wagatsuma, 1996). Encouraging interdependency is seen by Japanese mothers as a way

to achieve sunao, or “wholehearted cooperation” (White, 1996; Gjerde, 1996). Once

sunao has been established, demands on the child can become increasingly extreme

because the close mother-child bond can be used as an instrument of control (Gjerde,

1996). Overt control then ceases to be as necessary as it presumably is for American

mothers. The will of the “sunao” child has thereby intentionally not been separated to a

large degree from the will of his/her mother (Rohlen, 1989).

Consistent with sunao (wholehearted cooperation) and emotional nurturing, there

is considerable evidence that Japanese mothers coddle their children more so than

American mothers (Doi, 1986; .Hara & Minagawa, 1996; Zahn-Waxler et al., 1996). So

great is the Japanese mother’s desire to be protective of her child, that “baby-sitting” is

highly uncommon in Japan. Even in times when mothers must express negativity, as in

punishment, they may do so in a way that reinforces the importance of the protective,

collectivistic relationship. For example, it is common for Japanese mothers to take away

benefits of dependence as punishment (Vogel, S.H., 1996). An indication of this is the

relative absence of the practice of “grounding” in Japan, compared to America.

32

Interestingly, when children refuse to go to school, Japanese mothers may become even

more indulgent, blaming themselves for not having fostered amae (instrumental

dependency) enough (Vogel, S.H., 1996).

It is worth noting that Rohlen (1989), a Japanologist at Stanford, has drawn

connections between sunao (wholehearted cooperation) and wider institutions of

Japanese society. He argues that individualism is not comfortable with the kinds of

emotional attachment that are pervasive in Japan. As an example, Rohlen calls attention

to the aforementioned fact that mediation and conciliation have been highly successful

ways of reducing conflict - as opposed to formal written agreements and litigation. His

central idea is that since Japan is neither a police state nor a totalitarian society, the

distinctive mode of Japanese social control becomes a compelling issue.

Unless Japanese ways are dismissed as being somehow reserved for Japan alone,

the question then inevitably becomes, “what kind of relationships should society value?”

In his lengthy essay, Rohlen proposes withholding the label of “Japanese” and discussing

the modes of control themselves. Essentially what Rohlen asks is: “Can society make

individuals who ‘bask’ in pleasing one another?” This question is a progressive one,

discussed by many Japanophiles who are interested in the potential influence of Japanese

culture on other cultures.

In further delineating amae (instrumental dependency), wakaraseru and omoiyari

should be discussed. Wakaraseru simply means “having understanding” and omoiyari

has connotations not far removed from “thoughtfulness,” “sympathy,” and “empathy.”

When combined in the context of mother-child socialization, the dynamics of these

33

concepts are more understandable. That is, if a child is interdependent with his mother

(and wholehearted about it), then all the mother needs to do to control the child is to have

the child understand the ramifications of his behavior in the context of her feelings - and

therefore the feelings of others whom she has noted as being worthy.

There is mounting research that supports the above conceptualization. Lanham

and Garrick (1996) have demonstrated that Japanese mothers typically ask obedience of

their children by giving the reason that the undesirable behavior would “cause others

trouble.” That is, Japanese mothers tend to focus on the social consequences of their

child’s behavior. In contrast, Machida, Hess, and Azuma (1996) have found that

American mothers tend to control children by explicit, authoritative means (e.g., “don’t

do that, because I said not to”). Other researchers have further argued that interpersonal

sensitization is the primary focus of Japanese mothers (Vaughn, 1996; Zahn-Waxler,

Friedman, Cole, Mizuta, & Hiruma, 1996; Holloway & Minami; Gjerde, 1996).

Ironically, Azuma (1996) found a negative correlation between American mothers’ use of

authority messages lacking explanation and children’s school achievement. In Japanese

mothers a positive correlation was found. To explain these findings, Azuma speculated

that directive methods may work only in secure mother-child pairs, with perhaps amae-

like affiliation (i.e., that of instrumental dependency).

Primary and Secondary Control. In a 1984 issue of American Psychologist,

several Japanese and American researchers had an illuminating discussion of cross-

cultural differences in emotional adaptation that yielded a useful conceptual distinction.

The Americans (Weisz, Rothbaum, and Blackburn) provided the initial concepts and the

34

Japanese (Kojima and Azuma) responded with important parameters. Two types of

psychological control were discussed: primary and secondary. These are essentially

types of coping. Primary control is aimed at influencing existing realities. It is thought to

be pervasive in American coping styles. Secondary control is aimed at accommodating to

existing realities. It is thought to be pervasive in Japanese coping styles. That is,

American control tends to be assertive, deductive, and perhaps strong-armed at times. In

contrast, Japanese control tends to be suggestive, inductive, and generally acquiescent.

Secondary control relates to amae and enryo. To learn how, consider otonashi.

Otonashi is a “reserve, modesty, and reflection” that Japanese mothers hope to instill in

their children (Gjerde, 1996). It is considered part of the ideal state or personality in

Japan. It is both a reflection of the amae relationship and something that contributes to

the maintenance of it. Enryo is simply the feeling or condition of being sensitive or

vigilant of the possibility of breaching the state of otonashi (literally, “soundlessness”).

The monkeys of “hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil” are certainly illustrative here,

and were in fact enshrined at Toshogu in Nikko, by the indigenous Shinto religion, in

1650.

That enryo and otonashi are any more prevalent in Japan than in America is

reflected by numerous mundane practices (Lebra & Sugiyama, 1976). Particularly

amusing is that of automobile etiquette. When drivers come to a stop-light after dark,

they turn their head-lights off - so as not to shine in the rear-view mirror of the person in

front of them. When they are yielded to, they offer a tap on the horn in “thanks” (or

more accurately, “sorry.”) And when they are let pass, they momentarily activate their

35

emergency lights in a visual “excuse me for going first.” Such common courtesies

represent the proverbial “tip of the iceberg.” Much deeper is a reactive predisposition for

secondary control, the preferred means of accomplishing goals within a system that

emphasizes harmonious interdependence.

Essentially, Japanese people value interpersonal harmony very highly and the

way they maintain it is by sensitizing (Americans might say hyper-sensitizing) their

children to the kinds of cues that would jeopardize it. They attempt to do this by

fostering the kind of mother-child attachment wherein the child becomes highly conscious

of cues that might indicate he or she should feel guilty about upsetting the balance of the

interdependent relationship in question. Theoretically, amae develops between the

mother and child and then becomes generalized to other relationships. Secondary control

is therefore highly valued in Japan, because of the perception that acquiescence is the best

way to maintain amae.

As one might imagine, however, secondary control can have ulterior motives. Put

another way, primary control can have an indirect form. Japanese researchers Kojima and

Azuma reminded Weisz et al. that a covert way of actively influencing existing realities

can easily explain what often appears to be passive resignation in Japanese coping.

Japanese tend to employ a number of strategies that are indirect - yet tactically so.

Kojima and Azuma provide numerous anecdotal and proverbial illustrations. In times of

confrontation, Japanese will often attempt to issue subtle cues aimed at raising a finer-

grained consciousness of an issue [the reader is reminded of wakaraseru (having

understanding) in the previous section]. In order to avoid the risk of further

36

confrontation, this is typically inductive or “bottom-up” in nature. Kojima provides the

example of a rakugo, or comic story master, who is annoyed by his disciple’s singing.

Rather than jeopardizing the master-disciple relationship, he earnestly remarks about how

well the disciple sings - prompting the disciple to realize he is being a nuisance.

Indeed, any American who has lived in Japan and understands basic Japanese can

report about the daily culture-shock of numerous examples of this kind of control

(Bourne, 1975; Guthrie, 1979; Huang, 1977; Kim & Gundykunst, 1988; Oberg, 1960; for

reviews of the culture shock literature, see Barna, 1983; Berry, Kim, Minde, & Mok,

1987; Furnham & Bochner, 1986; Stening, 1979). The present writer vividly recalls a

holiday at a Japanese professor’s summer house. One afternoon, the professor

collectedly stated, “this house is enjoyable, but difficult to keep up” - at which point

cleaning supplies appeared!

Another case of indirect primary control can be seen in the Japanese habit of

seeking the assistance of third parties. For example, if one has a complaint, he or she will

often find someone else to speak with the source. This contrasts with much of what

Americans prefer in conflict resolution. Indeed, Americans would likely be quicker than

Japanese to judge such indirect primary control as being manipulative or even deceitful.

American taboos against indirect primary control are captured nicely by the

colloquialisms: “head-games,” “double-dealing,” and “going behind my back.”

Of course, any form of control has the potential for being manipulative or

deceitful. The worth of the intention is the underlying determinant. In the interests of

cultural sensitivity, it must be noted that Japanese who employ indirect primary control

37

are often truly invested in allowing their adversaries the dignity of keeping their

unpleasant feelings about the conflict concealed, and thereby maintaining or saving their

“face.” Moreover, because there is a disdain for outright assertion (and probably a

relatively large measure of classic “shyness” too), such face-saving is generally

appreciated by all parties involved in a given conflict. This may be a central feature of

Japanese-American cross-cultural differences in emotional adaptation.

Ruth Benedict (1946) noted rather astutely that in a discussion of the value of

indirectness, the very definition of “sincerity” is called into question. In America, people

are typically considered insincere if they do not “tell it like it is.” In Japan however,

one’s sincerity is more likely defined by how well one upholds the code of etiquette.

Therefore, although direct primary control would be seen as honne (inner thinking), it

would not be deemed heartfelt or conscientious - the true definition of sincerity in the

Japanese mindset (the reader is reminded of the Japanese mother’s goal of fostering

sunao, or heart-felt cooperation, in her child).

According to Azuma (1984), Japanese mothers emphasize that conscientious

yielding demonstrates tolerance, self-control, and flexibility (1984). He gives the example

of the proverb, makeru ga kachi - roughly, “to lose is to win.” Although such tactics

may not always produce the desired results, Azuma explains they are thought to

eventually modify behavior in the appropriate direction, without the bad feelings that

might be associated with American style confrontation. Of course to argue that American

mothers generally socialize their children to be unyielding and stubborn would be

baseless. Rather, because Americans are socialized for explicit conflict, they tend to have

38

a higher threshold than Japanese for labeling behavior as unyielding or stubborn.

Accordingly, Americans do not pay as much attention as do Japanese to the “subtle

hints” or the “extraneous noise” of paralinguistic communication. This underscores the

notion that the basis of a reality is often defined by consensus. For example, a group of

men living together might have different ideas about what constitutes a dirty house than

would a group of women. In the same manner that people must be sensitized to “feel

dirt” before they consider that it is time to clean, individuals must be sensitized to many

subtle cues in order for indirect primary control to “work,” or even be necessary or

desirable. (Interestingly, this leads some Japanese to claim that Americans cannot “take a

hint.”)

There is fascinating evidence that Western and Eastern socialization settings have

fostered divergent attitudes about the relative worth of modes of control for some time

(Markus & Kitayama, 1991; Triandis, 1989; Iwao, 1997; Lanham & Garrick 1996). The

diary of Natsume Soseki presents an interesting case of culture shock along these lines.

During the Meiji restoration of the late 1800s, Soseki was sent to England as a

government scholar. He wrote that his stay in London ended in despair because, lacking

the proper assertiveness, he was treated as a meek inferior. In contrast, the Westerner in

Japan must overcome assumptions that his or her assertiveness represents a lack of

refinement. His behavior must be “toned-down” in many ways. Certainly direct eye-

contact, demonstrative hand-gestures, and speech volume should be reduced in many

settings. This is especially true in times of interpersonal conflict, when hedging and

circumlocution are often essential (Hermans & Kempen, 1998). To really understand this

39

as an American, one might imagine communicating with a member of a culture much more

direct and expressive than our own. In this situation, violations of one’s familiar norms of

“body space” can be particularly uncomfortable. Violations of “psychological space” are

no exception.

With divergent values about what should be explicit in Japan and America, the

“double-edged swords” of control types can be seen to operate differentially. Namely,

the societal malfunctioning of primary control is not of particular concern in Japan,

whereas it is in America - and vice versa with secondary control. There is evidence of this

in the child pathology literature. Lewis (1996) has reported that in America, the pressing

need has been to research aggression. In contrast, Japanese researchers have seen the need

to focus on children who have trouble asserting themselves. It seems that when a society

structures itself to avoid one type of error, it opens itself up to another - the inverse of

the original.

VI. CONCLUDING REMARKS

This paper has attempted to outline major characteristics of Japanese culture as

they might bear on emotional adaptation. The goal was to provide a working set of

schemas that would sensitize American researchers to broader issues involved in the

cross-cultural comparison of Japanese and American children’s stress and coping

behavior. To this end, a number of important concepts were discussed in the context of

research findings, such as: honne (private self), tatemae (public self), enryo (hesitation),

gakurekishakai (academic credentialism), gaman (perseverance), and amae (instrumental

40

dependency). An understanding of these concepts will be crucial if data from future

cross-cultural work is to be interpreted accurately, with respect to cultural context.

In coping research on Japanese, particular attention should be paid to the concepts

of secondary and indirect primary control. The phenomena behind these concepts have

not yet been sufficiently incorporated into the emotional adaptation literature as more

than curious aberrations (Kitayama & Markus, 1995). In searching for an explanation for

this, Japanese psychologist Iwao (1997) has argued that the models of “normal” social

psychology are rooted in “Western thought deriving from Aristotelian logic, the Judeo-

Christian tradition and Cartesian logic (p. 330)” - the tools so favored by individualism.

Modern psychology is a product of the West, represented in large part by the

United States. Considering the United States emerged from the defining war of the

century as the most economically and militarily powerful nation in the world, it would

not be surprising if an intellectual “trade imbalance” had in fact occurred in psychology.

In a very subtle way, individualism-based models of thought may have permeated global

academe, shifting assumptions not unlike how Freud’s Unconscious shifted assumptions

in America. It is perhaps hard to imagine, but had modern psychology first come to

fruition in a non-Western country, such as Japan, psychology’s prevailing models might

have begun with a different set of assumptions - assumptions that Americans might find

imposing.

This conclusion does not discount the value of tendencies that might be assumed

Western in origin (e.g., that of cognitive consistency). Rather, it is aimed at sensitizing

the American researcher to the possibility that other cultures may have their own unique

41

tendencies. If psychology is to explain non-Western emotional adaptation in particular,

prevailing models may need to be expanded in fundamental ways. If, for perhaps

economic reasons, global acculturation to Western norms is inevitable, this task may be

more pressing than previously thought.

42

References

Adler, P. A., Kless, S. J., Adler, P. “Socialization to Gender Roles: Popularity AmongElementary School Boys and Girls.” Sociology of Education, 65, July 1992: 169-187.

Aldwin, C. M. & Revenson, T. (1987). Does coping help? A reexamination of the relationbetween coping and mental health. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,53, 337-348.

Aldwin, C. M. (1991). Does age affect the stress and coping process? Implications of agedifferences in perceived control. Journal of Gerontology, 46, 174-180.

Aldwin, C. M. (1994). Stress, coping, and development: An integrative perspective. NewYork: Guilford Press.

Aldwin, C. M., & Stokols, D. (1988). The effects of environmental change on individualsand groups: Some neglected issues in stress research. Journal of EnvironmentalPsychology, 8, 57-75.

Aldwin, C. M., Chiara, G., & Sutton, K.J. (1993). Stress and coping in older men:Findings from the Normative Aging Study. The Gerontologist, 33, 248.

Althen, G. (1988). American Ways, Boston: Intercultural Press.

Altshuler, J., & Ruble, D. (1989). Developmental changes in children's awareness ofstrategies for coping with uncontrollable stress. Child Development, 60, 1337-1349.

Angry teens forsake home for amusement centers: poll. (1998, October 25). JapanTimes, p.3.

Attie, I., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (1989). Development of eating problems in adolescent girls:A longitudinal study. Developmental Psychology, 25, 70-79.

Ayers, T.S., Sandler, I.N., & Twohey, J.L. (1998). Conceptualization and measurement of coping in children and adolescents. In Ollendick, T.H. &

Prinz, R.J. (Eds.), Advances in Clinical Child Psychology (pp. 243-301), Volume20. New York: Plenum Press.

Ayers, T.S., Sandler, I.N., West, S.G., & Roosa, M.W. (1996). A dispositional andsituational assessment of children’s coping: Testing alternative models of coping.

43

Journal of Personality, 64, 923-958.

Azuma, H. (1984). Secondary control as a heterogeneous category. American Psychologist, 39, 970-971.

Azuma, H. (1996). Cross-national research on child development: the Hess-Azumacollaboration in retrospect. In Shwalb, D. W., & Shwalb, B. J. (eds.), Japanesechildrearing: Two generations of scholarship. (pp. 220-240) New York: TheGuilford Press.

Band, E., and Weisz, J.R. (1988). How to feel better when it feels bad: children'sperspectives on coping with everyday stress. Developmental Psychology, 24, 2,247-253.

Barna, L. M. (1983). The stress factor in intercultural relations. In D. Landis & R.W. Brislin (Eds.), Handbook of intercultural training (pp. 19-49). New York: Pergamon.

Barnlund, D. (1975). Public and private self in Japan and the United States. SanFransisco: Intercultural Press.

Beasley, W. G. (1989). The Rise of Modern Japan. St. Martin's.

Berry, J. W., Poortinga, Y. H., Segall, M. H., & Dasen, P. R. (1992). Cross-culturalpsychology. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Berry, J.W., Kim, U., Minde, T., & Mok, D. (1987). Comparative studies of acculturative stress. International Migration Review, 21, 491-511.

Billing, A. G., & Moos, R. H. (1981). The role of coping responses and social resourcesin attenuating the impact of stressful life events. Journal of Behavioral Medicine,4, 139-157.

Billing, A. G., & Moos, R. H. (1984). Coping, stress, and social resources among adultswith unipolar depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 877-891.

Blinco, P. (1992). A cross-cultural study of task persistence of young children in Japanand the United States. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 23, 407-415.

Bolger, N. (1990). Coping as a personality process: A prospective study. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 59, 525-537.

44

Bourne, P.G. (1975). The Chinese student: Acculturation and mental illness. Psychiatry, 38, 269-277.

Boyce, T. W., Jensen, E. W., Cassell, J. C., Collier, A. M., Smith, A. H., & Ramey, C. T.(1977). Influence of life events and family routines on childhood respiratory tractillness. Pediatrics, 60, 609-615.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by natureand design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human development:research perspectives. Developmental Psychology 22: 723-742.

Brown, D.M. (1987). An Introduction to Advanced Spoken Japanese. Yokohama: Inter-University Center for Japanese Language Studies.

Brown, G. W. (1989). Life events and measurement. In G. W. Brown & T. O. Harris(Eds.), Life events and illness (pp.3-45). New York: Guilford Press.

Brown, L., Cowen, E. (1988). Children's judgments of event upsettingness and personalexperiencing of stressful events. American Journal of Community Psychology, 16,123-135.

Bryant, B. K. (1985). The neighborhood walk: Sources of support in middle childhood.Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 50 (3, Serial No.210).

Bullying won’t die but the students do. (1996, May 23). Daily Yomiuri, p. 3.

Byrne, D. (1964). Repression-sensitization as a dimension of personality. In B. A. Maher(Ed.), Progress in experimental personality research (Vol. 1, pp. 169-220). NewYork: Academic Press.

Carrere, S., Evans, G. W., Palsane, M. N., Rivas, M. (1991). Job strain and occupationalstress among urban transit operators. Journal of Occupational Psychology, 64,305-316.

Carver, C. S., & Scheier, M. F., & Weintraub, J. K. (1989). Assessing coping strategies: Atheoretically-based approach. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56,267-283.

Causey, D.L., & Dubow, E.G. (1992). Development of a self-report coping measure for elementary school children. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 21, 47-

45

59.

Chen, S.J. (1996). Are Japanese young children among the gods? In Shwalb, D. W., &Shwalb, B. J. (eds.), Japanese childrearing: Two generations of scholarship. (pp.31-43) New York: The Guilford Press.

Coddington, R. (1972). The significance of life events as etiologic factors in disease ofchildren. Journal of Psychosomatic Research, 16, 7-18.

Coelho, G. V., Hamburg, D. A., Adams, J. E. (Eds.). (1974). Coping and adaptation. NewYork: Basic Books.

Cohen, F., & Lazarus, R. S. (1973). Active coping processes, coping dispositions, andrecovery from surgery. Psychosomatic Medicine, 35, 375-389.

Colby, B. N. (1987). Well-being: A theoretical program. American Anthropologist, 89,879-895.

Collins, D. L., Baum, A., & Singer, J. E. (1983) Coping with chronic stress at Three MileIsland: Psychological and biochemical evidence. Health Psychology, 2, 149-166.

Compas, B. E., Worsham, N. L., & Ey, S. (1992). Conceptual and developmental issuesin children's coping with stress. In A. M. La Greca, L. J. Siegal, J. L. Wallander, &C. E. Walker (Eds.), Stress and coping in child health (pp. 7-24). New York:Guilford Press.

Coyne, J., Aldwin, C., & Lazarus, R. S. (1981). Depression and coping in stressfulepisodes. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 90, 439-447.

Cross, S. (1995). Self-construals, coping, and stress in cross-cultural adaptation. Journal of cross-cultural psychology, 26, 673-697.

Crystal, D. S., Chen, C., Fuligni, A. J., Stevenson, H. W., Hsu, C., Ko, H., Kitamura, S.,Kimura, S. (1994). Psychological Maladjustment and Academic Achievement: ACross-Cultural Study of Japanese, Chinese, and American High School Students.Child Development, 65, 738-753.

Daniel, C. (1997). Chronicle of America. London: Dorling Kindersley.

De Vos, G.A. (1996). Psychocultural continuities in Japanese social motivation. InShwalb, D. W., & Shwalb, B. J. (eds.), Japanese childrearing: Two generations ofscholarship. (pp. 44-84) New York: The Guilford Press.

46

DeLongis, A., Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R.S. (1988). The impact of daily stress on healthand mood: Psychology and social resources as mediators. Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 54, 486-495.

Depue, R. A., & Monroe, S. M. (1986). Conceptualization and measurement of humandisorder in life stress research: The problem of chronic disturbance. PsychologicalBulletin, 99, 36-51.

Dohrenwend, B.S., Krasnoff, L., Askenasy, A., & Dohrenwend, B.P. (1978).Exemplification of a method for scaling life events: The PERI life events scale.Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 19, 205-229.

Doi, T. (1973, 1986). Anatomy of dependence. Tokyo: Kodansha International.

Eisenberg, N., & Fabes, R.A. (1994). Mothers’ reactions to children’s negative emotions: Relations to children’s temperament and anger behavior. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 40, 138-156.

Elder, G., & Clipp, E. (1989). Combat experience and emotional health: Impairment andresilience in later life. Journal of Personality, 57, 311-341.

Elwood, S.W. (1987). Stressor and coping response inventories for children. Psychological Reports, 60, 931-947.

Endler, N., & Parker, J. D. A. (1990). Multidimensional assessment of coping: A criticalevaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 58, 844-854.

Erikson, E. H. (1963). Childhood and society (2nd ed.). New York: Norton.

Erikson, K. T. (1976). Everything in its path. New York: Simon & Schuster.

Fabes, R., Eisenberg, N., & Bernzweig, J. (1990). The Coping with Children's NegativeEmotions Scale: Procedures and Scoring. Available from authors. Arizona StateUniversity.

Fabes, R., Eisenberg, N., Karbon, M., Bernzweig, J., Lee Speer, A., & Carlo, G. (1994).Socilization of children’s vicarious emotional responding and prosocial behavior:Relations with mothers” perceptions of children’s emotional reactivity.Developmental Psychology, 30, 44-55.

Five teens held in attack on marines. (1998, October 21). The Japan Times, p. 3.

Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1980). An analysis of coping in a middle-aged community

47

sample. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 21, 219-239.

Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1985). If it changes it must be a process: Study of emotionand coping during three stages of a college examination. Journal of Personality andSocial Psychology, 48, 150-170.

Folkman, S., & Lazarus, R. S. (1988). Coping as a Mediator of Emotion. Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 54, 3, 466-475.

Folkman, S., Chesney, M., Pollack, L., & Coates, T. (1993). Stress, control, coping anddepressive mood in human immunodeficiency virus-positive and -negative gaymen in San Francisco. Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 181, 409-416.

Folkman, S., Lazarus, R. S., Dunkel-Schetter, C., Delongis, A., & Gruen, R. (1986). Thedynamics of a stressful encounter: Cognitive appraisal, coping, and encounteroutcomes. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 50, 992-1003.

Folkman, S., Lazarus, R. S., Gruen, R., & Delongis, A. (1986). Appraisal, coping, healthstatus, and psychological symptoms. Journal of Personality and SocialPsychology, 50, 571-579.

Fondacaro, M. R., & Moos, R. H. (1987). Social support and coping: A longitudinalanalysis. American Journal of Community Psychology, 15, 653-673.

Freud, A. (1966). The ego and the mechanisms of defense (rev. ed.). New York:International Universities Press.

Frydenberg, E., & Lewis, R. (1990). How adolescents cope with different concerns: Thedevelopment of the Adolescent Coping Checklist (ACC). Psychological TestBulletin, 3, 63-73.

Furnham, A. (1988). The adjustment of sojourners. In Y.Y. Kim & W.B. Gundykunst(Eds.), Cross-cultural adaptation: Current approaches (pp. 42-61).

Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Furnham, A., & Bochner, S. (1986). Culture shock: Psychological reactions to unfamiliar environments. New York: Methuen.

Gjerde, P.F. (1996). Longitudinal research in a cultural context: reflections, prospects,challenges. In Shwalb, D. W., & Shwalb, B. J. (eds.), Japanese childrearing: Twogenerations of scholarship. (pp. 279-299) New York: The Guilford Press.

Graham, S. & Juvonen, J. (1998). Self-blame and peer victimization in middle school: An

48

attributional analysis. Developmental Psychology, 34, 587-599.

Grolnick, W., & Ryan, R. (1989). Parent styles associated with self-regulation andcompetence in school. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 143-154.

Gross, E. (1970). Work, organization and stress. In S. Levine & N. A. Scotch (Eds.),Social stress (pp. 54-110). Chicago: Aldine.

Guthrie, G.M. (1979). A cross-cultural odyssey: Some personal reflections. In A.J. Marsella, R.G. Tharp, & T.J. Ciborowski (Eds.), Perspectives on cross-cultural psychology (pp. 349-368). New York: Academic Press.

Haan, N. (Ed.). (1977). Coping and defending. New York: Academic Press.

Hara, H. & Wagatsuma, M. (1996). From productive dependents to precious guests:historical changes in Japanese children. In Shwalb, D. W., & Shwalb, B. J. (eds.),Japanese childrearing: Two generations of scholarship. (pp. 9-30) New York: TheGuilford Press.

Hardy, D.F., Power, T.G., & Jaedicke, S. (1993). Examining the relation of parenting to children’s coping with everyday stress. Child Development, 64, 1829-1841.

Hardy, Power, and Jaedicke (1993). Examining the relation of parenting to children'scoping with everyday stress. Child Development, 64, 1829-1841.

Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: Wiley.

Hermans, H. J. & Kempen, H.J. (1998). Moving cultures: The perilous problems ofcultural dichotomies in a globalizing society. American Psychologist, 53, 1111-1120.

Hoffner, C. (1993). Children's strategies for coping with stress: blunting and monitoring.Motivation and Emotion, 17(2), 91-106.

Hofstede, G. (1980). Culture's consequences: International differences in work-relatedvalues. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

Holahan, C., & Moos, R. (1985). Life stress and health: Personality, coping and familysupport in stress resistance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 49,739-747.

Holloway, S.D. & Minami, M. (1996). Production and reproduction of culture: thedynamic role of mothers and children in early socialization. In Shwalb, D. W., &

49

Shwalb, B. J. (eds.), Japanese childrearing: Two generations of scholarship. (pp.164-176) New York: The Guilford Press.

Holmes, D., & Rahe, R. (1967). The Social Readjustment Rating Scale. Journal ofPsychosomatic Research, 11, 213-218.

Howard, L. & Tobias, A. (1998, May 18). Japan: Tapping into the kids.Newsweek, p. 4.

Huang, K. (1977). Campus mental health: The foreigner at your desk. Journal of the American College Health Association, 25, 216-219.

Hudgens, R. W. (1974). Personal catastrophe and depression: A consideration of thesubject with respect to medically ill adolescents, and a requiem for retrospectivelife events studies. In B. S. Dohrenwend & B. P. Dohrenwend (Eds.), Stressful lifeevents: Their nature and effect (pp. 119-134). New York: Wiley.

Hui, C. H., & Triandis, H. C. (1985). Measurement in cross-cultural psychology: Areview and comparison of strategies. Journal of cross-cultural psychology, 16,131-152.

Huntsinger, C.S., Jose, P.E., & Larson, S.L. (1988). Do parent practices to encourage academic competence influence the social adjustment of young European American and Chinese American Children? Developmental Psychology, 34, 747-756.

Iwao, S. (1997). Consistency orientation and models of social behavior: Is it not time for West to meet East? Japanese Journal of Psychological Research, 39, 323--332.

Janis, I., & Mann, L. (1977). Decision-making: A psychological analysis of conflict,choice, and commitment. New York: Free Press.

Jose, P. (1991a). The Children's Integrated Stress and Coping Scale. Unpublishedmanuscript, Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.

Jose, P. (1991b). The Everyday Life Events Scale for Children. Unpublished manuscript,Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.

Jose, P. (1991c). The Major Life Events Scale for Children. Unpublished manuscript,Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.

Jose, P. (1995). Children's Perception of Parenting Style Questionnaire. Unpublished

50

manuscript, Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, Illinois.

Jose, P., Cafasso, L., & D’Anna, C. (1997). Gender differences in stressors and copingstrategies among early adolescents. Manuscript in preparation.

Jose, P., Cafasso, L., & D'Anna, C. (1994). Ethnic Group Differences in Children'sCoping Strategies. Sociological Studies of Children, 6, 23-53.

Jose, P., Hunsinger, C. (1997). Stress and psycho-social adjustment of Chinese-Americanand European American Adolescents. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Jose, P.E., D’Anna, C.A., Cafasso, L.L., Bryant, F.B., Chiker, V., Gein, N., & Zhezmer, N. (1998). Stress and coping among Russian and American Early Adolescents, 34, 757-769.

Kaneko, T. (1987). Japan. In Gilgen, A. & Gilgen C. (eds.), International Handbookof Psychology. (pp. 274-296).

Kanner, A., Coyne, J., Schaefer, C., & Lazarus, R. (1981). Comparison of two modes ofstress measurement: Daily hassles and uplifts versus major life events. Journal ofBehavioral Medicine, 4, 1-39.

Karasek, R., & Theorell, T. (1990). Healthy work: Stress, productivity, and thereconstruction of working life. New York: Basic Books.

Kawanishi, Y. (1995a). The relationship between self-esteem and psychological stressprocess. The Japanese Journal of Health Psychology, 8, 22-30. In

Japanese.

Kawanishi, Y. (1995b). The Effects of Culture On Beliefs About Stress and Coping:Causal Attribution of Anglo-American and Japanese Persons. Journal ofContemporary Psychotherapy, 25, 1, 1995.

Kessler, R.C. (1997). The effects of stressful life events on depression. Annual Reviewof Psychology, 48, 191-214.

Kilburg, D.F. III (1997). Stress and Coping in Middle Childhood. Unpublished Master’s thesis. Chicago: DePaul University (482.259).

Kim, Y.Y., & Gundykunst, W.B. (1988). Cross-cultural adaptation: Current approaches. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.

Kitayama, S., Markus, H. (1995). (Eds.) Emotion and Culture. Washington, D.C.:

51

American Psychological Association.

Kitayama, S., Markus, H., Matusmoto, H., & Norasakkunkit, V. (1997). Individual andcollective processes in the construction of the self: Self-enhancement in the UnitedStates and self-criticism in Japan. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,72, 1245-1267.

Kliewer, W. (1991). Coping in middle childhood: relations to competence, type Abehavior, monitoring, blunting, and locus of control. Developmental Psychology,27, 689-697.

Kliewer, W., Fearnow, M.D., & Miller, P.A. (1996). Coping socialization in middle childhood: tests of maternal and paternal influences. Child Development, 67, 2339-2357.

Kobasa, S. C. (1982). Commitment and coping in stress resistance among lawyers.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 42, 707-717.

Kojima, H. (1984). A significant stride toward comparative study of control. American Psychologist, 39, 972-973.

Kovacs, M. (1985). The children's depression inventory. PsychopharmacologicalBulletin, 21, 995-998.

Kuhn, D. & Sieger, K. (Eds.) (1998). Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 2, Cognition,perception, and language. New York: Wiley.

Kurtz, L. (1994). Psychosocial coping resources in elementary school-age children of divorce. American Journal of Orthopscychiatry, 64, 554-563.

Kurume (1991). Life stressor, coping, personality, and stress response in university students. Japanese Journal of Health Psychology, 4, 1-9. In Japanese.

La Greca, A. M., Siegal, L. J., Wallander, J. L., & Walker, C. E. (Eds.). (1992). Stress andCoping in Child Health. New York: Guilford Press.

Lanham, B.B. & Garrick, R.J. (1996). Adult to child in Japan: interaction and relations.In Shwalb, D. W., & Shwalb, B. J. (eds.), Japanese childrearing: Two generationsof scholarship. (pp. 97-124) New York: The Guilford Press.

Laux, L. & Weber, H. (1991). Presentation of self in coping with anger and anxiety: Anintentional approach. Anxiety Research, 3, 233-255.

52

Lazarus, R. S. (1990). Theory-based stress measurement. Psychological Inquiry, 1, 3-13.

Lazarus, R. S. (1991). Emotion and Adaptation. New York: Oxford University Press.

Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.

Lazarus, R. S., Speisman, J. C., Markoff, A. M., & Davison, L. A. (1962). A lab study ofpsychological stress produced by a motion picture film. PsychologicalMonographs, 76 (34, Whole No. 553).

Lebra & Sugiyama, T. (1976). Japanese Patterns of Behavior. Hawaii.

Lewis, C. (1996). The contributions of Betty Lanham: a neglected legacy. In Shwalb, D.W., & Shwalb, B. J. (eds.), Japanese childrearing: Two generations of scholarship.(pp. 125-138) New York: The Guilford Press.

Maccoby, & Martin (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: parent-childinteraction. In E. M. Hetherington (Ed.), P. H. Mussen (Series Ed.), Handbook ofchild psychology: Vol. 4. Socialization, personality, and social development (pp.1-101). New York: Wiley.

MacCoby, E., & Martin, J. (1983). Socialization in the context of the family: Parent-childinteraction. In E. M. Hetherington (Ed.; P. H. Mussen, General Ed.), Handbook ofchild psychology: Vol. 4: Socialization, personality, and social development (4th

ed.). New York: Wiley.

Machida, S., Hess, R. & Azuma, H. (1996). Maternal and cultural socialization forschooling: lessons learned and prospects ahead. In Shwalb, D. W., & Shwalb, B.J. (eds.), Japanese childrearing: Two generations of scholarship. (pp. 241-259)New York: The Guilford Press.

Makino, S. & Tsutsui, M. (1986). A Dictionary of Basic Japanese Grammar. Tokyo: The Japan Times Press.

Markus, H. R., & Kitayama, S. (1991). Culture and the Self: Implications for Cognition,Emotion, and Motivation. Psychological Review, 98, 2, 224-253.

Masten, A., (1985). Stress, coping, and children's health. Pediatric Annals, 14, 543-547.

Mattlin, J., Wethington, E., & Kessler, R. C. (1990). Situational determinants of copingand coping effectiveness. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 31, 103-122.

Mauro, R., Sato, K., & Tucker, J. (1992). The Role of Appraisal in Human Emotions: A

53

Cross-Cultural Study. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 62, 2, 301-317.

McClure, M. & Shirataki, S. (1989). Child Psychiatry in Japan. Journal of theAmerican Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, 28, 488-492.

McCrae, R. R. (1984). Situational determinants of coping responses: Loss, threat, andchallenge. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 919-928.

McCrae, R. R. (1989). Age differences and changes in the use of coping mechanisms.Journals of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences, 44, 161-169.

Mechanic, D. (1978). Students under stress: A study in the social psychology ofadaptation. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press.

Menhaghan, E.G., Kowaleski-Jones, L., & Mott, F.L. (1997). The intergenerational costs of parental social stressors: Academic and social difficulties in early adolescence for children of young mothers. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 38, 72-86.

Miele, F. (1979). Cultural bias in the WISC-R. Intelligence, 3, 149-164.

Miller, P., Danaher, D., & Forbes, D. (1986). Sex-related strategies for coping withinterpersonal conflict in children ages five and seven. Developmental Psychology,22, 543-548.

Miller, S. (1987). Monitoring and blunting: validation of a questionnaire to assess stylesof information seeking under threat. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,52, 345-353.

Miller, S., & Mangan, C. E. (1983). Interacting effects of information and coping style inadapting to gynecological stress: When should the doctor tell all? Journal ofPersonality and Social Psychology, 45, 223-236.

Minami, O. (1987). Nihontekijiga (Japanese Self) Tokyo: Iwanami Shinsho Publishing.

Mitchell, R. E., Cronkite, R. C., & Moos, R. H. (1983). Stress, coping, and depressionamong married couples. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 92, 433-448.

Motoaki, H., Noguchi, K., Shigehisa, T. (1990). Ways of coping with stress in Americans and Japanese: a psychometric analysis of health indexes in a cross-cultural perspective. Japanese Journal of Health Psychology, 3, 22-31.

54

Mullen, B., & Suls, J. (1982). The effectiveness of attention and rejection as copingstyles: A meta-analysis of temporal differences. Journal of PsychosomaticResearch, 26, 43-49.

Murphy, L., & Moriarty, A. (1976). Vulnerability, coping, and growth: from infancy toadolescence. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Nader, L. (1985). A user theory of legal change as applied to gender. NebraskaSymposium on Motivation, 33, 1-33.

Nagane, M. (1991). Analysis of psychological stress in school life. Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology, 39, 182-185. In Japanese.

Nakano, K. (1988). Hassles as a measure of stress in a Japanese sample: Preliminaryresearch. Psychological Reports, 63(1), 252-254.

Nakano, K. (1989). Intervening variables of stress, hassles, and health. JapanesePsychological Research, 31(3), 143-148.

Nakano, K. (1991a). Coping strategies and psychological symptoms in a Japanesesample. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 47(3), 346-350.

Nakano, K. (1991b). The role of coping strategies on psychological and physical well-being. Japanese Psychological Research, 33(4), 160-167.

Nakano, K. (1992). The Role of personality characteristics in coping behaviors.Psychological Reports, 71, 687-690.

Nakano, K. (1993). Personality, hassles, and psychological and physical well-being.Japanese Journal of Psychology. 64, 123-127.

Nearly half of all preschoolers get outside education. (1996, May 1).Daily Yomiuri, p. A3.

Norris, F. H. (1992). Epidemiology of trauma: Frequency and impact of differentpotentially traumatic events on different demographic groups. Journal ofConsulting and Clinical Psychology, 60, 409-418.

Oberg, K. (1960). Culture shock: Adjustment to new cultural environments. Practical Anthropology, 7, 177-182.

Obuchi, K. & Yamamoto, I. (1990). The power strategies of Japanese children in interpersonal conflict: effects of age, gender, and target. The Journal of

55

Genetic Psychology, 151, 349-360.

Offer, D., Ostrov, E., & Howard, K. (1981). The adolescent: A psychological self-portrait. New York: Basic Books.

Ogrocki, P. K., Stephens, M. A. P., & Kinney, J. (1990, November). Assessing caregivercoping: State vs. trait approaches. The Gerontologist, 30, 135A.

Ohsako, H. (1994). Diversity and effectiveness of high school students’ stress-coping depending on situations. The Japanese Journal of Health Psychology, 7, 26-34. In Japanese.

Okayasu, T., Shimada, H., Niwa, Y., Mori, T., & Yatomi, N. (1992). The relationshipbetween evaluation of school stressors and stress responses in junior high schoolstudents. The Japanese Journal of Psychology, 63, 310-318. In Japanese.

Page, W. F., Engdahl, B. F., & Eberly, R. E. (1991). Prevalence and correlates ofdepressive symptoms among former prisoners of war. Journal of Nervous andMental Disease, 179, 670-677.

Peak, L. (1991). Learning to go to school in Japan: The transition from home topreschool life. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Pearlin, L. (1989). The sociological study of stress. Journal of Health and Social Behavior,30, 241-256.

Pearlin, L., & Schooler, C. (1978). The structure of coping. Journal of Health and SocialBehavior, 19, 2-21.

Popularity of housewifery rising: Research shows many young women prefer easierlifestyle. (1998, August 17). Mainichi Daily News, p. 14b.

Rabkin, J., Streuning, E. (1976). Life events, stress, and illness. Science, 194, 1013-1020.

Radford, M., Mann, L., Ohta, Y., & Nakane, Y. (1993). Differences between Australianand Japanese students in decisional self-esteem, decisional stress, and copingstyles. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 24, 3, 284-297.

Reich, J. W., & Zautra, A. (1981). Life events and personal causation: Some relationshipswith satisfaction and distress. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 41,1002-1112.

Reischauer, E.O. (1987). The Japanese Today. Harvard.

56

Revenson, T. A., & Felton, B. J. (1989). Disability and coping as predictors ofpsychological adjustment to rheumatoid arthritis. Journal of Consulting andClinical Psychology, 57, 344-348.

Reynolds, D. (1976). Morita Therapy. Berkley: University of California Press.

Rohlen, T. (1989). Order in Japanese society: attachment, authority, and routine. Journal of Japanese Studies, 15, 5-40.

Rollins, and Thomas (1979). Parental support, power, and control techniques in thesocialization of children. In W. R. Burre, R. Hill, F. I. Nye, and I. L. Reiss (eds.),Contemporary theories about the family: Research based theories (pp.317-364).New York: Free Press.

Rose, R. M. (1978). Air traffic controller health change study: A prospectiveinvestigation of physical, psychological and work-related changes. Springfield,VA: National Technical Information Service.

Rosenberger, N. R. (1992). Japanese sense of self. Cambridge: University Press.

Rowlison, R., & Felner, R. (1989). Major life events, hassles, and adaptation inadolescence: Confounding in the conceptualization and measurement of life eventsrevisited. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 55, 432-444.

Ryan, N. (1988). The stress-coping process in school-age children: Gaps in theknowledge needed for health promotion. Advances in Nursing Science, 11, 1-12.

Sandler, I.N., Tein, J.Y., & West, S.G. (1994). Coping, stress, and the psychologicalsymptoms of children of divorce: a cross-sectional and longitudinal study. ChildDevelopment, 1994, 65, 1744-1763.

Sandoval, J. (1979). The WISC-R and internal evidence of test bias with minoritygroups. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 47, 919-927.

Sarason, I., Johnson, J. H., & Siegel, J. M. (1978). Assessing the impact of life changes:Development of the Life Experiences Survey. Journal of Consulting and ClinicalPsychology.

Schnurr, P., Rosenberg, S., & Friedman, M. (1993). Change in MMPI scores from collegeto adulthood as a function of military service. Journal of Abnormal Psychology,102, 288-296.

57

Schooler, C. (1996). William Caudill and the reproduction of culture: infant, child, andmaternal behavior in Japan and the United States. In Shwalb, D. W., & Shwalb, B.J. (eds.), Japanese childrearing: Two generations of scholarship. (pp. 139-163)New York: The Guilford Press.

Schoolland, K. (1986). The bullying of Japanese youth. International Education, 15, 5-28.

Search of suicide forest nets three bodies. (1998, October 21). The Japan Times, p. 2.

Segall, M.H., Lonner, W.J., & Berry, J.W. (1998). Cross-cultural psychology as a scholarly discipline: On the flowering of culture in behavioral research. American Psychologist, 53, 1101-1110.

Shand, N. (1996). The transmission of culturally linked behavior systems throughmaternal behavior: nature versus nuture revisted. In Shwalb, D. W., & Shwalb, B.J. (eds.), Japanese childrearing: Two generations of scholarship. (pp. 260-278)New York: The Guilford Press.

Shelley, R. (1993). Japan. Portland: Graphic Arts Center Publishing Company.

Shimada, H., Miura, M., Sakano, Y., & Agari, I. (1996). Effects of cognitive appraisal for school stressors on stress coping and stress responses in elementary school children. Japanese Journal of Counseling Science, 29, 89-96. In Japanese.

Shwalb, D. W., & Shwalb, B. J. (1996). Japanese childrearing: Two generations ofscholarship. New York: The Guilford Press.

Shweder, R. (1997, January 26). America's Latest Export: A Stressed-Out World. TheNew York Times, pp. C19.

Smith, J.D. & Caplan, J. (1988). Cultural differences in cognitive style development. Developmental Psychology, 24, 46-52.

Sorenson, E. (1993). Children's stress and coping: A family perspective. New York: TheGuilford Press.

Spirito, A., Stark, L. J., Grace, N., & Stamoulis, D. (1991). Common problems and copingstrategies reported in childhood and early adolescence. Journal of Youth andAdolescence, 20, 531-544.

Stening, B.W. (1979). Problems in cross-cultural contact: A literature review.

58

International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 3, 269-313.

Stevenson, H. & Stigler, J. (1992). The learning gap: Why our schools are failing and whatwe can learn from Japanese and Chinese education. New York: Summit Books.

Stevenson, H., Azuma H., Hakuta, K. (Eds.) (1986). Child development and education inJapan. New York: W. H. Freeman and Company.

Students to get telephone cards against bullying. (1996, March 9).Daily Yomiuri, p. 2a.

Sukemune, S. (1992). Japan. In Sexton, V.S. & Hogan, J.D. (eds.), International Psychology: Views from Around the World. (pp. 259-272) .

Survey reveals 1 in 3 women subjected to abuse. (1998, May 24).Mainichi Daily News, p. 12(B).

Survey: Violence running rampant in elementary schools. (1998, May 2).Mainichi Daily News, p. A1.

Tannen, D. (1998, August 21). What it means to say sorry. The Japan Times, p.10.

The American Century. (1999, January 7). The Japan Times, p.16.

Thoits, P. (1983). Dimensions of life events that influence psychological distress: Anevaluation and synthesis of the literature. In B. Kaplan (Ed.), Psycho-socialstress: Trends in theory and research (pp. 33-103). New York: Academic Press.

Thurber, C.A. & Weisz, J.R. (1997). “You can try or you can just give up”: The impactof perceived control and coping style on childhood homesickness. DevelopmentalPsychology, 33, 508-517.

Toll mounts in “suicide forest”: Record 58 bodies found at popular hiking,hanging spot. (1998, October 29). The Japan Times, p. 3.

Tonan, K., Sonoda, A. (1994). The effect of stressor experiences and optimism upon stress responses. The Japanese Journal of Psychology, 65, 312-320. In Japanese.

Too much pressure too young: Schools try to lesson stress of exams. (1998, August 29).The Japan Times, p. 3.

Toward more creative learning: Relaxed curriculum to test teachers. (1998, August 28).

59

The Japan Times, p. 3.

Triandis, H. (1978). Some universals of social behavior. Personality and socialpsychology bulletin, 4, 1-16.

Triandis, H. (1988). Collectivism Vs individualism: A reconceptualization of a basicconcept in cross-cultural social psychology. In C. Bagley & G. Verma (Eds.).Personality, cognition and values (pp. 60-95). London: Macmillan.

Triandis, H.C. (1994). Culture and social behavior. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Triandis, H.C., Brislin, R., & Hui, H. (1988). Cross-cultural training across the individualism-collectivism divide. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 12, 269-289.

Troubled youth turn to friends. Parents little help to kids: Poll (1998, October 31). TheJapan Times, p. 2.

Turner, V. S. (1969). The ritual process: Structure and anti-structure. Chicago: Aldine.

Vaughn, C.A. (1996). Socialization and school adaptation: on the life work of George DeVos. In Shwalb, D. W., & Shwalb, B. J. (eds.), Japanese childrearing: Twogenerations of scholarship. (pp. 85-96) New York: The Guilford Press.

Vingerhoets, A. J., & Marcellissen, F. G. (1988). Stress research: Its present status andissues for future developments. Social Science and Medicine, 36, 279-291.

Vitaliano, P. P., Russo, J., Maiuro, R. D. (1987). Locus of control, type of stressor, andappraisal within a cognitive-phenomenological model of stress. Journal ofResearch in Personality, 21, 224-237.

Vogel, E. (1996). Japan’s old-time new middle class. In Shwalb, D. W., & Shwalb, B. J.(eds.), Japanese childrearing: Two generations of scholarship. (pp. 201-207) NewYork: The Guilford Press.

Vogel, S. (1996). Urban middle-class Japanese family life, 1958-1996: a personal andevolving perspective. In Shwalb, D. W., & Shwalb, B. J. (eds.), Japanesechildrearing: Two generations of scholarship. (pp. 177-200) New York: TheGuilford Press.

Weinberger, M., Hiner, S. L., & Tiernery, W. M. (1987). In support of hassles as ameasure of stress in predicting health outcomes. Journal of Behavioral Medicine,10, 19-31.

60

Weisz, J., Rothbaum, F., & Blackburn, T. (1984). Standing out and standing in: the psychology of control in America and Japan. American Psychologist, 39, 955-969.

Weisz, J., Rothbaum, F., & Blackburn, T. (1984). Swapping recipes for control. American Psychologist, 39, 974-975.

Wertlieb, D., Weigel, C., & Feldstein, M. (1987). Measuring children's coping. Journal ofOrthopsychiatry, 57, 548-560.

White, M. (1996). Renewing the new middle class: Japan’s next families. In Shwalb, D.W., & Shwalb, B. J. (eds.), Japanese childrearing: Two generations of scholarship.(pp. 208-219) New York: The Guilford Press.

Yamamoto, K. (1979). Children's ratings of the stressfulness of experiences.Developmental Psychology, 15, 581-582.

Yamamoto, K. (1993). Their world, our world: Reflections on childhood. Westport,Connecticut: Praeger.

Zahn-Waxler, C., Friedman, R. J., Cole, P. M., Mizuta, I., Hiruma, N. (1996). Japanese and United States preschool children’s responses to conflict and distress. Child Development, 67, 2462-2477.

Zborowski, M. (1952). Culture and symptoms: An analysis of patients' presentingproblems. American Sociological Review, 31, 615-630.