What Is Culture? Systems of People, Places, and Practices

APPLIED DEVELOPMENTAL SCIENCE 2020, VOL. 24, NO. 4, 310–322 https://doi.org/10.1080/10888691.2020.1789360 What is culture? Systems of people, places, and practices Jose M. Causadias Arizona State University ABSTRACT Culture is a fuzzy concept without fixed boundaries, meaning different things according to situations. To address this issue, I introduce a p-model to understand culture as a system of people, places, and practices, for a purpose such as enacting, justifying, or resisting power. People refers to population dynamics, social relations, and culture in groups. Places refers to ecological dynamics, institutional influences, and culture in contexts. Practices refers to participatory dynamics, community engagement, and culture in action. Power refers to forcing others into compliance (power-over people), controlling access to spaces (power in places), and behaving as desired (power-to practice). I use racism to illustrate the p-model and suggest applications in theory, research, and practice in developmental sciences. Should we abandon the concept of culture? The a proxy, a fixed variable impervious to change, and answer is yes, according to several scholars who see it a confound in statistical analyses (Quintana et al., as an obstacle for scientific progress. Culture has been 2006); using culture to bolster deficit models that compared to protoplasm, a black box with vague qual- portray some groups as inherently inferior and at risk ities posing as explanations (Tooby, 2015), equated to (Garcıa Coll et al., 1996); assuming that groups have a seven-letter word that stands for god (Betzig, 2015), large cultural differences without any theoretical justi- and denounced as a convenient term to designate all fication (Gjerde, 2004); and underestimating the sorts of things we feel need to be grouped together multifaceted and normative role of cultural processes (Boyer, 2015). Indeed, culture is a fuzzy concept, a on development (Rogoff, 2003). For these reasons, term without fixed boundaries, meaning different improving definitions of culture is imperative to avoid things according to situations (Gjerde, 2004; Spencer- misconceptions and biases that shape theory, research, Oatey & Franklin, 2012). Unlike crisp concepts that and practice in applied developmental science. have a relatively fixed meaning, set properties, and To promote better science, I introduce a p-model stable boundaries; fuzzy concepts have many layers in which culture is defined as a system of people, of significance, changing its meaning according to places, and practices, for a purpose such as enacting, situations (Haack, 1996). justifying, or challenging power. People refers to This fuzziness is a main reason why it is so population dynamics, social relations, and culture in difficult to define culture. In fact, there is a long groups. Places refers to ecological dynamics, institu- tradition of reviewing definitions of culture (Kroeber tional influences, and culture in contexts. Practices & Kluckhohn, 1952; Lonner & Malpass, 1994) and refers to participatory dynamics, community engage- denouncing confusion in the conceptualization of ment, and culture in action. Power refers to forcing culture as a major problem in psychology (Cooper & others into compliance (power-over people), control- Denner, 1998) and in other social sciences (Durham, ling access to spaces (power in places), and behaving 1991). Scientific progress is possible without consen- as desired (power-to practice). sus in a definition of culture, but specifying its main Next, I use racism to illustrate the p-model and characteristics can help advance the field even more propose applications in theory, research, and practice (Betancourt & Lopez, 1993). in developmental sciences. In this article, I incorporate Better definitions of culture can help avoid ques- insights from relational epistemology (Overton, 2010, tionable research practices, such as treating culture as 2015), developmental psychopathology (Cicchetti, CONTACT Jose M. Causadias [email protected] School of Social and Family Dynamics, Arizona State University, Cowden Family Resources Building, 850 South Cady Mall, Tempe, AZ 85281, USA. ß 2020 Taylor & Francis Group, LLC APPLIED DEVELOPMENTAL SCIENCE 311 People Individual-Social Processes Processes Power Places Practices Temporal-Spatial Behavioral-Symbolic Processes Figure 1. Culture as system of people, places, and practices connected by dimensions and processes, for a purpose such as justifying or resisting power. This figure by Jose M. Causadias is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available at https://www.josecausadias.com/contact. 1984), the integrative model for the study of develop- system (Cooper & Denner, 1998). For instance, mental competencies in minority children (Garcıa Snowdon (2018) defined culture as behavior patterns Coll et al., 1996), several traditions of cultural research that have some continuity across generations among in psychology (Shweder, 2000), critical race theory specific groups or populations, varying across different (Bonilla-Silva, 2010), and dynamic relational theory of people, but remaining somewhat consistent within power (Roscigno, 2011). I ground this paper on the- each one (Snowdon, 2018). Anthropologists have ory and research in the United States of America. I described culture as systems of beliefs, ideals, behav- use the term model because what I present here is the ior, and traditions related to specific populations start to a more comprehensive conceptualization (Rogoff, 2003; Shweder, 2000). of culture. Research on culture often centers on issues related to people, including variation across human populations (cultural diversity) and differences between What is culture? Introducing the p-model groups (cultural differences). According to Shweder Culture is a system, a dynamic whole that creates and (2000), the study of culture in psychology can be clas- is created by people, places, and practices (Figure 1). sified into subfields with different strategies to under- The system and its components are inseparable and stand people, either by focusing on culture as a source engaged in mutual determination: the whole organizes of diversity (cultural psychology), the unique cultural the parts and the parts organize the whole (Overton, experience of specific groups (indigenous psychology), 2010). People create culture through shared practices or the commonalities across human populations des- in places, and culture shapes how people engage in pite culture (cross-cultural psychology). A fourth sub- practices and build places. The p-model is consistent field is centered on racial/ethnic minorities (ethnic with a rich tradition of defining culture as systems minority psychology; Sue, 2009). (Triandis, 2007). For example, Tylor (1871) defined Places are the second essential component of cul- culture as “that complex whole which includes know- ture as a system: there is no culture without places ledge, belief, art, morals, custom and any other capa- and no places without culture. Places refers to eco- bilities and habits acquired by man as a member of logical dynamics, institutional influences, and culture society” (p. 1). Geertz (1973) defined religion as a cul- in contexts, including homes, neighborhoods, schools, tural system of symbols that informs actions, social and cities. Many definitions of culture underline this order, and world views. Understanding how culture component of the system (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, functions as a system requires discussing 2005). There is a long tradition of emphasizing culture its components. as places in anthropology, for instance, framing cul- People are the first essential component of culture ture as environmental settings for learning and think- as a system: there is no culture without people and no ing (Cole et al., 1971). Super and Harkness (1986) people without culture. People refers to population highlighted the importance of the developmental dynamics, social relations, and culture in groups, niche as unique context for individual development. including families, communities, and nations. Many Research on culture often focuses on issues related definitions of culture underline this component of the to places, including ecological influences on child 312 J. M. CAUSADIAS development, formal and informal educational settings (Overton & Muller,€ 2012). Many conceptualizations of that shape behavior and cognition, and situations that culture emphasize its collective nature, composed of facilitate adaptive or maladaptive adjustment. In social meanings and behaviors (Kitayama & Uskul, psychology, a main approach to culture-as-place is 2011). Thus, culture is not simply a personality trait Bronfenbrenner’s ecological framework, epitomized on characteristic of one person, but has a supraindividual the notion that “it all depends” on the context (Cole, nature. Culture is created, shared, and updated by 1979). The word “context” can take a variety of mean- groups (Causadias, 2013). In sum, culture is social. ings, including social, cultural, or environmental set- At the same time, culture is personal. Society tings. Here, context refers to ecological, physical, shapes and is shaped by individuals, reflecting a cycle organizational, institutional, and virtual settings. of mutual construction (Markus & Kitayama, 2010). Practices are the third essential component of cul- Gjerde (2004) made a case for the study of

Load more