Skip to main content icon/video/no-internet

Conceptualizations of culture and diversity in the trauma field and trauma are numerous. This variety in our understanding of what constitutes “culture” and how to operationalize it is at the root of numerous controversies in the field. Several parallel developments in the trauma field seek to understand trauma and suffering. One is led by cultural anthropologists and cultural psychologists, and it is more ecological and contextual in its understanding of trauma and human suffering. It conceptualizes the intersections of culture and trauma as deeply determined by the values, beliefs, worldviews, morals, preferences, power or privilege dimensions, among others, of both the patient and the researcher, theorist or clinician. It uses an idiographic as well as a social justice approach in its understanding of the human experience.

Another development is led by psychologists who emphasize a more intrapsychic approach to trauma and focuses on the neurobiological and cognitive dimensions of trauma. This approach tends mainly to operationalize culture in terms of ethnic and socioeconomic variables and is nomothetic and universalistic in its conceptualizations of trauma. It theorizes culture as that which belongs to the patient, subject, or client.

A third perspective brings together universal and idiographic dimensions of human experience and understanding of culture and social justice. It advocates for a more integrative approach whereby trauma is better studied through an interdisciplinary and multidimensional approach, including biological, clinical, and cultural perspectives. Among representatives of this third perspective, some grapple with the notion of how to culturally adapt evidence-based practices (EBPs) to address the needs of diverse populations while at the same time acknowledging that each culture is different.

Cultural Psychology and Anthropology

Anthropologists and cultural psychologists and psychiatrists have long refuted Western notions and conceptualizations of self-prevalent in psychiatry and psychology. They have argued that psychology has used a reductionistic approach by treating culture as subordinate to universal laws of human behavior. This perspective has long promoted the notion that individuals are deeply embedded in social contexts, thus introducing cultural notions of mental health in the field such as the idioms of distress (e.g., Arthur Kleinman, Clifford Geertz, Byron Good, Hazel Rose Markus, Shinobu Kitayama, Michelle Rosaldo, and Richard Shweder). Some anthropologists suggest that rather than speaking of a psychology of emotions, we should talk about an anthropology of emotions because of the inescapable link between emotions and culture.

Arthur Kleinman's classic text Rethinking Psychiatry was a call to the mental health profession to address culture in a more integrative way. It brought attention to the different explanatory belief models, advocating an idiographic approach to understand mental illness.

In the 1990s, the field of trauma experienced a rapid growth on the knowledge around the eth-nocultural aspects of posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) (e.g., Anthony Marsella, Yael Danieli, Beth Hudnall Stamm, among others). There was a significant amount of scholarship developed around non-European groups, consistent with the prevalent notion that culture is only about “ethnocultural” groups. It was recognized that appreciating cultural differences in trauma response is a necessary component of trauma assessment and treatment.

The development of the diagnosis of PTSD in the American Psychiatric Association's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition (DSM-IV) was very controversial among cultural psychologists and psychiatrists and some groups involved in international disaster work. Some even questioned the cross-cultural application of the PTSD diagnosis to non-Western groups, since culture mediates the ways people cope with trauma. Such diagnosis was seen as an attempt to apply Western epistemological and methodological notions as universally valid knowledge.

...

  • Loading...
locked icon

Sign in to access this content

Get a 30 day FREE TRIAL

  • Watch videos from a variety of sources bringing classroom topics to life
  • Read modern, diverse business cases
  • Explore hundreds of books and reference titles

Sage Recommends

We found other relevant content for you on other Sage platforms.

Loading