Seeking to identify factors that implicate culture bound theory both
in the socio demographic orientation of
hikikomori
and in the physical manifestation of `opting out` by `shutting in` and including
a brief comparison of those factors from a control culture with the related
social expectation withdrawal of
runaway.
I`m using as a baseline for analysis, Japan`s position in 3 of the culture value indices
defined by Hofstede, (G.Hofstede: 1980) namely the dimensions of:
Ø
individualism; IDV,
Ø
power distance; PDI,
Ø
uncertainty avoidance; UAI,
trying to analyse how, in conjunction with educational norms, peer
behavioral patterns and employment expectations within a society, cultural
values can determine how social withdrawal and `opting out` will present.
Hikikomori is not a social situation
that is disappearing in Japan,
even though it is no longer the hot topic of the previous decade. As interest
wanes and media inevitably moves its attention on to the next cult like
phenomenon among young people who behave differently, the growing
hikikomori population of over one
million ( ) should not be forgotten. Educators and politicians are in a prime position to
facilitate change and question teaching styles that may play a critical role in
responsibility for such a huge, national, cultural specific, social epidemic that
is not vanishing like its members, but is instead rampant and growing.
Culture-bound is a term that
indicates the native countries culture is trigger for a certain social behaviour
or trend. By naming a trend culture-bound, it is easier to trace cause and therefore
perhaps to find solutions or appropriate ways to respond or not. However, this
paper does not seek to offer solutions to the issue of hikikomori or to propose counsel although it does contain opinion.
It looks at possible contributing background societal factors and at a
juztapositional social withdrawal
phenomenon classified often as `runaway`
in an attempt to identify specific enantiomers that lay claim to the theory
herein that hikikomori is both
Japanese specific and culture bound.
In medical anthropology a culture bound or culture
reactive syndrome is a combination of
psychiatric and somatic symptoms that are recognizable only within a specific
society or culture. “Even though the
concept is controversial, the term culture-bound syndrome was included in the
fourth version of the Diagnostic and statistical manual of Mental Disorders, American
Psychiatric Association”: 1994 (Sakamoto: 2005)
Secher in Watts (2002)
explains “When you get large numbers of individuals behaving in similar ways,
it is generally a cultural expression of some kind”.
Hikikomori is now a well known term.
The translation alternatives (apathy syndrome, shut-ins, voluntary seclusion or
acute social withdrawal) never caught on for a reason; the Japanese word hikikomori is the term that settled and
is most widely used around the world for the phenomenon and this indicates
implicitly that it is considered to be either Japanese specific or at least
found mainly in Japan.
It is interesting to note the leading specialist
on hikikomori psychologist Dr.Tamaki Saito coined the buzzword originally as shakaiteki hikikomori in 1998 (Saito:1998)
acknowledging the intrinsic social (社会)
or cultural roots.
Originally considered an extension of truancy (不燈侯) it was first treated as a
medical ailment with copious quantities of drugs (Zielenziger:2006) but is now
widely accepted as a pattern of behaviour of young people who have jumped off the train
of expected educational and social norms, as happens in
many countries but have confined themselves inside their rooms as an escape
from that pressure.
The
IDV component.
Individualism.
To isolate oneself is a natural escape strategy reaction for
a collectivist low IDV society member. In high collectivist cultures like Japan,
context =identity. A person will
feel safe and comfortable belonging to a group. Indeed, without answers from a
stranger to establish context with questions
like; `What is your name? ` `How old are you? ` and `Where are you from?` it is
difficult to establish a baseline connection with another person. Even on
television interviewing random strangers in the street, Japanese television
will give a person`s age and job details, where in an individualistic culture this
would be considered rude, an invasion of privacy or in some cases a human
rights issue.
This can be seen in statistics of how trusting people in
both culture types are of complete strangers. In a collectivist culture a
stranger is not part of a group and so difficult to place or identify. They are met with unease
because there is no context. This unease is incidentally often misinterpreted
as shyness by those from collectivist cultures who interpret how this unease
would be identified in their own self oriented culture. Ignoring outsiders or
non members is acceptable because the group must maintain its loyalty above all
else and strangers will be met with unease.
In an individualist society, a person relates to a stranger
as a `self`, valuing their individual and independent status. A whole group
however may conversely be met with distrust.
In an individualist culture like America,
Australia and the UK, a
person feels most comfortable when they are able to make an individual
expression of self because self=
identity. There will be hints and comments pertaining to the self which may
appear self centered but are culturally ingrained communicative habits in
individualistic societies where people choose what to share and are taught that
to be assertive with self-needs and opinions is a highly desirable quality.
Zielenziger (ibid) reports on an experiment with photography
where a group of Japanese students (low IDV culture) and a group of American
students (high IDV culture) were told to photograph a friend. The Japanese
students all photographed their friend in an environment of some kind with the
background taking more than
60% of the photograph frame. The American students all took
closer up shots of their friend, the person took up most of the `canvas` and
the background was blurred or inconsequential. This could denote the importance
of people in context (typical in Japanese
culture) contrasting the importance of people
as self (typical inAmerican culture).
Ignoring outsiders or non members is acceptable in a
collectivist culture because the group must maintain its loyalty to each other
first and foremost like a mother cat guards her kittens. A complete stranger
represents a person that cannot immediately be placed in context or group. The
Daily Yomiuri (June 13th :2004) conducted a survey on trust in
strangers and 47% of Americans responded saying other people can be trusted
despite the far higher crime rate, where only 26% of Japanese responded that
they would trust a complete stranger. The implication for hikikomori here is
that once the person removes themselves from the group for an extended period
they will be shut out and ignored because they no longer belong. Likewise, if
an individual within the group behaves in a way contrary to group unwritten
rules but accepted behavioural patterns for that group, they will be ignored
and shut out to the point where they may voluntarily leave the group. This
passive aggressive style of bullying is more common in group-oriented cultures
and differs from the more violent and verbally abusive style bullying in
self-oriented cultures.
A glimpse at historically rooted traditional collectivist
culture
In traditional village society in the Tokugawa period, the
government divided each village into 5 units of mutual surveillance to create
smaller groups within the village
in order to promote mutual dependency and loyalty (⑤人国). The community was divided
into these groups and if one person within the group disobeyed rules
or rebelled the whole group would be punished or chastised.
In this way, it was taught through the generations that responsibility was for
one`s own group (only), and that the individual has little power but as a group
things can be achieved well.
By relying on this style of group dependency an individual`s
ability to think critically without consulting others, and the opportunities and incentive to create
change (which happens when one person thinks or does differently; others see,
discuss, adopt and accomodate) and the practice of doing so have diminished.
Closed networks known as shigarami within society bind the
groups strongly together so that those at the top, treated with utmost respect
born from recognition of the huge responsibility they have over the group`s
well being, must forfeit as much as their lives if one member of their group
steps out of line and shames the network. This close knit structure can be
compared with Amish societies `Ordnung` where rules down to exactly what
members can wear, and other some religious cult groups in other countries too,
but in Japan (and other highly collectivist group cultures too) this sense of
responsibility to the group is so intense that any party not within the network
or connected to a group cannot possibly get anywhere in life; where in contrast
the option to leave the cult or group is a viable one and often first choice
escape route in more individual-oriented countries with higher IDV scores.
While there is nothing new in this theory, the role that
this imbedded cultural way is intrinsically implicated in the main isolation
feature of social withdrawal/hikikomori is clear. Only by completely withdrawing
from all
groups can the individual salvage their desire to be different or to behave
differently from any group.
By withdrawing from the group they are in turn ignored and
outcast and can never again enter a new group in fear of the social stigma trailing
and attached to having left one. The final irony however is that the world
itself then clumps these individuals into a group and gives them the name `hikikomori`.
PDI
component (Power Distance Indice).
Dependence
V Independence.
The fact that hikikomori choose to retreat to their own rooms is a curious one
from a Western high power distance country perspective. A young person`s room
is where we are punished and forced to remain when we have done wrong. It is a
punishment `to be grounded`. Yet, if we look at this choice with
Hofstede`s
cultural dimension of power
indice in mind regarding a high PD culture with no similar traditional
confining punishment in childhood, it is easily comprehensible.
PDI rating is a country`s score for how it values dependency. This is
connected closely to the other two components of collectivist and uncertainty
avoidance but the focus is on hierarchy of a society and how extensive equality
is in terms of power. In a low power distance country people will respect
independence and demand it. In a high power distance culture (like Japan)
people at the top will have great power and positions and rank will be
controlled carefully with leaders consistently treated with great respect and
obedience. In low power distance cultures there will be more rebellion for
equality and change from those who feel powerless and less resistance to that rebellion
from those who have the power.
In both cultures, parents teach differing values to their children. In Japan,
traditionally although times are changing, parents have taught children to obey
the teacher and all rules. An important mantra is not to cause problems for
other people and to fall in line to save face for the family. In America and
lower PD cultures, children are taught to question the teacher, to question
everything and to answer back with an opinion when they disagree, to be a
`hero` by protecting a stranger and to `think outside the box`. These are basic
differences in the way parents bring up their children and as such, reflect how
a society shapes its power distance.
So, it is not surprising that opting out for Japanese young people should be
to stay at home. Here, their own room is a private sanctuary away from the peer
group and world outside that imposes restrictions on them. Here, they can be
semi safe from criticism from superiors` or society`s judgement, in a womb like
existence with Mother nearby. The core value of power distance is rejected but
the symbiotic relationship with Mother is very strong and offers a tiny thread
of that instinctive culture born expectancy that is hard to shake- that of
dependency.
In low power distant countries, we have the opposite culture reactive
phenomenon in young people; that of `runaway`. It is directly related to power
distance because it is chooses to run from all dependents and strives for
complete independence even if that means homelessness. As James Lehman, a
Canadian behavioural therapist for teens and young adults writes; “
kids run away from problems they cannot
handle. It`s in our culture. Adolescents often see running away as a way to
achieve a sense of power and independence.” (Lehman: 2009).
Both social phenomena are rooted in rebellion or reaction against authority,
but
hikikomori is unique because it chooses to place the family as a
safer haven than the peer group. This in turn, suggests that bullying and
school pressure play a
larger part in retreat than in the counterpart
phenomena of
runaway, where perhaps young people are fleeing the
pressure from family pressure.
Finally, let us take a look at the uncertainty avoidance indice and how it
relates to
hikikomori.
UAI
component
Rituals
of performance.
Japan`s high value of employment stability and lifetime employment is a
mental programming statistic, not necessarily found within individuals but a
composite factor within the construct described and researched by Hofstede
(Hofstede, 1983: 118-119) under the name of `
Uncertainty Avoidance`.
The longitudinal (25 years) research that supports culture bound hypothesis
in connection with employment avoidance and social withdrawal is documented in
approx. 118 articles published in the `Journal of International Business
Studies`between 1983 to 2008 (Au,K.Y, 1999;799-812).
UAI is a cultural dimension of toleration concerning uncertainty about the
future. At the high end of the scale are cultures in which people feel comfortable
with rituals and routines that reduce uncertainty in daily life and in the
workplace. Low end UAI cultures are those in which people are happier with
fewer routines and rituals and are open to much wider individual variation. In
countries where UAI is high, and
Japan
ranks 92nd out of 100
countries surveyed (Hofstede, 1980) people will demonstrate extreme loyalty to
the company or their employer and feel extreme social obligation to participate
in group activity.
A high UAI score relates to
hikikomori
because 100% of
hikikomori young
adults have opted out of both
work and
group social activity. They are therefore reacting in a culturally adverse
mode, mitigating the relevance of the claim `culture bound`.
The pressure on young people within the typical
hikikomori age range
of 14 to 30 -to find work
and to stay in that work - or to find a
club activity
and stay in that activity and to co-operate
correctly within a rigid peer group hierarchical system (
侯輩・先輩) within Japanese society are factors that go
towards creating pressure to isolate. As unemployment rates rise and the social
stigma attached to any kind of so named
drop out continues to
prevail, this has created in natural turn a world of so called
internet cafe hermits,
parasites, neats and
hikikomori..
While both social phenomena are rooted in rebellion or reaction against
authority,
hikikomori is unique because it chooses to place the family
as a safer haven than the peer group. This in turn, suggests that bullying and
school or work pressure play a
larger part in retreat than in the
counterpart phenomena of
runaway, where perhaps young people are fleeing
the pressure from family pressure. Parents in Western cultures usually
encourage their children to leave home by 18 where in Japan
“parents are happy to allow their children to remain at home and live
from their parents` income until their thirties” (Suwa et al. 2003).
In individualistic
cultures the trend for opting out sees `runaways`
leaving the home and seeking an alternative place to be. In these notes I have
hypothesized in a comparative analysis why Japanese hikikomori choose to confine themselves in their rooms within the
context of 3 cultural indices as defined by the world famous cultural expert
Geert Hofstede. I have tried to confirm my theory that the exact manner `opting
out` of society manifests itself in Japan is clearly culture reactive.
It is beyond the scope of this paper to develop further the enormous
implications that this theory has on socio-economics, education and politics where change could be
sought, but it is the foundation for further research into such considerations.
