From the margins to the center: Advancing research on caregiver socialization of emotion in Asia

Abstract

As in other fields of developmental science, emotion socialization research in Asia, where nearly 60% of the world's population lives, has emerged on the margins. Contextualizing this marginalization within colonial foundations of our science, in this article, I discuss the historic dominance of the Global North frameworks of emotion socialization. I also address associated limitations of emotion socialization research in Asia, recent conceptualizations that integrate cultural processes and emerging insights from this research, and the need for a decolonial framework to further advance this literature. A decolonial framework would enable scholars to contextualize emotion socialization within local milieus; use research methods valued by local communities; and interpret emotion‐related beliefs and behaviors in Asia as assets, not deficits. Adopting a decolonial framework can move emotion socialization research in Asia from the margins to the center of emotion socialization literature, generating knowledge to support the well‐being of children in Asia and around the world.

Towards a decolonial developmental science: Adolescent development in the Majority World taking center stage

“…The EuroAmerican dominance is also evident in the use of theoretical frameworks used to guide developmental research, constructs studied, and methods used that are derived from the Minority World. Even in published research that includes adolescent samples from the Majority World, often the research is conceptualized based on dominant theoretical frameworks of emotional, social, or cognitive development from the Minority World that are rooted in White Euro‐American worldviews (Marfo, 2011; Raval, 2023a). Adolescents around the world live in varying social, cultural, economic, educational, healthcare, political contexts that shape their everyday experiences, including aspects of their development (Raffaelli et al., 2013).…”

“…Even in the absence of a comparison group, developmental or caregiving processes of Majority World communities are often implicitly compared to the EuroAmerican norm and evaluated as less desirable, regressive, unhealthy, or even harmful—practices that can be conceived as “studying down” communities (Schrijvers, 1991) or as “epistemic violence” (Teo, 2010). For example, in studies of emotional development, descriptions of Asian caregivers as discouraging emotional expressions or Asian children as suppressing emotions result from comparisons with EuroAmerican norms that lead to viewing emotion socialization and emotion regulation approaches of Asian caregivers and youth as less desirable (Raval, 2023a).…”