51115600 final paper hikikomori … · title: microsoft word - 51115600_final paper_hikikomori.docx...

June5,2016 NGUYENNhuNgoc(Ruby)Sociologytoeverydaylife IDNumber:51115600Instructor:Prof.KoY.Chung 2016SpringSemester,Q1

1

FINAL PAPER

HIKIKOMORI IN JAPAN: When culture backfires

Understanding the phenomenon of social withdrawal in Japanese society

through the theory of social relativism

I. Research background and objective

As social beings living among others and involving in an enormous number of social activities on a daily basis, we would all

naturally from time to time feel the need for privacy and personal space. In other words, it is understandable if someone suddenly

needs a break from everybody else, from school and work, from social contacts and just spends time in their room doing whatever

pleases them. However, when that break extends from days to months and then years, when that someone has not the intention to

ever go out again, when that someone is not a special case but hundreds of thousands, now growing to millions, of people have

started to take that ‘break,’ it becomes a social phenomenon. That phenomenon is called Hikikomori, roughly translated to English

as social withdrawal or youth social withdrawal. It first emerged as a social phenomenon in Japan during the 1990s among young

generations (Suwa and Hara, 2007) but only until the year of 2001 did Japanese government officially acknowledged the

existence of this phenomenon that needs public attention, and above all, help (Zielenziger, 2006). Hikikomori very soon after the

acknowledgment starts to attract attention of the world and it has been rigorously investigated and studied by international

scholars, psychiatrists, clinicians, etc.

Along with such proliferation in research, several debates have arisen for the sake of gain a more thorough understanding of the

phenomenon because there is still much ambivalence around its definitional issues. For instance, it is still unknown whether

hikikomori should be categorized as a clinical issue or a social dysfunction, because the treatment approach for each is different.

Moreover, the Japanese term hikikomori itself denotes another heated debate about whether it is an exclusive phenomenon to

Japanese society (Saito, Nakai, and Aoki, 2001; Zielenziger, 2006; Teo and Gaw, 2010) or it is only a manifestation of some

psychiatric disorders already recognized in the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental

Disorders because similar cases have been recently reported from several countries such as Hong Kong, China, Korea, America

and Spain (Kato et al., 2011; Li and Wong, 2015). The former argument is based on Japan’s psychosocial background,

socioeconomic status and family relationships complex to explain the origins of hikikomori (Zielenziger, 2006); while the latter

takes a symptomatic approach by identifying hikikomori through behaviors such as not participating in full-time schoolwork or

employment, expressing excessive devotion to unworldly values, and enclosing themselves at home for long periods (Heinze and

Thomas, 2014) to show that hikikomori overlaps with other conceptualized popular cultures such as ‘freeter’ or ‘otaku’ in many

countries (Li and Wong, 2015). Although there are some common patterns in identifying hikikomori’s behaviors, there has not

been any consensus on any specific constituent factors such as age groups (teens to 40s in Japan), length of withdrawal (6 months

and more in Japan), degree of social contact during withdrawal (hard core or soft core), etc., and absolutely none whatsoever on

what mental and emotional stage lead to the decision to shutting oneself up in the bedroom for years (Li and Wong, 2015).

Instead of attempting to address as many issues as possible, this paper aims to look at only hikikomori inside Japanese society and

the social conditions that precipitate a typical Japanese hikikomori to isolate themselves from others including their own families.

Based on general records summarized from a wide range of academic studies in various fields (see summary in table 1), I find


2

three dominant catalysts that are said to have motivated several Japanese people to resort to becoming a hikikomori: (1) bullying

(ijime), which is usually accompanied by the negligence of authoritative figures like parents and school teachers; (2) lack of

interest/motivation/capability to keep up with one’s schoolwork or job; and (3) rather a result from the first two is the need for

resistance. At first glance, it’s nothing new or exclusive; bullying and social pressure are pervasive and ubiquitous in almost all

modern societies. However, I suggest we look at these as the tip of an iceberg. In effect, the rest of the iceberg under the water—

what is hidden underneath is multiple times more significant in both scope and importance, which I argue to be closely

interconnected with the cultural, social and traditional values that Japanese people generally embrace in their daily life and

interactions with others because either bullying or social pressure exist within the society, within the relationships between

humans. We can ask beyond what seems obvious, for example, what social conditions enable bullying to happen and remain as

one of the most serious social dysfunctions or disable schools and parents from effectively eliminate it from the society? What is

it inside Japanese society that shackles the individuals down to the expectations of others about what they should do well in

school, what they must do keep their job, how they should talk or behave, what kind of person they should be to be accepted, and

so on? Is it directly and particularly the bully they suffer in school or the examinations they must pass or the alcoholic boss they

must suck up to that hikikomori people are resisting against, or is it the systems of rules and values behind those sufferings? This

paper attempts to prove that there are certain Japanese ideologies that can provide a plausible explanation for the reasons buried

deep down below the overwhelming pressures experienced by hikikomori by looking at how Japanese society structures itself in

Japanese people’s minds. Given the limited space and time allowed for this paper, I would select two key ideologies to discuss the

case of hikikomori in depths. These include the guilt-shame morality and Japanese dependency, which will be presented and

organized under a theoretical framework called social relativism introduced by Takie Sugiyama Lebra in his definitive book

Japanese Patterns of Behavior (1976).

II. What is Social relativism? Social relativism in fact has two components—social preoccupation and interactional relativism—that respectively open up to us

the unwritten rules and values that run Japanese society.

II.1. Social preoccupation In constructing the theory of social relativism, Lebra refered to human beings as social objects distinguised from other objects of

human action. In a social relationship, we usually distinguish ourselves from other social objects of the interaction. Similarly,

Lebra (1976) distinguished between a central actor (Ego) and other human beings that Ego interacts with (Alter). In Japanese

society, people are most likely to be enormously preoccupied with how others perceive them and in effect the social relationships

and interaction with other people are the top priority to them, why is why Lebra termed it as Social preoccupation. We may ask

what other types of object people can be preoccupied with other than social objects. In general, objects in daily life that we can

relate to or act upon can be classified into three types: physical objects, symbolic objects, and social objects. Physical objects are

things either existing in nature or are manmade, which together make up a physical enviroment that Ego needs. In certain society,

people can focus more on the producing, owning, accumulating, consuming or enjoying these physical objects. Symbolic objects,

on the other hand, are things only conceivable through meanings, which require a two-way exchange between social actors—Ego

and Alter. For example, a musician needs his audience, a teacher needs his students, a God needs followers so that the symbols

conveyed can be understood and maintained. However, different Ego would behave towards certain symbolic objects in a

different way because this type of object has a world of its own. Some societies like tribal peoples then might have an

appreciation of symbolic objects that constitute most of their thoughts.


3

By saying Social preoccupation is the most dominant in Japanese society, it does not mean, however, that Japanese people are not

concerned with non-social objects. Rather, how Japanese deal with physical and symbolic objects can add to the extent to which

they are preoccupied with social objects because it is always people-oriented at the core. For example, food as a physical

existence does not interest Japanese people on the level of satisfying the hunger, but eating and drinking activities are an

inevitable part of social interactions. The all types of Japanese social parties (nomikai, tabekai, gohankai) deal with food and

drink on the social level and such activities are only important to them for sake of keeping the relationships, as a wife though left

alone to take care of children and housework would not get angry at her husband who comes home late from an after-work social

gathering. Likewise, regarding symbolic objects, we can see a good example in the way Japanese deal with religion and religious

Gods. Many scholars tend to draw a conclusion that religion and culture are all blurred up together and that Japanese cosmology

has been always worldly and earthbound even after the arrival of Buddhism (Pelzel, 1970). This observation is either wrong or

accurate. If we look at Shintoism in particular as the most influential and ubiquitous religion practiced throughout Japan, we

would easily see how Japanese have transformed religion as a symbolic object into their comfort zone—social realm. Instead of

having one God to worship, Japanese have hundreds, let alone demons; each God guards a different area from agriculture and

heavy industries and each requires an equal share of respect, worship, importance and belief through special rituals. Commonly

we would also know the appearance of each God and his/her preferences in being worshipped. That is to say, Japanese people do

not settle in the symbolic level of action, they transform it to the human size so that they can interact with and establish

relationships with in a more human way.

Turning back to the major concern of this section, I would like to draw your attention again to the social preoccupation towards

social objects, meaning other human beings, of Japanese people. What is the primary difference between a social object and a

non-social object? Basically, non-social objects do not have the ability to think, and thus they cannot react to us. Social objects,

on the contrary, as human beings, do not just receive actions and also respond. In other words, we do not just act upon other

people, we interact with them and they interact with us, and through such interactions, the behaviors both sides are shaped and re-

shaped to keep the interactions going in a favorable way. This is the key to understand the second constituent of Social relativism:

Interactional relativism.

II.2. Interactional relativism This concept is best understood as an end in a range of characteristics of social and non-social preoccupation. The other end is

called Unilateral determism. These two concepts are invented for the sake of understanding what is in between them because

there is no society that is solely preoccupied with only physical objects, or only symbolic objects, or only social objects. They are

all in a mixture and the only distinguishable difference is the degree of preoccupation—are the people of a specific society more

concerned with materials, with symbols, or with other people? To briefly explain, if someone relate themselves more to non-

social objects, they are more likely to be individualistic and their behavior tends to be determined by their own interest towards

those objects because there is technically no correspondence between Ego and his/her objects. In contrast, if someone are more

sensitized with social objects, they tend to care more about the relationships with other people, the mediation between different

interests, and thus their behavior is interaction-based and only relative. Japanese people, as aforementioned, do take into

consideration physical and symbolic objects but with the preoccupation with social interactions find themselves leaning towards

the Interactional Relativism, while people in Western societies for instance may think less of social objects and more of their

power over non-social objects and thus associate better with the other end of Unilateral Determism.


4

In short, a combination of Social preoccupation and Interactional relativism offers us a better tool to get to know the rest of the

Japanese culture iceberb that is hidden—the ‘law behind law,’ ‘words behind words,’ and ‘reason behind reason’ (BenDasan,

1970). Since hikikomori is most of all a social phenomenon, let us examine the four most relevant concepts generated from Social

relativism to see how the theory is connected to the invisible force that has pushed millions of young Japanese into shutting the

world out.

III. Understanding Japanese Hikikomori through the theory of Social relativism III.1. Guilt-shame morality

Based on the logic of social relativism, whatever matter that involves more than one party belongs to the realm of social

relationships and hence should be comprehended from more than one perspective. Morality is no exception. As Lebra (1976) put,

“for the Japanese, goodness or badness is a relative matter, relative to social situation and impact, whose complexity may often be

beyond any judge’s comprehension” (p. 11). Take the situation at a court for example, what we normally see in the news or in the

movies is the judge’s ultimate duty to rule one party to be guilty and responsible for the offense while the other, needless to say, is

innocent. In Japanese sense of morality, such ultimate duty shall never be accomplished because what’s crucial to interpret a

moral situation is the compassion and tolerance for every man’s imperfections. In other words, there is almost no absolute guilt

recognized in Japanese society. But shame, on the other hand, is prevalent. Actually, this concept of shame can be considered to

be guilt as well, but from Japanese angle. In Western ethics, guilt is rather an internal punishment against the violation of an

absolute moral standard, which is aforementioned non-existent in Japanese society. Instead, Japanese people view guilt as a form

of “self-imposed negative sanction,” which then is found similar to ‘shame’ and in whatever social scenario, all parties can always

find themselves a part of the shame as to why the problem arises in the first place.

When it comes to the mother-child relationship that is at the center of hikikomori identity, George DeVos (1960) argued that the

main source of Japanese guilt comes from the mother’s nature of self-sacrifice because such default unconditional love and care

would naturally evoke a strong sense of indebtedness and consequently the obligation to repay it. To generalize it, guilt in

Japanese sense appears to begin partially from one’s empathy for the sufferings of another person, especially for the sake of

him/her. Another source of Japanese guilt is interpreted by Doi Takeo (1971) as the feeling of betraying the trust and expectation

of the group that one belongs to socially. In effect, in both cases, guilt functions as a motivation to interact in human social

relationships, either to repay, to compensate, to correct, or to fulfill. More importantly, this kind of guilt is consumed primarily by

Ego and not as much by Alter.

Applying this understanding to the situation of many hikikomori who drop out school or work, we can see what role the Japanese

morality of guilt plays in the decision to shut themselves in. It is by no means a rarity that individuals find their interest and talent

in what they are expected to learn or do in the environment of schooling and institutional employment. Much as the national

systems of education and labor division are established and organized to fit the most population, they are not necessarily able to

do so. Such individuals who have difficulty in fitting it, understandably you would think, may find other ways to learn and

become a useful citizen to their society because statistics show that new jobs are being invented every day, requiring all kinds of

skills and knowledge. However, unfortunately, just as several other modern societies, Japanese society has its priorities as for

which school subjects, which examinations, which universities, which jobs, which companies, etc., are worth investing time and

effort in in terms of reputation, prestige, market value. As a result, children and young people from all backgrounds, interests,


5

talents and capabilities are squeezed into the race to get ‘there’ first to make their families and other social groups proud of them.

Those who fail to do so will find themselves lag behind, be alienated, and looked down on as a ‘shame.’

Although one of the reasons identified earlier about why many hikikomori feel the need to stay away from school and work is that

they could not care less about what they are expected or obliged to do and that they have the right to live the life they want to, it is

possible that the inescapable self-guilt and shame actually lock their doors up.

III.2. Dependency While it is valid argument to say that hikikomori is not exclusive to Japan because it has been found in several other countries as

well, it is important to note that the behaviors of hikikomori are nearly impossible to persist in certain other societies.

Documentaries after documentaries have been made about hikikomori and several mothers have been interviewed, one question

remains unanswered: Why don’t you demand him/her to get out of the bedroom? This question implies actions that would induce

the hikikomori to step outside and deal with whatever life trouble they have because hiding away does not solve anything. It

appears fairly simple for outsiders, especially foreigners, to list out reasons why Japanese mothers have the power to make such a

change because obviously hikikomori people are not making any money or having any close contact with anyone outside their

house if they are kicked out. In other words, the hikikomori people are entirely dependent on their family, mainly their mother, to

support them through the social withdrawal. Therefore, we would think merely a refusal to provide food, drink, and other

necessities for even a short period of time may work, or if necessary, the room door can be easily removed to make the hikikomori

inevitably exposed to other people. It may also seem strange to a society where group living is so much emphasized and embraced,

how come this much autonomy is assigned to dependent and helpless individuals to exercise a seemingly unacceptable behavior?

Interestingly, we find part of the answer again within the mother-child relationship, within the very dependency that connects

them together.

As aforementioned, Japanese people promote empathy to tolerate and understand other people so it is only logical that they also

promote dependency, not only in the mother-child relationship but in overall. Just look at the most commonly used Japanese

phrases that we are saying to one another on a daily, if not hourly, basis to see how Japanese constantly express dependency and

personal helplessness. When strangers meet for the first time, instead of simply ‘How do you do?’ or ‘Nice to meet you’ after

addressing the new encounter, they go straight to ‘Yoroshiku onegaishimasu’ conveying the expected future dependency on each

other. When being asked ‘How are you?’ normally a Japanese would add ‘Okagesamade’ literally meaning ‘Thanks to your

protection/benovelence’ before saying that ‘I am well.’ However, it is important to point out that the kind of dependency the

Japanese have in mind is always a mutual exchange of reliance, reciprocity. Still under the theory of social relativism, the concept

of dependency runs on the combination between the right to be dependent and the obligation to return the favor when needed.

According to Lebra (1976), there are four cultural types of dependency: Dependency on patronage, on attendance, on indulgence,

and on pity. As she also noted immediately after discussing the meaning of each type, the mother-child relationship “takes a

typical and total form [where] all four types of dependency intertwine to form a culturally idealized relationship” (p. 57). I would

proceed with explaining each type of dependency followed by the discussion on how it relates to most mothers’ confusing

response to their hikikomori children.

III.2.1. Dependency on Patronage


6

The first type, dependency on patronage is most likely to exist when two parties are unequal in status or power, such as in the

sempai-kouhai, parent-child, employer-employee, teacher-student, leader-follower, landowner-tenant, etc. In such cases, the

inferior is dependent upon the superior for support while the latter is expected to act in favor of the dependent, thus forming a

‘patron-client tie’. In the specific case of oya-ko (parent-child), the ko-bun can depend upon the oya-bun for protection, supply

and security. This dependency on patronage, though can be limitless and unconditional on the sideo of oya-bun, can only be

obtained by deepest gratitude and total dedication from the side of ko-bun. However, Lebra (1976) also suggested that such

dependency is “naturally stronger and more common in prewar times, where the social structure was more authoriatian and when

economic security for the average person was hard to come by” (p. 52). In the present day Japanese society, postwar

democratization and affluence have gradually made this dependency asymmetrical in the sense that the burden is now entirely on

the side of oya-bun while whether or not the children feel the obligation to feel grateful is at their own mercy.

Likewise, being a parent of a hikikomori child denotes still the unconditional providing of protection and care regardless of the

child’ attitude. Moreover, hikikomori always have an unsaid difficulty such as being bullied and unable to keep up with school

and work, that cannot really be helped, so the parents would avoid worsening the situation. Rather, they view the withdrawal as a

cure for the hurt child to calm down and take it slow because everyone is aware of the social pressure one has to bear so as to live

and be accepted by the society. That is to say, based on the patronage type of cultural dependency, a mother has a power over the

child because the latter totally relies on the former but the changed social and economic conditions have greatly influenced the

recipient end of the dependency. The power holder, who is the mother, is left clueless how to adjust their behavior because while

knowing there is something wrong, they simply cannot abandon their children because virtually they are still doing what they are

expected to do—depending on their parents.

III.2.2. Dependency on Attendance In general, this cultural type of dependency can be seen as a reverse dependency relationship where the superior becomes

dependent on the inferior to attend to his/her personal needs. A patronage does not have to take care of the daily chores that are

deemed unworthy and too trivial for them to handle. Similar to morality, status in Japan is not a clear-cut concept where inferior

and superior can be absolutely distinguished and holding a higher status is not free of taboo because based on the logic of

dependency on attendance, the higher up one reaches on the status ladder, the more dependent one depends on others to take care

of one’s needs. In other words, this type of dependency also has a price, which is the personal freedom not having to rely on

anybody. In daily, we can find examples where people try to compromise between the need of a caretaker and the individual

freedom by paying money. Men rely on their wives to attend to his needs but it is not without pressure fulfill their obligations

towards the caregiver so they turn to having other women like hostesses who can perform the exact same job, even with more

professional skills and pleasureable attitude, at bars rather than at home, but then it costs a lot of money.

Turning to the mother-child relationship, this dependency cannot be clearly defined as for who is the superior or inferior because

the child would undoubtedly depend on the mother to attend to their needs such as feeding, clothing, health care, toilet control, etc.

In a sense, the mother-child dependency relationship is one of a special kind where status does not function the same way as in

other relationships like husband-wife or sempai-kouhai. However, the dependency and freedom dilemma is still applicable

because commonly young people would be eager to find a job, move away to obtain their freedom. The mother-child is also

special in a sense that the ability to take care of the other’s needs becomes a contributor to one’s status, not so much as a superior,

but as simply a mother. A mother needs to have a child to wait upon to be able to perform her role and significance. Therefore,


7

when a hikikomori child prolongs the dependency, the status of the mother is also strengthened and the feeling that ‘I am needed’

refrains her from acting rashly to break that dependency.

III.2.3 Depedency on Indulgence

This type of dependency in Japanese is called amae (甘え), which is an emotional state that seeks after and is attained by

another’s indulgence. It basically comprises of two corresponding behaviors: amaeru and amayakasu. The former refers to the act

of relying on someone’s benevolence to be pampered and spoilt, which must be complemented and supported by the role that is

ready for offering amae, thus called amayakasu. There is much criticism against this type of depedency because it implies an

absence of discipline on the dependent person. Such criticism usually takes the form of friendly teasing by older siblings in the

family towards the child who requires amae exceeding their age. Amae, without saying, is prevalent in the Japanese mother-child

relationship and it can maintain long after a child actually cannot survive without the mother’s sweet and kind attendance.

Sometimes amae also refers to self-indulgence, which expresses a social disapproval that a person is irresponsible or too weak to

take on the harships in life.

Both forms of amae are found in hikikomori, one involves the mother and one comes from the hikikomori’s inner self. In reality,

we have to acknowledge that not all children grow and mature at an exact same age and there is no scientific way to determine

such a mature mental age of a child. Some shows serious progress in self-development at a very early age such as being able to

take care of oneself, having one’s own opinions and knowing how to behave responsibly; while others remain dependent and

naive despite growing over a certain age. Commonsense thinking would immediately points at the immature and irresponsible

case to describe hikikomori people. What else can better illustrate indulgence than lying around in one’s room, eating, sleeping,

playing and going out as one pleases, not doing any work and not being bothered by anybody. However, both cases are applicable.

According to findings from personal interviews, Mark Zielenziger (2006) showed us cases where the youth were really scared and

bruised from the social encounters and that they needed the shelter at home. But a surprising number of cases were found when

the hikikomori displayed an amazing degree of abstract intelligence and artistic talents as well as a profound understanding of life

in their own society. They were fully aware of why they were not accepted socially. It is because their society does not place

much significance on the things they’re interested in or really good at, instead it could even be social stigma attached to the kind

of thinking and jobs they want to do because those are not prestigious, not masculine or feminine enough, not promising, etc.

Nevertheless, most hikikomori facing this dilemma would not explain it to their parents because they knew they would not be

understood and tolerated. In consequence, the mothers have to turn to the assumption that their children are not well-prepared

enough to cope with the world and they need more time and more amae tenderness to soften the hardships.

III.2.4. Dependency on Pity Even when they choose to tell their parents of the difficulties they’re having, they are appealing for another type of depedency—

the call for help, empathy, and pity. A Japanese individual who is suffering tends to reveal it to someone they trust to release the

spiritual burden. It might also be understood that those hikikomori who decide not to disclose anything to their parents want to

free themselves from just another weight of dependency while already having too much to depend on them. Status, again, does

not play a great role in dependency on pity because anybody is susceptible of getting into trouble, becoming vulnerable in times

of hardships, and thus having the right to call for pity as a way out. It does not mean that Alter has to do anything in particular to

rescue the desperate and miserable Ego but the mere presence and utterance of empathetic words can complete the dependency.


8

In the case of hikikomori, this type of dependency is arguably the most relevant to explain the response of mothers towards their

shut-ins. They may or may not know the reasons behind the withdrawal but long as their children look like they are suffering in

despair and unbearable stress to the point that they have to hide away, the mothers do not dare to interfere out of pity. Their

constant support and supply of necessities speak the loudest of all for the pain they feel for the hikikomori. Though having certain

overlaps with the previous types of dependency, this type adds a new dimension to the interpretation of what has kept the

situation of hikikomori sustainable over long periods of time.

IV. Closing remarks This paper sets out to address the relatively new social phenomenon of hikikomori within the Japanese society through a

theoretical framework of social relativism. Due to the limited time and space allowed, the nature of this paper is introductory in

terms of making a connection between the phenomenon and the cultural context where it takes places, which is modern day Japan.

The cultural context described and discussed here is founded on the theory of social relativism introduced by Takie Lebra (1976)

and a selection of relevant concepts generated from the theory. The theory accounts for a number of major characteristics of

Japanese society that portrays the social preoccupation and interactional relativism embedded in Japanese patterns of behaviors. I

have chosen the two important concepts of Japanese guilt-shame morality and dependency with a view to furnishing an

comprehension of the less exposed reasons behind hikikomori identity. All in all, Hikikomori is by no means a simplistic and

straightforward topic to encompass as it is still full of ambiguities and uncertainties, but so are all newly emerged social issues. A

multidimensional approach from different fields and perspective is probably the only way to ever reach a degree of understanding

that enables appropriate attitude and social treatment towards this new identity, and hopefully this paper is a part of that process.


9


10

V. Bibliography

Alexander, K., & Dickie, J. R. (2013). Attachment and ‘Hikikomori’: A Psychosocial Developmental Model. International

Journal of Social Psychiatry, 59(1). Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0020764011423182 [15 February 2015]

Bauman, Z., & May, T. (2001). Thinking sociologically (2nd ed.). Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Driedger, S. M. (2007). Risk and the media: A comparison of print and televised news stories of a Canadian drinking water risk

event. Risk Analysis, 27(3), 775-786.

Dziesinski, M. (2003). Hikikomori - Investigations into the phenomenon of acute social withdrawal in contemporary Japan.

Retrieved from https://towakudai.blogs.com/Hikikomori.Research.Survey.pdf; [20 November 2015]

DeVos, G. (1959). Psycho-Cultural significance of concern over death and illness among rural Japanese. International Journal of

Social Psychiatry, 5, 5-19.

Funakoshi, A., & Miyamoto, Y. (2014). Significant factors in family difficulties for fathers and mothers who use support services

for children with hikikomori. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences. DOI: 10.1111/pcn.12230.

Furlong, A. (2008) The Japanese hikikomori phenomenon: Acute social withdrawal among young people. The Sociological

Review, 56, 309–325.

Hattori, Y. (2006) Social withdrawal in Japanese youth: A case study of thirty-five hikikomori clients. Journal of Trauma

Practice, 4, 181–201.


11

Kaneko, S. (2006). Japan’s ‘socially withdrawn youths’ and time constraints in Japanese society: Management and

conceptualization of time in a support group for hikikomori. Time & Society, 15, 233–249.

Kato, T. A., Shinfuku, N., Sartorius, N., et al. (2011) Are Japan’s hikikomori and depression in young people spreading abroad?

Lancet, 378, 1070.

Kato, T. A., Tateno, M., Shinfuku, N., et al. (2012) Does the ‘hikikomori’ syndrome of social withdrawal exist outside Japan? A

preliminary international investigation. Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology, 47, 1061–1075.

Lebra, T. S. (1976). Japanese patterns of behavior. Hawaii: University of Hawaii Press.

Li, T. M. H., & Wong, P. W. C. (2015). Youth social withdrawal behavior (hikikomori): A systematic review of qualitative and

quantitative studies. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry, 49(7), 595-609.

Nesser, L. (2009). Hikikomori – A Generation in Crisis. Unpublished MA thesis. Oslo: University of Oslo.

Pelzel, J. C. (1970). Human nature in the Japanese myths. In Craig, A. M. and Shively, D. H. (eds.) Personality in Japanese

history. Los Angeles: University of California Press.

Sakamoto N, Martin RG, Kumano H, et al. (2005). Hikikomori, is it a culture-reactive or culture-bound syndrome? Nidotherapy

and a clinical vignette from Oman. International Journal of Psychiatry in Medicine 35: 191–198.

Suwa, M., & Hara, K. (2007). Hikikomori among young adults in Japan. Journal of Medical Welfare, 3, 94–102.

Suwa, M., & Suzuki, K. (2013). The phenomenon of ‘hikikomori’ (social withdrawal) and the socio-cultural situation in Japan

today. Journal of Psychopathology, 19, 191–198.

Suwa, M., Suzuki, K., Hara, K., et al. (2003). Family features in primary social withdrawal among young adults. Psychiatry and

Clinical Neurosciences, 57, 586–594.

Tamaki, S. (2013). Hikikomori: Adolescence without end. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Tateno, M., Park, T. W., Kat,o T. A., et al. (2012). Hikikomori as a possible clinical term in psychiatry: A questionnaire survey.

BMC Psychiatry, 12, 169.

Teo, A. R. (2010). A new form of social withdrawal in Japan: A review of hikikomori. International Journal of Social Psychiatry,

56, 178–185.

Teo, A. R. (2012). Social isolation associated with depression: A case report of hikikomori. International Journal of Social

Psychiatry, 59, 339– 341.

Teo, A. R., & Gaw, A. C. (2010). Hikikomori, a Japanese culture-bound syndrome of social withdrawal? A proposal for DSM-5.

Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, 198, 444–449.


12

Teo, A. R., Fetters, M. D., Stufflebam, K., et al. (2014). Identification of the hikikomori syndrome of social withdrawal:

Psychosocial features and treatment preferences in four countries. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 61, 64–72.

Teo, A. R., Stufflebam, K. W., & Kato, T. A. (2013). The intersection of culture and solitude: The hikikomori phenomenon in

Japan. In Coplan, R. J., & Bowker, J. C. (Eds.), The Handbook of Solitude: Psychological Perspectives on Social

Isolation, Social Withdrawal, and Being Alone. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.

Wong, V. (2009). Youth locked in time and space? Defining features of social withdrawal and practice implications. Journal of

Social Work Practice, 23, 337–352.

Wong, V. (2012). Social withdrawal as invisible youth disengagement. The International Journal of Sociology and Social Policy,

32, 415–430.

Zielenziger, M. (2006). Shutting out the sun. United States: Vintage Books.

51115600 final paper hikikomori … · title: microsoft word - 51115600_final paper_hikikomori.docx...

Documents