ABSTRACT
One of the important services anthropology has traditionally provided other social sciences is to challenge generalizations about human nature and the social order that are derived from studies of a single society. The comparative perspective is especially valuable when the topic of inquiry concerns psychological “consequences” of particular social practices, such as for example, different methods of child-rearing (permissive vs. restrictive) or schooling (formal vs. nonformal) or mass communication (oral vs. literate). It is a hazardous enterprise to attempt to establish causal relationships among selected aspects of social and individual function without taking into account the totality of social practice of which they are a part. How are we to determine whether effects on psychological functioning are attributable to the particular practices selected for study, or to other practices with which they covary, or to the unique patterning of practices in the given society? When we study seemingly “same” practices in different societal contexts, we can better tease apart the distinctive impact of such practices from other features of social life.
