ZJ Si,~ce the 1920 s scholars and scientists have become increas-

ingt~ interested in the effects of cuhural forces upon the personali-

zes of individual members of the culture group. While the major

contributions have been made by anthropologists, a growing num-

ber of sociologists, social psychologists and psychiatrists have

turned their attention to the problem.

There is great potential value in the efforts of specialists from

different fields focussing on a common goal. Certain difficulties,

however, are likely to occur--difficulties of communication as well

as of the more obvious differing approaches and interpretations.

These must be recognized and deah with if we are to avoid con.

fusion and misunderstanding. In the study of culture and person-

ality we face several such confusions. What do we mean by "cul-

tare" and by "personality"? What field-work procedures should

be used in our investigations? Can quantitative methods, such as

tests and experimentation, be utilized advantageously? How valid

and useful are psychoanalytical interpretations? Projective tech-

niques? Biographical methods? How important are subcultural

factors, like family, community and class, within the broader cul-

tural pattern? What are the possibilities for future cooperative

research efforts?