{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.018188567186340016, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0066815144766146995, 'mean_word_length': 5.326291079812207, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology between 1993 and 2000

This issue marks the beginning of the 32nd volume of the Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology (JCCP). We say this with both pride and humility, and also with considerable optimism about its future. Inaugurated in 1970 as a quarterly publication and with the dedication to “consult all that is human” (part of our initial masthead policy), the judgment was made then that it was time for psychology to give serious, concentrated attention to culture as an essential ingredient in the understanding of human behavior. Indeed, the inauguration of JCCP was one of several developments that took place in psychology during the midto late 1960s in which culture played an integral part. Although one may speculate why that particular period fostered the development of cross-cultural psychology, we can say with certainty that the true measure of a mature science of human behavior is the extent to which it intentionally seeks to incorporate the broadest possible spectrum of humankind when formulating ideas about the causes and consequences of human behavior. With the exception of some psychologists who hold an absolutistic view of the world, it is clear that psychologists across the globe now recognize the importance of culture in shaping and maintaining human conduct. One can also say with certainty that it has yet to be determined exactly how and when culture and ethnicity affect human thought and behavior. For many years, cross-cultural psychologists have developed models, frameworks, and a host of theoretical propositions to help explain these connections. Other culturally oriented psychologists have similarly developed perspectives on the role that culture plays in human activity. In fact, one of the most striking developments in the past decade has been the growth in the number of individuals who represent different epistemological perspectives in the area of psychology and culture. Thus, we have, in addition to cross-cultural psychology, the orientations of cultural psychology, indigenous psychology, and psychological anthropology. The common denominator in these approaches, which have fuzzy boundaries between them, consists of making attempts to explain how and why behavior appears in specific cultural contexts. With these perspectives comes a rather formidable list of potential problems and questions that have been the center of interesting debates. For example, is the best approach the culture-comparative perspective, which is largely, but not exclusively, featured by the classical cross-cultural method? Or is comparativism potentially so fraught with difficulties, including how to deal with