Arguments are made in this commentary for the importance of integrating quantitative psychological and interpretive ethnographic methodologies in cultural psychology, and for overcoming the present insularity related to disciplinary affiliation of work within this tradition. Theoretical attention centers on the importance of cultural sensitivity, the compatibility of alternative empirical methodologies, and the pragmatic nature of explanation.ecent years have seen the reemergence of an interdisciplinary approach to culture and psychology, termed cultural psychology (Bruner 1990;Cole 1990; Miller 1997b; Shweder 1990; Wertsch 1995). 1 Central to this perspective is a view f culture and psychology as mutually constitutive. This approach recognizes that cultural meanings and practices are dependent on the subjectivity of particular communities of intentional agents, just as psychological processes and structures are understood to be patterned, in part, by sociocultural meanings and practices. Cultural psychologists maintain that understanding psychological processes requires crossing traditional disciplinary boundaries and attending to language and culture as well as to individual subjectivity and behavior. Heterogeneous in character, the perspective of cultural psychology has roots not only in research traditions that emphasize interpretive ethnographic methodologies, such JOAN MILLER is a research scientist in the Department of Psychology at Yale University. Ethos 25(2):164-176.