Commentaries 287 Reynolds, C, and R. Kamphaus 1998 BASC: Behavior Assessment System for Children Manual. Circle Pines, MN: American Guidance Service. On the Biocultural Study of Children's Hyperactive and Inattentive Behavior ALEXANDRA BREWIS KAREN SCHMIDT MARY MEYER It is heartening that two research projects beginning with entirely different theoretical perspectives (ours bioanthro- pological and Jacobson's social constructionist) can find such agreement in their empirical observations about the same behavioral phenomena. Of course the conclusions about the significance of those findings will vary by theo- retical persuasion, as they do here. Because we are inter- ested ultimately in detecting cross-cultural universals in the context of normal population variation, we premise our research from a very different theoretical starting point than Jacobson, who is instead oriented to the study of how society creates or applies meaning to categories of disorder. We do not necessarily agree, for example, with Jacobson's statement that "biology does not preordain a behavior as normal or abnormal." In fact, current thinking about psychiatric phenomena suggests just the converse: An ultimate boundary of what constitutes abnormality will be universally observable because the basic capacities for human social behavior are evolved. For example, core features of schizophrenic behavior (such as flattened facial expression) manifest in diverse cultural contexts and ap- pear to be universally defined as deviant or strange by other social actors regardless of the observer's cultural background (Murphy 1982; Schmidt 1997). We consider our American Anthropologist research re- port successful if it drives others to build on or test our findings in novel ways, including applying other theoreti- cal frameworks. Different readers probably developed var- ied senses of what needs to be done next, just as these commentators have. Some might have recognized the im- portance of testing our model in more culturally diverse settings: Reviewers of our work have often commented on the particular promise of comparable research among hunter-gatherers. Others may have seen the implications of considering how globalizing ideas (e.g., formal psychi- atric definitions of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disor- der [ADHD], such as from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition [DSM-IV]) and phenomena (e.g., formal schooling) create or alter notions of social deviance. 1 Jacobson focuses on the notion that abnormal behavior is solely culturally constructed and emphasizes policy Implications and the potential to help students achieve academically. For our own part, the find- ings discussed in the report were the spur for a more ambi- tious and comprehensive biocultural project we are cur- rently undertaking using hypotheses suggested by life his- tory theory to test ideas about the adaptive significance of specific childhood behavioral characteristics. This broader cross-cultural study continues to examine the social con- sequences of hyperactivity and inattention and uses direct and contextual assessments of behavior. These include ethological (observational) study of classroom, home, and playground behavior (including objective observations of the responses of other social actors to child behavior); di- rect neuropsychological measurement of children's behav- ioral traits using computer-based continuous performance testing (CPT); activity monitoring by accelerometry; caregiver and self-reports of children's behavior; and par- ticipant-observation and ethnographic interviewing with teachers, parents, and children. Our methods are chosen to include "external referents" (Browner et al. 1988) that perform the difficult task of allowing a stable and valid comparison of behavior cross-culturally. Understanding complex biobehavioral phenomena (like inattention and hyperactivity in childhood) also re- quires the use of well-defined, theory-driven questions that can be operationalized. Before the American Anthro- pologist report was published there were, to our knowl- edge, no other available studies that managed to test basic anthropological concepts of population/cultural variation in ADHD-associated behaviors. (We are therefore particu- larly pleased that Jacobson shares some findings here.) Our aim in the report was to pose some preliminary mod- els and to assess how actual data supported or failed to support some preliminary predictions about normal vari- ation in childhood hyperactivity and inattention across populations. While it would be ideal to leap into compari- sons of diverse populations with full ethnographic insight, as Caldararo seems to suggest, the canons and pragmatics of empirical enquiry suggest that raising small feasible is- sues and testing them sequentially and appropriately may be a more productive way to proceed. Another important consideration in cross-cultural comparison is that the characteristics of the groups studied must be relevant to the question posed rather than conform to a vague notion of anthropological correctness. The comparison between the United States and Colombia, for example, was not made for any other reason than that teachers' likely re- sponses to inattentive and hyperactive behavior vary be- tween the two contexts. The basic issue is not whether the United States is a diverse country or not or whether Co- lombia has a sufficiently independent history, economy, or "moral values." Rather, it is whether there is a signifi- cant Immediate difference in how teachers in Colombia would understand, interpret, and respond to inattention and hyperactivity in the classroom. In regards to comments about our sampling strategy, It Is important to recognize that population-representative sampling is the publication standard In psychology and other social sciences. By using this technique, findings can