The boom in cross-cultural psychology has resulted from psychologists' casual interest in other societies and from the pleasures of investigating exotic peoples. It has had some beneficial outcomes: documentation of cultural relativity for psychological processes; accumulation of evidence concerning environmental effects upon individuals; an impetus to examine subcultures at home; insight into phenomena more prevalent outside the West; scattered improvements in methodology; increased hesitation to generalize from college students and laboratory findings to mankind; and cross-cultural validation of a few theories. But it has not appreciably hastened a scientific millenium: No great theorist or theory has emerged; sloppy psychologizing and anthropologizing persist; problems have often been selected opportunistically; and neologisms and fancy phrases are flagrantly coined. Practically, demonstrating repeatedly the basic similarity of peoples everywhere is undoubtedly beneficial, and dramatic teaching materials have been made available. Providing additional illustrations of cultural relativity, however, is wasteful, but cross-cultural validation remains important. Research offsetting the scourge of war continues to be needed.