International does not mean cross-cultural

Comments on C. A. Ward's review (see record 2004-17633-044) of L. L. Adler's book International Handbook on Gender Roles (see record 1993-99094-000). The current author argues that it seems surprising that a reviewer for Contemporary Psychology is assigned a book review and then expresses some preconceived ideas about the book to be reviewed. The International Handbook on Gender Roles is obviously--as the title identifies--a book that deals with the topic of gender roles from an international perspective. Here is a unique and original approach for a handbook in that each chapter, in a parallel presentation, focuses on a different nationality, on one country only (though some countries belong to the same culture). The title of Ward's book review, "The Emics and Etics of Gender," is wrong to start out with; there are no "etics of gender," that is, nothing cross-cultural of gender is discussed in the book. At no time does the book promise "making a scholarly contribution...to cross-cultural research," or should it be reproached that it "does not provide a meaningful etic analysis of cross-cultural data." Each of the 31 chapters is written from an insider's (emic) point of view, which eliminates any consideration or suggestion of being a cross-cultural book. The title of the International Handbook on Gender Roles precludes any cross-cultural analysis. A knowledgeable reviewer should have been aware of this. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2016 APA, all rights reserved)