Margaret Mead's much more defined and singular approach to anthropology is markedly different from Ruth Benedict's, however it is far from opposed to the more holistic construct of her colleague. Mead would typically define and address specific research questions regarding a particular culture, such as adolescence or sexuality, focusing only on the rituals and beliefs that these particular cultural areas touched upon. While there is definitely a limitation in Mead's work in that it is confined to specific research questions, Mead does not fail to connect the rituals and beliefs of the cultural phenomenon or elements she examines to larger cultural values and trends. That is, though Mead examines elements of culture in a setting and context that definitely separates them and defines...

It is not that these two anthropologists have incompatible views as to how culture works to influence individuals and vice versa, but rather that they study such issues from different angles.
Ruth Benedict's approach to anthropology emphasizes the unified and comprehensive aspect of culture, while Margaret Mead's emphasizes the individual elements of culture that add up to the cohesive whole. Both of these perspectives and theories are valid ways of addressing anthropological concerns. It is through such varied perspectives that the science is able to progress and grow ever more refined, detailed, and accurate.