University Microfilms, A XEROXCompany, Ann Arbor, Michigan

70- 26,303HOGAN, John Daniel, 1939-

A SURVEY AND INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE CHARACTERISTICS: THE JOURNAL OF GENETICPSYCHOLOGY 1945-1969.

The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1970 Psychology, general

University Microfilms, A XEROXCompany, Ann Arbor, Michigan

V A O D P P P T W P n

A SURVEY AND INTERPRETATION OF ARTICLE CHARACTERISTICS:

THE JOURNAL OF GENETIC PSYCHOLOGY 1945-1969

DISSERTATION

Presented In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate

School of The Ohio State University

By

John Daniel Hogan, B.S., M.S. # * # # # #

The Ohio State University 1970

Approved by

r -------' ) Adviser Department of PsychePsychoIogy

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

Although many people were Involved In the successful completion

of this dissertation, I particularly want to thank committee members

Dr. Robinson and Dr. Jaap.

I am, personally, very grateful to Dr. Louise B. C. Vetter,

Dr. Philip Clark and Dr. John E. Horrocks; they all made it a great

deal easier.

VITA

February 24, 1939 . . . Born - Tarrytown, New York

I960.................. B.S., St. John's University, Jamaica,New York

1960-1962 ............ Teaching Assistant, Department of Psychology,Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa

1962.................. M.S., Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa

1962-1964 ............ Teaching Assistant, Department of Psychology,The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

1964-1965 ............ Assistant Instructor, Department ofPsychology, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

1965-1969 ............ Instructor, Department of Psychology,St. John's University, Jamaica, New York

1969-1970 ............ Research Assistant, Department of ArtEducation, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio

iii

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS............................................. I i

VITA........................................................ i 11

LIST OF TABLES............................................... v

Chapter

I. INTRODUCTION......................................... I

II. METHOD.............................................. 13

III. RESULTS............................................. 21

IV. DISCUSSION.......................................... 44

V. SUMMARY............................................ 61

BIBLIOGRAPHY. ............................................ 63

APPENDIXES

A........................................................ 66

B........................................................ 92

.......................................................... 109

tv

LIST OF TABLES

Table Page

1. Number of Articles.................................... 21

2. Total Number of Pages and AverageLength of Article......................... 22

3. Single and Multiple Authorship . ..................... 23

4. Sex of Contributing Authors............................. 24

5. Frequency of Multiple Contributions..................... 25

6. Authors of Repeated Contributions 1945-1957............. 26

7. Authors of Repeated Contributions 1957-1969............ 27

8. Authors of Repeated Contributions 1945-1969............. 28

9. Leading Institutional Contributors 1945-1957 ........... 29



12. Extent of Funding...................................... 33

13. Source of Funding........................... 35

14. Articles Based on Theses and Dissertations ............. 36

15. Classification of Article Content...................... 38

16. Total Number of References............................. 40

17. Number of References ExcludingSelf-Referring Authors . . . . . . . . . ............ 41

18. Most Frequently Cited Authors. . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

19. Average Length of Articles; Journalsof General and Experimental Psychology . ........... 46

20. Per Cent of Psychology Doctoratesfor Women; 1945-1961...................... 49

v

CHAPTER I

INTRODUCTION

Many forms of communication of scientific information exist

among scholars in a given field: personal correspondence, books,

newsletters, circulation of unpublished reports, papers read at

professional meetings, and so on. One of the most prominent sources

of information, however, is the professional journal.

The importance of the journal is demonstrated in several ways.

Generally, it serves as a primary source upon which continuing research

is built. Investigators typically begin the formal aspects of a project

by surveying the literature, of which journals are the largest part. A

research proposal would rarely be considered complete unless some

mention of journal articles was made. Also, knowledge of the articles

within a particular discipline is essential for scholarship in the

discipline. The articles form the foundation of the specialty.

Finally, prestige and advancement within the academic community are

often associated, in part, with authorship of journal articles.

The suggested importance of the journal is not meant to down

grade the other.sources which, individually, may be of greater value.

However, the journal does have several characteristics not easily

duplicated by the other sources. These include its relatively wide

circulation, its great variety of subject matter and authorship, its

conciseness, and its formal, printed nature which allows for easy

reference and referral.

Since so much time and effort, thought and scholarship, is put

into a journal, and so much importance attached to it, the study of a

journal should be of significant interest to the readership it serves.

Because the journal holds such a central and unique position within a

discipline, it seems appropriate that the journal itself become an

object of study. The answers which such a study would provide would

be helpful in several ways.

First, the study of a journal should yield information about

the discipline the journal serves. Although a journal represents only

one source of knowledge, it is an important source. Articles must meet

certain editorial standards regarding scholarship and scientific

approach. Although selection may take place In terms of content and

other journal specifications, trends in the discipline should be

reflected in the journal. In at least one area of psychology, for

instance, relevant journals were thought to be helpful in defining

the specialty itself (Schmidt and Pepinsky, 1965). Furthermore, it

should be of more than passing interest to know which topics are no

longer or minimally studied, and which topics seem of major importance

to the researcher today.

Second, the study of a journal should prove helpful in noting

omissions and suggesting areas of improvement. Are there substantial

areas within the discipline that have been receiving no coverage? Are

there certain kinds of studies which predominate? It is often difficult

to make such assessments when viewing a journal over a limited period of

time, but when a broader view is taken, such emphases or omissions may

be obvious.

Third, characteristics of the journal article can be obtained.

This would make available summary information regarding length of

articles, average number of citations, etc., as well as the identifica

tion of some other specific facts. Who are the leading contributors?

Where are the contributing centers of research? Which are the most

frequent citations? While this information should be of interest to

most individuals in the field, particularly journal contributors, it

should be of special interest to students. Lacking the historical

perspective that many older members of the discipline possess, it would

assist them in gathering information that might otherwise be difficult

to obtain.

A fourth reason for studying the journal arises from recent

comments in the academic community. Pasternack (1966), in referring

to the proposed new methods of information storage and retrieval, has

written: "I think that scientific journal publication as we know it

could be destroyed." Swanson (1966), in a more elaborate statement,

has written:

In some respects the evolution toward formalization and toward wider audiences ran amuck. The economics of present publication and distribution have led to circulation of scientific periodicals well beyond the boundaries of the directly interested readership. This occurs to the detriment of the recipient who must allocate valuable reading time to the relatively unrewarding pursuit of scanning much that is irrelevant in order to read a few things of importance.

With such strong statements concerning the present and future condition

of the scientific journal, it seems clear that the journal system itself

may soon go through a process of reevaluation. Before such an evalua

tion can be performed, the journals themselves must be studied.

This study attempts to survey one journal, The Journal of

Genetic Psychology (hereafter referred to as The Journal), over the

period of twenty-five years from 1945 to 1969. The study has two

major intentions: (I) to describe aspects of The Journal and its

articles in summary form, and (2) to note changes that have taken

place in The Journal over the period of the study.

This study investigates and summarizes trends in the following

areas: (I) general characteristics, (2) authorship, (3) institutional

affiliation of author, (4) extent and basis of research support,

(5) articles derived from theses and dissertations, (6) categorization

of content, and (7) characteristics of references.

While some of the above areas of investigation are further

delineated into sub-categories, in most cases the relevant variables

were considered within blocks of time. For example, the total number

of published articles was determined for the five five-year periods

between 1945 and 1969, as well as for the entire period. In this way,

a summation of article characteristics could be made as well as noting

changes over time. In certain categories a twelve and a half year time

span was used for clarity in comparison.

The Journal

The Journal of Genetic Psychology is the second oldest function

ing journal of psychology. Founded in 1891 by G. Stanley Hall under the

title of Pedagogical Seminary, it was originally characterized as an

"international record of educational literature, institutions and

progress" (Hall, 1891). In the beginning, The Journal was largely a

house organ for members of the "pedagogical department" of Clark

University.

The Journal was reorganized in 1925 by Carl Murchison and

became known as Pedagogical Seminary and The Journal of Genetic

Psychology. In 1928, The Journal was characterized as dealing with

issues in "child behavior, and differential and genetic psychology."

In 1929, the coverage was changed to "child behavior, animal behavior

and comparative psychology."

The title and announced coverage of The Journal remained the

same until 1954, when the title became simply The Journal of Genetic

Psychology. Again, in 1959, the coverage was changed to "child

behavior, animal behavior and problems of aging." Finally, in 1969,

the coverage read "deveIopmentaI, evolutionary and clinical psychology."

Animal studies, except those dealing with evolutionary processes,

species comparative behavior and ethology were no longer acceptable

In The Journal.

It seems evident that the scope of The Journal over the years

has been quite broad. In that sense, it presents an opportunity for

investigation that would not be available from many of the other

psychological journals.

The Journal is also unique in developmental psychology and

offers a particularly useful method for studying that sub-discipline.

It is unique in two ways: Cl) very few journals dealing with the

topics of developmental psychology have been in existence for the

twenty-five years surveyed by this study, and (2) those that have been,

emphasize human aspects of development to the almost total exclusion

of animal studies.

The research making up the body of knowledge of developmental

psychology is drawn from many different sources. An elementary text

typically includes journal citations not only from psychology but also

from education, psychiatry, sociology, biology and other areas. Of the

psychological journals cited, many could not properly be called

deveIopmentaI psycho Iog i caI journals since they are not specifically

concerned with the emergence and change of psychological functions over

time. The frequently cited Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology

(no longer publishing under that title) is an example. Of those that

are primarily concerned with developmental issues, almost all have a

limited history. Some of these journals and the year of first publica

tion are: Merri11-Palmer Quarterly of Behavior and Development, 1954;

Vita Humana (now Human Development), 1958; Journal of Experimental

Child Psychology, 1964; Adolescence, 1966; and Developmental Psychology,

1969.

Of those developmental journals with a history as long as The

Journal (notably Child Development, first issue 1930), none have the

broad developmental coverage of The Journal. As Munn (1955) has

pointed out, developmental psychology includes not only human development

but animal development as well. More recently, McCandless (1969), as

editor of the new APA journal, Developmental Psychology, stated,

"Some studies of infrahumans certainly belong under the heading of

developmental psychology." (p. I) Most developmental journals not

only limit such phylogenetic studies, but typically publish articles

dealing only with limited aspects of human development. The Journal

has published articles dealing with all aspects of developmental

psychology, infancy to senescence, ontogenetic and phylogenetic. For

these reasons, it seems the most logical journal for the study of

publishing trends in developmental psychology.

In the decades since its founding, The Journal has been

published continuously so that by December of 1969, it totalled one

hundred fifteen volumes. Since it is now published quarterly, with

two volumes a year, the number of volumes considered by this study

is fifty.

Review of the Literature

No studies of the Journal of Genetic Psychology have ever been

done. This is not unusual, however. A survey of the literature in

psychology and education reveals that only three journals have been

studied in the way proposed here: the Journal of Counseling Psychology,

Personnel and Guidance Journal, and the American Educational Research

Journal.

Several studies have been performed on other aspects of journal

publication. Jakobovits and Osgood (1967) investigated the connotations

of twenty psychological journals to their professional readers using the

semantic differential scales. Xhignesse and Osgood (1967) studied

characteristics of the psychological journal network in 1950 and I960,

concerning themselves primarily with cross-feeding of citations and an

analysis of the information flow. Garvey and Griffith (1964) investi

gated information exchange as it telates to time lags in publication.

While each of these studies related to some aspect of journal

publication in psychology, none of them were concerned with summarizing

multiple characteristics of a single journal.

The first investigators to perform a comprehensive summary of a

single journal were Barry and Wolf (1958). They studied certain

aspects of the Personnel and Guidance Journal for the five years between

October, 1952 and June, 1957. Articles were classified according to:

(I) educational level about which they were written, and (2) subject

matter. Authors of articles were classified according to: (I) position

held, (2) geographical location, and (3) repetition of authorship. The

questions which the investigators hoped to answer were: Who writes for

the journal? What topics are of most concern? What are the possible

results of these emphases? They were able to answer the first two

questions quite clearly, within the limits of their classification

scheme. With regard to the third question, they offered some specula

tion regarding lack of contributions in certain areas and by certain

kinds of professionals associated with guidance.

A comment which followed the article (Samler, 1958) was

primarily concerned with the arbitrary classification scheme used by

the authors, and their comments regarding the journal's statement of

policy. In general, however, the comment was positive to the attempt

of the authors.

Stone and Shertzer (1964) followed up the Barry and Wolf

study with the intent of extending the time span covered and incorpora

ting some of the suggestions for improvement set forth in Samler's

comment. Minor changes were made in some of the original table titles

and in sane topic categories. An APA category classification scheme

was also used to cover the time span of both studies, i.e., the ten-

year period between 1952 and 1962. Although sane shifts and emphases

were noted in applying the new classification scheme, no gross changes

were revealed from the Barry and Wolf data. With some small changes,

the contributors and their geographic location remained essentially

the same as Barry and Wolf reported.

Walsh, et al. (1969a) identified the individuals and institu

tions responsible for articles in the Personnel and Guidance Journal

from 1952 to 1968, inclusive. This sixteen-year period was divided

into two eight-year periods, analyzed separately and then together.

Leading authors and institutions were listed according to extent of

contribution. In both cases, the number of articles, the rank and per

cent of total were given. Similar figures for the total sixteen-year

period were also included.

The most recent comprehensive study of the Personnel and

Guidance Journal was done by Brown (1969). Beginning in 1962, where

Stone and Shertzer ended, Brown performed an analysis consisting of

three areas: (I) the journal itself - its size, development, and

features; (2) the articles included in the journal - their method, setting

and subject matter; and (3) the authors of the articles. Besides intro

ducing another classification scheme, the Brown study was unique in that

it considered the methodology of the research. Among Brown's conclusions

were (I) publication tends to parallel societal concerns and professional

fashions, and (2) the methodology of the large majority of studies is far

from sophisticated.

The Journal of Counseling Psychology has also been subject to

review, although the reviews have been more limited than the PersonneI

and Guidance Journal. Goodstein Cl963) and Bohn (1966) both reviewed

institutional sources of articles in the journal. They concluded:

(1) no one specific institution dominated or monopolized the field, and

(2) if any focus of the literature in counseling psychology were

discernible, it would be in the midwest.

Other studies of the Journal of Counseling Psychology include

the following. Schmidt and Pepinsky (1965) performed a review of

content of fifty-eight studies, largely from the journal. Walsh, et al.

(1969b) investigated graduate school origins of the authors. Myers and

DeLevie (1966) investigated the frequency of citation as a criterion of

eminence. This last study used several journals relating to counseling

psychology, Including the Journal of Counseling Psychology, from I960 to

1964. The authors listed the seven most frequently cited references and

the number of citations. They agreed with Ruja (1956) who, in an earlier

assessment of three other journals, concluded "that if we consider the

frequency of citation alongside a psychologist's bibliography, we have

an instrument for facilitating the assessment of influence of a

psychologist and of identifying his most influential work." Myers and

DeLevie (1966) added that they were "prepared to nominate the technique

as the most laborious bit of instrumentation ever proposed."

Finally, the American Educational Research Journal was the

subject of a review by DiVesta and Grinder (1968). The analysis

revolved around four questions. Of what significance is the journal

on the present educational research scene? In what ways do its

emphases and functions differ from those of other educational research

journals? What kinds of papers has it published? How do educational

researchers view it? They concluded that the editors had established a

highly attractive and functional layout, that articles on educational

history, philosophy, and administration were almost totally missing,

and that the format provided for great diversity, including the highly

innovative article.

Summary

The journal is a significant part of any scientific discipline.

Because of its importance, it seems appropriate to make the journal

itself the object of study.

A few journals in the psycho-educational area have been studied

Journal of Counseling Psychology, Personnel and Guidance Journal, and

the American Educational Research Journal. Other journals have been

investigated in more peripheral ways.

This study involves a comprehensive survey of the Journal of

Genetic Psychology. It attempts to gather information in seven

areas: general characteristics, authorship, institutional affiliation

of author, extent and basis of financial support for the research,

articles derived from theses and dissertations, categorization of

contents, and characteristics of references. It is believed that such

information would be of general interest to professionals in the area

The Journal serves, as we 11 as to students of psychology.

CHAPTER II

METHOD

Volumes of The Journal were obtained from four sources: the

libraries of Ohio State University, Capitol University, Ohio Wesleyan

University, and from a private collection. Additional materials were

secured by copying process from Ohio University. The use of multiple

sources was necessary because of missing and mutilated volumes.

A separate record of the relevant information was kept for each

article. The special problems and procedures involved for the several

variables are discussed individually below.

General Characteristics

There was sane difficulty in determining what constituted an

article, largely because several research reports were done in series.

This was not a problem when each unit in the series constituted a

complete article, i.e., it contained an introduction, method, results,

discussion and summary. However, some reports published parts of the

article separately. Sometimes these sections appeared consecutively in

a volume; sometimes they did not. Sometimes references followed each

section; sometimes they were Included only after the last unit. For

clarity in tabulation, each published section was considered an article

if it was indexed separately and contained its own title frontpiece.

13

Short comments by the editor, such as the call for articles on

senescence (Murchison, I960), although Indexed separately, were not

considered articles.

Two descriptive phrases also need explanation. Articles in this

section were characterized as either general articles or book reviews.

The designation "general articles" means only that the articles were not

book reviews. The designation "number of article pages" refers to pages

actually devoted to articles. Pages containing the table of contents

and the feature "books recently received" are eliminated from this count.

Authorship

The only major difficulty in considering author variables

concerned the sex of the author. In keeping with APA publication

recommendations, the first names of female authors were given, not

just initials, as was sometimes the case with male authors. However,

in the case of names unusual to the western culture, there was

difficulty in determining whether the author was male or female.

In order to determine the sex of these authors, the following

procedure was used. First, the articles were inspected again to deter

mine if classification could be made on the basis of footnotes or other

explanatory material. Next, directories of the APA were consulted in

the event a middle name or title would give appropriate clues. Finally,

international graduate students from the countries involved were

consuI ted.

Institutional Affiliation of Author

Some authors listed institutions at which the research was

conducted; other authors listed Institutions at which they were

presently located. In each case, the institution which was listed

on the title page of the article was the one considered.

Frequency counts were based on the number of times the name of

the institution appeared in connection with the title page of an

article.

Funding and Articles Derived from Theses and Dissertations

Information about funding and articles derived from theses and

dissertations was gathered from footnotes to articles. There is no

certainty that all of the instances of financial support are listed.

Neither is it certain that all articles based on theses and doctoral

dissertations are so indicated.

Categorization of Contents

The categorization of article contents was a complex undertaking

both because of the subjectivity of the task and because of the wide

scope of The Journal. The procedural objective was to devise a categor

ical system that was reliable and, at the same time, would reflect the

variety of journal content. Several approaches were tentatively

employed, none of them successfully. Foreman's classification (1966)

into theoretical-speculative and empirical articles, for instance, was

considered too broad for useful discrimination.

16

When it was decided that the classification scheme employed for

previously studied journals would be ineffective, primarily because of

the subject matter involved in the classification, several texts in

developmental psychology were surveyed. The choice of Thompson’s Chi Id

Psychology (1962) as a partial frame of reference was dictated primarily

by the ease of classification it afforded. The reputation of the text

and author were considered additional advantages. The table of contents

of this text lists not only general subject matter for each chapter,

but specifies each issue within the chapter. This was considered an

enormous advantage in assisting the inter-judge reliability of the

classification. When preliminary testing of the scheme indicated

substantial ease of classification, the Thompson categories were adopted,

though with some modification.

After eliminating all book reviews from consideration, a system

of twenty-one categories was finally employed. The categories and

procedures for categorization are as follows.

The first three categories were: (I) infancy, (2) delinquency,

and (3) aging. If an article dealt with subjects falling into these

groups, it was automatically categorized as belonging in the group,

regardless of the other variables considered. For instance, if a study

was concerned with motor behavior in the delinquent, the category of

the article was delinquency.

The fourth category, (4) animal studies, was treated similarly.

If a study was concerned solely with animal subjects, it was located In

this category regardless of the other variables under consideration.

17The fifth category, (5) human learning and problem solving, was concerned

with non-classroom aspects of learning not included in later categories.

A study of language learning would not be included here. A study of

memory, nonsense syllables, etc., would be included.

Category six, (6) general growth and development, and theories

of development and behavior, included articles which were concerned with

large aspects of development but were not relevant to later categories.

For instance, if an article were concerned with theories of language

development, it would not be included in this category since language

skills are the subject of a later category. If the article was

concerned with theories of adolescent development, however, it would

be included.

Categories seven and eight are (7) psychological testing, and

(8) research methods and methodology. Articles were included in

category seven if the focus of the article was to develop, validate,

secure normative data for, or otherwise determine information specifi

cally relevant to a psychological instrument. In all cases, the focus

had to be on the instrument itself, and not on a major psychological

function about which the test was incidental. Category eight included

all non-test aspects of research methods and methodology that were not

directly relevant to a later category.

The next twelve categories were based on Thompson's table of

contents for Chi Id Psychology (1962). This method was adopted because

of the difficulty in placing an article dealing with more than one

major psychological function. An article dealing with personality and

social correlates of IQ, for instance, could conceivably be located

18under the rubrics of intelligence, social variables or personality

development. Thompson deals with such articles in the chapter

"Intellectual Growth." Therefore, the article would be categorized

in the same fashion in this study.

Some variations in Thompson's organization were employed. In

the chapter "Intellectual Growth", for instance, aspects of intelligence

tests such as reliability and validity were discussed. In this study,

such topics would be categorized under (6) psychological testing. Some

variation was also necessary to include life-span characteristics rather

than just characteristics of the child.

A few of the Thompson categories were broken down even further.

Delinquency (2) was considered a separate topic from personality

integration and adjustment (17); vocational choice (16) was considered

separately from personal values (15); and classroom learning, student

and teacher characteristics (20) were considered separately from

institutional and cultural influences (19). The general procedure was

to place an article in a category unless a finer category applied.

The twelve categories taken or modified from Thompson were

(9) physical characteristics and motor functioning, (10) emotional

behavior and development, (II) perception and the acquisition of

concepts, (12) language ski I Is, (13) intellectual functioning, (14)

social awareness and interactive skills, (15) social attitudes and

personal values, (16) vocational development, (17) personality integra

tion and adjustment, (18) parental and home influences, (19)

institutional and cultural influences, and (20) classroom learning

19skills, pupil and teacher characteristics. A final category (21)

miscellaneous, was included for those articles which could not

reasonably be included elsewhere.

Even with this relatively lengthy delineation of topics, some

difficulty was experienced in categorizing articles. In these cases,

a judgment on the part of the investigator had to be made.

In order to determine the inter-rater reliability, a research

psychologist was asked to categorize two volumes of articles according

to the scheme proposed here. The per cent agreement for volume 88 was

92 per cent. The extent of agreement for volume 104 was 85 per cent.

The overall agreement for the two randomly selected volumes, which

contained 60 articles, was 88 per cent.

The results Indicated enough general agreement in the categori

zation system for it to be adopted.

References

One intention of this section was to determine the authors and

articles which were the most frequently cited in reference material.

These data were limited to volumes 106 to 115 (1965-1969) because of

the enormous amount of material included in the reference sections of

the articles.

All references which included the name of one or more authors

of the article they followed were excluded from the study. The

references were counted only if they had been written by authors other

than the authors of the article.

The preliminary task involved noting only the authors of the

reference material and a code for finding the reference again. All

authors, whether co-authors or single authors, were listed separately.

After the leading authors were determined, the intention was to deter

mine the most frequently cited articles by these authors and, hence,

determine the most frequently cited articles.

CHAPTER III

RESULTS

The results are reported In seven sections, corresponding to

each of the major areas of investigation.


The number of articles published in each of the time periods,

including the total time period, appear in Table I. The articles, at

this point, are characterized as either general articles or book reviews.

TABLE I

NUMBER OF ARTICLES

YearGenera 1 Articles

BookReviews

Total Number of Articles

1945-49 158 29 1871950-54 189 21 2101955-59 276 13 2891960-64 338 2 3401965-69 326 0 326

Total1945-69 1,287 65 1,352

The tabulations indicate a consistent increase in the number of

general articles and total articles, except for a slight reversal in the

last two time periods.21

22

The decrease in the number of book reviews is due to an

editorial decision. When the review journal, Contemporary Psychology,

was published, the appearance of book reviews in The Journal was felt

to be less crucial and they were thereafter limited.

In Table 2 are presented tabulations of the number of journal

pages published for each of the time periods.

TABLE 2

TOTAL NUMBER OF PAGES AND AVERAGE LENGTH OF ARTICLE

YearTotal Number of Pages

Number of Article Pages

AverageLength

1945-49 2,814 2,722 14.561950-54 3,146 3,052 14.531955-59 3,082 2,981 10.311960-64 3,685 3,560 10.471965-69 3,217 3,126 9.59

Total1945-69 15,944 15,441 11.42

In every volume, a few pages were devoted to a table of contents

and to a feature called "books recently received." The table designa

tion "number of article pages" eliminates both of these elements from the

page count. The figures refer only to the pages of articles and not to

peripheral materials.

Also in Table 2 appear the average lengths of articles in pages.

This figure was calculated by dividing the number of article pages by

the number of articles per time period.

23

The tabulations indicate no consistent increase or decrease in

the number of total pages or article pages. The average length of pages

devoted to an article, however, appear to have decreased with each

succeeding time period.

Authorship

A number of variables associated with authorship, including

identification of the authors themselves, were studied.

Some articles were written by a single author; others were

written in collaboration with two or more authors. Table 3 represents

a tabulation of single and multiple authorship over the time period of

the study. It includes the frequency of one, two and three or more

authors of a single article, as well as their per cent contribution.

TABLE 3

SINGLE AND MULTIPLE AUTHORSHIP

Number of Authors per ArticleYear 1 2 3 or more

1945-49 145 77.5# 34 18.2# 8 4.3#1950-54 143 68.155 55 26.2# 12 5.7#1955-59 152 52.6# 108 37.4# 29 10.0#1960-64 178 52.3# 124 36.5# 38 11.2#1965-69 156 47.9# 1 12 34.4# 58 17.8#

Total1945-69 774 57.3# 433 32.0# 145 10.7#

The results indicate a decrease over time in the per cent of

articles by single authors, from 77.5 per cent in 1945-49 to 47.9 per

24cent In 1965-69. The data indicate that more and more authors are

engaging in collaboration, although over half of the total articles

were still written by one author.

The sex of the contributing authors was also determined. Table

4 represents the frequency and per cent contribution of each.

TABLE 4

SEX OF CONTRIBUTING AUTHORS

Year Male Female Total

1945-49 108 67.9$ 51 32.1$ 1591950-54 148 74.0$ 52 26.0$ 2001955-59 279 83.3$ 56 16.7$ 3351960-64 303 84.6$ 55 15.4$ 3581965-69 314 76.2$ 98 23.8$ 412

Total1945-69 959 77.9$ 272 22.1$ 1,231

It should be noted that this table counts only the different

contributing authors. If a single author appeared more than once

within a time period, he was counted only once. Rather than indicating

the per cent of articles written by each sex, this table indicates the

per cent of the total pool of authors that are male or female.

In the same way, the figures listed as "Total 1945-69" are not

simply the sum or average per cent of the columns. Overlap in authors

occurred between each five-year period, and this overlap was eliminated

in the "Total" figure.

25

The table indicates a consistent decrease in the per cent of

female contributors from 1945 to 1964. An increase in female contribu

tions is noted for the period 1965 to 1969.

The total number of different authors for each period has also

increased, but this is consistent with an increase in the number of

articles. With 1,352 articles and 1,231 different authors, it appears

as if few authors are continuing contributors to The Journal. This is

confused, however, by the possibility of multiple authorship. Table 5

helps to clarify the issue.

TABLE 5

FREQUENCY OF MULTIPLE CONTRIBUTIONS

Number of ContributionsYear 1 2 3 or more

1945-49 115 72.3$ 29 18.2$ 15 9.4$

1950-54 158 79.0$ 20 10.0$ 22 11.0$1955-59 273 81.5$ 42 12.5$ 20 6.0$1960-64 292 81.6$ 36 10.1$ 30 8.4$1965-69 330 80.1$ 56 13.6$ 26 6.3$

Tota 11945-69 908 73.8$ 179 14.5$ 144 1 1.7$

In Table 5 appear the frequency of authors who made one, or more

than one, contribution to The Journal. Each contribution, whether

fractional or not, is listed as one contribution.

Again, the total scores do not represent the average of the

column scores. Because of overlap in authors between the time periods,

26the total scores were counted separately to give the overall figures

for the twenty-five year period.

The most striking feature of the table refers to the extent of

single contributors. Although there are no consistent changes over

time in any of the subdivisions, the extent of single contributors

appears continually high. The data indicate that, over the entire

twenty-five year time period, 908 or 73.8 per cent of the authors made

only one contribution to The Journal.

Tables 6 and 7 list the leading authors and the number of their

contributions for the periods 1945 to 1957 (volumes 66-90) and 1957 to

1969 (volumes 91-115), respectively. In each case, the intention was

to list the ten leading contributors but ties in number of contributions

extended the list slightly. Two people appear on both lists: Louise

Bates Ames and W. Lynn Brown.

TABLE 6

AUTHORS OF REPEATED CONTRIBUTIONS 1945-1957

Authors Contributions Rank

Ames, Louise Bates 22 1Brown, W. Lynn 12 3Caldwell, Willard E. 12 3HiIdreth, Gertrude 7 7.5James, W. T. 6 10.5Kl i ne, MiIton 6 10.5Lewis, W. Drayton 9 6Ross, Sherman 10 5Smith, Wendell I. 6 10.5Thompson, G. G. 7 7.5

TABLE 6— Continued

27


Wei Is, F. L. 12 3Ze11gs, Rose 6 10.5

TABLE 7



Ames, Louise Bates 12 5Brown, W. Lynn 54 1Elkind, David 10 7.5Levinson, Boris M. 15 3.5McDowell, Arnold A. 46 2Medinnus, Gene R. 10 7.5Moyer, K. E. 15 3.5Rosenberg, B. G. 9 10.5Shaklee, Alfred B. 9 10.5Sutton-Smith, B. 10 7.5Warren, J. M. 10 7.5

In Table 8 are listed the leading authors for the entire twenty-

five year period. The intention was to list only twenty authors, but

ties required extending this list as well. A list of all authors,

indicating their whole or part contributions to The Journal appears in

Appendix A.

28

TABLE 8



Ames, Louise Bates 34 3Antonitis, Joseph J. 9 16.5Brown, W. Lynn 59 1Caidwel1, Wi1 lard E. 20 4.5Davis, Roger T. 9 16.5Elkind, David 10 12Goss, Albert E. 8 21Ilg, Frances 8 21James, W. T. 13 8.5Levinson, Boris M. 16 6Lewis, W. Drayton 9 16.5McDowell, Arnold A. 45 2

Medinnus, Gene R. 10 12Moyer, K. E. 20 4.5Rosenberg, B. G. 9 16.5Ross, Sherman 13 8.5Shaklee, Alfred 9 16.5Smith, Madorah 8 21Sutton-Smith, B. 10 12

Thompson, George G. 9 16.5Warren, J. M. 14 7

Wells, F. L. 12 10

29Institutional Affiliation of Author

The institutions contributing the greatest number of publica

tions for each time period was determined. Some authors listed

Institutions at which the research was conducted; other authors listed

institutions at which they were presently located. In each case, the

institution which was listed on the title page of the article was the

one considered.

The frequencies represent the number of times the name of the

institution occurs. For instance, if both authors of an article listed

one institution, the institution was given a frequency of one. If two

authors list two different institutions, both are given a frequency

of one. If one author lists two different institutions, they are each

given a frequency of one.

Table 9 lists the leading institutional contributors, the number

of contributions and rank, from 1945 to 1957 (volumes 66-90). Table 10

lists similar information for 1957 to 1969 (volumes 91-115). In both

cases, ties in number of contributions required considering institutions

slightly in excess of the leading ten.

TABLE 9

LEADING INSTITUTIONAL CONTRIBUTORS 1945-1957

Institutions Contributions Rank

BuckneII Un ivers i ty George Washington University Harvard University Hunter Col lege

10131910

11

II

6


30


R. B. Jackson Memorial Laboratory 14 4.5Pennsylvania State University 14 4.5Syracuse University 10 IIUniversity of Chicago II 8University of Georgia 10 IIUniversity of Illinois 12 7University of Iowa 10 IIUniversity of Texas • 8 2Yale University 17 3

TABLE 10



Carnegie Institute of Technology 17 4Emory University 12 11Gese11 1nst i tute 12 IIIowa State University 12 IISan Jose State Col lege 16 5University of California, Berkeley 12 1!University of Denver 14 6.5University of Illinois 12 11University of Iowa 14 6.5University of Minnesota 12 1 1University of Texas 53 1University of Wisconsin 12 IIWashington University 18 3Yeshiva University 21 2

31

The two lists have three institutions in common: the University

of Illinois, the University of Iowa, and the University of Texas. The

appearance of San Jose State College, the University of California at

Berkeley and the University of Denver in the 1957-69 list, suggests a

rise in importance of centers of research located In the West. This

shift seems to have taken place at the expense of institutions located

in the East.

Table II lists the thirty (actually thirty-one) leading institu

tional contributors from 1945 to 1969. All major geographic areas of

the country are represented. The leading states are New York with six

institutions listed and California with four. Connecticut, Georgia,

Illinois, Iowa, Ohio and Pennsylvania have two apiece. This is

consistent with the number of psychologists actually residing in the

various states. The National Register of Scientific and Technical

Personnel for psychology (Cates, 1970) indicates the five leading states

in number of psychologists are, respectively, New York, California,

Illinois, Pennsylvania and Ohio.

TABLE I I



Brooklyn Col lege 12 29Carnegie Institute of Technology 20 9.5Columbia University 14 22Emory University 16 16

Fels Research Institute 12 29

32

TABLE II— Continued


George Washington University 22 6Gesell Institute 20 9.5Harvard University 21 7Hunter Col lege 12 29Iowa State University 12 29New York University 15 18.5Ohio State University 13 25.5Pennsylvania State University 19 12.5San Jose State Col lege 16 16Stanford University 14 22Syracuse University 14 22^University of California 13 25.5University of California, Berkeley 16 16University of Chicago 14 22University of Denver 15 18.5University of Georgia 20 9.5University of Illinois 24 2.5University of Iowa 24 2.5University of Maryland 12 29

University of Minnesota 17 14University of Oregon 14 22

University of Texas 71 1University of Wisconsin 19 12.5Washington University 20 9.5Yale University 23 4.5Yeshlva University 23 4.5

* Includes several agencies of the University of California, but not branch campuses; e.g., Child Research Station, Statistical Laboratory, etc.

33

Appendix B lists all institutions and their contributions for

the twenty-five year period. Foreign institutions are listed separately.

Funding

An inquiry was made into the extent to which research in The

Journal had been supported by various agencies. The frequency of funded

articles appears in Table 12. The figures were taken from footnotes to

articles and may be incomplete. There is no guarantee that all sources

of funding have been reported.

TABLE 12

EXTENT OF FUNDING

YearArticlesFunded

Per Cent of Total Articles Funded

1945-49 11 7.0$

1950-54 31 16.4$

1955-59 74 26.8$

1960-64 132 39.1$

1965-69 134 41.1$

Total1945-69 382 29.7$

If the author himself was under some special support (e.g., a

post-doctoral fellowship), this was not considered adequate evidence

that the research itself was supported. Also, if incidental materials

were supplied by an outside source (artist supplies, toys, etc.), this

was not considered funded research, in order to be counted in Table 12,

34

the article should state that financial assistance was provided for the

research project or the project was done under contract with a particu

lar agency. An article was considered funded even if the support was

only partial. The total articles on which per cent of funding is based

in Table 12 do not include book reviews.

The rise in per cent of funding is dramatic. From a low of 7.0

per cent in the 1945-49 time period, the figure has risen consistently

to a high of 41.1 per cent during 1965-69.

An inquiry was also made into the source of funding. These were

diverse and presented several difficulties.

Very often the source of assistance was not fully delineated.

An acknowledgment might read "financial assistance was obtained from the

Wilson Coe Research Fund." Whether such funds were available from a

private agent, or through a university, is not explained. In these

cases, when the source was not known to the investigator, it was listed

as "other".

The various agencies of the Department of Health, Education and

Welfare also presented a problem. Sometimes a report was listed as

supported by the Public Health Services, sometimes by the National

Institutes of Health and other agencies, and sometimes by the HEW

Department itself. Further complications arose when a single report

was supported by several different agencies of HEW. For clarity of

presentation, it was decided to treat the HEW Department as a single

unit, regardless of the source of assistance from within the department.

The problem of partial support by other agencies was handled by

treating them individually. For instance, if a report was supported by

35

both the National Science Foundation and by the university at which it

was completed, both were given credit.

Table 13 lists source and frequency of major funding agents.

Because of the large number in the "other" category, these figures

should be treated as rough approximations only.

TABLE 13

SOURCE OF FUNDING

Source

Army, Navy and Air Force

Atomic Energy Commission

Carnegie Corporation

Colleges and Universities

Ford Foundation

Health, Education and Welfare Department

National Science Foundation

Rockefeller Fund

Other

Number of Articles, Whole or Partial Support

49

5

6 93

5

176

23

6 73

Table 13 indicates the two major sources of funding for journal

articles to be the Department of Health, Education and Welfare, and

individual colleges and universities. HEW alone accounts for whole or

partial support of 176 articles, or 46.9 per cent of all funded articles.

36

Articles Fulfilling Degree Requirements

A number of articles acknowledge that the research was undei—

taken in an effort to fulfill degree requirements. The number of

articles reporting that they were based on such academic requirements

appears in Table 14.

TABLE 14

ARTICLES BASED ON THESES AND DISSERTATIONS WRITTEN TO FULFILL ACADEMIC REQUIREMENTS

Year Degree TotalPer Cent of Total Articles

1945-49 Ph.D. 11 14 8.9%Master's 3

1950-54 Ph.D. 13 17 9.0%Master's 4

1955-59 Ph.D. 15 16 5.8%Ed.D. 1

1960-64 Ph.D. 15 25 7.4%Ed.D. 1Master's 9

1965-69 Ph.D. 20 37 11.3%Ed.D. 1D. S. W. 1Master's 15

Total 109 8.5%It should be noted that In two cases, a single article was based

on two dissertations, i.e., four dissertations were combined into two

articles. The figures in Table 14 represent the number of articles and

not the number of dissertations on which they were based.

37

It is clear that theses written to fulfill degree requirements

do not represent a large proportion of the articles printed in The

Journal, although they do represent a continuing influence over the

years. Moreover, no consistent shift in their number has occurred

since 1945-49.

Categor i zat i on of Contents

Categorizing the subject matter of the articles in order to

determine the general content of The Journal, and to inspect changes

in emphases over time, was a difficult task. Some of the problems are

reported in the method section of this paper. The scheme that was

finally used was an adaptation of the table of contents from Thompson’s

Child Psychology (1962). Although changes were made to suit the actual

content of The JournaI, the focus was the development of major psycho

logical functions.

Table 15 contains a comparison of the subject matter of the

articles for the time periods 1945-57 (volumes 66-90), 1957-69 (volumes

91-115), and for the total time period 1945-69. For a more detailed

description of the subject classification, the reader is referred to

the method section.

Table 15 suggests a broad coverage by The Journal with some

shifts taking place over the years. The topics receiving more than two

percentage points gain in coverage in the 1957-69 period were: (3) The

Aged, (4) Animal Studies, (5) Human Learning and Problem Solving, and

(18) Parental and Home Influences. The increase in articles on the aged

was due to a policy change on the part of The Journal.

TABLE 15

CLASSIFICATION OF ARTICLE CONTENT

Articles Articles ArticlesClassification 1945-57 1957-69 1945-69

1. 1nfancy 8 1.6% 23 2.9% 31 2.4%2. De1i nquency 14 2.9% 10 \.2% 24 1.9%3. The Aged 5 \.0% 45 5.6% 50 3.9%4. Animal Studies 120 24.1% 256 3\ .9% 376 29.2%5. Human Learning and

Problem Solving 19 3.9% 50 6.2% 69 5.4%6. General Growth and Develop

ment, Theories of Development and Behavior 7 \.4% 5 0.6% 12 0.9%

7. Psychological Tests and Testing 32 6.6% 33 4.\% 65 5.\%

8. Research Methods and Methodology II 2.3% 12 1.5% 23 1.0%

9. Physical Characteristics and Motor Functioning 19 3.9% 16 2.0% 35 2.1%

10. Emotional Behavior and Development 7 1.4% 12 1.5% 19 1.5%

UJ00


Articles Articles ArticlesClassification 1945-57 1957-69 1945-69

II. Perception and the Acquisition of Concepts 50 10.3? 81 10.1? 131 10.2?

12. Language Ski 1 Is 24 4.9? 11 1 .4? 35 2.7?

13. Intellectual Functioning 41 8.5? 21 2.6? 62 4.8?

14. Social Awareness and Interactive Ski 1 Is 23 4.7? 35 4.4? 58 4.5?

15. Social Attitudes and Personal Values 13 2.7? 27 3.4? 40 3.1?

16. Vocational Development 5 1.0? 4 0.5? 9 0.7?

17. Personality Integration and Adjustment 25 5.2? 37 4.6? 62 4.8?

18. Parental and Home Influences 21 4.3? 60 7.5? 81 6.3?

19. Institutional and Cultural Influences 5 1.0? 16 2.0? 21 1 .6?

20. Classroom Learning Skills, Student and Teacher Characteristics 24 4.9? 30 3.7? 54 4.2?

21. Miscellaneous 12 2.5? 18 2.2? 30 2.3?485 802 1,287

40

Topics registering a drop of two or more percentage points in

the 1957-69 period were: (7) Psychological Tests and Testing, (12)

Language Skills, and (13) Intellectual Functioning.

References

The number of references appearing at the end of each article

was counted, and the mean number of references per article determined.

This was done in two ways: (I) included all references, and (2)

excluded references by one or more authors of the article which the

references followed. These results appear in Tables 16 and 17.

TABLE 16

TOTAL NUMBER OF REFERENCES

Year NumberMean per Article

1945-49 2,075 13.1

1950-54 2,547 13.5

1955-59 3,148 11.4

1960-64 4,058 12.0

1965-69 4,091 12.6

Total1945-69 15,919 12.4

41

TABLE 17

NUMBER OF REFERENCES EXCLUDING SELF-REFERRING AUTHORS

Year NumberMean per Article

1945-49 1,839 11.6

1950-54 2,297 12.1

1955-59 2,773 10.1

1960-64 3,429 10.1

1965-69 3,569 10.9

Total1945-69 13,907 10.8

The data indicate that the average article has approximately

twelve references, and no consistent trends are suggested.

The authors most frequently cited in the reference sections of

articles were also determined. This survey was limited to 1965-69

(volumes 106-115) because of the enormous amount of reference material.

The results indicate those researchers who are presently the leading

reference sources for The Journal. Their names and number of citations

appear in Table 18. In order to be included in this table, an author

must have been cited a minimum of fifteen times.

All authors who were cited a minimum of five times are listed

in Appendix C, with their number of citations.

TABLE 18

MOST FREQUENTLY CITED AUTHORS 1965-1969

Authors Citations

Cattell, R. B. 67

Flavel1, J. H. 15

Gesel1, A. 18

Guhl, A. M. 20

Gui1 ford, J. P. 21

Harlow, H. F. 29

Inhelder, B. 18

Kagan, J. 22

Luria, A. R. 15

Maccoby, E. 15

Ml 1ler, N. E. 15

Pasamanick, B. 15

Piaget, J. 50

Schaefer, E. 18

Sears, R. R. 20

Siegel, S. 22

Smedslund, J. 16

Stevenson, H. W. 20

Torrance, E. P. 16

Wechsler, D. 18

The original intention was to determine which articles

were the most frequently cited. Because of the wide range of

authors, this intention was abandoned. In effect, there is no

single reference that has a high number of citations.

Of the most frequently cited authors, R. B. Cattell and

Jean Piaget are the leaders by far, although a number of other

authors have substantial citations.

CHAPTER IV

DISCUSSION

Several of the results require no further elaboration. They

are simply a statement of conditions and characteristics of The Journal.

Others can be compared to studies of other journals or are of interest

in their own right.

The various results are discussed under their individual

head i ngs.


While the total number of journal pages from 1945 to 1969

indicates no general change, the number of published articles has

shown a relatively consistent increase. This has been accomplished

at the expense of article length. From a mean length of 14.6 pages

in 1945-49, the average length of an article in 1965-69 was approxi

mately 9.6 pages.

Some data is avai table from the Personnel and Guidance Journal

for comparison. Brown's description of that journal between 1962 and

1969, indicates no general change in total number of published pages,

although there is variability from time period to time period (Brown,

1969). Barry and Wolf (1959), Stone and Shertzer (1964), and Brown

(1969) all note an Increase in the number of articles over the years,

although the increase appears not to have been as dramatic as

44

45The JournaI. The data from Brown regarding length of article Indicates

a median from 5.0 to 5.6 pages. This is considerably shorter than

articles in The Journal. Also, no substantial changes in length, over

time, are noted.

The sharpest drop in article length in The Journal occurred

between 1950-54 and 1955-59, when the mean dropped from 14.5 pages to

10.3 pages. The reason for this drop is unclear. There is no evidence

of a change in editorial policy, although this is a possibility. It is

also possible, of course, that a change in style of scientific writing

took place. Comparative data from other journals would be helpful in

deciding this issue, but none is available before 1958.

Each year the American Psychologist, in either the December or

January issue, prints summary statistics regarding journals published

by the American Psychological Association for the previous year.

Although some summary information is available before 1958, Information

regarding length of article could not be obtained from the American

Psychologist before this date. Further, approximately half of the

journals published by this association in 1969, were not in existence

in 1945, including the American Psychologist itself. Comparisons with

The Journal for the period 1945-69, then, were not immediately avail

able.

However, two journals were surveyed in an attempt to provide a

basis for comparison. They were the Journal of Experimental Psychology

and the Journal of General Psychology. Since no other journal closely

resembles the content of The Journal, the choice of these two was some

what arbitrary, though not completely so.

46Both of these journals publish original research, with a

deemphasis on the speculative or summary article, and little or no

comment, letters to the editor and other similar material. The Journal

publishes in the same manner. Moreover, the Journal of General Psycho

logy has the same publisher as The Journal - the Journal Press - and

for most of its life had the same editor. The Journal of Experimental

Psychology, on the other hand, is completely independent of the Journal

Press and its editor. A comparison among these three should be

particularly helpful in determining whether decrease in article

length was simply a publishing decision or a general trend.

These data are available in Table 19. It should be noted that

the figures were based on counts made of the even numbered volumes for

the years under consideration.

TABLE 19

AVERAGE LENGTH OF ARTICLES:JOURNALS OF GENERAL AND EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY

YearAverage Length of Article in Pages

General Psychology Experimental Psychology

1945-49 13.0 10.5

1950-54 14.0 7.0

1955-59 11.0 6.7

1960-64 11.3 6.7

1965-69 10.8........ 6.7

The table indicates that both journals experience a drop in the

average length of an article. For the Journal of General Psychology

47this drop occurs in precisely the same time period as The Journal.

This would seem to indicate an editorial decision on the part of the

Journal Press to reduce the length of their articles at that time.

The decrease in the Journal of Experimental Psychology occurs slightly

earlier, but is a decrease nonetheless. On the basis of this limited

data, it would be unreasonable to posit a diminution in length for

articles in all psychological journals. It is reasonable to speculate,

however, with the increase of published research beginning after World

War II, that editors made use of this method to insure publication

within the generally Imposed total page limitations.

Authorsh i p

The number of authors per article has consistently increased

since 1945-49. While only 22.5 per cent of the articles in 1945-49

were written by more than one author, 52.1 per cent were written by

more than one author in 1965-69. This represents an increase larger

than 100 per cent. Brown reports a rise in multiple authors from

20 per cent (1952-57) to 40 per cent (i962-69). In both journals,

the maximum number of authors of an article was five.

It is interesting to speculate on the reasons for this change

in authorship. Have the designs for experiments become so complex that

most are too difficult for one man to handle efficiently? Are the

exigencies of academic publication such that multiple authorship is

necessary to meet them? Are the cases of multiple authorship simply

reflective of the greater number of psychologists and the possibility

among them of similar interests? The data do not indicate which, if any, of these contingencies may be operating.

48However, the general existence of multiple authorship is

evident. Woods C1961) reported on a survey of nineteen psychological

journals regarding multiple authorship. He concluded that although

there were large differences among journals, in general, slightly more

than one-half of the total articles were written by single authors, a

third were written by two authors, and the remainder by more than two.

These proportions based on the nineteen psychological journals is

almost identical to that reported for The JournaI.

The per cent of female contributors decreased from a high of

32.1 per cent in 1945-49, to a low of 15.4 per cent in 1960-64. A

rise was then noted in 1965-69 to 23.8 per cent.

The per cent decline in number of female contributors 1950-54

to 1955-59, is significant beyond the .005 level (chi square equal to

6.7, one tailed test). The rise between 1960-64 and 1965-69, is also

significant beyond the .005 level (chi square equal to 8.5, one tailed

test). It should be noted that the use of this technique for selected

cells is not entirely legitimate because of its ex post facto nature.

However, the high degree of significance demonstrates the probability

of a real decline and then rise in the number of contributing females.

This data somewhat parallels the trends in number of psychology

doctorates conferred on women, in the United States, between 1945 and

I960 (Harmon, 1961). This data is presented in Table 20. A large per

cent of doctorates were produced in the early years of the survey, a

decline followed, and a slight increase is noted during the last years.

Although the data of Table 20 do not continue until 1969, an apparent

upward trend has begun by 1961. Since a greater number of publications

49tend to occur in the early years after conferral of the doctoral degree

in psychology (Beckman, 1952), the changes in female contributions may

simply be a reflection of trends in doctoral conferral.

TABLE 20

PER CENT OF PSYCHOLOGY DOCTORATES FOR WOMEN: 1945-1961

Year Per Cent Year Per Cent

1945 38 1953 121946 32 1954 121947 27 1955 151948 16 1956 131949 16 1957 181950 13 1958 171951 14 1959 171952 12 I960 19

The decrease is also somewhat consistent with data regarding

women in the professional work force.

. . . there was a significant decline in the proportion that women were of all professional and technical workers from 45 per cent in 1940 and 42 per cent in 1950 to 37 per cent in 1965. Although the number of women employed in professional and technical occupations rose sharply over the twenty-five year period, men moved into these occupations at a much more rapid pace, and as a result women's representation among all workers dropped. (Women's Bureau, U.S. Dept, of Labor, 1965.)

A slight increase in the women's professional and technical work force

is reported for 1968 to thirty-eight per cent (Women's Bureau, 1969).

This rise may also account for the increase in number of female contri

butors in 1965-69.

50

A similar decline is seen in comparing the Barry and Wolf data

(1958), where twenty-one per cent of the contributions were by females,

with the Stone and Shertzer data (1964), where thirteen per cent of the

contributions were by females. However, it should be noted that compar

isons are not entirely appropriate. Barry and Wolf, and Stone and

Shertzer, list the per cent of female contributions. This study lists

the per cent of different female contributors.

In terms of overall contributors, the data indicate that 908

or 73.8 per cent of all authors made only one, or part of one, contri

bution to The Journal in the twenty-five year period of the study.

These figures are comparable to the three studies of the Personnel and

Guidance Journal which indicate the incidence of single author contri

bution to be between 80.0 per cent and 86.3 per cent. These figures

may be somewhat inflated since each of the Personnel and Guidance

Journal studies was calculated independently and some overlap of

authorship undoubtedly occurred between the three time periods studied.

There would seem to be both positive and negative aspects to

this high incidence of single contributions. On the positive side, it

suggests that the journals are non-discriminatory in terms of authors,

since the bulk of contributors have not had previous publication in the

journal. Presumably then, acceptance is based on merit of the article

and fulfillment of journal specifications.

On the other hand, who are these people who publish once and

then never again in the same journal? They are not graduate students

publishing their dissertations. The incidence of this Is relatively

low as Table 14 pointed out. Do these people, then, publish in other

journals? Some undoubtedly do. A handful of the single authors, for

instance, are well-known psychologists who have published extensively

elsewhere. But what of the others? It would seem that a particular

journal should serve as a primary outlet for the area it serves. If

research interests are relatively stable, and the authors are continu

ing to do research, they would certainly be expected to publish more

than once in The Journal. Yet almost three out of four do not. The

question becomes more acute when it is noted that almost nine out of

ten authors made no more than two contributions.

These data likely represent nothing more than the low publica

tion productivity of the American psychologist. Clark (1957) indicated

that of psychologists receiving their doctoral degrees in 1940-44, the

median number of Psychological Abstracts citation counts was 3.1.

Beckman (1952) whose mean figures for publication per person are higher

than Clark, nonetheless points out the low publication rate Including

the fact that sixteen per cent of his sample published nothing within

ten years after receipt of their doctorate. Finally, Webb (1968)

indicated that in an analysis of the articles in Psychological

Abstracts between 1961 and 1965, sixty per cent of the authors appeared

only once and twenty per cent more only twice within the five-year

period. A similar phenomenon is apparently operating among contributors

to The Journal.

With regard to leading contributors, it should be remembered

that rank is based on the number of whole or part contributions. If

fractional credit had been given, the ranks would be somewhat different.

52

However, either method gives substantially the same result. The

Spearman rho between fractional and whole credit for the leading

contributors 1945-69 was equal to .86.

In relation to the individual contributors, there are several

not very surprising results. A few contributors (Ames and Brown)

remained leaders over the years. However, most leaders in 1945-57

were not leaders in 1957-69, as would be expected over a twenty-five

year period. Comparisons of leading contributors with Personnel and

Guidance Journal, the only other journal with similar data, indicate

no overlap whatsoever in leading authors.

Only three of the leading twenty-two contributors, or 13.7 per

cent, are female. This figure is somewhat less than the percentage of

overall female contributors.

Institutional Affiliation of Author

The same problem of fractional credit applies to institutions

as applied to leading contributors. Because the ranks may vary some

what if fractional credit were given, ranks are to be viewed only as

approximations.

Several of the leading institutional contributors became so

because of one, or perhaps two, authors. The high rank of the

University of Texas, for instance, is due almost entirely to the

publications of W. Lynn Brown and A. A. McDowell. Other institutions,

such as Iowa State University, attain their rank because of many differ

ent contributors.

53

The most notable geographic change in leading institutions

concerns the rising importance of institutions in the West. However,

all sections of the country would appear to be represented to some

degree. Unlike Brown's conclusion regarding the Personnel and

Guidance Journal Cl969), it would not be appropriate to conclude that

the majority of the most productive institutions were in the Mid-West.

Of the fourteen leading institutional contributors listed by

WaIsh, et a I., (1969), for the Personnel and Guidance Journal, seven

of them also appear as leading contributors for The Journal. When

Goodstein's list of leading institutional contributors to the JournaI

of Counseling Psychology is included, it is found that five institutions

appear on all three lists. They are the University of California at

Berkeley, the Universities of Illinois, Iowa and Minnesota, and Ohio

State University.

There are probably a number of reasons why these particular

institutions are the largest contributors to The Journal. Faculty

publication rate and availability of publication outlets for the type

of research stressed are two. Bias of consulting editors may be a

third, although this is not evident from the data. The strongest

reason, however, would seem to be the resources of the Institution

itself. For instance, larger institutions will employ more psycholo

gists generally and, hence, have a greater probability of publication

in The Journal. if the number of psychology doctorates produced are

used as an index of resources in psychology for the academic institu

tions, the results seem more clear. Of the five institutions which

appear as leading contributors to all three previously mentioned

54

journals, all are In the top twenty leading producers of psychology

doctorates, and four are in the top ten. Of the ten leading producers

of psychology doctorates 1920-61 (Harmon, 1964), eight appear as

leading contributors to The Journal. While the data are not perfectly

coincidental, size and resources of the institutions seem important

determinants of repeated publication in The Journal.

Funding

Of particular interest is the extent of funding for research

on which articles in The Journal were based. From a low of 7.0 per

cent in 1945-49, the figure had risen to 41 per cent in 1965-69.

Foreman (1966) collected somewhat similar data for six journals

related to counseling and for the Journal of Experimental Psychology.

Between 1954 and 1965, the amount of grant support for the counseling

journals ranged from zero per cent (Counselor Education and Supervision),

to 22.9 per cent (Journal of Consulting Psychology). The Journal of

Experimental Psychology exceeded all of the others by far with 59.7 per

cent of its research-based articles supported. In this respect, The

Journal is much more Iike the Journal of Experimental Psychology than

any of the counseling journals.

The source of funds for all of the journals in the Foreman

study were much like those found Ln The Journal. Both the Department

of Health, Education and Welfare, and Individual colleges and universi

ties made a significant contribution. However, no counseling related

journal reported such large support from the Army, Navy and Air Force

as did The Journal and the Journal of Experimental Psychology.

55

Journal of Experimental Psychology

The Increase in grant supported research Is no doubt due, In

large part, to the increased government funds which have been made

available. The expenditures of the federal government for research

and development, including research and development facilities, rose

about sixteen-fold between 1949 and 1968, from just over one billion

dollars to an estimated more than seventeen billion dollars, or from

less than three to twelve per cent of the federal budget. Federal

obligations for research, both basic and applied, in the social and

behavioral sciences have shown greater rates of growth than ail the

other sciences in recent years (David, 1969). Support for psychologi

cal and social science research has risen from about 50 millions to

about 240 millions of dollars in the last ten years (Riecken, 1967).

Large increases in support are also apparent from colleges and

universities.

Articles Based on Theses and Dissertations

The per cent of articles written to fulfill degree requirements

in The Journal has remained relatively small over the years, the highest

per cent of total articles being 11.3 per cent in the 1965-69 time

period. Several of the journals studied by Foreman Cl966) exceeded that

total. For instance, of the articles in the Journal of Experimental

Psycho Iogy, approximately twenty-one per cent are based on theses or

dissertations. Similarly, in the Journal of Counseling Psychology,

19.6 per cent of its articles were so based. On the other hand,

Counseling Education and Supervision pub!ished no such articles, and

56

the Journal of Clinical Psychology indicated only 4.8 per cent of its

articles were so based. It would seem as if The Journal fa I Is some

where in the middle ground in this regard.

Categorization of Contents

The classification of article content, based on Thompson Chi Id

Psychology, indicates a wide range of developmental studies published

in The JournaI. Noticeably limited are articles dealing with broad

questions and theories of development, but this may be an inappropriate

criticism. Perhaps such discussions are more fitting in another form,

such as a book.

One shortcoming of the classification scheme involved animal

studies. Although it is of interest to know the percentage of animal

studies, some further differentiation within this group seems appropri

ate. Developing such a scheme proved difficult and unreliable in this

investigation, and, therefore, it was not presented. It could likely

be accomplished by someone more familiar with the animal literature.

The categories showing the most gain in articles were those

involving (3) The Aged, (4) Animal Studies, (5) Human Learning and

Problem Solving, and Cl8) Parental and Home Influences. Only the

category of (3) The Aged was affected by an announced editorial

decision to seek such articles. The enhancement of the others presum

ably reflects general research Interests and trends.

The categories showing the largest drop in frequency of

articles were (7) Psychological Tests and Testing, CI2) Language Skills,

and CI3) Intellectual Functioning. Each of these represents a more or

57

less traditional area of research in developmental psychology. The

decrease in their frequency may reflect a need to seek new psychologi

cal variables for study. Shifts in emphasis may also be a function of

available publication outlets. During the period of this survey, a

large number of journals related to developmental psychology have begun

publication. Their editorial specifications and requirements may have

had a direct effect on those articles appearing in The JournaI. None

is immediately apparent, however.

The decision to note shifts of two per cent or more in category

frequencies is an arbitrary one intended for clarity of presentation.

It should not be interpreted, necessarily, as evidence of statistically

significant shifts.

References

The number of references has remained relatively constant over

the years, with a mean of 12.4 per article. Xhignesse and Osgood

(1967), as part of their study of information flow in psychological

journals, analyzed The Journal references in 1950 and in I960. They

found approximately twelve references per article. This is presumably

higher than the median of 7.5 references reported by Brown (1969) for

Personnel and Guidance Journal, but the articles in that journal are

also shorter.

When self-referring authors are eliminated from the citation

count, the mean drops to 10.8 references per article. On the average

then, 1.6 references after each article were written by one or more

authors of the article which they follow.

58

The twenty most frequently cited authors during 1965-69 were

also listed. The treatment of this data was consistent with Ruja

(1956) who wrote:

. . . to publish is one thing and to be read and cited may be another, is not a psychologist's eminence measurable not only in terms of publications (by him) but also in terms of number of citations Cof him)?

The answer to Ruja's question seems to be both "yes” and "no".

The most cited author in this study is R. B. Cattell with sixty-seven

citations. However, Cattell was cited multiple times after a single

article. Two publications alone generate a total of twenty-three

citations for him. Piaget, on the other hand, was rarely cited more

than two or three times after any single article. Yet his fifty

citations, fewer than Cattell, depict a broader influence than Cattell.

The same situation applies, to a lesser degree, to other authors.

This suggests only, of course, that the method is not perfect.

However, with the enormous amount of clerical work the technique

requires, one would hope the results were less ambiguous.

In comparing the results to the leading citations in four

counseling journals (Myers and DeLevi, 1966), no overlap whatsoever is

found. However, there is a modest overlap with Ruja's original study

(1956). Ruja determined the five leading authors, in terms of

references to them, in the Journal of Experimental Psychology, the

Journal of Applied Psychology, and the Journal of Abnormal and Social

Psychology, during the years 1949-52. Two of the authors he listed

appear on the list for The Journal from 1965-69. Those authors were

N. E. Miller, who Ruja listed as frequently cited in the Journal of

59

Experimental Psychology, and J. P. Guilford, who was listed in the

Journal of Applied Psychology. It is somewhat surprising to find

any overlap at all when one considers the large difference in time

periods studied.

The intention was to determine the most frequently referenced

articles by the leading authors, but a brief survey indicated that no

publications were consistently referenced. Both Ruja CI956) and Myers

and DeLevi (1966) were able to determine such references for the

journals they studied. Perhaps the broad coverage of The Journal, or

the short time span of references studied, limited the frequency of

specific articles. This result may also be due to a tendency on the

part of researchers today to cite only the most recent articles, a

fact noted by Xhignesse and Osgood (1967) and observed informally in

this study.

In this last regard, a final note should be added about the

quality of publications. The evidence for increased number of published

articles in The Journal and other journals is clear. But what of the

articles themselves? Has an Increase in quantity had any effect on the

quality of the research? The increase in number of articles for The

Journal 1945-49 to 1965-69 is seventy-four per cent. Has psychology

experienced an increase in knowledge to any comparable degree? These

are difficult questions and, perhaps, too naively stated.

Rejection rates for journals, although variable, tend to be

quite high. Consulting editors are apparently doing their job. Yet,

no new "classics" seem to be emerging. No single pieces of research

seem to have sufficiently excited enough independent researchers for

60them to appear consistently in referenced material. Piaget is probably

the only recent exception, but his work has attained recency more

through translation than innovation.

This was not the case earlier in The Journal. Informal

surveys, by this author, of the articles previous to and during the

early part of this study indicate a core of articles that were

frequently cited and, it is concluded, were held to be significant.

The 1960's have been characterized by the citation of articles the

bulk of which are no more than five years old. In 1965, the citational

history of an article rarely extended before I960. In 1969, the

majority of references were written after 1964. Does research become

outdated so quickly? Are our journal memories so short term? Is what

was written the day before yesterday necessarily the best? Whatever is

operating, the apparent loss of our journal history is a disturbing one.

CHAPTER V

3UMMARY

The professional journal is a significant part of many disci

plines. Because of its importance, it seems appropriate to make the

journal itself the object of study.

A few journals in the psycho-educational area have been

studied: the Journal of Counseling Psychology, Personnel and Guidance

Journal, and the American Educational Research Journal. Other journals

have been investigated in more peripheral ways.

This study involves a comprehensive survey of the Journal of

Genetic Psychology. It gathers data-in seven areas: general character

istics, authorship, institutional affiliation of author, extent and

basis of research support, articles based on theses and dissertations,

categorization of contents, and characteristics of references. Compar

isons were made from available data of other journals, both in limited

time periods and the total range of this study 1945-1969.

The results indicated an increase in the number of general

published articles, a decrease and then elimination of book reviews, a

decrease in article length, and a relatively constant number of

published pages.

Trends in the representation of authors were studied, with

comparisons of the male-female ratio to Department of Labor statistics.

61

62

Leading contributors as well as leading Institutional contributors

were listed by name.

The extent of funding of research was found to be continually

on the increase since 1945-49, and the leading sources of support are

listed. The per cent of articles based on theses and dissertations

is also discussed.

All articles in the journal between 1945 and 1969, are

categorized and certain changes in their representation pointed out.

Finally, reference variables are discussed including their number and

the most frequent citations.

It is believed that such information would be of general

interest and use to professionals in the area The Journal serves, as

well as to students of psychology.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Barry, Ruth, and Beverly Wolf. Five years of the Personnel and Guidance Journal. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1958,36, 549-555. --

Beckman, P. R. Productivity of psychologists who have received their doctorate: a quantitative study. UnpublishedMaster’s thesis, Ohio State University, 1952.

Bohn, M. J., Jr. Institutional sources of articles in this Journal of Counseling Psychology - Four years later. Journal of CounseIi ng Psycho Iogy, 1966, J13, 489-490.

Brown, F. G. Seven years of the journal: a review. Personnel andGuidance Journal, 1969, 48, 263-272.

Cates, Judith. Psychology’s manpower: report on the 1968 NationalRegister of Scientific and Technical Personnel, American Psychologist, 1970, 25, 254-263.

Clark, K. E. America's psychologists: a survey of a growingprofession. Washington, D.C.: Ameri can Psycho log i caIAssociation, Inc., 1957.

David, Henry,, Behavioral sciences and the federal government. American Psychologist, 1969, 24, 917-922.

DiVesta, F. J., and R. E. Grinder. American Educational Research Journal. American Educational Research Journal, 1968, 5, 687-700.

Foreman, M. E. Publication trends in counseling journals. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1966, _I3, 481-485.

Garvey, W. D., and B. C. Griffith. Scientific information exchange in psychology. Science, 1964, 146, 1655-1659.

Goodstein, L. D. The institutional sources of articles in the Journal of Counseling Psychology. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1963, 10, 94-95.

Harmon, L. R. Production of psychology doctorates in the United States. American Psychologist, 1961, 716-717.

63

Harmon, L. R. Production of psychology doctorates. American Psychologist, 1964, 629-633.

Jakobovits, L. A., and C. E. Osgood. Connotations of twenty psychological journals to their professional readers. American Psychologist, 1967, 22, 792-800.

McCandless, B. R. Editorial. Developmental Psychology, 1969, J_, I

Munn, Norman L. The evolution and growth of human behavior.Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1955.

Myers, R. A., and A. S. DeLevie. Frequency of citation as acriterion of eminence. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1966, J2, 245-246.

Pasternack, S. Is journal publication obsolescent? Physics Today, 1966, J_9, 38-43.

Riecken, H. W. Government-sclence relations: the physical andsocial sciences compared. American Psychologist, 1967,22, 211-218.

Ruja, H. Productive psychologists. American Psychologist, 1956, M_, 148-149.

Samler, J. Comments. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1958, 36, 555-556.

Schmidt, L. D., and H. B. Pepinsky. Counseling research in 1963. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1965, 12, 418-427.

Stone, S. C., and B. Shertzer. Ten years of the Personnel and Guidance Journal. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1964,42, 958-969.

Swanson, D. R. Scientific journals and information services of the future. American Psychologist, 1966, 2\_, 1005-1010.

Thompson, G. G. Child Psychology. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1962

Walsh, W. B., et al. Publishing patterns in the Personnel and Guidance Journal. Personnel and Guidance Journal, 1969,47, 868-871.

Walsh, W. B., D. Feeney, and H. Resnick. Graduate school origins of Journal of Counseling Psychology authors. Journal of CounseIing PsychoIOgy, 1969, 16 , 375-376.

65Webb, W. B. A "couple" of experiments. American Psychologist, 1968,

23, 428-433.

Women’s Bureau, United States Department of Labor, Handbook on Women Workers. Bulletin 290, 1965.

Women’s Bureau, United States Department of Labor, Handbook on Women Workers. Builetin 294, 1970.

Woods, P. J. Some characteristics of journals and authors. American Psychologist, 1961, JM6, 699-701.

Xhignesse, L. V., and C. E. Osgood. Bibliographical citationcharacteristics of the psychological journal network in 1950 and I960. American Psychologist, 1967, 22, 778-791.

APPENDIX A

AUTHORS OF ARTICLES 1945 - 1969

Numbers after the authors’ names refer to fractional or whole

contributions to individual articles.

Aarons, Louis 1/2

Abbe, Alice E. I

Adams, James F. I

Adamson, Robert 1/2

Adcock, Cyril J. I-I-I-I-I-I/2

Adcock, Ngaire V. 1/2

Adkins, James I/3-I/3

Adler, Helmut E. I

Adlerstein, Arthur M. 1/2

Aghi, M. 1/3

Ai, J. W. I

Albert, Robert S. I

Albright, Joy Buck 1/2

Albright, Robert W. 1/2

Alexander, Irving E. 1/2-1/2

Al-lssa, Ihsam I

Allen, Martin G. I

Allen, Robert M. I-I-I-I-I-I/2

Aim, 0. W. 1/2

Altus, Grace I

Altus, William D. I-I-I

Alverson, William E. 1/4

Alvy, Kerby T. I

Amatora, Sr. Mary l-l-l

Ames, Louise Bates I-I/2-I-I/2-

I/2-I/2-I/2-I-I-l-l-l/4-1-1/2-I-

1/2-1/2-I-I-I/4-I/2-I/2-I-l-l-l/3-

I-I/2-I/2-I-I/2-I/2-I/2-I/2

Ammons, Carol H. 1/2

Ammons, R. B. I-J/2-I

Amsterdam, Beulah 1/4

Anastasi, Anne I-1/3-1/2

Anderson, C. C. I

Angelino, Henry 1/3

Angermeier, Wilhelm Franz 1/2—I —

1/3-1/2

66

Angers, Willi am P. I

Angri11i, Albert F. I

Antonitls, Joseph J. I/2-I/2-

1/2-1/3-1/3-1/3-1/2-1/3-I

Apperson, Louise Behrens I

Applefeld, Suzanne W. 1/2

Arastek, Josephine D. I

Armstrong, Clairette P. 1/2

Assum, A. L. 1/2

Auble, Donavon 1/2-1/3-1/3

August, Judith I/2-I/2

Ausubel, David P. I/2-I/4-I/3-I

Axe I rod, Seymour 1/2—I/2

Badgeley, Elizabeth W. I

Baer, Daniel J. I/2-I/2

Bailey, Lois I. 1/2

Baker, Nancy E. 1/2

Baldwin, Alfred I

Balint, Michael 1-1

Banham, Katharine M. 1-1

Banker, Claire A. 1/3

Banks, Edwin I

Banks, James H., Jr. 1/3-1/3

Barbour, Mary A. 1/2

Barker, Edwin N. 1/2

Barkley, Mary Jo 1/3

Barnes, Gerald W. 1/2

Baron, A. 1/2-1/3-1/3-1/3-

1/2-1/3

Barry, III, Herbert 1

Barsch, Ray H. l-l

Bartlett, Claude J. 1/2

Bartley, S. Howard 1/2

Baruch, Dorothy W. 1

Bassett, H. Thomas 1/3 -1/3

Bath, John A. 1/2

Baugh, Verner S. 1/2

Bay ley, Nancy l-l-•1/3-1/2

Beach, Frank 1/4

Becher, Barbara Ann 1

Becker, GiIbert 1

Beckham, Albert 1

Beech ley, Robert M. 1/2- 1/2

Been, R. T. 1/2

Behar, Isaac 1/3

Be 11, Richard Q. 1/3

Bel 1, Russel 1 A. 1/3

Beller, Emanuel K. 1

Belmont, Ira 1/2Bench, John L. 1Benimoff, Murray 1/2

68Bennett, Edward 1/2 Boardman, Wi11iam K. 1/3

Benson, Emery 1/3-1/3 Bobbitt, Ruth A. 1/3

Bereiter, Carl 1 Bock, Elmer W. 1/2

Bergen, Tina C. 1/4 Boes, Roderick H. 1/2

Berkowitz, Bernard I/2-I/2-I/2-I-I/2 Boguslavsky, George W. 1-1

Berkson, Gershon 1 Bolton, N. 1/2

Bernard, Jack 1/2 Blodgett, H. C. 1/5

Bernasconi, Marion 1/2 Blum, Abraham 1/2

Bernstein, Stephen 1/2 Boice, Robert 1

Bevan, John M. 1/4 Bortner, Morton 1/2

Bevan, Will!am 1/2--1/2-1/2-1/4-1/2- Bortner, Raymans W. 1/3

1/3 Botwinick, Jack 1/3-1/2-

Beytagh, Luz A. 1/2 1/2-1/2

Bieliauskas, Vylautas J. 1/2 Bousefeld, W. A. 1-1/3

Bijou, Sidney 1/2-1 Bowles, J. W. 1/4

Birch, Herbert G. 1/2-1/3-1/2 Bradway, Katherine 1P. 1

Birnbaum, E. Ann 1/2 Bramel, Dana 1/2

Birren, James E. 1/2-1/2 Bransky, Malcolm 1/3

Blair, Margaret A. 1/2 Brauchle, Robert P. 1/4

Blake, R. R. 1/3-1/3-1/3 Brewster, D. J . 1

Blakely, W. Paul 1 Breznitz, Schlomo 1/2-1/2

Blauvelt, Helen 1 Brimley, Joseph F. 1/3-1/2

Bloom, Leonard 1 Brtson, David W. 1

Blum, Lucl1le Hoi lander 1-1/2 Britton, Peter G. 1/2

Blumenfeld, Walter l-l Broadhurst, P. L. 1/3

Blumenthal, Irving 1/3 Brodbeck, Arthur J . 1

69Brooks, Sylvia I

Brotherton, D. A. 1/3

Brousard, Irvin C. 1/2

Broverman, Donald M. 1/2

Brower, Daniel l-l-l

Brown, Janet L. I

Brown, L. B. 1/2-1/2-I

Brown, W. Lynn I-I/2-I/2-I/2-I/2

I/2-I/2-J/2-1/2-1/2-I/2-I/2-I/2-I/2-I /2-1 /2-1 /2-1 /2-1 /4-1 /2-1 /2-1 /2-1 /2-

I/2-I/2-I/2-I/3-I/2-I/3-I/3-I/2-I/2-

I/3-I/2-I12-I/2-I/2-I/2-I/2-I/2-I/2-I/2-1/2-1/2-1/2-1/3-112-1/2-1/2-1/2-I/3-I/2-I/3-I/2-I/2-I/2-I/2-I-I/5

Brownstein, Aaron J. 1/3

Buck lew, John I

Buker, Mae 1/2

Bunnell, B. N. I/2-I/2-I/2-I/2-I/2

Burchinal, Lee G.

Burger, G.

Burke, Henry R.

Burke, Maurice 0.

Burke, Ronald J.

BurwelI, Elinor

Butler, Robert A.

Butterworth, K.

-I-I/3-I/2

/3

-I

/2-I

/4

Butterworth, Robert F. 1/2

Caldwell, Bettye M. 1-1/2

Caldwell, Willard E. 1-1/2-

I/2-J/2-I/2-I/2-I/2-J12-I/3- I12-I/2-I/2-I/2-I/2-J/2-I/2- 1/2-1/2-1/3-1/2

Calkins, James E. 1/2

Calvin, Allen D. 1/3

Cameron, Norman 1/2

Canestrari, Robert E., Jr. I-I

Cannon, Deore J. 1/2-1/2

Caputo, Daniel V. I

Carey, Janice E. 1/2

Carlton, Lilyn E. 1/2

Ca rI ton, Theodore I/2

Carpenter, C. R. I

Carr, Richard M. I/2-1/2-1/4-

1/2-1/3

Cassel, Robert 1/3

Cassel, Russell N. 1/2-I-1/2-

1- 1/2

Cattell, Raymond B. I-1/2-1/2-I

Cautela, Joseph I

Chalfen, Leo I

Chapanis, Alphonse 1/2

Charles, Don C. 1/2-1/2-1/3- Collins, Gordon 1/2

1/2-1/2 Collins, Jeanne 1

Charles, Margaret S. 1/2 Comal 11, Peter E., Jr. 1/3

Chase, Joan A. 1 Combs, Ann 1/2

Chase, Richard All in 1/4 Combs, Ronald H. 1/3

Chen, Tso-Yu 1/2 Connon, Helene E. 1/2

Child, Arthur 1 Connor, Ruth 1/5

Chow, Huai-Huai 1/2 Cooper, Joseph B. 1/2- 1/2-1-1/2

Church, Joseph 1/2 Coppinger, Neil W. 1/3

Clark, Alton H. 1/3 Corah, Norman L. 1/2-1

Clark, D. L. 1/2 Corah, Patricia Laney 1/2

Clark, George 1/2-1/2 Corn-becker, Frances 1/4

Clark, K. E. 1/4 Cors ini, Raymond J. 1/2

Clayton, Keith 1/5 Coslett, Stephen B. 1/2

Claytor, Mae P. 1 Costa, Paul 1/2

Cleeland, Charles 1/3-1/3 Cotter, Sheldon 1/2

Clifford, Edward 1 Cowden, James E. 1/3-1/3

Clifford, L. Thomas Cowley, J. J . 1/2- 1/2-1/2

Cobb, Katharine 1/3-1/4 Cox, Shelagh M. 1

cobb, Nancy J. 1/4 Crain, Loren 1/2

Cocking, Rodney R. 1 Cramer, Phebe 1

Cofer, Charles N. 1/2 Crandal1, Vaughn J. 1/2- 1/2-1/3-

Cohen, Abraham I. 1 1/3-1/4-I/3

Cohen, Michael I/3-I/3 Crane, A. R. l-l

Cohen, Nadia 1/3 Crockett, Walter H. 1/2

Coleman, John C. 1 Cronbach, Lee J. 1

Cronholn, James N. 1/3-1/3 DeMeritt, Stephen 1/3

Crump, E. Perry 1/2 Denenberg, Victor 1/3-1Cumlngs, Ruth 1/2 Dennis, Wayne 1Cutler, Rhoda 1/4 Denny, Joseph 1/2

Denny, M. Ray 1/2Dales, Ruth J. 1/5-1 Dewey, Rachel 1/4D'Amato, M. R. 1/2 DeWit, F. 1/4Damrin, Dora 1/3 Di1ler, Jullet C. 1Dameron, Lawrence 1 Di1ler, Leonard 1D'Amour, Fred E. 1/3 DI1Iman, ArlIne 1/3D’Angelo, Rita Y. 1/2 Dimond, Stuart J. 1/2Danziger, K. 1 Dinoff, Michael 1/2Darcy, Natalie T. l-l DiStefano, M. K., Jr. 1

Darley, Frederic L. 1/2 DiVesta, Francis J. 1Davenport, John W. 1 Dixon, J. C. l-lDavldon, Robert S. 1/2 Doll ins, Joseph 1/3Davidson, Helen H. 1/2 Dominguez, Kathryn Ella 1Davis, Roger T. 1/3-■I-I-I/4-I/2- Dommich, Joan R. 1/31-1/2-1/2-1/3 Donahoe, John W. l-l-1/2-1

Davol, Stephen H. 1/2 Dorff, J. E. 1/3Dawson, Barbara 1/4 Doty, Barbara A. l-lDeFee, John F., Jr. 1/2 Dreger, Ralph Mason I-I/2-I/2deHlrsch, Katrina 1 Dreyer, Albert S. 1/2Deltz, George E. 1 Duncan, Marie CastaIdi 1

DeLaGaza, Cesar Octavio 1/2 Durea, M. A. 1/2-1/2

deLissovoy, Vladimir 1 Durkin, Dolores 1

Eagle, Carol Johnson 1/2

Edelston, H. 1

Edwards, A. S. 1/2

Ehrenberg, A. S. C. 1

Einlnger, Mary Ann 1/2

Elsdorfer, Carl 1/2-1/2-

Eisenberg, Jay 1/4

Eisenson, John 1/3

El fas, Hans 1

Elkind, David l-l-l- l-l-l-l-l-l-

Ellen, Pau1 1/2

El 1ingson, R. J . 1

Elliot, Orville 1/2

Ellis, Albert I-I-I/2-I/2

Elonen, Anna S. 1/2

Enge1, Mary 1/2-1/2

Erickson, Ralph W. 1

Eson, Morris E. 1/2

Esterson, J. 1/3

Estes, Betsy Worth 1— 1— 1/2

Estvan, Frank J. l-l

Exner, J. 1/4

Fagan, Joseph F. 1/4

Fancher, Edwin C. I-I/2-I

Farley, Frank H. 1

72

Farrimond, Thomas 1

Fassett, Katherine K. 1/2

Fattu, Nicholas 1/3

Fauls, Lydia Boyce 1/2

Feddersen, W. E. 1/2

Feffer, Melvin H. 1/2

Feigenbaum, Kenneth D. 1/2

Feinberg, Henry l-l

Feinberg, Mortimer 1/3-1

Felker, Donald W. 1

Fenn, James D. 1/2

Ferguson, Leonard W. 1

Field, Helen 1/4

Fields, Paul E, 1

Fink, Charles D. 1/3

Finley, Judson R. i/3

Finney, Joseph C. 1

Finocchio, D. V. 1/3

First, Daphne 1/4

Fischer, Gloria 1-1/2

Fisher, Alan E. 1/3-1/4

Fisichelli, Vincent 1/4-1/3

Fitzgerald, Robert D. 1/2

Flavel1, John H. 1/2

Floyd, John P. 1/2

Forbes, Marie L. H. l-l-l

Forgus, Ronald H. 1/2

Forney, Robert D. 1/3

Foshee, Donald P. 1/2

Fosmire, Frederick R. 1/2-1/2-1/2

Fox, Charlotte 1/2

Franco, Daisy 1

Frankel, Norman 1/3

Frederickson, Emil M - -1/2-1/3-1/4

Freeberg, Norman E. 1/2

Freedman, Alfred M. 1/4

Freeman, Olen 1/2

French, Joseph L. 1-1/2

Frenkel-Brunswik, Else 1/2

Frey, Roger B. 1/3

Friedman, Gloria 1

Friedman, Howard l-l-l-l

Fromme, Donald K. 1/2

Fry, Charles L. 1

Frye, Roland L. 1/2- 1/3-1/3

Fu1ler, J. L. 1/4-1

Furchtgott, Ernest 1/2

Gaddis, Earl 1/3

Gaeddert, Willard 1/2

Galer, Eugene L. 1

Gale, Richard A. 1/2

Gallo, K. M. 1/3

Gardner, D. Bruce 1/3- 1/3

Gardner, Eric F. 1/2

Gardner, Louis E., Jr. 1/2

Gardner, L, Pearl 1-1/2

Garn, Stanley M. 1/2

Gartley, Wayne 1/2

Gates, Mary Frances 1

Gauron, Eugene l-l-•1/2-1/2

Gaylord, H. A. 1/3- 1/3

Gebhardt, Linda J. 1/2

Gelber, Beatrice 1

Geller, Max 1/2

Gentry, G. V. 1/3

Germas, John E. 1/2

Gersten, Charles 1

Gese11, Arno 1d 1/2- 1/2- 1/2

Gewirtz, Donald 1/5

Gewlrtz, Jacob l-l

Ghiselll, Edwin E. 1

Gi1 lard, Betty Jo 1/3

Gillum, Eugene 1/2

Glnott, Haim G. 1/2

Gllckman, Stephen E. 1/5

Goertzen, Stanley M. 1

Goldberg, S. E. 1/2

74

Golden, Beverly 1/4 Grant, Marguerite 1/3

Goldfarb, Willi am 1 Graves, Winifred S. l-l

Goldman, Alfred E. 1/2 Green, D. C. 1/3

Goldman, Jacqueline R. 1 Green, Phillip C. 1

Goldstein, AlIan C. 1/4 Green, Robert C., Jr. 1/2

Goldstein, Melvin L. 1 Green, Russell F. 1/2-1/2-

Goldstone, Sanford 1/3 1/2-1/2

Goldzband, M. G. 1/2 Greenberg, David 1/3

Gonzalez, Richard 0. 1/2 Greenberg, Irving 1/2

Goodenough, Donald R. 1/2 Greenfield, Norman 1/2

Goodman, Roy R. 1/3 Greenhut, Ann 1/2

Goodrich, Charles L. l-l-l Griesel, R. D. 1/2- 1/2-1/2

Goodson, Felix E. 1/2 Griffiths, Marjorie T. 1/3-1/2-

Goodwin, Rhoda 1/3 1/3

Gordon, Anitra 1/2 Griffiths, William J., Jr. 1/3-

Gordon, Edmund W. 1/3 1/2-1/3

Gordon, Jesse E. 1 Grimm, Elaine R. 1/4

Gordon, L, V. 1/2 Grinder, Robert E. 1/2

Goss, Albert E. 1/2-1/2- iCMTCM\ Grodsky, MiIton A. 1/4-1/3

1/2-1/2-1/2-1/4 Grossman, Bruce D. l-l

Gotteer, Richard F. 1 Grossman, Klatis E. 1

Gottesman, Eleanor G. 1/2 Guerney, Bernard J. 1/3-1/3

Gottfried, Nathan W. 1 Guertin, Wilson H. 1

Gottiieb, Luci1le S. 1/2 Gurney, N. L. 1/4

Gott1ieb, Nancy D. 1/2 Guze, Henry 1

Gourevitch, Vivian 1/2 Gynther, Malcolm D. 1/2

75Haeussermann, Else 1 Harman, Harry H. 1

Haggerty, Arthur D. l-l-1 Harms, Ernest 1Haines, Aleyne Clayton 1/3 Harms, Irene 1/2-1/2Ha las, Edward S. 1/2-I /2-I/2 Harrell, Samuel N. 1/3Halbertson, Jacob L. 1 Harriman, Arthur E. 1Hal 1, John F. l-l-1/2-1/2-1 Harriman, Philip L. 1Hal 1, Vernon C. 1/2 Harrington, Robert W. 1/2Hal 1, Wi11iam E. 1/2 Harris, D. B. 1/4-1Hal 1Iday, R. W. 1/2 Hart, H. C. 1Halverson, H. M. l-l Hartley, Ruth E. 1/2Hamilton, Marshall L • 1 Hartman, W. E. 1/3Hammack, Ben A. 1 Haslerud, George M. 1Hammer, Emanuel F. 1 Haupt, Dorothy 1/2Hampton, Peter J. 1 Havel, Joan 1/2

Hanawelt, Nelson G. 1/2 Hawkes, Glenn R. 1/3-1/3Handel, Gerald 1/2 Hayes, Roslyn F. 1/2Hand Ion, Joseph H. 1/2--1/3 Heard, Wt11iam G. 1/3

Hanes, Bernard 1/2 Hearn, June L. 1/3Hanna, Gerald S. 1/3 Heathers, Glen l-lHara, Kazuo 1/3 Heilbrun, Alfred B., Jr. 1-1-1/2-

Harbug, Ernest 1/2 I-I/2-I/3-I/2

Harder, Donald A. 1/2 Heimer, Caryl B. 1/4

Hardesty, FrancLs P. 1/2 Hetser, R. B. 1

Hare, A. Paul 1/2 Heisler, Florence 1/2

Hare, Rachel T. 1/2 Henderson, Donald 1/5

Harlow, H. F. 1/3--1/2--1/2-112 Henderson, Edmund H. 1/2-1/3

Henderson, Harold L. 1/2 Horrall, Bernice Moody l-l

Henderson, Richard 1/4 Horrocks, John E. 1/2-1/2-1/2

Henry, Sibyl l-l-l 1/2-1/2-1/3

Hen+on, Comradge L. 1/2-1 Horton, Carroll P. i/2

Herman, David T. 1/2 House, Betty J. 1-1/3

Herme1i n, Beate 1/2 Houssiadas, L. 1/2

Hess, Robert D. 1/2 Howard, Joyce L. 1/2

Hickey, Louise A. 1/3 Howard, Ruth W. l-l

Hickey, Tom 1/3 Howarth, Edgar 1/2-1/2

Hildreth, Gertrude 1-l-l-l-l-l-l Hsu, E. H. 1

Hill, John P. 1/4-1/2 Huang, 1. 1/3-1-1/2

H i me 1ste in, Philip 1/2 Hudgins, Bryce B. 1/3-1/2

Hindley, C. B, 1 Huffman, Arthur W. 1/2

Hirschfield, Paul P. 1 Hughes, Francis W. 1/3

Hirt, Zoe Isabelle 1 Hulickas, Irene M. 1/2-1

Hitt, J. C. 1/3-1/2 Humphrey, Carrol 1 E. 1/2

Hodge, MiIton H. 1/3 Humphries, Joanna M. 1/2

Hoeflln, Ruth 1 Hunt, David E. 1/2

Hoff, Louis A, 1/3 Hunt, J. McV, 1/2-1/3

Hoffeld, Donald R. 1/2 Hunton, Vera D. 1

Hofstaetter, Peter R. 11-1/2 Hurst, Francis M, 1/3

Holmes, Jack Alroy

Hopkins, Kenneth D.

l-l

1

Hurst, John G. 1

Hopper, Harold E. 1/2 LIsager, Holger 1

Horn, John 1/3 ■Mg, Frances I/4-I/2- 1/2-1/2-1/2-

Horowitz, Francis Degen 1 1/2-1/2-1/2

77

11lovsky, Joseph 1 Jones, Mary Cover 1

Impel 1izzeri, Irene H. 1 Jurko, Marion 1/2

Iriye, Tom T. 1/3 Jurovsky, Anton 1

Isch, Maria Jeffre 1

Israeli, Nathan l-l--1-1 Kaden, Stanley 1/3

Itkin, Wi11iam l-l Kagan, Jerome 1/2

Ives, Virginia 1/3 Kahn, Marvin W. l-l-l

Iwahara, Shinkuro 1/3 Kalish, Richard A. 1/3

Kaplan, Oscar J. 1

Jackson, Joseph l-l Kasdon, Lawrence M. 1/2

Jagoda, H. 1/2 Kasser, Edmund 1

James, Suzanne T. 1/2 Kastenbaum, Robert I-I/2-I

James, W. T. I-I-I-I-I/2- l-l-l- Katcher, AlIan 1

I-I-I-I/2-I/3 Kates, Solis L. 1/2

Jeeves, M. A. 1/2-1/2- 1/2 Katkovsky, Walter 1/4-1/3-1/3

Jeeves, T. A. 1 Katz, Jerrold J. 1/3

Jensen, Gordon D. 1/3 Katz, Martin M. 1/2

Jimenez, Carmina 1/2 Kay, Carol Lynn 1/2

Johannsen, Dorothea L. 1/2 Keasey, Carol T. 1/2

Johnson, Basil 1/2 Keefe, Daniel J. S/2

Johnson, Granville B., Jr . 1 Keeler, Clyde E. 1/2

Johnson, Louise Snyder 1/2 Keislar, Evan R. 1

Johnson, Thomas J. 1/3 Kell away, Richard 1/3

Jones, B. Edson 1/3 Keller, E. Duwayne 1/2

Jones, H. E. 1/2 Kempf, Edward 1

Jones, Lyle V. 1 Kenny, Douglas T. 1/2

Kent, Grace H. 1 Kogan, Nathan 1/2-1/2Kerr, Wi 1 lard 1/3 Kohler, ivo 1Kessen, William 1 Kohn, Martin l-lKes+on, Morton J. 1/2--1/2 Kolstoe, Ralph H. 1/3Kidd, Aline H. I--1/2 Koos, Eugenia M. 1Kim, Chungsoon Chung 1/5 Koppitz, Elizabeth M. 1Kimble, Gregory A. 1/2 Korn, James H. 1-1/2King, David 1/3 Kosofsky, Sidney 1King, D. J. 1/4 Krise, G. M. 1/3King, Gerard F. 1/2 Kronovet, Esther 1/2King, James E. 1/3 Kubala, Albert L. 1/2King, John A. l-l Kuehn, Robert E. 1/3King, Maurice G. l-l-l Kuevahara, Hiroshi 1/3Kingsley, Richard 1/2 Kugelmass, Sol 1/2-1/2Kirk, Virginia 1/3 KuhImann, Wi11iam 1/4Kish, George B. 1/2-172-•I/3-I/3 Kuo, Shwu Ching H. 1/2Kitchener, Saul L. 1/2 Kuo, Zing Yang l-l-l-l- l-l-lKleban, Morton 1/3-1-•l-l Kurke, Martin 1. 1Kleinfeld, Gerald J. 1/2 Kvaraceus, W. C. 1Kline, Milton V. I-I-I-•l-l — 1/2

Klingberg, Gote 1 L1Abate, Luciano 1Klugman, Samuel F. 1 Lacey, Harvey 1/2Knobloch, Hilda 1/2 Lagerspetz, Kirsti 1/2Knopf, Irvin J. 1/2 Lakatos, Robert J. 1/3

Knutson, Clifford S. 1/2 Lang, Patricia 1/2

Koch, Helen L. l-l Langford, Louise 1/2

Langl1le, Wallace W. 1/3 Levy, David M. 1

Lankford, Harry G. 1/3 Levy* Girard W. 1/2Lash ley, K. S. 1 Levy, Nissim 1/3Latham, A. J. 1 Lewinski, Robert J. l-lLatimer, James 1 Lewis, Donald J. 1/2Lawler, Carol 0. 1/2 Lewis, Edwin C. 1/2Lawler, Edward E., Ill 1/2 Lewis, George W. 1/2Lawson, Reed 1/2 Lewis, Hi Ida P. 1Lazar, Eve 1 Lewis, John H. 1/2Learned, Janet 1/2- 1/2-1/4- Lewis, Michael 11/4-1/2-1/2 Lewis, Nan 1/2LeBlanc, Arthur 1 Lewis, W. Drayton 1-■l-l-l-l-

Lebo, Dell I-I/2-I-I-I-I/2 l-l-l-lLee, H. W. 1/2 Lhamon, Wi11iam T. 1/3Leeds, Donald S. 1/2-1/3 Lichtenstein, Don 1/2Lehman, Harvey C. l-l-l Lichtenstein, P. E. 1Leibowltz, Sarah L. 1 Lieberman, J. Nina 1Lemke, Elmer A. 1/3 Lindgren, Henry Clay 1/2Lenz, Patricia 1/2 Lindner, Greig 1/2Lerea, Louis 1 Lindsey, James M. 1/2Lessing, Elise E. 1 Ling, Bing-Chung l-lLester, David 1 Linker, Eugene 1/2Levine, Jacob l-l-l LLnn, George B. 1

Levine, Seymour 1 Lipton, Earle L. 1/3

Levinson, Boris M. 1l-l-l-l-l- Littman, Richard A. I-I/3-I/2

l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l-l Livson, Norman I/2-I-I

Lockwood, Ann 1/4

LoftIs, Lorraine 1/2

London, Ivan D. l-l

London, Perry 1/2

Long, Barbara H. 1/3-1/2

Longo, Nicholas 1/2

Lorge, Irving 1/2-1/3

Lotsof, Erwin J. 1/3

Lough 1 in, Leo J. 1/4-1/3

Love, John M. 1/2

Lovelace, WiIIiam E. 1/2-1/2

Lowden, Lynn M. 1/4

Luchins, Abraham S. I/2-M/2-I

Luchins, Edith 1/2

Ludwig, David 1/2

Luton, Frank H. 1/3

Lutzky, Harriet C. 1/2

Lyle, J. G. 1

Lynn, David B. 1/2

Lynn, James 0. 1/2

Lynn, R. l-l-l

MacCracken, WiIIiam 1/2

MacKintosh, J. 1/2-1/3

Mackintosh, N. J. 1/2-1/3

MacRae, John M. 1

Mahan, Harry C. 1

Maier, Norman R. F. 1/2

Mann, Helene Powner 1

Mann, J. W. 1

Mannello, George 1

Manocha, Satinder N. l-l

Margoshes, Adam l-l

Marks, John B. 1

Marquart, Dorothy 1. 1/2

Marr, John N. 1/2-1

Marschak, Marianne 1

Marsh, Charles J. 1

Marshall, Helen R. I-I-I/2-I

Marshall, Hermine H. 1

Marston, Mary-Vesta 1/2

Martin, Gilbert 1/2

Martin, William A. 1

Martin, Wi11iam E. l-l-l

Marx, Melvin H, I/2-I/3-I

Mas low, Abraham H. 1

Mason, Wi11iam A. 1-1/2

Masten, Sherman H. 1/2

Matsumoto, Mtsao 1/2

Maurer, Adah l-l

Mayzner, Mark S., Jr. 1/3

McCarthy, Robert J. 1/2

81McCarthy,■Timothy.E. 1/2 Merchant, G. M. 1/2McCleary, Robert A. 1 Meredith, Gerald N. l-lMcCully, Robert S. 1 Messe, Lawrence 1/5McDonald, Robert L. I-I-I/2-I Messick, Samuel J. 1/2McDowell, Arnold A. 1/4-1-1/2-1/2- Metroux, Ruth 1/41/2-1/2-1/2-1/2-I/2-I/2-l-l/2— 1 /2- Meyer, Donald R. 1/21/3-1/3-1/2-1/2-I/3-1/2-1/2-1/2- Meyer, Wi11iam J. 1-1/21/2-1/2-1/2-I/2—1/2-1/2-1/2— 1/2-1/2- Michels, Kenneth M. 1/2-1/2

1/3-1/2-1/2-I/2-I/2-1/3-I/3-1/2-1/2- Mil gram, Norman A. 11/2-1/2-1/3-1/2-1/3-1/3 Mi 1ler, Robert E. 1/3- 1/3- 1/3McGI11, Thomas E. 1 Miller, W. C. 1/2McKinney, John Paul 1/2-1 Milton, Alexander 1/2

McManis, Donald L. l-l Minnich, Robert E. 1/2

McNemar, Quinn 1 Mintz, Alexander 1

McTee, A. C. 1/3 Misiak, Henry 1/2

Mead, D. Eugene 1/2 Mitchell, G. D. 1/2

Mead, J. L. 1/3 Moran, F. A. 1/3- 1/3- 1/3

Mech, Edmund 1/2-1/3-1/3-1/3 Moran, L. J. 1/3- 1/3-1/3Medinnus, Gene R. I-I-I-I-I-I- Morgan, Elmer F. 1/31/2-1/2-l-l Morian, George K. l-lMeier, Gilbert M. 1/2 Morra, Michael 1

Meinke, Dean L. 1/3 Moseley, John 1/3

Meissner, W. W. l-l-l Morrow, Wi11iam R. 1/2

Meister, David I-I-I/2 Moustakas, Clark E. l-l

Mello, Maria Jorgiza 1/2 Mowrer, 0. H. 1/3- 1

Meltzer, H. I - M / 2

82

Moyer, K. E. 1-1/2-1/2--J-l-■1- North, Alvin J . 1/21-1/2-1/2-1/2-1/2-I/2-I-I1/2-1- Norton, Donald 1/2

I/2-I-I-I-I/2 Norton, Joseph L. l-l

Moyer, Robert S. 1/3 Nyman, Arie J. 1

Moylan, Marie C. 1/2

Mullener, Nathanael 1/2 Oakes, W. F. 1

Murphy, J. V. 1/3 O ’Brien, Cyri1 C. 1

Mursteln, Bernard 1. 1 O ’Connor, Henry A. 1/4

Mussen, Paul 1/2 O’Connor, James F. 1/2

Mutimer, Dorothy 1/3 O ’Connor, N.

Offenbach, Stuart

1/2-

1

1/2

Nagy, Maria H. I-I-•l-l Ogawa, Nobuya 1/3

Najarian-svajian, Pergrouhi 1 O ’Grady, Richard 1

Nash, Earl H. 1/2 Olson, David R. 1/2

Nash, Harvey l-l Olson, Mark 1/3

Neidt, Charles E. 1/2 O’NeiII, Philip 1

NeiIon, Patricia 1 Onken, Mary A. 1/2

Neimark, Edith D. 1/2 Oppenheimer, Oscar l-l

Newman, Michael 1 Ordy, J. M. 1/3

Nelson, Thomas M. 1/2-1 Orgel, Arthur R. 1/2-1/2

Nichols, Thomas F. 1/2 Or land, Frank 1/2

Nidorf, Louis J. 1/3 Orr, Helen K. 1/2

Nlenstedt, Carl W., Jr. 1/2 Osborne, R. Travis 1/2-1/2

Nlssen, Henry W. 1/2-i/2 Osterkamp, Annmargaret 1/2

Noble, Merrill E. 1/2 Ostrich, Ralph 1/2

Norman, Ralph D. 1/2-1/2 Overal1, John E. 1/4-1/3

83Overton, Richard K. 1/2-1/2-1/3 Phi 11ips, Leslie 1/3

Owen, S. 1 Pickford, R. W.

Pierce, Helen Oexle

1

1

Palmer, Florence 1/3 Pierson, George R. 1/3-1/3Pan, Ju-Shu 1 Pike, Frances 1/3Pangrac, Ivan 1/2 Pikler, Emmi 1Pantle, AlIan J. 1/2 PiIgrim, Francis J . 1/2Pare, Wi11iam P. 1-1/2-1 Pi 1Isbury, Walter B. 1Parker, Jean R. 1/3 Pinneau, Samuel R. 1/2-1/2Parsley, Kenneth, Jr. 1/4 Pinto, Isabelle N. 1/2

Pasamanick, Benjamin 1-1/2 Pizzuto, Joseph S. 1/5

Passey, George F. 1/2 Plant, Walter T. I-I-I/2

Pastore, Nicholas l-l Platt, Jerome J. 1/3

Patterson, C. H. 1 Plenderleith, Mavis 1

Patton, R. A. 1/2 Plutchik, Robert 1/2

Payne, Donald T. 1/2 Poffenberger, Thomas 1/2

Peacock, L. J . 1/3 Portin, Raya 1/2

Pearlman, Joel 1/3 Posey, H. Tharp 1/2

Pease, Damaris 1/3-1/3 Possenti, Richard G. 1/2Pelz, Kurt 1/3 Pouliot, Samuel 1/2Pennypacker, H. S. 1/2 Powell, Marvin 1/2-1/4-1/3Perez, Vernon J. 1/3 Pratt, Karl C. 1-1-1/3-1-1/3Peterson, Harold W. 1/3 Presley, W. J. 1/2

Pfaffenberger, C. J. 1/2 Preston, Anne 1/2-1/4-1/3-1/3

Phaup, Minnie Rob 1/2-1/2 Prien, Erich 1/2

Phi 11ips, E. Lakin l-l Pritchard, Sally Ann 1/2

84

Pronko, N. H. 1/2- I/4-I-I/2 Richardson, Claudia 1/2

Pumroy, Donald K. 1/2— 1/2 Richardson, Helen M. 1/2

Pumroy, Shirley S. 1/2-1/2 Richmond, Julius B. 1/3

Richmond, R. George 1/2-1/2

Quinn, Marian 1/3 Rickard, Henry C. 1/2

Riegel, Klaus F. 1/2

Rabe, Peter l-l Riesen, Austin H. 1/2

Rabson, Alice 1/2 Rimoldi, H. J. A. 1/3

Rafferty, Jane E. 1/3 Riopelle, Arthur J. 1/2--1/2-1/2

Ragosta, Teresa A. 1/2 Ritter, R. M. 1/5

Raine, Walter J. 1/2 Rivoire, Jeanne L. 1/2

Rajalakshmi, R. 1/2-1/2-1/2 Robb in, Joseph S. 1/3

Ranzoni, Jane H. 1/3 Roberts, A. Dudley 1

Rawn, Moss L. 1 Roberts, John M. 1/2

Ray, A. Joseph, Jr. 1-1/2 Robinowitz, Ralph 1-1/2

Read, J. M. 1/3 Robinson, E. M. 1/3

Reed, G. F. 1/2-1/2 Robles, Albert 1/3

Reed, Homer B. 1 Rosauer, Josephine Keefe 1/3

Reed, J. David 1 Rose, A. M. 1/4

Rees, Willis N. 1/3 Rose, Dorian 1/3

Regan, Richard A. 1/2 Rose, Grace 1/3Reiman is, Gunars 1-1/2 Rosen, Daniel E. 1/2

Reiter, Henry H. 1 Rosen, Joseph l-l-l

Reymert, Martin 1/2 Rosenberg, B. G. 1/2-1/2- i»CMs

Reynolds, Wi11iam F. 1/2 1/2-1/2-1/2-1/4-1/2

Richards, T. W. 1/2 Rosenzweig, Saul l-l

Ross, Bruce M. 1/2 Salzen, E. A. 1Ross, Jean Goodwin 1/2-•1/2 Salzinger, Kurt l-lRoss, Sherman 1/2-1/2-1/2- 1/3-1/2- Sanders, WiIma B. 1/21/2-I/2-1/2-1/2-I-1/2-I/3-I/4 Sanderson, Margaret H. 1Roth, Robert M. 1/2 Sands, David J. 1/2Ro+h, Wi11iam F., Jr. 1/3 Sanger, Marjorie D. 1/3Rothaus, Paul 1/3 Saucer, Rayford T. 1/3RothchiId, Barbara F. 1 Savage,R. Douglas 1/2-1/2Rothenberg, Barbara B. 1 Sawrey, Wi11iam L. 1/2Rotman, Miriam 1/2 Saxon, Sue V. l-lRountree, Clyde B. 1/3 Scarborough, Barron B. 1-1/2Rowley, Vinton N. 1/2--1/2-1/2-1/2 Schaefer, Earl S. 1/3-1/2Royce, Joseph R. 1/2 Schatz, Louis 1/2Rubin-Rabson, Grace 1 Schiff, Bernard 1/5Rudin, Stanley A. 1 Schiff, Herbert M. 1/2Ruebush, Britton K. 1 Schlagel, T. F., Jr. 1Ruja, Harry 1 Schlottman, Robert S. 1/3Russo, Frank 1/2 Schmeidler, Gertrude R. 1/2Rutherford, Eldred E. 1 Schmidt, Hans, Jr. 1/3-1/2Ryans, David G. 1 Schmidt, Robert 1/3Rychlak, Joseph F. 1 Schneck, Jerome M. l-l

Schneider, Dale S. 1/2Saelens, Elizabeth 1/3 Schneider, Gerrie 1/3Safier, Gwen 1 Schneidman, Edwin S. 1Salama, Ahmad A. 1/2 Schpoont, S. H. 1/4

Salisbury, Lee H. 1/3 Schrier, AlIan M. 1

Schubert, Josef I

Schuckert, Robert F. I

Schulz, R. E. 1/3

Schvaneveldt, Jay D. l-l

Schwesinger, Gladys C. 1-1-

I-I-I-ISchweikart, George E., Ill I

Scott, J. P. 1/2-1/2-1/2-

1/4-1/2

Scott, Ralph I

Scott, Thurman C. I

Seay, Bi11 1/3

Seeman, William 1/2-1/2-1/2

Segel, Irving I

Seidel, H. E., Jr. 1/3

Seltzer, Carl C. I

Settlage, P. H. 1/3

Seward, Georgene H. I

Seward, John P. 1/2-1/3-I

Shaklee, Alfred B. I/2-I/3-I-

I/2—I — I—I — I — IShapiro, Ellen B. 1/3

Shapiro, Herbert i

Sharpe, Lawrence 1/2

Sharp less, Aneita 1/4

Shaw, M. E. 1/2

86

Shelton, Florence C. I/2-I/2

Sherman, Arthur Wesley I

Sherman, Murray l-l

Shoemaker, Donald J. 1/2

Siegel, Paul S. 1/2

SLevers, Dorothy J. 1/2

Si liman, Leonard R. I

Silverman, Irwin 1/2

SiIvers, WiIlys K. 1/2

Simmons, Alvin J. 1/2

Simon, Seymore 1/3

Simpson, A. D., Jr. 1/2

Simpson, James E. I

Simpson, Ray H. 1/3

Singh, S. D. 1/3

Sines, Jacob 0. I-I/2-I-I/3-I/3

Sinha, M. M. 1/2

Sinha, S. N. 1/3

Sinks, Naomi B. 1/2

Skeels, Harold M. I/2-I/2-I/2

Skodak, Marie I-I/2-I/2

Skorepa, Carol A. 1/3

Slater, Philip E. I

Sloan, William 1/2

Slochower, Muriel Z. l-l

Smart, Russell C. I

Smedslund, Jan l-l Spiegel, Leo Angelo

87

1

Smith, A. C. 1/2-1/2 Spiker, Charles C. 1/2-1/2

Smith, Anthony J. 1 Sp i vack, Sarah Scherer 1

Smith, Dorothy B. 1/2 Spoerl, Dorothy Tilden l-l-l-l

Smith, Henrietta 1/2 Springer, Doris V. l-l-l

Smith, Howard P. 1/2-1/2 SpruiII, Jean 1/2

Smith, James C. 1/2 Staats, Arthur W. 1/3

Smith, Louis M. 1/3 Stabler, John R. 1/2

Smith, Madorah E. l-l-l-l- Stacey, Chalmers L. 1/2

1-1-1/2-1 Stamm, John S. 1

Smith, Maurice P. 1/2 Standk, Edward J. 1/2

Smith, Max 1/3 Standard, Henry C. 1/4

Smith, Roger 0. 1/2 Starer, Emanuel 1/3-1

Smith, Ruth E. 1/3 Staudt, Virginia M. 1-1/2

Smith, Stanley 1/2 Stebbins, Wi11iam C. 1/2

Smith, Walter 1/2-1/2 Stedman, Donald J. 1/2

Smith, Wendell 1. 1/2-1/3- Steele, J. P. 1/4

1/2-1/2-1/2-1/2 Steinberg, Frederick 1/4

Smoot, Kenneth E. 1/2 Steinschneider, Alfred 1-1/3

Snyder, F. W. 1/4 Steisel, Ira M. I-I-I/2

Sol ley, Charles M. 1/2-1/2 Stendler, Celia 1/3

Solomon, Daniel 1-1/3 Stephens, William N. 1

Sontag, Lester W. 1/2 Stern, John A. I-I-I/2

South, Donald R. 1/3 Stevens, David A. 1/2

Sp&tz, Dorothy 1/3 Stevenson, Harold W. 1-1/2

Spector, Judith C. 1/2 Stevenson, Nancy G. 1/2

88

Stewart, Alan L. 1/3 Surko, Elise F. 1/2

Stewart, Horace, Jr. 1/2 Sutherland, N. S. 1/3

Stewart, Lawrence H. 1 Sutton, Rachel S. 1

Stlth, Doris 1/3 Sutton, Samuel 1/4

Stoke, Stuart M. 1 Sutton-Smith, B. I/2-I/2--1/2-1/3

Stolmeier, P. V. 1/2-1/3 1/2-1/2-1/2-1/2-1/4-1/2

Stolsky, Bernard A. 1-1/3 Sweeney, Arthur B. 1Stolurow, Lawrence 1 Sweet land, Anders 1/2

Stolz, Carol 1/3 Swenson, Dale E. 1/3

Stone, F. Beth 1/2 Swinn, Richard M. 1

Stone, G. Raymond 1/2 Symmes, David 1

Stone, LeRoy A. 1/2 Synolds, D. L. 1/2-1/4

Stone, Mary Anne 1/2

Story, A. W. 1/2 Tabachnick, B. Robert 1

Stott, D. H. 1 Tacker, R. Stephen 1/2

Stout, Robert J. 1/3 Tagatz, Glenn E. 1/3

Stover, Lillian 1/3-1/3 Tajfel, Henri 1/2

Strang, Harold R. 1 Tal land, George A. l-l

Strauss, Anselm L. l-l Tasch, Ruth J. 1Stuart, Richard B. 1 Taub, Harvey A. 1Sturmfels, Gloria 1/2 Tedeschi, James T. 1/2

Subotnlk, Leo 1 Tees, Richard C. 1

Sul kin, Howard 1/2 Terrel 1, Glenn, Jr. 1/2-1

Sullivan, Edmund V. 1/2-1 Thaler, Wi11iam D. 1/3

Sumner, F. C. 1-1/2 Thayer, Lee 0. 1/2

Sundberg, Norman D. 1/3 Thiesen, J. Warren 1/2

89

Thompson, Claire Wright 1 Utecht, A. J. 1/3Thompson, George G. 1/2--1/3- Uzgiris, Ina C. 1/3I/2-I-I-I-I/2-I/2-I/2

Thompson, Grace M. 1 Valasek, F. 1/4Thompson, Larry W. I/2-I/2 Vandament, Wi11iam E. 1/4Thompson, William R. 1/2 VanHine, Nancy P. 1/2Thorndike, Robert L. l-l Van Krevelin, Alice 1Thorne, B, Michael 1/3 Vaughan, Graham M. l-lThou less, R. H. 1/2 Vegas, Olga N. 1/3-1/3Thurlow, Wi1 lard 1/2 Vervi1le, Elinor 1/2-1TIedemann, John G. 1/2 Very, Philip S. 1/2Tiemeyer, Elizabeth B. 1/2 Vinacke, W. Edgar 1TiIton, J . W. 1 Vogel, Wi11iam 1/2Toback, Ethel 1/4 Von Haller, GiImer B. 1/2-1/2Torrance, E. Paul I

Trent, Richard D, l-l- l-l Waldman, Marvin 1/3Tresselt, M. E. 1/2-1/3 Walker, Richard N. 1/4-1/2Trowbridge, Norma 1/2 Wallin, J. E. W. l-l-l-lTuckman, Jacob I/2-I/3- I/2-I-I/2 Walters, C. Etta 1Turkewitz, Gera 1d 1/3 Walters, James 1/5Tyler, Bonnie B. 1/3 Wang, James D. 1Tyler, Forrest B. 1/3 Wapner, Seymour 1/3Tyler, Leona E. l-l Warren, Helen B. 1/2

Warren, J. M. 1/2— 1 —I/2— 1/2—1 — 1 -

Uhrbrock, Richard S. 1 I-I/2-I/3-I/2-I-I-I-I/2

Urmer, A. H. 1/2 Washington, Charles 1/2

90

Waters, R. H. 1/2 Williams, Harold 1/2

Watson, Robert 1/2 Williams, W. C. 1/2

Wattenberg, WiIIiam W. 1 Wilson, Frank T. l-l-l-l

Wei land, 1. Hyman 1/2 Wilson, J. 1

Weinberg, Rita Mohr 1 Wilson, Robert C. 1/2

Weinlander, Albertina A. 1 Wincze, John P. 1/2

Weinlander, Max M. 1 Windsor, Ruth S. 1

Weinstein, Morris 1/2 Winefield, A. H. 1

Welch, Livingston 1-l-l-1/4- Winltz, Harris 1-1/2

I/3-I/2 Winter, David G. 1/2

Wei Is, Charles A. 1 Winthrop, Henry l-l-l

Wells, F. L. 1-l-l-l-l- Wisner, Robert J. 1/2

l-l-l-l-l-l-l Witherspoon, Ralph :/5

Wendt, R. A. 1/2 Witryol, Sam L. 1/2-1/2-1/4

Werber, Morton 1/3 Wittman, Mary Phyllis 1/2

Werner, Emmy 1 Wohlwi11, Joachim F. l-l-l

Werner, Heinz 1/2'-1/2-1/3 Woli n, Lee R. 1/3

Wertheimer, Michael l-l-l Wo1 ins, Leroy 1/3-1/3

Wheeler, D. K. 1 Wolman, Richard N. 1/2

White, Robert K. 1/2-1/4-1/3 Wong, Roderich 1

Whitmark, G. A. 1/3 Wortis, Helen 1/2

Wicker, dames E. 1/3-1/2 Wright, Logan 1

WiIbanks, W. A. 1/2 Wurtz, Kenneth R. 1

Wi1 bourn, J. 1/3 Wyatt, Frederick 1

Wi11iams, part D. 1/3

Wi11iams, Gertrude J. 1/2

91Yaksh, Tony 1/3 Zakolski, F. C. l-l-l

Yamamoto, Kaoru 1 Zaretsky, Herbert H. 1/2

Yang, H. C. 1/3 Zeigler, May 1

Yao, F. Y. 1/3 Zeligs, Rose l-l-•l-l-l-l-l

Yarrow, Leon J. 1 Zeman, Frederick D. 1/3

Yedinack, Jeannette G. 1 Zern, David 1

Yonge, K. A, 1/2 Zigler, Edward 1

Yoshloka, Joseph G. 1/2 Zi1ler, Robert C. 1/3-1/3

Young, Florene M. 1 Zimmerman, Donald W. 1

Young, Francis A. 1/2 Zubin, Joseph 1/4

Youngman, William F. 1/2 Zunich, Michael l-l

Zuk, G. H. l-l-l-l

APPENDIX B

INSTITUTIONAL CONTRIBUTIONS 1945-1969

Air Adjutant General’s Office I

Alameda State College I

Albany Medical College I

American Foundation of Religion and Psychiatry, New York I

American International College 6

Antioch Col lege I

Arizona State University I

Army Air Force Tactical Center I

Austin Col lege 3

Aviation Medicine, School of, U.S.A.F. I

Baltimore City Hospitals 3

Barnard College I

Baylor University College of Medicine I

Bennington College I

Bethel College I

Boston State Hospital 2

Boston University 7

Bowling Green State University 10

Brandeis University 3

Brooklyn Col lege 12

92

93

Brown University I

Bryce Hospital, Tuscaloosa, Alabama I

Bryn Mawr Col lege I

Bucknell University II

California Institute of Technology I

California Youth Authority, Ventura, California 6

Carleton University 4

Carnegie Institute of Technology 20

Carter Memorial Hospital, Indianapolis I

Catholic Guardian Society of the Diocese of Brooklyn I

Catholic University of America 4

Center for Psychological Services, Chicago I

Central Is I ip State Hospital, New York I

Central Louisiana State Hospital I

Central Michigan College of Education 7

Central New Jersey Mental Hygiene Center 2

Chicago Board of Education 2

Chicago Medical School 2

Chicago Public Schools I

Child Guidance and Speech Correction Center, Jacksonville, Florida 2

Child Guidance Clinic, Oklahoma City I

Children’s Health Council, Palo Alto, California I

Children's Mental Health Center I

Cincinnati Public School System 6

City Col lege of New York 7

Clark University 12

94.

Cleveland Psychiatric Clinic I

Columbia Presbyterian Medical Center I

Columbia University 14• »Columbus Psychiatric Institute I

Connecticut Col lege I

Cornell University 9

Corning Community College 2

Council Child Development Center, New York I

Creedmoor Institute, Queens, New York I

C. W. Post College I

Danvers State Hospital I

Davidson College I

Dearborn Public School 2

Delaware Division of Special Education and Mental Hygiene I

DePauw University I

Detroit Jewish Social Services Bureau 2

Diagnostic Center, Menlo Park, New Jersey I

Drake University I

Duke University 10

Eastern Pennsylvania Psychiatric Institute 2

Eastern Washington College of Education I

Educational Testing Service 3

El Monte Pub Iic Schools, El Monte, California I

Emory University 16

Erie, Pennsylvania School District I

Fels Research Institute 12

95

Findlay Col lege I

Fi+zsimons General Hospital, Denver I

Flint, Michigan Guidance Center I

Florida State University II

Fontana Unified School District I

Fordham University 10

Fort Hays Kansas State Col lege 4

Franklin and Marshall College I

Fulton State Hospital I

Galesburg State Hospital, Illinois I

General Electric Advanced Electronics Lab, New York I

George Peabody Col lege for Teachers I

George Washington University 22

Gesell Institute of Child Development 20

Goldwater Memorial Hospital I

Goucher Col lege 2

Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Company I

Green Hill School, Washington I

Grinnell College I

Guide Dogs for the Blind I

Hahnemann Medical College, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania I

Hampton Institute I

Harvard University 21

Haverford Col lege I

HawaiI State MentaI Health Division I

Hofstra University I

96Houston State Psychiatric Institute I

Howard University 3

Hunter Col lege 12

Illinois Department of Public Welfare 2

Illinois Institute of Technology 2

Illinois State Pediatric Institute I

111inois University 2

Indiana School of Medicine I

Indiana University 4

Infant Welfare Society of the Child Development Center, Chicago I

Institute for Juvenile Research, Chicago 2

Iowa State University 12

Ithaca Col lege I

Ittleson Center for Child Research, New York I

JacksonviIle University I

Jewish Vocational Services, Milwaukee, Wisconsin I

Johns Hopkins University 2

Kansas State University 4

Kennedy Ch iId Study Center 2

Kentucky State College I

Kings Park State Hospital I

Kirkland Air Force Base, New Mexico I

Langley Porter Cl inic I

Language Arts and Remedial Reading Center, Hawaii I

Lapeer State Home and Training School I

Lawrence College I

97

Lederle Laboratories, Pearl River, New York I

Lenox Hill Hospital, New York City I

Lincoln State School I

Linden Hill School, New York I

Lompoc Unified Schools, California I

Long Island University 7

Louisiana State University 9

Loyola University 2

Lynchburg State College, Virginia I

MacMurray Col lege 2

Madigan Army Hospital, Tacoma, Washington I

Malcolm Bliss Behavioral Research Lab., St. Louis I

Maritime Academy of Music I

Ma rquette Un i ve rs i ty I

Martin Company I

Massachusetts Division of Mental Health I

Massachusetts General Hospital I

Massachusetts Mental Health Center, Boston I

Mayo Clinic 2

Meharry Medical College I

Menninger Foundation 3

Mental Health Research Institute, Fort Steilacom, Washington I

Mergenthaler Linotype Company I

Merrill Palmer Institute, Detroit 4

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company I

Miami-Dade itunior Col lege I

98

Michael Reese Hospital and Medical Center, Chicago 2

Michigan State University 7

Ml IledgeviIle State Hospital, Georgia I

Mi Ms Col lege I

Mississippi Southern College I

Montana State University 4

Montclair State College I

Monteith Col lege I

Mooseheart Laboratory for Child Research 4

Mount Holyoke College 2

Mount Sinai Hospital, New York City I

Murray State Teacher’s Col lege 4

Nash-Edgecombe Economic Development, Inc., Rocky Mount, N. Carolina I

National Institute of Health 9

National Institute for Personnel Research I

National Leadership Institute, Austin, Texas I

Neal Junior High School I

New Hampshire State Hospital I

New Jersey State Teaeher's Col lege at Glasboro I

New Mexico State University 2

New York ChiIdren’s Court I

New York Hospital I

New York Medical College I

New York Service for Orthoped Lea M y Handicapped I

New York State Department of Mental Hygiene I

New York State Psychiatric Institute I

99New York State Training School for Boys 2

New York-State University I

-Albany 2

-Buffalo 2

-College of Medicine I

-Downstate Medical Center I

-Upstate Medical Center 3

New York University 15

Norristown State Hospital 3

North Central College 2

North Dakota State University I

Northeastern University 2

Northern New Jersey Mental Hygiene Clinic 3

Northeast Independent School District, Texas I

Northern Illinois University 5

Northwestern University 8

Ohio State University 13

Ohio University 6

Painesville City Schools, Ohio I

Palomar College, San Marcos, California I

Parsons State Hospital and Training Center 2

Passaic New Jersey Board of Education I

Pennsylvania State University 19

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania Department of Public Health 4

Phoenix Col lege System, Arizona 2

Phoenix Union College I

100Phoenix Union High Schools I

Pinecrest State School, Baton Rouge I

Porterville State Hospital, California I

Portland State College I

Postgraduate Center for Psychotherapy 2

Princeton University 2

Purdue University II

Queens Col lege, New York 2

Radcliffe Col lege 3

Rand Corporation I

R. B. Jackson Memorial Laboratory 6

Reiss-Davis Clinic for Child Guidance I

Rhode Island College I

Richmond Professional Institute, Virginia I

Rutgers University 8

Sacred Heart Hospital, Yankton, South Dakota I

St. Christopher's Hospital, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 3

St. Francis College, Fort Wayne, Indiana 3

St. John's Episcopal Hospital, Brooklyn, New York I

St. Norbert Col lege 2

San Diego State College I

San Francisco State College 2

San Jose State College 16

Santa Barbara County Schools 2

Shippensburg State College I

Smith College I

101Smithsonian Institute 7

South Carolina Medical College 2

South Carolina State Hospital I

South Dakota State University I

Southern Illinois University I

Southern Methodist University

Southern Oregon Col lege I

Southern University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana 2

Southwestern Louisiana Institute 5

Springfield Col lege I

Stanford University 14

Stephens Col lege I

Syracuse University 14

Teacher's College of Connecticut I

Temple University 2

Tennessee Department of Public Health I

Texas A. and M. 3

Texas Technological College I

Texas Women's University 3

Tuft's Col lege I

Tulane University 4

U.S. Army Medical Research Laboratory I

U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare 2

University of

Alabama 4

Alaska I

102University of (continued)

Arizona 5

Arkansas 2

*California 13

California, Berkeley 16

California, Davis I

California, Los Angeles II

California Medical Center, San Francisco I

California, Santa Barbara 3

Ch i cago 14

Colorado 11

Connecticut 5

Delaware 2

Denver 15

Florida 2

Georg i a 20

Hawai i 9

Houston I

Idaho I

Illinois 24

Indiana 2

Iowa 24

Kansas 7

Kansas City IoKentucky 8

* Includes several agencies within the university, but not branch campuses.

University of (continued)

Loui svilie 4

Ma i ne 10

Maryland 12

Massachusetts 8

Miami 8

Michigan 7

Minnesota 17

Missouri 7

Morgan State College

Nebraska 5

New Hampshire I

New Mexico 5

North Carolina 3

North Dakota 3

Northern Iowa I

Oklahoma 7

Oregon 14

Pennsylvania 2

Pittsburg 6

Puerto Rico I

Redlands I

Rhode Island I

Rochester 5

San Marcos I

South Dakota 5


Southern California 2

Tennessee 2

Texas 7 1

Texas at El Paso I

Toledo I

Vermont I

Virginia I

Washington 9

Wichita 7

Wisconsin I

Utah State University 2

VanderbuiIt University 2

V. A. Centers and Hospitals

Augusta, Georgia I

Bath, New York 6

Canandaigua, New York I

Cush i ng Hosp itaI, Massachusetts

Dayton, Ohio I

East Orange, New Jersey I

Hampton, Virginia I

Kecoughton, Virginia 2

LosjAngeles ° I

Newington, Connecticut I

Northport, New York 2

Perry Point, Maryland I

V. A. Centers and Hospitals (continued)

Psychological Services I

Syracuse, New York 3

Waco, Texas I

Vassar Col lege 3

Ventura County Schools, California I

Warwick Child Welfare Project 2

Washington Square Consultation Center, New York

Washington State University 5

Washington University 20

Wayne County Training School I

Wayne State University 2

Wayne University I

Wei Iesley Col lege I

Wenatchee Valley College I

Wesleyan University, Connecticut I

Westchester County Department of Health 3

Westchester County Mental Hygiene Clinic, New York

Western Col lege I

Western State Psychiatric Hospital, Pennsylvania

Westminster College I

Wheaton Co 11ege I

W. A. White Institute I

Wi11iams College I

Williamson County Guidance Study I

Wisconsin Department of Public Welfare 2

Wisconsin State University of Whitewater I

Wisconsin, State of, Department of Health and Social Services

Witchita Chi Id Guidance Center I

Witchita University 2

Wittenberg University I

Woodmere Public Schools, New York I

Woodstock Col lege, Maryland 2

Wooster Col lege 2

Worchester State Hospital 4

Xavier University 3

Yale University 23

Yerkes Laboratory of Primate Biology 4

Yeshiva University 23

Youv iI Ie Co 11ege I

Foreign Institutions

Alder Hey Children’s Hospital, Liverpool I

American University of Beirut, Lebanon I

B. D. H. Research Limited, Godalming, England I

Bradford Child Guidance Center, Bradford, England I

China Institute of Educational Psychology, Nanking, China I

Fu Jen University I

Gorakhpur University I

Hebrew University of Jerusalem 2

Institute fur ExperimenteIle Psychologic, Innsbruck I

Institute for Social Research, Oslo, Norway I

International People's Col lege, Denmark I

107

International Psicopedogogic Nacional, Lima, Peru I

Kingston College Clinic, Kingston, England I

London Hospital Medical College I

Massey University, New Zealand I

McGill University I

Melbourne, Department of Mental Hygiene, Victoria, Australia I

National Institute for Infant Care and Education, Budapest, Hungary I

National Institute for Personnel Research, Johannesburg I

National University of Chekiang 4

Penjab University, Chandigark, India 2

Pazmany Peter University, Budapest, Hungary I

Regional Center for Educational Research, SaIvador-Bahia, Brazil I

Slovak University of Bratislava I

St. Francis Xavier University, Nova Scotia I

Teacher's College, Armidale, Australia 2

Teacher's College, Falum, Sweden I

University of

Adelaide, S. Australia 5

Alberta, Canada 3

British Columbia 3

Calgary, Canada I

Cambri dge I

Cardiff, College of, Wales I

Exete r, G reat Britain 3

Glasgow 2

Liverpool 2


London 8

Manchester 3

NataI, South Af r i ca 5

Newcastle-upon-Tyne, England 2

Oslo, Norway I

Oxford 3

Queensland I

Strathclyde, Glasgow, Scotland I

Sydney, Australia 2

Thessalonkik, Greece I

Toronto 6

Turku, Finland I

Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand I

Western Australia I

Victoria University, Wellington, New Zealand

APPENDIX C

FREQUENTLY CITED AUTHORS 1965-1969

Ader, R. 6 Brown, F. A. 9

AI lee, W. C. 12 Brown, J. S. 6

Allport, G. W. 5 Bruner, J. 6

Altus, W. 5 Campbell, B. A. 9

Ames, L. B. 9 Candland, D. K. 5

Anastasi, A. 7 Castaneda, A. 5

Baer, D. M. 5 Cattell, R. B. 67

Baldwin, A. L. 8 Cohen, J. 6

Bandura, A. 9 Col Iias, N. E. 6

Bass, B. M. 9 Crandall, V. J. 13

Bayley, N. II Cronbach, L. J. 6

Beach, F. A. 9 Davidson, K. S. 7

Becker, W. C. 7 Denenberg, V. H. 12

Bell, R. Q. 7 Dennis, W. 13

Berlyne, D. E. 7 Deutsch, M. 5

Bindra, D. 5 Duncan, D. B. 6

Birren, J. E. 6 Dyk, R. B. 5

Bitterman, M. E. 5 Edwards, A. L, II

Breese, F. H. 6 Eel Is, K. 7

Broadhurst, P. L. II Eisdorfer, C. 5

Bronfenbrenner, U. 8 Elkind, D. II

109

Erikson, E. H.

Estes, W. K.

Eyesenck, H. J.

Fantz, R. L.

Feffer, M. H.

Feifel, H.

Flave 11, J. H.

Forgays, D. G.

Freud, S.

Furchtgott, E.

Gellermann, L.

GeselI, A.

Getzels, J. W.

Ghent, L.

Gibson, J. J

Goodenough, F. L.

Greenacre, P.

Grinder, R.

Guhl, A. M.

GuiI ford, J. P.

Hale, E. B.

Harlow, H. F.

Harman, H. H.

Harris, D. B.

Hebb, D. 0.

Hess, R. D.

Hilgard, E. R.

Hoi Iingshead, A.

Horn, J. L.

Horrocks, J. E.

House, B. J.

Hunt, J. McV.

tnglis, J.

tnhelder, B.

Jackson, P.

Jaynes, J.

Jenkins, J. J.

Jensen, A. R.

Jones, H. E.

Kagan, J.

Kaiser, H. F.

Kay, D. W. K.

Kessen, W.

Knapp, R. R.

Knob loch, H.

Kogan, N.

Levin, H.

Levine, S.

Levy, D. M.

Lewin, K.

LighthalI, F. F.

Lindzey, G.

6611

7

65

15

5

I I

65

18

7

5

5

I I

5

9

2021

5

29

7

5

10

6

Lorge, 1. 8 Postman, L. 6

Lovel1, K. 6 Richter, C. P. 5

Luria, A. R. 15 Riopelle, A. J. 5

McCandless, B. R. 7 Roe, A. 7

McClearn, G. E. 6 Rohwer, W. D. 5

McNemar, Q. 5 Ruebush, B. K. 7

Maccoby, E. 15 Russel 1, W. A. 5

Mas low, A. H. 7 Sarason, 1. G. 5

Mason, W. A. 6 Sarason, S. B. 8

Maw, E. W. 8 Schachter, S. 9

Maw, W. H. 8 Schaefer, E. 18

Meeker, M. 5 Scheier, 1. 7

Merrifield, P. R. 5 Schjelderup-Ebbe, T. 6

Meyer, W. J. 6 Scott, J. P. 8

Mi 1ler, N. E. 15 Sears, R. R. 20

Montgomery, K. C. 7 Sheffield, F. D. 8

Mowrer, 0. H. 7 S i ege1, S. 22

Murchison, C. 9 Sigel, 1. E. 6

Murray, H. A. 9 Singer, J. L. 5

Mussen, P. H. 13 Skinner, B. F. 8

Nissen, H. W. 6 Smedslund, J. 16

Osgood, C. 7 Solomon, R. L. 8

Palermo, D. S. 6 Spence, K. W. 7

Pasamanick, B. 15 Stevenson, H. W. 20

Pawlik, K. 8 Taylor, J. A. 5

Piaget, J. 50 Terman, L. M. 9

Thompson, G. G. 8

Thompson, H. 5

Thompson, W. R. 8

Thurstons, L. L. 10

Torrance, E. P. 16

Waite, R. 9

Walters, R. H. 8

Warner, W. L. 5

Warren, J. M. 6

Wechsler, D. 18

Weir, M. W. 9

WelRer, W. 1. 5

Werner, H. 9

White, R. W. 5

Winer, B. 9

Witkin, H. A. 6

WohlwiII, J. F. 9

Wood-Gush, D. G. M. 5

Wynne, L. C. 5

Zeaman, D. . 12

Zigler, E. F. 5

Zimbardo, P. 5

Zuckerman, M. 9

University Microfilms, A XEROXCompany, Ann Arbor, Michigan

Documents