¹ The questionnaire was in the form of a letter asking each chairman for the following information about all staff members of his department and all Ph.D. candidates:

(a) Name of investigator

(b) Topic (including title and brief description)

(c) Method (kinds of sources? interviews? polling? size and distribution of sample?)

(d) Cooperating discipline, if any (field of collaborators? location of collaborators? project a fully joint undertaking or are others serving as consultants or partial collaborators?)

(e) Probable date of availability for use by others (including only projects to be available by the end of 1953)

The reports submitted by the department chairmen, with an accompanying card index, are available at the Washington office of the American Political Science Association.

² See Current Research Projects in Public Administration (Chicago, 1951)Google Scholar, the ninth in a series.

³ See “Current Research in International Affairs,” International Conciliation, Vol. 466, pp. 589–678 (Dec., 1950)Google Scholar, the fourth in a series.

⁴ For a discussion of “les sciences politiques,” see Aron, Raymond, “Political Science in France,” Contemporary Political Science, UNESCO Publication No. 426 (Paris, 1950), pp. 50 ff.Google Scholar

⁵ Under contract with the Office of Naval Research and under the administration of the American Council of Learned Societies, questionnaires are now being circulated for a national register of social scientists and humanists. Since some of the questions in this register will refer to research work in progress, the register could serve as the basis for such a census.

⁶ Dr. Tompkins is Principal Investigator, Logistics Research Project, George Washington University. The quotation is from a memorandum prepared in May, 1951. The italics are ours.

⁷ It should be stressed that, because we use Tompkins' rule here and in the following tables, the sum of the subclasses often is greater than the total number of topics. Since this rule provides that documents whose suitability is not determinable from the classification scale must be retained rather than rejected, many items, which might be used for more than one purpose, are included in more than one subclass.

⁸ “Political Science in the United States,” in Contemporary Political Science, pp. 233–248Google Scholar, especially pp. 247–248.

⁹ We have included all topics which it is reasonable to suppose may contribute to the development of generalizations about international relations or to the verification of information about international law, international organization, or foreign countries. We have excluded, however, topics which are affected by, but do not appear seriously to affect, international relations. The reason for this exclusion is not hard to see. In the world of 1952, studies of management may and do, for instance, deal with such problems as “current executive development programs in the U. S. Army and Air Force.” Probably, however, this study has no more bearing upon international relations than has any other study of management and personnel. On the other hand, an analysis of “The Strategy of Air Power” may contribute directly to the analysis of international events.

¹⁰ The American People and Foreign Policy (New York, 1950), pp. 154–156Google Scholar.

¹¹ A number of area studies, of course, pay some attention to these factors, but apparently few, if any, are focused upon the way in which they affect political processes concretely.

¹² Almond, p. 154.

¹³ This is a special case of a more general problem which our questionnaire was not constructed to study but which, in our reflections on the data, became of considerable importance. What plan or plans can or should we make so that the preparation of the Ph.D. dissertation might have deeper scientific and civic value to the candidate?

It is, for instance, generally agreed by political scientists, as reported in footnote 25 below, that “political theory” is or ought to be the core of our discipline. Yet the number of studies in the field is small and the number of Ph.D. dissertations proportionally even smaller. Would it be feasible to permit, encourage, or even require candidates to prepare, as part of their graduate training, a paper on some problem of theory which would be substantially more serious than the typical term paper, and accordingly would diminish the labor required in the major dissertation itself? This idea may be utterly impractical, but pedagogic inventions of this sort, if not this particular one, appear to be needed. See the Report of the Committee on the Advancement of Teaching of the American Political Science Association, Goals for Political Science (New York, 1951)Google Scholar, passim.

¹⁴ See above, n. 7.

¹⁵ Area studies might include, of course, studies of language, culture, literature, ethics, epistemology, etc. Such studies are not customarily prepared under nor reported by the political science departments, however. Again see above, n. 7, for an explanation of the total.

¹⁶ Studies about China, not directly related to Sino-Russian relations, are not included here. However, studies of Rumania's relationships with the Nazis are included under this heading in the belief that most persons studying Rumania would do so because of its current status as a “satellite.” It should be noted that no studies whatsoever are reported of Yugoslavia. Studies of the activities of the Cominform are also included here. Of the studies dealing with the USSR, 9 are predominantly historical, dealing with events before 1944; 9 deal with internal problems of Russian economy, government, and law; 7 deal with Russian military and diplomatic theory and practice; and all the others deal with USSR relationships with other nations—i.e., the focus of emphasis is heavily upon the USSR in its role as a threat to international peace.

¹⁷ Excluding studies of Puerto Rico, including studies of the Inter-American security system. Fifteen of these studies deal with a particular nation, 12 with groups of nations, and 4 with relations between the United States and Latin America.

¹⁸ Six of these studies deal with the Weimar period, 6 with the Nazi period, and 6 with the occupation period, while 2 cover longer periods.

¹⁹ Of the British political area studies, 9 deal especially with effects of the Labor Government since 1945; 9 deal with administration; 8 with politics and Parliament; and 2 with civil liberties.

²⁰ For example, such authors of texts in public administration as Leonard D. White, John M. Pfiffner, or Herbert Simon.

²¹ Contemporary Political Science, p. 247.

²² “Research in Public Administration in the United States,” Contemporary Political Science, p. 433Google Scholar.

²³ Several studies by anthropologists specializing in colonial areas or Indian tribes illustrate the type of study which is not found here. One of the more systematic of these is Kluckhohn, Clyde, “Covert Culture and Administrative Problems,” American Anthropologist, Vol. 45, pp. 213–227 (April-June, 1943)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

²⁴ Because of the heterogeneity of studies in public administration, many of the 282 studies listed under the heading “public administration” were not included in the subclasses above. At the same time, the use of Tompkins' rule caused some overlapping among the subclasses.

²⁵ See, for example, Young's, Roland report on research in “Representative Government and the Legislative Process,” in Griffith, Ernest (ed.), Research in Political Science (Chapel Hill, 1948), pp. 32–52Google Scholar.

²⁶ “The Methods of Political Science, Chiefly in the United States,” Contemporary Political Science, pp. 75–90Google Scholar, quotation from p. 78.

²⁷ The point we are making here was indicated in an exaggerated form a quarter of a century ago by Elliott, William Yandell in his Pragmatic Revolt in Politics (New York, 1928)Google Scholar. Because Elliott appeared to reject, or was read as rejecting, the instrumentalist approach to politics, his warnings have for the most part gone unheeded.

²⁸ Here as elsewhere, some critics of our manuscript felt that we favored interdisciplinary Cooperation unduly. We admit that a large proportion of allegedly cooperative studies have focused exclusively on problems of interest to social psychologists or students of small group dynamics, and have not therefore yielded results of value to the student of political processes. But that genuine collaboration has not been achieved does not prove that it cannot be achieved in the future.

²⁹ Because of the heterogeneity of studies in pressure groups, political parties, public opinion, representation, and legislation, many of the 204 studies listed under the above heading were not included in the subclasses above; at the same time, however, the use of Tompkins' rule caused some overlapping among these subclasses.

³⁰ It may be noted that whereas there are 16 studies of United States Supreme Court Justices, there are only 3 of United States legislators. Yet it would be very difficult to argue that some Speakers, long-time Majority Leaders, and chairmen of important committees have not been as important as individuals as Supreme Court Justices. Certainly as types, they are at least as deserving of study.

³¹ Swisher, Carl B., “Research in Public Law: Report of the Panel on Public Law,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 40, p. 557 (June, 1946)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

³² Courts on Trial (Princeton, 1949), p. 1Google Scholar. Judge Frank mentions Earl Stanley Gardner as one well worth study in this field. For a perhaps slightly less bizarre reference, one might cite Cozzens, James Gould, The Just and the Unjust (New York, 1942)Google Scholar. We are repeating here the plea made by Lasswell, Harold D. and McDougal, Myres S. in their “Legal Education and Public Policy; Professional Training in the Public Interest,” Yale Law Journal, Vol. 52, pp. 203–295 (1943)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, reprinted in Lasswell's, The Analysis of Political Behaviour (London, 1948)Google Scholar.

³³ “Political theory is not in practice the core of political science teaching but there is a widespread feeling among political scientists that it should be made the heart of the subject” (Goals for Political Science, p. 126).

³⁴ See, for example, Voegelin, Eric, “Research in Political Theory,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 38, p. 751 (Aug., 1944)Google Scholar.

³⁵ Myrdal, Gunnar, in The American Dilemma (New York, 1944)Google Scholar, and Cozzens, James Gould, in Guard of Honor (New York, 1948)Google Scholar, are concerned with discovering in the contemporary American scene what are the ideologies by which men are governed. Perhaps the most systematic effort to find out what an ideology really means is to be found in Bateson, Gregory, Naven (New York, 1937)Google Scholar. See also the analysis of American ideology in Robert, S. and Lynd, Helen N., Middletown in Transition (New York, 1937), especially Chap. 12, pp. 413–415Google Scholar.

³⁶ Contemporary Political Science, p. 248.

³⁷ Cook in Contemporary Political Science, p. 81.

³⁸ Our dubious cases would include such items as “The Methodology of Max Weber” and “The Administration of Private Colleges in the Midwest” because there is a fair chance that they are undertaken in political science departments due to an interest in comparative politics.

³⁹ One of the great difficulties in classifying research in this area is a terminological one. Other people apparently use the term “comparative government” in a different sense. This may perhaps explain the difference between our report and the prediction made by Loewenstein, Karl, in his “Report on the Research Panel on Comparative Government,” American Political Science Review, Vol. 38, p. 540 (June, 1944)CrossRefGoogle Scholar, that comparative government “is about to undergo a rejuvenation not hoped for by its most ardent devotees.”

⁴⁰ Salvadori, Massimo, Introduction to Contemporary Political Science, pp. 7–8Google Scholar.

⁴¹ Adamovich, Ludwig, “The Science of the State in Germany and Austria,” Contemporary Political Science, p. 25Google Scholar.

⁴² Ibid., p. 33.

⁴³ Siches, Luis Recasens, “Political Science in Spain during the Last Thirty Years,” Contemporary Political Science, p. 269Google Scholar.

⁴⁴ “Political Science in Poland,” Contemporary Political Science, pp. 178–195Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ There are two types of problems which might be dealt with here: (1) problems of the objectives of teaching political science (and indeed other disciplines), and (2) empirical problems in which political scientists make use of the findings of educational psychology and sociology. Of the former, it might be said that among eminent political scientists of former days, both Plato and Rousseau were concerned with such issues; and it could be argued that traditionally political philosophy and educational philosophy have been inseparable. An analysis of the type here implicitly recommended for political science teaching has already been made, by one of the authors, for the teaching of physics. See Dexter, Lewis A. and Thornton, Robert A., “Analysis of the Transfer of Training,” American Journal of Physics, Vol. 19, pp. 538–545 (1951)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

⁴⁶ See above, nn. 8 and 26.

⁴⁷ An example of a political study using observation is Lazarsfeld, P., Berelson, B., and Gaudet, H., The People's Choice (New York, 1944)Google Scholar. These authors are not professional political scientists.

⁴⁸ Here probably psychologists, sociologists, and economists have done more than political scientists, even in connection with political problems.