13

SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH COUNCIL

ITEMVOLUME 18 " NUMBER 2 " JUNE 1964230 PARK AVENUE " NEW YORK, N. Y. 10017

CHINA'S POPULATION; AN APPROACH TO RESEARCH

The most inexplicable aspect of Chinese studies is theneglect of the Chinese population. The most inexpli-cable aspect of population studies is theneglect of Chinaand the Chinese. That which is inexplicable is not theneglect by a specific individual or a particular academicgroup but the pervasive substitution of myopic repeti-tion, propaganda, politics, and faith for imaginative ap-proaches and arduous labor. The deficiencies in theChinese numerical apparatus, the difficulties of theChinese language, and the intellectual and political clo-sures of China to the sophisticated acumen of researchanalysts are widely known. They complicate but do not

bar research. The fundamental fact is a simple one.Neitherstudents of theChinese society and economy nordemographerswho labor in global or comparative focuscan ignore the size, structure, and growth of the Chinesepopulation and the interrelations of demographic, so-cial, economic, and political processes in that growth.China is not an island easily traveled and comprehen-sively studied by a lone scholar on a small grant. It isnot an esoteric or a picturesque group whose compre-hension yields the enduring status of unique expert.China is,rather, the locus of the largest and most viablepopulation on earth.

Study of the Chinese population is neither coun-try nor regional specialism. It is the extension of scien-

* The author is Senior Research Demographer at the Office ofPopulation Research, Princeton University. As a member of the Sub-committee on Research on Chinese Society of the Joint Committee on

Contemporary China, sponsored by the American Council of LearnedSocieties and the Social Science Research Council, she presented theoriginal, longer version of this paper at the subcommittee's tenth semi-nar, held at Gould House, Dobbs Ferry, March 31 -April 2, 1964(as reported on page 20 infra).

by Irene B. Taeuber *

tific analysis to a major human experiment in demo-graphic and social development. Until knowledge,generalization, and developmental principles can bebased on the analysis of the Chinese as well as thenon-Chinese, there can be no statements of integritythat do not specifically limit relevance to the non-Chinese population on the planet. Given the fact thatthe Chinese number more than one-fifth of the world'spopulation and have done so since the days of CaesarAugustus, their exclusion is a main barrier to the gen-eralization of formal demographyand population study.

A hiatus of research on the population of Chinais not amenable to simple resolution by mobilization ofpersonnel and facilities under the benevolent auspicesof foundations and government. Present moves towardresearch are mainly responses to the requirements ofthe moment. They may also be the beginnings of a con-centration that will culminate perhaps a century and ahalf from now in analyzed and conceptualized knowl-edge of the population of China and hence an Asia anda world that includes China. Perhaps the greatest of themany challenges of research on the Chinese populationis that it points onward with lines and patterns of trans-

formation that are not now known.Limitations to data and to publication are major

barriers to population research within Mainland Chinaas well as outside it. Students outside China have accessonly to fragments of whatever data have been collectedand tabulated within China. Academicians who laborwithin China have the knowledge of population reali-ties, governmental activities, and sources of data thatinhere in life and work within the country, but theirfacilities and their access to sources of data are subject topolitical barricades. There are data within the Bureau of

14

Statistics and other institutions of the government ofMainland China, but we know neither the types, thequantity,nor the quality. We suspect that developmentshave been slowed by security constrictions and a majorinsulation from the interchanges of knowledge, meth-odology, and technology in other parts of the world.We know, however, that closure is not absolute.

If research on the Chinese population is critically sig-nificant and intellectually exciting, why is there thepaucity of research? The answers to this question lie incross-cutting dichotomies. One is abiding; it is a con-tinuing product of developments within China and out-side it. Another is a complex and largely unknownprod-uct of the various policy and political factors involvedin ideologies and the intellectual perceptions associatedwith them. To the Chinese, China is central, all else pe-ripheral. As the political and economic controls of theWest diffused in Asia, the Chinese defined the Westernmen as barbarians. The intruders in Asia respondedwith views of China as a land of mystery and the Chineseas esoteric in social institutions, personality formation,andreproductive behavior. The immediate explanationslie in the history of China and the external relations ofthe Chinese in recent centuries. The Ch'ing (Manchu)established control over China in the middle of theseventeenth century. The first hundred years of theircontrol was a period of expansion andcontinuing popu-lation growth; the second hundred was a period of in-creasing pressures and tensions that culminated in theTai-p'ing rebellion. Western encroachment was indiverse penetrations, not conquest. The balance of ex-ternal political power was such that no one couldconquer China. The Ch'ing maintained nominal con-trol until 1912. Then successive governments of theRepublic of China struggled for an effective cen-tral government along with administrative relationswith the provinces. Effective national administrationwas not achieved either at central or provincial levels inthe years from 1912 to 1949. The invasion of theJapanese in Manchuria in 1931 and in China below theGreat Wall in 1937 transformed the major problemfrom one of peaceful development to one of nationalsurvival. Fundamentally, however, the unification ofChina was an immense task and the time was brief. In1949 the Communists secured control of the Mainland,and the governmentof the Republic of China moved to

Taiwan. The majority of the Chinese became subjectto a Peoples Republic.

Thus China was divergent in political, economic, andsocial organization in the period prior to 1912. Thecountry had not become colonial; the people had notbeen subjected to the administrative controls and thecontinuing cultural contacts and personal interactions

of a colonial period. There was optimism in and outsideChina in 1912and the following years as China preparedto move toward a Western democratic and develop-mental organization. However, the Republic of Chinain its successive administrative forms lasted only the 37years from 1912 to 1949. Then China evolved a di-vergent Communism that led to ideological conflict andeconomic differentiation, not alone with the surround-ing Asian peoples but with the other Communist peo-ples, particularly those of the U.S.S.R.

Whatever the threads of modernization in China inthe centuries of Western contact, most of the people ofChina remained premodern in most aspects of thoughtand action until the middle of the twentieth century.The successive governments of China achieved someknowledge of the administrative apparatus and opera-tions appropriate to modern governments. Sometimesadministrative decisions and instructions seemed mod-ern, as did papers presented to international meetingsand published in learned journals. The model formatwas the product of small minorities within bureaucracy,however, and there was a Gresham's law of dilution asinstructionswent down to lower and lower levels. Therewas no colonial administration with administrative andtechnical know-how, nor were there alternate sourcesfor technical assistance at operating levels. There wereonly a few demographic statisticians; for most of them,training had been limited and it had occurred manyyearsbefore. If dedication to the teachings of theremoteacademic years was maintained and compromise wasspurned, nothing happened in the inchoate structurethat was China. Adjustment, disillusion, fading mem-ories, the aging of skills—all proceeded year by year asthe Ministry of the Interior and the pao-chia (registra-tion) system produced from the field or elsewhere thefigures that became official. Difficulties and deficiencieswere compounded in demographic field surveys, wheremen partially and remotely trained planned and wrotein traditional status contexts, while field workers la-bored under the surveillance of the village headman.

The ancient and intermittently continuing recordsystems of China are neither demographic nor statisticalbut purposively political. Control, collective responsibil-ity, labor levies, taxation, conscription —these were theassociations of the local records, the investigations, theregistrations, and the counts. So, early, people who actedrationally in their approaches to survival learned to as-sess purposes, balance that which would be conduciveto local welfare with that which would be acceptable ifnot pleasing to government, and record or report ac-cordingly. The officials of government at the successiveechelons were similarly motivated. Here the balancingoperation became more complicated, for there was the

15

m

knowledge of probable reality in relation to the sum-mations of local reports, the type of report that wouldproduce minimum difficulties at lower levels, and thenature of the data that would be pleasing at higherlevels.

There was an enduring pattern of secrecy with refer-ence to the figures that were produced. The numbers,the location, the characteristics, and the status of thepeople were aspects of the state of the realm. The figureswere related to taxation, conscription, military potential,and prestige. This was not the milieu of welfare anddevelopment that permeates areas where levels andtrends per capita are the measures of present achieve-ment and future hope. Neither was it a milieu for re-search on population.

The hiatus in external research on the population ofChina is quite comprehensible. The early Western menwho came to China were interested in many things, butthese did not include the levels of fertility inherent inHan culture, thecourse of normal and cataclysmic deathrates, or the relations between familism, populationpressure, and political stability. The missionaries wereinterested in the salvation of men's souls and the better-ment of their society on earth; demographic facts and as-sessments were sometimes presented, but they were in-cidental. The influences of the West entered colleges,universities, hospitals, and other institutions largelyunder missionary influence. Humanitarian motivationswere major; the element of compassion needs no em-phasis among those of us who heard the returned mis-sionaries in the Sunday schools and churches of ouryouth. There was condemnation along with compassion,and it covered the Chinese way of life, the family system,and thevalues on life and death. That detachment whichwas basic to scientific analysis in the population fieldcould not coexist with the mission of religious conver-sion or secular transformation.

Western men in China contributed little populationresearch, but the source materials for research thatflowed from their activities and their pens are immenseandbarely touched. Many publications are valuable not

so much for the presumed facts and analyses as for theincidental knowledge of the characteristics of the day-to-day functioning of areas and groups in China at thetime of writing.

The absence of major Japanese demographic re-search on China is also comprehensible. Japan's ownmodernization was recent; koseki (household registers)remained the sole source of demographic data until1920. The Japanese were insecure in their demographicwork as they viewed it in Western focus. This was nota basis for originality in the approach to the vast andcomplex situation of China. Then, too, invasion and

conquest did not provide a milieu appropriate to pro-fessional collaboration or personal rapport.

Thus the Chinese failed to make other than incidentalstudies of their own population, while Westerners andJapanese failed to initiate, stimulate, or carry throughmany significant demographic analyses. Chinese lookedoutward for tacit assistance, while outsiders deferred toChinese with appropriate if rather rare humility. Theconsequence was a remarkable absence of research.

There is now another series of factors influencing ifnot barring research on the Chinese population. This isthe conflict of political ideologies and social organiza-tions within China, among the Communist states, andbetween China and that part of the West that includesthe United States of America. The interrelations ofpopulation statistics, demographic research, Marxism-Leninism, and the operating Communist state are toocomplex for other than notation here. The major pointis that China has moved from a premodern state withoutdemographic statistics, demographers, or populationstudies to a format of modernization that precludesmuch of the now conventional forms, usages, and re-search activities of the advanced industrial states andbars information on or publication from those that arecarried on. In this state of great need and greater igno-rance, technical assistance came from the Soviet Union.

The initial result of the Communist form of govern-ment was a darkening of the outlook for populationstatistics and analysis within a free research context. Inthe U.S.S.R. there was a complete census in 1926, nineyears after the revolution, and it was fully published.In Communist China therewas a simple census registra-tion in 1953-54, four years after the revolution. Fewfigures were published. No national statistical activityin the population field seems to have been undertakenin the last ten years. The traditions of China's past seemto have thwarted or perverted most of the types of datacollection that would havebeen anticipated in a modern-izing state, whetherCommunist or non-Communist. Theview of population as a highly sensitive topic survives;the walls of secrecy are not lowered.

A FORMAT FOR RESEARCHThe fact of China challenges population research as

no other area in the world, past or present. The factsof Chinese numerical traditions, statistical retardations,and ideological orientations bar the collection, tabula-tion, and publication of the relatively precise and de-tailed data that are usually regarded as basic to formalpopulation analysis. Hence research must have dimen-sions other than the objective ordering and the self-contained analysis of data on the numbers, distribution,

16

characteristics, and dynamics of populations. Moreover,the research must proceed without given base lines orreferral points. The initial states from which changes areevaluated have to be established by procedures otherthan direct measurement.

Problems of population research in or on Chinaare broader and deeper than those of relevant tech-niques. The questions that precede the initiation of re-search and the hypotheses that guide it must be derivedexternally, whether in the context of principles es-tablished in research that did not involve China or byanalogy with the results of research on populationscomparable to and divergent from that of China inknown ways.

Approach to the study of the population of Chinamust be demographic, but it must also be within a cross-disciplinary frame of interrelations, plausibilities, andconsistencies. This approach is less hazardous in popu-lation studies than in most other fields of the behavioralsciences, for the variations and fluctuations in mortalityandreproduction are held within the inherent limits ofman's biological characteristics. Conditioning is major,but conditioning beyond specific ranges leads to the ex-tinction of the group or the modification of the vitalprocesses. Thus there is incontrovertible containment ofthe plausible in population figures, whatever the periodof time, the system of data collection, or the state ofpolitical control. The populations of limited areas canincrease rapidly through immigration; they cannotincrease suddenly and rapidly through the naturalprocesses of maturation and reproduction. Decline cancome swiftly as cataclysmic mortality or exodus. If thisoccurs, natural recovery is slow, for it involves thematuring of new generations of women in the repro-ductive ages. Gyrations in population numbers arelikely to be artifacts of publication, tabulation, report-ing, or collection rather than reflections of populationchange.

The human span of life is basic to and conditionscultural continuity and social change. Change mergesinto transformation as new generations are conditionedto and accept as natural thenew ways or the new order.Improved education, new skills, and advanced occupa-tions are acquired in youth or young adulthood. Indevelopment, each age cohort is more skilled, moreadaptable, than the one preceding it. In revolution,hatreds and somber memories survive among the agingbut soon become only hearsay or history to youth.

Statements of age transitions and age roles in lifecycles are made because of the paramount importanceof age in transition processes. The migrants to citiesand industrial employment, the soldiers, and the bridesare young people. Since it is now 15 years since 1949,

the major conditioning of China's youth is already thatof the new era. Some 40 percent of the total populationwere born under Communism. Substantial proportionsof babies now being born are in families whose memo-ries of a pre-Communist period are childhood ones.Five years from now, age cohorts entering the child-bearing years will have been born under Communism.

Continuities and continuing changes are alike relatedto man's processes of growth, maturity, and senescence.A population at a given time may be viewed in over-simplified form as successive layers. Contrary to thepaleontological comparison, however, the newest layersare at the bottom, the oldest at the top. Family values,sex roles, and reproductive mores may be more suscept-ible to modification as the new cohorts of a Communistsociety mature in that society. In theory and by analogy,relative stability in birth rates would be expected topersist as long as the majority of those having childrenwere conditioned under the traditional values of therural society. Directives and exhortations would havelittle impact. Perhaps now directives and exhortationsmay have greater impact, especially if they proceedalong with locally available facilities for limitation andsubsistence deterrents to those who fail to heed thenew goals or fail in attempts to achieve them.

This is patently speculative. It is speculation of a typeessential to the formulation of hypotheses, though, evenif verification has to proceed through whatever tech-niques can be derived at a distance. Moreover, it sug-gests a timing of change and a strategic time for re-search. The years of anticipated change relevant topopulation structure and dynamics are not those thathave elapsed since 1949 but those that are now begin-ning. This is true whether the focus of interests is theanalysis of the probable dynamics of the present or theprojection of the numbers and characteristics of thepopulation into future years.

THE APPROACH TO RESEARCH

If population is conditioning factor, correlate, andpartial product of almost all other aspects of the Chinesenatural base, historical development, economy, andsociety, population research is widely ramified in space,time, and topic. The statement of the pervasive inter-relations is essential, but generalities are hardly basesfor research. The statement may be altered to the formthat almost any aspect of Chinese man-resources rela-tionships, economy, society, politics, and polity may bestudied from a demographic focus. There is also theform of statement that any aspect of economic and socialstructure and process is influenced by the fact andprocess of the Chinese population.

17

"

In formal methodological approaches, population size, ability? If so, other variables may be estimated in nec-structure, and dynamics have necessary associations thatare analyzed on the basis of statistical data and theirinterrelations. The fundamental demographic processcan be given specificity if a few key parameters areknown. These parameters are not known for China.There are not now, nor have there ever been, age dis-tributions, birth rates, death rates, or rates of popula-tion change for all China. The closest to an irreparabledeficit, however, is the absence of a series of verifiablefigures for the total population. Neither statisticalmanipulation nor argument by analogy yields otherthan conjecture as to the changing numbers of theChinese. Even if successive counts for several areaswithin China could be evaluated, the major problemwould remain. Differences between qualitatively evalu-ated figures at several time periods would not yieldstatistically valid measurements of the rate of growthfor all China. It is even more hazardous to assume thatsuch rates could be projected to yield estimates of popu-lation in years after the terminal figures.

The development of models for age structures andvital rates requires imagination, daring, and courage.The Chinese population is a biological group reproduc-ing largely within a closed universe. Rates of fertilityare confined within the boundaries of the physiologicallypossible on the one hand, the biologically necessary onthe other. The death rate is confined within a rangedetermined by the conditions of life and the hazards ofliving. These relations are necessary ones, and they areintrinsically interesting. Unfortunately for the estima-tion of the dynamics of the population of China, thereis a range of plausible estimates of fertility and mortalitythat yield assumed but quite plausible relations.If the birth rate is approximately 40 per 1,000 totalpopulation and the population is changing only slightlyover time, then the death rate must be somewhat lessthan 40, the expectation of life atbirth somewhat higherthan 25 years. If the birth rate is 45 and the populationis increasing one-half of one percent a year, the sameassumption can be made as to the level of the death rate.However, if the birth rate is 37, then under earlier as-sumptions as to rates of growth death rates must be sub-stantially lower than those assumed for the birth rate of40. Given even a narrow range of freedom to assume abirth rate, a death rate, and a rate of growth, possiblecombinations of plausible assumptions are diverse in-deed. The problem is the escape from circularity in-volved in the continuing concentration on the decisionas to hypothetical rates that yield patterns believed tobe plausible. Is there, then, any component in the com-plex of fertility and mortality that can be determinedwith a reasonable degree of plausibility if not prob-

essary relationship to it—provided that the rate ofpopulation growth can be assumed.

The death rate is related directly to conditions offood, nutrition, sanitation, and contagion; it mayfluctuate severely with natural calamity, civil disorder,and war. It is the basic regulator of numbers in the pre-modern society, the prime generator of growth in themodernizing society. Hence mortality is not the growthcomponent that would be expected to yield the approxi-mation to an inherent characteristic of peoples of Hanculture.

The birth rate is related directly to the traditions andvalues of the culture. It is aspect, product, and generat-ing force in the structure and functioning of the familyand of related institutions. Age and form of marriage,roles and functions of women, attitudes toward child-bearing and family continuation, control practices andresponses to pressure or to lightened pressure—this is apartial list of the institutional, attitudinal, and physicalfactors conditioning thechildbearing of women and thefertility of the population. Some of these factors fluctu-ate. Age at marriage, marital separations, and controlpractices may differ according to theactual or perceivedstate of economy and society. Famine, epidemics, andflight may result in lowered fertility; highly favorableconditions may reduce pressures and raise rates of child-bearing as well as the survival rates of those who areborn. These may be viewed as variations from a normwhich is the fertility inherent in the institutions andvalues of the traditional culture under normal or modalconditions.

The argument as to fertility may be stated as a hy-pothesis that there is a modal level and pattern of fer-tility among peoples of Han culture. This is a hypothesissubject to empirical testing. If there is a modal levelamong those of Han culture, it should characterizeChinese peoples who were included in the statisticalactivities of colonial governments ruling Chinese peo-ple. It should also characterize peoples in areas of sur-vey or record within China. Variations in levels,whether within or outside China, should be associatedwith conditions suggestive of departure from an as-sumed modality in conditions of living and value struc-tures. Given the depth of the social and psychologicalassociations of fertility, the levels and patterns of fer-tility among peoples whose cultures have been in-fluenced deeply by the Chinese should manifest re-productive behavior comparable to that modal in Chinaor deviate from it in ways congruous with the departureof the culture itself from the modalities of China.

In basic research, therefore, the early if not the initialapproach to the population of China lies in the analysis

18

of the population dynamics of those Chinese peoplesoutside China for whom demographic records are avail-able. Formal demographic analysis and incisively struc-tured population studies are logically preface to the in-tricate tasks of analysis and conjecture for all China.

RESEARCH ON CHINESE POPULATIONSAND THE POPULATION OF JAPAN

There are multiple approaches to Chinese populationstudies. All are essential to the achievement of themaximum precision and generality in knowledge ofthe present state and prospective development of thepopulation of China. There is the central population ofChina, where figures substitute for the firm data of cen-suses and vital record systems. There are Chinese popu-lations where series of censuses and related data permitdirect demographic analysis. Then there is Japan, withdistinctive indigenous cultures, a period of major ab-sorption of Chinese culture in the seventh and latercenturies, and then long centuries of internally struc-tured and often isolated development.

Analysis of the records for Chinese populations andJapan is the essential base for the formulation of hy-potheses and the evaluation of the probable with refer-ence to China itself. The basic hypothesis is that thereare modal Chinese processes that are modified in waysappropriate to the response patterns of the culture.China itself is a land of immense diversity, and histori-cal, technological, and subcultural variations are many.It is a necessary derivative of the main hypothesis thatthese, too, are patterned within the framework of Hanculture. Thereare many demographic relationships thatvalidate this hypothesis.

The numerical records of China and Japan have re-markable parallels and major diversities. The kosekirecord system of Japan traces back to the Taika Reformof the mid-seventh century A.D.; the pattern as thenestablished was a replica of the Han dynasty code. ForChina, there is a record from 1749 to 1851; for Japan,there is a record from 1726 to 1852. China's century ofrecord ended in the Tai'ping rebellion. It was followedby almost a century of disorganization, persistent eco-nomic retardation, chronic malnutrition and disease,and episodic catastrophes over limited or wider areas.Japan's century of record ended with the opening to theWest; it was followed by a century of economic, social,political, and demographic modernization, with in-creasingly adequate data to measure an increasingly com-plex transition.

The great statistical records for Chinese populationsare the censuses, surveys, and registrations of ImperialJapan. The initial censuses taken by the Japanese were

those in Taiwan in 1905 and 1915. In the successive five-year periods from 1920 to 1940 Japan took comparablecensuses in Japan itself, Taiwan, and the KwantungLeased Territory. The South Manchuria Railway Zonewas covered in censuses from 1920 to 1935. Experimen-tal censuses were taken in hsien towns and great cities inManchukuo in the 'thirties. In 1940 the Imperial censusblanketed Japan, Taiwan, the Kwantung Leased Ter-ritory, and Manchukuo. Unfortunately for research,only simple tallies were made from the Manchukuoschedules before war priorities forced cancellation offurther tabulation. However, these tallies include ageby sex for groups classified as Han, Manchu, Mongol,and Muslim in the provinces, the cities, and the hsien.

There are many population studies that could bebased on the analysis of official and other records fortheChinese populations ruled by Imperial Japan. Thesestudies would contribute to comparative demographyand the precision and expansion of generalization inmany aspects of structure, function, and relationship instability and mobility. Demographic, social, and eco-nomic interrelations could be studied at specific statesof development, as well as in transition from one stateto another. Within countries and areas there werepeoples of Han and other cultures, and thus close andcontrolled comparisons are possible. There were varioussubcultures in the different Chinese areas, even withinsingle areas. There were differences in indigenous de-velopments, in the extent and duration of Japanese orJapanese-related rule, and in thepolicies of Japanwithinthe areas. Since time and data are comparable, the oreavailable for themining is rich indeed.

RESEARCH ON AREAS IN CHINA

Data for the Republic of China and the provinces orhsien that are susceptible to analytical approaches,evaluative or substantive, are primarily those associatedwith the restoration of thepao-chia system in the 'thirtiesand the 'forties. In this period there were advances inthe universities and beginnings in planning in govern-ment and economic institutions. Students were return-ing from abroad with advanced training. Field studiessuch as those of Chinese farm-operator households bythe University of Nanking provided stimulus, model,and data for citation. Governments made comparablestudies, such as the census of the city of Nanking in1935. Data collecting proliferated in areas and institu-tions with Western contacts. Municipalities such asShanghai, public health stations, hospitals, and the fieldareas of the Mass Education Movement are notable.

The planning for a national census in 1950 was a by-product of the investigations andregistrations associated

19

with the restoration or development of the pao-chiaregistration and control system in the war and postwaryears. The "censuses" of hsien that are cited so oftenwere parts of this process; some are censuses, someregistration compilations, others an intermixture of thetwo. The most abundant data pertain to the Szechwanhsien and to the Cheng-tu and Kun-ming Lake surveysand registrations in Yunnan in the war years.

Publication at the national level was extensive, but itconsisted primarily of pages and pages of figures onnumbers of people and households for minor civil divi-sions. Occasionally, however, data susceptible to demo-graphic evaluation if not analysis became available. Themost notable instance is thereport on age for the popula-tion in 19 provinces andcities from the investigations of1947.

The sparsity of publication by the government of thePeoples Republic requires no further comment.

Thereiterative statement is relevant. Data are limitedand defective. Available collections are incomplete.There are major possibilities for evaluation and analysis.Research that is feasible and significant is not beingdone.

RESEARCH AND THE FUTURE

Theapproach toresearch on Chinese populations andon the population of China leads quickly into the speci-ficities of data systems, areas, cultures, and subcultures.Suggestions for research projects or research approachesto the population of China would be feasible. So alsowould an essay on the methodological problems in

demographic and related research in a situation wheredata are fugitive and defective and access is barred.Theseand other activities should be undertaken as partsof the process of opening the field of Chinese studiesto demographers and alerting other scientists to thedemographic aspects of the Chinese saga. The thesishere, however, is that neither the Chinese populationnor research on it are simply area studies or culturalspecializations. Rather, the Chinese development is aneglected dimension and a critical aspect of populationresearch that is widely relevant without reference to

space or time.The research that is now beginning is geographically

scattered and substantively multifaceted. This seems to

be true within Mainland China and outside it. Thefuture of thatresearch is related not so much to our ownminiscule approaches as to future developments withinChina. Theconcentrated and highly diversified scholar-ship that yields knowledge of status, relationships, anddynamics must be Chinese, and much of it must be donewithin China. The great contributions will comeeventually from the scientists in the universities and theresearch institutions of a modernized China. This is thelong future, however, and when it becomes reality thatwhich has occurred in our times will also be history.Ourpresent activities may contribute breadth and depthto contemporary knowledge and generalization. Theymay also develop analytical bases and theoretical framesfor that future period when the Chinese, as the Euro-peans, conduct their own intensive and highly sophisti-catedresearch on the past, the present, and the future oftheir own population.

COMMITTEE BRIEFS

CONTEMPORARY CHINA(Joint with American Council of Learned Societies)

A. Doak Barnett (chairman), Alexander Eckstein, JohnK. Fairbank, Walter

Galenson,

John M. H. Lindbeck,Robert A. Scalapino, G. William

Skinner,

George E. Taylor,Mary C. Wright; staff, Bryce Wood.

A conference on research on the government and politicsof contemporaryChina was held at the Greyston Conference

Center,

Riverdale, N.Y. on April 17-18. The

conference,

which was an outgrowth of several informal meetings ofpolitical scientists sponsored by the joint committee duringthe past three years, was intended to facilitate discussion ofapproaches to understanding of thepolitical system of Com-munist China, and to explore ways of developing furtherresearch. The following papers were written for the con-ference: "Political Research on Contemporary China: SomeProblems and Opportunities," by William F. Dorrill of the

Rand Corporation, "The Role of Social Science in ChinaScholarship," by Chalmers A. Johnson, and "Political Sci-ence and the Study of Contemporary China," by James R.Townsend, both of the University of California, Berkeley.

In addition to the authors of these papers and membersand staff of the joint committee, the participants in theconference included: Sheldon Appleton, Oakland Univer-sity; Davis B. Bobrow, and Glenn D. Paige, Prince-ton University; Howard L. Boorman, Michel C. Oksenberg,James D. Seymour, and David B. Truman, Columbia Uni-versity; Edward Friedman, and Bruce D. Larkin, HarvardUniversity; Pendleton Herring; Harold C. Hinton, Institutefor Defense Analyses; Paul E. Kovenock, University ofWashington; Harold D. Lasswell, Yale University; John W.Lewis, Cornell University; David P. Mozingo, Rand Cor-poration; Irwin J. Schulman, University of Pittsburgh; H.Arthur Steiner, University of California, Los Angeles; Tang

20

Tsou, University of Chicago; Richard L. Walker, Universityof South Carolina; and Allan S. Whiting, U.S. Departmentof State.

CONTEMPORARY CHINA: SUBCOMMITTEEON RESEARCH ON CHINESE SOCIETY

G. William Skinner (chairman), John C. Pelzel, Irene B.Taeuber; staff, Bryce Wood.

The tenth and last seminar in the series sponsored by thesubcommittee was held at Gould House, Dobbs Ferry, onMarch 31 -April 2, 1964. The seminar was concerned withappraisal of the state of research on Chinese society, andwith opportunities for the further development of such re-search in several disciplines. The papers prepared for theseminar were: "The Overseas Chinese: Past Studies andFuture Needs" (summary), by Maurice Freedman, LondonSchool of Economics andPolitical Science; "The CommunistMainland: Social Anthropology, Past and Future," by Mr.Pelzel; "Sociology and the Study of Communist China," byH. F. Schurmann, University of California, Berkeley;"China's Population," by Mrs. Taeuber; "Research in HongKong: Past, Present and Possible," by Barbara E. Ward,Birkbeck College, University of London; "Notes on the De-velopment of Studies of Chinese Society," by the staff. Otherparticipants in addition to the chairman of the subcom-mittee included Morton H. Fried, Columbia University;Marion J. Levy, Jr., Princeton University; Robert M. Marsh,and Arthur P. Wolf, Cornell University; and C. K. Yang,University of Pittsburgh.

GENETICS AND BEHAVIOR

Gardner Lindzey (chairman), Ernst W. Caspari, Theodo-sius Dobzhansky, David A. Hamburg, Jerry Hirsch, GeraldE. McClearn, J. N. Spuhler; staff, Ben Willerman.

Applications for admission to the summer research train-ing institute on behavioral genetics to be held by the Uni-versity of California, Berkeley, June 22 -July 31, underthe cosponsorship of the committee and the University, werereviewed by the committee in February. Invitations toparticipate as "trainees" have been accepted by the follow-ing: AlexanderAlland, Instructor in Anthropology, HunterCollege; Carl J. Bajema, Assistant Professor of Biology,Mankato State College; Sidney L. Beck, U.S. Public HealthService Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Biology andGenetics, University of Michigan; Spiros J. Caramalis, In-structor in Political Science, University of South Carolina;George T. Davis, Professor of Animal Genetics, MontanaState College; William E. Edwards, Associate Professor ofAnthropology and Sociology, University of South Carolina;Alexander Kessler, Research Graduate Fellow in Geneticsand Social Ecology, Rockefeller Institute; Dudley F. Peeler,Jr., Instructor in Neurosurgery (Research), University ofMississippi Medical Center, Jackson; Marvin B. Seiger,Post-doctoral Research Associate in Genetics, University of Notre

Dame; Michael H. Smith, Interim Instructor in Biology(zoology), University of Florida; David L. Sparks, U.S.Public Health Service Postdoctoral Fellow in Psychology,University of Mississippi Medical Center, Jackson; DelbertD. Thiessen, Research Associate in Medical Psychology,Scripps Clinic and Research Foundation, La Jolla; SisterFrances Jerome Woods, Professor of Sociology, Our Ladyof the Lake College; and the following graduate students:in animal breeding—D. Dal Kratzer, lowa State University;in anthropology—Michael H. Crawford, and Mary W.Gunning, University of Washington; in biology—EugeneR. Katz, Brown University; in political science—Leslie L.Roos, Jr., Massachusetts Institute of Technology; in psy-chology—Douglas O. Draper, University of Tennessee;Gary C. Haltmeyer, and Richard G.

Swensson,

Purdue Uni-versity; Ralph L. Levine, and Dale A. Wise, University ofCalifornia, Berkeley; Martin Manosevitz, University ofMinnesota; Philippa L. Mathieu, University of Wisconsin;Robert M. Murphey, Jr., Vanderbilt University; in sociologyand biostatistics—William D. Hogan, Tulane University; inzoology—Paul A. Buckley, Cornell University; Carol AnnMcColm, University of Minnesota; Don E. Miller, Uni-versity of Wisconsin; in zoophysiology—Diane Russell,Washington State University.

INTELLECTIVE PROCESSES RESEARCH

William Kessen (chairman), Roger Brown, Jerome Kagan,Lloyd N. Morrisett, Paul H. Mussen, A. Kimball Romney,Harold W. Stevenson; staff, Ben Willerman.

The institute on cognitive development planned by thecommittee in cooperation with the University of MinnesotaInstitute of Child Development will be held at the Uni-versity from June 15 to July 24, under the direction of Mr.Stevenson. Twenty-nine applicants for admission have ac-cepted invitations to participate: Bernard Z. Friedlander,Research Psychologist, Mental Development Center, West-ern Reserve University; Janice Loeb, Staff Psychologist,Wisconsin Diagnostic Center, Madison; and the followinggraduate students in psychology: Thomas M. Achenbach,Sally Allen, Charles

Clifton,

Donald Foss, Kennedy Hill,and Thomas Landau, University of Minnesota; LeslieB. Cohen, University of California, Los Angeles; RhetaDeVries, University of Chicago; Gordon E. Finley, andEdward F. Kelly, Harvard University; Edward T. Fitz-gerald, and Allan Weinstock, University of California,Berkeley; Herbert Ginsburg, University of North

Carolina;

Robert A. Goodale, Tufts University; Larry R. Goulet, St.Louis University; John Hagen, and Carol Hanlon, StanfordUniversity; Wilbur A. Hass, University of Michigan; FrankB. Murray, Johns Hopkins University; Vivian Paskal, Uni-versity of Pennsylvania; Arnold Sameroff, Cynthia P.Turnure, and James Turnure, Yale University; Keith G.Scott, University of Connecticut; Robert E. Shaw, Vander-bilt University; Joan S. Sibol, University of Delaware;William C. Ward, Duke University.

21

-t^mmimmmmmmwmmmmmimimwmmmmmrw

LEARNING AND THE EDUCATIONAL PROCESS

Lee J. Cronbach (chairman), Richard C. Atkinson,Eleanor J. Gibson, Evan R. Keislar, Judson T. Shaplin;staff, Ben Willerman.

Participants in the summer research conference on learn-ing and the educational process, to be conducted by Stan-ford University with the assistance of the committee fromJune 21 to July 31, have been selected by the co-directors,Messrs. Atkinson and Cronbach, and the staff of the con-ference. As reported in the December 1963 issue of Items,the participants will meet in four groups, which will be con-cerned respectively with the following areas:

Learning, instruction, and pupil characteristics, withparticular reference to the language arts, under the direc-tion of John B. Carroll: Leonard Cahen, Project Coordi-nator, National Longitudinal Study of Mathematical Abili-ties, Stanford University; Alfred E. Hall, Assistant Pro-fessor of Psychology and Education, Carnegie Institute ofTechnology; Duncan N. Hansen, Research Associate, In-stitute for Mathematical Studies in the Social Sciences,Stanford University; Bryce B. Hudgins, Associate Professorof Education, Washington University; Thomas J. Mcllale,Research Assistant, Bureau of Educational Research, Uni-versity of Illinois; Jason Millman, Assistant Professor ofEducational Psychology and Measurement, Cornell Uni-versity; Joan L. Prentice, graduate student in education,Indiana University; Ezra V. Saul, Associate Professor ofEducational Psychology, Tufts University; Douglas D.Sjogren, Assistant Professor of Educational Psychology, Uni-versity of Nebraska; Robert

Stake,

Associate Professor ofEducational Psychology and Measurement, University ofNebraska; George E. Temp, Assistant Professor of Educa-tion, University of California, Santa Barbara; M. L. Turner,Chief Research Officer, Australian Council for Educa-tional Research, and Lecturer, University of Melbourne.

Behavioral analysis of concept formation and transferwith implications for programmed instruction and use ofcomputers in educational research, under the direction ofLawrence M. Stolurow: Irving Biederman, Teaching Fel-low in Psychology, University of Michigan; John A. Easley,Jr., Associate Professor of Education, University of Illinois;Frank R. Hartman, Associate Professor of Psychology,Dickinson College; Paul Johnson, graduate student in psy-chology, Johns Hopkins University; Bert Y. Kersh, Associ-ate Director, Teaching Research, Oregon State System ofHigher Education, Monmouth; George Murphy, graduatestudent in education, University of Connecticut; DonaldT. Payne, Research Associate, Audio-Visual Center, IndianaUniversity; Joseph M. Scandura, Assistant Professor of Ed-ucation, State University of New York at Buffalo; JoannaP. Williams, Assistant Professor of Education, University ofPennsylvania; M. C. Wiltrock, Assistant Professor of Educa-tion, University of California, Los Angeles; Karl Zinn,Instructor in Psychology, University of Michigan.

Sociocultural and organizational determinants of student

motivation, under the direction of Fred L. Strodtbeck:Norman Eagle, School Psychologist, Fort Lee, N. J. PublicSchools; Gordon Foster, Instructor in Education, MiamiUniversity; Frank Garfunkel, Associate Professor of Educa-tion, Boston University; Oren W. Glick, Director of Evalua-tion, Youth Development Project, Kansas City; EdmundW. Gordon, Professor of Education, Yeshiva University;Edwin B. Hutchins, Assistant Director of Basic Research,Association of American Medical Colleges, Evanston;Charles P. Smith, Assistant Professor of Psychology, Prince-ton University; Anne E. Trask, Assistant Professor, Bureauof Educational Research, University of Illinois; JonathanR. Wan-en, Director of Counseling and Research, WesternPersonnel Institute, Pasadena; Meda White, graduate stu-dent in sociology, University of Chicago.

Motivational determinants of achievement-oriented be-havior, under the direction of John W. Atkinson: DonaldFitzgerald, Assistant Professor of Education, University ofHawaii; Berj Harootunian, Associate Professor of Educa-tion, University of Delaware; Guy J. Johnson, graduatestudent in psychology, University of Texas; John C.McCullers, Assistant Professor of Psychology, San Jose SlateCollege; Robert D. Singer, Associate Professor of Psychol-ogy, State University of New York at Stony Brook; MarvinTaylor, Assistant Professor of Education, Queens College;Willavene Wolf, Assistant Professor of Education, OhioState University.

MATHEMATICS IN SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCHPatrick Suppes (chairman), David Blackwell, James S.

Coleman, Clyde H. Coombs, Robert Dorfman, R. DuncanLuce, Howard Raiffa; staff, Elbridge Sibley.

In addition to the research training institute on mathe-matics for political scientists and sociologists to be held bythe committee this summer, as announced in Items, De-cember 1963 (see page 27 infra for participants), the com-mittee will sponsor a six-week senior conference on mathe-matical models of economic growth. This will be led byLionel McKenzie, Professor of Economics at the Universityof Rochester, and will meet in Rochester, June 29-Au-gust 7. Those expected to participate throughout the sessionare Emmanuel M. Drandakis, Assistant Professor of Eco-nomics, Yale University; Ken-ichi Inada, Professor ofEconomics, Tokyo Metropolitan University; MordecaiKurz, Lecturer in Economics, Hebrew University; Daniel L.McFadden, Assistant Professor of Economics, University ofCalifornia, Berkeley; Maurice Macmanus, Professor ofEconometrics, University of Birmingham, England; James A.Mirrlees, Fellow and Tutor in Economics, University ofCambridge; Hukukane Nikaido, Professor of Mathematics,Osaka University; and Jinkichi Tsukui, Technical Associ-ate, Research Project on the Structure of the AmericanEconomy, Harvard University. A number of other Ameri-can and foreign economists will participate in the confer-ence for shorter periods.

22

smmm^aamßmaMmmmmmmmmmmmmH

SOCIOLINGUISTICS versity; Paul W. Friedrich, Associate Professor of Anthro-Charles A. Ferguson (chairman), Joseph H. Greenberg, P°logy, University of Chicago; John J. Gumperz, Associate

Everett C. Hughes, Thomas A. Sebeok, John Useem; staff, Professor of Near Eastern Languages, University of Cah-Elbridge Sibley.

fornia,

Berkeley; Einar Haugen, Professor of ScandinavianAs announced in Items, December 1963, an eight-week Languages, University of Wisconsin; Chester L. Hunt, Pro-

seminar on research on sociolinguistics will be held at Indi- lessor of Sociology, Western Michigan University; Nathanana University, June 22 -August 14, concurrently with the Keyfitz, Professor of Sociology, University of Chicago; HeinzLinguistic Institute and under cosponsorship of the com- Kloss, Forschungsstelle fur Nationalitaten- und Sprachen-mittee and the Center for Applied Linguistics of the fragen, Kiel; William A. Labov, Department of Lin-Modern Language Association of America. Mr. Ferguson guistics, Columbia University; Stanley Lieberson, As-

will act as chairman of the seminar. Other participants will sociate Professor of Sociology, University of Wisconsin;include JackBerry, Professor, African Studies

Center,

Michi- Leonard D. Savitz, Associate Professor of Sociology, Templegan State University; William Bright, Associate Professor University; and William A. Stewart, Research Linguist,of Anthropology, University of California, Los Angeles; Center for Applied Linguistics. A number of others areJoshua A. Fishman, Professor of Psychology, Yeshiva Uni- expected to visit the seminar as consultants for short periods.

PERSONNELWilliam R. Ellis, Jr., Ph.D. candidate in sociology, Uni-

versity of California,Los Angeles, forresearch onAmeri-can Negro protest movements, 1900-1964.

RESEARCH TRAINING FELLOWSHIPS

The Committee on Social Science Personnel—George H.Hildebrand (chairman), Harry Alpert, Charles E. Gilbert, Allan N Galpern, Ph.D. candidate in history, UniversitySamuel P. Hays, Dell H. Hymes, Irving L. Janis, and PaulWebbink—at its meeting on March 12-13 voted a total of49 awards, 4 postdoctoral and 45 predoctoral, as follows:

Alan Arian, Ph.D. candidate in political science, Michigan

of

California,

Berkeley, for research in France on popu-lar religion in Champagne, 1550-1600.

John A. Gardiner, Ph.D. candidate in government, Har-vard University, for research on the decision-makingprocess in criminal trial courts.

State University, for research on ideological change in Cad L R ph D candidate in sociology( Tuianethe legislative and administrative branches of the Is- University, for research on fertility trends and socialraeh Government. change in the Deep South.

James M. Banner, Jr., Ph.D. candidate in history, Colum- G c L Hkks> , ph D candidate in anthropology,bia University, for research on the foundations, struc- University of Illinois, for research on integrating andture, and operationof New England Federalist politics, differentiating mechanisms in a complex society: com--1800-1815. munal settlements in the United States.

Robert M. Berdahl, Ph.D. candidate in history, University Michael R Holt, Ph.D. candidate in history, Johns Hop-of Minnesota, for completion of research in Germany ldm University, for research on the formation of theon the Prussian Conservative party, 1866-76 (renewal). Republican party in Pittsburgh, 1848-61.

Stephen D. Berger, Ph.D. candidate in sociology, Harvard Christopher J. Hum, Ph.D. candidate in sociology, North-University, for completion of research in Germany on western University, for research in Puerto Rico on thereintegration of German society after World War 11 process of industrialization and changing conceptions(renewal). of equity.

H. Russell Bernard, Ph.D. candidate in anthropology, Christopher H. Johnson, Ph.D. candidate in history, Uni-University of Illinois, for an ethnological comparison versity of Wisconsin, for research in Paris and Amster-in Greece and the United States of two Greek sponge- dam on the influence 0f £tienne Cabet and the Icarianfishing communities, one in each country. movement on the revolutionary psychology of France

Burton J. Bledstein, Ph.D. candidate inhistory, Princeton in 1848.University, for research on the rise of social science Harold B. Johnson, Jr., Ph.D. in history, University ofin the United States, 1870-85. Chicago, for anthropological training and for research

Howard Bliss, Ph.D. candidate in government, CornellUniversity, for research in Belgium on Belgian partici-pation in regional organizations.

Steven J. Brams, Ph.D. candidate in political science,Northwestern University, for research onpolitical inte-gration and the analysis of transaction flows.

Richard D. Brown, Ph.D. candidate in history, HarvardUniversity, for research on the Boston Committee ofCorrespondence in the American Revolution, 1772-75.

in Portugal on medieval and contemporary peasantsociety in Galicia (renewal).

Eldon Kenworthy, Ph.D. candidate in political science,Yale University, for research in Argentina on interrela-tions of political, social, and economic change.

Klaus F. Koch, Ph.D. candidate in anthropology, Univer-sity of California, Berkeley, for research in the CentralHighlands of West New Guinea on law and justice ofa Papuan group.

Thomas J. Cottle, Ph.D. candidate in sociology, University Kenneth P. Langton, Ph.D. candidate in political science,of Chicago, for research on personality characteristics University of Oregon, for research in Jamaica onand patterns of family interaction. political socialization of secondary school students.

23

Michael Leiserson, Ph.D. candidate in political science,Yale University, for an application and empirical as-sessment of mathematical models in the study of theU.S. Congress.

Robert C. Lind, Ph.D. candidate in economics, StanfordUniversity, for an application of time series analysisto selected inventory series.

Charles Maier, Ph.D. candidate in history, Harvard Uni-versity, for comparative research in Europe on politicalconservatism in France, Germany, and Italy, 1918-24.

Marvin D. Markowitz, Ph.D. candidate in internationalrelations and government, Columbia University, forresearch in the Republic of the Congo on the politicalrole of Christian missions in that country, 1908-60(renewal).

John S. Matthiasson, Ph.D. candidate in anthropology,Cornell University, for research on Baffin Island onEskimo adjustment to Canadian law (renewal).

Catherine L. McArdle, Ph.D. candidate in political sci-ence, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, for re-search in the Federal Republic of Germany on factorsinfluencing its security policy.

Gordon R. Mork, Ph.D. candidate in history, Universityof Minnesota, for research in the Federal Republic ofGermany on the National Liberal Party, 1867-80.

Samuel A. Morley, Ph.D. candidate in economics, Uni-versity of California, Berkeley, for research on thetheory of investment of the firm.

Dale T. Mortensen, Ph.D. candidate in economics, Car-negie Institute of Technology, for the development andtesting of a theory of aggregate consumption.

Michael D. Olien, Ph.D. candidate in anthropology, Uni-versity of Oregon, for research in Mexico on ritual co-parenthood in an urban community.

James L. Phillips, Ph.D. candidate in psychology, South-ern Illinois University, postdoctoral fellowship for studyat Stanford University of mathematics applicable todevelopment of theories of human interaction.

D. Michael Ray, Ph.D. candidate in geography, Univer-sity of Chicago, for research in Canada on industriallocation in southern Ontario.

Miriam M. Reik, Ph.D. candidate in English literature,Columbia University, for research in England onThomas Hobbes and his contemporarycritics: an analy-sis of Restoration values and the sources of early mod-ern science.

Leslie L. Roos, Jr., Ph.D. candidate in political science,Massachusetts Institute of Technology, for computersimulation of the attitudinal effects of communicationspatterns in Turkey.

John Evans Rothenberger, Ph.D. candidate in anthropol-ogy, University of California, Berkeley, for research inLebanon on conflict resolution or law in its socialenvironment in a Sunni Muslim village in the Beqaavalley.

Edward B. Segel, Ph.D. candidate in history, Universityof California, Berkeley, for research in England on theforeign policy of Sir John Simon, 1931-35.

James F. Shepherd, Jr., Ph.D. candidate in economics,University of Washington, for research in England andthe United States on the American Colonial balance ofpayments, 1768-73.

David Beardsley Smith, Ph.D. candidate in anthropology,Columbia University, postdoctoral fellowship for re-search in Barbados and British Guiana on middle- andupper-class behavior and values.

Randolph Starn, Ph.D. candidate in history, HarvardUniversity, for research in Italy on Donato Giannottiand the Renaissance origins of modern political andsocial thought.

Victoria Steinitz, Ph.D. candidate in social psychology,Harvard University, for research on imbalanced atti-tudes (renewal).

Peter S. Stern, Ph.D. candidate in history, Princeton Uni-versity, for research in France on the "Right" and theevolution of French war aims, 1914-19.

Walter S. Stolz, Ph.D. candidate in mass communication,University of Wisconsin, postdoctoral fellowship forstudy at Harvard University and research on children'sgrammatical "rules."

Elizabeth S. Studley, Ph.D. candidate in history, JohnsHopkins University, for research on party structure andorganization in Georgia politics, 1865-72.

Paul Tennant, Ph.D. candidate in political science, Uni-versity of Chicago, for research in Canada on FrenchCanadian participation in national political parties,1867-1964.

Judith P. Ward, Ph.D. candidate in economic history,University of Wisconsin, for research in France onFrench investment in Latin America, 1880-1914.

James Wallace Wilkie, Ph.D. candidate in history, Uni-versity of California, Berkeley, for research in Mexicoon the social revolution and the rise of LazaroCardenas, 1928-34.

Marvin Zonis, Ph.D. candidate in political science, Massa-chusetts Institute of Technology, for research in Iranon impediments to political consensus (renewal).

FACULTY RESEARCH FELLOWSHIPSThe Committee on Faculty Research Fellowships—John

Useem (chairman), Dorwin Cartwright, Lawrence E.Fouraker, John D. Lewis, A. J. Mayer, and Charles Sellers—held the second of its two meetings scheduledfor 1963-64 onMarch 16-17. It voted to award 13 fellowships, as follows:

Richard M. Abrams, Assistant Professor of History, Uni-versity of California, Berkeley, for research on the re-flection of shifts inpower among competing Americanbusiness groups in state and national politics in thelate nineteenth century.

Clopper Almon, Jr., Assistant Professor of Economics,Harvard University, for research on detailed forecast-ing of long-range balanced growth in the Americaneconomy.

Frank Barron, Research Psychologist, University of Cali-fornia, Berkeley, for research in Ireland on socialforces affecting creative achievement.

John S. Chipman, Professor of Economics and Statistics,University of Minnesota, for research on the theory ofpreference.

Allan D. Coult, Assistant Professor of Anthropology, Uni-versity of California, Davis, for research on the cor-relates of cross-cousin marriage.

24

Susan M. Ervin, Assistant Professor of Speech, Universityof California, Berkeley, for research in France on so-ciolinguistic variations in French request forms.

Harvey Goldberg, Professor of History, University of Wis-consin, for research in Europe on the French Commu-nist movement, 1920-40.

Irwin Katz, Associate Professor of Psychology, New YorkUniversity, for research on situational determinants ofthe quality of performance by Negroes in biracialsettings.

Samuel J. Konefsky, Professor of Political Science, Brook-lyn College, for research on the Supreme Court and theconstitutional tradition in America.

Gerhard Loewenberg, Associate Professor of Political Sci-ence, Mount Holyoke College, for research in theFederal Republic of Germany on the functions of theBundestag in its system of government.

David

Owen,

Professor of History, Harvard University,for research in England on London's MetropolitanBoard of Works, 1855-89, as a transitional attemptto deal with problems of urban government andadministration.

Frank M. Tamagna, Professor of Economics, AmericanUniversity, for research in India, Australia, and Japanon central banking and monetary policies and theirrelation to economic growth.

Mack Walker, Assistant Professor of History, HarvardUniversity, for research in Germany on efforts to pre-serve a closed communitarian society against demo-graphic and technological changes in the nineteenthcentury.

POLITICAL THEORY AND LEGALPHILOSOPHY FELLOWSHIPS

The Committee on Political Theory and Legal PhilosophyFellowships—J. Roland Pennock (chairman), David Easton,

Jerome Hall, John H. Hallowell, Robert G. McCloskey,and Sheldon S. Wolin—at its meeting on March 27 awarded6 fellowships:

John R. Champlin, Ph.D. candidate in public law andgovernment, Columbia University, for study in Eng-land of ethical and political theory.

Fred M. Frohock, Ph.D. candidate in political science,University of North Carolina, for research on the rela-tionship between classical political philosophy andcontemporarybehavioral theory.

James L.

Green,

Ph.D. candidate in philosophy, Colum-bia University, for research in England and theUnited States on the doctrine of responsibility in crimi-nal law.

Isaac Kramnick, Ph.D. candidate in government, Har-vard University, for research in England on the life andpolitical thought of Henry St. John, Viscount Boling-broke (renewal).

Roger D. Masters, Assistant Professor of Political Sci-ence, Yale University, for research in France on therelationship between human nature, natural right, andpolitics in Rousseau's political philosophy.

Robert S.

Summers,

Assistant Professor of Law, Univer-sity of Oregon, for study in England of law andcoercion, and legal reasoning and philosophy.

GRANTS-IN-AIDThe Committee on Grants-in-Aid—Guy E. Swanson

(chairman), Alfred D. Chandler, Jr., David H. French,Theodore S. Hamerow, Holland Hunter, and William H.Riker—held the second of its two meetings scheduled for1963-64 on March 30-31. It voted to award 25 grants-ma-id, as follows:

Russell H. Barrett, Professor of Political Science, Uni-versity of Mississippi, for research on integration atthe University of Mississippi.

Alan W. Brownsword, Assistant Professor of History,Long Beach State College, for research on the politicalhistory of Connecticut, 1817-35 (renewal of grant madein 1961-62).

Norman Dam, Assistant Professor of History, Rutgers -The State University, Newark, for research on conceptsof insanity in the United States, 1865-1945 (renewal).

William V. D'Antonio, Associate Professor of Sociology,University of Notre Dame, for a comparative studyof the role of voluntary associations and political par-ties in party organization and local elections.

James C. Davis, Assistant Professor of History, Universityof Pennsylvania, for research in Italy on methods usedby European families to conserve their fortunes, fromthe fifteenth through the eighteenth centuries.

James Eayrs, Associate Professor of Political Economy,University of Toronto, for research in Canada on themaking of Canadian national security policy, 1945-65(supplementary to Faculty Research Fellowshipawarded in 1962-63).

Robert Forster, Associate Professor of History, DartmouthCollege, for research in France on its provincialnobility in the eighteenth century (supplementary toFaculty Research Fellowship awarded in 1961-62).

Paul Goodman, Instructor in History, Brooklyn College,for research on the origins and evolution of theDemocratic-Republican party of the South, 1780-1815(renewal).

Robert A. Gordon, Assistant Professor of Social Rela-tions, Johns Hopkins University, for research on familyand peer relations of gang delinquents.

Lydia Jane Hainline, Acting Assistant Professor of An-thropology, University of California, Riverside, for apreliminary study in the Yap Islands of human ecologyand population genetics.

C. Warren Hollister, Associate Professor of History, Uni-versity of California, Santa Barbara, for research on thereign of Henry I, King of England, 1100-1135.

Charles H. Hubbell, Assistant Professor of Sociology,State University of lowa, for a matrix-algebra analysisof the adaptations of group structure to internal strains.

William Jaffe, Professor of Economics, Northwestern Uni-versity, for research on the life and works of LdonWalras.

Gabriel Kolko, Cambridge, Massachusetts (Ph.D. in his-tory, Harvard University),for research on the businesscommunity and the formation of national security poli-cies since 1946 (supplementary to grant for researchon national security policy awarded in 1962-63).

Basil J. Moore, Assistant Professor of Economics, Wes-leyan University, for research on the supply, demand,

25

nfl

and price determination of corporate equities in theUnited States.

Philip M. Raup, Professor of Agricultural Economics,University of Minnesota, for research in Europe onpostwar trends in land policy.

Robert W. Resek, Assistant Professor of Economics, Uni-versity of Illinois, for research on the socioeconomicfactors affecting banking.

Gaston V. Rimlinger, Associate Professor of Economics,Rice University, for research in the Federal Republicof Germany on recent developments in its social se-curity policy.

David J. Saposs, Adjunct Professor of InternationalLabor, School for International Service, American Uni-versity, for research on the history of labor ideologies.

James A. Storing, Professor of Political Science, ColgateUniversity, for research in Norway and Denmark onthe organization, administration, and operation of theNorwegian Ombudsmann.

Charles Tilly, Lecturer in Sociology, Harvard University,for research on social change and political upheaval inFrance, 1830-1960.

Kathryn Turner, Assistant Professor of History, WellesleyCollege, for research on the adaptation of English Lawin America to 1860.

Irwin Unger, Assistant Professor of History, Universityof California, Davis, for research on the career ofSalmon P. Chase.

Andrew G. Whiteside, Associate Professor of History,Queens College, for research on the extreme Right inAustria, 1867-1938.

Deil S. Wright, Associate Professor of Political Science,State University of lowa, for a survey of the personalcharacteristics and attitudes of state administrativeofficials.

GRANTS FOR RESEARCHON INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATION

The Committee on International Organization—Inis L.Claude, Jr. (chairman), Lincoln P. Bloomfield, WilliamDiebold, Jr., Leland M. Goodrich, Ernst B. Haas, H. FieldHaviland, Jr., Stanley Hoffmann, Walter R. Sharp, andRichard C. Snyder—met on March 13 to make its firstawards under this new program. Grants for research havebeen offered to 10 scholars, as follows:

Richard M. Buxbaum, Acting Associate Professor of Law,University of California, Berkeley, for research inEurope on the role of trade associations in the formula-tion of antitrust policies within the European EconomicCommunity.

Raymond H. Dawson, Associate Professor of PoliticalScience, University of North Carolina, for research inEurope on decision making in weapons selection at theinternational level, with special reference to operationsresearch groups in the North Atlantic Treaty Organiza-tion (joint with George E. Nicholson, Jr.).

John S. Gillespie, Assistant Professor of Political Science,Tulane University, for research in Canada on the ex-tent of Canadian involvement in the programs anddecisions of the InternationalLabor Organization.

Leon Gordenker, Associate Professor of Politics, Prince-ton University, for research in Europe and Africa onthe influence exerted by the United Nations and spe-cialized agencies on national governments through pro-grams in economic and social fields.

Harold K. Jacobson, Associate Professor of Political Sci-ence, University of Michigan, for research in Europeand Africa on relations between new states and func-tional international organizations.

Lloyd Jensen, Assistant Professor of Political Science,University of Illinois, for research in Europe and theUnited States on international nuclear safeguards: theexperience of the International Atomic Energy Agency,the European Nuclear Energy Agency, and Euratom.

George E. Nicholson, Jr., Professor of Statistics, Uni-versity of North Carolina, for research in Europe ondecision making in weapons selection at the interna-tional level, with special reference to operations re-search groups in the North Atlantic Treaty Organiza-tion (joint with Raymond H. Dawson).

Adrian Pelt, Hermance, Switzerland, for research in theUnited Kingdom of Libya on the events leading to itsestablishment under the guidance of the United Na-tions in 1950-51.

George Stambuk, Associate Professor of InternationalAffairs, George Washington University, Naval WarCollege Center, Newport, R.L, for research in Europeon political aspects of supranational functional organi-zation, with special reference to the European Eco-nomic Community.

Eric Stein, Professor of Law, University of Michigan, forresearch in Europe on assimilation of national lawsas a function of European integration.

GRANTS FOR ASIAN STUDIESThe Joint Committee on Asian Studies, of the Ameri-

can Council of Learned Societies and the Social Science Re-search Council—John A. Pope (chairman), Robert I.

Crane,

H. G. Creel, Paul S. Dull, L. A. Peter Gosling, and John L.Landgraf—met onFebruary 15-16. It has awarded 17 grantsfor research, as follows:

Aziz Ahmad, Associate Professor of Islamic Studies, Uni-versity of Toronto, for research on Islamic modernismin India and Pakistan.

Michael M. Ames, Assistant Professor of Sociology,McMaster University, for analysis of questionnaire dataon value and attitude changes in Ceylon (renewal).

John H. Broomfield, Instructor in History, University ofMichigan, for research on social and political relation-ships of the Bhadralok and Muslim communities inBengal, 1900-1912.

Robert E. Brown, Assistant Professor of Music, WesleyanUniversity, for a study of melodic improvisation andraga structure in South Indian art music.

Robert I. Crane, Professor of History, Duke University,for research and consultation on the Dictionary of In-dian Nationalist Biography project.

James A. Dator, Instructor in Political Science, RikkyoDaigaku (St. Paul's University), Tokyo, for research onthe sociopolitical personality of Japanese and Ameri-can membersof the Soka Gakkai.

26

William J. Gedney, Professor of Linguistics and SoutheastAsian Languages, University of Michigan, for researchon comparative Thai linguistics (renewal).

John W. Hall, Professor of History, Yale University, forresearch on Tokugawa Japan: an institutional studyof the Bizen Domain.

Mantle Hood, Director, Institute of Ethnomusicology,University of California, Los Angeles, for a comparativestudy in musical style of gender wajang literature ofBali.

Jung-pang Lo, Research Assistant Professor of Far East-ern History, University of Washington, for research onthe Chinese navy in the Ming and early Ch'ing Periods.

John R. McLane, Assistant Professor of History, North-western University, for research on politics and eco-nomic change in Bengal, 1850-1920.

Johanna M. Menzel, Assistant Professor of History, Vas-sar College, for a study of a provincial gentry family,the Lins of Taichung, Taiwan.

David W. Plath, Assistant Professor of Anthropology,State University of lowa, for a field study of idealisticcommunities in modern Japan.

Edward H. Schafer, Professor of Oriental Languages,University of California, Berkeley, for research on theVermilion Bird: Tang images of the South.

Thomas C. Smith, Professor of History, Stanford Uni-versity, for research on social classes and relative sharesof national income in Japan, 1600-1868, and on aris-tocracy in modern Japanese history, 1550-1868.

Tung Li Yuan, Subject Cataloger, Library of Congress,for a bibliography of Chinese art and archaeology.

Leon M. Zolbrod, Assistant Professor of Japanese andComparative Literature, Indiana University, for re-search on the impact of Chinese drama and fiction onEdo writers and intellectuals.

GRANTS FOR LATIN AMERICAN STUDIES

In addition to the awards listed in the March issue ofItems, the Joint Committee on Latin American Studies,sponsored with the American Council of Learned Societies,has made the following grant for research:

Hugh M. Hamill, Jr., Associate Professor of History, Uni-versity of Connecticut, for research in Mexico and theUnited States on propaganda and psychological war-fare in New Spain, 1799-1821.

GRANTS FOR SLAVIC ANDEAST EUROPEAN STUDIES

The Subcommittee on Slavic and East European Grants(of the Joint Committee on Slavic Studies sponsored withthe American Council of Learned Societies)—Donald W.Treadgold (chairman), John C. Campbell, David T. Cattell,Victor Erlich, and Norman M. Kaplan—met on February 8.It has made the following 17 grants for research:

Elizabeth Bacon, Instructor in Anthropology, CityCollege, New York, for research on society and culturein Central Asia, 1865-1964.

Patricia Blake, Research Associate, Russian Institute,Columbia University, for a study of Isaac Babel.

Deming Brown, Professor of Slavic Languages and Lit-eratures, University of Michigan, for research on recentdevelopments in Soviet Russian prose fiction.

Zdenek David, Assistant Professor of History, Universityof Michigan, for research on the religious and socialthought of Vladimir Sergeevich Soloviev.

Alexander Erlich, Associate Professor of Economics,Columbia University, for research on Marxian theoriesof economic development and their relevance for theSoviet industrialization policies.

George Fischer, Professor of Government, Cornell Uni-versity, for research on recruitment patterns of theSoviet elite: origins and careers of full-time party ex-ecutives.

Joseph Frank, Associate Professor of Comparative Liter-ature, Rutgers -The State University, for research onDostoevsky as seen against the background of Russiancultural history.

Maurice Friedberg, Associate Professor of Classics, HunterCollege, for research on Western European and Ameri-can fiction, drama, and films in the Soviet Union since1953, and their possible impact on the Soviet public.

Jarija Gimbutas, Visiting Lecturer in Slavic Languages,University of California, Los Angeles, for research onthe ancient Slavs.

Franklyn D. Holzman, Professor of Economics, TuftsUniversity, for research on Soviet foreign trade pricingand exchange rate policy, 1928-60.

Maria Kuncewicz, Visiting Professor of Slavic Languages,University of Chicago, for a study of five Western pro-files in Polish literature.

Woodford D. McClellan, Assistant Professor of History,U.S. Military Academy, for research on the history ofthe Russian section of the International Workingmen'sAssociation, 1868-75.

Marc Raeff, Associate Professor of History, ColumbiaUniversity, for research on the institutional and intel-lectual roots of the Russian intelligentsia.

Michael Samilov, Associate Professor of Slavic Linguistics,Yale University, for research on the history of theMacedonian language.

George C. Soulis, Associate Professor of History, IndianaUniversity, for research on Byzantium and the Balkansin the Middle Ages.

Marc M. Szeftel, Professor of History, University of Wash-ington, for research on the idea of state in Russia be-tween the "Time of the Troubles" and the FrenchRevolution.

Arthur Voyce, San Francisco, California, for research onthe arts of modern Russia.

1964 SUMMERRESEARCH TRAINING INSTITUTEON MATHEMATICS FOR POLITICAL

SCIENTISTS AND SOCIOLOGISTSSelection of applicants for admission to the summer re-

search training institute on mathematics for political scien-tists and sociologists, which was announced in the Decem-ber 1963 issue of Items and which will be held at Stanford

27

Wtl

University from July 13 to August 21, has been made by asubcommittee of the Committee on Mathematics in SocialScience Research, sponsor of the institute. The following 25persons have accepted invitations to participate:

William E. Alexander, Ph.D. candidate in sociology,Syracuse University

Thomas R. Burns, Ph.D. candidate in sociology, Stan-ford University

Linwood W. Dodge, Coadjutant Lecturer in PreparatoryMathematics, Newark Extension Center, Rutgers -The State University

Douglas S. Gatlin, Assistant Professor of Political Science,Wake Forest College

Peter M. Hall, Assistant Professor of Sociology, State Uni-versity of lowa

Irving Howards, Associate Professor of Government,and Associate Director, Public Affairs Research Bureau,Southern Illinois University

John B. Hudson, Assistant Professor of Child Develop-ment and Family Relationships, Cornell University

Kenneth Janda, Assistant Professor of Political Science,Northwestern University

Sungjook Junn, Assistant Professor of Political Science,Mercer University

Jiri T. Kolaja, Associate Professor of Sociology, Univer-sity of Kentucky

Stefan Kwiatkowski, Research Associate, Main School ofPlanning and Statistics, Warsaw (Fellow in Sociology,Stanford University)

James D. Laing, Ph.D. candidate in political science,Stanford University

Richard H. Lent, Assistant Professor of Sociology, Uni-versity of Pittsburgh

Leo Meltzer, Associate Professor of Psychology and Sociol-ogy, Cornell University

Peter A. Morrison, Ph.D. candidate in sociology, BrownUniversity

Charles L. Mulford, Assistant Professor of Sociology,Grinnell College

Stanley Naparst, graduate student in political science,University of California, Berkeley, and Social ScienceAnalyst, U.S. Forest Service

Leon A. Pastalan, Assistant Professor of Sociology, Uni-versity of Toledo

Bruce M. Pringle, Associate Professor of Sociology,Southern Methodist University

James A. Robinson, Associate Professor of Political Sci-ence, NorthwesternUniversity

Romesh Shah, Ph.D. candidate in political science, NewYork University

Richard G. Sheridan, Ph.D. candidate in political science,University of Tennessee

Seymour Spilerman, Ph.D. candidate in sociology andoperations research, Johns Hopkins University

Henry Teune, Assistant Professor of Political Science,University of Pennsylvania

Eugene S. Uyeki, Associate Professor of Sociology, CaseInstitute of Technology

INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE TRAVEL GRANTSUnder the program administered by the Committee on

International Conference Travel Grants—George Garvy(chairman), Joseph B. Casagrande, Rowland A. Egger, LouisMorton, Matilda White Riley, Roger W. Russell, and HarryVenneman—additional awards have been made, at itsmeeting on April 24 and meetings of its staff subcommitteeon March 6 and April 1, to assist social scientists residentin the United States to attend international meetings out-side this country: 'International Association of Agricultural Economists,

Twelfth International Conference of Agricultural Econ-omists, Lyon, August 24 -September 3, 1964Frank T. Bachmura, Associate Professor of Economics,

Indiana UniversityEarl O. Heady, Professor of Economics and of Agricul-

tural Economics, lowa State UniversityD. Gale Johnson, Professor of Economics, University of

ChicagoLee R. Kolmer, Professor of Economics, lowa State Uni-

versityHoward C. Williams, Associate Professor of Agricultural

Economics, Ohio State University

Thirty-sixth International Congress of Americanists,Barcelona, August 31 -September 2; Madrid, September4-5; Seville, September 8-9, 1964Howard F. Cline, Director, Hispanic Foundation, Library

of CongressBailey W. Diffie, Professor of History, City College, New

York* Leopold Pospisil, Associate Professor of Anthropology,Yale UniversityBernard J. Siegel, Professor of Anthropology, Stanford

UniversityEdward H. Spicer, Professor of Anthropology, University

of Arizona

Seventh International Congress of Anthropological andEthnological Sciences, Moscow* August 3-10, 1964William N. Fenton, Assistant Commissioner, New York

State Museum and Science Service*Leopold Pospisil, Associate Professor of Anthropology,Yale UniversityA. Kimball Romney, Associate Professor of Anthropology,Stanford UniversityG. William Skinner, Professor of Anthropology and Asian

Studies, Cornell University

International Geographical Union, Twentieth InternationalGeographical Congress, London, July 19-28, 1964John P. Augelli, Professor of Geography, University of

KansasAndrew H. Clark, Professor of Geography, University of

WisconsinSaul B. Cohen, Professor of Geography, Boston Uni-

versity* Grant for attendanceat two meetings, as indicated.

28

John Fraser Hart, Professor of Geography, Indiana Uni-versity

Richard Hartshorne, Professor of Geography, Universityof Wisconsin

David Lowenthal, Research Associate, American Geo-graphical Society

Malcolm A. Murray, Associate Professor of Geography,Miami University

Allan L. Rodgers, Professor of Geography, PennsylvaniaState University

William Warntz, Research Associate, American Geo-graphical Society

International Political Science Association, Sixth WorldCongress,

Geneva,

September 21-25, 1964

Charles Aikin, Professor of Political Science, Universityof California, Berkeley

Carl Beck, Associate Professor of Political Science, Uni-versity of Pittsburgh

Donald C. Blaisdell, Professor of Political Science, CityCollege, New York

Bernard C.

Cohen,

Professor of Political Science, Uni-versity of Wisconsin

R. Taylor

Cole,

Professor of Political Science, Duke Uni-versity

Gottfried Dietze, Professor of Political Science, JohnsHopkins University

Louise W. Holborn, Research Professor of

Government,

Connecticut College* Robert E. Lane, Professor of Political

Science,

Yale Uni-versity

* Walter H. C. Laves, Professor of

Government,

IndianaUniversity

* Seymour M. Lipset, Professor of Sociology, Universityof California, Berkeley

Roy C. Macridis, Professor of Political

Science,

State Uni-versity of New York at Buffalo

* Richard L. Merritt, Assistant Professor of Political Sci-ence, Yale University

Norman D. Palmer, Professor of Political

Science,

Uni-versity of Pennsylvania

Frank A. Pinner, Associate Professor of Political

Science,

Michigan State UniversityRobert H. Salisbury, Associate Professor of Political Sci-

ence, Washington University

* Grant for attendance at two meetings, as indicated.

Roberta S. Sigel, Assistant Professor of Political Science,Wayne State University

K. H. Silvert, Professor of Government, DartmouthCollege

Henry Wells, Associate Professor of Political Science, Uni-versity of Pennsylvania

International Social Science Council, Second Conference onData Archives in the Social Sciences, Paris, September28-30, 1964David Easton, Professor of Political Science, University

of Chicago

* Robert E. Lane, Professor of Political Science, YaleUniversity

* Walter H. C. Laves, Professor of

Government,

IndianaUniversity

* Seymour M. Lipset, Professor of Sociology, Universityof California,Berkeley

* Richard L. Merritt, Assistant Professor of Political Sci-ence, Yale University

Latin American Sociological Association and ColombianSociological Association, Seventh Latin American Con-gress on Sociology, Bogota, July 14-19, 1964Theodore Caplow, Professor of Sociology, Columbia Uni-

versityCharles Y. Glock, Professor of Sociology, University of

California, BerkeleyTalcott Parsons, Professor of Sociology, Harvard Uni-

versityT. Lynn

Smith,

Graduate Research Professor of Sociology,University of Florida

Gresham M. Sykes, Executive Officer, American Socio-logical Association

European Society for Rural Sociology, and Rural Socio-logical Society, First World Congress on Rural Sociology,Dijon, August 16-20, 1964

J. Allan Beegle, Professor of Sociology and Anthropology,Michigan State University

Alvin L. Bertrand, Professor of Sociology and RuralSociology, Louisiana State University

Louis J. Ducoff, Chief, Farm Population Branch, Eco-nomic Research

Service,

U.S. Department of Agri-culture

E. A. Wilkening, Professor of Rural Sociology, Universityof Wisconsin

SOCIAL SCIENCE RESEARCH COUNCIL

230 PARK AVENUE, NEW YORK, N. Y. 10017

Incorporated in the State of Illinois, December 27, 1924, for the purpose of advancing research in the social sciences

Directors, 1964: Bernard Bailyn, Abram Bergson, Dorwin Cartwright, JosephB. Casagrande, Thomas C.

Cochran,

James S. Coleman, HaroldC. Conki.in, Karl A. Fox, William J. Goode, Jr., Morris H. Hansen, Ciiauncy D. Harris, Pendleton Herring, George H. Hildebrand, NathanKeyfitz, Thomas S. Kuiin, Stanley Lebercott, Gardner Lindzey, Quinn McNemau, Franco Modigliani, Louis Morton, J. Roland Pennock,

Don K.

Price,

Leo F. Schnore, Herbert A. Simon, Guy E. Swanson, David B. Truman, John W. Tukey, Charles Wagley, Donald Young

Officers and Staff: Pendleton Herring, President; Paul Webbink, Vice-President;Elbridge Sibley, Executive Associate; Bryce Wood, Eleanor C.

Isbell, Rowland L. Mitchell, Jr., Ben Willerman, Staff Associates; Catherine V. Ronnan, Financial Secretary