Final summary report of the AFOSR postdoctoral research program, 1961-70 (1973)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

FINAL SUMMARY REPORT OF THE AFOSR POSTDOCTORAL RESEARCH PROGRAM, I96I-7O Introduction During the decade, 196I-7O. a program o f p o s t d o c t o r a l research awards, supported by the A i r Force O f f i c e o f S c i e n t i f i c Research o f the A i r Force Re- search D i v i s i o n , and administered by the Fellowship O f f i c e o f the O f f i c e o f S c i e n t i f i c Personnel, N a t i o n a l 'cademy o f Sciences/National Research Coimcil, provided young i n v e s t i g a t o r s o f superior a b i l i t y w i t h s p e c i a l o p p o r t u n i t i e s f o r advanced study and research i n various branches o f the n a t u r a l and a p p l i e d sciences o f particiLLar importance t o the A i r Force. These awards, open t o c i t i z e n s o f the United States, were tenable a t appropriate educational i n s t i t u t i o n s o r research l a b o r a t o r i e s , e i t h e r i n t h i s country o r abroad. Each a p p l i c a n t was nominated by a sponsor o f h i g h p r o f e s - s i o n a l standing and the Awardees were selected by a Board appointed by the President o f the N a t i o n a l Academy o f Sciences. I n I 9 6 1 , the i n i t i a l Board o f Selection remarked, "The members are i n d i v i d u a l l y and c o l l e c t i v e l y d e l i g h t e d t h a t these awards have been e s t a b l i s h e d t o r e i n s t a t e the s p i r i t and i n f l u e n c e o f the former N a t i o n a l Research Covincil Postdoctoral Fellowships which played such an important r o l e i n the development o f American science i n the p e r i o d be- ginning around 1 9 2 0 . " During the t e n years o f i t s existence, 1 9 6 1 - 7 0 , t h i s AFOSR program a t t r a c t - ed a t o t a l o f 1 , 3 8 8 a p p l i c a n t s , o f whom 1I+6 ( 1 0 , 5 ^ ) , o r about I 5 per year, r e - ceived p o s t d o c t o r a l awards. Except f o r k3 vromen a p p l i c a n t s ( 3 ^ ) and one awardee ( 0 . 7 ' ^ ) , a l l i n v o l v e d were male. This summary r e p o r t on the program provides a survey o f the f i e l d s o f these AFOSR Awardees. together w i t h t h e i r r e g i o n a l and I n s t i t u t i o n a l m o b i l i t y during sequential career stages from bacca- l a u r e a t e , d o c t o r a l and p o s t d o c t o r a l study t o i n i t i a l and current employment.* As an a d d i t i o n a l f e a t i i r e o f t h i s follow-up of AFOSR Awardees' progress t o date, the r e l a t i o n s h i p o f the p o s t d o c t o r a l experience t o subsequent research p u b l i c a - t i o n s and the c i t a t i o n o f these p u b l i c a t i o n s by other s c i e n t i s t s has been assessed, using data from the Science C i t a t i o n Index, I96I-7O. Throughout the r e p o r t these and other features o f the AFOSR Postdoctoral Awardees w i l l be com- pared w i t h the more general f i n d i n g s o f Dr. L. R. Harmon's studies o f Career * I n f o r m a t i o n concerning the career stages o f the AFOSR Awardees has been assembled from data i n t h e i r i n i t i a l a p p l i c a t i o n s , i n o f f i c e records and i n f i n a l r e p o r t s which, c o l l e c t i v e l y , covered the periods o f t h e i r baccalaureate, doctorate, p o s t d o c t o r a l a c t i v i t y and i n i t i a l subsequent eniployment. The p e r i o d between t h i s and t h e i r current employment has been reconstructed from i n f o r m a t i o n i n American Men and Women o f Science ( l 2 t h e d i t i o n ) , i n annual N a t i o n a l Faculty D i r e c t o r i e s , i n i n d i v i d u a l u n i v e r s i t y catalogues and i n s p e c i a l t y society d i r e c t o r i e s through 1972. Instances o f residvial u n c e r t a i n t y have been resolved by correspondence or telephone communications w i t h f a c i l i t y sponsors or Awardees. See the attached Roster o f Awardees i n Appendix I I . -1- 

Patterns o f Ph.D.'s i n the Sciences ( 1 9 6 5 - 7 I ) , w i t h those o f the N a t i o n a l Re- search Council's siirvey o f Postdoctoral Education i n the United States, conduct- ed i n 1967 and published i n I 9 6 9 , as w e l l as w i t h aspects o f the p o s t d o c t o r a l f e l l o w s h i p programs o f NSF and KIE i n the more recent p e r i o d I 9 6 9 - 7 I . F i e l d s o f Postdoctoral Study and Pesearch Of the t o t a l ikS AFOSR Awardees, during t h e i r p o s t d o c t o r a l a c t i v i t i e s , 111 or 76'fo were i n the f i e l d s o f engineering, mathematics and the p h y s i c a l sciences, w h i l e 35 or 2k'fo were i n areas o f zhe b i o l o g i c a l , b e h a v i o r a l o r s o c i a l sciences. W i t h i n the EMP sciences, awards by f i e l d s were i n : engineering I 6 ( 1 1 ^ ) , mathematics 21 {ikio), chemistry 3^ ( 2 5 ^ ) , ph;ysics 37 ( 2 5 ^ ) and e a r t h sciences 3 (2^0). Of the remaining Awardees, 32 (22fc,) were i n h i o l o g y and 3 {2<fo) i n be- h a v i o r a l o r s o c i a l sciences. I t may be noted t h a t a s u b t o t a l o f 103 o r JOfo of a l l Awardees were i n the three major f i e l d s o f chemistry ( 3 ^ ) ) physics ( 3 7 ) and biology ( 3 2 ) (Table 1 and Figure l ) . As regards the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f Awardees by s u b - f i e l d s , i n engineering the l a r g e s t numbers were i n e l e c t r i c a l ( 5 ) and chemical ( 3 ) engineering and i n f l u i d mechanics ( 3 ) . I n chemistry, Awardees were concentrated i n p h y s i c a l ( 1 7 ) and organic ( 8 ) chemistry. I n physics, the l a r g e s t nimibers were i n s o l i d s t a t e ( 9 ) and t h e o r e t i c a l ( 7 ) physics. I n b i o l o g y , the l a r g e s t numbers were i n biochem- i s t r y ( 8 ) , biophysics ( 7 ) and molecular b i o l o g y (k). I n general, the concentra- t i o n o f Avrardees corresponded c l o s e l y t o the areas o f major research a c t i v i t y i n these f i e l d s during the s i x t i e s . Changes i n F i e l d s Since the AFOSR p o s t d o c t o r a l awards provided an a d d i t i o n a l p e r i o d o f ad- vanced study and research between completion o f the doctorate and assumption o f career p u r s u i t s , i t i s o f i n t e r e s t t o know whether changes o f f i e l d s were asso- c i a t e d w i t h i t . I n only fo\ir cases (3% o f the t o t a l ) d i d the Awardees's f i e l d of p o s t d o c t o r a l study d i f f e r from t h a t o f the doctorate and, i n each instance, the change \ms t o an analogous a^ea o f a c l o s e l y adjacent f i e l d : from aeronau- t i c a l engineering t o plasma physics, from e l e c t r i c a l engineering t o s o l i d s t a t e physics, from b i o p h y s i c a l chemistry t o biochemistry and from a p p l i e d physics t o biophysics. More commonly, the p o s t d o c t o r a l research o f the Awardees was characterized by greater concentration or s p e c i a l i z a t i o n w i t h i n the f i e l d o f d o c t o r a l emphasis. At stages between the p o s t d o c t o r a l award and c u r r e n t employment, however, 15 or lOfo o f a l l Awardees changed from t h e i r e a r l i e r f i e l d s . Of t h i s group, seven l e f t engineering f o r : i n f o r m a t i o n and computer science ( l ) , physics ( 3 ) , p l a n e t a r y and space science ( l ) , d e n t i s t r y ( l ) and business a d m i n i s t r a t i o n ( l ) . Three l e f t chemistry f o r physics ( 2 ) and biochemistry ( l ) . Five l e f t physics f o r a p p l i e d mathematics ( l ) , biophysics ( l ) and astronomy and p l a n e t a r y physics or geophysics ( 3 ) . I n b i o l o g y , one l e f t biophysics f o r chemistry and another i n physiology p r e s e n t l y holds a j o i n t appointment i n e l e c t r i c a l engineering. I n a d d i t i o n , two A^rardees i n i t i a l l y i n mathematics are c u r r e n t l y i n systems analysis i n an ecology l a b o r a t o r y ( l ) and a department o f operations research ( l ) . The main p e r i o d o f changing f i e l d s thus occurred a f t e r the p o s t d o c t o r a l experience, e i t h e r m r e l a t i o n t o i n i t i a l employment o r betvreen i t and cvirrent employment but, even then,involved only 10^ o f a l l Awardees (Table 1 and Fig\are l ) . 

Career Stages o f AFOSR Postdoctoral Awardees The f o l l o w i n g general survey o f the career stages o f AFOSR Awardees includes reference t o t h e i r completion o f the baccalauTeate, attainment o f the doctorate, tenure o f the p o s t d o c t o r a l award, and succeeding i n i t i a l and c u r r e n t employment. At each o f these stages, featiires o f the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f the Awardees a t the v a r i e t y o f i n s t i t u t i o n s w i t h which they have been associated are presented i n Table 2 and Figure 2 . Baccalaureate Stage The lk6 AFOSR Awardees obtained t h e i r baccalaureates a t a t o t a l o f 80 i n - s t i t u t i o n s . Three-quarters o f the group ( 1 0 8 o r 7 ^ ) completed undergraduate study a t hk o f the leading 1 0 0 U.S. u n i v e r s i t i e s * ; h a l f o f the t o t a l ( 7 5 o r 31^) at 20 o f the leading i i n i v e r s i t i e s : C a l i f o r n i a I n s t i t u t e o f Technology - 8 , C o r n e l l and Princeton - 7 each. U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a , Berkeley, Columbia and Massachusetts I n s t i t u t e o f Technology - 6 each, Harvard, I l l i n o i s and Chicago - 5 each, e t c . The remaining quarter ( 3 7 or 2jfo) obtained t h e i r baccalaureates a t 17 other \ m i v e r s i t i e s and l 8 colleges. The s i n g l e f o r e i g n baccalaureate was ob- t a i n e d a t M c G i l l U n i v e r s i t y , Canada. Doctorate Stage I n c o n t r a s t t o t h i s ranging i n s t i t u t i o n a l base o f undergraduate p r e p a r a t i o n , the lk6 AFOSR Awardees' d o c t o r a l education was concentrated a t only 37 U.S. u n i - v e r s i t i e s , t h a t o f 1 2 3 (Q^o) of them a t 21 o f the l e a d i n g i n s t i t u t i o n s : Stanford - 1 7 , U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a , Berkeley - l 6 , Chicago - 1 1 , Princeton - 10, Massachusetts I n s t i t u t e o f Technology - S, Colwnbla - 8 , C a l i f o r n i a I n s t i t u t e of Technology - 6 , e t c . Stage o f Postdoctoral A c t i v i t y Following the doctorate, h a l f (7^1- o r 50^) of' the Awardees pursued t h e i r post- d o c t o r a l study and research a t 20 leading U.S. i m i v e r s i t i e s , i n the same p a t t e r n o f concentration j u s t noted: Stanford - 1 2 , Harvard - 1 1 , U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i - f o r n i a , Berkeley - 1 0 , Massachusetts I n s t i t u t e o f Technology - 9 , Princeton - 7 , C a l i f o r n i a I n s t i t u t e o f Technology - 7, etc. I n only seven instances o f the t o t a l ) , hovrever, d i d i n d i v i d u a l Awardees undertake p o s t d o c t o r a l a c l i v i t y a t the same i n s t i t u t i o n a t v:hich they had completed d o c t o r a l study. The balance o f Awardees t a k i n g t h e i r postdoctorals a t U.S. u n i v e r s i t i e s moved p r i n c i p a l l y from i n s t i t u t i o n s on one coast t o those on the other o r from the centraJ. area o f the co\mtry t o i n s t i t u t i o n s on e i t h e r coast. An a d d i t i o n a l 7 {%) A^/ardees pursued p o s t d o c t o r a l a c t i v i t i e s i n the United States a t f i v e non-academic i n s t i t u t e s or centers: three a t the I n s t i t u t e f o r Advanced Study, Princeton, and one each a t Brookhaven, Oak: Ridge, NIH and the Salk I n s t i t u t e f o r B i o l o g i c a l Studies. * The 1 0 0 U.S. i n s t i t u t i o n s leading i n f i v e i n d i c e s o f d o c t o r a l and p o s t d o c t o r a l education and research during I 9 6 8 - 7 I : Federal o b l i g a t i o n s f o r academic science, research doctorates awarded, q u a l i t y o f graduate f a c u l t y and i n s t i t u t i o n a l choices o f NSF and NIH p r e d o c t o r a l and p o s t d o c t o r a l f e l l o w s h i p awardees. The leading 25 o f these i n s t i t u t i o n s are l i s t e d i n Table 8 , Column D . -3- 

The large remaining p r o p o r t i o n o f Awardees (65 or h%) h e l d t h e i r post- d o c t o r a l awards abroad, kl {2%) a t 23 academic i n s t i t u t i o n s and 22 {1%) a t 12 non-academic research i n s t i t u t e s , centers o r l a b o r a t o r i e s . Those a t t r a c t i n g the l a r g e s t number o f Awardees abroad were: Cambridge U n i v e r s i t y - 8, Oxford U n i v e r s i t y - k, I m p e r i a l College o f Science and Technology, London - 3 j U n i v e r s i t e L i b r e de Bruxelles - 3, Eidgenossische Technische Hochschule, Z u r i c h - 3} Medical Research Council Laboratory o f Molecular Biology, Cam- ] bridge - 5, CERN, Geneva - 3, I n s t l t u t Pasteur, Paris - 2, L a b o r a t o r i N a z l o n a l l d i F r a s c a t i , Rome - 2, and Weizmann I n s t i t u t e f o r Science, I s r a e l - 2. Stage o f I n i t i a l Appointment I n t h e year f o l l o w i n g t h e i r p o s t d o c t o r a l awards, o f the 81 {'^%) AFOSR Awardees who had remained i n the United States, 26 ( l 8 ^ ) continued t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s a t the same i n s t i t u t i o n , 53 (36^0) moved t o other U.S. i n s t i t u t i o n s , w h i l e 2 (Ifo), who had h e l d t h e i r AFOSR awards i n the United States, went be- l a t e d l y abroad f o r a d d i t i o n a l p o s t d o c t o r a l research under other auspices. Of the 65 {k'yio) Awardees who had spent t h e i r year outside the United States, I 5 (10^) continued t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s i n the same o r other s e t t i n g s abroad, w h i l e 50 (33'^) returned t o a v a r i e t y o f i n s t i t u t i o n s i n the United States. O v e r a l l , t h e r e f o r e , i n the year a f t e r t h e i r awards, 129 (89^0) of the AFOSR Awardees h e l d i n i t i a l appointments i n the United States, IO8 ( 7 ^ ) m l)-5 acade- mic i n s t i t u t i o n s , w i t h 7^ o f them ( 5 0 ^ of the t o t a l ) a t 22 leading u n i v e r s i t i e s , vrhere t h e i r concentrations resembled those a t e a r l i e r stage:;: 'Jniversity o f C a l i f o r n i a , Berkeley, Massachusetts I n s t i t u t e o f Technology and Stanford - 8 each. U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a , Los Angeles - 7, C a l i f o r n i a I n s t i t u t e o f Techno- logy and Harvard - 5 each, Yale - h, Johns Hopkins, Princeton and Wisconsin - 3 each, e t c . An a d d i t i o n a l 13 ( 9 % ) Awardees h e l d appointments a t 1 1 n a t i o n a l r e - search i n s t i t u t e s o r l a b o r a t o r i e s o f Federal agencies: AEC's Brookhaven, Oak | Ridge, Lawrence Radiation Laboratory, Los Alamos and Sandla Laboratory; HEVJ's \ N a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t e of A r t h r i t i s and Metabolic Disease and the Oregon Regional ' Primate Center; the Naval Ordnance Laboratory and Naval Postgraduate School; ' • NASA's Goddard Space F l i g h t Center; and the Department o f Commerce's N a t i o n a l i Bureau o f Standards. I t i s o f i n t e r e s t t o note t h a t a remaining group o f 8 {G^o) Awardees h e l d t h e i r i n i t i a l appointments i n the l a b o r a t o r i e s o f s i x research- o r i e n t e d I n d u s t r i e s : B e l l Telephone, General D:,TiamicE, -Gens-ral Motors, McDonald- Douglas A s t r o n a u t i c s , North American A v i a t i o n and SqullTu Inb'oitate f o r Medical Research: Stage o f Current Employment | Most r e c e n t l y , a t the stage o f t h e i r present employment, o f the 139 ( 9 5 ^ ) i AFOSR Awardees i n the United States, 120 (82fo) h o l d appointments m academic i n - j s t i t u t i o n s , w i t h 65 o f them {kk% o f the t o t a l ) concentrated a t 20 leading u n l - j v e r s l t i e s , as above: U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a , Berkeley - 10, Stanford - 7, i C o r n e l l - 6, C a l i f o r n i a I n s t i t u t e o f Technology - 5, Harvard, Johns Hopkins, Wisconsin and Yale - h each, U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a , Los Angeles, Chicago, Massachusetts I n s t i t u t e o f Technology - 3 each, e t c . An a d d i t i o n a l I 6 (llfo) Awardees h o l d appointments a t I 5 non-academic i n s t i t u t i o n s . Eight are a t e i g h t Federal agencies o r other research s e t t i n g s : AEC's Sandla and NASA's Jet Pro- p u l s i o n Laboratories, the N a t i o n a l Eye I n s t i t u t e and N a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t e f o r A r t h r i t i s and Metabolic Diseases, the Naval Ordnance Laboratory, the Department of Commerce's N a t i o n a l Bureau o f Standards, Cold Spring Harbor l a b o r a t o r y and the Rand Corporation, Eight ( 6 % ) others are a t seven R & D i n d u s t r i e s : B e l l 

Telephone Laboratories, Booz, A l l e n Applied Research, General Motors, M a r t i n M a r i e t t a Corporation, McDonald-Douglas A s t r o n a u t i c s , the Squibb I n s t i t u t e f o r Medical Research, and TRVJ Systems Group. Seven ( 5 % ) other Awardees have not returned t o the United States f o l l o w i n g t h e i r p o s t d o c t o r a l study abroad; f o u r o f them are a t f o r e i g n u n i v e r s i t i e s and three a t research l a b o r a t o r i e s . Des- p i t e e f f o r t s t o t r a c k them down, the cirrrent l o c a t i o n of three (2<^) remaining Awardees i s unknown. Considered more broadly, the a c t i v i t i e s o f the lk6 AFOSR Awardees a t stages between t h e i r undergraduate education and c u r r e n t employment permit o f g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s around three component groups: f i r s t , the l a r g e p r o p o r t i o n o f 120 {82%) who p r e s e n t l y h o l d appointments a t 58 academic i n s t i t u t i o n s i n the United States; second, the group o f 16 (11%) who are p r e s e n t l y appointed a t I 5 non-academic i n s t i t u t i o n s i n the United States; and t h i r d , the remaining 7 (5%) who are p r e s e n t l y employed outside the United States. AFOSR Awardees a t Academic I n s t i t u t i o n s The l a r g e group o f 120 Awardees p r e s e n t l y employed a t U.S. academic i n s t i - t u t i o n s can i t s e l f be d i f f e r e n t i a t e d i n t o three sub-groups. F i r s t , the 66 (^5fo o f the t o t a l ikS) who, throughout t h e i r careers, have moved c e n t r i p e t a l l y w i t h - i n , between or, t o a small degree, i n t o the leading 25 u n i v e r s i t i e s i n t h i s country. Of the 66 Awardees p r e s e n t l y a t these 25 leading i m i v e r s i t i e s , k2 had e a r l i e r obtained t h e i r baccalaureates and 59 t h e i r doctorates a t the 25 i n s t i - t u t i o n s , w h i l e 6k or a l l but two had also pursued t h e i r p o s t d o c t o r a l a c t i v i t y e i t h e r a t i n s t i t u t i o n s m t h i s group ( 3 5 ) or abroad ( 3 1 ) . Moreover, 53 of t h i s group h e l d i n i t i a l appointments i n the year a f t e r t h e i r awards at these leading 25 i n s t i t u t i o n s . A second sub-group i s composed o f k8 Awardees (33*5^1 of ikG) who are c u r r e n t l y appointed a t 30 o f the remaining 100 U.S. u n i v e r s i t i e s outside the leading 2 5 . I n c o n t r a s t t o those j u s t considered, these Avrardees have formed a r e l a t i v e l y mobile group w i t h c e n t r i f u g a l tendencies t o d i s p e r s i o n over a wide spectrum o f educational i n s t i t u t i o n s . Of the 1+8, only 13 obtained t h e i r baccalaureates a t the l e a d i n g 25 d i v e r s i t i e s and, although 38 completed t h e i r doctorates and kl pursued t h e i r p o s t d o c t o r a l a c t i v i t i e s a t the leading 25 u n i v e r s i t i e s or abroad, only 17 h e l d i n i t i a l appointments a t these 25 i n s t i t u t i o n s f o l l o r i n g t h e i r award year. U n i v e r s i t i e s w i t h the l a r g e s t number o f these Awardees are: seven o f the younger campuses o f the U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a (12 Awardees), one campus and another u n i t o f the State U n i v e r s i t y o f Nev/ York, a t Stony Brook ( 3 ) and Syracuse ( l ) , Utah ('4), V i r g i n i a ( 3 ) , Brown ( 2 ) , Hawaii ( 2 ) , U n i v e r s i t y o f Southern C a l i f o r n i a ( 2 ) and Rutgers ( 2 ) . The t h i r d sub-group consists o f seven A-trardeeiS who are c u r r e n t l y appointed a t seven U.S. educational i n s t i t u t i o n s outside the leading 100 but, i n other respects, resemble the second sub-group. Only two received t h e i r baccalaureates at the leading 25 u n i v e r s i t i e s and, although f i v e obtained t h e i r doctorates and s i x pursued p o s t d o c t o r a l a c t i v i t i e s a t the 25 leading i n s t i t u t i o n s or abroad, only one h e l d an i n i t i a l appointment a t the leading 25 f o l l o w i n g the award year. These seven Awardees are c u r r e n t l y appointed ( l each) a t : California State U n i v e r s i t y , F u l l e r t o n , U n i v e r s i t y o f I l l i n o i s , Chicago C i r c l e , I l l i n o i s State U n i v e r s i t y , Montana State U n i v e r s i t y , Northeastern U n i v e r s i t y , VJesleyan U n i v e r s i t y and Swarthraore College. Of the aggregate 55 Awardees (38% of the t o t a l ) c u r r e n t l y appointed a t U.S. -5- 

Academic i n s t i t u t i o n s other than t h e leading 2 5 , t h e r e f o r e , ko obtained t h e i r baccalaureates and 12 t h e i r doctorates a.z such other i n s t i t u t i o n s , w h i l e 37 h e l d appointments a t such i n s t i t u t i o n s i n the i n i t i a l year a f t e r t h e i r awards. The a s s o c i a t i o n o f k3 o f these Awardees w i t h the 25 leading u n i v e r s i t i e s during d o c t o r a l study and o f 2k o f them during t h e i r p o s t d o c t o r a l study, obviously v^as not r e i n f o r c i n g enough t o l e a d t o tenured o r career a f f i l i a t i o n s . Whether r e - luctance l a y p r i n c i p a l l y w i t h the leading u n i v e r s i t i e s or w i t h t h e Awardees i s not, from a v a i l a b l e records, c l e a r . Chronology o f the Academic Employment o f AFOSR Awardees Although the ikS AFOSR Awardees have been discussed u n t i l now as though they comprised a c h r o n o l o g i c a l l y homogeneous group, w i t h respect t o t h e stage o f . t h e i r c u r r e n t employment t h i s i s not the case. Even f o r the l a s t group o f Awardees, concluding t h e i r p o s t d o c t o r a l study i n 1 9 7 1 , the f o u r e a r l i e r stages of baccalaiireate, doctorate, p o s t d o c t o r a l a c t i v i t y and i n i t i a l appointment appear r e l a t i v e l y comparable t o those o f e a r l i e r groups. The concluding stage o f c u r r e n t employment, ho^rever, has ranged from about one year f o r the l a s t Airardees, appointed i n 1 9 7 0 , t o a dozen years f o r the f i r s t Awardees, appointed i n 1 9 6 1 . To g a i n an impression o f the v a r i a t i o n s i n v o l v e d , the I I 6 Awardees w i t h known t i t l e s a t academic i n s o i t u t i o n s were d i v i d e d i n t o three groups, t h e f i r s t r e c e i v i n g awards i n the i n i t i a l years o f the program ( 1 9 6 I - 6 3 ) , the second m the middle program years (196^1-67), and the t h i r d i n the most recent years (1968-70). To consider ohe l a t t e r group f i r s t , t h e i r c u r r e n t academic t i t l e s range over the spectrum from research a s s i s t a n t , t o research associate, t o research associate and associate i n s t r u c t o r , t o v i s i t i n g a s s i s t a n t professor, t o a s s i s t a n t professor. Of t h e 33 Awardees, ik c u r r e n t l y h o l d research t i t l e s , w h i l e 16 are a s s i s t a n t and three associate professors. Academic t i t l e s o f the middle group range from research associate, t o research a s s i s t a n t professor, t o a s s i s t a n t professor, t o associate professor, t o associate professor and chairman of department, t o professor. Of the k6 Awardees, only two h o l d research t i t l e s , 21 are a s s i s t a n t and 18 associate professors, w h i l e the remaining f i v e are professors. T i t l e s o f t h e e a r l i e s t ; group range from a s s i s t a n t profes-sor, t o associate professor, t o associate professor and associate chairman o f departmejit, t o associate professor and d i r e c t o r o f a research l a b o r a t o i y , t o research p h y s i c i s t , t o professor, t o professor and head o f the department. Of the 37 Awardees, only one s t i l l holds a research t i t l e ( e q u i v a l e n t t o p r o f e s s o r ) , two are s t i l l a s s i s t a n t professors, 21 are associate professors and 13 are professors. I n the chronology o f t h e i r appointments a t academic i n s t i t u t i o n s , t h e r e f o r e , zhe most recent Awardees d i s p l a y a GO-kO r a t i o o f academic versus research t i t l e s , w h i l e only three have continued t o h o l d research t i t l e s f o r longer periods. Pro- motion t o tenure (associate professor o r professor) appears t o be f o l l o w i n g a normal course: thi-ee o r ll'fo o f the most recent group have already been appoint- ed associate professors; 23 o r 5O/0 o f the middle group are associate professors ( 1 8 ) o r professors ( 5 ) ; vrhile 3^ o r 92'fo o f t h e e a r l i e s t group are now associate professors ( 2 l ) or professors ( 1 3 ) . I t may be noted, fm'ther, t h a t one i n the middle group and others i n bhe e a r l i e s t group have already begun t o assume ad- m i n i s t r a t i v e r e s p o n s i b i l i t i e s t h a t w i l l i n e v i t a b l y reduce t h e i r i n v e s t i g a t i v e achievements. Proportions o f the three c h r o n o l o g i c a l groups a t academic i n s t i t u t i o n s , i n the order o f e a r l i e s t , middle and most recent, are c u r r e n t l y Spfo, 78^ and 83%. W i t h i n academia, r e s p e c t i v e component p r o p o r t i o n s a t the leading 25 u n i v e r s i t i e s are h3io, 50fo and ko^o. Proportions i n U.S. Government, i n d u s t r y o r n o n - p r o f i t -6- 

i n s t i t u t i o n s are 9^, % and 16^0. Proportions of the three groups s t i l l outside o f the United States are 8fo and 0^. The seemingly l a r g e p r o p o r t i o n o f the recent group employed i n government and i n d u s t r y (l6'/o) involves only seven Awardees, as compared w i t h f i v e i n the middle group and f o u r i n the e a r l i e s t group. This small increment i n non-academic employment has not s u b s t a n t i v e l y reduced the p r o p o r t i o n i n academic i n s t i t u t i o n s , which account f o r the remain- ing 83'5b o f the recent group. W i t h i n academia, proportions of the recent group are d i s t r i b u t e d almost e q u a l l y a t the f i r s t 25 i n s t i t u t i o n s ( 1 7 Awardees o r hOPjo) and a t other leading 100 i n s t i t u t i o n s ( 1 6 Awardees o r 38fo). I n the e a r l i e s t group, these respective p r o p o r t i o n s were hyjo and 3 3 ^ and, i n the middle group, 505^ and 22"^. Employment o p p o r t u n i t i e s at the leading 25 u n i v e r s i t i e s thus appear somewhat t i g h t e r f o r the most recent group o f Awardees, though only two are employed a t academic i n s t i t u t i o n s outside the leading 1 0 0 u n i v e r s i t i e s . AFOSR Awardees a t Non-Academic I n s t i t u t i o n s The career p a t t e r n s o f the 16 Awardees (11^ of the t o t a l ) c u r r e n t l y appoint- ed a t non-academic i n s t i t u t i o n s i n the United States resemble those o f Awardees at the leading 25 u n i v e r s i t i e s a t stages from the baccalaureate through post- d o c t o r a l study. Of the I 6 , seven obtained t h e i r baccalaiireates, 12 o f t h e i r 'doctorates and e i g h t 'ptirsued t h e i r p o s t d o c t o r a l a c t i v i t i e s a t the leading 25 u n i v e r s i t i e s and another s i x a t academic i n s t i t u t i o n s abroad. I n the case o f 11 Awardees, the move t o research appointments i n government, i n d u s t r y or non- p r o f i t organizations occurred as the i n i t i a l appointment f o l l o ^ r i n g the AI'OSR award. I n the case o f the remaining f i v e , the nove occurred, a f t e r i n i t i a l aca- demic appointments between one and s i x years. Only one o f these 16 Awardees pur- sued h i s p o s t d o c t o r a l a c b i v i t y a t a non-academic i n s t i t u t i o n (the National I n s t i t u t e s o f H e a l t h ) , e i t h e r i n the United States or abroad. By c o n t r a s t , o f the t o t a l 30 Avra-rdees who pursued t h e i r p o s t d o c t o r a l a c t i v i t y a t non-academic i n s t i t u t i o n s , e i t h e r i n the United States ( 8 ) or abroad ( 2 2 ) , 27 are c u r r e n t l y appointed i n academic i n s t i t u t i o n s i n the United States or abroad, w h i l e only three p r e s e n t l y h o l d appointments i n non-academic i n s t i t u t i o n s , a l l of them abroad. By f i e l d s , 1^+ o f the 16 Ai:ardees c u r r e n t l y a t non-academic i n s t i t u t i o n s (10^ o f 1^+6) are i n engineering ( 3 ) , 'chemistry ( 5 ) and physics ( 6 ) ; w h i l e two {1% o f I46) are i n biochemistry ( l ) and molecular bio^^gy ( l ) . By c o n t r a s t , during 1 9 6 7 - 7 1 , an average o f 3 8 ^ of a l l new U.S.. doctoTc-'ii^" l u engineering, chemistry and physics planned i n i t i a l errrployment i n government, i n d u s t r y o r n o n - p r o f i t i n s t i t u t i o n s , as d i d 1% o f a l l new doctorates i n biochemistry and biophysics. Although the employment periods o f AFOSR Awardees and those of new doctorates don't provide a precise match, the p r o p o r t i o n o f AFOSR postdoctorals o r i e n t e d toward non-academic careers appear t o be only 1 0 ^ t o 25fo o f t h a t of a l l recent doctorates i n the same f i e ] d s . I n the NRC survey o f Posbdoctoral Education i n the United States, i n 1967, about 20^ o f a l l postdoctorals irere m non-academic i n s t i t u t i o n s and t h e i r r e s - ponses i n d i c a t e d t h a t 2% of those i n Federal i n s t a l l a t i o n s and 2,% o f those i n i n d u s t r i a l s e t t i n g s expected t o remain i n government o r i n d u s t r y . From a quarter t o a h a l f o f these respondents were f o r e i g n p o s t d o c t o r a l s , which makes comparison d i f f i c i i l t , but again the p r o p o r t i o n of AFOSR Awardees o r i e n t e d toward non-academic careers appears less than t h a t of the t o t a l p o s t d o c t o r a l p o p u l a t i o n i n the United States i n I 9 6 7 . 

AFOSR Awardees Employed Outside the United States Turning t o the seven Awardees who, i n 1973, had remained abroad f o r s i x to eleven years f o l l o w i n g completion o f t h e i r AFOSR award, i t may be noted t h a t six obtained both t h e i r baccalaureates and doctorates a t the leading 20 U.S. u n i v e r s i t i e s , t h a t a l l spent t h e i r p o s t d o c t o r a l study year abroad, f i v e of them i n the same f o r e i g n country and three a t the same i n s t i t u t i o n at which they are c u r r e n t l y appointed. Four c u r r e n t l y h o l d academic and three non-academic appointments i n Canada ( l ) , England {k) and I s r a e l ( 2 ) . Current Location Unknovm As f o r the remaining three Felicias, one m chemistry and two i n e l e c t r i c a l engineering, whose c u r r e n t l o c a t i o n i s unknovm, a l l completed t h e i r baccalau- reates and doctorates and two t h e i r p o s t d o c t o r a l a c t i v i t i e s and i n i t i a l appoint- ments a t leading L.S. u n i v e r s i t i e s . There are i n d i c a t i o n s t h a t two o f these Awardees may be i n R & D I n d u s t r y and t h i s i s a p o s s i b i l i t y f o r the t h i r d as well. Regional D i s t r i b u t i o n o f AFOSR Awardees i n the United States I n the quarter century f o l l o w i n g World War I I , growing Federal support o f academic science, as w e l l as research i n government and i n d u s t r y , brovight major advances i n a range of f i e l d s o f science and technology. Throughout t h i s p e r i o d , the demand f o r s p e c i a l i s t manpower catalyzed the establishment and expansion o f n a t i o n a l f e l l o w s h i p programs, supporting both d o c t o r a l graduate education^and p o s t d o c t o r a l study and research. As t h i s a c t i v i t y reached i t s f u l l dimension i n the l a t t e r h a l f o f the 196o's5 congressional concern developed t h a t regions, states and i n s t i t u t i o n s had begun t o d i s p l a y peaks and depressions o f i n v o l v e - ment, w i t h substantive v a r i a t i o n s i n l o c a l economic f a l l o u t , the i n e q u i t a b l e geographic d i s t r i b u t i o n of vhich was i n c o n t r a s t t o the h i s t o r i c p r i n c i p l e s o f e g a l i t a r i a n i s m i n our n a t i o n . The general f e a t u r e s o f the AFOSR Postdocboral Research Program, one of the outstanding of t h i s p e r i o d , have j u s t been si:ii'veyed. I t i s o f I n t e r e s t now t o explore more f u l l y the program's demographic aspects, as i t s Awardees have been located i n and migrated between regions, states and i n s t i t u t i o n s m the United States, as w e l l as t o compare the f i n d i n g s w i t h those of p o s t d o c t o r a l f e l l o w s o f the N a t i o n a l Science Fotindation and the N a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t e s o f Health. Moreover, since p o s t d o c t o r a l study and research extend from a base of d o c t o r a l education, i t i s o f i n t e r e s t also t o examine the d o c t o r a l backgrounds of the AFOSR Av;ardees, as compared w i t h a l l doctorates. The cumulative i n f o r m a t i o n on r e g i o n a l d i s t r i - b u t i o n i s presented i n Tables 3-5 and depicted m Figures 3 - 5 . The l a t t e r ' s block diagrams o f the United States, i n the p a t t e r n developed by Dr. L. R. Harmon, show the main geographic regions, each of a size which i n d i c a t e s i t s p r o p o r t i o n o f the t o t a l U.S. baccalaureate, doctorate or p o s t d o c t o r a l popula- tion. When the r e g i o n a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of annual U.S. doctorates i s examined f o r changes between 19^5-1950, 1955-1960 and 1967 (Table 3 and Figure 3 ) , i t can be noted t h a t the Midwest >;as preeminent throughout, although i t s kl'fo of U.S. doctorates i n I9U5-5O, f e l l t o 39-/o m 1955-60 and t o 3H i n 1967, an o v e r a l l decline of % . S i m i l a r l y , the p r o p o r t i o n o f annual doctorates from New England and the m i d - A t l a n t i c regions, together amounting t o 37^ of the t o t a l i n 19^5-50, f e l l t o 31^0 i n 1955-60 and t o 28^, i n I 9 6 7 , again a decline of 9fo. During the -8- 

same i n t e r v a l , the p r o p o r t i o n of doctorates from the South rose from lOfo t o 15% t o 20/0, and t h a t from the West from 11% t o 15% t o 20%, a combined gain o f 19%, matching the decline i n the proportions of the Midwest and Northeast. As a r e - s u l t o f these changes, the r a t i o o f annual doctorates from the Midwest and the Northeast t o those from the South and West, which was about 80 t o 20 i n 19^5-50, had become 60 t o kO i n 1967 and i s c u r r e n t l y 57 t o k3 (1972). Another mode o f change leading t o the more equitable d i s t r i b u t i o n o f s p e c i a l i s t manpower over the country has been ontogenetic, i n v o l v i n g the progress o f i n d i v i d u a l s through the stages o f t h e i r p r e p a r a t i o n f o r career p u r s u i t s . Ex- amination o f the educational backigroiinds o f 2,26l immediate postdoctorals r e - sponding t o the NRC survey o f U.S. postdoctorals i n 1967, revealed t h a t the Northeast had been the preeminent source of baccalaureates and doctorates who subsequently pursued p o s t d o c t o r a l study and research, while the Midwest was i n second place (Table k and Figure k). By the stage o f p o s t d o c t o r a l a c t i t i v y how- ever, about 10% of the i n i t i a l group had moved t o the South (3%) or t o the West ( 6 % ) . I n the p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s study. Postdoctoral Education i n the United States (NAS/NRC, I969), Dr. R. B. C u r t i s summarized the process as f o l l o w s : "When we examine the geographic d i s t r i b u t i o n of the immediate postdoctorals a t t h e i r various educational l e v e l s , a general p a t t e r n u n f o l d s . As the population progresses from the baccalaureate t o the Ph.D. and from the Ph.D. t o the p o s t d o c t o r a l , i t becomes more u n i - formly d i s t r i b u t e d geographically. This i s t r u e , almost without ex- c e p t i o n , i n each f i e l d . The East and Midwest tend to fend ,their baccalaureates t o p o s t d o c t o r a l appointments m the South and West w i t h the West being the major b e n e f i c i a r y . The East p a r t i c u l a r l y i s the baccalaureate o r i g i n o f the eventual p o s t d o c t o r a l s , t o a greater extent than i t i s a baccalaureate o r i g i n o f Ph.D.'s generally. The s i t u a t i o n m the Midwest i s j u s t the opposite." I t i s interestin3 t h a t these d i s t i n c t i o n s became as c l e a r as they d i d i n the NRC 1967 survey, which included a v a r i e t y of categories o f postdoctorals: Fellows chosen i n n a t i o n a l competition by select panels; Trainees selected by f a c u l t y p a r t i c i p a n t s i n t r a j n i n g grant programs a t s i n g l e i n s t i t u t i o n s ; Research Associates selected by individua.l f a c u l t y vith research grants; and unspecified others. From departmental responses m the NRC I967 survey, of the k,^28 U.S. postdoctorals i n the EMP, b i o l o g i c a l and mp'Sical sc:pr'?'°,?^. i t afoeared t h a t only l , l l l + or 25% o f the t o t a l h e l d n a t i o n a l f e l l o w s h i p s , while the remaining 3,^1^ or 75% h e l d t r a i n e e s h i p s , research associateships or had other modes o f support. The d i s t i n c t i o n s i m p l i c i t i n these types o f p o s t d o c t o r a l support can now be recognized more c l e a r l y from conspicuous d i f f e r e n c e s between the r e g i o n a l d i s - t r i b u t i o n o f U.S. postdoctorals i n the 1967 NRC sui'vey and those holding n a t i o n a l fellovrships a t the end o f the s i x t i e s . Moreover, s i g n i f i c a n t f u r t h e r d i s t i n c - t i o n s appear t o e x i s t among the d i f f e r e n t p o s t d o c t o r a l f e l l o w s h i p programs them- selves. Comparison o f Regional D i s t r i b u t i o n of AFOSR Awardees w i t h NSF and NIH Fellows When one examines the r e g i o n a l d i s t r i b u t i o n o f U.S. postdoctorals h o l d i n g AFOSR awards and NSF and NIH f e l l o w s h i p s m the 1960's, t h a t of AFOSR Avrardees and NSF FelLows are very s i m i l a r (Table 5 and Figure 5 ) . Both d i f f e r substan- t i a l l y from t h a t o f NIH Fellows, and the l a t t e r , m t u r n , i s the only program t h a t bears some resemblence t o the d i s t r i b u t i o n of a l l U.S. p o s t d o c t o r a l respon- dents i n the NEC s^^rvey o f 1967 (Figure k). To expediLe comparison, t h e -9- 

r e s p e c t i v e p r o p o r t i o n s o f each group o f p o s t d o c t o r a l s can be presented sequen- t i a l l y f o r each U.S. r e g i o n i n the order o f i t s preeminence f o r AFOSR Awardees and NSF P o s t d o c t o r a l F e l l o w s ( F i g u r e 5 ) . New England and t h e m i d - A t l a n t i c r e g i o n or, together, t h e Northeast, was o u t s t a n d i n g l y t h e l e a d i n g r e g i o n i n a l l programs. I t had 35<^ o f a l l U.S. p o s t - d o c t o r a l s i n the NRC survey of I 9 6 7 , 3 H of a l l NIH P o s t d o c t o r a l F e l l o w s i n t h e U.S. i n 1970-71, ^2'/o o f a l l NSF P o s t d o c t o r a l F e l l o w s i n the U.S. i n I 9 6 9 - 7 I , and 52fo o f a l l AFOSR P o s t d o c t o r a l Awardees i n the U.S. i n I 9 6 I - 7 O , t h e l a t t e r r e p r e s e n t i n g a 17fo h i g h e r p r o p o r t i o n than t h a t o f a l l U.S. p o s t d o c t o r a l s i n 1967. Of t h e two component a r e a s o f the Northeast, New England had a l a r g e r p r o p o r t i o n than the m i d - A t l a n t i c a r e a i n a l l t h r e e f e l l o w s h i p programs. Res- p e c t i v e proportions o f the two a r e a s were iSfjo and l 6 ^ i n the case o f NIH F e l l o w s , 2% and 1% i n the case o f NSF F e l l o w s and 2% and 2 ^ i n t h e case o f AFOSR Avfardees. The West, r a t h e r than t h e Midwest, was i n second p l a c e , w i t h 22fo o f a l l U.S. p o s t d o c t o r a l s i n the NRC survey, 30fo o f a l l NIH Fellows and 38°^ each o f a l l NSF Fello-t/s and AFOSR A-vrardees. As f u r t h e r i n d i c a t i o n of the major degree to which the Northeast and the West have become l e a d i n g s e t t i n g s f o r p o s t d o c t o r a l study, they accoiinted together f o r 57'5b of a l l p o s t d o c t o r a l s i n the U.S. i n I 9 6 7 , f o r 6% of a l l r e c e n t NIK P o s t d o c t o r a l F e l l o w s , T o r 80°/, of a l l r e c e n t NSF P o s t - d o c t o r a l F e l l o w s , and f o r 90^o o f a l l AFOSR P o s t d o c t o r a l Awardees over the decade, I 9 6 I - 7 O . R e c i p r o c a l l y , t h e Midwest, which accounted f o r 21'^^ of a l l p o s t d o c t o r a l s i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s i n I 9 6 7 and f o r 2lfo of a l l r e c e n t NIH P o s t d o c t o r a l F e l l o w s , had only 1% of a l l r e c e n t NSF F e l l o w s and only % o f a l l AFOSR Awardees over the decade 1 9 6 I - 7 0 . S i m i l a r l y , the South which accoujited f o r 2 0 ^ o f a l l p o s t - d o c t o r a l s i n the U n i t e d S t a t e s m I 9 6 7 , had only lUfo o f r e c e n t NIH F e l l o w s , and only 5^5 each o f a l l r e c e n t NSF Fellows and AFOSR P o s t d o c t o r a l Awardees. To- gether, t h e r e f o r e , t h e .Midv/est and South accounted f o r hl% o f a l l U,.S. postdoc- t o r a l s i n 1967, f o r 35*^ of a l l r e c e n t NIH p o s t d o c t o r a l s , f o r 1% o f a l l r e c e n t NSF p o s t d o c t o r a l s and f o r only 1 0 ^ of a l l AFOSR p o s t d o c t o r a l s over the decade 1961-70. As a concluding f e a t u r e o f t h e r e g i o n a l d i s t r i b u t i o n o f U.S. p o s t d o c t o r a l s , the s e q u e n t i a l proporoions o f a l l AFOSR P o s t d o c t o r a l Awardees, whether i n the United S t a t e s or abroad, may be examined a t stages between t h e i r b a c c a l a u r e a t e s and c u r r e n t appointments (Table 6 and F i g u r e 6A and 6 B ) . I n terms of t h e i r c u r r e n t l o c a t i o n , the West i s s u b s t a n t i a l l y t h e r e g i o n o f predominant a t t r a c t i o n for Awardees m t h i s program. Proportions o f AFOSR Awardees l o c a t e d i n the West were 2 0 ^ a t the b a c c a l a u r e a t e , 2 9 ^ a t the doctorate, 2lPlo during postdoc- t o r a l study (the drop r e s i a t i n g from the l a r g e n\iraber abroad), 36^0 a t the stage of i n i t i a l appointment and, most r e c e n t l y , Uofo a t the stage of c u r r e n t employ- ment. I n second p l a c e , the p r o p o r t i o n of Awardees m the Northeast was kk'^jo a t the b a c c a l a u r e a t e , 35fo a t the doctorate, 2% diirmg the a^rard period, 3 0 ^ a t the stage o f i n i t i a l appointment and, most r e c e n t l y , 2 8 ^ a t the stage o f c u r r e n t employment. I n t h i r d p l a c e , t h e p r o p o r t i o n of Awardees l o c a t e d i n the Midwest was 2h% a t t h e b a c c a l a u r e a t e , 2 ^ ^ a t t h e doctorate, only % during p o s t d o c t o r a l study, IQPio a t i n i t i a l appointment and, most r e c e n t l y , 1 3 ^ a t the stage of c u r r e n t employment. Fourth, t h e p r o p o r t i o n of Awardees m the South was llfo a t the b a c c a l a u r e a t e , 11.% a t the doctorate, 37o during the avard p e r i o d , lO^o a t -10- 

i n i t i a l appointment and c u r r e n t l y i s again l l i . F i f t h and l a s t , a s f o r AFOSR Awardees o u t s i d e t h e U n i t e d S t a t e s , one obtained a f o r e i g n b a c c a l a u r e a t e i n Canada, the l a r g e p r o p o r t i o n o f of t h e t o t a l went abroad f o r t h e i r p o s t - d o c t o r a l study, and 12^ were s t i l l abroad a t t h e stage o f i n i t i a l employment. T h i s p r o p o r t i o n has s i n c e d e c l i n e d t o a r e s i d u a l k'fo who a r e c u r r e n t l y s t i l l em- ployed o u t s i d e t h e United S t a t e s - one m Canada, four i n England and two i n Israel. The dimensions o f change i n t h e r e g i o n a l d i s t r i b u t i o n o f s p e c i a l i s t man- power i n t h i s country dviring the s i x t i e s can be emphasized, i n c o n c l u s i o n , by comparing t h a t o f t h e AFOSR Awardees' c u r r e n t employment, j u s t presented, w i t h the l a s t follow-up o f Dr. Harmoi's d o c t o r a l cohorts o f I955 and 1960, a t t h e stage o f t h e i r employment, 3-8 /ears a f t e r t h e doctorate, i n I963 ( F i g u r e 6B, l a s t diagram). H a l f (50^) o f a l l these doctorates were employed about e q u a l l y i n t h e Northeast (26%) and Midv-c^st {2kio), another q u a r t e r were i n t h e South i2h'fo), but only l8/o, not even a q u a r t e r , were i n t h e West. I n t h e i r aggregate c a r e e r developments during the s-ixties u n t i l now, t h e AFOSR Awardees had r e - c a p i t u l a t e d the changes from thi:se e a r l i e r p a t t e r n s o f r e g i o n a l d i s t r i b u t i o n . S t a r t i n g a t t h e i r b a c c a l a u r e a t e s , w i t h a preponderant kkio of a l l Awardees i n the Northeast, 2kio i n t h e Midwest, 11^ i n t h e South and only 20^ i n t h e West, by the stage o f p r e s e n t employment, t h e i r d i s t r i b u t i o n has become i n v e r t e d . A much reduced 28^ a r e now i n the Northeast, only 13^ a r e i n the Midwest, t h e South has 11% and t h e r e a r e a r t r s i d u a l k'fo abroad. By c o n t r a s t , a much i n c r e a s e d kCffo o f the Awardees a r e now i n .he West f o r , c l e a r l y , throiighout t h e i r c a r e e r s , the AFOSR Awardees have implemented the 19th century a d v i c e o f Horace Greeley, "Go West, young man. Go WestJ" D i s t r i b u t i o n o f AFOSR Awardees by S t a t e s I n connection w i t h t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n of AFOSR Awardees and other groups i n r e g i o n s o f t h e United S t a t e s , i t should be emphasized t h a t each region c o n s i s t s of s e v e r a l s t a t e s , w i t h i n which q u i t e v a r y i n g , r a t h e r than e q u i v a l e n t , numbers of p o s t d o c t o r a l s may be l o c a t e d . T h e i r c o n c e n t r a t i o n i n a s i n g l e s t a t e or i n only a few s t a t e s o f a r e g i b n may thus g r e a t l y i n f l u e n c e r e g i o n a l proportions. I t i s o f i n t e r e s t , t h e r e f o r e , t o examine t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f t h e AFOSR Awardees and r e l a t e d groups by i n d i v i d u a l s t a t e s . The aggregate lk6 AFOSR Awardees, a t t h e f i v e stages o f b a c c a l a u r e a t e , doctorate, p o s t d o c t o r a l study, i n i t i a l and c u r r e n t employment, were l o c a t e d a t a t o t a l o f 39* s t a t e s . * * When the cumiaative nimiber o f Awardees a t these stages i s d i v i d e d by f i v e , t h e i n v o l v e d s t a t e s ' r e p r e s e n t a t i o n averaged be- tween 36.5 and 0.2 Awardees. As seen i n Table 7, Column A, the l e a d i n g f i v e s t a t e s accounted f o r 67%, the l e a d i n g t e n f o r 82^0 and the l e a d i n g 25 s t a t e s f o r 95^ o f t h e s e averages. The t e n l e a d i n g s t a t e s and t h e average number o f Awardees l o c a t e d i n them were: C a l i f o r n i a - 36.5, New York - l^.h, * The D i s t r i c t o f Columbia i s i n c l u d e d here a s a s t a t e . ** I t sho\ad be noted t h a t t h e s t a t e s o f t h e AFOSR group i n c l u d e d a l s o those i n which the Awardees were l o c a t e d a t b a c c l a u r e a t e and d o c t o r a l stages before and stages o f i n i t i a l and c u r r e n t employment 8-fter t h e i r p o s t d o c t o r a l study. During t h e i r p o s t d o c t o r a l p e r i o d s , AFOSR Awardees were l o c a t e d i n only 12 s t a t e s , t h e s i x l e a d i n g ones o f which were i d e n t i c a l w i t h those l e a d i n g i n the average o f f i v e s t a g e s . -11- 

Massachusetts - I 5 . 3 , I l l i n o i s - 9 - 2 , New J e r s e y - 8 . 7 , Maryland - 5 . 8 , C o n n e c t i c u t - 3 . 8 , P e n n s y l v a n i a - 3 . 6 , Michigan - 3 . 0 and Texas - 3 - 0 . C a l i f o r n i a w i t h an average of 3 6 . 5 Awardees was f a r i n the l e a d , w h i l e New York and Massachusetts were e s s e n t i a l l y t i e d f o r second p l a c e , w i t h r e s p e c t i v e averages of 15,1+ and I 5 . 3 . Together these three l e a d i n g s t a t e s , w i t h a cumula- t i v e average of 6 7 . 2 Awardees, exceeded the cumulative average of 6 0 . I A m r d e e s o f the remaining 36 s t a t e s combined. A pronounced c o n c e n t r a t i o n a t l e a d i n g s t a t e s , analagous to t h a t of AFOSR Awardees, can be noted a l s o i n the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f a l l U.S. p o s t d o c t o r a l s i n the NRC survey of 1967. Of the t o t a l l^,i^•05 p o s t d o c t o r a l s d i s t r i b u t e d i n kk s t a t e s i n 1967, 2 , 1 5 3 or k&fo were l o c a t e d i n the l e a d i n g f i v e s t a t t j s , 3 , 0 6 l or 68/0 i n the l e a d i n g t e n and ^1,203 or 95^ i n the l e a d i n g 25 s t a t e s ( T a b l e 7 , Colimm C ) . S i m i l a r l y , of the t o t a l 2 , 1 6 3 NSF and NIH P o s t d o c t o r a l F e l l o w s , together d i s t r i - buted i n 43 s t a t e s i n 1 9 6 9 - 7 I , 1,222 or ^6^0 were l o c a t e d i n the l e a d i n g f i v e s t a t e s , 1,618 or jkio i n the l e a d i n g t e n and 2 , 0 7 8 or 96^ i n the l e a d i n g 25 s t a t e s ( T a b l e 7 , Column B)*, 17 of these l e a d i n g s t a t e s were common to a l l t h r e e of the p o s t d o c t o r a l groups and an a d d i t i o n a l seven to two of the t h r e e . F i n a l l y , i t may be noted t h a t t h e r e i s a remarkable f u r t h e r agreement be- tween the 25 s t a t e s i n which the t h r e e groups of p o s t d o c t o r a l s have tended t o concentrate and the 25 s t a t e s l e a d i n g i n the average of e i g h t i n d i c e s of h i g h e r education and r e s e a r c h i n the s c i e n c e s and engineering i n t h i s country. Table 7 , Column D, shows, f o r FY 1968, the 25 s t a t e s l e a d i n g i n aver£,ges of t h e i r pro- p o r t i o n s of the f o l l o w i n g U.S. t o t a l s : p o p u l a t i o n , p e r s o n a l income, expendi- t u r e s f o r h i g h e r education, t o t a l enrollment i n h i g h e r education, enrollment f o r masters and d o c t o r a l degrees, numbers of d o c t o r a t e s awarded i n s c i e n c e and en- g i n e e r i n g , t o t a l F e d e r a l o b l i g a t i o n s to u n i v e r s i t i e s and c o l l e g e s , and F e d e r a l o b l i g a t i o n s f o r academic s c i e n c e . These l a t t e r 25 s t a t e s d i f f e r by only two from the 25 l e a d i n g i n p o s t d o c t o r a l s i n the 1967 NRC survey, by only t h r e e from the 25 l e a d i n g i n NSF and NIH P o s t d o c t o r a l F e l l o w s i n I 9 6 9 - 7 I , and by only s i x from the 25 l e a d i n g i n AFOSR Awardees diuring the f i v e stages of t h e i r c a r e e r s . With t h i s i n s i g h t concerning t h e i r d i s t r i b u t i o n by s t a t e s , i t now becomes p o s s i b l e to d e s c r i b e the r e g i o n a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of AFOSR Awardees and other p o s t - d o c t o r a l groups e l a b o r a t e d above. The Northeast i s a l e a d i n g r e g i o n f o r p o s t - d o c t o r a l a c t i v i t y because of the c o n c e n t r a t i o n of Awardees i n New York, Massa- c h u s e t t s , Pennsylvania, Connecticut and New J e r s e y . The West i s a l e a d i n g r e g i o n p r i n c i p a l l y because of the c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f p o s t d o c t o r a l Awardees i n C a l i f o r n i a , but a l s o because of Awardees i n Washington, Colorado, Utah, Oregon and A r i z o n a . The Midwest i s r e p r e s e n t e d r e g i o n a l l y c h i e f l y because of Awardees i n I l l i n o i s , Michigan, Wisconsin, I n d i a n a and Ohio. The South i s r e p r e s e n t e d r e g i o n a l l y c h i e f l y because of Awardees i n Maryland, Texas, North C a r o l i n a , V i r g i n i a and F l o r i d a . O v e r a l l , the top f i v e s t a t e s a r e C a l i f o r n i a and, i n v a r y i n g order i n d i f f e r e n t groups, New York, Massachusetts, I l l i n o i s and Pennsylvania. D i s t r i b u t i o n of AEOSR Awardees a t U.S. Universities As noted above f o r r e g i o n s , AFOSR Awardees and r e l a t e d p o s t d o c t o r a l groups a r e by no means d i s t r i b u t e d uniformly w i t h i n s t a t e s but, t y p i c a l l y , a r e concen- t r a t e d i n urban or suburban s e t t i n g s , p r i n c i p a l l y a t U.S. u n i v e r s i t i e s . The c o n c e n t r a t i o n of AFOSR Awardees a t such i n s t i t u t i o n s i s the c h i e f f a c t o r account- ing f o r t h e i r v a r y i n g d i s t r i b u t i o n by s t a t e s . -12- 

When the cumiilative number o f AFOSR Avmrdees a t a s i n g l e i n s t i t u t i o n a t each o f f i v e career stages was d i v i d e d by f i v e , the involved i n s t i t u t i o n ' s r e - p r e s e n t a t i o n o f Awardees averaged between 10,0 and 0.2. As seen i n Table 8, Column A, the 15 u n i v e r s i t i e s leading i n the average o f t h e i r AFOSR Awardees were: U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a , Berkeley - 10.0, Stanford - 9-0, Massachusetts I n s t i t u t e o f Technology - 7.0, Harvard - 6.6, C a l i f o r n i a I n s t i t u t e o f Technology • S.k, P r i n c e t o n - 3.k, Chicago - J+.6, C o r n e l l - h.6, Columbia - k.O, Yale - 3-2, U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a , Los Angeles - 3.0, Johns Hopkins - 3.0, Wisconsin - 2.6, I l l i n o i s - 2.k, and Michigan - 1.8, The leading 25 i n s t i t u t i o n s thus accounted f o r 73% and the remaining 91 f o r 27^0 o f these averages. As shown i n more d e t a i l i n Figure 7, the percent d i s t r i b u t i o n o f avera^/js o f the AFOSR Awardees a t f i v e career stages a t l l 6 academic i n s t i t u t i o n f were: f i r s t 25 i n - s t i t u t i o n s - 73^0, second 25 - ihi, t h i r d 25 - 6%, f o u r t h 2^ - ki, and remaining l6 - 3fo. As shown i n Figure 8, i n f i n e r g r a i n , the percent d i s t r i b u t i o n o f the 7S<fo o f Awardees a t the leading 25 i n s t i t u t i o n s were: f i r s t I'ive i n s t i t u t i o n s - 33^0, second f i v e - l 8 ^ , t h i r d f i v e - ICffo, f o u r t h and f i f t h f i v e - 5^ each. I t may be noted t h a t , by themselves, the t e n leading u n i v e r s i t i e s accounted f o r a cumulative 51% of these averages, or s l i g h t l y more than the remaining k&fo a t t r i b u t a b l e t o the averages o f the 106 other i n s t i t u t i o n s combined. Comparison o f the I n s t i t u t i o n a l D i s t r i b u t i o n o f AFOSR Awardees w i t h NSF and NIH Fellows A remarkably s i m i l a r c o n c e n t r a t i o n o f N S F and N I H Postdoctoral Fellows a t leading U.S. i n s t i t u t i o n s i n I 9 6 I - 7 I can be noted i n Table 8, Column B, and Figures 9 and 10. Twelve o f the leading I 5 i n s t i t u t i o n s were i d e n t i c a l w i t h those o f A F O S R Awardees, though not i n p r e c i s e l y the same order. As f o r the other three instances, the U n i v e r s i t y c f C c l i f o r n i a , Sen Dicgc and the Univer- sities o f Washington and Pennsylvania were i n the f i r s t I 5 i n s t i t u t i o n s of N S F and N I H Fellows, but s l i g h t l y lower i n the A F O S R l i s t ; w h i l e Princeton and the U n i v e r s i t i e s o f I l l i n o i s and Michigan were i n the f i r s t I 5 i n s t i t u t i o n s o f the A F O S R Awardees, but lower i n the N S F / N I H l i s t s . When the two l a t t e r programs are considered separately, the N S F Postdoctoral Fellows were'more concentrated at the leading 25 u n i v e r s i t i e s o f the t o t a l ) than were N I H Fellows (62% o f the t o t a l ) and, w i t h i n the leading 25, a t the f i r s t f i v e i n s t i t u t i o n s ( N S F - kkio and N I H - 23% o f the t o t a l ) and second f i v e i n s t i t u t i o n s ( N S F - 1% and N I H - ihio of the t o t a l ) . I n these respects, the d i s t r i b u t i o n o f U.S. p o s t d o c t o r a l s a t academic i n s t i t u t i o n s i n the NRC survey o f I967, shown i n Table 8, Column C and Figures 11 and 12, i s almost i d e n t i c a l w i t h t h a t o f N I H Fellows, w i t h Ski o f the t o t a l a t the leading 25 i n s t i t u t i o n s , 22% a t the f i r s t f i v e and 15% a t the second f i v e . The NRC svxvey data thus more c l o s e l y resemble t h a t o f N I H Fellows than o f N S F Fellows and A F O S R Awardees. As shown i n Table 8, Colvmin D, a s t r i k i n g f u r t h e r agreement e x i s t s between the 25 i n s t i t u t i o n s leading i n the numbers o f A F O S R Awardees and other p o s t d o c t o r a l groups Just described and the 25 " i n s t i t u t i o n s i n t h i s country leading i n f i v e more general i n d i c e s o f d o c t o r a l and p o s t d o c t o r a l education and research i n I968-7I: Federal o b l i g a t i o n s f o r academic science, doctorates awarded, q u a l i t y o f graduate f a c u l t y , and i n s t i t u t i o n a l choices o f N S F and N I H p r e d o c t o r a l and p o s t d o c t o r a l f e l l o w s h i p awardees. D i s t r i b u t i o n o f AFOSR Awardees i n C a l i f o r n i a Concluding a t t e n t i o n may be d i r e c t e d t o C a l i f o r n i a which leads the states i n employment o f former AFOSR Awardees; the c u r r e n t numbers a t the leading e i g h t states being: C a l i f o r n i a - I+5, New York - 13, Massachusetts - 9, I l l i n o i s - 8, Maryland - 8, Pennsylvania - 6, Connecticut - 5 and New Jersey - 5. As sho\7h i n 1 -13- 

Figure 13, t h e Awardees I n C a l i f o r n i a , a t h i r d o f a l l I 3 6 AFOSR Awardees i n the United States, are d i s t r i b u t e d a t 17 i n s t i t u t i o n s . Twenty-five are a t nine campuses o f the U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a - Berkeley - 10, Los Angeles and San Diego - 3 each. R i v e r s i d e , San Francisco and Santa Cruz - 2 each, and Davis, I r v i n e and Santa Barbara - 1 each. One Awardee i s a t the C a l i f o r n i a State U n i v e r s i t y , F u l l e r t o n . Sixteen are a t fovir p r i v a t e u n i v e r s i t i e s : Stanford - 7, C a l i f o r n i a I n s t i t u t e o f Technology - 6 , U n i v e r s i t y o f Southern C a l i f o r n i a - 2 and Claremont Graduate School - 1. The remaining Awardees are a t three non- academic i n s t i t u t i o n s : Rand Corporation - 1, TRW Systems Group - 1, and McDonald-Doviglas Astronautics - 1. To come back once more t o the r e g i o n a l d i s - t i i b u t i o n o f Awardees, o f the kCffo o f a l l U.S. AFOSR Awardees c u r r e n t l y employed i r the West, 33^0 are i n C a l i f o r n i a and, o f t h i s l a t t e r p r o p o r t i o n , 3lfo o f them ace a t the state's leading x i n i v e r s i t i e s . P u b l i c a t i o n s and C i t a t i o n s o f AFOSR Awardees As a. concluding f e a t u r e o f t h i s Summary Report o f the AFOSR Postdoctoral Program, the research p r o d u c t i v i t y o f 102 Awardees w i t h tmique names (70^ o f the t o t a l li|-6) has been assessed by the cumulative numbers o f t h e i r p u b l i c a t i o n s , and the c i t a t i o n s o f these p u b l i c a t i o n s by others, i n the s c i e n t i f i c l i t e r a t u r e . These p u b l i c a t i o n s and c i t a t i o n s were covinted by the I n s t i t u t e o f S c i e n t i f i c I n f o r m a t i o n , P h i l a d e l p h i a , f o r the years I961 and 196^1 through 1970. Publica- t i o n s i n years other than these were not counted, though c i t a t i o n s t o e a r l i e r p u b l i c a t i o n s have been included. For comparison, analogous data was r e t r i e v e d f o r 892 a p p l i c a n t s t o the program who d i d not receive AFOSR awards, as w e l l as f o r two matched but random groups o f doctorate r e c i p i e n t s o f U.S. u n i v e r s i t i e s , from the O f f i c e o f S c i e n t i f i c Personnel's Doctorate Record F i l e , one group o f which had pursued p o s t d o c t o r a l study and research w h i l e the other had not. As might be expected, i n a l l f o u r o f these groups, t h e cumulative numbers o f p u b l i c a t i o n s and c i t a t i o n s were highest f o r those completing t h e i r doctor- ates and p o s t d o c t o r a l a c t i v i t i e s e i t h e r s h o r t l y before o r during the e a r l y years o f the 1960's and declined p r o g r e s s i v e l y t o approach or reach zero through the balance o f the p e r i o d t o 1970. As shown i n Figure ik, the mean c i t a t i o n s o f the AFOSR Awardees considerably exceeded those o f a l l three o f the c o n t r o l groups, except f o r the s i n g l e cohort o b t a i n i n g doctorates before 1958, i n which only two AFOSR Awardees were e a r l i e r represented. I n an intermediate p o s i t i o n , the mean c i t a t i o n s o f AFOSR a p p l i c a n t s , who d i d not receive awards, overlapped those o f the Doctorate Record F i l e groxip who had obtained p o s t d o c t o r a l ex- perience under other auspices, again w i t h the s i n g l e exception o f the cohort w i t h pre-1958 doctorates which contained very few AFOSR a p p l i c a n t s . Close t o the base-line, the mean c i t a t i o n s o f the Doctorate Record F i l e group w i t h o u t p o s t d o c t o r a l experience had an exceedingly low p r o f i l e . These data, assembled and made a v a i l a b l e by Dr. L. R. Harmon (1973), i d e n t i f y i n terms o f t h e i r mean c i t a t i o n s t h e remarkably favorable standing o f the AFOSR Awardees i n comparison w i t h the other groups. I n a d d i t i o n , honorable mention should go t o AFOSR applicants w i t h o u t awards, whose mean c i t a t i o n s appeared equivalent t o those o f a random group o f d o c t o r a l graduates w i t h p o s t d o c t o r a l experience i n other programs.* The mean c i t a t i o n s o f these groups w i t h p o s t d o c t o r a l a c t i v i t y exceeded by a considerable margin those o f doctorates w i t h o u t such experience. * A c t u a l l y , a number o f these a p p l i c a n t s t o the AFOSR program subsequently gained p o s t d o c t o r a l experience under other auspices. -Ih- 

Patterns o f P u b l i c a t i o n and C i t a t i o n o f AFOSR Avardees i n D i f f e r e n t F i e l d s When the a c t u a l numbers o f c i t a t i o n s o f AFOSR Avardees are summed f o r co- h o r t s by doctorate years, as an a l l - f i e l d t o t a l and by t h e Avardees' f i v e major s p e c i a l t y f i e l d s , the symmetrical o v e r a l l p r o f i l e i s seen t o be composed o f q u i t e disparate f i e l d p a t t e r n s (Figure I 5 ) . The l a r g e s t number o f c i t a t i o n s vere o f p u b l i c a t i o n s i n the f i e l d s o f physics and b i o l o g y . The number o f c i t a - t i o n s i n the f i e l d o f chemistry occupied an intermediate p o s i t i o n , v h i l e those i n t h e f i e l d s o f mathematics and engineering vere much fever i n number. When the cumiilative numbers o f c i t a t i o n s o f the Avardees' p u b l i c a t i o n s vere assembled by t h e i r f i v e major s p e c i a l t y f i e l d s , the same d i f f e r e n t i a l f i e l d - r e l a t e d c i t a - t i o n p a t t e r n s vere displayed (Table 9 and Figure 1 6 ) . There vere s u b s t a n t i a l l y l a r g e r numbers o f t o t a l c i t a t i o n s o f p u b l i c a t i o n s i n chemistry, physics and b i o l o g y , v h i c h together numbered 3 > 5 6 l f o r 73 Avardees or an average o f k9 per Av.-ardee; as compared v i t h those dn mathematics and engineering, v h i c h together numbered hlO f o r 26 Avardees or an average o f I 5 per Avardee. These d i s t i n c - t i o n s h e l d as v e i l f o r c i t a t i o n s o f p u b l i c a t i o n s i n component f i e l d s v h i c h , i n decreasing order, vere: b i o l o g y - 1,372 c i t a t i o n s f o r 2k Avardees, or 57 per Avardee; physics - 1 , 1 6 3 f o r 26 Avardees, or ^5 per Avardee; chemistry - 1,026 f o r 23 Avardees, or ^5 per Avardee; mathematics - 23O f o r 13 Avardees, or I 8 per Avardee; and engineering - I 8 0 f o r 13 Avardees, or 6 per Avardee. Analogous, but much l e s s marked, d i s t i n c t i o n s may be noted also i n numbers o f p u b l i c a t i o n s by f i e l d s v h i c h , i n descending order, vere: chemistry - 262 by 23 Avardees, or an average o f 11 per Avardee; physics - 26O by 26 Avardees, or 10 per Amrdee; b i o l o g y - 200 by 2k Avardees, or 8 per Avardee; mathematics - 102 by I 3 Avardees, or 8 per Avardee; and engineering - 85 by 13 Avardees, or 6 per Avardee Such v a r i a t i o n s i n the average c i t a t i o n s o f r e l a t i v e l y s i m i l a r numbers o f p u b l i - cations imply t h a t the c i t a t i o n s o f these Avardees vere not simply l i n e a r de- r i v a t i v e s o f t h e nmbers o f t h e i r p u b l i c a t i o n s . I n agreement, the average o f c i t a t i o n s per p u b l i c a t i o n by f i e l d vere: b i o l o g y - 6 . 8 , physics - chemistry - 3-95 mathematics - 2 . 2 and engineering - 2 . 1 . When the cumulative c i t a t i o n s o f AFOSR Avardees by f i e l d s vere considered as p r o p o r t i o n s o f the t o t a l k,031, r e s p e c t i v e percents vere: b i o l o g y - 1 , 3 7 2 (3H o f the t o t a l ) , physics - 1 , 1 6 3 (29/0), cheirfistry - 1,026 (25^0), mathematics - 230 {6i) and engineering - I 8 0 (4^). Cumulative p u b l i c a t i o n s and t h e i r p r o p o r t i o n s o f the t o t a l 917 vere: chemistry - 262 ( 2 8 f o ) , physics - 260 (2%), b i o l o g y - 200 ( 2 2 ^ ) , mathematics - 102 {iVfo) and engineering - 85 {%). I n each f i e l d , up t o t v o - t h i r d s o f t h e c x t a t i o n s i n the l o v e r h a l f o f t h e range vere o f Avardees vho began t h e i r p o s t d o c t o r a l a c t i v i t i e s betveen I 9 6 8 and 1970. I n the case o f these Avardees, there simply had not been an adequate amount o f time f o r the completion and p u b l i c a t i o n o f research, and i t s c i t a - t i o n i n the p u b l i c a t i o n s o f others, comparable t o t h a t o f Avardees completing t h e i r p o s t d o c t o r a l experience i n e a r l i e r years o f the s i x t i e s . The Avardees i n -each f i e l d vere, t h e r e f o r e , d i v i d e d i n t o more-cited and l e s s - c i t e d halves and t h e i r r e s p e c t i v e c i t a t i o n s are presented i n the sub-columns o f Figure 1 6 . For the more-cited group o f 53 Avardees, the average number o f c i t a t i o n s per Avardee, v h i c h vas 67 f o r a l l f i e l d s combined, vas: b i o l o g y - 9 6 , physics - 8 0 , chemistry - 7 9 , mathematics - 30 and engineering - 2k. Again, f o r t h e more- c i t e d h a l f o f the Avardees, the average number o f p u b l i c a t i o n s per Avardee, v h i c h vas 12 f o r a l l f i e l d s combined, vas: chemistry - I 7 , physics - I 5 , mathematics - 1 2 , b i o l o g y - 10 and engineering - 9 . Last, f o r the more-cited group, the average number o f c i t a t i o n s per p u b l i c a t i o n , v h i c h vas 5 . 3 f o r a l l f i e l d s com- bined, vas: b i o l o g y - 9 . 8 , physics - 5 . 3 , chemistry - k.S and mathematics and engineering - 2 . 6 each. -15- 

To generalize, on the basis o f t h i s data f o r a l i m i t e d number o f AFOSR Awardees, those i n chemistry and physics have published more feequently than those i n b i o l o g y , mathematics o r engineering. With respect t o the c i t a t i o n o f t h e i r p u b l i c a t i o n s , those i n b i o l o g y , physics and chemistry have been c i t e d most f r e q u e n t l y , i n t h a t order, and considerably more o f t e n than those i n mathe- matics o r engineering. A l l i n d i c a t i o n s p o i n t t o the nvmiber o f c i t a t i o n s as being something more than a simple d e r i v a t i v e o f the number o f p u b l i c a t i o n s . The p o s s i b i l i t y o f d i f f e r e n t i a l , f i e l d - r e l a t e d p a t t e r n s o f s c i e n t i f i c and tech- n i c a l communication, suggested by the data, sho\ild be explored w i t h much l a r g e r populations o f s c i e n t i s t s . C i t a t i o n and P u b l i c a t i o n Scorer, o f I n d i v i d u a l AFOSR Awardees and A p p l i c a n t s When the o v e r a l l ^^,031 c i t a t i o n s qf 917 p u b l i c a t i o n s , accumulat.ed by 102 AFOSR Awardees, are examined i n terms o f i n d i v i d u a l scores, sub-totals o f 2 , 1 0 8 c i t a t i o n s ( 5 2 ^ o f a l l citations.) o f 2k0 p u b l i c a t i o n s (26<fo o f a l l p u b l i c a t i o n s ) are a t t r i b u t a b l e t o j u s t I 5 o f the highest-scoring Awardees {l% o f a l l Awar- dees). The remaining 1 , 9 2 3 c i t a t i o n s {k&fo of t o t a l ) o f 6 ? ? p u b l i c a t i o n s {iki of t o t a l ) were accumulated by 87 lower-scoring Awardees {Q^io o f a l l Awardees). The c i t a t i o n scores o f i n d i v i d u a l Awardees i n t h i s l a t t e r group o f 87 ranged by small increments from zero t o a h i g h of 6 7 . As seen i n Figure 1 7 , the c i t a - t i o n scores of i n d i v i d u a l Awardees i n the highest-scoring group o f I 5 ranged from 7 1 t o a h i g h o f 3 6 2 . I n tae case o f seven o f these Awardees, scores rose by small increments from 7 I t o 9 5 - For the next s i x o f these Awardees, scores rose by l a r g e r steps from 122 t o 1 8 6 . Of the two remaining Awardees, the runner-up had a c i t a t i o n score o f 217 and the highest-scoring person a score o f 362 c i t a t i o n s . By sub-groups o f t h e I 5 h i g h e s t - s c o r i n g Awardees, the l e a d i n g f i v e had 1,120 c i t a t i o n s of Ilk p u b l i c a t i o n s , the second f i v e had 58^ c i t a t i o n s o f "jk p u b l i c a t i o n s and the t h i r d f i v e had hok c i t a t i o n s o f p u b l i c a t i o n s . For the three groups o f f i v e , p r o p o r t i o n s o f c i t a t i o n s o f the t o t a l i+,031 were respec- t i v e l y 2 8 ^ , ikio and 10^; comparable p r o p o r t i o n s o f p u b l i c a t i o n s o f the t o t a l 917 were r e s p e c t i v e l y 12^, % and % . By f i e l d s , the I 5 Awardees leading i n c i t a t i o n scores were i n : b i o l o g y - 6 , physics - 5, chemistry - 2 and mathema- t i c s and engineering - 1 each. Of these I 5 Awardees, s i x received t h e i r awards i n I961, four i n I 9 6 2 - 6 3 , three i n I 9 6 U and one each i n I 9 6 5 and 1967. An i n t e r v a l o f f i v e t o t e n years f o l l o w i n g the p o s t d o c t o r a l experience thus appeared needed t o acctunulate these h i g h e s t c i t a t i o n scores. I t should be noted here t h a t among the 892 applicants who d i d not receive AROSR awards, the leading I 5 o f t h a t group accimiiilated c i t a t i o n scores matching or s l i g h t l y exceeding those o f the l e a d i n g AFOSR Awardees. The h i g h e s t - c i t e d a p p l i c a n t received hoQ c i t a t i o n s , t h r e e others had c i t a t i o n scores o f 3 8 2 , 370 and 362, the l a t t e r t y i n g the top score o f AFOSR Awardees, w h i l e 11 other a p p l i c a n t s had scores ranging from 283 down t o 1 9 7 . These I 5 leading a p p l i c a n t s , who d i d not receive AFOSR Awards, accumulated an aggregate kyOk'i c i t a t i o n s o f 3^+^+ p u b l i c a t i o n s , o r s l i g h t l y more than the 1+,031 c i t a t i o n s o f 917 p u b l i c a t i o n s o f the 102 AFOSR Awardees combined. I t may be noted t h a t t e n o f these I 5 lead- i n g a p p l i c a n t s , f o r whom i n f o r m a t i o n could be r e t r i e v e d , had gained p o s t d o c t o r a l experience, analogous t o t h a t o f AFOSR Awardees, under other auspices. I n a recent p u b l i c a t i o n i n Science, two s o c i o l o g i s t s , Jonathan and Stephen Cole, have a p p l i e d C i t a t i o n Index data t o the study of u n i v e r s i t y p h y s i c i s t s and e v a l u a t i o n o f the so-called "Ortega Hypothesis", t h a t "the work o f the -16- 

great s c i e n t i s t i s b u i l t upon a pyramid o f small discoveries made by average s c i e n t i s t s . " Equating the q u a l i t y o f s c i e n t i f i c c o n t r i b u t i o n s w i t h the number o f c i t a t i o n s o f authors, the Coles conclude t h a t "a r e l a t i v e l y small number o f s c i e n t i s t s produce work t h a t becomes the base o f f u t u r e discoveries i n physics." Although a considerably l a r g e r amount o f study i s needed before substantive conclusions can be drawn, l e t alone any sweeping s o c i o l o g i c a l g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s , i t i s o f i n t e r e s t t o note t h a t , o f the almost 1 , 0 0 0 applicants and awardees i n the AFOSR Postdoctoral Program, the c i t a t i o n scores o f 2 0 or about 2% have ranged, between 200-1+00, a t the top o f the scale. There i s no sharp discon- t i n u i t y between these scores, however, and those o f the re-jaining 3% o f p a r t i - c i p a n t s , b u t only a continuum o f small steps diminishing u l t i m a t e l y t o zero. Current I n s t i t u t i o n a l D i s t r i b u t i o n o f AFOSR Awardees-Relat.^d t o Their P u b l i c a t i o n s and C i t a t i o n s To provide a glimpse o f i n d i v i d u a l i n s t i t u t i o n s , the cumulative p u b l i c a t i o n s and c i t a t i o n s o f 1+3 AFOSR Awardees c u r r e n t l y employed a t e i g h t leading U.S. u n i v e r s i t i e s are compared i n Figvire 1 9 . These k'i o r k2% o f the t o t a l accounted f o r klO o r k% o f a l l p u b l i c a t i o n s and 2 , 1 2 6 o r 53^0 o f a l l c i t a t i o n s o f Awardees i n the program. The 20 Awardees a t a l l nine campuses o f the U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a * had I 8 7 p u b l i c a t i o n s ( 2 0 ^ o f a l l ) and 8 9 I c i t a - t i o n s ( 2 2 ^ o f a l l ) . By comparison the 2 0 Awardees a t Stanford, C a l i f o r n i a I n s t i t u t e o f Technology, U n i v e r s i t y o f Washington, Johns Hopkins U n i v e r s i t y , Northwestern U n i v e r s i t y and the U n i v e r s i t y o f Chicago, together had 20h p u b l i - cations (22% o f a l l ) and 990 c i t a t i o n s {,2k'jo o f a l l ) , or s l i g h t l y higher numbers. The average number o f p u b l i c a t i o n s per Awardee, which was 9 . 5 f o r t h i s group and y.O f o r the t o t a l AJb'USK Program, ranged from an average o f l b . 5 a t Northwestern, 1 2 . 5 a t the U n i v e r s i t y of Washington, 1 1 . 7 a t C a l i f o r n i a I n s t i - t u t e o f Technology and 1 1 . 2 a t Stanford, through 9 , 3 a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a , t o 6 . 5 a t Johns Hopkins, 6 . 3 a t Wisconsin and 5 . 6 a t Chicago. The average number o f c i t a t i o n s per Awardee, which was kS f o r t h i s group and 39 f o r the t o t a l AFOSR Program, ranged from l t ) 3 a t the U n i v e r s i t y of Washington, 81 a t Wisconsin, 6 7 a t Northwestern, 6 0 a t C a l i f o r n i a I n s t i t u t e o f Technology, 1+6 a t Stanford, a t the U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a , 38 a t Johns Hopkins, t o 8 a t Chicago. The combination o f c h r o n o l o g i c a l , f i e l d - r e l a t e d and i n d i v i d u a l v a r i a t i o n s makes i t impossible t o draw a d d i t i o n a l g e n e r a l i z a t i o n s concerning i n s t i t u t i o n a l c o r r e l a t e s o f p u b l i c a t i o n s and c i t a t i o n s f o r these Awardees. Summation As t h i s r e p o r t has i n d i c a t e d , over the decade o f the s i x t i e s the A i r Force O f f i c e o f S c i e n t i f i c Research has made i t possible f o r 1I+6 outstanding young .^investigators t o pursue, a t leading research centers, advanced study and r e - search i n areas o f the natviral and a p p l i e d sciences relevant t o the research mission o f the A i r Force. The high r e p u t a t i o n o f the program i s a t t e s t e d by the almost 1 , 4 0 0 * The " M u l t i v e r s i t y " o f C a l i f o r n i a i s presented i n t h i s section and Figure I 9 as a s i n g l e i n s t i t u t i o n t o permit i n c l u s i o n o f AFOSR Awardees on a l l o f i t s nine campuses. A l l previous references t o the U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a , as i n Table 8 , have been t o i n d i v i d i i a l campuses o f the system. -17- 

a p p l i c a t i o n s f o r the 1^ awards a v a i l a b l e over the decade. The h i g h selec- t i v i t y o f the program i s r e l a t e d t o t h i s , f o r only one out o f every t e n a p p l i c a n t s was chosen f o r an award. Two f a c t o r s c o n t r i b u t e d t o t h i s selec- tivity: each a p p l i c a n t had t o be nominated by an outstanding s c i e n t i s t and these nominees were then evaluated by boards o f outstanding s c i e n t i s t s and engineers appointed by NAS/NRC. Awardees pursued t h e i r advanced stud;y and research a t l e a d i n g u n i v e r s i t i e s , i n s t i t u t e s and centers both i n t h i s country and abroad, e i t h e r i n c o l l a b o r a t i o n w i t h or under the supervision o f experienced s c i e n t i s t s who were o f t e n i n t e r - national figures i n t h e i r respective f i e l d s . Although the i n s t i t u t i o n a l base o f the undergraduate education o f these AFOSR Awardees was broad and ranging, the group became concentrated f o r the most p a r t a t the leading 20 U.S. u n i v e r s i t i e s during the periods o f t h e i r d o c t o r a l and p o s t d o c t o r a l study and research. I n the i n t e r v a l between then and now, however, the group has again dispersed and once more d i s p l a y s a balanced d i s t r i b u t i o n a t the leading 20 U.S. i n s t i t u t i o n s , a t others o f the f i r s t 100 and a t a number o f developing i n s t i t u t i o n s . Outside o f academia, groups o f former awardees are employed i n about equivalent numbers a t Federal or n o n - p r o f i t l a b o r a t o r i e s and i n the research programs o f major R & D industries. Patterns o f the c u r r e n t d i s t r i b u t i o n o f former AFOSR Awardees have i n t e r - e s t i n g geographical as w e l l as i n s t i t u t i o n a l f e a t i i r e s . Upon i n i t i a t i n g t h e i r educational p r e p a r a t i o n , t h e i r predominant concentration was i n the Northeast and Midwest. A t each stage since, t h i s p r o p o r t i o n has diminished and, d i s t r i b u t i o n by states i s i n the order o f C a l i f o r n i a , New York, Massachusetts, I l l i n o i s , Maryland, e t c . , w i t h C a l i f o r n i a considerably i n the lead. F i n a l l y , i t has been p o s s i b l e t o evaluate the i n f l u e n c e o f the postdoc- t o r a l experience upon the research p r o d u c t i v i t y o f these AFOSR Awardees, by comparing the numbers o f t h e i r p u b l i c a t i o n s , and the c i t a t i o n s o f these pub- l i c a t i o n s by others, over the p e r i o d t o 1970, w i t h those o f postdoctorals i n other programs and o f d o c t o r a l graduates w i t h o u t p o s t d o c t o r a l experience. The achievements o f the AFOSR Awardees exceeded those o f a l l other groups by con- siderable dimensions. -18- 

REFEIRENCES Bayer, Alan E. I n t e r r e g i o n a l M i g r a t i o n and the Education o f American S c i e n t i s t s . Sociology o f Education, 1+1:88, I968. Cole, Jonathan R. & Cole, Stephen. The Ortega Hypothesis. Science, 178:368, 1972. Equitable D i s t r i b u t i o n o f R & D Funds by Government Agencies. Hearings before the Subcommittee on Government Research, Parts 1-3. U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , Washington, D.C., 1967. G a r f i e l d , E. C i t a t i o n Analysis as a Tool i n Journal Evaluation. Science, 178:U7, 1972. N a t i o n a l Research Council: Careers o f Ph.D.'s Academic Versus Nonacademic. P u b l i c a t i o n 1577} N a t i o n a l Academy o f Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1968. The I n v i s i b l e U n i v e r s i t y ; Postdoctoral Education i n t h e United States. N a t i o n a l Academy o f Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1969. M o b i l i t y o f Ph.D.'s Before and A f t e r the Doctorate. N a t i o n a l Academy o f Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1971. Postdoctoral Training i n the Biomedical Sciences, an Evaluation o f NIGMS Postdoctoral Traineeship and Fellowship Program. N a t i o n a l Academy o f Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1973- P r o f i l e s o f Ph.D.'s i n the Sciences. P u b l i c a t i o n 1293, N a t i o n a l Academy o f Sciences, Washington, D.C., 1965. N a t i o n a l Science Foundation Grants and Awards. NSF 70-2, I969; NSF 71-2, I97O; NSF 72-2, 1971. U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , Washington, D.C. Roe, A. Patterns i n P r o d u c t i v i t y o f S c i e n t i s t s . Science, 176:9^0, 1972. U.S. Department o f HEW, Public Health Service. N a t i o n a l I n s t i t u t e s o f Health T r a i n i n g , Part I I . F i s c a l Year 197O and 1971 Funds. U.S. Government P r i n t i n g O f f i c e , Washington, D.C. 

Table 1. DISTRIBUTION OF AFOSR POSTDOCTORAL AWARDEES BY FIELDS OF DOCTORATE, POSTDOCTORAL STUDY AND CURRENT EMPLOYlffiNT Postdoctoral Cvirrent Field Doctorate Employment TOTAL 11*6 100^ il*6 , ll»6 J.00* EMP SCIENCES 113 77i in 108.5 ik<i, Engineering 18 12^ 16 9.5 Mathematics 21 ihi 21 \H 2k 16* Chemistry 35 zH 25* 32 22* Physics 36 2ki 37 25^t , 36 2U* Earth Sciences 3 H 3 7 5* BIOLOGICAL, BEHAV/SOC SCIENCES 33 22^ 35 3l*.5 23* Biology 30 20^t 32 22$ 31.5 21* Behavioral/Social 3 3 H 3 2* UNKNOWN 3 2* 

Table 2. INSTITUTIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF lU6 AFOSR POSTDOCTORAL AWARDEES AT FIVE CAREER STAGES U.S. AND FOREIGN Baccalaureate Doctorate PostdoctoreJ. I n i t i a l Appf. Current Appt. INSTITUTIONS Awardees I n s t s . Awardees I n s t s . Awardees I n s t s . Awardees I n s t s . Awardees I n s t s . TOTAL AWARDEES & INSTS. lk6 80 lk6 37 llt6 60 1U6 77 IU6 80» SUBTOTAL U.S. lk3 79 1U6 37 81 25 129 62 136 73 U.S. ACADEMIC INSTS. lk5 79 llt6 37 7k 20 108 120 58 F i r s t 25 Univ. 73 20 123 21 67 13 7h 22 65 20 Second 25 Univ. 12 9 lU 8 5 5 13 8 21 11 T h i r d 25 Univ. Fourth 25 Univ. 11 12 8 6 1 6 1 - 2 2 8 8 6 11 12 10 7 7 5 Other Univ. 18 17 2 1 - - 5 k 10 9 Colleges 19 18 - - - - - - 1 1 U.S. NON-ACADEMIC INSTS. - - - - 7' 5 21 17 16 15 U.S. BUSINESS/INDUSTRY - - - _ f - - 8 6 8 7 U.S. GOVERNMENT LABS - - - - 3 3 13 11 6 6 U.S. NON-PROFIT lABS - - - - k 2 - - 2 2 SUBTOTAL FOREIGN 1 1 - - 65 35 .17 15 7 7 FOREIGN ACADEMIC INSTS. 1 1 - - h3 23 9 9 1* FOREIGN NON-ACADEMIC INSTS. - - 22 12 8 6 3 3 * Current l o c a t i o n unknown 

Table 3 REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF ANNUAL U S DOCTORATES BETl^EEN 1935 AND 1972 L R Harmon Doctoral Cohorts Annual Doctorates U S Region 1935 & ho 19U5 & 50 1955 & 60 1967 1972 Number (100*) 2,965 2,916 U,136 20,295 33,001 New England 15* iki 11* 9* H Mid-Atlantic 23* 23* 20* 19* 18* Mldvest U2* kii 3^ 32* 31* South 10* 10* 15* 20* 23* West 9* 11* 15* 20* 20jo 

Table k PERCENTAGE OF 2,26l U S If^EDlfiTE POSTDOCTORALS AT STAGES OF BACCALAUREATE, D0CT0R.1TE AJID POSTDOCTORAL STUDY (NRC SURVEY, I967) Region Baccalaureate Doctorate Postdoctoral A l l Regions 2,261 (100*) 2,261 (100*) 2,261 (100*) East* 3U* 35* Midwest 26* 27* 21* South 17* m 20* vrest 16* 20i 22* * New England and Mid-Atlantic regions combined 

Table 5. REGIOrAL DISTRIBUTION OF AFOSR AWARDEES AMD NSF AND NIH POSTDOCTORhL FELLOE'S -.T L S ACADEMIC INSTITUTIONS AFOSR NSF NIH Awardees Awardees Awardees 1961-70 1969-71 1970-71 TOTAL NUMBERS 8I 301 1,628 New England 2% 27i Mid-Atlantic Midwest % South West 1% 3C^ 

Table 6 REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF AFOSR AWARDEES AT FIVE CAREER STAGES U S. & Foreign Initial Current Regions Baccalaureate Doctorate Postdoctoral Appointment Appointment A l l Regions (lOOjS) ik6 (lOC^) ll»6 (100^) lU6 fioo%) ^ Ilt6 (100%) New England 23 22 22\* (15%) 20 (13%) l 6 (11%) Mid-Atlantic kl (2W 30 (20%) 19|* (13%) 25 (17%) 25 (17%) J 1 ) ' Midwest 35 (21;^) 36 (2U%) It (3%) 15 (10^) 20 (13%) ] South 16 16 (11%) k (3%) 15 (10%) 17 (11%) 1 ; West 30 {20i) k2 ( 2 ^ ) 30|* (21%) 53 (35%) 59 (1*0%) j Foreign 1 (0.6^) (1*5%) 18 (12%) 6 (W 1 , Unknown 3 (2%) * h denotes Awardees spending t h e i r postdoctoral period a t two locations 

Table 7. STANDING OF 25 STATSS LEADING IN: A) AFOSR POSTDOCTORAL AWARDEES (AVERAGE OF FIVE CAREER STAGES), B) NSF & NIH POSTDOCTORAL FELLOWS (1969-71), C) U.S. POSTDOCTORALS (NRC, I967) AND D) EIGHT INDICES OF HIGHER EDUCATION AND RESEARCH, FY I968 A) AFOSR Awardees B) NSF & NIH Fellows C) NRC Postdoctoral D) I n d i c e s of Higher Survey Education & Research Avg, of " Average Awardees State # State # State Rank State ALL U.S. 127.3 ALL U.S. 2,163 ALL U.S. It, U05 (39 S t a t e s ) (100*) (U3 S t a t e s ) (lOOjJ) {hh s t a t e s ) (lOC^) I s t 25 States 122.3 1st 25 States 2,078 1st 25 States 1*,203 1st 25 S t a t e s (95*) (96*) (95*) l e t 5 States 85.1 1st 5 States 1,222 1st 5 States 2,153 1st 5 S t a t e s (67*) (56*) {h%) California 36.5 California h6h California 619 California 1.1 New York 15.h Massachusetts 303 Massachusetts 576 New York 1.8 Massachusetts 15.3 New York 210 New York U56 Illinois 3.6 Illinois 9.2 Maiyland 139 Illinois 271 Pennsylvania l*.l New Jersey 8.7 Illinois 106 Pennsylvania 231 Massachusetts 6.0 2nd 5 States 19.2 2nd 5 States 396 2nd 5 States 908 2nd 5 S t a t e s (15*) (18*) (20*) Maryland Pennsylvania 99 Texas 206 Texas 6.2 Connecticut 3-8 Wisconsin 86 Connecticut 202 Michigan 6.U Pennsylvania 3.6 Connecticut 83 N. C a r o l i n a 197 Ohio 7.1 •Michigan 3.0 Washington 75 Maryland I5U Indiana 10.6 Texas 3.0 New Jersey 53 Michigan 11*9 Wisconsin 12.0 - — 3rd 5 States 9.6 3rd 5 States 232 3rd 5 States 617 3rd 5 States (7*) (lOjt) Wisconsin 2.6 Michigem 51 Ohio Missouri 12.1 Ohio 2.k Texas U9 Minnesota 11*3 Florida 12.5 Virginia 1.8 N. C a r o l i n a U8 Wisconsin 1U3 N. C a r o l i n a 13-1 Iowa l.k Colorado 1*5 Washington 96 New J e r s e y 13.8 Rhode I s l a n d l.k Indiana 39 Indiana 91 Minnesota 16.5 Ifth 5 States 5.h l*th 5 States ihh hth 5 States 336 l*th 5 States (H) (6*) (7*) Utah l.k Oregon 37 Iowa 80 Maryland 17.2 Kansas 1.2 Missouri 35 New Jersey 76 Washington 17.6 Indiana 1.0 Tennessee 26 Florida 70 Tennessee 19.5 Oregon 1.0 Ohio 23 Virginia 56 Connecticut 19.7 Colorado 0.8 Virginia 23 Missouri ^ Georgia 19.8 5th 5 States 3.2 5th 5 States 8U 5th 5 States 188 5th 5 States (2*) (3*) {hi) Washington 0.8 Florida 22 Colorado 1*7 Virginia 19.8 Arizona 0.6 Minnesota 22 Georgia 1*1* Louisiana 21.1 Dist.Columbia* 0.6 Iowa 16 Ktmsas 37 Iowa 21.2 Hawaii 0.6 Georgia 12 Louisiana 36 Colorado 25.1* Missouri 0.6 Kentucky 12 Kentucky- 21* D i s t . Columbia* 26.2 ik Other States k.Q 18 Other States 85 19 Other States 202 {hi) {hi) {hi) * Counted here as a state 

Table 8. STANDING OF 25 UNIVERSITIES LEADING IN: A) AFOSR POSTDOCTORAL AWARDEES (AVERAGE OF FIVE CAREER STAGES), B) NSF & NIH POSTDOCTORAL FELLOWS (1969-71), C) U.S. POSTDOCTORALS (NRC, I967) AND D) FIVE INDICES OF DOCTORAL AND POSTDOCTORAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH (1968-7I) A) AFOSR Awardees B) NSF & NIH Fellows C) NRC Postdoctoral D) I n d i c e s o f Advanced Survey Education & Research Avg. of Average Acad. I n s t s . Awardees Acad. I n s t s . # & ^ Acad. I n s t s . # & ^ Acad. I n s t s . Rank ALL U.S. 118.6 ALL U.S. i,9ho ALL U.S. k,3kO ilOCi,) 1st 25 Univ. 86.2 1st 25 Univ. 1,390 1st 25 Univ. 2,801 1st 25 Univ. (6^) 1st 5 Univ. 39.0 1st 5 Univ. 527 1st 5 Univ. 96U XBt 5 Univ.. (33%) (27i) (22%) U.C., Berkeley 10.0 Harvard 192 Harvard 3UU Harvard 2.6 Stanford 9.0 U.C., Berkeley 99 Yale 185 U.C., Berkeley 3.h M.I.T. 7.0 Wisconsin 8h Stanford 150 Stanford 5.2 Heurvard 6.6 Stanford 79 Minnesota 1^3 Wisconsin |A Cal.Inst.Tech. 6.I1 U.C., San Diego 73 M.I.T. llt2 M.I.T. 6.2 2nd 5 Univ. 21.8 2nd 5 Univ. 330 2nd 5 Univ. 6kO 2nd 5 Univ. (15%) Princeton 5.U Yale 72 U.C., Berkeley I36 Michigan 8.8 Chicago k.6 U. Washington 70 Johns Hopkins I3U Columbia 9.8 Cornell U.6 Cornell 68 Wisconsin 128 Yale ll.lt Col\imbia k.O Cal.Inst.Tech. 62 Duke 121 -U.C.,Los Angeles 11.6 Yale 3.2 M.I.T. 61 Texas 121 Cornell 11.6 3rd 5 Univ. 12.8 3rd 5 Univ. 230 3rd 5 Univ. 5h5 3rd 5 Univ. (lOji) (12%) (12%) U.C.Los Angeles 3.0 Johns Hopkins 5I Pennsylvania II8 Illinois 11.8 Johns Hopkins 3.0 U.C.,Los Angeles U9 Cornell II6 Chicago 12.6 Wisconsin 2.6 Pennsylvania U8 Illinois 112 U. Washington lU.2 Illinois 2.U Columbia k3 Chiceigo 105 Pennsylvania I6.8 Michigan 1.8 Chicago 39 U. Washington 9*+ Minnesota 18.U kth 5 Univ. 6.6 kth 5 Univ. 173 Uth 5 Univ. 37U Uth 5 Univ. (5i) (93^) (8%) U.C., San Diego l.k Duke 37 Cal.Inst.Tech. 90 Johns Hopkins 20.2 Iowa State l.U Illinois 36 U.C.,Los Angeles 80 Michigan State 20.2 CUNY l.k Michigan 35 Ohio State jk Purdue 22.0 Brown 1.2 U.C,San F r a n c i s . 33 N. C a r o l i n a 72 Princeton 22.2 Pennsylvania 1.2 Colorado 32 Columbia 58 New York U. 2U.0 5th 5 Univ. 6.0 5th 5 Univ. 127 5th 5 Univ. 278 5th 5 Univ. (5%) (6%) (6%) Rice 1.2 Princeton 32 Princeton 57 Northwestern 2U.8 SUNY, Stony Brk. 1.2 Oregon 28 Michigan 56 Ohio State 25.6 Texas, Austin 1.2 Northwestern 23 Western Reserve 56 Cal.Inst.Tech. 25.8 Utah 1.2 Minnesota 22 Yeshiva 55 Indiana 26.2 Virginia 1.2 Washington U. 22 Indiana 5U Texas, Austin 26.8 91 Other I n s t . 32.1+ 101 Other I n s t . 550 127 Other I n s t . 1,539 (27%) (28%) (35.U%) 

Table 9 PUBLICATIONS AND CI'JVTIONS OF 102 AFOSR AWARDEES GROUPED BY THE YIARS OF THEIR POSTDOCTORAL AWARDS AND FI3 LDS OF SPECIALIZATION, 1961-70 1961-6>+ 1965-67 1968-70 Dates o f Awardees 1961-70 P Awdee(A). Pub(P). CitCC) U50 2,6U2 31 318 1,121 31 II+9 268 GRAND TOTAL 102 917 h,03^ ko k kl lilt k 23 57 5 15 9 ENGINEFRING 13 85 180 kQ 101 k 52 129 2 2 0 MATHEf^TICS 13 102 230 7 100 6U9 10 118 286 8 kk 91 CHEMISTRY 23 262 1,026 5 9I+6 5 6k 157 9 k3 60 PHYSICS 26 260 1,163 12 153 101 7 55 U72 6 kk 107 BIOLOGY 2k 200 1,372 11 793 1 1 6 20 1 1 1 OTHER 3* 8 60 1 39 * One Awardee each i n Geology, Oceanography and Economics 

Table 10. CURRENT INSTITUTIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF 102 AFOSR AWARDEES AND TEIEIR CUMULATIVE PUBLICATIONS AND CITATIONS Type of # of #of #of Pubs per C i t s per Citations Institutions Awardees Pubs Cits Awardee Awardee per Pub GRAND TOTAL 102 917 It, 031 9.0 39.5 k.k ACADEMIC INST, 86 771 3,352 8.9 38.9 k.3 1st 25 378 1,677 8.U 37.2 k.k Other 100 32 321 1,328 10.0 k.l Other U.S. 8 61 280 7.6 35.0 k.6 Foreign 1 11 67 11.0 67.0 6.1 NON-ACADEMIC INST. lU 121 582 8.6 Ul.5 U.8 U.S. I n s t . 11 105 k26 9.5 38.7 k.O Foreign I n s t . 3 16 156 5.3 52.0 9.7 UNKNOWN 2 25 97 12.5 U8.5 3.9 (ALL FOREIGN) k 27 223 6.7 55.7 8.2 

Fltture 1 . FIELDS OP DOCTORATE / 7, POSTDOCTORAL ACTIVITy ^777 AND PRESEHT EMPLOYMENT O F L W APOSR POSTDOCTORAL AMARDEES, I 9 6 I - 7 O TTT. 35 / ; I-- f / 1: : I-: • I. I- iJ:, / • 1 i 1 / 30; V ii I . ' : 1 • '/ w: i . . !••= I • :t / .' f • / I • i' , .1 . / / / / I ' / V .: I. I. • I '. / f • I- I •iii- / h / l is H ' •I -1 / 20;> i / / V . I .1, t / t ' .'I / v / / / / / / / i I: i / '/ / n / r-1 10-: / V y / / / / / / i. / / / A / I • / / / I / 'A Engr Math Chem Physics• Geol Biol Behav KTRT.rr. OP DOCTORATR, TOaTDOCTORAL BTODY AND PRESENT EMfT.OYMTWT 

zaz-r. ' ••• Figure 2. ' • INSTITUTIONS OF lU6 AFOSR POSTIXXJTORAL AWARDEES AT STAGES OF BACCALAUREATE, r-.— -DOCWWAGE,- POSTDOCTORAL STUDY, INITIAL AND CURRENT APPOINOMENTS ' j ^ ^ "Unknovm '. V£L*i>" ' Foreign Non-academic" "" X V V • -Foreign U n i v e r s i t i e s . — " / t ^ "U. S._Non-acadendc J _ 'SOB- U.S. U n i v e r s i t i e s , Other '•E^- -iJ,S,-.Universities, 1st 25: !total No. of- I n s t i t u t i o n s 150i i:. ••(•- i i 5' I lOOi-:- ! - I 80 60* I 60 50r ^ . Bacca- .Doctorate Postdoctoral Initial Current laureate Study Appt. Appt. Does not include i n s t i t u t i o n s o f three Awardees whose current l o c a t i o n i s \inknown. 

Figure 3. REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION OF ANNUAL U.S. DOCTORATES BETWEEN I9U5 AND I967 Nev England i37i) H Haimon Midwest West 19k5 & 50 Mid-Atlantic Cohorts 2yi South 1^^ New England Earmon Midwest West 1955 & 60 39* Mid-Atlantic 1% Cohorts 20* South 15* New England 9f, (28*) H NRC Midwest Doctorate 32* Mid-Atlantic West Recipients 19t, 20* 1967 South 20* L 

FiKure k. PERCENTAGE OF 2,26l U.S. IMMEDIATE POSTDOCTORALS AT STAGES OF New England and Midwest Mid-Atlantic Baccalaureate West 26^& kOi, South nii New England and Midwest Mid-Atlantic West Doctorate 27* 3hi 20$, • South 18* New England Midwest and Mid-Atlantic West 21* 35* 22* Postdoctoral • South 20*