Concerns itself with the future of sociology, and of all social science. The thirteen authors—among them Wendell Bell, Kai T. Erikson, Scott Greer, Robert Boguslaw, James Mau, and Ivar Oxaal—are oriented toward a redefinition of the role of the social scientist as advisor to policymakers and administrators in all major areas of social concern, for the purpose of studying and shaping the future. This book contains research strategies for such "futurologistic" study, theories on its merits and dangers, as well as an annotated bibliography of social science studies of the future.

WENDELL BELL is professor of sociology at Yale University.

JAMES A. MAU is associate professor of sociology and associate dean of the Graduate School at Yale University.

CONTRIBUTORS: J. Victor Baldridge, Pauline B. Bart, Robert Boguslaw, Menno Boldt, William R. Burch Jr., Kai T. Erikson, Scorr Greer, Paul Hollander, Bettina J. Huber, Ivar Oxall, Henry Winthrop.

Much has been said about the general subject [of how to measure a corporation's social performance] but little has been contributed to answering this fundamental question. Thus, in November 1971, Russell Sage Foundation sponsored a development effort aimed at examining the "state-of-the-art" and at suggesting a program of research that would advance that state.

"Raymond Bauer and Dan Fenn have provided us with a first product—a state-of-the-art conception and description, and recommendations for future development. They are to be commended for their astute considerations and their clear thinking in the murky pond of corporate social audits. Their effort has provided the social science community with a point of departure for future research in the area."—Eleanor Bernert Sheldon

RAYMOND A. BAUER is Professor of Business Administration at the Harvard University Graduate School of Education.

A Volume in the the Russell Sage Foundation's Social Science Frontiers Series

How are human subjects treated in biomedical research? What are the expressed standards and self-reported behavior of biomedical researchers in regard to what has sometimes been called their “animal of necessity”? What are some of the determinants of the “strict” and “permissive” patterns which describe the standards and behavior of biomedical researchers? These are the important questions asked and answered in Research on Human Subjects. It is a book based on four years of intensive research. Two studies were completed, one on a nationally representative sample of biomedical research institutions, a second on a sample of 350 researchers who actually use human subjects.

In their chapters on “the dilemma of science and therapy,” the authors look at the tension between the values of humane therapy and discovery in science. They show that the significant minority of researchers who are “permissive” on the issues of informed consent and a favorable risk-benefit ratio are more likely to be those who are “relative failures” in pursuing the science value.

Research on Human Subjects also documents the inadequate training that biomedical researchers get in the ethics of research on human subjects not only in medical schools but in their postgraduate training as well. The medical schools pay relatively more attention to the scientific training of their students than they do to the ethical training that should be its essential complement.

The local peer review groups that screen research on human subjects in the institutions where it is carried on are another central focus of attention of the research and analysis reported in this book. The peer review groups do a fairly good job but, the authors show, there are various conditions of their relative efficacy which are not met by review groups in many important research institutions. The medical school review groups, for example, have not been outstanding performers with respect to the several conditions of relative efficacy.

In the concluding chapter, the authors discuss the general problem of the social responsibilities of powerful professions and make very specific suggestions for policy change and reform for the biomedical research profession and its use of human subjects.

BERNARD BARBER is on the Barnard College and Graduate Faculties of Columbia University.

JOHN J. LALLY is at Lehman College, CUNY.

JULIA LOUGHLIN MAKARUSHKA is at Barnard College, Columbia University.

DANIEL SULLIVAN, formerly of Barnard College, now teaches at Carleton College.

Does social science influence social policy? This is a topic of perennial concern among students of politics, the economy, and other social institutions. In Effective Social Science, eight prominent social researchers offer first-hand descriptions of the impact of their work on government and corporate policy.

In their own words, these noted political scientists, economists, and sociologists—among them such influential scholars as James Coleman, Joseph Pechman, and Eliz Ginzberg—tell us what it was like to become involved in the making of social policy. These rich personal narratives, derived from detailed interviews conducted by Bernard Barber (himself a veteran of the biomedical poliy arena), illuminate the role of social science in diverse areas, including school desegregation, comprehensive income taxation, military manpower utilization, transportation deregulation, and the protection of privacy.

The patterns traced in this volume indicate that social science can influence policy, but only as part of a pluralistic, political process; effective social research requires advocacy as well as a conducive social and idealogical climate. For anyone curious about the relationship between social knowledge and social action, this book provides striking illustration and fruitful analysis.

BERNARD BARBER is professor at Barnard College and the Graduate faculties at Columbia University.

A recent Supreme Court decision confirmed the churches' right to tax exemption for religious property. In this highly relevant book, Alfred Balk places this question in social perspective and demonstrates how tax exemption and immunity affect the fiscal load of local communities and the well-being of our whole society. Among the "free list" or tax-free properties which the author examines are churches, hospitals, schools, and government buildings. Seven specific proposals for reform are set forth.

ALFRED BALK is visiting editor of the Columbia Journalism Review and an Editor-at-Large of Saturday Review. He has written more than a hundred articles for national magazines, including Harper’s, Saturday Review, Saturday Evening Post, New York Times Magazine, Reader’s Digest, This Week, The Nation, McCall’s, and The Reporter. He also is the author of The Religion Business (John Knox, 1968), and a contributor to a number of anthologies.

Winner of the 1973 C. Wright Mills Award from the Society for the Study of Social Problems

Less than 2 percent of some 4000 adults prosecuted for participating in the bloodiest ghetto revolt of this generation served any time in jail as a result of their conviction and sentencing. Why? Why, in contrast, did the majority of those arrested following a brief and minor confrontation with police in a different city receive far harsher treatment than ordinarily meted out for comparable offenses in "normal" times? What do these incidents tell us about the nature of legal repression in the American state?

No coherent theory of political repression in the liberal state exists today. Neither the liberal view of repression as "anomaly" nor the radical view of repression as "fascist core" appears to come to grips with the distinctive characteristics of legal repression in the liberal state.

This book attempts to arrive at a more adequate understanding of these "distinctive characteristics" by means of a detailed analysis of the legal response to the most serious violent challenge to the existing political order since the Great Depression—the black ghetto revolts between 1964 and 1968.

Using police and court records, and extensive interviews with judges, defense attorneys, prosecutors, and detention officials, Professor Balbus provides a complete reconstruction of the response of the criminal courts of Los Angeles, Detroit, and Chicago to the "civil disorders" that occurred in these cities. What emerges is a disturbing picture of the relationship between court systems and participants and the local political environments in which they operate.

ISAAC D. BALBUS has been assistant professor of politics at Princeton University, and will join the faculty of York College of the City University of New York as associate professor of political science in the fall of 1973. He received his B.A. in Government from Colby College and his M.A. and Ph.D. in Political Science from the University of Chicago. He is the author of a number of articles on Marxism, Elitist Theory, and Pluralism.

Sensitivity training, T-Groups, and encounter groups have become a way of life. Beyond Words traces the history of this movement, the background of its successes, its varieties, and its failures. Dr. Back's approach is neither one of wide-eyed admiration nor hostility. Instead, he has written a book that provides the first long, hard look at sensitivity training as a social phenomenon.

From its fortuitous beginnings the movement is followed through its developments at Bethel, its growth across the country, its new centers in California, its spread to Europe. The novelty of this movement, an almost religious exercise based on the scientific ethos, is related to the peculiar conditions of the last quarter century. The movement has acquired its own mythos. Dr. Back examines the interplay of the conflicting aims of self-expression and change, and shows how these contradictory aims have affected the ramifications of the movement in theory, in management, in recreation, and in education. Results emerging from studies on effects of sensitivity training indicate a recurrent pattern of great immediate emphasis followed by little permanent beneficial effect.

Finally, Beyond Words assesses the overall impact of the movement, its relation to science, its possible changes, and its portent as a symptom of the state of society.

Dr. Back examines the interplay of the conflicting aims of self-expression and change, and shows how these contradictory aims have affected the ramifications of the movement in theory, in management, in recreation, and in education.

KURT W. BACK is professor of sociology and psychiatry at Duke University.

Over the last forty years, rising national income has helped reduce poverty rates, but this has been accompanied by an increase in economic inequality. While these trends are largely attributed to technological change and demographic shifts, such as changing birth rates, labor force patterns, and immigration, public policies have also exerted a profound affect on the welfare of Americans. In Public Policy and the Income Distribution, editors Alan Auerbach, David Card, and John Quigley assemble a distinguished roster of policy analysts to confront the key questions about the role of government policy in altering the level and distribution of economic well being.

Public Policy and the Income Distribution tackles many of the most difficult and intriguing questions about how government intervention—or lack thereof—has affected the incomes of everyday Americans. Rebecca Blank analyzes welfare reform, and presents systematic research on income, poverty rates, and welfare and labor force participation of single mothers. She finds that single mothers worked more and were less dependent on public assistance following welfare reform, and that low-skilled single mothers had no greater difficulty finding work than others. Timothy Smeeding compares poverty reduction programs in the United States with policies in other developed countries. Poverty and inequality are higher in the United States than in other advanced economies, but Smeeding argues that this is largely a result of policy choices. Poverty rates based on market incomes alone are actually lower in the United States than elsewhere, but government interventions in the United States were less than half as effective at reducing poverty as were programs in the other countries. The most dramatic poverty reduction story of twentieth century America was seen among the elderly, who went from being the age group most likely to live in poverty in the 1960s to the group least likely to be poor at the end of the century. Gary Englehardt and Jonathan Gruber examine the role of policy in alleviating old-age poverty by estimating the impact of Social Security benefits on the income of the elderly poor. They find that the growth in Social Security almost completely explains the large decline in elderly poverty in the United States.

The twentieth century was remarkable in the extent to which advances in public policy helped improve the economic well being of Americans. Synthesizing existing knowledge on the effectiveness of public policy and contributing valuable new research,Public Policy and the Income Distribution examines public policy's successes, and points out the areas in which progress remains to be made.

ALAN J. AUERBACH is Robert D. Burch Professor of Economics and Law at the University of California, Berkeley.

DAVID CARD is Class of 1950 Professor of Economics at the University of California, Berkeley.

JOHN M. QUIGLEY is I. Donald Terner Distinguished Professor and professor of economics at the University of California, Berkeley.

CONTRIBUTORS: Rebecca M. Blank,  Dora L. Costa,  Janet Currie,  Gary V. Engelhardt,  Jonathan Gruber,  Matthew E. Kahn, Steven Raphael,  Emmanuel Saez,  Jonathan Skinner,  Timothy M. Smeeding,  Weiping Zhou.   

A comprehensive case study of secondary school counseling as a developing profession. The author examines the growth of counseling, the characteristics of the contemporary counselor, the use of standardized tests, the changing orientation of the counselor from “educational advisor” to “therapist,” the influences of the institutional setting on counseling, and the impact of counseling on students and society.

DAVID J. ARMOR is assistant professor of social relations at Harvard University and director of the computation facility of the Laboratory of Social Relations.