The letters were first divided according to 

 sector. For each sector, an initial set of letters 

 was read, and a list was made of the problems 

 and suggestions that they discussed. This list 

 was reduced to a smaller list that combined 

 statements of issues that were very similar, and 

 this became the first tentative list of categories. 

 The list was revised as more letters were read 

 until categories were reached that would cover 

 almost all of the responses. A count was kept of 

 the number of responses that fell under each 

 category. Further details of the analysis can be 

 found in Appendix A. Some members of the 

 National Science Board verified the list of 

 categories by their own independent reading of 

 the letters. 



The categories that were developed from the 

 letters by the above method are the concerns 

 and needs of the Nation's scientific enterprise as 

 these are perceived within each sector. Tables 

 2-2 through 2-5 list the issues mentioned most 

 often from each sector, roughly in the order of 



their frequency. A complete list, which includes 

 the less frequent issues, is given in Appendix D. 



RESULTS OF THE ANALYSIS 



If one examines the four tables of issues from 

 the four research sectors (Tables 2-2 to 2-5), it is 

 striking that all the sectors expressed such 

 similar concerns. The preliminary analysis of 

 the response letters divided the Nation's 

 research effort into separate sectors, but it can 

 now be seen that the commonality of interests 

 among these sectors is much more significant 

 than their differences. This is one of the most 

 important results of the present Report. 



The similarity of interests can be exhibited 

 most easily by rearranging all the issues listed 

 in Tables 2-2 to 2-5 so that similar issues from 

 the different sectors appear together. This leads 

 to a new set of tables, each of which combines 

 issues from all sectors under a common heading. 



Table 2-4. Issues Most Often Mentioned from the Government Sector 



Need for coordinated research policy at the national level Involving long-range planning, 

 commitments and priorities. 



Increased emphasis on short-term research and neglect of basic research. 

 Overmanagement as evidenced by too many restrictions, especially on longer-term research. 

 Need for increased or stable funding. 



Desire for improved personnel management (e.g., personnel changes, salary scales, staff levels, 

 etc.). 



Need to maintain research staff vitality with more positions for young scientists and continuing 

 education for older ones. 



Meeting public demand for justification of basic research programs with respect to mission. 



Lack of Congressional or Executive support and understanding of basic research. 



Table 2-5. Issues Most Often Mentioned from Independent Research Institutes 



Need for long-term continuity in funding. 



Lack of coherent national science policy especially toward IRI's. 



Need for adequate justification of research. 



Manpower needs— particularly in IRI's — as problems associated with multi-disciplinary efforts. 



Federal pressure toward over-direction of research with emphasis on short-term or applied 



research. 



Need for research funds including construction funds. 



THE INQUIRY TO THE RESEARCH COMMUNITY 



27 



