issue from a perspective that not only is closer 

 to the actual research work, but also is 

 conditioned by the problems of individual 

 disciplines. As an example, from the Division of 

 Biological and Medical Sciences at Brown 

 University, Dean Elizabeth H. Leduc wrote: 



Our "number two problem" is that of low faculty 

 (investigators) morale. This is the result of a 

 general malaise based on recent changes in the 

 Federal system of support for biomedical 

 research which can be summarized very briefly as 

 follows: 



- Shifts in program emphasis to specific 

 targeted research, primarily on cancer and 

 diseases of heart and lung, with resultant 

 diminution of research support for other 

 areas of biomedical research; 



- Concomitant emphasis on rapid translation 

 of research results to clinical applications, 

 suggesting a competition for funds between 

 fundamental research and health care. . . . 



Another chairman's view came from Earl 

 Hunt, Chairman of the Department of Psy- 

 chology at the University of Washington, who 

 stated: 



The second problem that Psychology faces, at 

 the institutional level, is that Psychology is, and 

 always has been, under heavy pressure to "make 

 our research relevant" before the necessary 

 scholarly knowledgebase has been established. I 

 could make an excellent case out for the 

 proposition that the current mess over in- 

 telligence testing arose for precisely that reason. I 

 am concerned that such pressures are in- 

 creasing. In particular, agencies of the federal 

 government seem to have more and more money 

 for programs that promise " results now," and less 

 for the slower but safer route of establishing 

 scientific facts before offering social engineering 

 advice. In this respect some of the current 

 policies of NIE and NSF are disturbing. 



Similarly, the chairman of a physics depart- 

 ment reported that one of his faculty members is 

 a recognized expert in nuclear physics. 

 Although he is eager to work on a theoretical 

 problem in that field, he is working in another 

 field where funding happens to be available. 



Government 



In the Government research sector, the 

 increased emphasis on short-term rather than 

 basic research was again a major issue. Among 

 all these respondents combined it ranked 

 second, while it was actually first among 

 directors of intramural laboratories and head- 

 quarters officials. Here again, the issue is often 

 expressed in terms of pressures for targeting 

 and short-term payoffs in research, and a bias 

 against longer-term more fundamental efforts. 

 For example, W.N. Hess, Director of the 

 Environmental Research Laboratories (ERL), of 

 the Department of Commerce's National 

 Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 

 stated: 



The major issue related to fundamental research, 

 as I see it for a laboratory system such as ERL, is 

 to achieve and maintain a proper balance 

 between short term and long term research. . . 

 there is strong pressure on our research 

 programs to focus efforts on providing short term 

 results. . . . 



The implications of this trend were noted by 

 many respondents, including William W. 

 Carter, Acting Technical Director of the Harry 

 Diamond Laboratories, U.S. Army: 



With the lack of a strong, clear federal policy on 

 fundamental science, and a national anti-science 

 climate, Congress and others are pushing too 

 strongly the short term, applied research 

 emphasis. We are out of balance and will pay the 

 consequences in the 1980's. It is exceedingly 

 difficult to protect and fund even small groups of 

 basic researchers for the extended times that are 

 needed to produce significant results 



The phrase "pressure towards research with 

 short term payoffs" recurred with considerable 

 regularity among the responses. Again and 

 again, laboratory directors spoke of the dif- 

 ficulties of sustaining basic or long-term 

 research in the face of these pressures, and 

 expressed the desire to establish a balance, so as 

 to assure "replenishment" of the stock of new 

 knowledge for future applications. 



FREEDOM IN THE RESEARCH SYSTEM 



61 



