-4- 
rDNA activities. (7) Workers and (8) students were institutionally 
affiliated and may or may not have been involved in rDNA activities . 
(9) Other includes any individuals not contained in one of the preceding 
categories. 
Results 
Figure 1 shows the distribution of IBCs by size. Sizes ranged from 
three to nineteen, with an average size of just over ten. Committee sizes 
also varied by type of institution; universities tended to have somewhat 
larger panels (about 11 members) than noneducational institutions (about 8 
members) . Biographical data indicated that the committees were made up 
overwhelmingly of men (the average number of men and women per committee panel 
was 8.9 and 1.3, respectively). Also, most committee members (over 90 percent) 
were directly affiliated in one way or another with the university or research 
institution. 
The representation of different types of members on IBCs is shown in 
Figure 2. The pie-shaped figure indicates the membership composition of 
a "typical" IBC — the average number of members per committee in each of the 
nine membership categories. Not surprisingly, scientists in rDNA disciplines 
represented the largest membership block. The representation of rDNA-related 
members is broader still (averaging close to 85%) , if peripherally related 
scientists and related administrators are combined with rDNA scientists. 
The proportions of public members, workers, nonrelated administrators, 
and students each averaged less than 2 percent. Likewise, the representa- 
tion of nonrelated disciplines was small — on the average, only nine percent 
of committee members were scholars in disciplines unrelated to rDNA. 
In short, the number of committee members who may be considered "nonexperts" 
in rDNA research was very small. 
[ 390 ] 
