ED 196 717

AUTHOR

TITLE

INSTITUTION

FEPORT NC

PUB DATE

NOTE

AVAILABLE FRCM

EDRS PRICE

DESCRIPTORS

ABSTRACT

DOCUMENT RESUME

SE 033 767

Cobern, Morris: Conlon, Nancy

Occupational Mobility cf Scientists and Engineers.

Special Report.

National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C. Div. of

Science Resources Studies.

NSF-80-317

80

25p.: Contains shaded charts and graphs which may not

reproduce well.

Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing

Office, Washington, DC 20402 (no price quoted).

MF01/FC01 Plus Postage.

*Career Change; *Employment Patterns: *Engineers: Job

Satisfaction: Labor Force: *Occupational Mobility:

Science Education: *Scientists

This report describes the occupational mobility of

science and engineering (S/E) personnel. This analysis is part of the

National Science Foundation's Division of Science Resources Studies

program designed to enhance the understanding cf the operations of

the S/E labor market. Charts represent information discussed in the

text regarding such topics as: (1) change in economic .indlcators

affecting S/E employment: (2) 1978 occupational distribution of 1972

occupational cohorts of experienced scientists and engineers: (3)

distribution of 1972 experienced S/E work force employed in non-S/E

jobs in 1978 by reason for movement: and (4) occupational mobility of

experienced S/E by selected characteristics, 1972-7S. Appendices

include technical notes, a bibliography, and statistical tables.

(CS)

***********************************************************************

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made

from the original document. ***********************************************************************
occupational

molly of

1 scientists and

;) national science

D foundation

US OEPAAIMENIOFNEALIN

EOUCAT ION I WELFARE NATIONAL INSIITUtEOF

EDUCATION DOCAIEN1 HEEN U[PACI. Dun Dar.Ilr aS RECEPiED tP041

IME PpoSO.i DP OGrAfilaTION PGIN. at.1.611 poirosIN OR OPINIONS

'' '"IfD DO NOI NE[ES;Mnir gpat. ).140441 ovNriq Of rnofanO Po,,,110s+ Da Pm qr

special report

NSF 80.317

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing 011ice Washington, D.C. 20402

related publications

Science Resources Studies Highlights NSF Number Price

i?National Sample of Scientists and Engineers: Changes in Employment, 1972.74 and 1974-76'. 77.322

"National Sample of Scientists and Engineers: Median Annual ,$alaries, 197-1" 75-332

"Selected Employment and Labor Force Characleristics of the Redefined Science and Engineering

Population" ..... ..... ........ ....... 75-326

-litationai Sampled Scientists anct Engineers,

Participation in National Programs and Changes

in Educational Attainment, 1972-74" , 75-317

"National Sample of Scientists and Engineers:

Changes in Employment, 1970-72 and 1972-74" , 75-309

"The 1972 Scientist and Engineer Population Redefined" 75.305

Detailed Statistical Tables

Characteristics of Experienced Scientists and Engineers 1978 . . ................ , 79-322

1976 78.305 The 1972 Scientist and Engineer Population Redefined Volume 2. Labor Force and Employment Characteristics, Engineers, by Ffeld 76-306

Reports Characteristics of National Sample of Scientists and Engineers, 1974 Part 1, Demographic and Educational 75.333 $1.90 Part 2, Employment ............ , 76-323 $2.80 Par13. Geographic 76-330 $2.00 The 1972 Scientist and Engineer Population Redefined

Volume 1, Demographic, Educational and

Professional Characteristics ...... iiiiii, 75.313 $3,70 Volume 2. Labor Force and Employment Characteristics 75.327 $2.65

Aidiabil'dy of Publioanons

chose publications marked with a price should be obtained directly Ir om the Superintendent of Docu. met, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Where no price is listed, single copies may be obtained gratis from the National Science Foundation, Washington, D.C. 20550.

(See inside back cover or OlherScience ResourcesPublications.)
foreword

Significant changes have occurred in the employment patterns of various

scientific and technical occupations over the past two decades. Rates of change

differed among fields as well as between employing sectors of the economy in

which scientists and engineers play significant roles. Such events have frequently

produced dramatic changes in labor market conditions for scientists and engineers. This publication examines one important mechanism of labor market

adjustmentoccupational mobility. Although industrial, geographic, and job

mobility are important aspects of this phenomenon, this report focuses on movement into, out of, and between science and engineering (S/E) occupations. This

analysis is part of the National Science Foundation's Division of Science Resources Studies program designed to enhance the understanding of the operations

of the S/E labor market.

June 1980

4

Charles E. Falk

Director, Division of Science

Resources Studies

Directorate for Scientific, Technological,

and International Affairs

iii
acknowledgments

This report was prepared in the Division of Science Resources Studies by

Morris Cobern and Nancy Conlon, under the direction of Joel Barnes, i Study

Director, Utilization Studies Group and Alan Fechter, !lead, Scientific and Technical Personnel Studies Section. Wilma Molitor, Steven W. C. Lowe, and Melissa

Lane provided statistical assistance.

The data which provided the basis for this study were collected and tabulated

for the National Science Foundation by the Population Division of the Bureau of

the Census, primarily by Murray Weitzman, Paula J. Schneider, Thomas Palumbo,

Mary K. Friday, and Anita Chiera.

iv
contents

Piige

Highlights 1 Part 1. Introduction 2

Part 2. Background 3

Part 3. Occupational Mobility 5

Occupation 5

Age 7

Education 7

Race 8

Sex 8

Changing Labor Market Conditions 8

Appendixes:

A. Technical Notes

B. Bibliography 13

C. Statistical Tables 15
highlights

About one out of four persons employed in science and engineering (S/E)

occupations in 1972 changed to different occupations by 1978, The bulk of this

movementapproximately four-fifths--was to non -S /E. occupations, primarily in management and administration.

A very small proportion, 6 percent, of those moving to non-S/E occupations

did so because of the absence of job opportunities in S/E labor markets.

The largest occupational movement among S/E occupations was out of mathematical sciences, where demand was weak, into computer specialities and

engineering, where demand was strong. By 1978 about 8 percent of those

employed as mathematicians in 1972 were employed as engineers. Another 7

percent had become computer specialists.

Occupational mobility appeared inversely related to age. The youngest age

group, those "under 35," reported the highest mobility rate, 5.7 percent per

year, for the 1972-78 period. The oldest group, "45 and over," reported the

lowest rate, 3.7 percent per year.

Occupational mobility showed a relation to the level of educational attainment. Doctorate-holders, in general, were less apt to change occupations than

others in the same occupation with less education.

Women scientists and engineers changed occupations more than men over the

1972-78 period (35 percent versus 26 percent). The observed sex differential

was entirely attributable to the tendency of women scientists and engineers

to be concentrated in occupations with relatively high rates of out mobility.

No systematic sex differences remain after differences in occupational distributions have been accounted for.

In general, blacks exhibited slightly more occupational mobility between

1972 and 1978 than whites (32 percent versus 26 percent), and Asians were

considerably less mobile than either group (16 percent).

In spite of major differences in the performance of the economy between

the periods 1968-72 and 1972-78, occupational mobility patterns remained

generally stable.

Occupational mobility between S/E and non-S/E jobs has implications for

both the market adjustment process and the potential for efficient utilization

of those with S/E skills. The magnitude of the outflows suggests that this

has been a very common adjustment to excess supply conditions in the S/E

labor market. Involuntary employment in non-S/E jobs caused by an absence

of job opportunities represents underemployment of S/E skills. However, the

relatively low proportion of the respondents who reported they moved to

non -S /E occupations because of the absence of job opportunities suggests that

very little underemployment existed.

r'^4

1
part 1.

introduction

An important dimension of short-run

labor market adjustment to shifts in

demand is the movement of workers

between jobs, employers, occupations,

and geographic locations. The major

source of new scientists and engineers,

new graduates from institutions of higher

education, historically has lagged in response to labor market changes, in part

because of the long lead time required

to move through the education pipeline. Thus, occupational change is the

major form of short-run accommodation to changes in market conditions.

The study of this particular type of

response is important for three reasons. First, it provides the basis for

identifying closely related occupations

which are part of the reservoir of skills

available to meet shifting economic

priorities. Second, it measures differ2

ences in the labor market behavior of

segments of the work force. Finally, an

understanding of these flows and their

determinants for individual occupations can facilitate evaluation of the

consequences of alternative demand

scenarios.

This report addresses the movements

and relationships between occupations

during the decade 1968-78. It examines

the propensity to stay in or leave a job

by characteristics such as occupation,

age, sex, race, and degree level. While

discussions of these movements are

primarily descriptive, possible causal

relationships are discussed.

Two data bases are used in this report. The 1968-72 data emanate from

about 70,000 respondents to a 1972 NSF

survey. The sample for this survey consisted of individuals who, in response

to the 1970 Census of Population, indicated that they were a scientist or engineer, or in a related job. The 1972-78

data are based on about 50,000 respondents to the 1972 survey, who were then

resurveyed in 1974,1976, and 1978. (See

technical notes.)

The populations used in this study

were working as scientists and engineers in both 1970 and 1972. The samples

exclude new entrants to the labor force

after 1970. Therefore, the average age

of the sample is higher and the mobility

rates lower than would be the case had

new entrants been included. Because

of the exclusion of new entrants, the

individuals referred to in the tables

and charts are designated as "experienced" scientists and engineers. The

"experienced" populations comprised

about three - fifths of the S/E labor

force in 1978.
part 2.

background

Occupational mobility patterns are

affected by the state of the economy.

The balance between the supply and

demand for workers and jobs is one of

the determinants of job and occupational mobility. Mobility patterns differ in periods of rising demand compared to periods of decline or stability

in the labor market for scientists and

engineers. Chart 1 depicts the rate of

change of S/E employment in relation

to several economic indicators for the

period 1960-78.

The sixties were characterized by

rapid growth of demand for scientists

and engineers in all sectors, spurred by

increased space-related research and

development, for which real spending

increased from $600 million in 1960 to

$5.9 billion by 1965.' Defense-related

'National Science Foundation, National Patterns of

R&D Resources: Funds Fr Personnel in the United

States. 1953-1978-79 (NSF 78-313) (Washington, D.C.:

U.S. Government Printing Office, 1978), tables 13-5 and

13-9.

aUsiilentlitignetpriiibeibes

9

3
activitioti atm) increntunl, an well as now

1 ni tilt tivett nn doettlic propro ma. Total

corporate profitti innronaod stomilly

between IOW) nn(' 10011 and the mrotin

national product ((NI') increased between MOO and MOO, marking the lonHost

smottinmi 'Hulot' of oconomic growth

since 11129,4 College enrollment grew

dramatically In the nixtimt, morn than

dotthlItu4 from t960 to 1060, uncompitniod

by a doubling of lotni faculty positions,'

In this environment of strong demand

'Council of I.:comma AtIvitoN, ll000rt of

Iho Prosolmil (),Voxliloglon, LH, thoiorilmoni

Printing Whom January 1111101, 1,11)1114 11.2 owl 11.10.

'lloparlinon1 of Commorco, 1111romi of Iho Cooson,

HlullsUrul AloOroul of Iho I Holml Stumm, 110711 (0/m11%-

11/ton, I G.: I I Govortimmil l'rlollom 1 )(Num 197111,

lablo 231

4

In 1111 H00101'N 011110 000110111y 1110 number

of employod natural ,Hcientints and onplnoortiHrow hy Ingram', almost twice

as riot tut tho total number of civilittn,

nonit8riculturn1 workern,'

111(1 Into rtixtiort tool onrly tiovonHem pomod it lotally clummod onvironmonl for inbor markelti. Spontlinp

for rmuntrch and (lovolopmont, flori).

rah) profitH, told (NI) growth human In

foil, Unemploymont of enginoorn

espocially Motto previously working In

defense/space workincrotuted from

0,7 percent In '19011 to 2,11 porcon( Ill

'Ilmtarloionl of Labor, lloroiol of 1.illtor

rdoliloymool ol Sciunlisln mot EOgifiliorn, I !I 5 0.1 9;1,

Ilullulin 17111 11.11.: 11,11. l;nvnrumunl

VH1111118 IIfflca, 11173.1

.1 0

11171, I )omroog In 8/1,: prprimui lovolud

off all(' howill to dochno, and HulunllHtH

told onminoors hired by m141(11)111 instiludonft worn ituIremtingly oinloyifil in

lompornry, nontenttro truck tind purltime

In dm midsovontion omploymont (follow(' for Holonlislti toul onpinoortt grew

imco tu4ttin, primarily in rolmontut to

gunning indutttriul production and incroasmi I) expondituro,'

.l'or nn onolynk of 1110 hocloto1 (roods In employ. mom of nclolills19 ond imminmirN 111 thin looloil, moo

Notional FiMmico V1=1141111, "Emoloymmo of 1.11:11m

pule mol linginoor5 Incromool 111thvoon 111711 will 111711

11111 1 loullood In ;Moto Scionco Hcterico au.

stitarmi Studios I lighlighlm 1N11-11' 1111;11161 (Wunhinglon, 10.1;., 11111111
part 3,

occupational mobility

This section describes patterns of

occupational mobility for the 1972-78

period and their differences from the

1968-72 period. The earlier period underwent a relatively declining demand

for scientists and engineers, while the

latter period showed growth; therefore,

the data were examined for changes in

occupational mobility patterns between

the periods.

Occupational mobility is defined as

a worker's change from a major occupational S/E group to either another

major S/E group, a managerial and administrative position, or another nonS/E occupation. Four-fifths of all the

occupational mobility of scientists and

engineers was to non-S/E occupations.

The major S/E groups are engineers,

computer specialists, mathematicians

and statisticians, physical scientists,

biological scientists, social scientists,

psychologists, and "other" scientists.

occupation

Over 25 percent of all scientists and

engineers changed their major occupational group of employment between

the base year of 1972 and 1978. The

most occupationally mobile S/E group

was mathematiciansover two-fifths

moved to another occupational group

over the period. (See chart 2 and appendix table C-1.) Psychologists and engineers were the least occupationally

mobile-20 percent and 23 percent,

respectively.

The occupations with the greatest

relative mobility to non-S/E jobs were

social scientists (32 percent), computer

specialists (26 percent), and mathematicians (23 percent). The high rate of

mobility to non-S/E jobs of social scientists and mathematicians reflects

relatively weak demand conditions in

these fields. The high rate of mobility

to non-S/E fields of computer specialists reflects upward career movements

to managerial and administrative positions rather than weak demand conditions. Physical scientists were the least

mobile to non-S/E jobs (chart 2).

Of those changing to non-S/E occupations between 1972 and 1978, two-thirds

made the move to manager and administrator occupations and only one-third

to other non-S/E fields. Of those who

moved to non-S/E jobs, computer specialists had the greatest relative movement to managerial and administrative

positions (3.5:1), followed by engineers

(2.7:1). The smallest relative movement

to managerial and administrative positions was among psychologists (0.7:1)

and biological scientists (0.8:1).

While the magnitude of outmobility

from S/E jobs was large, it was not

5
Chart 2. 1978 occupational

distribution of 1972

occupational cohorts of

experienced scientists

and engineers

1070

occupation

Physical

scientists

Management/

administration

Other nonscience/

engineering

Engineering

Other science/

engineering

1978

,occupation.

Biological

scientists`::

,Manageiilent/ r. :,.ac1rninietrallon:

.7.0ttleilnOnSolenciii

engineering '"" y.

i.,P0.011100ting'

Physical scientists (1072 occupation)

Percent

20 40 60 00

Biological scientists (1972 occupation)

Percent

20 40 60 80

1070

occupation

Computer

'machinate

Management(

administration

Other nomeolence/

engineering

Engineering

Other ecienco!

engineering

Computer specialists (1072 occupation)

Percent

20 40 00 00

L

Psyohoioglsts (1072 occupation)

Percent

1070 0 20 40 00

occupation

Paychologista

Management!

administration'

Other nonolencei

engineering

Engineering

Other science/

engineering

80

Social scientists (1972 occupation)

Percent

.1078 40 occupalidn

`Soalal

001.3!i10;[..

Menigeniantf;',

a0h11010,00041

Other ttanacteecet

91191;fler,ing

80 80

atheratIcians(197200cUpation

Percent

cOP,atl, s jN p. Mathern 11.0

tMa SI igirni I

ineere (1972 11?c1J0510Ori

ercen

000

.frit4Ot ncel

6
caused by a lack of S/E jobs. Of the

1972 scientists and engineers that had

changed to non-S/E jobs by 1978, only 6

percent reported that it was because

no S/E joh was available. The largest

proportion of the non-S/E employed

(over one-half) reported that they had

either been "promoted out" of their

S/E position or that they "preferred"

non-S/E employment (chart 3).

The second category of mobility, to a

different S/E occupational group, accounted for 5 percent of all scientists

and engineers (or one-fifth of the occupationally mobile scientists and engineers) over the 1972-78 period. Mobility

among S/E jobs was generally limited

to a few fields. Of the 56 possible occupational transfers considered (7 alternatives for 8 original S/E occupations) in the 1972-78 period, only 4

displayed movement of 5 percent or

more.' The most dramatic movement

was out of mathematical sciences (where

demand was weak) into computer specialties and engineering (where demand

was strong). About 8 percent of those

employed as mathematicians in 1972

were engineers in 1978; about 7 percent were computer specialists.

The low rate of outflow for engineers

may reflect the strong demand for engineers in the lal(-3 seventies, a period in

which shortages for some engineering

specialties wore being reported. While

computer specialists had moderately

high ommobilityabout one-third

most of this flow was to management

and administrative jobs. reflecting the

rapid growth of the computer field.

Another indicator of the field's growth

was the attraction of mathematicians

to computer specialties.' Almost 7 percent of the mathematicians became

Ilhsii data. ixaminiiit by broad occupational group,

mask milviittoults which undoulityill. occur between

specialized odds within th groups. e.g , physicist to

dooms! iAlthin the ph sical scientists group and nitichanical .wrospaci. engineer %%Albin the eingiIPr jiir,/,11)

I npablishod data of the Bureau of Labor Statistics

reveal that between 147a and I976, the number employed in computer specialties grew by 114.784. that for

engineering by 1118.727 the two fastest growing SiE

holds. the third ranking field was social sciences which

showed an increase of only 51.164 employed. Computer

specialties and engineering are also fields with high

proportions of baccalaureates. making entry into these

fields easier than other fields which more often require gradual, ,leg oyes for eon-if

experience 0000n0

0

0*'

1000

0_

reesOnlitielrioye0ent,

Obtained

better

paying

job

10elitional

preference

'6.54t;

"* Scienoti.

engineering

jobreot available

13.2%

Promoted to

norysciencet

engineering

lob

26.2'.

Preferred

non-science/

engineering

employment

259°0

Other 24 7.0

SOURCE: National Science Foundation

computer specialisls between 1972 and

1978. The low rate of occupational

change of psychologists indicates a

lack of commonality with other S/E occupations (only 3 percent moved to

these occupations) and the small population flowing to managerial occupations may reflect the "private practice"

nature of johs in psychology. Social scientist also had little in common with

other S/E occupations; however, 15

percent moved to managerial or administrative jobs.

age

Occupational mohility of scientists

and engineers was inversely related to

age (chart 4). While further research is

needed to explain the reasons for this

relationship among scientists and engineers, it has been shown that in the

overall lahor force the amount of onthe-joh training acquired in an occupation through labor market experience

increases as workers age. Almost onethird of all scientists and engineers

under 35 changed jobs in the 6-year

period, compared with one-fourth of

those between the ages of 35 and 44 and

one-fifth of those 45 and older. This

relationshp may also reflect other factors associated with a change of employer or location which may accompany a change in occupation. Workers

may he mord reluctant to undergo an

occupation change as they age because

of vested interest in pension plans and

community attachments. Also, younger

workers, who have accumulated less

on-the-job training, are more vulnerable to layoffs than older workers. This

may produce greater cyclical sensitivity

in the rate of occupational mobility of

younger workers compared to older

workers." While age has an inverse relationship with mobility to management

and administration, outmohility to other

non-S/E jobs is less influenced by age

(appendix table C-2).

education

S/E doctorate-holders were less likely

to change occupations than their colleagues with less education, reflecting

the highly specialized nature of and

large investment in their formal training (chart 4 and appendix table C-3).

Also, doctorate-holders may accumulate more "specific" on-the-job training than nondoctorates, which mav

deter firms from laying them off." Interestingly, while the group with the

most training, the Ph.D.'s, had the lowest

rate of occupational mohility (22 percent), the group with the least training,

the bachelor's degree-holders, did not

have the highest rate (25 percent). The

absence of a systematic relationship

between mohility and level of highest

degree could be explained by the relative levels of coincidence of the degree

field with the occupation. During the

1972-78 period the master's degreeholders had the lowest coincidence (78

percent had the master's in a field of

study coincident with their 1972 occupation) followed by hachelor's degreeholders (83 percent), while the Ph.D.'s

had the greatest coincidence (86 percent). The relatively low coincidence

rate for those workers whose highest

degree was the master's suggests that

"Lowell E. mllaway "Age and Labor Mobility Patterns, The Southern Economic journal, October 11169,

p. 171.

"lamb Mincer, Schooling. Experience and Earnings

(New York: National Bureau of Economic Research.

1i1741, pp. 30-31.

7
training outside the field of an individual's occupation facilitates movement

to another occupation. The case of an

engineer who earns a master's degree

in business administration comes readily

to mind. Most likely, an individual wishing to remain in his or her occupation

would not earn a master's in a different

field.

In addition, master's degree-holders

tend to be, on the average, somewhat

younger than bachelor's degree-holders

and, as discussed previously, younger

workers tend to be more mobile than

their older colleagues. In 1978, 16 percent of the master's degree-holders were

under 35 years old, compared to 11 percent of those with only baccalaureates.

At the older end, 61 percent of the baccalaureates were 45 years and over,

compared to 47 percent of the master's

degree-holders. Thus, two factors likely

account for a greater degree of mobility

of those scientists and engineers with

master's than bachelor's degrees. First,

the use of master's degrees to prepare

for new occupations; and, second, the

master's degree-holders were, on the

average, younger than those with only

a bachelor's degree.

race

Black scientists and engineers had a

higher occupational mobility rate over

the 1972-78 period than whites (32 percent versus 26 percent). Asians had the

lowest rate (chart 4 and appendix table

C-4). The low mobility of Asians was

consistent with their higher level of

education-30 percent held the doctorate compared to 11 percent each of

the black and white S/E groups. There

was no significant difference in age

distribution between blacks and the

other groups to account for their high

mobility, but blacks were not as concentrated in engineering (45 percent

versus 70 percent of whites), a less

mobile occupation. Given the same occupational distribution as whites, the

black mobility rates would he reduced

slightly to about 30 percent, indicating

that field distribution was not the sole

determinant of racial differences in

occupational mobility.

For all S/E occupations combined,

black scientists and engineers moved

into management and administrative

8

positions at the same rate as did whites15 percent over the 1972-78 period. Thus,

the overall difference in black S/E occupational mobility was entirely attributable to movement to other nonS/E occupations-12 percent of the

black versus 6.9 percent of the white.

(Appendix table C -4 shows the average

annual mobility by race and occupation.)

sex

Women were more mobile than men

between 1972 and 1978 (35 percent versus 26 percent) (chart 4). However, the

difference was entirely attributable to

women's concentration in more mobile

scientific occupations in 1972 rather than

in engineering (94 percent of women

and 34 percent of men were scientists).

If male scientists and engineers had

had the same occupational distribution

as females in 1972, male mobility would

have been identical to that of women.

S/E women moved into management

and administrative positions at a lower

average rate than males (10 percent

versus 15 percent); however, there was

parity among biological scientists, psychologists, and social scientists, Women

also had a higher average mobility to

other non-S/E occupations (18 percent

versus 6 percent). These higher rates

were found in all occupational groups

except psychology where mobility was

equal between the sexes (appendix

table C -5).

changing labor

market conditions

Although labor market conditions

for scientists and engineers in the late

sixties and early seventies differed

markedly from those of the mid- and

late seventies, general patterns of occupational mobility were similar. The

earlier years showed large decreases

in defense, space-related, and commercially sponsored research, development, and production (chart 1). Unemployment of scientists and engineers

peaked as the academic institutions continued to graduate record numbers of

S/E-degree recipients. Nevertheless,

for all scientists and engineers, the

estimated outmobility was similar in

the 1968-72 and 1972-78 periods, about

4.4 percent per year, although there

were differences between the periods

for some occupational and demographic

groups.

In both periods mathematicians were

the most occupationally mobile while

psychologists were the least mobile

(appendix table C-6). In both periods

all the occupations, except computer

specialists, maintained the same relative ranking of their propensity to change

occupations. Computer specialists were

among the least mobile in the 1968-72

period and the second most mobile

during 1972-78. The increased mobility

of computer specialists probably resulted from the rapid growth in the

field of computer technology, and the

movement of experienced computer

specialists to management positions. In

the 1972-78 period computer specialists

had the highest propensity to move to

management positions of any of the S/E

occupations (chart 2).

Between the two time periods, some

14
differences appeared in occupational

mobility patterns by age and education

levels. In the 1972-78 period scientists

and engineers less than 35 years old

were more mobile than their older colleagues. While the 1972-78 mobility of

the younger group increased substantially compared to 1968-72, mobility of

the over 35-year-olds declined (appendix

table C-6).'" However, little systematic

relationship existed between age and

mobility in the 1968-72 period. This suggests that, while older workers are

'"The age designation of the sample for 1988-72 and

1972-7E1 was as of the last year of each period.

generally less mobile (i.e., in periods

of both weak and strong demand), the

relatively poorer job opportunities

during the earlier period inhibited

mobility of the younger population.

With respect to educational attainment, the most distinct patterns of

change between the two periods was

for doctorate-level scientists, who were

generally more occupationally mobile

in the 1968-72 period (appendix table

C-6). This phenomenon may reflect a

pushing-out effect resulting from poor

employment opportunities caused by

the substantial drop in R&D funding

during the 1968-72 period, an activity in

which doctorate scientists and engi15

neers were highly concentrated. The

recovery of R&D activities over the

1972-78 period could have contributed

to the observed reduction in occupational mobility for the S/E doctorates.

(Total S/E employment in research

and development grew at a 2.3-percent

annual rate during the later period,

compared to a decrease of about 1 percent per year over the 1968-72 period.)

No significant change occurred in

the pattern of movement between occupations over the two periods for S/E

women who generally followed the

overall occupational patterns (appendix

table C-6). Comparable data for minorities were not available.

9
appendixes

A. Technical Notes

B. Bibliography

C. Statistical Tables

16
appendix a

technical notes

Data for mobility patterns of the

1972-78 period are from a sample survey of persons who reported their occupation as scientist or engineer in the

1970 Census of Population and who

were surveyed in 1972 and resurveyed

in 1974,1976, and 1978. A sample of 50,093

representing a population of 1,400,000

scientists and engineers (the "Experienced Sample") were identified from

the 1970 Census. The sample for the

1972-78 analysis included approximately

30,000 persons who responded in both

years. The occupational mobility data

for the period 1968-72 is based on responses to a retrospective question about

employment asked in 1972 of 75,000

persons representing 1,037,000 persons

who were in scientific or engineering

or closely related occupations in 1970.

For further detail and explanations

about the questionnaires, definitions,

12

weighting and estimating procedures,

sources of data, criteria for fields of

science and engineering, sample selection, and analysis of responses see:

Characteristics of Experienced Scientists and Engineers (Detailed Statistical

Tables)

1978 (NSF 79-322)

1976 (NSF 78-305)

The above publications are available gratis from the Division of Science

Resources Studies, National Science

Foundation, Washington, D.C. 20550.

Characteristics of the National Sample of Scientists and Engineers, 1974

(Detailed Statistical Tables)

Part 1. Demographic and Educational (NSF 75-333)

(PB 253444/AS, $5.00)

Part 2. Employment (NSF 76-323)

(PB264671/AS, $1.75)

Part 3. Geographic (NSF 76-330)

(PB265681/AS, $5.00)

For the 1968-72 data see:

The 1972 Scientist and Engineer Population Redefined

Volume 1. Demographic, Educational, and Professional

Characteristics

(NSF 75-313)

(PB 253184/AS, $7.75)

Volume 2. Labor Force and Employment Characteristics

(NSF 75-327)

(PB253604/AS, $6.00)

The above publications are available

from the National Technical Information Service, Department of Commerce,

Springfield, Virginia 22151. PB number

and price are in parentheses.

17
appendix b

bibliography

Apgar, W. C., Jr. Migration as Investment: Some Further Considerations,

Discussion Paper No.64, Cambridge,

Mass.: Harvard University, Program

on Regional and Urban Economics,

May 1970.

Becker, G. S. Human Capital, 2nd edition. New Yu.No.:__National Bureauof

Economic Research, 1972.

Bowles, S. "Migration as Investment:

Empirical 'rests of the Human Investment Approach to Geographical

Mobility," Review of Economics and

Statistics, Vol. LII, No. 4, Nov. 1970,

pp. 356-62.

Bowman, M. J. and R. G. Myers. "Schooling, Experience, and Gains and Losses

in Human Capital through Migration,"

Journal of the American Statistical

Association, Sc. 967, pp. 875-98.

Brown, D. The MoOile Professors. Washington, D.C.: American Council on

Education, 1967.

Commerce, Department of, Bureau of

the Census, "Mobility of the Population of the United States, March 1970

to March 1975," Current Population

Reports, Series P. 20, No. 285. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1975.

Fein, R. "Educational Patterns in Southern Migration," Southern Economic

Journal, Vol. 32, July 1965, pp. 106-124.

Fields, G. "Place-to-Place Migration:

Some New Evidence," Review of

Economics and Statistics, Vol. LXI,

February 1979, pp. 21-32.

Folger, J. K. "Models in Migration,"

Selected Studies of Migration Since

World War 11. New York: Milbank

Memorial Fund, 1958, pp. 155-65.

Folger, J., H. Astin, and P. Bayer. Human

Resources and Higher Education. New

York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1970.

Gallaway, L. E. "Age and Labor Mobility

Patterns," Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 26, October 1969, pp. 171-

1801.

Gallaway, L. E., R. F. Gilbert, and P. E.

Smith. "The Economics of Labor

Mobility: An Empirical Analysis,"

Western Economic Journal, June

1967, pp. 211-23.

Greenwood, M. J. "Research on Internal Migration in the United States:

A Survey," Journal of Economic Literature, Vol XIII, No. 2, June 1975,

pp. 397-433.

"The Geographic Mobility of College Graduates," The

Journal of Human Resources, Vol.

VIII, No. 4, Fall 1973, pp. 506-15.

"An Analysis of the Determinants of Geographic Labor Mobility in the United States," Review

18

of Economics and Statistics, Vol. LI,

No. 2, May 1969, pp. 189-94.

Kleiner, M. An Analysis of Interregional

Migration for Manpower Planning,

Document 133. Urbana, Ill.: Center

for Advanced Computation, 1974.

Kottis, A. "Mobility and Human Capital

Theory: The Education, Age, Race,

and Income Characteristics of Migrants," Annals of Regional Science,

Vol. 6, No. 1, June 1972, pp. 41-60.

Labor, Department of. Why Families

Move, A Model of the Geographic

Mobility of Married Couples, R&D

Monograph 48 by J. DeVanzo. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1967.

Ladinsky, J. "Sources of Geographic

Mobility Among Professional Workers: A Multivariate Analysis," Demography, Vol. IV, No. 1, 1967, pp. 293-309.

"The Geographic Mobility

of Professional and Technical Manpower," Journal of Human Resources,

Vol. V, No. 4, Fall 1967, pp. 475-94.

_ . Langley, P. C. "The Private Gains to

Long-Distance Migration in the United

States," The Economic Journal, Vol.

89, March 1970, pp. 120-26.

Lansing, J. B. and J. N. Morgan. "The

Effect of Geographical Mobility on Income," Journal of Human Resources,

Vol. II, No. 4, Fall 1967, pp. 449-60.

13
Lansing, J. B. and E. Mueller, eds. The

Geographic Mobility of Labor. Ann

Arbor, Mich.: University of Michigan, Institute for Social Research,

Survey Research Center, 1967.

Long, L. H. "Migration Differentials by

Education and Occupation: Trends

and Variations," Demography, Vol.

10, No. 2, May 1973, pp. 243-58.

Mincer, J. "Family Migration Decisions,"

Journal of Political Economy, Vol, 86,

No. 5, October 1978, pp. 749-73.

Polachek, S. and F. Horvath. "A Life

Cycle Approach to Migration," In Research in Labor Economics, R. Ehrenberg, ed. Greenwich, Conn.: JAI Press,

Inc., 1977.

14

Psacharopoulos, G. and K. Hinchliffe.

"Further Evidence on the Elasticity

of Substitution Among Different Types

of Educated Labor," Journal of Political Economy, Vol. 80, No. 4, July/

August 1972, pp. 786-92.

Schroeder, L.D. "Interrelatedness of

Occupational and Geographic Labor

Mobility," Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 29, No. 3, April

1976.

Social Security Administration, Office

of Research Statistics. Interindustry

Labor Mobility in the United States,

1957 to 1960, Research Report No. 18

by L. E. Gallaway. Washington, D.C.:

U.S. Government Printing Office, 1967.

Sommers, D. and A. Eck. "Occupational Mobility in the American Labor

Force, Monthly Labor Review, January 1977.

Sommers, P. M. and D. B. Suits. "Analysis of Net Interstate Migration,"

Southern Economic Journal, Vol. 40,

October 1973, pp. 193-201.

Wash, P. "Occupational Mobility of

Health Workers," Monthly Labor

Review, May 1977.

Wertheimer, R. F., III. The Monetary

Rewards of Migration Within the

U.S. Washington, D.C.: The Urban

Institute, 1970.

Wolfle, D. The Uses of Talent. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press,

1971.
appendix c

statistical tables

C-1. Occupational mobility of experienced scientists

and engineers: 1972-78 16

C-2. Average annual occupational mobility rates of experienced

scientists and engineers by age group: 1972-78 17

C-3. Average annual occupational mobility rates of experienced

scientists and engineers by degree level: 1972-78 17

C-4. Average annual occupational mobility rates of experienced

scientists and engineers by race: 1972-78 18

C-5. Average annual occupational mobility rates of experienced

scientists and engineers by sex: 1972-78 18

C-6. Average annual occupational mobility rates of experienced

scientists and engineers by selected characteristics:

1972-78 and 1968-72 19

C-7. Selected characteristics of the experienced scientists and

engineers of 1972 in 1978 19

15
Table C-1. Occupational mobility of experienced scientists and engineers: 1972-78

Occupation in 1972

Occupation in 1978

Total

Physical

scientists

Biological

scientistsMathematicians

Computer

specialists

Psychologists

Social

scientists

Other

scientists

Engi- neers Managers

and administrators

Other non- scientists/

engineers

In thousands

Total 830.5 64.5 53.0 18.5 51.9 20.4 22.3 19.8 406.3 117.0 56.9

Physical scientists 80.3 56.9 2.4 .3 .8 (I) .1 1.4 4.2 9.0 5.1

Biological scientists 67.8 2.7 48.6 .2 .1 .2 .5 .6 .8 6.1 8.1

Mathematicians' 27.6 .3 .1 16.1 1.9 (I) .5 .1 2.1 3.5 2.9

Computer specialists . 66.5 .3 (I) .7 43.1 .1 .2 .3 4.8 13.1 3.8

Psychologists

Social scientists

24.1

32.5

(1)

(I)

.1

.2

.1

.4

(')

.1 19.2

.6

.4

20.4

(I)

.1

(t)

.2

1.7

5.0

2.6

5.5

Other scientists' 21.2 .8 .7 (') .1 (I) .1 16.7 .7 1.5 .7

Engineers 510.5 3.5 .8 .6 5.6 .3 .2 .6 393.5 77.1 28.1

Percent distribution

Total 100.0 7.8 6.4 2.2 6.2 2.5 2.7 2.4 48.9 14.1 6.9

Physical scientists 100.0 70.8 3.0 () 1.1 () () 1.7 5.2 11.3 6.4

Biological scientists 100.0 3.9 71.7 () () () .7 .9 1.1 9.0 12.0

Mathematicians, 100.0 1.2 .5 58.4 6.8 () 1.8 () 7.7 12.5 10.5

Computer specialists 100.0 .5 () 1.1 64.9 () () .5 7.2 19.7 5.7

Psychologists 100.0 (4) .6 () () 79.6 1.5 () () 7.1 10.6

Social scientists 100.0 () .7 1.3 () 1.9 62.8 () .5 15.3 17.0

Other scientists' 100.0 3.7 3.1 () .5 () () 78.6 3.3 6.8 3.3

Engineers 100.0 .7 () () 1.1 () () () 77.1 15.1 5.5

'Less than 50.

'Includes statisticians.

'Primarily environmental scientists.

'Not calculated because of small sample size.

Note: Components may not add to totals because of rounding.

16

Source: National Science Foundation

21
Table C-2. Average annual occupational mobility

rates of experienced scientists and engineers

by age group: 1972-78

Occupation Under 35 35-44 45 and over

Physical scientists, total 6.5 5.0 4.2

Administrative and managerial 2.0 2.2 1.6

Other non-science/engineering 2.0 1.0 0.8

Other science/ engineering 2.5 1.8 1.8

Biological scientists, total 7.4 4.6 4.1

Administrative and managerial 2.2 1 9 1.3

Other non-science/engineering 3.8 ..1 1.8

Other science/engineering 1.4 1.3 1.0

Mathematicians, total 7.9 6.9 6.4

Administrative and managerial 2.5 2.1 1 1.8

Other non-science/engineering 1.7 1.5 2.0

Other science/engineering 2.7 3.3 2.6

-4- Computer specialists, total 5.5 6.0 5.9

Administrative and managerial 3.3 3.4 3.0

Other non-science/engineering 1.0 1.0 .8

Other science/engineering 1.2 1.6 2.1

Psychologists, total 3.1 4.1 3.2

Administrative and managerial 1.2 1.5 1.0

Other non-science/engineering 2.6 1.4 1.8

Other science/engineering (') 1.2 .4

Social scientists, total 8.7 5.9 5.4

Administrative and managerial 3.9 2.5 2.1

Other non-science/engineering 3.8 2.9 2.4

Other science/englneering 1.0 .5 1.0

Other scientists, total 5.1 3.9 3.1

Administrative and managerial 1.5 1.0 1.2

Other non-science/engineering .6 .7 .5

Other science/engineering 3.0 2.2 1.4

Engineers, total 5.1 4.1 3.2

Administrative and managerial 3.1 2.9 2.1

Other non-science/engineering 1.6 .8 .8

Other science/engineering .4 .4 .3

Not estimated because of small sample size

Source: National Science Foundation

Table C-3. Average annual occupational mobility

rates of experienced scientists and engineers

by degree level: 1972-78

Occupation Bachelor's Master's Doctorate

Physical scientists, total 5.6 6.0 3.7

Administrative and managerial 2.1 2.6 1.5

Other non-science/engineering 1.4 1.4 .6

Other science/engineering 2.1 2.0 1.6

Biological scientists,total 5.9 6.1 3.4

Administrative and managerial 2.3 1.9 1.0

Other non-science/engineering 2.3 2.9 1.2

Other science/engineering 1.3 1.3 1.2

Mathematicians, total 9.5 8.1 4.5

Administrative and managerial 2.7 2.8 1.1 Other non-science/engineering . . 2.4 1.6 1.4

Other science/engineering 4.4 3.7 2.0

Computer specialists,total 5.3 6.8 6.1

Administrative and managerial 3.2 3.8 1.5

Other non-science/engineering .9 .8 1.8

Other science/engineering 1.2 2.2 2.8

Psychologists, total (I) 3.6 3.1

Administrative and managerial (') 1.3 1.0

Other non-science/engineering (') 1.8 1.7

Other science/engineering (') .5 .4

Social scientists, total (I) 7.5 3.8

Administrative and managerial 6.0 3.1 1.1 Other non-science/engineering 3.8 3.3 1.9

Other science/engineering (I) 1.1 .8

Other scientists, total 4.1 2.8 3.4

Administrative and managerial 1.3 .9 1.2

Other non-science/engineering .6 .3 .6

Other science/engineering 2.2 1.6 1.6

Engineers, total 3.7 3.9 3.6

Administrative and managerial 2.5 2.8 1.7

Other non-science/engineering .9 .7 .5

Other science/engineering .3 .4 1.4

Not estimated because of small sample size.

Source: National Science Foundation

22

17,
Table C-4. Average annual occupational mobility

rates of experienced scientists and engineers

by race: 1972-78

Occupation Black Asian White

Physical scientists, Total 3.8 2.4 4.9

Administrative and managerial 1.0 .9 2.0

Other non - science /engineering 1.5 .2 1.1 Other science/engineering 1.3 1.3 1.8

Biological scientists, total 6.1 3.3 4.7

Administrative and managerial .7 .8 1.6

Other non-science/engineering 4.9 .8 2.0

Other science/engineering .5 1.7 1.1 Mathematicians total (I) (I) 7.1

Administrative and managerial (') (I) 2.2

Other non-science/engineering . , (1) (1 1.7

Other science/engineering (I) (I) 3.2

Computer specialists, total 7.0 (t) 5.9

Administrative and managerial 4.8 (I) 3.3

Other non-science/engineering .8 (l) 1.0

Other science/engineering 1.4 (I) 1.6

Psychologists, total (1) (I) 3.3

Administrative and managerial (') (I) 1.2

Other non-science/engineering (1) (I) 1.8

Other science/engineering (I) (I) .3

Social scientists, total (I) (I) 6.1

Administrative and managerial . . . (') (1) 2.6

Other non-science/engineering (') (I) 2.7

Other science/engineering (I) (I) .8

Other scientists, total (I) (I) 3.5

Administrative and managerial (') (I) 1.2

Other non-science/engineering (') (I) .5

Other science/engineering (I) (I) 1.8

Engineers, total 4.5 .3 3.9

Administrative and managerial 3.3 1.2 2.6

Other non-science/engineering .8 .6 .7

Other science/engineering .4 .5 .4

'Not estimated because of small sample size.

Source: National Science Foundation

18

Table C-5. Average annual occupational mobility

rates of experienced scientists and engineers

by sex: 1972-78

Occupation Male Female

Physical scientists, total 4.8 6.3

Administrative and managerial .. . 1.9 1.6

Other non-science/engineering .9 3.3

Other science/engineering 2.0 1.4

Biological scientists, total 4.4 6.8

Administrative and managerial 1.5 1.6

Other non-science/engineering 1.6 4.5

Other science/engineering ' 1.3 .7

Mathematicians, total 7.1 6.1

Ad ministrative and managerial 2.3 .7

Other non-science/engineering 1.5 3.4

Other science/engineering 3.3 2.0

Computer specialists, total ... . 6.1 3.7

Administrative and managerial 3.5 1.9

Other non-science/engineering .9 1.3

Other science/engineering 1.5 .5

Psychologists, total 3.3 3.7

Administrative and managerial 1.2 1.2

Other non-science/engineering 1.8 1.8

Other science/engineering .3 .7

Social scientists, total 5.7 8.0

Administrative and managerial 2.5 2.7

Other non-science/engineering 2.5 4.1

Other science/engineering .7 1.2

Other scientists total 3.6 (I)

Administrative and managerial 1.2 (I)

Other non-science/engineering .5 2.7

Other science/engineering 1.9 (I)

Engineers, total 3.8 5.5

Administrative and managerial 2.5 1.8

Other non-science/engineering . .9 1.5

Other science/engineering .4 2.2

'Not estimated because of small sample size.

Source: National Science Foundation
Table C-6. Average annual occupational mobility rates of experienced scientists and engineers

by selected characteristics: 1972-78 and 1968-72

Occupation

and period

Sex Highest degree Age Race

Male

FemaleBachelor'sMaster's Ph.D

Under

35 35-44

45 and

older Black White Asian

1972-78

Physical scientists 4.8 6.3 5.6 6.0 3.7 6.5 5.0 4.2 3.8 4.9 2.4

Biological scientists 4.4 6.8 5.9 6.1 3.4 7.4 4.6 4.1 6.1 4.7 3.3

Mathematicians 7.1 6.1 9.5 8.1 4.5 7.9 6.9 6.4 (I) 7.1 (I) Computer specialists . 6.1 3.7 5.3 6.8 6.1 5.5 6.0 5.9 7.0 5.9 (I) Psychologists 3.3 3.7 (I) 3.6 3.1 4.1 3.2 3.2 (I) 3.3 (') Social scientists 5.7 8.0 (I) 7.5 3.8 8.7 5.9 5.4 (') 6.1 (I) Other scientists 3.6 (I) 4.1 2.8 3.4 5.1 3.9 3.1 (I) 3.5 (I) Engineers 3.8 5.5 3.7 3.4 3.6 5.1 4.1 3.2 4.5 3.9 2.3

1968-72

Physical scientists 5.7 5.8 5.8 10.2 5.1 5.5 6.9 5.3 (2) (2) (2)

Biological scientists 5.1 7.7 4.9 7.1 5.3 5.3 5.3 6.1 (2)

(2) (2) Mathematicians 9.3 7.7 13.9 7.8 3.3 9.3 8.5 8.7 (2) (2) (2)

Computer specialists . 4.1 2.1 2.2 4.8 9.4 3.5 4.3 6.2 (2) (2) (2)

Psychologists 3.1 4.1 (') 2.9 3.6 2.7 4.4 3.7 (2) (2)

(2) Social scientists 4.1 4.5 4.1 3.0 4.3 3.5 5.3 4.9 (2) (2) (2) Other scientists 3.4 2.0 2.4 3.9 4.1 3.3 3.3 3.0 (2) (2) (2)

Engineers 4.1 8.8 4.3 4.1 4.5 4.0 4.7 4.4 (2) (2) (2)

'Not estimated because of small sample size.

'Not available.

Source: National Source Foundation

Table C-7. Selected characteristics of the experienced scientists and

engineers of 1972 in 1978

Occupation Total

Sex Race Age Degree level

Male

Female White Black Other'Less than

35 35-44

45 and over Bachelor'sMaster's

Doctorate

(In thousands)

Total 830.5 788.8 41.7 796.8 9.3 24.4 126.7 310.1 393.6 434.6 205.5 153.0

Physical scientists 64.5 60.8 3.7 60.0 1.3 3.2 8.2 25.7 30.6 21.0 11.7 31.6

Biological scientists 53.0 46.8 6.2 50.0 .9 2.2 5.7 21.2 26.1 12.2 9.3 29.7

Mathematicians' 18.5 16.0 2.5 16.9 .7 .9 3.4 7.7 7.4 3.5 5.9 8.9

Computer specialists . 51.9 45.7 6.2 49.9 .7 1.1 13.2 25.3 13.4 32.2 15.2 3.7

Psychologists 20.4 15.2 5.3 20.0 .4 .1 3.5 7.4 9.5 .5 5.7 14.2

Social scientists 22.3 18.1 4.2 21.6 .2 .5 3.3 8.2 10.7 2.4 6.3 13.5

Other scientists' 19.8 19.2 .6 19.5 (4) .2 1.8 6.5 11.5 8.0 5.4 6.3

Engineers 406.3 404.8 1.5 390.2 2.7 13.4 52.0 139.8 214.5 260.3 99.0 23.7

Managers and

administrators 117.0 112.8 4.2 114.0 1.4 1.6 21.9 49.3 45.8 67.2 33.4 11.7

Other 56.9 49.2 7.6 54.6 1.1 1.2 13.8 19.0 24.1 26.9 13.6 9.7

Percent who changed

occupation,

1972-78 26.0 25.6 34.5 26.2 32.0 19.2 34.4 27.6 22.0 25.4 29.1 22.0

'Primarily Asian.

'Includes statisticians.

'Primarily environmental scientists.

9 A

'Less than 50.

Source: National Science Foundation

19
OTHER SCIENCE RESOURCES

PUBLICATIONS

Science Resources Studies Highlights

NSF No. Price

SIE Personnel

Decline in Recent Science and Engineering

Doctoral Faculty Continues into 1978" .. 79-301

Detailed Statistical Tables

R&D Funds

Research and Development in Industry,

1978. Funds. 1978:Scientists and

Engineers. January 1979 80-307

Research and Development in State and

Local Governments, Fiscal Year 1977 79-327

Academic Science. R&D Funds, Fiscal

Years 1978 79-320

Federal Funds for Research and Development. Fiscal Years 1978, 1979. and

1980, Volume XXVIII 79-318

S/E Personnel

Employment of Scientists, Engineers.

and Technicians in Manufacturing

Industries, 1977

Reports

R&D Funds NSF No. Price

Federal Funds for Research and

Development, Fiscal Years 1978, 1979.

and 1980, Volume XXVIII 80-315 $3.75

Federal Support to Universities, Colleges,

and Selected Nonprofit Institutions,

Fiscal Year 1978 80-312 $5.50

S/E Personnel

Science and Engineering Personnel: A

National Overview 80-316 $4.25

Employment Patterns of Academic Scientists and Engineers, 1973-78 80-314 $1.75

Projections of Science and Engineering

Doctorate Supply and Utilization,

1982 and 1987 79-303 $2.25

Composite

National Patterns of Science and Technology Resources, 1980 80-308 $3.75

Academic Science: 1972-77. R&D Funds,

Scientists & Engineers, and Graduate

Enrollment and Support 80-313 $4.25

Reviews of Data on Science Resources

R&D Funds

No. 35. "State and Local Government

R&D Expenditures, FY 1977" 80-302 $1.25

No. 33. "U.S. Industrial R&D Spending

80-306 No. 33. Abroad"

U.S. Scientists and Engineers, 1978 80-304

Academic Science: Scientists and

Engineers, January 1979 79-328

Characteristics of Experienced Scientists

and Engineers, 1978 79-322

Academic Science: Graduate Enrollment

and Support. Fall 1978 79-316

Characteristics of Doctoral Scientists

and Engineers in the United States, 1977 79-306

79-304 $0.70

S/E Personnel

No. 36. "Employment Characteristics of

Recent Science and Engineering

Graduates: The Effects of Work

Experience, Advanced Degrees,

and Business Cycles" 80-311 $1.50

No. 34. "Sex and Ethnic Differentials in

Employment and Salaries Among

Federal Scientists and Engineers" 79-323 $1.00