Journal of Applied Psychology Copyright 1983 by the

1983, Vol 68, No 4, 678-685 American Psychological Association, Inc

An Estimate of Variance Due to Traits in Leadership

David A. Kenny Stephen J. Zaccaro
University of Connecticut Virginia Polytechnic Institute and
State University

The rejection by psychologists of the trait explanation of leadership emergence can

be attributed to the results of two major types of studies, attempts to identify
leadership traits and the use of rotation designs Numerous reviews of the literature
consistently note the failure to isolate a specific leadership trait Using a rotation
design, Barnlund (1962), after varying both the task and member composition of
groups and computing the correlation of leadership rank in one group with the
average leadership ranks received in all other groups, reported that leadership
emergence varied across group situations Thus, his data suggested that leadership
is not a stable characteristic The present study, however, uses the Social Relations
Model (Kenny, 1981) to reexamine Barnlund's conclusion. This reanalysis suggests
that between 49% and 82% (representing lower- and upper-bound estimates) lead-
ership variance can be attributed to some stable characteristic It was speculated
that this characteristic, rather than being a traditional personality trait, may actually
involve the ability to perceive the needs and goals of a constituency and to adjust
one's personal approach to group action accordingly

Groups pervade many aspects of social life
The behavior of individuals interacting in
classrooms, in work groups, on juries, on ath-
letic teams, and in therapy sessions is heavily
influenced by group-related phenomena (e.g.,
norms, influence pressures, and cohesiveness).
The effectiveness of such groups often depends
on the behavior of group leaders. Whether ap-
pointed to the group or emerging from the
group process, leaders exert a major influence
on directions their groups may take.
The current leadership literature empha-
sizes an interaction hypothesis in explaining
who emerges as a group leader. The interaction
hypothesis as formulated by Sherif (1948, p.
456) states-
Leadership is an interactional phenomenon arising when
group formation takes place The relative role an
individual member assumes within the group is determined
both by the role needs of the group and by the particular
attributes of personality, ability, and skill which differentiate
him from other members of the group However (and this
Support for this article was provided in part from Na-
tional Science Foundation Grants BNS-7913820 and BNS-
8210137 The MacArthur Foundation also supported the
first author at the Center for Advanced Study in the Be-
havioral Sciences, 1982-1983
Requests for reprints should be sent to David A Kenny,
Department of Psychology U-20, University of Connec-
ticut, Storrs, Connecticut 06268.
678
is the crux of the interactional theory), "the role he achieves
is determined not by his personal qualities in the abstract
but by his standing in relation to his fellow members in
the special qualities required by the particular group goal
or situation" (Gibb, 1969, p 268)
The interactional interpretation states then
that leadership occurs as a function of the in-
teraction between the group's needs and the
member resources available to satisfy these
needs (Jenkins, 1947; Murphy, 1941) The
member who possesses those resources that
can best aid the group in reaching its ordained
goals is more likely to emerge as the leader.
The initial processes involved in the early
stages of group development concern the iden-
tification of such member resources and sub-
sequent group coalescence around the chosen
leader (Geier, 1967; Hollander & Julian, 1970).
There is the explicit rejection by interaction
theorists of a purely trait explanation of lead-
ership emergence. In an early statement of the
interaction hypothesis, Murphy (1941) stated
that, "Leadership does not reside in the person.
It is a function of the whole situation" (p.
674). Contrary to the "great men" (or women)
theory of leadership, the specific circumstances
call for certain qualities in a leader. In an al-
ternate set of circumstances, this leader may
become a follower. The trait approach has been
evaluated by two major types of studies: at-
tempts to identify so-called leadership traits
 VARIANCE IN LEADERSHIP
and rotation studies in which member com-
position or group tasks are varied. Data from
rotation designs demonstrating variability in
leader emergence as well as the failure to un-
cover a trait that is consistently associated with
leader emergence have led researchers to reject
dispositional explanations for leader emer-
gence. We argue in this article, however, that
such rejection is unwarranted or, at best, pre-
mature. In his revision of StogdiU's Handbook
of Leadership, Bass (1981) maintained that
"some of the variance in who emerges as leader
and who is successful and effective is due to
traits of consequence in the situation; some of
the variance is due to situational effects and
some of the variance is due to the interaction
of traits and situations" (pp. 81-82) In this
article we will use a quantitative model of
leadership that allows a researcher to isolate
the amount of variance attributable to traits
Furthermore, applying this model to one of
the more elaborate rotation designs (Barnlund,
1962), we hope to mitigate the conclusion that
leader emergence is not a function of traits.
We first begin, however, by reviewing in turn
both trait identification studies and rotation
design experiments.
The Failure to Identify Traits Correlated
With Leadership
Reviews of the leadership literature all tend
to demonstrate the point that "no single trait
or group of characteristics has been isolated
which sets off the leader from the members of
his group" (Jenkins, 1947, pp 74-75). Bird
(1940), after reviewing 20 studies, noted 79
leadership traits; however, only 5% of these
traits were common to four or more investi-
gations (Geier, 1967). Subsequent reviews by
Jenkins (1947) and Stogdill (1948) echoed this
discouraging state of affairs.
A trait that generally has been found to cor-
relate with leader emergence has been intel-
ligence. Stogdill (1948) reported 23 studies (out
of 33) that reported a significant positive cor-
relation between leadership and intelligence
Although Mann's (1959) review supported this
relationship, it cast doubt on its strength. In
the studies surveyed, none yielded a correlation
higher than .50 and the median correlation
was .25. Furthermore, Gibb (1969) suggested
that the reportedly higher intelligence of lead-
679
ers may be, in fact, situation specific because
most group situations under study were per-
formance tasks.
Two other proposed traits that have received
substantial support in some quarters are dom-
inance and personality adjustment. Stogdill
(1948) reported that 11 studies (out of 17)
indicated that leaders had higher scores on
various dominance scales. Gibb (1969) re-
ported several studies published after the Stog-
dill review that indicated a similar relationship.
However, Mann (1959) again questioned the
strength of these correlations. No correlation
between dominance and leadership exceeded
.42 and the median correlation was .20. The
same conclusions can be drawn about per-
sonality adjustment. Whereas several studies
were reported as supporting a positive rela-
tionship between leadership and adjustment
(Bird, 1940; Gibb, 1969; Jenkins, 1947; Mann,
1959, Stogdill, 1948), Mann indicated that the
median correlation was 15 and no correlation
exceeded .53
All major reviews of the leadership literature
have noted the overall failure to find either a
consistent and strong trait or a constellation
of traits that differentiate leaders from follow-
ers. One explanation for this failure offered
by Gibb (1969) was the inadequacy of trait
and personality measures. Measures used in
reported research may not have been sensitive
enough to highlight the leadership trait. An
alternate method, the rotation design, can be
used to test the trait theory of leadership with-
out positing specifically what the trait is.
Rotation Designs
Rotation designs are based on the hypothesis
that if leadership is a function of personal
qualities of the leader, then the same person
will emerge as a leader when aspects of the
situation are varied. If, however, leadership is
a function of either situational factors or of
an interaction between qualities of the poten-
tial leader and needs of the group, then varying
situational factors will change who emerges as
the group leader Thus, to contrast a trait hy-
pothesis with an interactiomst hypothesis of
leader emergence, rotation designs are used to
vary some aspects of the group (e.g., member
composition and task) over a series of sessions.
The relationship between leadership rank in
680 DAVID A KENNY AND STEPHEN J ZACCARO
one session with rankings in other sessions is
then observed.
Three different rotational schemes have
been employed. The first type of rotational
study holds the task constant but varies mem-
ber composition. Generally, each person is in
a group with each other person in the study
only once. Setting group size at n, to execute
such a study there must be n2 subjects and
each subject must be in n + 1 groups. The
second type of rotational study keeps member
composition constant but varies the task A
third type of rotation study varies both mem-
ber composition and task.
Bell and French (1950) varied only member
composition to study leader stability Twenty-
five male subjects interacted in five-member
groups over six group sessions. In each session,
each individual interacted with group mem-
bers who were not a part of any other group
that included the individual. During each ses-
sion, each group had to discuss a case history
of a student who had a personal adjustment
problem m college. After the group members
reached a solution consensus, they rank or-
dered all fellow members according to leader
preference. Bell and French then averaged the
rankings given each individual by his fellow
members and correlated this average with the
mean status score given this individual m the
other five groups of which he was a member.
The range of these correlations was —.03 to
+.98, and the average correlation was 75 This
result led Bell and French to conclude that
varying group composition did not have major
effects on consistency of leadership position
and that the "recent trend toward emphasis
upon situational factors in leadership may re-
quire some reevaluation" (p. 767)
Borgatta, Bales, and Couch (1954) also var-
ied member composition Three-member
groups planned a future role play situation
and each subject participated in four group
sessions. Using a variety of indices, including
leadership rankings by fellow members, as-
sertiveness ratings, and sociometric scales, 11
leaders were discerned in the first group ses-
sion. The authors found that in the second
and third sessions 8 of these 11 leaders re-
mained m the top position.
In both studies only group composition was
varied, and the task was kept constant. It is
possible that leaders who emerged across
groups having different memberships did so
because of a special skill for that task. They
may have had special abilities or resources that
fellow members recognized. A more complete
test would thus involve varying the group task.
Gibb (Note 1) did vary group tasks, while
keeping membership constant. Leadership was
found to be consistent across the different
tasks. Carter and Nixon (1949), using a similar
design, had the same dyads work on three con-
secutive tasks, an intellectual task, a clerical
task, and a mechanical task. Although lead-
ership was associated in the intellectual and
clerical situations, it seemed to be independent
on the mechanical task Whereas these two
studies appear, in part, to offer additional sup-
port for a trait interpretation of leader emer-
gence, it is reasonable to assume an mertial
effect whereby a leader who emerges in one
group situation will continue to be perceived
as a leader in subsequent group sessions by
the same fellow members.
Only Barnlund (1962) varied both member
composition and group task Further, the tasks
used were different enough so that each one
required a different "constellation of skills."
As m Bell and French (1950), each of the 25
subjects worked with four fellow members in
six group sessions structured so that no in-
dividual worked with another member m more
than one session. Subjects worked on motor,
artistic, mathematical, literary, social, and
spatial problems At the conclusion of each
session subjects were asked to rank order their
preferences for a leader Using the same sta-
tistical procedures as Bell and French, Barn-
lund reported a correlation of .64, which he
judged to be statistically nonsignificant.1 He
concluded that his results lent "credibility to
the idea that leadership grows out of the special
problems of coordination facing a given group
and the available talent of the participants"
(P 51).
' Because Barnlund assumed n equaled only five, a cor-
relation of 878 would be needed to achieve conventional
statistical significance However, because 64 is an average
of 30 nonindependent correlations each based on an n of
five, it would seem likely that it is statistically significant
The interest in this article, however, is estimation of the
percent of variation due to traits and not significance
testing
 VARIANCE IN LEADERSHIP
A Model of Leadership
Barnlund's study appears to be somewhat
convincing against a trait hypothesis of emer-
gent leadership. Although rotation design pro-
vides a reasonable method to determine the
extent to which leadership is stable, by itself,
it provides us with only a qualitative basis of
ascertaining leadership stability and not a
quantitative one. A quantitative model of
leadership applied to Barnlund's data will give
us a more accurate estimate of leadership sta-
bility.
To review, for Barnlund's design each of the
25 subjects works with four members in six
group sessions structured in such a way so that
no one individual works with another indi-
vidual in more than one session. After each
session subjects rank order the four other group
members in terms of leadership We can refer
to a data point as Xljkm, where i refers to rater
(1 through 5), j to ratee (1 through 5), k to
group (1 through 5), and m to session or task
(1 through 6). Kenny (1981) presented a gen-
eral model for two-person data structures that
he called the social relations model. We will
use this model for the ratings of leadership.
Person i's rating of person j's leadership in
group k working on task m is
- Hkm + <*ikm + fijkm + 1ijkn (1)
The term ixkm represents a constant term for
group k and task m. The term alkm represents
the extent to which person i tends to see others
in the group as leaders.2 The term @jkm rep-
resents the extent to which person j is seen by
others in the group to be a leader. It then is
the measure of leadership The term yljkm rep-
resents the interaction of rater and ratee It
represents disagreement in the ratings and so
can be considered an error of measurement
In sum, a is a rater bias term, /3 is the person's
true leadership in the group, and y is an error
of measurement
Of key interest is the correlation of lead-
ership or |8 for two different tasks (tasks m and
m') The correlation pgmsm or X2 denotes the
extent to which leadership is stable across two
tasks m and m' If it is 1.0, someone high on
leadership for one task will also be high for
another task If zero, then leadership is un-
stable across tasks. It is then the key correlation
that needs to be estimated.
681
Because X2 is the parameter of interest, we
must be clear what it is. The term <P$ represents
the variance in leadership in a particular group
working on a task The term X2 represents the
overlap of the j8s across two different groups.
It then represents the percent of the variance
of the j8s that is stable across groups and tasks.
Formally it is the covariance of the /3s across
two tasks divided by the variance within a
task
Researchers who have employed the rotation
design have computed correlations that they
have implicitly assumed to estimate X2. The
major correlation that Barnlund (1962) and
others have computed is the within-group cor-
relation The leadership scores of individuals
in one group for task m are correlated with
the average of their leadership scores for the
other tasks When there are five groups for
each task and six tasks, there are a total of 30
within-group correlations each with an n of
five. Given the model that is presented in
Equation 1, what will the within-group cor-
relation be?
The model in Equation 1 must be modified
because subjects are forced to rank order the
other members in the group. One consequence
of using a rank order is that the mean remains
constant across raters (I e , Ms of 1, 2, 3, and
4 must equal 2.5 for all raters) Such a con-
straint modifies the rating of person i of person
j in the following way (see Appendix):
M+
1 n- 1
+ 1Vkm ~ It km- (2)
The term _M IS now a constant across group
and task; 0km is the mean fi for all persons in
group k on task m, and ylkm is the mean y
for person i m group k working on task m.
For Expression 2 the mean for each rater is
the same. One benefit of this is to remove the
rater effect of a from the equation Note that
if person i is a leader and so $l)km is large, then
i's ratings of j and others are inflated because
they are compared to each other and not to
person i.
2
Because rank orders are used, it may seem that the
alpha term can be dropped As will be seen, any scheme
that forces the mean to be the same for all raters affects
beta
682 DAVID A KENNY AND STEPHEN J ZACCARO
Investigators compute the average rating for
each person in a group. We must then compute
this term from Expression 2. It is for person
j in group k and task m:
s (« - 2)
M + Pjkm — P kn>n ;
(« - I)2
2 "tl km
jkm (3)
n- 1
where 0 km is the average /3 for all persons in
group k (see Appendix for proof.) The average
rating of person j m the other tasks besides m
can be approximated by (see Appendix)'
+
This is what the within-group correlation
theoretically estimates.
It does not exactly estimate X2 for two rea-
sons. First, unreliability attenuates the cor-
relation. Thus, to the extent that of does not
equal zero, the withm-group correlation
underestimates X2. Second, X2 and the withm-
group correlation are not equivalent. The
method of correlating the rating on a single
task with the average ratings on the remaining
n tasks results in an overestimation of X2. The
parameter we seek to measure, X2, is the cor-
relation between leadership in one other task
Given the formal analysis that we performed
based on the social relations model (Kenny,
1981), it is possible to reexamine the rotation
studies to determine the value of X2. Because
Barnlund (1962) varied both member com-
position and group task, we will use his study.
He reports the within-group correlation as .64.
As the preceding analysis has shown, the
within-group correlation does not exactly es-
timate the stability of leadership across group
situations. Adjustments must be made for un-
reliability and equivalence. Given the reli-
ability estimates reported by Barnlund,4 the
disattenuated correlation is .89. To determine
what X2 is, we need to solve for it from
where /3<m) is the mean of person / s |3s across
all tasks but task m and the y term is similarly
denned.
If we denote n(n - 2)/(« - I) 2 as p and
of as a^/(n — 1), the covariance between
Expressions 3 and 4 can be shown to equal
p ^ X 2 , and the variances of Expressions 3 and
4, respectively, are p^aj + p<rt and
erf
X2 is the correlation of leadership across tasks,
of represents error variance due to y, and
dp represents leadership variance.3 Then the
correlation between Expressions 3 and 4 equals
(5)
.89 =
1 + X2(« - 1)
which is derived from Expression 5 by setting
of = 0 The solution for X2 is 82 Even if we
do not disattenuate .64 (and so assume no
error variance), the estimate of X2 is .49. Thus,
49% of variance represents a lower-bound es-
timate for the leadership-trait variance for the
Barnlund study. The comparable lower-bound
estimate for the Bell and French (1950) study,
which did not vary task, is .63.
Discussion
One of the oldest topics m psychology is the
extent to which leadership is a trait. Research-
3
We are assuming that the 7s are independent It might
seem plausible that y,j is correlated 7,,. For instance, if
person 1 thinks person j is more of a leader than others,
j sees 1 as more (or less) of a leader For peer rating data,
this correlation has not been found (Kenny, Lord, & Garg,
Note 2)
4
Barnlund's (1962) use of the Spearman-Brown proph-
ecy formula to estimate the reliability of leadership across
n tasks presumes that X2 is one Because X2 is less than
one, his estimate of reliability is inflated, making the dis-
attenuated correlation somewhat deflated
 VARIANCE IN LEADERSHIP
ers have attempted to answer this question in
two ways The most common way has been
an attempt to isolate the particular leadership
trait As is well known, this approach has not
isolated any leadership trait The second ap-
proach has been to examine the stability of
leadership across different situations. Persons
are rotated across different tasks or groups.
Only the Barnlund study varied both task and
member composition Using the social rela-
tions model (Kenny, 1981), we estimated the
percent variance in leadership due to trait as
between 49% and 82% In conjunction, the
rotation design and the social relations model
seem to suggest that leadership is much more
stable across situations than our introductory
texts would indicate
Regarding our findings, the distinction be-
tween leader emergence and leader effective-
ness needs to be emphasized We have focused
only on factors influencing leader emergence
and not effectiveness Traits may determine
who emerges as leaders but may not be as
important when considering the subsequent
effectiveness of these leaders Likewise, the m-
teractionist perspective may be more relevant
m predicting leader effectiveness than leader
emergence.
Because our major result is derived from
Barnlund's data, a few cautions regarding his
method are m order. Even though Barnlund
varied both task and group membership, the
setting and experimental instructions were the
same across groups. These aspects of the group
situation may be as important as task content
in determining leader emergence Further-
more, the subjects were homogeneous, all being
male college students. From the interactionist
perspective, which emphasizes group diversity,
this homogeneity may have artificially raised
the estimate of X2. These limitations in Barn-
lund's study make replication all the more
necessary.
Although our analysis reveals that leadership
is stable, it in no way illuminates what per-
sonality trait or set of behaviors bring about
this stability We suspect, however, that re-
opening the search for a specific leadership
personality trait may, as before, prove un-
fruitful. The variability of group situations and
group needs does imply that different leader
approaches may be needed for different group
683
situations This implication, however, can be
harmonized with a leader-trait perspective by
proposing that persons who are consistently
cast in the leadership role possess the ability
to perceive and predict variations in group
situations and pattern their own approaches
accordingly Such leaders may be highly com-
petent in reading the needs of their consti-
tuencies and altering their behaviors to more
effectively respond to these needs
The methodological and measurement dif-
ficulties of demonstrating such an ability in
leaders are obvious These difficulties, however,
rather than causing an abandonment of a trait
notion of leadership, should spur the devel-
opment and use of innovative techniques that
can more effectively evaluate this notion.
Those who have so strongly endorsed the in-
teractions theory of leadership have done so
because they have learned the wrong lesson
from the failure of past research attempts to
isolate the leadership trait. This failure should
not be interpreted as meaning no traits exists
but that our research and measurement strat-
egies were inadequate.
Reference Notes
1 Gibb. C A The emergence ofleaders in small temporary
groups of men (Publication 1392) Ann Arbor Uni-
versity of Michigan Microfilms, 1949
2 Kenny, D A , Lord, R G , &Garg, S A social relations
analysis ofpeer ratings Unpublished manuscript, Uni-
versity of Connecticut, 1983
References
Barnlund, D C Consistency of emergent leadership in
groups with changing tasks and members Speech
Monographs, 1962, 29, 45-52
Bass, B M Slogdill's handbook of leadership A survey
of theory and research New York Free Press, 1981
Bell. G B , & French, R L Consistency of individual
leadership position in small groups of varying mem-
bership Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 1950,
45, 764-767
Bird, C Social psychology New York Appleton-Century-
Crofts 1940
Borgatta, E F , Bales, R L , & Couch, A S Some findings
relevant to the great man theory of leadership American
Sociological Review 1954, 19, 755-759
Carter, L F , & Nixon, M An investigation of the rela-
tionship between four criteria of leadership ability for
three different tasks Journal of Psychology, 1949, 27,
245-261
Geier, J G A trait approach to the study of leadership
in small groups Journal of Communication, 1967, 17,
316-323
684 DAVID A KENNY AND STEPHEN J. ZACCARO

Gibb, C A Leadership In G Lindzey & E. Aronson
(Eds.), Handbook ofsocialpsychology (2nd ed.) Reading,
Mass Addison-Wesley, 1969
Hollander, E P , & Julian, J W Studies in leader legitimacy,
influence, and innovation In L Berkowitz (Ed), Ad-
vances in experimental social psychology (Vol 5) New
York Academic Press, 1970
Jenkins, W O A review of leadership studies with particular
reference to military problems Psychological Bulletin,
1947, 44, 54-79
Kenny, D A Interpersonal perception A multivanate
round robin analysis In M B Brewer & B E Collins
(Eds.), Scientific inquiry and the social sciences A volume
in honor of Donald T Campbell San Francisco Jossey-
Bass, 1981
Mann, R D A review of the relationships between per-
sonality and performance in small groups. Psychological
Bulletin, 1959, 56. 241-270
Murphy, A J A study of the leadership process. American
Sociological Review, 1941, 6, 674-687
Shenf, M An outline of social psychology New 'York. Har-
per & Brothers, 1948
Stogdill, R M Personal factors associated with leadership'
A survey of the literature Journal of Personality, 1948,
25, 35-71

Appendix

Expression 2 is equal to X,jkm - X, km + fi and fijkm

has equal means across ratees for each rater The (» - I) 2 (B - I) 2
mean of Equation 1 across ratees for rater ; is
Making this substitution and gathering terms, we
2 $)km have
X, km = Hkm + Oilkm +' ' + 7, km (Al)
n(n - 2)
Because (n - I) 2 Jkm

2 ft/tm 2 Pjkm ~ fiiltn

',, (A2) (A6)
n— \ n —1 n—1 «— 1 n— 1
the right-hand side of Equation A1 becomes which is Expression 3
Expression 4 is an approximation of the mean
<X,km ylkm (A3) of Expression 3 across n tasks It ignores the fol-
n-1 n-1 lowing minor terms that are means of at least n2
terms, (a) The mean of all the /3s of ratees for groups
Thus X,Jkm - X,km + ix equals with person j except those persons in group k, task
m (b) The mean of all the 7s of rater-ratee com-
O n
ft km filkm . - r A A\ binations for groups with person j except those 7s
+ Pjkm —" + _ + y,jkm - "Ylkm, (A4) in group k, task m
_
To determine the variances of Expressions 3 and
which is Expression 2 4 in the text and their covanance, we define the
The mean of Expression A4 across raters for ratee following nonzero expected values
j equals

Pikm

and

Tikm
n'J
(A5) The mean of Expression 3 for any group of n
n- 1 persons is constant. The expected value of its vari-
ance then equals n/(n — 1) times the expected value
Given Equation A2 and Expression A3, the fourth of Expression 3 squared That expectation times «/
term in Expression A5 becomes (7Z - 1 ) IS
 VARIANCE IN LEADERSHIP 685

because
where p equals n(n - 2)/(n - I)2 and a2 = oil ryottm^ 2 fl + X2(n - 1)"]
m
(B-l). ' ^i. » J
The mean of Expression 4 for a group of n persons The
is ordinarily nonzero The mean equals covanance of Expression 3 and 4 equals
because
no {km) 1 r, ((cm)

The expected value of the variance of Expression

4 minus its mean equals
+ X2(
"~ ^ 1 + ?± Received February 14, 1983
} n ' Revision received June 30, 1983

New Journal on Aging Call for Nominations

By action of APA's Publications and Communications Board and Council of Rep-

resentatives, the APA is publishing a quarterly journal called Psychology and Aging,
the first issue of which will appear in 1985 Psychology and Aging will contain original
articles on adult development and aging The articles may be reports of research or
applications of research, and they may be biobehavioral, psychosocial, educational,
methodological, clinical, applied, or experimental (laboratory, field, or naturalistic)
studies. For more information about the new journal, see the November issue of the
APA Monitor.
Nominations for the editor of Psychology and Aging are now open Candidates
must be members of APA and should be available to start receiving manuscripts in
mid-1984 to prepare for issues published in 1985 To nominate candidates, prepare
a statement of one page or less in support of each candidate. Submit nominations
no later than April 2, 1984, to
Martha A. Storandt
Department of Psychology
Box 1125
Washington University
St. Louis, Missouri 63130
(314)889-6508