newcomb theodore m

8/12/2019 Newcomb Theodore m

1/20

N A T I O N A L A C A D E M Y O F S C I E N C E S

Any opinions expressed in this memoir are those of the author(s)

and do not necessarily reflect the views of the

National Academy of Sciences.

T H E O D O R E M E A D N E W C O M B

19031984

A Biographical Memoir by

PHILIP E . CONVERSE

Biographical Memoir

COPYRIGHT 1994NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES

WASHINGTON D.C.


2/20


3/20

T H E O D O R E M E A D N E W C O M BJuly 24 1903 December 28 1984

B Y P H I L I P E C O N V E R S E

T EODORE M NEW COMB was one of the principal pioneersin the establishment of social psychology as a fertilearea for study at the boundary between the traditional dis-ciplines of psychology and sociology. During five decadesof research he sought to enrich individualistic treatmentsof human motivation, learning, and perception with a keenerunders tanding of the social processes that shape them. Hewas author o r co-author of th ree widely used textbooks thatgave systematic definition to this emergent field, and hedirected the influential doctoral program in social psychol-ogy at the University of Michigan for twenty-six years.

Newcomb s personal research made an impressive seriesof conceptual and empirical contributions to the new areaof social psychology. These included work on autism andsocial communication; the first ambitious tracing of the evo-lution of political attitudes over the adult life course; acareful elucidation of the basic principles of cognitive bal-ance; studies of the primary forces shaping interpersonalattraction; and, in a closely related way, the growth of main-stream and deviant subcultures. Throughout his life he wasalso interested in the dynamics of the education process.More than a small portion of his basic research was focused


4/20

322 B I O G R P H I C L M E M O I R Son this interest, and he successfully applied much of whathe learned to practical problems in higher education.

P E R S O N A L B A C K G RO U N D

Theodore M Newcomb was born July 24, 1903, in RockCreek, a rural village in Ashtabula County at the northeast-ern tip of Ohio. His father was a Congregational minister.In an engaging autobiographical note entitled The Loveof Ideas (1980), Newcomb recalled that his father had apassion for the 'rural church, ' and as a consequence thefamily moved frequently from one small town to another.This nieant in turn that his family provided the only conti-nuity in his development, an d he gave it uncommon loyalty.

The Newcomb ancestors had been early settlers in Con-necticut and Vermont who had followed the westward move-ment to New York state, and then on into what was oncethe Western Reserve in Ohio. Family traditions were persis-tently Congregational, not untouched by Calvinism. Theyhad also been early abolitionists and, until a defection byNewcomb's parents in World War I, unshakably Republican.

Newcomb grew up feeling that the family was, however,sharply set apart from its rural setting. Both his parentswere college-educated and held advanced degrees. Theysubscribed to serious magazines otherwise unknown inthe community, and the family spent much time readingbooks, often aloud. There were even moments of ostracismfor the family as the father took u p locally unpopular posi-tions from the pulpit, attacking the Ku lux Klan or sup-porting pacifism. Family solidarity was thereby enhanced,and young Ted received his first lessons in the invigorationof departing from the herd politically.

Given the rural setting, Newcomb's early education wasspent in one-room schools. The big transition came as hebegan ninth grade in a large high school in Cleveland,


5/20

T H E O D O R E M E D N E W C O M B 3 3Ohio. He weathered the change well, however, and fouryears later was class valedictorian. His valedictory addressheaped scorn on the New York State Legislature for havingdenied seats to two legally elected members on groundsthat they were bolshevistic socialists. He was pleased thathis parents liked the talk, and that the principal did not.

All of his social world, including Ted, took for grantedthat he would enroll at Oberlin College, where all goodCongregationalists went. He and his closest high schoolfriend had made a join t decision to become Christian mis-sionaries, and his undergraduate days at Oberlin, spent as afaithful student volunteer, were heavily dominated by thisgoal. He graduated summ cum l ude in 1924 but in retro-spect found any serious learning from the college years anear blank.

To pay off college debts he put in a year teaching highschool, and then entered Union Theological Seminary inNew York City. With Columbia University across the streetand a tradition of cross-enrollments in courses, the pace ofhis intellectual growth began to quicken. He was excitedby fellow students, his professors, and the issues that weregripping them all. He recalled particular fascination withexegesis of the Old Testament from Julius Bewer; progres-sive education, as taught by William Kilpatrick at ColumbiaTeachers College; educational psychology with GoodwinWatson, also at Teachers College; general psychology withGardner Murphy at Columbia, with whom he would laterdevelop a most fruitful collaboration; and ethics with HarryWard at the Seminary, who dealt more in current issuesthan in Bible studies.

Ironically, Newcomb's two years at Union convinced himthat he might prefer to be a psychologist in academe ratherthan a Christian missionary. One small reinforcement forthis decision was exposure to a seminary professor who lec-


6/20

324 B I O G R A P H I C A L M E M O I R Stured frequently on the total superiority of Christianity toall other religions, at a time when Newcomb was readinganthropology about cultural differences and the illusionsof ethnocentrism. Therefore, he switched his registration,continued his graduate work for another two years, andreceived his Ph.D. in psychology from Columbia in 1929.

P R O F E S S I O N A L C A R E E R

Newcomb took his first academic position in the psychol-ogy department a t Lehigh University in the fall of 1929. Inpart because of his exposure to educational issues at Teach-ers College, the fledgling instructor was asked to preparean analysis of some of the university's operating policies.Newcomb's report to the dean was apparently not flatter-ing, and officials requested that he make a number of changesin his findings to put the university in a more favorablelight. Newcomb refused, and despite the growing nationalgloom following the collapse of the stock market, he feltobliged to look elsewhere for employment.

His next position was at Cleveland College, Western Re-serve University, where he spent four years. On August 27,1931, he married Mary E Shipherd of an old Oberlin fam-ily. The relationship was an uncommonly devoted one forthe remaining half-century, and soon the family grew toinclude three children: Esther, Suzanne, and Theodore, Jr.Meanwhile the Depression continued to gain force, andNewcomb was deeply affected. He recalls that he learnedas much from suffering students and their families as fromnewspapers, and during the darkest days of the early thir-ties he joined the Socialist Party.

1934 brought a remarkable job change, which influencedthe rest of Newcomb's career. He received an offer to jointhe faculty at the new Bennington College in Vermont, andhe accepted with what he called indecent haste. His Western


7/20

T H E O O R E M E D N E W C O M B 325Reserve colleagues were baffled by his choice of a tiny andnearly unknown women's college in the Vermont hills overhis Cleveland position. Newcomb was, however, thoroughlycommitted to experiments in progressive education and wasaware of the new college's philosophies. He found the pros-pect of dispensing wisdom in a more intimate setting an excit-ing one, and it was not until he had moved to Vermont thatthe sympathizer with the underdog came to realize that theBennington student body was unrelievedly upper crust.

The next seven years at Bennington were heady ones.Despite the implausible setting, Newcomb plunged into anarray of mildly radical political activities, including the or-ganization of student political groups on the one hand,and a teachers' union at the college on the other.

These considerable distractions notwithstanding, he savedhis main energies for his research and writing, and in thisperiod he became a nationally established scholar. He wasinvited by his former mentor Gardner Murphy at Columbiato participate in a thorough revision of a popular text, Ex-pem mental Soc ial Psychology (1937), that Murphy and his wifehad first published in 1931. Newcomb was to add a majornew section systematizing the flood of studies of social atti-tudes, attitude change, and personality measurement thathad appeared since the first edition. His statement increasedthe bulk of the volume by one quarter and was widely ad-mired. The contribution put him in the habit of usingskillful textbook writing to introduce fresh synthetic theoryto his peers.

The collaboration with the Murphys dovetailed nicely witha rapid expansion of Newcomb's own research agenda. Al-though the Murphy book was originally focused on socialpsychological experiments, Newcomb's part dealt more withmeasurement of attitudes and personality in natural set-tings. He appreciated the inferential power of the experi-


8/20

3 6 B I O G R P H I C L M M O I R Smental method, but worried about the potential artificialityof the behavior of self-conscious human beings in plainlycontrived laboratory situations. Moreover, he had pickedup from Kurt Lewin, his principal social-psychological heroas he once described him, a fascination with the whys andhows of change in groups over more extended periods oftime than fitted the normal confines of the tightly con-trolled laboratory experiment.

Given these predilections, it is not surprising that Newcombquickly came to see Bennington in the mid-1930s as a prom-ising natural experiment in large-scale attitude change.Young women from genteel and often deeply conservativepolitical backgrounds were gathered together at a time ofnational economic distress so overwhelming as to stimulatewidespread interest in radical reform. It was clear thatcohorts graduating from Bennington had on average ar-rived at views of the political world fundamentally differentfrom the ones they had when they entered, and that thedetails of this change-who changed, who resisted, and un-der what circumstances-were shaped in no small degreeby internal group processes. Issues pivotal to basic theoryin social psychology were at stake here, and Newcomb wantedto subject this changing scene to systematic study.

Therefore, he designed an ambitious longitudinal projectto monitor the timing and extent of these changes duringthe undergraduate career, and to specify the circumstancesunder which they were most likely to occur. Among a richarray of results reported in his monograph Personality andSocial hange 1943),some of the clearest findings tied changeclosely to the college experience itself. Not only did move-ment toward more liberal views cumulate steadily over theundergraduate years, but the change was greatest amongthose students most involved in college affairs and mostrespected among their peers.


9/20

T H E O D O R E M E A D N E W C O M B 3 7The Bennington Study, as this research effort came to

be called, had a major impact on the nascent field of socialpsychology. Not only was the longitudinal design novel forthe period, but the study contained numerous innovativeways of capturing the interplay between individual disposi-tions and group process. And, of course, the careful dem-onstration of the potent shaping of individual responses byfactors of group context gave empirical reassurance for someof the most central assumptions motivating the study ofsocial psychology.The Bennington Study also shaped Newcomb's own intel-lectual development in important ways. The long-term lon-gitudinal study became something of a trademark, despiteNewcomb's wry comment that waiting for such studies toripen on the vine had notably shortened his list of publica-tions relative to peers who completed a number of experi-ments or shorter studies per year. Some of the substantivefindings about the effects of college also influenced somemajor institutional experiments involving the harnessing ofgroup process to deepen the educational experience, whichNewcomb put to real-world application at the University ofMichigan thirty years later.

Finally, he was to carry on the Bennington study itselfwith further longitudinal extensions. About 1960 he re-turned to the same students, now middle-aged, whom hehad studied at Bennington in order to assess the persistenceof the attitude change associated with the college experi-ence. The stability was impressive, and as clear for collegeconverts as for those who had come to college already lib-eral in their views. At the time of his death in 1984, Newcomband the young social psychologist Duane Alwin were in thelate stages of yet another interview with the Benningtonstudents, after more than forty years had passed.In his seventh year at Bennington, Newcomb was invited


10/20

3 8 B I O G R P H I C L M E M O I R Sto join the faculty at the University of Michigan. He ac-cepted the new position with alacrity, as he had come tomiss the stimulation of contact with graduate and pre-pro-fessional students. He took up his work in Ann Arbor a fewmonths before Pearl Harbor plunged the United States intoWorld War 11. Soon thereafter he was on his way to Wash-ington, D.C., to join a growing cadre of middle-aged socialscientists drawn into various forms of research associatedwith the war effort. He served with the Foreign BroadcastIntelligence Service and the Office of Strategic Services,and, late in the war, spent time in Europe helping to carryout the U.S. Strategic Bombing Survey.

At the war s end he returned to Ann Arbor to resumeserious effort on the task for which he had originally beenhired: to help the University of Michigan develop strengthin the growing area of social psychology. This he did in thegrand manner; he proposed to the university the establish-ment of a joint doctoral program, which he would chair,shared by his two departments of sociology and psychology.

The new program, which had but one loose parallel atHarvard, turned into an instant success. It accepted stu-dents only beyond the master s level, but soon attracted adeluge of applications and was able to set a high thresholdfor entrance. Newcomb assembled a distinguished facultyto help define and teach in the program, including mostcentrally Daniel Katz and Dorwin Cartright, as well as othersocial psychologists from his Washington days who had cometo Michigan to form the Institute for Social Research. Inshort order, the program was awarding Ph.D. s at a ratethat made it one of the largest in the university. UnderNewcomb s leadership over the next two decades, programgraduates went to all corners of the land, colonizing bothsociology and psychology departments in the name of thejoint discipline.


11/20

T H E O D O R E M E A D N E W C O M B 3 9In the early period of the program Newcomb published

his basic text Social sychology (1950). This was a gentle butthoughtful work that enjoyed great popularity. Several goodtexts in this new area had appeared over the precedingfifteen years, including the 193'7 Murphy revision to whichNewcomb had contributed. Most of these were, however,written by psychologists from a distinctly psychological pointof view. Although his own primary background had alsobeen in psychology, Newcomb's definition of the field weldedin a richer complement of basic sociological concepts, in-cluding social roles, social norms, and other essentials ofsocial structure.

In this same general period Newcomb extended hisBennington studies by joining with W W. Charters in experi-mental work manipulating the situational salience of refer-ence groups to gauge variation in their impact (1952, 2 .

He also began work on a set of theoretical notions thatwould permeate his own research agenda for at least an-other decade. He had become intrigued with the work ofFritz Heider in the 1940s, developing propositions aboutcognitive balance, or a hypothesized tendency toward sym-metry in feelings about objects that the actor cognitivelyassociates with one another in unit relations. One obvi-ous special case of such an association might be the linkingof a message with its source. If, for example, the actorlistens to a source, for whom he has feelings, express someattitudes, for which he also has feelings, it is of course pos-sible that at any given time these feelings are opposite insign: the source is liked but the message is disliked, or viceversa. Such configurations represent a form of disequilibrium,which has predictable consequences for both the actor'sattitudes and behavior, the most general of these being thelonger-run expectation of a move toward greater symmetryof these linked preferences.


12/20

33 B I O G R A P H I C A L M E M O I R SNewcomb took these ideas of structural equilibria out of

the heads of individual actors and worked with them as aset of basic terms for the understanding of two-person ordyadic interactions. The relationship between persons Aand B could be described as an attitude of liking or dislik-ing, and each could like or dislike a shared object of orien-tation X. These terms formed an ABX system becausethere was some interdependence or strain toward symme-try between the valences present. The more detailed ex-position of the nuances of the ABX system appeared in hisinfluential article, An Approach to the Study of Communi-cative Acts (1953, 2 .

Much of Newcomb's work over the ensuing decade wasaddressed to the phenomena surrounding interpersonalperception and liking. He was eager to test the predictionsof his ABX theorizing in a more natural setting, and gravi-tated toward a field-experimental design that bore no smallresemblance to the earlier Bennington Study. He felt heneeded to capture the formative beginnings of such sys-tems, catching A's7' and B's before they were aware ofone another's existence, and hence before either knew theother's orientation toward various X's. Therefore, he ar-ranged an intensive two-year study of students' attitudesand interpersonal attractions based in their living units fromthe time of arrival at the university, when dorm mates metfor the first time. The resulting monograph, The Acquaintance Process (1961), stands as another milestone contribu-tion to social psychology.

In his later years Newcomb turned his lifelong fascina-tion with the useful integration of living and learning tosome practical institutional consequence at the Universityof Michigan. He was one of the central figures in the de-sign and creation of a small, informal residential collegewithin the university. In an early role as associate director


13/20

T H E O D O R E M E D N E W C O M B 33of this unit he devoted a great deal of time to the forma-tion of its institutions and particularly to the creation of itscommunity governance in a mode that involved a remark-able level of student participation. He frequently served asa consultant to similar developments elsewhere in the country,and summarized a good deal of informal experience, per-sonal research, and a copious external literature in a two-volume work entitled Impact of College on Students 1 9 6 8 ) .

Over the course of his career, Newcomb served his twoparent disciplines of psychology and sociology in a varietyof roles. He was president of the Society for the Psycho-logical Study of Social Issues in 1945-46 and president ofthe Division of Personality and Social Psychology of theAmerican Psychological Association in 1948-49. He editedthe summit journal, the Psychological Review, from 1954 to1959. In 1955-56 he was president of the full AmericanPsychological Association.

In a different context he served on the Board of Trusteesof Antioch College for twelve years from 1959 to 1972 chair-ing the board for the last six years. From 1961 to 1966 hespent periods of each year at the Western Behavioral Sci-ences Institute as a Visiting Fellow. He also completed termsas Visiting Professor at both San Diego and Santa Cruz inthe University of California system and as DistinguishedVisiting Professor at York University (Toronto) and AmherstCollege. In his final years at Michigan he was the MaryAnn and Charles R. Walgreen, Jr., Professor for the Studyof Human Understanding.

Newcomb s intellectual contributions brought him manyother honors and awards in addition to his election to theNational Academy of Sciences in 1974. He was a FulbrightScholar in London in 1951-52, a fellow at the Center forAdvanced Study in the Behavioral Sciences at Stanford in1956-57, and a Guggenheim Fellow in 1960. He was elected


14/20

332 B I O G R A P H I C A L M E M O I R Sto the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 1957.Other awards included the Kurt Lewin Memorial Awardfrom the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Is-sues (1962); the first annual Research Award from the Ameri-can Educational Research Association (1972); the Distin-guished Scientific Contributions Award of the AmericanPsychological Association (1976) and the Cooley-Mead Awardof the American Sociological Association (1980).

TED NEWCOMB TH PERSONIt remains to us to capture the essence of Ted Newcomb

as a most lively colleague, mentor, and friend.In his autobiographical statement, Ted recalled that when

he was a boy in his early teens, his father announced to thefamily that he would present them with phrases that wouldbest distinguish each of the children. For Ted, the phrasewas "Isn't it going to be wonderful " Seventy years later, as agroup of Ted's closest colleagues and former students pre-sented remembrances of him in a memorial service at theUniversity of Michigan, one of several traits mentioned byall was his bursting joie de uiure, a zest for life that simplyseemed irrepressible.

Closely related, and mentioned with equal frequency, wasan infectious playfulness. He was a quick wit, often irrever-ent and what on e speaker called "bratty," but never mean-spirited to others in his humor. He also expected work tobe play. "He never confused seriousness with solemnity,"said William Gamson at the memorial. "A class was a timeto play with ideas-serious play."

He was also a profoundly generous person. He was knownfor giving "not just money for good causes, needy students,or embarrassed colleagues," Robert Kahn recalled, "but gen-erosity of time and self." His pervasive generosity was no-where more clear than with his students, whom Ted once


15/20

T H E O D O R E M E D N E W C O M Bcalled his jewels. Just as he was a stellar role model fo raspiring young people, his marriage with Mary was a nota-bly loving one. Their home was remarkably open, and theywere considered as spiritual godparents by virtually all ofthe hundreds of students who came through the social psy-chology program. Over the years Ted drew many studentsinto personal collaboration on research projects and otherprofessional writing, a priceless learning experience for thestudents, although not always the most efficient use of hisown time.Ted was also unusual in his response to situations of rulesand authority, and this was equally true whether he came atthem from the top side or the bottom. He was, of course,intensely egalitarian, but this value he shared with manyothers of the same time and place. He was uncomfortablearound pomp and puffery and resisted it in others in aquiet and good-humored way.

hasty and superficial observer might have coded Ted asdeeply irreverent toward authority. But in the degree sucha description calls to mind the hostile malcontent, nothingcould be further from the mark, or less in tune with hissunny and trusting disposition. He was not negatively dis-posed toward human institutions; in fact, as noted, he cre-ated several very innovative institutions himself and led themwith high distinction. But he did not have a bureaucraticbone in his body. He knew that rules and social organiza-tion could facilitate progress toward many enticing goals,but he also knew that they could become obstructions aswell, an outcome he was not prepared to tolerate.

Indeed, in his memorial service remembrance of Ted,William Gamson credited him with a certain deliberateobtuseness about obstacles. His instinct was always Whynot? , with the burden of proof always on the resisters andfoot draggers rather than on those who would create some-


16/20

4 B I O G R P H I C L M E M O I R Sthing new an d different. Boundaries were there to becrossed and unspoken rules to be broken. Why not? Theywere ou r boundaries and rules, weren't they? His focuswas always on the goals and the main vision. Decisionsabout the best means were left to come tumbling after.

He did have one major public confrontation with HigherAuthority, and acquitted himself impressively. In the early1950s the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC)descended on Ann Arbor to interrogate suspected Commu-nist sympathizers on the University of Michigan faculty. Al-though Ted was himself on one of HUAC's lists because ofhis memberships of the 1930s, he was not one of the imme-diate quarry. Several younger faculty members refused toidentify their associations for the committee, however, andan intimidated university administration agreed to expel orsuspend them. This capitulation distressed a substantialfraction of the faculty. When the president came to a meet-ing of the university senate to defend his actions, Ted tookthe floor with a calm but forceful challenge to both HUACand the administration on the fundamentals of academicfreedom. It was a matter of widespread embarrassment tomany sympathetic colleagues that Ted alone had stood upto be counted on the issue.

Ted Newcomb was a person of thorough-going convic-tions without a trace of sanctimony. He was a warm andplayful companion at the same time that he was an inspir-ing colleague and mentor. He did as much as anyone todefine and systematize social psychology as an area of spe-cialization, and he helped adorn the subject with five de-cades of excitement. Above all, he was insatiably curiousabout the human condition and how it might best be un-derstood. And to a generation of us, he conveyed withconsummate skill the love of ideas.


17/20

T H E O D O R E M E D N E W C O M B 335MUCH OF THIS M E M O I R is based on a diffuse range of informal

sources, including my personal recollections as a student of andlater collaborator with Ted Newcomb, and many conversations overthe years with friends and colleagues from different periods andsectors of his life. Two hard-copy sources were, however, indis-pensable. One was the self-portrait The Love of Ideas (see bibli-ography). Th e other was Remembering Ted Newcomb: Bio-graphical Sketch and Remembrances from a Memorial Service forTheodore M. Newcomb, Held January 25, 1985, at the University ofMichigan.


18/20

336 B I O G R P H I C L M E M O I R SSELECTED B I B L I O G R A P H Y

Does extroversion-introversion offer a clue for the prognosis andtreatment of problem boys? Ment. Hyg. 14:919-25.

With Gardner and Lois Murphy. Experimental Social Psychology.Wilmington N.C.: Harper.

Determinants of opinion. Pub. Opin. Q. 1:71-78.1942

Community roles in attitude formation. Am. Soc. Rev. 7:621-301943

Personality and Social Change. Hinsdale 11.: Dryden Press.

The influence of attitude climate upon some determinants of infor-mation. J Abnorrn. Soc. Psychol. 41:291-302.

1947Autistic hostility and social reality. J. Hum. Rel . 1:68-86.

1950Social Psychology. Hinsdale 11.: Dryden Press.

Social psychological theory: Integrating individual and social ap-proaches. In Social Psychology at the Crossroads e d ~ .. Rohrer andM Sherif pp. 31-49. New York: Harper an d Brothers.

Attitude development as a function of reference groups: TheBennington study. In Read ings i n Social Psychology eds. G. E .Swanson T. M Newcomb and E L Hartley pp. 420-30. NewYork: Henry Holt.

With W. W. Charters Jr . Some att itud inal effects of experimentallyincreased salience of a membership group. In Readings i n Social


19/20

T H E O D O R E M E D N E W C O M B 337Psychology eds. G. E . Swanson, T. M. Newcomb, and E L Hartley,pp . 415-20. New York: Henry Holt.

Social psychology and group processes. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 4:183-214. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

An approach to the study of communicative acts. Psychol. Rev 60:393-404.

The prediction of interpersonal attraction. Presidential Addressto American Psychological Association, September 1956) Am.Psychol. 2:575-86.

Cognition of persons as cognizers. In Person Perception and Interper-sonal Behavior eds. Renato Tagiuri and Luigi Petrullo, pp. 179-90. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

The study of consensus. In Sociology Today vol. 11, eds. R. Merton,L Broom, an d L. Cottrell, Jr. New York: Harper and Row.

The Acquaintance Process. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Stabilities underlying changes in interpersonal attraction.J. Abnorm.Soc. Psychol. 66:376-86.1966

With K. 0 Price and E. Harburg. Psychological balance in situa-tions of negative interpersonal attitudes. J Pers. Soc. Psychol. 3:265-70.

1967With K. Koenig, R. Flacks, and D Wanvick. Persistence and Change:

Bennington College and Its Students After 25 Years. New York: JohnWiley an d Sons.


20/20

338 B I O G R P H I C L M E M O I R S

With K A. Feldman. Imp act of College on Stud ents vols. and 11. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass.1970

With D. R. Brown, J. A. Kulik, D J. Reimes, and W. R. Revelle. Self-selection and change. In The Cluster College ed. Jerry Gaff, pp.137-60. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Dyadic balance as a source of clues about interpersonal attraction.In Theor ies of At tract ion an d Love ed. Bernard I Murstein, pp. 31-45. Kew York: Springer.

Reciprocity of interpersonal attraction: A nonconfirmation of aplausible hypothesis. Soc. Psychol. Q 14:299-306.

Th e love of ideas. Autobiographical statement. Society 17 6):76-82.

newcomb theodore m

Documents