I was very interested in the remarks you made regarding the interdisciplinary possibilities in the Social Sciences.  I wish to contribute the following perspective form Social Psychology and Psycholingusitics (my own specialty).  The Table on the next page lists the concepts you presented, arranged in three groupings of concept universes corresponding to the schema below:

               A                                                  B                                               C
STRIVING ISSUES ------------->    PLANNING ISSUES --------->    MAPPING ISSUES
things that deal with                             things that deal with                          things that deal with
MOTIVATION: ideology                  PLANNING or intermediate             VISIBLE or MANIFEST
commitment, intentionally,                   between goal and effect:                    items:  effects,
drive, desire,                                      such as management, method,            consequences,
impulse, essence, and                         means, approach, analysis,                 ends, ultimate,
origin -- in terms of                            and so on -- in terms of                      labels, etc.--
THEORY BUILDING;                     THEORY BUILDING;                     In terms of THEORY
                                                                                                                  BUILDING.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By dividing all your concepts in these three separate categories, I am able to see relations between them more clearly.  This appears especially advantageous when I compare what other concepts in political science I already have in my Dictionary of Concepts and the concepts of Neubauer and Heenan who were Colloquium speakers before you.  You'll notice that all three of you use concepts that (a) fall readily into the three basic phases of a BEHAVIOR UNIT (MOTIVATIONAL, PLANNING, AND MAPPING issues), and (b) that fit in with each other very coherently.
    For further theoretical cross-fertilization, I present the following correspondences that might suggest to you theoretical extensions and further explanations of your own concepts since they ought to behave conceptually in accordance with the correspondences:

Page  2    James Dator
 
 
 

TABLE OF CORRESPONDENCES IN POLITICAL PSYCHOLOGY 
Part I:  James Dator Concepts  (11/13/81)

STRIVING ISSUES---------->	PLANNING ISSUES------->	MAPPING ISSUES
POWER/INFLUENCE/AUTHORITY  ACTORS/AGENTS/SPIRIT  THEOLOGY & HISTORY  BEHAVIORISM/FREUDIANISM  BEHAVIORISM REVOLUTION  POSITIVISTIC REVOLTN.  BIOLOGICAL BASES OF BEH.  BEHAVIORAL REVOLTNS.  (1950'S & 1960'S)  IDEOLOGICAL STRIVINGS  WITHIN POL. SCI. DEPTS.  NEW CULTURAL CHANGES	COLLECTIVE DECISION MAKING CONFLICT RESOLUTION  STRUCTURES/INSTITUTIONS  CONSTITUTIONAL LAW MORAL PHILOSOPHY  LASSWELL (up to 1950)  STATISTICS/COMPUTER MODELS (1950 plus)  NEO-MARXISM (structures)  MATH MODELS/SCALING TECH.  BEHAVIORAL METHODS  SCIENTIFIC RIGOR  GAMING  NORMATIVE ISSUES  FUTURE STUDIES  THE 4 SCENARIOS  CORRECTION PROGRAMS  (failure of)  MEDIA LITERACY	POLITICAL SCIENCE  VOTING BEHAVIOR  METHODS/PERSPECTIVES  ANECDOTAL APPROACH  POLITICAL BIOGRAPHY  POLITICAL LEADERS  MICRO TECHNICAL  SPECIALIZATION  NEW AGE POLITICS  POLITICAL ECONOMY.  SOCIO-POLIT. BIOLOGY  JAP. RELIG. & POLITICS  POLITICAL PSYCHOL.  TRAINING PROGRAMS  MICRO PREDICTIONS  MACRO PREDICTIONS  DOMINANT FORECASTS  CITIZENSHIP REFORM  AUDIOVISUAL METHODS  OF EDUCATION

 
 
 

Part  II:  Deane Neubauer Concepts (10/23/81)

ROLE OF PSYCH. IN SS  SOCIAL ECOLOGY THAT  CREATES SCIENTISTS  PROFESSION PROCESS OF THE SCIENTIST

TYPES OF PSYCHOLGS.  SOCIAL SCI. PARADIGMS  UNIVERSITY ROLE  PUBLIC SERVICES  APPLIED & FIELD EMPIRICISM.  NEW ACADEMIC PROGRAMS

UTILIZATION OF KNOWLEDGE  POLICY & APPL. SCI.  RE-APPRAISALS  NEW EPISTEMOLOGIES  SOCIAL BIOLOGY  BIOLOG. ECONOMICS

 
 
 

Part III: David Heenan Concepts (11/6/81)

COMMITTMENT TO ECONOM.  IDEOLOGY  PERSONAL IDEOLOGY  PREFERENCES  WALKS OF LIFE CATEGOR.  VALUES  COMMUNITARIAN ETHIC	HUMANITARIAN ETHICS  SOCIO-PSYCH. FUTURES  HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIOS  DOMINATE INTERNATINL. MODELS  CONTENT ANALYSIS OF  SURVEY ITEMS  NATIONAL PLANNING TYPE OF WORKER PARTIC.	SURVEY DATA RESULTS  BUSINESS PRACTICES  EXPRESSED PREFS.  EFFECTIVE  ELITE BURAUCRACY  BEHAVIOR STYLES  ATTITUDES & THOUGHTS
PSYCHOLOGY  LEWINIAN  IDEOLOGY (FUTURE)	POLITICAL SCIENCE  SKINNERIAN  MANAGEMENT (PAST)	POLIT. PSYCHOL.  APPLICATION(PRESENT)

To:  Dr. DAVID HEENAN, Vice President for Academic Affairs, UH
From:   Dr. Leon Jakobovits, Professor, Department of Psychology, UH
RE:  MEMO REGARDING YOUR COLLOQUIUM PRESENTATION TODAY
 

You may recall I asked you a question, or rather, made a comment to the effect that there appeared to be a psychological correspondence between your three principal concepts and the traditional psychological division of behavior into three components of MOTIVATION (will, intention, commitment, drive, etc.), BELIEF (plan, theory, hypothesis, analysis, etc.), and STYLE (overt, visible component of behaviors).  I am enclosing the notes I took during your presentation.  As you can see, I use a form called the "graphic concept" to locate your concepts as they appear in the stream of you talk.  I am currently developing this method of "listening" and "organizing" scientific concepts and have other applications should you be interested in seeing them.
 

To explain.  According to the graphic concept analysis of you presentation, it is obvious that your ideas fall appropriately into the tree fold psychological organization defined by the graphic format, namely MOTIVATIONAL OR STRIVING ISSUES -- these appear in the innermost circle of the various displays;  then all the concepts you use that relate to PLANNING ISSUES appear in the intermediate circles, and in the outer circles appear all the concepts you use that relate to visible MAPPING ISSUES.  Thus we can make the following graph-table  display of your principal ideas as follows:

THE STRIVING ISSUES                   THE PLANNING ISSUES           THE MAPPING ISSUES

COMMITMENT TO AN              HUMANITARIAN ETHICS           SURVEY DATA RESULTS
ECONOMIC IDEOLOGY            SOCIO- PSYCH.  FUTURES        BUSINESS PRACTICES
PERSONAL IDEOLOGY            HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIOS     EXPRESSED PREFERENCE
PREFERENCES                             DOMINATE                                  EFFECTIVE
WALKS OF LIFE CATEGORY       INTERNATIONAL MODEL      ELITE BUREAUCRACY
VALUES                                       CONTENT ANALYSIS OF           BEHAVIOR STYLES
COMMUNITARIAN ETHIC             SURVEY ITEMS                      ATTITUDES & THOUGHTS
                                                       NATIONAL PLANNING
                                                        TYPE OF WORKER
                                                        PARTICIPATION
                                                        RESISTANCE TO CHANGE
                                                          INDIVIDUALISM

This tabulation of your concepts and ideas shows that they are divided in three concept universes.  These are independent theoretically, therefore if they are found correlated in any one study, the indication is that the conditions are such as to recreate the correlation, and this needs to be explained according to the individual case.
 

Some conclusions that may be drawn from organizing your concepts in this threefold psychological organization:

1.    All data on PREFERENCES correspond to the psychological component of
        MOTIVATION (drive, commitment, intention, will, etc.);  all data on
        DOMINATE correspond to the psychological component of PLANNING (belief, opinion,
        assumption, theory, analysis, etc.);  and all data on EFFECTIVE will correspond to the
        psychological component of MAPPING (actions, decisions, sets, behaviors, styles, etc.);  Since
        each psychological component is distinct and has a particular operation associated with it, it is
        potentially useful to know these relations between  the MANAGEMENT components and the
        PSYCHOLOGY components.  Is it?

2.      All PREFERENCE data will be related to DOMINATE data and to EFFECTIVE data in a
        manner of prior to ulterior, as in the series ORIGIN leading to CAUSE eventuating in EFFECT.
        Thus:
         PREFERENCE data originate DOMINATE data which cause EFFECTIVE data

3.      Similarly:
            COMMUNITARIAN ETHIC  originates NATIONAL PLANNING  which causes  ELITE
            BUREAUCRACY STLES OF BEHAVING.

4.      HENCE:
            COMMUNITARIAN ETHIC and FEET PREFERENCES are STRIVING ISSUES and
            originate:   NATIONAL PLANNING and HYPOTHETICAL SCENARIOS which cause:
            AN ELITE BUREAUCRACY and EFFECTIVE BEHAVIOR STYLES and particular
            EXPRESSED PREFERENCES

5.      Along with these concepts there are many others that relate to them and can be drawn upon for
         finding explanatory correspondences.  E.g.:
          FELT PREFERENCES/COMMUNITARIAN ETHIC:  JUDGMENT; CONSUMMATION
                                                                                              OF REWARD; ALTRUISM GOODS;
                                                                                              ENDS; RELATIONSHIP; UNITY;
                                                                                              INTUITION; etc.

          DOMINATE/NATIONAL PLANNING:                  UNDERSTANDING; RATIONALITY;
                                                                                            AGREEMENT; ABILITY; HABIT;
                                                                                            TRAINING; MEANS;  etc.

           EFFECTIVE / ELITE BUREAUCRACY:            EFFECTS; USES; ACTION; PERCEPTIONS;
                                                                                        EXECUTION; PERFORMANCE; REACTIONS;
                                                                                        CONTENT; SETTING; APPEARANCE; etc.
 

There are many more correspondences from my "Graphic Dictionary" some which may make sense and leads to theory (others may not).  I only wished to give you an indication of the idea that scientific concepts are organizable in three concept universes always corresponding to the basic pattern:

                                             I------------------->  II----------------------->  III
                                     ORIGIN--------------> CAUSE-------------->  EFFECT
or:                              PRIORMOST-------> INTERMEDIATE----> ULTIMATE
or:                             GOALS/ENDS----------> MEANS----------->  CONSEQUENCES
or:                                STRIVING               PLANNING                 MAPPING
                                      ISSUES---------->  ISSUES----------------->  ISSUES

 
This system comes from eighteenth century scientist/philosopher Emanuel Swedenborg and not known at all today.  If this is meaningful to you, I would be happy to explore the method further with you and show you my other correspondences.  This system helps organize theory-building, helps organize one's listening to a lecture, helps organize one's concepts.  It is listening tool as well as a thinking tool.