frequencies of occurrence, in the specified content, of (favorable and un-
favorable treatment of) each of a set of over two hundred symbols refer-
ring to political ideologies. Just as the present study of political trends
is only one among several applications of content analysis, so is symbol
analysis only one among several techniques employed in the field. The
categories of this study--subject matter and direction--are two among
several categories on which analysis has been done; and the term is only
one of the units of analysis.

These brief remarks are meant only to orient this study within its
general field. The particular procedures of the study are fully explained
and justified in the text itself, where the author demonstrates a high
degree of sophistication and ingenuity in his handling of the symbol data
relative to the problems which he poses. There are, however, certain
general problems raised by such an analysis which it may be useful to
discuss. They are in the nature of general limitations in the application
of symbol analysis which can perhaps be exemplified in this particular
study. Just as the author of this monograph was aware of these difficulties,
so should the reader be--and it may be appropriate to make them explicit
in this introductory note.

First, in content analysis, as in several other methods in social sci-
ence research, it is useful to call attention to the many difficult technical
decisions that must be made in the production of the data. What sample
shall be drawn to achieve the purposes of the study? What symbols shall
be included in the original list for analysis? What statistical measures
shall be employed in the subsequent analysis of the content data? What
definitions shall be set up for favorable and unfavorable treatment of a
given subject matter? Even when such matters are handled in a highly
competent manner, as they are in this study, they leave a residue of
difficulties, as the author himself acknowledges at several points. Al-
though the rigorous content analyst takes responsibility for solving such
technical problems in a way avoided by the impressionistic historian of
political trends, technical difficulties nevertheless remain and may qualify
the findings.

Second, studies of the comparative uses of political symbols must
recognize that the same terms carry quite differentmeanings in the ide-
ologies of different countries. The author of this monograph has himself
pointed out, in a brilliant analysis, the relationship between the Soviet
and the Western definitions of "democracy"--a term which both employ
with some effect. ^* If symbol studies are to be taken as "meaning studies,"
then such differences in definition must somehow be calibrated. For some
purposes of the monograph, of course, this is not necessary (e. g., for
the analysis of the concentration-dispersion ratio of political vocabulary);
but, in general, the observation is relevant for evaluation of symbol
studies of this kind.

-iv-