82 JOURNAL OF THE SOCIETY OF COSMETIC CHEMISTS cent on the average for all industries (13). In other words, on the average, there is a 100 per cent turnover among research engineers and scientists every six years in American industry. Ponder this fact when tempted tc keep the matter a trade secret. Another factor to consider in this trade secret question is your standing in the event that a competitor hits upon the same invention and obtains a patent on it. While the law has not yet crystallized in clear fashion on this question, the least that can be said is that you will have some mighty uncomfortable and perhaps expensive moments in attempting to evaluate your rights as compared to the rights of your competitor-patent owner. It might be well also to contemplate the effect of any changes in the Fed- eral Food Drug and Cosmetic Act which would require the listing of new cosmetic raw materials on labels. While the present law does not make this requirement, I understand that there is reason to believe that the Delaney hearings may result eventually in legislation making such a requirement. There is another factor which is not often recognized. There is much to be gained by a dissemination of information quickly and fully. The en• tire industry benefits by such a procedure. Witness the petroleum indus- try in this country. This industry is an outstanding example of one which makes early and full disclosures by way of the patent and scientific literature and its growth and earnings records do not appear to have suffered. It may be of more than incidental interest to note that the separation rate of research engineers and scientists in the petroleum industry is the lowest of all industries covered by the study referred to, the rate being about one- half that of the average for all industries. There may be a natural reluctance on the part of the cosmetic industry to accept the implications of the foregoing statements. The keen competi- tion and the small economic units comprising most of the industry seem to be two factors which mitigate against the industry as a whole going over- board on the full and early disclosure policy. There are hopeful signs, how- ever, that a period of transition is already so far advanced in the cosmetic industry that the time is not far off when such a result can be attained for the industry in general. Indeed, the very existence of your organization appears to be a long step in the desired direction. Your Society could not exist without the interchange of technical ideas. That you as chemists rec- ognize the value to your profession of contributors to the literature is also strikingly shown in the mere enumeration of the outstanding people whom you have honored to date with your medal awards: Bogerr, Evans, deNavarre, Kunz, and McDonough. It may well be that someday when the history of the cosmetic industry has unfolded considerably more than is presently the case, the date of the creation of your Society may be taken as marking the beginning of the most productive era of your industry, both scientifically and economically.

ANALYSIS OF PSYCHOLOGICAL PROPERTIES OF COSMETICS 83 REFERENCES (1) In re Hass & Susie, 60 U.S.P.Q. 548. (2) Ex parte Carson, 78 U.S.P.Q. 93. (3) In re Henze, 85 U.S.P.Q. 261. (4) Ex parte Matheson & Mikeska, 92 U.S.P.Q. 255. (5) 57 U.S.P.Q. 324. (6) U.S.P. 2464284. (7) U.S.P. 2537998. (8) U.S.P. 2443138. (9) U.S.P. 2554826. (10) Ex parte Wagner, 1951, C. D. 3. (11) In re Bloomer, 84 U.S.P.Q. 135. (12) Reissue Patent 22922. (13) "Industrial Research and Development--a Preliminary Report," Research and De- velopment Board, Department of Defense, Washington 25, D.C. EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS OF THE PSYCHOLOGIGAL PROPERTIES OF COSMETICS By DEAN Direct/or of Laboralories, U.S. Testin,• Company, Hoboken, N. A GREAT DEAL IS heard currently about pane] testing, consumer re- search, market surveys, motivation analysis, and other approaches to eval- uating consumer products. Unfortunately, many of these approaches are purely trial-and-error methods, executed by non-professionals, and failing in their purpose, namely, to answer the questions that the manufacturer needs to know and wants to know. To compete successfully today, the progressive manufacturer is asking specific questions about the quality of his prodtact: How uniform is it? What are its positive and negative properties? and, How can it be improved? These questions can be answered satisfactorily only after a systematic study of the reactions of people to these products. Since human reactions are the principal subject matter, it is only logical to turn to psychologists for the solutions. Actu- ally, however, these specialists in human behavior have rarely applied their science to product evaluation. The principles of psychological meas- urement, carefully formulated during 100 years of experimentation, have usually been ignored, and each investigator elects to begin again. There is another side to the issue, however. The industrial psychologists have too long delayed the application of the basic principles, so well known to them, to consumer commodities, including toilet goods and other per- sonal products. Presented at the May 15, 1953, Meeting, New York City.