while the opposite was expected for the latter. Men were expected to exhibit no change. In fact, no systematic change in any variable was observed for any group. Even unsystematic change was minimal. This suggests that the survey instrument is highly reliable, but it does not support the biological hypothesis for political orientations. Attempts to test biological explanations of observed political behavior are reasonable enough given the underdeveloped status of the research. Testing for biological roots of male-female political differences is justified by extant literature. Given this, what inter-pretation should be placed on the negative empirical results just reported? One might conclude that reasonable though the attempt may have been, there is little justification for further work in this field. Indeed, at least by implication, the case for cultural explana-tions of sex differences in politics is strengthened. If negative results can stimulate more imaginative inquiry into cultural explanation, they still serve a very useful purpose, for there is much to be done here. Similarly, though they should not have been deterred by positive findings, persons who seek more equitable status for women through modification of the cultural environment may take heart from this, for it does underscore the likely efficacy of their strategy. There are other implications to this effort. First, it is possible to do actual research about the importance of biological variables in political behavior. The process does not have to be difficult; ques-tions generated by the literature are amenable to straightforward research. One study producing negative results in a single area can-not represent closure across the whole broad question of biology and political behavior. Hopefully this work will stimulate further think-ing on related concepts in the discipline. Finally, it is unlikely that the question of whether there are biological roots to male-female political differences will be regarded as definitively settled at any time in the near future. Perhaps this will encourage measured, re-sponsible research into the matter; it would not do to leave this area of inquiry entirely to chauvinists and polemicists. NOTES