Writing in the American Psychologist, Paul Meehl (1962), perhaps a little playfully, proffered this challenge: Suppose that you were required to write down a procedure for selecting an individual from the population who would be diagnosed as a schizophrenic by a psychiatric staff; you have to wager $1,000 on being right; you may not include in your selection procedure any behavioral fact, such as a symptom or trait, manifested by the individual. What would you write down?After lamenting that most clinical students fail to answer this question correctly on Ph.D. orals, Meehl continued: So far as I have been able to ascertain, there is only one thing you could write down that would give you a better than even chance of winning such a bet-namely, "Find an individual X who has a schizophrenic identical twin."Nearly 11 years and hundreds of research reports later, the betting situation remains relatively unchanged-although we can tell the bettor that his chances are a little greater in England than in Scandinavia, a refinement we could not have offered 11 years ago.Meehl's little puzzle, which must seem positively perverse to the examined graduate students, underscores the current status of research into the etiology of schizophrenia. Researchers from the opposing "biologic-geneticist" and "environmentalist" schools agree on one set of findings: Schizophrenia is more common in identical twins than fraternal twins and is more common in first-and second-degree relatives of schizophrenics than in the general population. But although agreed on these findings, the geneticists and environmentalists are in sharp disagreement about the major causes or mechan-*Presented in the symposium, "The Schizophrenias: A Challenge to Knowledge and Delivery of Services/' at the Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association,