This monograph presents findings from an analysis of data on international cooperation over a three-year period. A computer printout of the analysis is included. The document is part of a large scale research project to test various theories with regard to their power in analyzing international relations. In this monograph, an inventory is presented of a relative status field theory analysis of 'topdog' (T) and 'underdog' (U) behavior in the international system according to WEIS conflict data for 1966-1969. WEIS conflict data (World Event Interaction Survey) is an index which was created using the "New York Times" as a data source. Field theory maintains that international relations consists of all the attributes and interactions of nations, can be analytically divided into attributes and behavior, and exhibits dyad formations (interactions between two nations) in matters of behavior. Relative status field theory presents a break with the status-field theory approach in that it argues that status relationships ought to be treated in relative terms. Scores on variables including domestic violence, population density, economic development, political stability, and power base were compared for approximately 130 nations to determine relative status. The method involved assigning a negative or positive parameter weight on each predictive factor (such as economic development) which indicated the kind of behavior engaged in by that nation relative to other states. A model for each state was generated based on variations of 'topdog'/'underdog' behavior--'topdog' (TT actors) in this analysis. Findings indicated that nation attributes are linked (at least predictively) to cooperation and conflict export patterns and may be linked causally. Findings are based on a significance level of .05 or less. Policy implications of findings are discussed. (DB)