You can tell very little regarding a person's intelligence from his photograph. This has now been pretty well established. Photographs of persons of various degrees of intelligence are placed before those who are reputed to be good judges, and their estimates compared with the test ratings, and there is no correspondence. You might just as well look at the back of the photograph as at the front.

Even with the person before you, you are likely to commit great errors. This sort of incident has happened. A young woman is brought before the court for delinquency, and the psychologist who has tested her testifies that she is of low intelligence. But the young woman is good-looking and graceful in her speech and manners, and so impresses the judge that he dismisses as "absurd" the notion of her being feeble-minded. He sets her free, on which she promptly gets into trouble again. Apparently the only way to perceive intelligence is to see a person in action, preferably under standard conditions, where his performance can be measured; that is to say, in an intelligence test.

Errors of Perception

The grocer needs to be a.s.sured of the accuracy of his scales, and the chemist of the high accuracy of his chemical balance; the surveyor needs to know about the errors that may creep into the process of measuring the length of a line or angle. All of them, using instruments to a.s.sist in accurate perception of facts, are concerned about the accuracy of their instruments. Now, we all use the senses in perceiving facts, and "errors of sense" therefore concern us {447} all. Some of the errors committed in sense perception can be laid at the door of the senses, and some rather belong in the sphere of perception proper.

If you come out of a cold room into a warm room, the latter seems warmer than it is; and if you come out of a dark room into a light room, the latter seems brighter than it is. These errors, due to adaptation of the temperature sense and of the retina, are properly cla.s.sed as errors of sense.

If you are taking a child's temperature with a "minute thermometer", it is best to use your watch to tell you when the minute is up, for the minute, when you are simply waiting for it to pa.s.s, seems very long. But if you are "working against time", a minute seems short. The professor is shocked when the closing bell rings, and thinks that certainly the hour cannot be up; but some of the students have been consulting their watches for quite a long while, being sure the hour must be nearly over. These are scarcely errors of sense, but they are errors of perception.

Where we tend to err in one certain direction from the truth, as in the examples just cited, psychology speaks of a "constant error", and evidently the knowledge of such constant errors is of importance wherever the facts are of importance. In a court of law, a witness often has to testify regarding the length of time occupied by some event, and a knowledge of the constant errors in time perception would therefore be of considerable legal importance. They would need to be worked out in considerable detail, since they differ according to the desires and att.i.tude of the witness at the time of the event.

Besides constant errors, there are accidental or variable errors, due to slight momentary causes. Both constant and variable errors can be ill.u.s.trated by a series of shots at a target. The variable error is ill.u.s.trated by the scatter of {448} the hits, and the constant error by the excess of hits above the bull's-eye, or below, or to the right or left. The constant error can be corrected, once you know what it is; if results show that you tend to shoot too high, you can deliberately aim lower. But the variability of any performance cannot be eliminated except by long practice, and not altogether even then.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 66.--Constant error and scatter in hitting at a target. The little circle was the target, but the center of the actual distribution of the attempts lies at the cross, which was drawn in afterwards. The constant error could be stated by saying that the center of distribution was so far from the target, and in such and such a direction. The scattering of the attempts can be measured also.]

Experimental psychology has taken great pains in measuring the accuracy of different sorts of perception. How small a difference in length can be perceived by the eye, how small a difference of weight by the hand--these are sample problems in this line.

For example, to measure the fineness with which weights can be perceived when "hefted" in the hand, you take two objects that are alike in size and appearance but differing slightly in weight, and endeavor to decide which is the heavier just by lifting them. You try repeatedly and keep track of the number of errors, using this number as a measure of the accuracy of perception. Now, if one weight were twice as heavy as the other (one, for example, weighing 100 grams {449} and the other 200), you would never make an error except through carelessness; but if one were 100 and the other 120 grams, you would make an occasional error, and the number of errors would increase as the difference was decreased; finally, comparing 100 and 101 grams, you would get almost as many wrong as right, so that your perception of that small difference would be extremely unreliable.

ERRORS IN PERCEIVING SMALL DIFFERENCES OF WEIGHT (From Warner Brown)

Difference 20 16 12 8 4 8 2 1 grams

Errors 1 2 5 18 28 81 89 44 per hundred trials

The weights were in the neighborhood of 100 grams; each weight was compared with the 100-gram weight, and each such pair was lifted and judged 1400 times. Notice that the per cent of errors gradually increases as the difference becomes smaller.

The smaller the difference between two stimuli, the more numerous the errors in perceiving it, or, the less perceptible it is, and there is no sharp line between a difference that can be perceived and one that is too small to be perceived. That is the first great result from the study of the perception of small differences.

The second great result is called _Weber's law_, which can be stated as follows: In the same sort of perception, equal relative (not absolute) differences are equally perceptible. For example, from the preceding table we see that 28 per cent. of errors are made in comparing weights of 100 and 104 grams; then, according to Weber's law, 28 per cent, of errors would also be made in comparing 200 grams with 208, or 500 with 520, or 1000 with 1040 grams, or any pair of weights that stood to each other in the ratio of 100 to 104. Weber's law is only approximately true for the perception of weights, since actually fewer errors are committed in comparing 500 and 520 than in comparing 100 and 104 grams; but the discrepancy is not extremely great here, and in {450} some other kinds of perception, as especially in comparing the brightness of lights or the length of seen lines, the law holds good over a wide range of stimuli and only breaks down near the upper and lower extremes. We are familiar, in ordinary life, with the general truth of Weber's law, since we know that an inch would make a much more perceptible addition to the length of a man's nose than to his height, and we know that turning on a second light when only one is already lit gives a much more noticeable increase in the light than if we add one more light when twenty are already burning.

A third great result of this line of study is that different sorts of perception are very unequal in their fineness and reliability.

Perception of brightness is about the keenest, as under favorable conditions a difference of one part in one hundred can here be perceived with very few errors. Visual perception of length of line is good for about one part in fifty, perception of lifted weight for about one part in ten, perception of loudness of sound for about one part in three. But the perception of small differences in the pitch of musical tones is keener still, only that, not following Weber's law in the least, it cannot be expressed in the same way. A person with a good ear for pitch can distinguish with very few errors between two tones that differ by only one vibration per second, and can perceive this same absolute difference equally well, whether the total vibration rate is 200, 400, or 800 vibrations per second.

Illusions

An error of perception is often called an "illusion", though this term is commonly reserved for errors that are large and curious. When one who is being awakened by a bell perceives it as a tom-tom, that is an illusion. An {451} illusion consists in responding to a sensory stimulus by perceiving something that is not really there. The stimulus is there, but not the fact which it is taken to indicate.

Illusion is false perception.

The study of illusions is of value, not only as showing how far a given kind of perception can be trusted, but also as throwing light on the process of perception. When a process goes wrong, it sometimes reveals its inner mechanism more clearly than when everything is running smoothly. Errors of any kind are meat to the psychologist.

Illusions may be cla.s.sified under several headings according to the factors that are operative in causing the deception.

1. Illusions due to peculiarities of the sense organs.

Here the stimulus is distorted by the sense organ and so may easily be taken as the sign of an unreal fact.

Separate the points of a pair of compa.s.ses by about three-quarters of an inch, and draw them across the mouth, one point above it and the other below; you will get the illusion of the points separating as they approach the middle of the mouth (where the sensory nerve supply is greatest), and coming together again as they are drawn to the cheek at the other side.

Under this same general head belong also after-images and contrast colors, and also double vision whenever for any reason the two eyes are not accurately converged upon an object. The fact that a vertical line appears longer than an equal horizontal is supposed to depend upon some peculiarity of the retina. Aside from the use of this cla.s.s of illusions in the detailed study of the different senses, the chief thing to learn from them is they so seldom are full-fledged illusions, because they are ignored or allowed for, and not taken as the signs of facts. An after-image would const.i.tute a genuine illusion if it were taken for some real {452} thing out there; but as a matter of fact, though after-images occur very frequently--slight ones practically every time the eyes are turned--they are ignored to such an extent that the student of psychology, when he reads about them, often thinks them to be something unusual and lying outside of his own experience.

The same is true of double images. This all goes to show how strong is the tendency to disregard mere sensation in the interest of getting objective facts.

2. Illusions due to preoccupation or mental set.

When an insane person hears the creaking of a rocking-chair as the voice of some one calling him bad names, it is because he is preoccupied with suspicion. We might almost call this an hallucination,[Footnote: See p. 375.] since he is projecting his own auditory images and taking them for real sensations; it is, at any rate, an extreme instance of illusion. In a milder form, similar illusions are often momentarily present in a perfectly normal person, as when he is searching for a lost object and thinks he sees it whenever anything remotely similar to the desired object meets his eyes; or as when the mother, with the baby upstairs very much on her mind, imagines she hears him crying when the cat yowls or the next-door neighbors start their phonograph. The ghost-seeing and burglar-hearing illusions belong here as well. The mental set facilitates responses that are congruous with itself.

3. Illusions of the response-by-a.n.a.logy type.

This is probably the commonest source of everyday illusions, and the same principle, as we have seen, is operative in a host of correct perceptions. Perceiving the obliquely presented rectangle as a rectangle is an example of correct perception of this type. Perceiving the buzzing of a fly as an aeroplane is the same sort of response only that it happens to be incorrect. If the present stimulus has something in {453} common with the stimulus which has in the past aroused a certain perception, we may make the same response now as we did before--especially, of course, if the present mantel set favors this response.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 67.--The Ladd-Franklin illusion of monocular perspective. Close one eye, and hold the book so that the other eye is at the common center from which the lines radiate; this center is about 5 inches from the figure. Hold the book horizontally, and just a little below the eye.]

A good instance of this type is the "proofreader's illusion", so called, perhaps, because the professional proofreader is less subjcet to it than any one else. The one most subject to it is the author of a book, for whom it is almost impossible to find every misspelled word and other typographical error in reading the proof. Almost every book comes out with a few such errors, in spite of having been scanned repeatedly by several people. A couple of misprints have purposely been left in the last few lines for the reader's benefit. If the word as printed has enough resemblance to the right word, it arouses the same percept and enables the reader to get the sense and pa.s.s on satisfied. {454} Before we began to pore over books and pictures, the lines that we saw usually were the outlines of solid objects, and now it requires only a bare diagram of lines to arouse in us the perception of a solid object seen in perspective. An outline drawing, like those of the cube and staircase used to ill.u.s.trate ambiguous perspective, is more readily seen as a solid object than as a flat figure.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 68.--Aristotle's illusion.]

Another illusion of this general type dates away back to Aristotle.

Cross two fingers, perhaps best the second and third, and touch a marble with the crossed part of both fingers, and it seems to be two marbles; or, you can use the side of your pencil as the stimulus. In the customary position of the fingers, the stimuli thus received would mean two objects.

A much more modern illusion of the same general type is afforded by the moving pictures. The pictures do not actually show an object in motion; they simply show the object in a series of motionless positions, caught by instantaneous photography. The projector shows the series of snap-shots in rapid succession, and conceals them by a shutter while they are shifted, so as to avoid the blur that would occur if the picture were itself moved before the eyes. But the series of snap-shots has so much in common with the visual stimulus got from an actually present moving object that we make the same perceptive response. {455} The same illusion in a rudimentary form can be produced by holding the forefinger upright three or four inches in front of the nose, and looking at it while winking first the one eye and then the other. Looked at with the right eye alone it appears to be more to one side and looked at with the left eye alone it appears to be more to the other side; and when the one eye is closed and the other simultaneously opened, the finger seems actually to move from one position to the other.

[Ill.u.s.tration: Fig. 69.--The pan illusion. The two pan-shaped outlines are practically identical, but it is hard to compare the corresponding sides--hard to isolate from the total figure just the elements that you need to compare.]

4. Illusions due to imperfect isolation of the fact to be perceived.

Here belong, probably, most of the illusions produced in the psychological laboratory by odd combinations of lines, etc. A figure is so drawn as to make it difficult to isolate the fact to be observed, and when the observer attempts to perceive it, he falls into error. He thinks he is perceiving one fact, when he is perceiving another. The best example is the Muller-Lyer figure, in which two equal lines are embellished with extra lines at their ends; you are supposed to perceive the lengths of the two main lines, but you are very apt to take the whole figure in the rough and perceive the distances between its chief parts. You do not succeed in isolating the precise fact you wish to observe.

{456}

The Muller-Lyer Illusion

The most familiar form of this striking illusion is made with arrow heads, thus

[Ill.u.s.tration: Inward and outward arrowheads on two equal length lines.]