Instructions For Year III

III, 1. POINTING TO PARTS OF THE BODY

PROCEDURE. After getting the child's attention, say: "_Show me your nose._" "_Put your finger on your nose._" Same with eyes, mouth, and hair.

Tact is often necessary to overcome timidity. If two or three repet.i.tions of the instruction fail to bring a response, point to the child's chin or ear and say: "_Is this your nose?_" "_No?_" "_Then where is your nose?_" Sometimes, after one has tried two or three parts of the test without eliciting any response, the child may suddenly release his inhibitions and answer all the questions promptly. In case of persistent refusal to respond it is best not to hara.s.s the child for an answer, but to leave the test for a while and return to it later. This is a rule which applies generally throughout the scale. In the case of one exceptionally timid little girl, it was impossible to get any response by the usual procedure, but immediately when a doll was shown the child pointed willingly to its nose, eyes, mouth, and hair. The device was successful because it withdrew the child's attention from herself and centered it upon something objective.

SCORING. _Three responses out of four_ must be correct. Instead of pointing, the child sometimes responds by winking the eyes, opening the mouth, etc., which is counted as satisfactory.

REMARKS. Binet's purpose in this test is to ascertain whether the subject is capable of comprehending simple language. The ability to comprehend and use language is indeed one of the most reliable indications of the grade of mental development. The appreciation of gestures comes first, then the comprehension of language heard, next the ability to repeat words and sentences mechanically, and finally the ability to use language as a means of communication. The present test, however, is not more strictly a test of language comprehension than the others of the 3-year group, and in any case it could not be said to mark the _beginning_ of the power to comprehend spoken language. That is fairly well advanced by the age of 2 years. The test closely resembles III, 2 (naming familiar objects), and III, 3 (enumeration of objects in a picture), except that it brings in a personal element and gives some clue to the development of the sense of self. All the data agree in locating the test at year III.

III, 2. NAMING FAMILIAR OBJECTS

PROCEDURE. Use a key, a penny, a closed knife, a watch, and an ordinary lead pencil. The key should be the usual large-sized doorkey, not one of the Yale type. The penny should not be too new, for the freshly made, untarnished penny resembles very little the penny usually seen. Any ordinary pocket knife may be used, and it is to be shown unopened. The formula is, "_What is this?_" or, "_Tell me what this is._"

SCORING. There must be at least _three correct responses out of five_. A response is not correct unless the object is named. It is not sufficient for the child merely to show that he knows its use. A child, for example, may take the pencil and begin to mark with it, or go to the door and insert the key in the lock, but this is not sufficient. At the same time we must not be too arbitrary about requiring a particular name. "Cent" or "pennies" for "penny" is satisfactory, but "money" is not. The watch is sometimes called "a clock" or "a tick-tock," and we shall perhaps not be too liberal if we score these responses _plus_.

"Pen" for "pencil," however, is unsatisfactory. Subst.i.tute names for "key" and "knife" are rarely given. Misp.r.o.nunciations due to baby-talk are of course ignored.

REMARKS. The purpose of this test is to find out whether the child has made the a.s.sociation between familiar objects and their names. The mental processes necessary to enable the child to pa.s.s this test are very elementary, and yet, as far as they go, they are fundamental.

Learning the names of objects frequently seen is a form of mental activity in which the normally endowed child of 2 to 4 years finds great satisfaction. Any marked r.e.t.a.r.dation in making such a.s.sociations is a grave indication of the lack of that spontaneity which is so necessary for the development of the higher grades of intelligence. It would be entirely beside the point, therefore, to question the validity of the test on the ground that a given child may not have been _taught_ the names of the objects used. Practically all children 3 years old, however poor their environment, have made the acquaintance of at least three of the five objects, and if intelligence is normal they have learned their names as a result of spontaneous inquiry.

Always use the list of objects here given, because it has been standardized. Any improvised selection would be sure to contain some objects either less or more familiar than those in the standardized list. Note also that three correct responses out of five are sufficient.

If we required five correct answers out of six (like Kuhlmann), or three out of three (like Binet, G.o.ddard, and Huey), the test would probably belong at the 4-year level. Binet states that this test is materially harder than that of naming objects in a picture, since in the latter the child selects from a number of objects in the picture those he knows best, while in the former test he must name the objects we have arbitrarily chosen. This difference does not hold, however, if we require only three correct responses out of five for pa.s.sing the test of naming objects, instead of Binet's three out of three. All else being equal, it is of course easier to recognize and name a real object shown than it is to recognize and name it from a picture.

III, 3. ENUMERATION OF OBJECTS IN PICTURES

PROCEDURE. Use the three pictures designated as "Dutch Home," "River Scene," and "Post-Office." Say, "_Now I am going to show you a pretty picture._" Then, holding the first one before the child, close enough to permit distinct vision, say: "_Tell me what you see in this picture._"

If there is no response, as sometimes happens, due to embarra.s.sment or timidity, repeat the request in this form: "_Look at the picture and tell me everything you can see in it._" If there is still no response, say: "_Show me the ..._" (naming some object in the picture). Only one question of this type, however, is permissible. If the child answers correctly, say: "_That is fine; now tell me everything you see in the picture._" From this point the responses nearly always follow without further coaxing. Indeed, if _rapport_ has been properly cultivated before the test begins, the first question will ordinarily be sufficient. If the child names one or two things in a picture and then stops, urge him on by saying "_And what else_" Proceed with pictures _b_ and _c_ in the same manner.

SCORING. The test is pa.s.sed if the child enumerates as many as _three_ objects in _one_ picture _spontaneously_; that is, without intervening questions or urging. Anything better than enumeration (as description or interpretation) is also acceptable, but description is rarely encountered before 5 years and interpretation rarely before 9 or 10.[46]

[46] See instructions for VII, 2, and XII, 7.

REMARKS. The purpose of the test in this year is to find out whether the sight of a familiar object in a picture provokes recognition and calls up the appropriate name.[47] The average child of 3 or 4 years is in what Binet calls "the identification stage"; that is, familiar objects in a picture will be identified but not described, their relations to one another will not be grasped.

[47] For a discussion of the significance of the different types of response, enumeration, description, and interpretation, see VII, 2, and XII, 7.

In giving the test, always present the pictures in the same order, first Dutch Home, then River Scene, then Post-Office. The order of presentation will no doubt seem to the uninitiated too trivial a matter to insist upon, but a little experience teaches one that an apparently insignificant change in the procedure may exert a considerable influence upon the response. Some pictures tend more strongly than others to provoke a particular type of response. Some lend themselves especially to enumeration, others to description, others to interpretation. The pictures used in the Stanford revision have been selected from a number which have been tried because they are more uniform in this respect than most others in use. However, they are not without their differences, picture _b_, for example, tending more than the others to provoke description.

There seems to be no disagreement as to the proper location of this test.

III, 4. GIVING s.e.x

PROCEDURE. If the subject is a boy, the formula is: "_Are you a little boy or a little girl?_" If a girl, "_Are you a little girl or a little boy?_" This variation in the formula is necessary because of the tendency in young children to repeat mechanically the last word of anything that is said to them. If there is no response, say: "_Are you a little girl?_" (if a boy); or, "_Are you a little boy?_" (if a girl). If the answer to the last question is "no" (or a shake of the head), we then say: "_Well, what are you? Are you a little boy or a little girl?_"

(or _vice versa_).

SCORING. The response is satisfactory if it indicates that the child has really made the discrimination, but we must be cautious about accepting any other response than the direct answer, "A little girl," or, "A little boy." "Yes" and "no" in response to the second question must be carefully checked up.

REMARKS. Binet and G.o.ddard say that 3-year-olds cannot pa.s.s this test and that 4-year-olds almost never fail. We can accept the last part of this statement, but not the first part. Nearly all of our 3-year-old subjects succeed with it.

The test probably has nothing to do with s.e.x consciousness, as such.

Success in it would seem to depend on the ability to discriminate between familiar cla.s.s names which are in a certain degree related.

III, 5. GIVING THE FAMILY NAME

PROCEDURE. The child is asked, "_What is your name?_" If the answer, as often happens, includes only the first name (Walter, for example), say: "_Yes, but what is your other name? Walter what?_" If the child is silent, or if he only repeats the first name, say: "_Is your name Walter ... ?_" (giving a fict.i.tious name, as Jones, Smith, etc.). This question nearly always brings the correct answer if it is known.

SCORING. Simply + or -. No attention is paid to faults of p.r.o.nunciation.

REMARKS. There is unanimous agreement that this test belongs in the 3-year group. Although the child has not had as much opportunity to learn the family name as his first name, he is almost certain to have heard it more or less, and if his intelligence is normal the interest in self will ordinarily cause it to be remembered.

The critic of the intelligence scale need not be unduly exercised over the fact that there may be an occasional child of 3 years who has never heard his family name. We have all read of such children, but they are so extremely rare that the chances of a given 3-year-old being unjustly penalized for this reason are practically negligible. In the second place, contingencies of this nature are throughout the scale consistently allowed for in the percentage of pa.s.ses required for locating a test. Since (in the year groups below XIV) the individual tests are located at the age level where they are pa.s.sed by 60 to 70 per cent of unselected children of that age, it follows that the child of average ability _is expected_ to fail on about one third of the tests of his age group. The plan of the scale is such as to warrant this amount of leeway. But even granting the possibility that one subject out of a hundred or so may be unjustly penalized for lack of opportunity to acquire the knowledge which the test calls for, the injustice done does not greatly alter the result. A single test affects mental age only to the extent of two months, and the chances of two such injustices occurring with the same child are very slight. Herein lies the advantage of a multiplicity of tests. No test considered by itself is very dependable, but two dozen tests, properly arranged, are almost infinitely reliable.

III, 6. REPEATING SIX TO SEVEN SYLLABLES

PROCEDURE. Begin by saying: "_Can you say 'mamma'? Now, say 'nice kitty.'_" Then ask the child to say, "_I have a little dog._" Speak the sentence distinctly and with expression, but in a natural voice and not too slowly. If there is no response, the first sentence may be repeated two or three times. Then give the other two sentences: "_The dog runs after the cat_," and, "_In summer the sun is hot._" A great deal of tact is sometimes necessary to enlist the child's cooperation in this test.

If he cannot be persuaded to try, the alternative test of three digits may be subst.i.tuted.

SCORING. The test is pa.s.sed if at least _one sentence is repeated without error after a single reading_. "Without error" is to be taken literally; there must be no omission, insertion, or transposition of words. Ignore indistinctness of articulation and defects of p.r.o.nunciation as long as they do not mutilate the sentence beyond easy recognition.

REMARKS. The test does not presuppose that the child should have the ability to make and use sentences like these for purposes of communication, or even that he should know the meaning of all the words they contain. Its purpose is to bring out the ability of the child to repeat a six-syllable series of more or less familiar language sounds.

As every one knows, the normal child of 2 or 3 years is constantly imitating the speech of those around him and finds this a great source of delight. Long practice in the semi-mechanical repet.i.tion of language sounds is necessary for the learning of speech coordinations and is therefore an indispensable preliminary to the purposeful use of language. High-grade idiots and the lowest grade of imbeciles never acquire much facility in the repet.i.tion of language heard. The test gets at one of the simplest forms of mental integration.

Binet says that children of 3 years _never_ repeat sentences of ten syllables. This is not strictly true, for six out of nineteen 3-year-olds succeeded in doing so. All the data agree, however, that the _average_ child of 3 years repeats only six to seven syllables correctly.

III. ALTERNATIVE TEST: REPEATING THREE DIGITS

PROCEDURE. Use the following digits: 6-4-1, 3-5-2, 8-3-7. Begin with two digits, as follows: "_Listen; say 4-2_." "_Now, say 6-4-1_." "_Now, say 3-5-2_," etc. p.r.o.nounce the digits in a distinct voice and with perfectly uniform emphasis at a rate just a little faster than one per second. Two per second, as recommended by Binet, is too rapid.

Young subjects, because of their natural timidity in the presence of strangers, sometimes refuse to respond to this test. With subjects under 5 or 6 years of age it is sometimes necessary in such cases to re-read the first series of digits several times in order to secure a response.

The response thus secured, however, is not counted in scoring, the purpose of the re-reading being merely to break the child's silence. The second and third series may be read but once. With the digits tests above year IV the re-reading of a series is never permissible.

SCORING. Pa.s.sed if the child repeats correctly, _after a single reading, one series out of the three_ series given. Not only must the correct digits be given, but the order also must be correct.

REMARKS. Others, on the basis of rather scanty data, have usually located this test at the 4-year level. Our results show that with the procedure described above it is fully as easy as the test of repeating sentences of 6 to 7 syllables.[48]

[48] See p. 194 _ff._ for further discussion of the digits test.

CHAPTER X