_Unsatisfactory._ "The husband is leaving and the dog is looking at the lady." "It's a picture to show how people dressed in colonial times." "The lady is crying and the man is trying to comfort her." "The man is going away. The woman is angry because he is going. The dog has a ball in its mouth and looks happy, and the man looks sad."

Such responses as the following are doubtful, but rather _minus_ than _plus_: "A picture of George Washington's home." "They have lost their money and they are sad" (gratuitous interpretation). "The man has struck the woman."

Doubt sometimes arises as to the proper scoring of imaginative or gratuitous interpretations. The following are samples of such: (a) "The little girl is crying because she wants a new dress and the mother is telling her she can have one when Christmas comes if she will be good." (b) "The man and woman have gone up the river to visit some friends and an Indian guide is bringing them home." (c) "Some old Rubes are reading about a circus that's going to come." (d) "Napoleon leaving his wife."

Sometimes these imaginative responses are given by very bright subjects, under the impression that they are asked to "make up" a story based on the picture. We may score them _plus_, provided they are not too much out of harmony with the situation and actions represented in the picture. Interpretations so gratuitous as to have little or no bearing upon the scene depicted should be scored _minus_.

REMARKS. The test of picture interpretation has been variously located from 12 to 15 years. It cannot be too strongly emphasized that everything depends on the nature of the pictures used, the form in which the question is put, and the standard for scoring. The Jingleman-Jack pictures used by Kuhlmann are as easy to interpret at 10 years as the Stanford pictures at 12. Spontaneous interpretation ("What is this a picture of?" or "What do you see in this picture?") comes no more readily at 14 years than provoked interpretation ("Explain this picture") at 12. The standard of scoring is no less important. If with the Stanford pictures we require three satisfactory responses out of four, the test belongs at the 12-year level, but the standard of two correct out of four can be met a year or two earlier.

Even after we have agreed upon a given series of pictures, the formula for giving the test, and upon the requisite number of pa.s.ses, there remains still the question as to the proper degree of liberality in deciding what const.i.tutes interpretation. There is no single point in mental development where the "ability to interpret pictures" sweeps in with a rush. Like the development of most other abilities, it comes by slow degrees, beginning even as early as 6 years.

The question is, therefore, to decide whether a given response contains as much and as good interpretation as we have a right to expect at the age level where the test has been placed. It is imperative for any one who would use the scale correctly to acquaint himself thoroughly with the procedure and standards described above.

XII, 8. GIVING SIMILARITIES, THREE THINGS

PROCEDURE. The procedure is the same as in VIII, 4, but with the following words:--

(a) _Snake_, _cow_, _sparrow_.

(b) _Book_, _teacher_, _newspaper_.

(c) _Wool_, _cotton_, _leather_.

(d) _Knife-blade_, _penny_, _piece of wire_.

(e) _Rose_, _potato_, _tree_.

As before, a little tactful urging is occasionally necessary in order to secure a response.

SCORING. _Three satisfactory responses out of five_ are necessary for success. Any real similarity is acceptable, whether fundamental or superficial, although the giving of fundamental likenesses is especially symptomatic of good intelligence.

Failures may be cla.s.sified under four heads: (1) Leaving one of the words out of consideration; (2) giving a difference instead of a similarity; (3) giving a similarity that is not real or that is too bizarre or far-fetched; and (4) inability to respond. Types (1), (3), and (4) are almost equally numerous, while type (2) is not often encountered at this level of intelligence.

This test provokes doubtful responses somewhat oftener than the earlier test of giving similarities. Those giving greatest difficulty are the indefinite statements like "All are useful," "All are made of the same material," etc. Fortunately, in most of these cases an additional question is sufficient to determine whether the subject has in mind a real similarity. Questions suitable for this purpose are: "Explain what you mean," "In what respect are they all useful?" "What material do you mean?" etc. Of course it is only permissible to make use of supplementary questions of this kind when they are necessary in order to clarify a response which has already been made.

While the amateur examiner is likely to have more or less trouble in deciding upon scores, this difficulty rapidly disappears with experience. The following samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory responses will serve as a fairly adequate guide in dealing with doubtful cases:--

(a) _Snake_, _cow_, _sparrow_

_Satisfactory._ "All are animals" (or creatures, etc.). "All live on the land." "All have blood" (or flesh, bones, eyes, skin, etc.). "All move about." "All breathe air." "All are useful" (_plus_ only if subject can give a use which they have in common). "All have a little intelligence" (or sense, instinct, etc.).

_Unsatisfactory._ "All have legs." "All are dangerous." "All feed on grain" (or gra.s.s, etc.). "All are much afraid of man."

"All frighten you." "All are warm-blooded." "All get about the same way." "All walk on the ground." "All can bite." "All holler." "All drink water." "A snake crawls, a cow walks, and a sparrow flies" (or some other difference). "They are not alike."

(b) _Book_, _teacher_, _newspaper_

_Satisfactory._ "All teach." "You learn from all." "All give you information." "All help you get an education." "All are your good friends" (_plus_ if subject can explain how). "All are useful" (_plus_ if subject can explain how).

_Unsatisfactory._ "All tell you the news." "A teacher writes, and a book and newspaper have writing." "They are not alike."

"All read." "All use the alphabet."

(c) _Wool_, _cotton_, _leather_

_Satisfactory._ "All used for clothing." "We wear them all."

"All grow" (_plus_ if subject can explain). "All have to be sent to the factory to be made into things." "All are useful" (_plus_ if subject can give a use which all have in common). "All are valuable" (_plus_ if explained).

_Unsatisfactory._ "All come from plants." "All grow on animals."

"All came off the top of something." "All are things." "They are pretty." "All spell alike." "All are furry" (or soft, hard, etc.).

(d) _Knife-blade_, _penny_, _piece of wire_

_Satisfactory_. "All are made from minerals" (or metals). "All come from mines." "All are hard material."

_Unsatisfactory._ "All are made of steel" (or copper, iron, etc.). "All are made of the same metal." "All cut." "All bend easily." "All are used in building a house." "All are worthless." "All are useful in fixing things." "All have an end." "They are small." "All weigh the same." "Can get them all at a hardware store." "You can buy things with all of them."

"You buy them with money." "One is sharp, one is round, and one is long" (or some other difference).

Such answers as "All are found in a boy's pocket," or "Boys like them," are not altogether bad, but hardly deserve to be called satisfactory. "All are useful" is _minus_ unless the subject can give a use which they have in common, which in this case he is not likely to do. Bizarre uses are also _minus_; as, "All are good for a watch fob," "Can use all for paper weights," etc.

(e) _Rose_, _potato_, _tree_

_Satisfactory._ "All are plants." "All grow from the ground."

"All have leaves" (or roots, etc.). "All have to be planted."

"All are parts of nature." "All have colors."

_Unsatisfactory._ "All are pretty." "All bear fruit." "All have pretty flowers." "All grow on bushes." "All are valuable" (or useful). "They grow close to a house." "All are ornamental."

"All are shrubbery."

REMARKS. The words of each series lend themselves readily to cla.s.sification into a next higher cla.s.s. This is the best type of response, but with most of the series it accounts for less than two thirds of the successes among subjects of 12-year intelligence. The proportion is less than one third for subjects of 10-year intelligence and nearly three fourths at the 14-year level. It would be possible and very desirable to devise and standardize an additional test of this kind, but requiring the giving of an essential resemblance or cla.s.sificatory similarity.

For discussion of the psychological factors involved in the similarities test, see VII, 5.

CHAPTER XVIII

INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR XIV.

XIV, 1. VOCABULARY (FIFTY DEFINITIONS, 9000 WORDS)

PROCEDURE and SCORING, as in VIII, X, and XII. At year XIV fifty words must be correctly defined.

XIV, 2. INDUCTION TEST: FINDING A RULE

PROCEDURE. Provide six sheets of thin blank paper, say 8 11 inches.

Take the first sheet, and telling the subject to watch what you do, fold it once, and in the middle of the folded edge tear out or cut out a small notch; then ask the subject to tell you _how many holes there will be in the paper when it is unfolded_. The correct answer, _one_, is nearly always given without hesitation. But whatever the answer, unfold the paper and hold it up broadside for the subject's inspection. Next, take another sheet, fold it once as before and say: "_Now, when we folded it this way and tore out a piece, you remember it made one hole in the paper. This time we will give the paper another fold and see how many holes we shall have._" Then proceed to fold the paper again, this time in the other direction, and tear out a piece from the folded side and ask how many holes there will be when the paper is unfolded. After recording the answer, unfold the paper, hold it up before the subject so as to let him see the result. The answer is often incorrect and the unfolded sheet is greeted with an exclamation of surprise. The governing principle is seldom made out at this stage of the experiment. But regardless of the correctness or incorrectness of the first and second answers, proceed with the third sheet. Fold it once and say: "_When we folded it this way there was one hole._" Then fold it again and say: "_And when we folded it this way there were two holes._" At this point fold the paper a third time and say: "_Now, I am folding it again. How many holes will it have this time when I unfold it?_" Record the answer and again unfold the paper while the subject looks on.

Continue in the same manner with sheets four, five, and six, adding one fold each time. In folding each sheet recapitulate the results with the previous sheets, saying (with the sixth, for example): "_When we folded it this way there was one hole, when we folded it again there were two, when we folded it again there were four, when we folded it again there were eight, when we folded it again there were sixteen; now, tell me how many holes there will be if we fold it once more._" In the recapitulation avoid the expression "_When we folded it once, twice, three times_," etc., as this often leads the subject to double the numeral heard instead of doubling the number of holes in the previously folded sheet. After the answer is given, do not fail to unfold the paper and let the subject view the result.

SCORING. The test is pa.s.sed _if the rule is grasped by the time the sixth sheet is reached_; that is, the subject may pa.s.s after five incorrect responses, provided the sixth is correct and the governing rule can then be given. It is not permissible to ask for the rule until all six parts of the experiment have been given. Nothing must be said which could even suggest the operation of a rule. Often, however, the subject grasps the principle after two or three steps and gives it spontaneously. In this case it is unnecessary to proceed with the remaining steps.