1 2 3 4 5 6 Total
  Place
known
Place
unknown
K. U. K. U. K. U. K. U. K. U. K. U.
Homogeneous     1 13    2 28    9 41    15 31    15 44    42 157   
        6(?)   14(?)   19(?)   21(?)   15(?)   75(?)
Heterogeneous 2 5 1 8 2 15 4 36 5 34 2 25 16 123
Similar       4   4   5 3 6 2 13 5 32
Total
excluding(?)
2 5 2 25 4 47 13 82 23 71 19 82 63 312
Total of Known
+ Unknown
7 27 51 95 94 101 375

(?) Inhibition or fusion.


SUBSTITUTIONS

  1 2 3 4 5 6 Total
Homogeneous 8 12 26 27 38 14 125
Heterogeneous 4 4 14 21 30 20 93
Similar 1 5 9 25 33 27 100
Total 13 21 49 73 101 61 318

FUSIONS [See (?) under Inhibitions]

  1 2 3 4 5 6 Total
Homogeneous   1 2 1 3 10 17
Heterogeneous     0 0 0 0
Similar     3 3 6 6 18
Total   1 5 4 9 16 35

Note. There were no clear cases of fusion, but the evidence favored fusion rather than inhibition.


PERMUTATIONS

    1 2 3 4 5 6 Total
Homogeneous (a) 6 29 46 56 30   167
  (b)   5 21 45 68 35 174
Heterogeneous (a) 15 25 60 62 28   190
  (b)   14 23 51 82 44 214
Similar (a) 13 20 37 78 16   164
  (b)   12 17 26 75 28 158
Total (a) 34 74 143 196 74   521
  (b)   31 61 122 225 107 546

(a) forward, (b) backward

Note. The permutation of an inhibited figure was not noted unless its location was known: hence the difference in the number of forward and backward permutations.

  1 2 3 4 5 6 Total
Total Interferences 54 160 323 509 524 300 1870
% 3% 9% 17% 27% 28% 16%  
Absolute Errors (ex- 20 55 119 191 225 103 713
cluding Permutations) 3% 8% 17% 27% 31% 14%  

ABSOLUTE ERRORS (excluding Permutations)

  Homogeneous Heterogeneous Similar
Inhibitions 199 139 37
Substitutions 129 93 101
Fusions 17   18
(?) 75    
Total 420 232 156
  52% 29% 19%

Over 50% of the errors were found in the 4th and 5th places.

[Ranschburg: 90% of errors in right half—60% in 5th place, 30% in 4th, few in 6th.]

In 1620 tests, the homogeneous series contained 52% of the absolute errors, the heterogeneous 29%, and the similar 19%.

COLORS

In the hope that some light might be thrown upon the main question at issue, the writer changed the stimuli, using colors instead of numbers.

It was important that the colors should be of the same or only slightly varying intensity and that they should be easily distinguishable. In a series of preliminary experiments in which red, blue, yellow, green, brown, gray, pink, and violet were used, red was lost in 8% of the tests, and gray in 25%.

Colors 1×4 cm. in size "ran into each other," while those which were 1×1 cm. remained distinct.

Here it was found necessary to distinguish between the various factors which might cause inhibition. Three factors entered into each test—perceiving, naming, remembering.

Four subjects found difficulty in naming, especially at first. The various methods of naming are given below in detail. M. says: "The name of the color is localized in my mouth. Generally there is no movement of the tongue—an impulse only; and the name is felt in that part of the mouth where the sound would be reflected, as, red in the upper part, blue near the front, etc."

S.: "Usually there is no apparent tendency to pronounce. Occasionally, naming them over inaudibly before recording is found advantageous."

E., V., and H.: "The naming is mental, but is accompanied by a slight movement of the tongue and throat."

684 heterogeneous and 200 homogeneous tests showed that greatest inhibition occurred in the following order: 4th place (27%), 3d (26%), 5th (24%), 2d (11%), 6th (8%), 1st (4%). There was but little difference in the 3d, 4th, and 5th places.

During first tests subjects were allowed only one exposure, but later it was thought best to eliminate all omissions resulting from inability to name colors perceived, and hence they were asked to record only when able to name all colors perceived during that exposure. However several required but one exposure.

Preliminary drill was given for two weeks. Since no clear cases of fusion had been obtained in the entire number-series, the one aim of the experimenter was to ascertain whether fusion of colors, even though of heterogeneous, be possible. Eight hundred heterogeneous tests gave 927 cases of inhibition, 7 of fusion, and 18 which, though somewhat doubtful, yet gave more evidence of fusion than of inhibition. Yellow (3d place) and brown (6th place) were seen as yellowish-brown, brown and pink as pinkish-brown, etc. Gray was seen several times instead of a color and its complementary when these were in immediate succession. This was true of both red and blue. Half of the total number of substitutions was due to the displacement of yellow by brown. And a color not in the series was as likely to be substituted as one preceding or following the displaced color.

Two hundred and fifty-two homogeneous tests showed that there is greatest interference when identicals are in immediate succession, and least, when removed two places. The doubtful (fusion?) cases number one third of the inhibited. The 4th and 5th colors are permuted most often, as was found to be the case in the heterogeneous series also. The element is generally permuted but one place.

The heterogeneous color-tests show three times as much interference as the corresponding number-tests, and the homogeneous twice as much. The discrepancy in the amount of variation may be due to the experiments with the heterogeneous colors being earlier, when naturally more errors would be made.

However, a comparison of 252 homogeneous with the same number of heterogeneous tests, taken at the same time, shows that there is a much larger difference in the number of absolute errors between the heterogeneous and the homogeneous number-series than there is, proportionately, between the two series of color-tests.

Lest the want of correspondence in the results might have been due to the comparatively small number of immediately successive identicals in the color-tests, 90 homogeneous tests, equally distributed among all possible variations in the location of the identical elements, were compared with 90 heterogeneous, and it was unexpectedly found that the absolute errors as well as the permutations were almost equal in the two series. Nevertheless, the validity of a conclusion based on so few tests may well be questioned.

Ranschburg found that simultaneous homogeneous stimuli interfere with one another; while simultaneous heterogeneous stimuli clear the way for one another. On the basis of the experiments with numbers, the writer would amend the conclusion reached in the earlier research to read thus: Homogeneous optical stimuli, whether occurring simultaneously in different positions, or in immediate succession in the same positions, interfere with one another; while heterogeneous stimuli clear the way for one another.


SUBJECTIVE AND OBJECTIVE SIMULTANEITY

BY THOMAS H. HAINES

This investigation finds its starting-points in two widely separated lines of experimentation in the problems of attention. These two lines are the "scope-of-attention" experiment with the tachistoscope, and the "time-displacement" experiment with the pendulum apparatus. It seems to me these two can be brought into relation to each other to the help of each of them individually, and that an investigation taking these wide relations within its scope may reasonably be expected to throw new light upon the manner in which mental processes are related to each other when they are together in consciousness at the same time. The first of these experiments (tachistoscopic) is concerned with the number and relative clearness of the processes which go on at the same time. The second (displacement) is concerned with the conditions of the subjective displacement of one of two objectively simultaneous stimuli with reference to the other. Its problem is the essential psychological problem involved in the astronomer's error in transit observations by the eye-and-ear method, for the personal equation arising in these observations is more a matter of the reciprocal relations among the processes which are together in consciousness at the moment of observation than it is of mere reaction time. It is primarily more a matter of relative clearness, as controlled probably through interference of one with another, than it is of the more or less temperamental facility of converting ideas into action.

The psychological question at the heart of the observation-error, called the personal equation, is this,—What are the conditions which hinder such a division of attention among the parts of the complex operation of coördinating sense-stimulations, that the processes which start simultaneously may proceed to equal clearness at the same time, and so be perceived as simultaneous? The facts sought in order to answer this question are the very same as some of those, at least, demanded by the "scope-of-attention" investigation when it really opens up to its true problem. W. Wirth[108] has recently shown, in an exhaustive criticism of the tachistoscopic method, that "scope of attention" is primarily concerned with the relations of the processes present together, and that this demands a previous exhaustive study of their relative clearnesses. Earlier studies by the tachistoscopic method, as, for example those of Cattell[109] on the relatively short time for the perception of letters in words, as compared with that for separate letters, and the overlapping of processes in continuous reading, showed that the important question is, what are the processes which may go on at the same time. Leaving out a statement of the nature of the processes is equivalent to leaving out one of the dimensions when endeavoring to state the contents of a solid. The scope of attention can be defined adequately only when one knows fully what the separate processes are as well as how many there are. This analysis, which the scope-of-attention problem demands, cannot fail to be directly fruitful for the solution of the time-displacement problem. The analysis of this larger problem directly involves the former. Any attempt to investigate the time-displacement of sense-impressions from simultaneous stimuli must inevitably place the highest value upon the whole detailed analysis of any moment of attentive effort.

The present investigation, starting with the facts of time-displacement, and taking the hint offered by Gonnessiat,[110] attempts to show, by a more complete analysis, the effects of the various relations within each series,—the visual within which the sounds are to be placed, and the auditory series itself, and also relations existing between the two series. In other words, the attempt is made to strip the "displacement" experiment until nothing more remains to be coördinated than a single pair of simultaneous stimuli. This was the experiment of Exner.[111] He investigated the shortest discriminable interval marked off by various pairs of stimuli, addressed to the same sense and to different senses. From this coördination of a visual and an auditory stimulus, where the limits of the "specious present" are obtained, I make a turn into the realm of the scope of attention. By a new method, whereby impairment of accuracy of processes is made the test as to whether the processes have proceeded together, it is shown that two such perceptual processes can go on just about as well at the same time as separately. Since this test is subject to the objection that the visual and auditory processes may really be successive, though seemingly at the same time, owing to retinal inertia, the same question is removed to an entirely different plane in a further and more detailed set of experiments where the processes combined are judgments of comparison based upon one and the same visual sensation.

EXPERIMENTS IN TIME-DISPLACEMENT

The Leipsic Complication Experiment with the pendulum apparatus (for description of this see Wundt's Physiol. Psy., 5th ed., vol. 3, p. 82) was an early adaptation of the astronomers' eye-and-ear method to the purposes of psychological experimentation. Instead of localizing a visual stimulus (star on meridian) in an auditory series (clicks of a chronoscope) as in the eye-and-ear method, this adaptation localized an auditory stimulus (bell-stroke) in a visual series (successive positions of a pointer on a graduated circle). This pointer passed around to the right and to the left from the position of rest, in which it pointed vertically upward, as the pendulum, to which it was connected by clockwork, swung back and forth. By a simple adjustment the bell-stroke could be made to come at any point in the complete double swing of the pendulum, and so anywhere in the arc over which the pointer moved. This machine makes an additional problem as to the effects upon displacement of the increasing and decreasing speed. My aim being to simplify as much as possible the displacement-error and so reduce it to its elements, this feature was not only not of direct interest, but it was very desirable to dispense with it altogether. This was done by arranging the visual series so that the members were shown in perfectly regular order, i. e. with equal time-intervals, throughout the series. These equal intervals were secured by the rotation of a disc at a uniform rate.

My method also gave a more distinctly serial character to the visual stimuli, in that they were separated by blank periods. The series consisted of letters in alphabetical order. Denison's smallest white letters, about six millimetres in height, were pasted upon a disc of black cardboard, near the circumference and perpendicular to radii, so that they would appear in succession and right side up, to an observer looking through a slit at the peripheral region of the disc, as it rotated. The letters were placed in three concentric rows, so that as the disc rotated they appeared in three different places. The disc was 56.5 cm. in diameter. As a further aid in securing separate exhibitions of letters, another black disc of the same size as the one bearing the letters, with radial slits 2 mm. wide and cut in from the edge 4 cm., opposite each letter on the other disc, was mounted on the same shaft, six inches from the first, and between it and the observer. A short observation-tube was placed at the same height as the axis of the discs parallel to this axis, and opposite the slits when they were at this elevation. Looking through this, as the discs were rotated, one would see the letters right side up and in serial succession. Uniform illumination was secured by working in a dark room with artificial light. An electric lamp was hung between the discs. Uniform motion was secured by an automatic control gravity motor, connected by belt with a pulley on the disc-shaft.

The auditory stimulus, a click, adjustable to any part of the series, was made as follows: A wooden shaft, mounted on the same axle as the discs, and beyond the discs from the observer, could be rotated freely around the axle when the nut securing it was loosened. This shaft extended beyond the edge of the disc. It carried a copper wire which was in contact with the axle. A mercury cup was placed on the table, upon which the machine rested, in such position that the copper tip passed through the mercury when the discs rotated. It was thus a very simple matter to connect an electric sounder so that it would click every time the circuit was made by the copper passing through the mercury. And, by the adjustment of the wooden shaft, the click was readily placed anywhere in the visual series.

As already suggested above, the length of interval between members of the visual series, and also the time between clicks, seem to be important factors in determining the amount, and perhaps also the direction of the displacement. Bessel found his personal equation was considerably diminished when he used a clock marking half-seconds instead of one marking seconds. Wolf also diminished his error by using a clock beating one hundred times a minute instead of one beating seconds, which he was accustomed to use. Wundt found his customary negative displacement on the pendulum apparatus (coördinating the sound with a position of the index earlier than that with which it was actually simultaneous) disappeared when he had members of the visual series one thirty-sixth second apart and the auditory stimuli one second apart. It seemed important at the outset, therefore, to determine, if possible, the effects of each of these factors.

BOTH INTERVALS PROGRESSIVELY VARIED

In each experiment the observer was allowed to observe as many complications (coincidences of click and letter) as he desired, in order to assure himself of his judgment. The experimenter counted and recorded the number observed in each experiment. Experiments were made in series of ten. Six different combinations of intervals were used in this first group of experiments. The auditory intervals (time between successive clicks) and visual intervals (time between successive members of the visual series) are given at the tops of the columns in Table I. This table is a summary presentation of the results of this group. There were three observers. During each hour of experimentation with a given observer, at least one series with each of the first four time-interval combinations was tried out. "Aver. num. Trials" means the average number of complications observed in the whole number of tests averaged. "Num. Series av." means the number of series of ten experiments each averaged to give the displacement results below. "Aver. Error" is the average of all the displacements of the auditory impression, irrespective of the direction of the displacement. "Mean Displacement" is the actual mean displacement as obtained by dividing the algebraic sum of all displacements, positive and negative, by the number of experiments. The plus sign indicates a positive displacement, and the minus sign, a negative. Negative and positive are here used in the sense customary in similar experiments,—namely, the click, being heard as simultaneous with a visual impression which actually came before it, was said to be displaced negatively, and the click, being heard as simultaneous with a visual impression coming in fact later than it did, was said to be displaced positively. Average errors and mean displacements are given in the table in thousandths of seconds. Observers were asked to locate the click in the visual series in terms of one tenth the distance or time between the letters.

TABLE I

  Aud. Interval (sec.) 1.28 2.56 4.04 8.40 1.28 2.02
  Vis. Interval (sec.) .040 .080 .120 .260 .080 .120
Obs.              
B Av. num. Trials 13.9 5.8 3.8 2.1 9.8 13.9
  Num. Series av. 8 13 13 8 2 2
  Aver. Error (sec.) .056 .064 .077 .164´ .045 .067
  Mean Displac'mt (sec.) +.045   -.040   -.067   -.152   +.045   +.067
Bo Av. num. Trials 9.4 4.1 3.0 2.0 5.5 3.5
  Num Series av. 6 10 11 8 3 2
  Aver. Error. (sec.) .114 .060 .054 .049 .05 .082
  Mean Displac'mt (sec.)   +.114 +.045 +.033 .000 +.045 +.082
M Av. num. Trials 6.3 3.1 2.5 2.2 5.3 4.4
  Num. Series av. 9 12 12 10 3 2
  Aver. Error (sec.) .09 .07 .076 .110 .067 .172
  Mean Displac'mt (sec.) +.089 -.058´ -.058 -.104 +.062 +.168

Transcriber Note

(sec.) moved into row heading from main body of the table.

Obs B row, 13.9 sec., taken out sec.

The first four combinations of intervals above, with which the major part of the results was obtained, it will be noticed, are approximately proportionate increases in each interval, column by column. These conditions were planned with a view to revealing the conditions, most favorable for coördinating the auditory and visual impressions, for each observer, so that his displacement would disappear, or show a tendency to disappear. So far as is shown by these results, there are here two types of observer. Bo has no mean displacement for the 8.40-.260 sec. combination, and it steadily decreases toward this point as the two intervals increase. Both B and M, on the other hand, have a considerable positive mean displacement for the 1.28-.040 sec. combination, and a considerable negative mean displacement for the 2.56-.080 sec. combination, and there is a further increase in the negative displacement as the intervals increase from this point. It seems as though these observers would give a mean displacement of zero for some combination of intervals between these first two. It will be noticed that the average number of trials is exceptionally large for all three of the observers in the first combination. This seemed to be pretty clearly due to the very short interval separating visual impressions.

THE AUDITORY INTERVAL alone VARYING

In order more certainly to isolate the influence of the time-interval between successive auditory impressions, another series of experiments was performed, in which this interval between clicks, alone, was varied from series to series. The visual interval was kept at .083 sec. throughout. This seemed to be about the shortest time-separation at which the successive impressions were perfectly distinct. The auditory impressions were at 1, 1½, 2, 3, and 4 sec. intervals. The additional observer, H, was myself. I obtained these results by experimenting alone. I adjusted the wooden shaft carelessly to a new position and started the machine. When speed was attained, I would make the observation just as an observer for whom the adjustment had been made. I would have as little idea beforehand as he with regard to the position of the click in the series of letters. Having made the observation, however, I measured the actual place of the sound and recorded it, as well as my judgment. In this way, of course, I had some idea, all the time, as to what kind of displacements I was making and how large. I was as careless of this knowledge as possible, and the records were laid aside absolutely, until I was through with the whole experiment. Terms used in Table II are the same as in Table I.

TABLE II

  Aud. Interval (sec.) 1 2 3 4
  Vis. Interval (sec.) .083 .083 .083 .083 .083
Obs.            
B Av. num. Trials 8.5 6.8 6.2 4.8 4.8
  Num. Series av. 10 10 10 10 10
  Aver. Error (sec.) .097 .108 .106 .097 .101
  Mean Displacement (sec.) +.097 +.108 +.106 +.097 +.101
Bo Av. num. Trials 6.0 5.0 4.2 3.2 3.1
  Num. Series av. 10 10 10 10 10
  Aver. Error (sec.) .103 .080 .081 .092 .082
  Mean Displacement (sec.) +.102 +.073 +.078 +.089 +.075
M Av. num. Trials 4.4 3.8 3.4 3.0 2.8
  Num. Series av. 10 10 10 10 10
  Aver. Error (sec.) .088 .084 .081 .068 .052
  Mean Displacement (sec.) +.086 +.079 +.072 +.051 +.048
H Av. num. Trials          
  Num. Series av. 10 10 10 10 10
  Aver. Error (sec.) .043 .036 .047 .040 .037
  Mean Displacement (sec.) -.022 -.012 -.027 -.017 -.013

Transcriber Note

(sec.) moved into row heading from main body of the table.

One series of ten of each of these combinations was given during each hour of experimentation with each observer. These were also given in a different order each day, so that no combination should have the advantage, by practice or lack of fatigue, in the average of the ten series. Here again it was evident, in the records of each of the observers for whom the count was made, that the largest number of trials was necessary in the 1-.083 sec. combination. It thus appears that it was not the short visual interval, .040, in Table I, that was responsible for the large number of trials necessary in the first combination. Here, where there is the same visual interval of .083 sec. throughout, it must be the short auditory interval which makes particularly difficult conditions for attention. This agreement between the results in both groups of experiments seems to indicate unfavorable conditions for accurate coördination at auditory intervals as short as one second. The large changes in the mean displacement for B and M between the first two combinations in the first group (Table I) was kept especially in mind in planning this second series of combined intervals. It was presumed from the results given by these observers in Table I that they would each, with the range of auditory interval presented them in these experiments, show a point of no displacement, or a very slight one, and an increasing displacement on each side of this point. They both seemed to indicate a time-interval favorable for the "ripening of apperception" as Wundt and Von Tschisch call it, and I planned these experiments especially to bring it out more clearly. But there is far less indication of a time most favorable for "ripening" than in the previous group of experiments. B and M both give all mean displacements as positive, and decidedly small differences in displacement for the various combinations. Results of Bo are, however, entirely consistent with those of Table I. H gives a very small negative mean displacement throughout. This, as well as the smallness of the average error, may be due to the knowledge of results which I had.

An examination of the detailed daily results, which cannot be exhibited here, shows considerable change in the direction of the displacements as the work proceeded. This is especially marked in the case of B, who, during the first two hours of experimentation, gave only negative displacements. Through the rest of the first group there was a gradual increase of positive displacements, and in the last two hours about 90% were positive. In the second group he did not give a single negative displacement. The same change is manifested in the results of M for the first group; but he did not change over nearly so completely. In the five hundred experiments of Table II, for M, there are three hundred and ninety-two positive, sixty-seven negative, and forty-one no displacements. Bo gave a number of positive displacements from the start. These increased considerably in the second over the first group, showing only thirty-seven negative displacements in the second group. This change in the direction of the displacement, rather independently of the intervals, is an interference with the main purpose of the experiment. It may represent the effect of practice.

Angell and Pierce[112] found the same progressive change from negative to positive displacements. They explained it as a change in the focus of attention. The visual series is focal at first, and the sound becomes focal in later experiments. Negative displacements result from fixing the last possible point in the visual series before the sound is heard, while positive displacements result from getting the first letter possible after the sound. The method of my observers, with the large numbers of trials at their disposal, was to "let the sound announce the letter" on the first trial, and then to "lie in wait for the letter" so announced, and to "see whether it was too late or too early." It was found to be too late usually, for this was the second method of Angell and Pierce, which gave positive displacements.

So at the next trial the preceding letter would be waited for, and tested in the same way. The first trial was thus auditory-visual attention and the second was visual-auditory, and there was a striving after a balance where neither auditory nor visual impression had the preference.

As soon as adjustment to the conditions of a given combination had been secured, it was a simple matter to anticipate, with a fair degree of accuracy, both a given letter and the recurrence of the sound. The attention could thus be pretty accurately divided between the two, and a very small time-displacement was the result. When I was acting as observer, a change of the auditory interval upset the whole plan of procedure for a short time. I had to accustom myself to the new rhythm. But as soon as this adjustment was made, it was just as easy to make the judgment at one rate as at another, barring variations which might be called fortuitous, since they were so small. This experience with the conditions here under consideration, as well as the introspections of the other observers, convinces me that the conception of an apperception-ripening time has been overworked.

It is true that I find here, just as Pflaum[113] found, displacements in both directions with every observer. It seems very doubtful to me, however, whether these are in any sense due to what may be considered a fixed apperception-time for a given observer, under fixed objective conditions. The facility with which adaptation is made to the changed conditions of a new combination of intervals, so that just as small displacements are made under one as another, indicates to my mind that one can control the conditions so that the apperception shall ripen quickly or slowly, depending upon the warmth of the interest, and the concentration or division of the attention,—that there is a capacity in the ordinary individual so to adapt himself to the conditions as to do equally good work in coördinating two sense-impressions anywhere within a wide range of intervals. The influence of the length of the interval separating succeeding clicks, in determining displacements, has been considerably overestimated. I should state here that no one of the three observers had any specific training to reduce the displacement. The results were not discussed with them. They had no means of knowing what displacements they were making. This certainly adds strength to the inference, from these results, that there are adaptable apperceptive conditions for coördinating sense-impressions.

THE INFLUENCE OF THE LENGTH OF THE SERIES OF VISUAL IMPRESSIONS

The next step in the analysis of the complication experiment, bringing it into relation with the simple coördination of two disparate stimuli, is to show, if possible, the influence of the series of visual impressions. This naturally divides into two lines, namely, (1) the length of the series as such, and (2) the relative influence, in case of a given kind of displacement, of the part of the series coming after the auditory stimulus, and the part preceding it. For the first, I used in comparison, a series of twelve letters, a series of three, and a single letter. For the second, the letter, whose coördination with the click was set as the task of the observer, was made successively the first, the last, and the middle member of a series of five letters.

During each hour of experimentation, the observer was tested as to his accuracy of localization of the click, (1) in a series of twelve letters at intervals of .083 sec., (2) in a series of three at the same interval, and (3) with reference to a single letter. The method for the first two was exactly as in the preceding experiments. In the case of the single letter, he was asked to localize as accurately as possible in terms of the intervals as he remembered them from the series. This introduced an element of uncertainty. One observer, St, would not give any judgments as to time-differences in the case of the single letter. Another method had to be adopted in order to obtain more comparable results. These results (Table III) are presented as showing, by comparison with the following table, the transition from one method to the other. Clicks were at 2-sec. intervals. Each number in the table is the average result of fifty or more experiments. They are in thousandths of seconds, and the plus and minus signs indicate positive and negative displacements.

TABLE III