Sixteen Experimental Investigations from the Harvard Psychological Laboratory - Hugo Münsterberg (best life changing books txt) 📗
- Author: Hugo Münsterberg
- Performer: -
Book online «Sixteen Experimental Investigations from the Harvard Psychological Laboratory - Hugo Münsterberg (best life changing books txt) 📗». Author Hugo Münsterberg
restrict his attention to the general field upon which the ideated
objects might appear, and to note what occurred on the field. The
period of introspection, which followed immediately the disappearance
of such retinal images as remained, after the closing of the eyes to
the external objects, lasted sixty seconds. The reports, like the
signals, were given in a just audible tone. They were in such terms as
‘right—left,’ ‘small—large,’ ‘circle—star,’ terms the simplest that
could be found, or such as seemed, in any given case, most naturally
or automatically associated with the object, and therefore least
likely to disturb the course of the observation. And each report was
noted down by the experimenter at the instant it was given, with the
time of each phase, in seconds, as indicated by a stop-watch under the
experimenter’s eye.
It will be remarked that the attitude required of the observer was one
which is not commonly taken. And it may be objected that the results
of an attitude so unusual towards objects so ghostly and attenuated
must be too delicate, or too complex, or influenced by too many alien
suggestions, to be plumply set down in arabic numerals. The subjects,
in fact, did at first find the attitude not easy to assume. A visual
object may hold the attention by controlling the reflexes of the eye.
But an ideational object has ordinarily no sure command of the
conscious field save under the influence of a volitional idea or some
strongly toned affectional state. But with a little practice the
difficulty seemed to disappear. The subject became surer of his
material, and the mental object gradually acquired the same sort of
individuality as the visual object, though the impression it made
might be less intense.
After a few preliminary experiments, figures were devised for the
purpose of testing the effect of mere difference in the complexity of
outline. That is to say, the members of every pair of objects were of
the same uniform color-tone (Bradley’s neutral gray No. 2), presented
the same extent of surface (approximately 42 sq. cm.), were exposed
simultaneously for the same length of time (5 seconds), and were in
contour usually of like general character save that the bounding line
in the one was more interrupted and complex than in the other.
In another series the variant was the extent of surface exposed, the
color-tone (neutral gray), outline, and other conditions being the
same for both members of each pair. The smaller figures were of the
same area as those of the preceding series; in the larger figures this
area was doubled. Only one member of each pair is represented in the
diagrams of this and the next series.
In a third series brightness was the variant, one member of each pair
being white and the other gray (Bradley’s cool gray No. 2). All other
conditions were for both figures the same.
In still another series strips of granite-gray cardboard half a
centimeter wide were cut out and pasted on black cards, some in
straight and some in broken lines, but all of the same total length
(10 cm.). These were exposed under the same general conditions as
those which have already been described, and were intended to show the
relative effects of the two sorts of lines.
TABLE I.
1 2 3 4 5 Totals. Averages.
L R L R L R L R L R L R L R
I. 45 45 25 29 27 27 31 24 36 20 164 145 32.8 29
II. 20 25 28 28 28 19 31 31 28 14 135 117 27 23.5
III. 11 12 17 28 0 7 0 15 27 23 55 85 11 17
IV. 7 6 47 22 17 21 17 45 31 30 119 124 23.8 24.8
V. 27 33 46 36 40 31 44 31 26 35 183 165 36.6 33.2
VI. 11 14 32 29 34 21 14 35 0 46 91 145 18.2 29
VII. 36 33 30 30 50 50 22 22 52 52 190 187 38 37.4
VIII. 41 44 33 33 45 45 34 44 37 28 190 194 38 38.8
IX. 45 45 39 46 42 47 47 47 44 44 217 229 43.4 45.8
X. 40 39 24 25 19 21 21 23 18 25 122 133 24.4 26.6
XI. 51 53 52 50 42 42 42 42 42 42 229 229 45.8 45.8
334 349 373 356 344 331 303 359 341 359 1695 1754 30.8 31.9
The Arabic numerals at the head of the columns refer, in every
table, to the corresponding numerals designating the objects
in the diagram accompanying the table.
L: left-hand object.
R: right-hand object.
The Roman numerals (I to XI) indicate the different
subjects. The same subjects appear in all the experiments, and
under the same designation. Two of the subjects, IV and
VIII, are women.
The numbers under L and R denote the number of seconds
during which the left-hand image and the right-hand image,
respectively, were present in the period of introspection (60
seconds).
General average: L, 30.8 sec.; R, 31.9 sec.
[Illustration: FIG. 1.]
Series No. 1.—For the purpose of obtaining something that might
serve as a standard of comparison, a series of observations was made
in which the members of every pair were exact duplicates of each
other, and were presented under exactly the same conditions, spatial
position of course excepted. The records of these observations are for
convenience placed first as Table I.
In treating the facts recorded in the accompanying tables as phenomena
of inhibition no assumption is implied, it may be well to repeat, that
the ideational images are forces struggling with each other for
mastery. Nor is it implied, on the other hand, that they are wholly
unconditioned facts, unrelated to any phenomena in which we are
accustomed to see the expression of energy. Inhibition is meaningless
save as an implication of power lodged somewhere. The implication is
that these changes are conditioned and systematic, and that among the
conditions of our ideas, if not among the ideas themselves, power is
exerted and an inferior yields to a superior force. Such force, in
accordance with our general presupposition, must be neural or
cerebral. Even mental inhibition, therefore, must ultimately refer to
the physical conditions of the psychical fact. But the reference, to
have any scientific value, must be made as definite as the case will
allow. We must at least show what are the conditions under which a
state of consciousness which might otherwise occur does not occur.
When such conditions are pointed out, and then only, we have a case of
what has been called psychical inhibition; and we are justified in
calling it inhibition because these are precisely the conditions under
which physiological inhibition may properly be inferred. And, we may
add, in order that the conditions may be intelligibly stated and
compared they must be referable to some objective, cognizable fact.
Here the accessible facts, the experiential data, to which the
psychical changes observed and the cerebral changes assumed may both
be referred, are visual objects, namely, the figures already
described.
What may occur when these objects are precisely alike, and are seen
under conditions in all respects alike except as to spatial position,
is indicated in Table I. The general average shows that the image
referred to the left-hand object was seen some 30 seconds per minute;
that referred to the right-hand image, some 31 seconds. Sometimes
neither image was present, sometimes both were reported present
together, and the time when both were reported present is included in
the account. In this series it appears, on the whole, that each image
has about the same chance in the ideational rivalry, with a slight
preponderance in favor of the right. Individual variations, which may
be seen at a glance by inspection of the averages, show an occasional
preponderance in favor of the left. But the tendency is, in most
cases, towards what we may call right-handed ideation.
Series No. II.—In the second series (Table II.) we find that, other
things being equal, _an increase in the relative complexity of the
outline favors the return of the image to consciousness_. Including
the time when both images were reported present at once, the simpler
appears but 27 seconds per minute as against 34 seconds for the more
complex. No attempt was made to arrange the figures on any regularly
increasing scale of complexity so as to reach quantitative results.
The experiment was tentative merely.
TABLE II.
1 2 3 4
S C S C S C S C
I. 21.5 23.5 14.5 35 22.5 21.5 15 27
II. 35.5 21.5 32.5 48 32 33.5 32.5 21.5
III. 27.5 39 20.5 47.5 24.5 46.5 8 22.5
IV. 31.5 26.5 38 23.5 34.5 22 24 29.5
V. 48 50 48 39.5 41.5 51.5 51 47.5
VI. 11.5 35 26.5 28.5 21 33 29 17
VII. 29.5 35 47 47 10.5 52 29.5 33.5
VIII. 12.5 41 32 28.5 13 26.5 17 41.5
IX. 10.5 25.5 27.5 34.5 14.5 44 33 44.5
X. 24 25.5 20 23 16.5 28 23 21
XI. 46 46.5 31.5 53.5 18 53.5 27 50.5
298 369 338 408.5 248.5 412 289 356
5 6 7 Averages.
S C S C S C S C
I. 20.5 21 14.5 27 7.5 37.5 16.57 27.50
II. 31.5 32 50 45.5 49.5 39.5 37.64 34.50
III. 19.5 32.5 13 31 29 18 20.28 33.85
IV. 40.5 46.5 27 30.5 26 32 31.64 30.07
V. 47.5 47.5 50.5 48.5 38 38 46.35 46.07
VI. 14.5 29 14 33 21 28.5 19.64 29.14
VII. 25.5 43 42.5 30 28 41.5 30.35 40.28
VIII. 8 34 24 27 33 14.5 19.92 30.42
IX. 41.5 27 29.5 27.5 29.5 28 26.57 33.00
X. 10.5 36.5 17 27 18 25 18.42 26.57
XI. 21.5 53.5 40.5 43.5 30 45 30.64 49.42
281 402.5 322.5 370.5 309.5 347.5 27.10 34.62
S: Outline simple.
C: Outline complex.
In this and the following tables the numbers in the body of
the columns represent, in each case, the combined result of
two observations, in one of which the simpler figure was to
the left, in the other the more complex. The figures were
transposed in order to eliminate any possible space error.
General average: S, 27.10 sec.; C, 34.62 sec.
Can anything be said, based on the reports, by way of explanation of
the advantage which complexity gives? In the first place, the attitude
of the subject towards his image seems to have been much the same as
his attitude towards an external object: to his observation the image
became, in fact, an object. “When the image was gone,” says one, “my
eyes seemed to be in search of something.” And occasionally the one
ideated object was felt to exert an influence over the other. “The
complex seemed to affect the form of the simpler figure.” “It seemed
that the complex actually had the effect of diminishing the size of
the simpler figure.” From time to time the images varied, too, in
distinctness, just as the objects of perception vary, and the superior
distinctness of the more complex was frequently noted by the subjects.
Now the importance of the boundary line in perception is well
understood. It seems to have a corresponding importance here. “What I
notice more in the simple figure,” says one observer, “is the mass; in
the complex, the outline.” “The simple seemed to lose its form,” says
another, “the complex did not; the jagged edge was very distinct.” And
it is not improbable, in view of the reports, that irregularities
involving change of direction and increase in extent of outline
Comments (0)