Sixteen Experimental Investigations from the Harvard Psychological Laboratory by Hugo Münsterberg (100 books to read .txt) 📕
[5] Dodge, Raymond, PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW, 1900, VII., p. 456.
[6] Graefe, A., Archiv f. Ophthalmologie, 1895, XLI., 3, S. 136.
This explanation of Graefe is not to be admitted, however, since in the case of eye-movement there are muscular sensations of one's own activity, which are not present when one merely sits in a coach. These sensations of eye-movement are in all cases so intimately connected with our perception of the movement of objects, that they may not be in this case simpl
Read free book «Sixteen Experimental Investigations from the Harvard Psychological Laboratory by Hugo Münsterberg (100 books to read .txt) 📕» - read online or download for free at americanlibrarybooks.com
- Author: Hugo Münsterberg
- Performer: -
Read book online «Sixteen Experimental Investigations from the Harvard Psychological Laboratory by Hugo Münsterberg (100 books to read .txt) 📕». Author - Hugo Münsterberg
image, the ‘mass’ being in both figures approximately the same. Nor
did the advantage of the broken line escape the notice of the subject.
“I found myself,” is the comment of one, “following the contour of the
star—exploring. The circle I could go around in a twinkle.” Again,
“the points entered the field before the rest of the figure.” And
again, “the angle is the last to fade away.”
[Illustration: FIG. 2.]
Now this mental exploration involves, of course, changes in the
direction of the attention corresponding in some way to changes in the
direction of the lines. Does this shifting of the attention involve
ideated movements? There can be little doubt that it does. “I felt an
impulse,” says one, “to turn in the direction of the image seen.” And
the unconscious actual movements, particularly those of the eyes,
which are associated with ideated movements, took place so often that
it is hard to believe they were ever wholly excluded. Such movements,
being slight and automatically executed, were not at first noticed.
The subjects were directed, in fact, to attend in all cases primarily
to the appearance and disappearance of the images, and it was only
after repeated observations and questions were put, that they became
aware of associated movements, and were able, at the close of an
observation, to describe them. After that, it became a common report
that the eyes followed the attention. And as we must assume some
central influence as the cause of this movement, which while the eyes
were closed could have no reflex relation to the stimulus of light, we
must impute it to the character of the ideas, or to their physical
substrates.
The idea, or, as we may call it, in view of the attitude of the
subject, the internal sensory impression, thus seems to bear a double
aspect. It is, in the cases noted, at once sensory and motor, or at
any rate involves motor elements. And the effect of the activity of
such motor elements is both to increase the distinctness of the image
and to prolong the duration of the process by which it is apprehended.
The sensory process thus stands in intimate dependence on the motor.
Nor would failure to move the eyes or any other organ with the
movement of attention, if established, be conclusive as against the
presence of motor elements. A motor impulse or idea does not always
result in apparent peripheral movement. In the suppressed speech,
which is the common language of thought, the possibility of incipient
or incomplete motor innervations is well recognized. But where the
peripheral movement actually occurs it must be accounted for. And as
the cause here must be central, it seems reasonable to impute it to
certain motor innervations which condition the shifting of the mental
attitude and may be incipient merely, but which, if completed, result
in the shifting of the eyes and the changes of bodily attitude which
accompany the scrutiny of an external object. And the sensory process
is, to some extent at least, conditioned by the motor, if, indeed, the
two are anything more than different aspects of one and the same
process.[7]
[7] Cf. Münsterberg, H.: ‘Grundzüge d. Psychologie,’ Bd. I.,
Leipzig, 1900, S. 532.
But where, now, the subject is occupied in mentally tracing the
boundaries of one of his two images he must inhibit all motor
innervations incompatible with the innervations which condition such
tracing: the rival process must cease, and the rival image will fade.
He may, it is true, include both images in the same mental sweep. The
boundary line is not the only possible line of movement. In fact, we
may regard this more comprehensive glance as equivalent to an
enlargement of the boundaries so as to include different mental
objects, instead of different parts of but one. Or, since the
delimitation of our ‘objects’ varies with our attitude or aim, we may
call it an enlargement of the object. But in any case the mental
tracing of a particular boundary or particular spatial dimensions
seems to condition the sense of the corresponding content, and through
inhibition of inconsistent movements to inhibit the sense of a
different content. No measure of the span of consciousness can, of
course, be found in these reports. The movements of the attention are
subtle and swift, and there was nothing in the form of the experiments
to determine at any precise instant its actual scope. All we need
assume, therefore, when the images are said to be seen together, is
that neither has, for the time being, any advantage over the other in
drawing attention to itself. If in the complete observation, however,
any such advantage appears, we may treat it as a case of inhibition.
By definition, an idea which assumes a place in consciousness which
but for itself, as experiment indicates, another might occupy,
inhibits the other.
[Illustration: FIG. 3.]
TABLE III.
1 2 3 4 5 6
S L S L S L S L S L S L
I. 22 24 19.5 23 20 26 21.5 21 21 26 18 31
II. 31 39 31.5 36 15 32.5 11 22.5 13.5 24.5 7.5 23
III. 10.5 43.5 12 21.5 13 14.5 19 10.5 18.5 30.5 7 18.5
IV. 34.5 29.5 29.5 24 40.5 33 30.5 32.5 15 30 26 30
V. 31.5 30 42 45 39 51 47 49.5 41 37 46 45
VI. 22 20 20.5 22 23.5 22 25 16 24 20 22 25.5
VII. 53.5 53.5 23.5 23.5 47.5 47.5 51 52 52.5 53 51 52
VIII. 34 40.5 23 29 21 22 22 37.5 34.5 35 27.5 28
IX. 19.5 45 19.5 46 22 23.5 23.5 48 26 45.5 19 44.5
X. 16 30.5 12 35 21 24.5 8.5 41 15.5 33 19 28
XI. 38.5 36.5 21 48.5 30 54.5 31 55.5 32 54 12 50
313 392 254 353.5 292.5 381.5 290 386 293.5 388.5 255 375.5
7 8 9 10 Averages
S L S L S L S L S L
I. 20.5 31.5 21.5 28.5 22.5 28 22.5 26 20.90 26.50
II. 14.5 17.5 19 20 11 4.5 7 30.5 16.10 25.00
III. 10 22 8.5 26 17 16 8 16 12.35 21.90
IV. 27.5 28.5 35 30.5 23.5 46 27.5 49.5 28.95 33.35
V. 40.5 35 24.5 22.5 21 31 21.5 21.5 35.40 36.75
VI. 22.5 18.5 11.5 21 20 27 22.5 24 21.35 21.60
VII. 44.5 46.5 52 51 33.5 49 39.5 50.5 44.85 47.85
VIII. 19.5 20 21 27 19.5 27.5 18.5 22.5 24.05 29.60
IX. 18.5 46 13 42 20 42 18.5 43 19.95 44.90
X. 18.5 24 20.5 21 20.5 22 18.5 28.5 17.00 28.75
XI. 21 49 32 53.5 38 53.5 34.5 46.5 29.00 50.15
257.5 338.5 258.5 343 246.5 346.5 238.5 358.5 24.54 33.30
L: large. S: small.
General average, S, 24.54 sec.; L, 33.30 sec.
Series No. III.—In the third series, where the variant is the
extent of (gray) surface exposed, the preponderance is in favor of the
image corresponding to the larger object. This shows an appearance of
some 33 seconds per minute as against 24 for the smaller (Table III.).
Here the most obvious thing in the reports, aside from the relative
durations, is the greater vividness of the favored image. Something,
no doubt, is due to the greater length of boundary line and other
spatial dimensions involved in the greater size. And it is this
superiority, and the ampler movements which it implies, which were
probably felt by the subject who reports ‘a feeling of expansion in
the eye which corresponds to the larger image and of contraction in
the other.’ But the more general comment is as to the greater
vividness of the larger image. “The larger images seem brighter
whichever side they are on.” “The larger is a little more distinct, as
if it were nearer to me.” “Large much more vivid than small.” Such are
the reports which run through the series. And they point, undoubtedly,
to a cumulative effect, corresponding to a well-known effect in
sensation, in virtue of which greater extension may become the
equivalent of greater intensity. In other words, the larger image made
the stronger impression. Now in external perception the stronger
impression tends to hold the attention more securely; that is, it is
more effective in producing those adjustments of the sensory organs
which perceptive attention implies. So here what was noticed as the
superior brightness and distinctness of the larger image may be
supposed to imply some advantage in the latter in securing those
adjustments of the mental attitude which were favorable to the
apprehension of that image. Advantage means here, again, in part at
least, if the considerations we have urged are sound, inhibition of
those motor processes which would tend to turn attention to a rival.
And here, again, the adjustment may reach no external organ. An
incipient innervation, which is all that we need assume as the
condition of a change of mental attitude, would suffice to block, or
at least to hamper, inconsistent innervations no more complete than
itself.
[Illustration: Fig. 4.]
TABLE IV.
1 2 3 4
G W G W G W G W
I. 15.5 28.5 21.5 32.5 20 33 21 28.5
II. 39.5 23 22.5 22.5 19 20.5 35.5 17.5
III. 13.5 12.5 32 4.5 8.5 10 11.5 11.5
IV. 30 33.5 38 36.5 36 39.5 37.5 13.5
V. 33.5 32.5 34.5 32 33 35 45 36.5
VI. 15 22 21 21 18.5 22 12 22
VII. 53.5 50 43 46 54.5 55 56 56
VIII. 15.5 24.5 24 25 20 13 16.5 21
IX. 17.5 44 9.5 46 18.5 43.5 16 42
X. 25.5 19 29.5 19 21 20.5 23.5 18
XI. 35 42.5 13 29.5 18.5 46 16 38
294 332 288.5 314.5 267.5 338 290.5 304.5
5 6 7 8
G W G W G W G W
I. 24 26.5 23.5 25 19.5 30.5 21 29
II. 21 29.5 20 18.5 29 16.5 28.5 14
III. 20.5 8.5 11 11.5 10 14 23 16.5
IV. 39.5 28.5 34.5 22.5 23 30.5 33.5 18
V. 45 53 48 51 45 29 32.5 34.5
VI. 21.5 28 18 32 20.5 19 21.5 18
VII. 54.5 56 54.5 54.5 45 46 49 49
VIII. 24 26.5 23.5 22.5 24 17.5 31 31.5
IX. 16 44 14 43.5 9 43.5 13 44.5
X. 24.5 18 24 21.5 25.5 24 22 22.5
XI. 20.5 8.5 15 36.5 33 23 34 29
311 327 286 339 283.5 293.5 309 306.5
9 10 11 12 Averages.
G W G W G W G W G W
I. 25 25.5 22.5 21 25 26.5 27 21.5 22.95 27.33
II. 20 25 15 20 29 32 13.5 20 24.37 21.58
III. 12 20 12.5 17.5 10.5 21 3 23 14.00 14.25
IV. 33 19.5 35.5 28 21.5 34.5 25.5 26.5 32.29 27.58
V. 51 50 35 30.5 40.5 54.5 45.5 52.5 40.70 40.91
VI. 13 29.5 25 33.5 28.5 23 23.5 27.5 19.83 24.79
VII. 46.5 39.5 38.5 44.5 43.5 47.5 42.5 34.5 48.41 48.20
VIII. 17.5 25.5 22 15.5 21 29 22.5 21.5 21.79 22.75
IX. 13 43.5 12.5 41.5 15 42 11 40 13.75 43.16
X. 24 24 27 19 25 21.5 23.5 23.5 24.58 20.87
XI. 13.5 49 2.5 43 14 34 23 22 19.83 33.41
268.5 351 248 314 273.5 365.5 260.5 312.5 25.61 29.53
G: Gray. W: White.
General average: G, 25.61 sec.; W, 29.53 sec.
Series No. IV.—This and the next following series do not suggest
much that differs in principle from what has been stated already. It
should be noted, however, that in the white-gray series (Table IV.)
Comments (0)