Sixteen Experimental Investigations from the Harvard Psychological Laboratory by Hugo Münsterberg (100 books to read .txt) 📕

IX. 35.5 41.5 45.5 47 41.5 41.5 39 44.5 41 41.5 40.5 43.2

X. 19 30.5 21.5 30.5 21 29.5 16 37.5 22.5 30.5 20.0 31.7

XI. 11.5 52.5 18 51.5 14.5 50.5 23 50.5 15 52.5 16.4 51.5

26.59 40.14 28.59 40.86 29.32 40.86 26.45 42.09 29.55 41.45 28.10 41.08

F: Full-faced. O: Outlined.

General average: full-faced, 28.10 sec.; outlined, 41.08 sec.

Series No. XI.—In this series full-faced figures were compared with

outline figures of the same dimensions and form. Material,

granite-gray cardboard. The area of the full-faced figures was the

same as that of the figures of similar character employed in the

various series, approximately 42 sq. cm.; the breadth of the lines in

the outline figures was half a centimeter. The objects in each pair

were exposed simultaneously, with the usual instructions to the

subject, namely, to regard each object directly, and to give to each

the same share of attention as to the other.

The form of the experiment was suggested by the results of earlier

experiments with lines. It will be remembered that the express

testimony of the subjects, confirmed by fair inference from the

tabulated record, was to the effect that lines show, in ideation as in

perception, both greater energy and clearer definition than surfaces.

By lines are meant, of course, not mathematical lines, but narrow

surfaces whose longer boundaries are closely parallel. To bring the

superior suggestiveness of the line to a direct test was the object of

this series. And the table fully substantiates the former conclusion.

For the outline figure we have a general average of 41.08 seconds per

minute, as against 28.10 seconds for the full-faced figure.

The notes here may be quoted as corroborative of previous statements.

“I notice,” says one, “a tendency of the color in the full-faced

figure to spread over the background”—a remark which bears out what

has been said of the relative vagueness of the subjective processes

excited by a broad homogeneous surface. To this may be added: “The

full-faced figures became finally less distinct than the linear, and

faded from the outside in;” “the areal (full-faced) figure gradually

faded away, while the linear remained.” Another comment runs: “I feel

the left (full-faced) striving to come into consciousness, but failing

to arrive. Don’t see it; feel it; and yet the feeling is connected

with the eyes.” This comment, made, of course, after the close of an

observation, may serve as evidence of processes subsidiary to

ideation, and may be compared, in respect of the motor factors which

the ‘striving’ implies, with the preparatory stage which Binet found

to be an inseparable and essential part of any given (vocal) motor

reaction.[8]

[8] Binet, A. et Henri, V.: op. citat.

Series No. XII.—Both the figures of each pair in this series were

linear, and presented the same extent of surface (granite-gray) with

the same length of line. In other words, both figures were constituted

of the same elements, and in both the corresponding lines ran in the

same direction; but the lines in the one were connected so as to form

a figure with a continuous boundary, while the lines of the other were

disconnected, i.e., did not inclose a space. The total length of

line in each object was twenty centimeters, the breadth of the lines

five millimeters. Both figures were arranged symmetrically with

respect to a perpendicular axis.

[Illustration: FIG. 6.]

TABLE XII.

1 2 3 4 5 Indiv. Av.

L F L F L F L F L F L F

I. 31.5 24 30 24.5 23.5 32 25.5 30.5 27 29.5 27.5 28.1

II. 55 55 56 56 56 56 56.5 56.5 54 54 55.5 55.5

III. 22 6 26.5 9.5 31.5 1.5 23 5.5 28.5 0 26.3 4.5

IV. 31 15 46.5 20.5 52 9.5 49 6 55 18 46.7 13.8

V. 56 54 56 56 56 56 56.5 56.5 55.5 55.5 56.0 55.6

VI. 33 30 34 39.5 31.5 29.5 26.5 32 26 31.5 30.2 32.5

VII. 55.5 49.5 56.5 38 54.5 35 57.5 32.5 38 27 52.4 36.4

VIII. 26.5 15.5 21.5 13.5 25 17 25.5 21 15 13.5 22.7 16.1

IX. 45.5 32.5 44.5 39 42.5 35.5 41.5 37.5 43 40.5 43.4 37.0

X. 29.5 23 36.5 16 23 28.5 35.5 16.5 29 23 30.7 21.4

XI. 52 8 49.5 19 45.5 25 43.5 21.5 15 31.5 41.1 21.0

39.77 28.41 41.77 30.18 40.10 29.60 40.05 28.73 35.10 29.50 39.32 29.26

L: Interrupted lines.

F: Figure with continuous boundary. (Figure in outline.)

General average: Lines, 39.32 sec.; figure, 29.26 sec.

The experiment was devised in further exploration of the effect of the

line in ideation. The result fully bears out, when read in the light

of the introspective notes, what has been said of the importance of

the motor element in ideation. It might have been supposed, in view of

the importance usually attached to unity or wholeness of impression in

arresting and holding the attention in external perception, that the

completed figure would have the more persistent image. The general

averages, however, stand as follows: Interrupted lines, 39.32 seconds

per minute; completed figure, 29.26 seconds per minute. The individual

averages show slight variations from the tendency expressed in these

figures, but the averages for the several pairs are all in harmony

with the general averages.

The notes furnish the key to the situation: “I felt that I was doing

more, and had more to do, when thinking of the broken lines.” “The

broken figure seemed more difficult to get, but to attract attention;

continuous figure easy to grasp.” “Felt more active when

contemplating the image of the broken figure.” “In the broken figure I

had a feeling of jumping from line to line, and each line seemed to be

a separate figure; eye-movement very perceptible.” The dominance of

the interrupted lines in ideation is evidently connected with the more

varied and energetic activity which they excited in the contemplating

mind. Apparently the attention cannot be held unless (paradoxical as

it may sound) it is kept moving about its object. Hence, a certain

degree of complexity in an object is necessary to sustain our interest

in it, if we exclude, as we must of course in these experiments,

extraneous grounds of interest. Doubtless there are limits to the

degree of complexity which we find interesting and which compels

attention. A mere confused or disorderly complex, wanting altogether

in unity, could hardly be expected to secure attention, if there is

any truth in the principle, already recognized, that the definite has

in ideation a distinct advantage over the vague. Here again the notes

suggest the method of interpretation. “The broken lines,” says one,

“tended to come together, and to take the form of the continuous

figure.” Another remarks: “The broken figure suggests a whole

connected figure; the continuous is complete, the broken wants to be.”

In virtue of their power to excite and direct the activity of the

attention the interrupted lines seem to have been able to suggest the

unity which is wanting in them as they stand. “The broken lines,” says

another, “seemed to run out and unite, and then to separate again”—a

remark which shows a state of brisk and highly suggestive activity in

the processes implied in attention to these lines. And a glance at the

diagram will show how readily the union of the broken lines may be

made. These were arranged symmetrically because the lines of the

completed figures were so arranged, in order to equalize as far as

possible whatever æsthetic advantage a symmetrical arrangement might

be supposed to secure.

It thus appears that, whatever the effect in ideation of unity in the

impression, the effect is much greater when we have complexity in

unity. The advantage of unity is undoubtedly the advantage which goes

with definiteness of impression, which implies definite excitations

and inhibitions, and that concentration of energy and intensity of

effect in which undirected activity is wanting. But a bare unity, it

appears, is less effective than a diversified unity. To what extent

this diversity may be carried we make no attempt to determine; but,

within the limits of our experiment, its value in the ideational

rivalry seems to be indisputable. And the results of the experiment

afford fresh proof of the importance of the motor element in internal

perception.

TABLE XIII.

1 2 3 4 5 Indiv. Av.

F V F V F V F V F V F V

I. 25 29 26 29 29.5 26.5 25.5 30 24.5 31 26.1 29.1

II. 56 56 55 55 54 54.5 47.5 47.5 45 50 51.5 52.6

III. 2.5 5.5 2.5 8.5 6.5 5 16.5 9.5 17 15 9.0 8.7

IV. 48 48 31.5 31.5 31 46 51.5 51.5 35 52 39.4 45.8

V. 54 54 56.5 52 56 56 56 56 54 56 55.3 54.8

VI. 39 29 30 33.5 35.5 22.5 32.5 34 33.5 24.5 34.1 28.7

VII. 46 55 54.5 46.5 46.5 50 49.5 54 47 46 48.7 50.3

VIII. 9 14.5 23 20.5 23.5 22 18 14.5 16 17 17.9 17.7

IX. 43 43 46.5 46.5 45.5 45.5 43.5 43.5 46 47.5 44.9 45.2

X. 28 26.5 21 29.5 26.5 26.5 21.5 31.5 25 29 24.4 28.6

XI. 23.5 46 19.5 35.5 20 46 24 47.5 28.5 19.5 23.1 38.9

34.00 36.95 33.27 35.27 34.05 36.41 35.09 38.14 33.77 35.23 34.03 36.40

F: Figure (in outline). V: Vertical lines.

General average: Figure, 34.03 sec.; vertical lines, 36.40 sec.

Series No. XIII.—In this series, also, both the figures of each

pair were constituted of the same elements; that is to say, both were

linear, and presented the same extent of surface (granite-gray), with

the same length of line, the total length of the lines in each figure

being twenty centimeters and the breadth of the lines being three

millimeters. But while the lines of one figure were connected so as to

form a continuous boundary, the lines of the other figure were all

vertical, with equal interspaces. And, as in the last preceding

series, the two figures were formed by a different but symmetrical

arrangement of the same lines.

As before, the advantage is on the side of the disconnected lines. In

this case, however, it is very slight, the general averages showing

34.03 seconds for the completed figure, as against 36.40 seconds for

the lines. This reduction in the difference of the averages is

probably to be explained by the reduced complexity in the arrangement

of the lines. So far as they are all parallel they would not be likely

to give rise to great diversity of movement, though one subject does,

indeed, speak of traversing them in all directions. In fact, the

completed figures show greater diversity of direction than the lines,

and in this respect might be supposed to have the advantage of the

lines. The notes suggest a reason why the lines should still prove the

more persistent in ideation. “The lines appealed to me as a group; I

tended always to throw a boundary around the lines,” is the comment of

one of the subjects. From this point of view the lines would form a

figure with a content, and we have learned (see Series No. VI.) that a

space with a varied content is more effective in ideation than a

homogeneous space of the same extent and general character. And this

unity of the lines as a group was felt even where no complete boundary

line was distinctly suggested. “I did not throw a boundary around the

lines,” says another subject, “but they had a kind of unity.” It is

possible also that from the character of their arrangement the lines

reinforced each other by a kind of visual rhythm, a view