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
appears that subject M is perfectly uniform in mechanical choice
when the fixed line is the small line—i.e. when it moves out, the
larger is placed near the center; but when the conditions of
mechanical choice would demand that, as the larger fixed line moves
out, the small variable one should move out farther, he regularly
chooses the reverse. Nevertheless, he insists that in just these
cases he has a feeling of equilibrium.
A also takes the mechanical choice as the small fixed line goes
farther from the center; but when the fixed line is large and leaves
the center, he reverses the mechanical choice—evidently because it
would take the small line too far out. As he says, ‘he is always
disturbed by too large a black space in the center.’
G almost always takes the mechanical choice;—in one whole set of
experiments, in which the fixed line is the large line, he reverses
regularly.
H takes for F. (80×10) the mechanical choice only for the positions
F. 160 and F. 200—i.e., only when F. is very far from the center
and he wishes V. (160×10) nearer. For F. (160×10) he makes six such
choices out of ten, but for positions F. 160 and F. 200 he has V. 44,
65 and 20.
S takes for F. (160×10) at F. 120, V. 185 and-70; says of V. 185,
which is also his choice for F. (160×10) at F. 80, ‘I cannot go out
further, because it is so hard to take in the whole field.’ For F.
(160×10) at F. 200, he has V. 130 and 60; says of V. 60, ‘Very
agreeable elements in connection with the relation of the two lines.’
C takes for F. (80×10) only one mechanical choice until it is at F.
120. Then always mechanical, i.e., nearer center; for F. (160×10)
makes after the position F. 40 no mechanical choice, i.e., V. is
nearer center.
It is evident from the above tables and individual cases that the
reversals from the mechanical choice occur only when the mechanical
choice would bring both lines in the center, or both near the edges,
and the subjective testimony shows from what point of view this
appears desirable. The subjects wish ‘to take in the whole field,’
they wish ‘not to be disturbed by too large a black space in the
center’; and when, in order to cover in some way the whole space, the
small line is drawn in or the large one pushed out, they have,
nevertheless, a feeling of equilibrium in spite of the reversal of
mechanical balance.
Accepting for the present, without seeking a further psychological
explanation, the type of ‘mechanical balance,’ in which amount of
space is a substitute for weight, as the one most often observed, we
have to seek some point of view from which this entire reversal is
intelligible. For even the feeling that ‘the whole field must be
covered’ would hardly account for an exact interchanging of positions.
If size gives ‘weight,’ why does it not always do so? A simple answer
would seem to be given by the consideration that we tend to give most
attention to the center of a circumscribed space, and that any object
in that center will get proportionately more attention than on the
outskirts. The small line near the center, therefore, would attract
attention by virtue of its centrality, and thus balance the large
line, intrinsically more noticeable but farther away. Moreover, all
the other moments of æsthetic pleasure, derived from the even filling
of the space, would work in favor of this arrangement and against the
mechanical arrangement, which would leave a large black space in the
middle.
The hypothesis, then, that the demand for the filling of the whole
space without large gaps anywhere enters into competition with the
tendency to mechanical balance, and that this tendency is,
nevertheless, reconciled with that demand through the power of a
central position to confer importance, would seem to fit the facts. It
is, of course, clear that neither ‘mechanical balance’ nor the balance
of ‘central’ with ‘intrinsic’ importance have been yet accounted for
on psychological grounds; it is sufficient at this point to have
established the fact of some kind of balance between elements of
different qualities, and to have demonstrated that this balance is at
least not always to be translated into the ‘mechanical’ metaphor.
C. Experiments on Movement.
In the preceding experiments the element of size was isolated, and it
was sought to discover, in pleasing combinations of objects of
different sizes, the presence of some kind of balance and the meaning
of different tendencies of arrangement. The relative value of the two
objects was taken as determined on the assumption, supported by common
sense, that under like conditions a large object is given more
attention than a small one. If the unequal objects seem to balance
each other, then the only other condition in which they differ, their
distance from the center, must be the cause of their balancing. Thus
the influence of relative position, being the only unknown quantity in
this balance-equation, is easily made out.
The following experiments will deal with the as yet quite undetermined
elements of suggested movement, perspective and intrinsic interest. By
combining objects expressing them, each with another simple object of
the same size, another equation will be obtained in which there is
only one unknown quantity, the sizes of the objects being equal and
the influence of relative position being at least clearly indicated.
1. Movement.
The experiments on suggestion of movement were made by C, O and
P. Suggestions of movement in pictures are of two kinds—given by
lines pointing in a direction which the eye of the spectator tends to
follow, and by movement represented as about to take place and
therefore interpreted as the product of internal energy. Thus, the
tapering of a pyramid would give the first kind of suggestion, the
picture of a runner the second kind. Translated into terms of
experiment, this distinction would give two classes dealing with (A)
the direction of a straight line as a whole, and (B) the expression of
internal energy by a curve or part of a line. In order to be able to
change the direction of a straight line at a given point, a strip of
tin two inches long was fastened by a pivot to the usual clasp which
slipped up and down on the vertical black strip. The tin strip could
be moved about the pivot by black threads fastened to its perforated
ends. A strip of cardboard glued upon it would then take its
direction. The first experiments, made with the usual 80×10 strip,
proved very disagreeable. The subject was much disturbed by the blunt
ends of the strip. The variable (pivoted) line was then slightly
pointed at the upper end, and in the final experiments, in which both
are oblique, both strips were pointed at each end. In Exp. III. a line
pointing at an angle from the perpendicular was set over against a
line of the same dimensions in the ordinary position.
Exp. III. (a) F. (80×10) pointed up toward center at 145°,
V. (80×10).
F. 40:—(1) 39 48 48, (2) 60 66 68, (3) 97 97, (4) 156* 168*.
F. 60:—(1) 45, (2) 60 62 65 68 90, (3) 90 94, (4) 117 128 152
155.F. 80:—(1) 50 44*, (2) 74 76 77, (3) 94 100 106 113 115 116,
(4) 123 124* 140 165* 169*.
F. 100:—(1) 36 58 60 65* 65 74 77 80 87, (2) 98 108 118, (3)
114* 168 186* 170 136*.
F. 120:—(1) 40 46 54 60 63 76 96 97 111, (2) 115 120 126*
137*, (3) 170 170*.
F. 140:—(1) 45 52 65 65 76 76 86 90, (2) 109 111, (3) 125
140*, (4) 168*.
F. 160:—(1) 38 50 50 60, (2) 80 90 96 98 98, (3) 176*.
F. 180:—(1) 21 23, (2) 54 70 84 90, (3) 100 100 108 114 120,
(4) 130 145*.
F. 200:—(1) -2, (2) 33 37 50, (3) 106 110 to 120 115 120 130
132 138 142.
The most striking point about these groups is the frequency of
positions far from the center when F. also is far out. At F. 120, a
position at which the mechanical choice usually prevails if F. is
smaller, a very marked preference indeed appears for positions of V.
nearer the center—in fact, there is only one opposing (first) choice.
Now, if it is not the wide space otherwise left which pulls the
variable in,—and we see from a note that the subjects have no feeling
of a large empty space in the center,—it must be that F. has the same
effect as if it were really smaller than V., that is, mechanically
‘light.’ We see, in fact, that the moment F. has passed the point,
between 80 and 100, at which both lines close together in the center
would be disagreeable, the preference is marked for inner positions of
V., and I repeat that this cannot be for space-filling reasons, from
the testimony of F. 200 (3).
And this ‘lightness’ of the line pointed in at 45° is indeed what we
should have expected a priori since we found that objective
heaviness is balanced by a movement out from the center on the
mechanical principle. If movement out and objective heaviness are in
general alike in effect, then movement in and objective lightness
should be alike in effect, as we have found to be the case from the
preceding experiments. The inward-pointed line does not actually move
in, it is true, but it strongly suggests the completion of the
movement. It enters into the ‘mechanical’ equation—it appears to
balance—as if it had moved.
The point, however, in which this ‘lightness’ of the inward-pointed
line differs from that of the small or short line is its space-filling
quality. It suggests movement in a certain direction, and, while
giving the mechanical effect of that movement as completed, seems also
in a sense to cover that space. We see from F. 180 (3), (4), and 200
(3), that the subject does not shrink from large spaces between the
lines, and does not, as in Exp. I. (a), 4 and 5, bring the variable,
which in both cases is evidently ‘heavier,’ to the center. This must
be from the fact that the empty space does not in this experiment feel
empty—it is filled with energy of the suggested movement. This view
is confirmed by the dislike which the subjects show to the position F.
40; F., being ‘lighter,’ but the object of attention as close to the
center, might well balance V. far out. But as if the whole variable
field would be in that case ‘overfilled,’ the records show 50 per
cent. of refusals to choose for this position.
In brief, then, a straight line suggesting movements in a certain
direction has the effect, in the general scheme of mechanical balance,
of a static position in which this movement has been carried out, with
the added suggestion of the filling of the space over which such
movement is suggested.
A few additional experiments were made with a point on the upper end
of V. The groups of III. (a) are maintained almost exactly: F. 120
is again strikingly ‘mechanical’; after F. 120 there are only two
mechanical choices out of nineteen; while for F. 40, as in Exp. III.
(a), out of six choices, four are either refusals or question-marked.
Exp. IV. Both lines took oblique directions, and, to
Comments (0)