initial commit of ebook 20662HEADmain

30 files changed, 56696 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6833f05
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+* text=auto
+*.txt text
+*.md text
diff --git a/20662-0.txt b/20662-0.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..73acd64
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-0.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,13921 @@
+Project Gutenberg's The Measurement of Intelligence, by Lewis Madison Terman
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: The Measurement of Intelligence
+       An Explanation of and a Complete Guide for the Use of the
+       Stanford Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon
+       Intelligence Scale
+
+Author: Lewis Madison Terman
+
+Editor: Ellwood P. Cubberley
+
+Release Date: February 25, 2007 [EBook #20662]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: UTF-8
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE MEASUREMENT OF INTELLIGENCE ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Audrey Longhurst, Laura Wisewell and the Online
+Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+                          RIVERSIDE TEXTBOOKS
+                              IN EDUCATION
+
+
+                     EDITED BY ELLWOOD P. CUBBERLEY
+
+                         PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION
+                   LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY
+
+
+                    DIVISION OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
+                     UNDER THE EDITORIAL DIRECTION
+                          OF ALEXANDER INGLIS
+
+                         PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION
+                           HARVARD UNIVERSITY
+
+
+
+
+                            THE MEASUREMENT
+                            OF INTELLIGENCE
+
+
+                        AN EXPLANATION OF AND A
+                   COMPLETE GUIDE FOR THE USE OF THE
+                   STANFORD REVISION AND EXTENSION OF
+                  _The Binet-Simon Intelligence Scale_
+
+                                   BY
+
+                            LEWIS M. TERMAN
+                         PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION
+                   LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY
+
+                             [Illustration]
+
+                        HOUGHTON MIFFLIN COMPANY
+                 BOSTON NEW YORK CHICAGO SAN FRANCISCO
+                     The Riverside Press Cambridge
+
+
+
+
+                  COPYRIGHT, 1916, BY LEWIS M. TERMAN
+
+                          ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
+
+
+
+                          The Riverside Press
+                       CAMBRIDGE · MASSACHUSETTS
+                         PRINTED IN THE U.S.A.
+
+
+
+
+                             To the Memory
+                                   OF
+                              ALFRED BINET
+
+      PATIENT RESEARCHER, CREATIVE THINKER, UNPRETENTIOUS SCHOLAR;
+                     INSPIRING AND FRUITFUL DEVOTEE
+                                   OF
+                         INDUCTIVE AND DYNAMIC
+                               PSYCHOLOGY
+
+
+
+
+EDITOR'S INTRODUCTION
+
+
+The present volume appeals to the editor of this series as one of the
+most significant books, viewed from the standpoint of the future of our
+educational theory and practice, that has been issued in years. Not only
+does the volume set forth, in language so simple that the layman can
+easily understand, the large importance for public education of a
+careful measurement of the intelligence of children, but it also
+describes the tests which are to be given and the entire procedure of
+giving them. In a clear and easy style the author sets forth scientific
+facts of far-reaching educational importance, facts which it has cost
+him, his students, and many other scientific workers, years of
+painstaking labor to accumulate.
+
+Only very recently, practically only within the past half-dozen years,
+have scientific workers begun to appreciate fully the importance of
+intelligence tests as a guide to educational procedure, and up to the
+present we have been able to make but little use of such tests in our
+schools. The conception in itself has been new, and the testing
+procedure has been more or less unrefined and technical. The following
+somewhat popular presentation of the idea and of the methods involved,
+itself based on a scientific monograph which the author is publishing
+elsewhere, serves for the first time to set forth in simple language the
+technical details of giving such intelligence tests.
+
+The educational significance of the results to be obtained from
+careful measurements of the intelligence of children can hardly be
+overestimated. Questions relating to the choice of studies, vocational
+guidance, schoolroom procedure, the grading of pupils, promotional
+schemes, the study of the retardation of children in the schools,
+juvenile delinquency, and the proper handling of subnormals on the
+one hand and gifted children on the other,--all alike acquire new
+meaning and significance when viewed in the light of the measurement
+of intelligence as outlined in this volume. As a guide to the
+interpretation of the results of other forms of investigation relating
+to the work, progress, and needs of children, intelligence tests form a
+very valuable aid. More than all other forms of data combined, such
+tests give the necessary information from which a pupil's possibilities
+of future mental growth can be foretold, and upon which his further
+education can be most profitably directed.
+
+The publication of this revision and extension of the original
+Binet-Simon scale for measuring intelligence, with the closer adaptation
+of it to American conditions and needs, should mark a distinct step in
+advance in our educational procedure. It means the perfection of another
+and a very important measuring stick for evaluating educational
+practices, and in particular for diagnosing individual possibilities and
+needs. Just now the method is new, and its use somewhat limited, but it
+is the confident prediction of many students of the subject that, before
+long, intelligence tests will become as much a matter of necessary
+routine in schoolroom procedure as a blood-count now is in physical
+diagnosis. That our schoolroom methods will in turn become much more
+intelligent, and that all classes of children, but especially the gifted
+and the slow, will profit by such intellectual diagnosis, there can be
+but little question.
+
+That any parent or teacher, without training, can give these tests, the
+author in no way contends. However, the observations of Dr. Kohs, cited
+in Chapter VII, as well as the experience of the author and others who
+have given courses in intelligence testing to teachers, alike indicate
+that sufficient skill to enable teachers and school principals to give
+such tests intelligently is not especially difficult to acquire. This
+being the case it may be hoped that the requisite training to enable
+them to handle these tests may be included, very soon, as a part of the
+necessary pedagogical equipment of those who aspire to administrative
+positions in our public and private schools.
+
+Besides being of special importance to school officers and to students
+of education in colleges and normal schools, this volume can confidently
+be recommended to physicians and social workers, and to teachers and
+parents interested in intelligence measurements, as at once the simplest
+and the best explanation of the newly-evolved intelligence tests, which
+has so far appeared in print.
+
+    ELLWOOD P. CUBBERLEY.
+
+
+
+
+PREFACE
+
+
+The constant and growing use of the Binet-Simon intelligence scale in
+public schools, institutions for defectives, reform schools, juvenile
+courts, and police courts is sufficient evidence of the intrinsic
+worth of the method. It is generally recognized, however, that the
+serviceableness of the scale has hitherto been seriously limited, both
+by the lack of a sufficiently detailed guide and by a number of
+recognized imperfections in the scale itself. The Stanford revision and
+extension has been worked out for the purpose of correcting as many as
+possible of these imperfections, and it is here presented with a rather
+minute description of the method as a whole and of the individual tests.
+
+The aim has been to present the explanations and instructions so clearly
+and in such an untechnical form as to make the book of use, not only to
+the psychologist, but also to the rank and file of teachers, physicians,
+and social workers. More particularly, it is designed as a text for use
+in normal schools, colleges, and teachers' reading-circles.
+
+While the use of the intelligence scale for research purposes and for
+accurate diagnosis will of necessity always be restricted to those who
+have had extensive training in experimental psychology, the author
+believes that the time has come when its wider use for more general
+purposes should be encouraged.
+
+However, it cannot be too strongly emphasized that no one, whatever his
+previous training may have been, can make proper use of the scale unless
+he is willing to learn the method of procedure and scoring down to the
+minutest detail. A general acquaintance with the nature of the
+individual tests is by no means sufficient.
+
+Perhaps the best way to learn the method will be to begin by studying
+the book through, in order to gain a general acquaintance with the
+tests; then, if possible, to observe a few examinations; and finally to
+take up the procedure for detailed study in connection with practice
+testing. Twenty or thirty tests, made with constant reference to the
+procedure as described in Part II, should be sufficient to prepare the
+teacher or physician to make profitable use of the scale.
+
+The Stanford revision of the scale is the result of a number of
+investigations, made possible by the coöperation of the author's
+graduate students. Grateful acknowledgment is especially due to
+Professor H. G. Childs, Miss Grace Lyman, Dr. George Ordahl, Dr. Louise
+Ellison Ordahl, Miss Neva Galbreath, Mr. Wilford Talbert, Mr. J. Harold
+Williams, and Mr. Herbert E. Knollin. Without their assistance this book
+could not have been written.
+
+    STANFORD UNIVERSITY,
+        _April, 1916_.
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS
+
+
+PART I. PROBLEMS AND RESULTS
+
+CHAPTER I
+
+THE USES OF INTELLIGENCE TESTS                                         3
+
+  Intelligence tests of retarded school children. Intelligence
+  tests of the feeble-minded. Intelligence tests of delinquents.
+  Intelligence tests of superior children. Intelligence tests as a
+  basis for grading. Intelligence tests for vocational fitness.
+  Other uses of intelligence tests.
+
+CHAPTER II
+
+SOURCES OF ERROR IN JUDGING INTELLIGENCE                              22
+
+  Are intelligence tests superfluous? The necessity of standards.
+  The intelligence of retarded children usually overestimated. The
+  intelligence of superior children usually underestimated. Other
+  fallacies in the estimation of intelligence. Binet's
+  questionnaire on teachers' methods of judging intelligence.
+  Binet's experiment on how teachers test intelligence.
+
+CHAPTER III
+
+DESCRIPTION OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD                                 36
+
+  Essential nature of the scale. How the scale was derived. List of
+  tests. How the scale is used. Special characteristics of the
+  Binet-Simon method. The use of age standards. The kind of mental
+  functions brought into play. Binet would test "general
+  intelligence." Binet's conception of general intelligence. Other
+  conceptions of intelligence. Guiding principles in choice and
+  arrangement of tests. Some avowed limitations of the Binet tests.
+
+CHAPTER IV
+
+NATURE OF THE STANFORD REVISION AND EXTENSION                         51
+
+  Sources of data. Method of arriving at a revision. List of tests
+  in the Stanford revision and extension. Summary of changes.
+  Effects of the revision on the mental ages secured.
+
+CHAPTER V
+
+ANALYSIS OF ONE THOUSAND INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS                       65
+
+  The distribution of intelligence. The validity of the
+  intelligence quotient. Sex differences. Intelligence of the
+  different social classes. The relation of the I Q to the quality
+  of the child's school work. The relation between I Q and grade
+  progress. Correlation between I Q and the teachers' estimates of
+  the children's intelligence. The validity of the individual
+  tests.
+
+CHAPTER VI
+
+THE SIGNIFICANCE OF VARIOUS INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS                    78
+
+  Frequency of different degrees of intelligence. Classification of
+  intelligence quotients. Feeble-mindedness. Border-line cases.
+  Examples of border-line deficiency. Dull normals. Average
+  intelligence. Superior intelligence. Very superior intelligence.
+  Examples of very superior intelligence. Genius and "near" genius.
+  Is the I Q often misleading?
+
+CHAPTER VII
+
+RELIABILITY OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD                                105
+
+  General value of the method. Dependence of the scale's
+  reliability on the training of the examiner. Influence of the
+  subject's attitude. The influence of coaching. Reliability of
+  repeated tests. Influence of social and educational advantages.
+
+
+PART II
+
+GUIDE FOR THE USE OF THE STANFORD REVISION AND EXTENSION
+
+CHAPTER VIII
+
+GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS                                                 121
+
+  Necessity of securing attention and effort. Quiet and seclusion.
+  Presence of others. Getting into _rapport_. Keeping the child
+  encouraged. The importance of tact. Personality of the examiner.
+  The avoidance of fatigue. Duration of the examination. Desirable
+  range of testing. Order of giving the tests. Coaxing to be
+  avoided. Adhering to formula. Scoring. Recording responses.
+  Scattering of successes. Supplementary considerations.
+  Alternative tests. Finding mental age. The use of the
+  intelligence quotient. How to find the I Q of adult subjects.
+  Material for use in testing.
+
+CHAPTER IX
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR III
+
+  1. Pointing to parts of the body                                   142
+  2. Naming familiar objects                                         143
+  3. Enumeration of objects in pictures                              145
+  4. Giving sex                                                      146
+  5. Giving the family name                                          147
+  6. Repeating six to seven syllables                                149
+     Alternative test: Repeating three digits                        150
+
+CHAPTER X
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR IV
+
+  1. Comparison of lines                                             151
+  2. Discrimination of forms                                         152
+  3. Counting four pennies                                           154
+  4. Copying a square                                                155
+  5. Comprehension, first degree                                     157
+  6. Repeating four digits                                           159
+     Alternative test: Repeating twelve to thirteen syllables        160
+
+CHAPTER XI
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR V
+
+  1. Comparison of weights                                           161
+  2. Naming colors                                                   163
+  3. Æsthetic comparison                                             165
+  4. Giving definitions in terms of use                              167
+  5. The game of patience                                            169
+  6. Three commissions                                               172
+     Alternative test: Giving age                                    173
+
+CHAPTER XII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VI
+
+  1. Distinguishing right and left                                   175
+  2. Finding omissions in pictures                                   178
+  3. Counting thirteen pennies                                       180
+  4. Comprehension, second degree                                    181
+  5. Naming four coins                                               184
+  6. Repeating sixteen to eighteen syllables                         185
+     Alternative test: Forenoon and afternoon                        187
+
+CHAPTER XIII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VII
+
+  1. Giving the number of fingers                                    189
+  2. Description of pictures                                         190
+  3. Repeating five digits                                           193
+  4. Tying a bow-knot                                                196
+  5. Giving differences from memory                                  199
+  6. Copying a diamond                                               204
+     Alternative test 1: Naming the days of the week                 205
+     Alternative test 2: Repeating three digits reversed             207
+
+CHAPTER XIV
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VIII
+
+  1. The ball-and-field test                                         210
+  2. Counting backwards from 20 to 1                                 213
+  3. Comprehension, third degree                                     215
+  4. Giving similarities, two things                                 217
+  5. Giving definitions superior to use                              221
+  6. Vocabulary (20 definitions, 3600 words)                         224
+     Alternative test 1: Naming six coins                            231
+     Alternative test 2: Writing from dictation                      231
+
+CHAPTER XV
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR IX
+
+  1. Giving the date                                                 234
+  2. Arranging five weights                                          236
+  3. Making change                                                   240
+  4. Repeating four digits reversed                                  242
+  5. Using three words in a sentence                                 242
+  6. Finding rhymes                                                  248
+     Alternative test 1: Naming the months                           251
+     Alternative test 2: Counting the value of stamps                252
+
+CHAPTER XVI
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR X
+
+  1. Vocabulary (30 definitions, 5400 words)                         255
+  2. Detecting absurdities                                           255
+  3. Drawing designs from memory                                     260
+  4. Reading for eight memories                                      262
+  5. Comprehension, fourth degree                                    268
+  6. Naming sixty words                                              272
+     Alternative test 1: Repeating six digits                        277
+     Alternative test 2: Repeating twenty to twenty-two syllables    277
+     Alternative test 3: Healy's Construction Puzzle A               278
+
+CHAPTER XVII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR XII
+
+  1. Vocabulary (40 definitions, 7200 words)                         281
+  2. Defining abstract words                                         281
+  3. The ball-and-field test (superior plan)                         286
+  4. Dissected sentences                                             286
+  5. Interpretation of fables (score 4)                              290
+  6. Repeating five digits reversed                                  301
+  7. Interpretation of pictures                                      302
+  8. Giving similarities, three things                               306
+
+CHAPTER XVIII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR XIV
+
+  1. Vocabulary (50 definitions, 9000 words)                         310
+  2. Induction test: finding a rule                                  310
+  3. Giving differences between a president and a king               313
+  4. Problem questions                                               315
+  5. Arithmetical reasoning                                          319
+  6. Reversing hands of a clock                                      321
+     Alternative test: Repeating seven digits                        322
+
+CHAPTER XIX
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR "AVERAGE ADULT"
+
+  1. Vocabulary (65 definitions, 11,700 words)                       324
+  2. Interpretation of fables (score 8)                              324
+  3. Differences between abstract terms                              324
+  4. Problem of the enclosed boxes                                   327
+  5. Repeating six digits reversed                                   329
+  6. Using a code                                                    330
+     Alternative test 1: Repeating twenty-eight syllables            332
+     Alternative test 2: Comprehension of physical relations         333
+
+CHAPTER XX
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR "SUPERIOR ADULT"
+
+  1. Vocabulary (75 definitions, 13,500 words)                       338
+  2. Binet's paper-cutting test                                      338
+  3. Repeating eight digits                                          340
+  4. Repeating thought of passage                                    340
+  5. Repeating seven digits reversed                                 345
+  6. Ingenuity test                                                  345
+
+SELECTED REFERENCES                                                  349
+
+INDEX                                                                359
+
+
+
+
+FIGURES AND DIAGRAMS
+
+
+  1. Distribution of Mental Ages of 62 Normal Adults                  55
+  2. Distribution of I Q's of 905 Unselected Children, 5-14 Years
+     of Age                                                           66
+  3. Median I Q of 457 Boys and 448 Girls, for the Ages 5-14 Years    69
+  4. Diamond drawn by R. W.; Age 13-10; Mental Age 7-6                82
+  5. Writing from Dictation. R. M., Age 15; Mental Age 9              83
+  6. Ball and Field Test. I. M., Age 14-2; Mental Age 9               84
+  7. Diamond drawn by A. W.                                           85
+  8. Drawing Designs from Memory. H. S., Age 11; Mental Age 8-3       86
+  9. Ball and Field Test. S. F., Age 17; Mental Age 11-6              88
+ 10. Writing from Dictation. C. P., Age 10-2; Mental Age 7-11         90
+ 11. Ball and Field Test. M. P., Age 14; Mental Age 10-8              91
+ 12. Ball and Field Test. R. G., Age 13-5; Mental Age 10-6            93
+ 13. Ball and Field Test. E. B., Age 7-9; I Q 130                     98
+ 14. Ball and Field Test. F. McA., Age 10-3; Mental Age 14-6         100
+ 15. Drawing Designs from Memory. E. M., Age 6-11; Mental Age 10,
+     I Q 145                                                         101
+ 16. Ball and Field Test. B. F., Age 7-8; Mental Age 12-4; I Q 160   102
+ 17. Healy and Fernald Construction Puzzle                           279
+
+
+
+
+THE MEASUREMENT OF INTELLIGENCE
+
+PART I
+
+PROBLEMS AND RESULTS
+
+
+
+
+THE MEASUREMENT OF INTELLIGENCE
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER I
+
+THE USES OF INTELLIGENCE TESTS
+
+
+INTELLIGENCE TESTS OF RETARDED SCHOOL CHILDREN. Numerous studies of the
+age-grade progress of school children have afforded convincing evidence
+of the magnitude and seriousness of the retardation problem. Statistics
+collected in hundreds of cities in the United States show that between a
+third and a half of the school children fail to progress through the
+grades at the expected rate; that from 10 to 15 per cent are retarded
+two years or more; and that from 5 to 8 per cent are retarded at least
+three years. More than 10 per cent of the $400,000,000 annually expended
+in the United States for school instruction is devoted to re-teaching
+children what they have already been taught but have failed to learn.
+
+The first efforts at reform which resulted from these findings were
+based on the supposition that the evils which had been discovered could
+be remedied by the individualizing of instruction, by improved methods
+of promotion, by increased attention to children's health, and by other
+reforms in school administration. Although reforms along these lines
+have been productive of much good, they have nevertheless been in a
+measure disappointing. The trouble was, they were too often based upon
+the assumption that under the right conditions all children would be
+equally, or almost equally, capable of making satisfactory school
+progress. Psychological studies of school children by means of
+standardized intelligence tests have shown that this supposition is not
+in accord with the facts. It has been found that children do not fall
+into two well-defined groups, the "feeble-minded" and the "normal."
+Instead, there are many grades of intelligence, ranging from idiocy on
+the one hand to genius on the other. Among those classed as normal, vast
+individual differences have been found to exist in original mental
+endowment, differences which affect profoundly the capacity to profit
+from school instruction.
+
+We are beginning to realize that the school must take into account, more
+seriously than it has yet done, the existence and significance of these
+differences in endowment. Instead of wasting energy in the vain attempt
+to hold mentally slow and defective children up to a level of progress
+which is normal to the average child, it will be wiser to take account of
+the inequalities of children in original endowment and to differentiate
+the course of study in such a way that each child will be allowed to
+progress at the rate which is normal to him, whether that rate be rapid
+or slow.
+
+While we cannot hold all children to the same standard of school
+progress, we can at least prevent the kind of retardation which involves
+failure and the repetition of a school grade. It is well enough
+recognized that children do not enter with very much zest upon school
+work in which they have once failed. Failure crushes self-confidence and
+destroys the spirit of work. It is a sad fact that a large proportion of
+children in the schools are acquiring the habit of failure. The remedy,
+of course, is to measure out the work for each child in proportion to
+his mental ability.
+
+Before an engineer constructs a railroad bridge or trestle, he studies
+the materials to be used, and learns by means of tests exactly the
+amount of strain per unit of size his materials will be able to
+withstand. He does not work empirically, and count upon patching up the
+mistakes which may later appear under the stress of actual use. The
+educational engineer should emulate this example. Tests and forethought
+must take the place of failure and patchwork. Our efforts have been too
+long directed by "trial and error." It is time to leave off guessing and
+to acquire a scientific knowledge of the material with which we have to
+deal. When instruction must be repeated, it means that the school, as
+well as the pupil, has failed.
+
+Every child who fails in his school work or is in danger of failing
+should be given a mental examination. The examination takes less than
+one hour, and the result will contribute more to a real understanding of
+the case than anything else that could be done. It is necessary to
+determine whether a given child is unsuccessful in school because of
+poor native ability, or because of poor instruction, lack of interest,
+or some other removable cause.
+
+It is not sufficient to establish any number of special classes, if they
+are to be made the dumping-ground for all kinds of troublesome
+cases--the feeble-minded, the physically defective, the merely backward,
+the truants, the incorrigibles, etc. Without scientific diagnosis and
+classification of these children the educational work of the special
+class must blunder along in the dark. In such diagnosis and
+classification our main reliance must always be in mental tests,
+properly used and properly interpreted.
+
+INTELLIGENCE TESTS OF THE FEEBLE-MINDED. Thus far intelligence tests
+have found their chief application in the identification and grading of
+the feeble-minded. Their value for this purpose is twofold. In the first
+place, it is necessary to ascertain the degree of defect before it is
+possible to decide intelligently upon either the content or the method
+of instruction suited to the training of the backward child. In the
+second place, intelligence tests are rapidly extending our conception of
+"feeble-mindedness" to include milder degrees of defect than have
+generally been associated with this term. The earlier methods of
+diagnosis caused a majority of the higher grade defectives to be
+overlooked. Previous to the development of psychological methods the
+low-grade moron was about as high a type of defective as most physicians
+or even psychologists were able to identify as feeble-minded.
+
+Wherever intelligence tests have been made in any considerable number in
+the schools, they have shown that not far from 2 per cent of the
+children enrolled have a grade of intelligence which, however long they
+live, will never develop beyond the level which is normal to the average
+child of 11 or 12 years. The large majority of these belong to the moron
+grade; that is, their mental development will stop somewhere between the
+7-year and 12-year level of intelligence, more often between 9 and 12.
+
+The more we learn about such children, the clearer it becomes that they
+must be looked upon as real defectives. They may be able to drag
+along to the fourth, fifth, or sixth grades, but even by the age of
+16 or 18 years they are never able to cope successfully with the more
+abstract and difficult parts of the common-school course of study. They
+may master a certain amount of rote learning, such as that involved in
+reading and in the manipulation of number combinations but they cannot
+be taught to meet new conditions effectively or to think, reason, and
+judge as normal persons do.
+
+It is safe to predict that in the near future intelligence tests will
+bring tens of thousands of these high-grade defectives under the
+surveillance and protection of society. This will ultimately result in
+curtailing the reproduction of feeble-mindedness and in the elimination
+of an enormous amount of crime, pauperism, and industrial inefficiency.
+It is hardly necessary to emphasize that the high-grade cases, of the
+type now so frequently overlooked, are precisely the ones whose
+guardianship it is most important for the State to assume.
+
+INTELLIGENCE TESTS OF DELINQUENTS. One of the most important facts
+brought to light by the use of intelligence tests is the frequent
+association of delinquency and mental deficiency. Although it has long
+been recognized that the proportion of feeble-mindedness among
+offenders is rather large, the real amount has, until recently, been
+underestimated even by the most competent students of criminology.
+
+The criminologists have been accustomed to give more attention to the
+physical than to the mental correlates of crime. Thus, Lombroso and
+his followers subjected thousands of criminals to observation and
+measurement with regard to such physical traits as size and shape of the
+skull, bilateral asymmetries, anomalies of the ear, eye, nose, palate,
+teeth, hands, fingers, hair, dermal sensitivity, etc. The search was for
+physical "stigmata" characteristic of the "criminal type."
+
+Although such studies performed an important service in creating a
+scientific interest in criminology, the theories of Lombroso have been
+wholly discredited by the results of intelligence tests. Such tests have
+demonstrated, beyond any possibility of doubt, that the most important
+trait of at least 25 per cent of our criminals is mental weakness. The
+physical abnormalities which have been found so common among prisoners
+are not the stigmata of criminality, but the physical accompaniments of
+feeble-mindedness. They have no diagnostic significance except in so far
+as they are indications of mental deficiency. Without exception, every
+study which has been made of the intelligence level of delinquents has
+furnished convincing testimony as to the close relation existing between
+mental weakness and moral abnormality. Some of these findings are as
+follows:--
+
+    Miss Renz tested 100 girls of the Ohio State Reformatory and
+    reported 36 per cent as certainly feeble-minded. In every one of
+    these cases the commitment papers had given the pronouncement
+    "intellect sound."
+
+    Under the direction of Dr. Goddard the Binet tests were given to
+    100 juvenile court cases, chosen at random, in Newark, New
+    Jersey. Nearly half were classified as feeble-minded. One boy
+    17 years old had 9-year intelligence; another of 15½ had
+    8-year intelligence.
+
+    Of 56 delinquent girls 14 to 20 years of age tested by Hill and
+    Goddard, almost half belonged either to the 9- or the 10-year
+    level of intelligence.
+
+    Dr. G. G. Fernald's tests of 100 prisoners at the Massachusetts
+    State Reformatory showed that at least 25 per cent were
+    feeble-minded.
+
+    Of 1186 girls tested by Miss Dewson at the State Industrial
+    School for Girls at Lancaster, Pennsylvania, 28 per cent were
+    found to have subnormal intelligence.
+
+    Dr. Katherine Bement Davis's report on 1000 cases entered in the
+    Bedford Home for Women, New York, stated that there was no doubt
+    but that at least 157 were feeble-minded. Recently there has
+    been established at this institution one of the most important
+    research laboratories of the kind in the United States, with a
+    trained psychologist, Dr. Mabel Fernald, in charge.
+
+    Of 564 prostitutes investigated by Dr. Anna Dwyer in connection
+    with the Municipal Court of Chicago, only 3 per cent had gone
+    beyond the fifth grade in school. Mental tests were not made,
+    but from the data given it is reasonably certain that half or
+    more were feeble-minded.
+
+    Tests, by Dr. George Ordahl and Dr. Louise Ellison Ordahl, of
+    cases in the Geneva School for Girls, Geneva, Illinois, showed
+    that, on a conservative basis of classification, at least
+    18 per cent were feeble-minded. At the Joliet Prison, Illinois,
+    the same authors found 50 per cent of the female prisoners
+    feeble-minded, and 26 per cent of the male prisoners. At the St.
+    Charles School for Boys 26 per cent were feeble-minded.
+
+    Tests, by Dr. J. Harold Williams, of 150 delinquents in the
+    Whittier State School for Boys, Whittier, California, gave
+    28 per cent feeble-minded and 25 per cent at or near the
+    border-line. About 300 other juvenile delinquents tested by
+    Mr. Williams gave approximately the same figures. As a result of
+    these findings a research laboratory has been established at the
+    Whittier School, with Dr. Williams in charge. In the girls'
+    division of the Whittier School, Dr. Grace Fernald collected a
+    large amount of psychological data on more than 100 delinquent
+    girls. The findings of this investigation agree closely with
+    those of Dr. Williams for the boys.
+
+    At the State Reformatory, Jeffersonville, Indiana, Dr. von
+    Klein-Schmid, in an unusually thorough psychological study of
+    1000 young adult prisoners, finds the proportion of
+    feeble-mindedness not far from 50 per cent.
+
+But it is needless to multiply statistics. Those given are but samples.
+Tests are at present being made in most of the progressive prisons,
+reform schools, and juvenile courts throughout the country, and while
+there are minor discrepancies in regard to the actual percentage who are
+feeble-minded, there is no investigator who denies the fearful rôle
+played by mental deficiency in the production of vice, crime, and
+delinquency.[1]
+
+[1] See References at end of volume.
+
+Heredity studies of "degenerate" families have confirmed, in a striking
+way, the testimony secured by intelligence tests. Among the best known
+of such families are the "Kallikaks," the "Jukes," the "Hill Folk," the
+"Nams," the "Zeros," and the "Ishmaelites."
+
+    _The Kallikak family._ Martin Kallikak was a youthful soldier in
+    the Revolutionary War. At a tavern frequented by the militia he
+    met a feeble-minded girl, by whom he became the father of a
+    feeble-minded son. In 1912 there were 480 known direct
+    descendants of this temporary union. It is known that 36 of
+    these were illegitimates, that 33 were sexually immoral, that 24
+    were confirmed alcoholics, and that 8 kept houses of ill-fame.
+    The explanation of so much immorality will be obvious when it is
+    stated that of the 480 descendants, 143 were known to be
+    feeble-minded, and that many of the others were of questionable
+    mentality.
+
+    A few years after returning from the war this same Martin
+    Kallikak married a respectable girl of good family. From this
+    union 496 individuals have been traced in direct descent, and in
+    this branch of the family there were no illegitimate children,
+    no immoral women, and only one man who was sexually loose. There
+    were no criminals, no keepers of houses of ill-fame, and only
+    two confirmed alcoholics. Again the explanation is clear when it
+    is stated that this branch of the family did not contain a
+    single feeble-minded individual. It was made up of doctors,
+    lawyers, judges, educators, traders, and landholders.[2]
+
+    [2] H. H. Goddard: _The Kallikak Family_. (1914.) 141 pp.
+
+    _The Hill Folk._ The Hill Folk are a New England family of which
+    709 persons have been traced. Of the married women, 24 per cent
+    had given birth to illegitimate offspring, and 10 per cent were
+    prostitutes. Criminal tendencies were clearly shown in
+    24 members of the family, while alcoholism was still more
+    common. The proportion of feeble-minded was 48 per cent. It was
+    estimated that the Hill Folk have in the last sixty years cost
+    the State of Massachusetts, in charitable relief, care of
+    feeble-minded, epileptic, and insane, conviction and punishment
+    for crime, prostitution pauperism, etc., at least $500,000.[3]
+
+    [3] Danielson and Davenport: _The Hill Folk_. Eugenics Record Office,
+    Memoir No. 1. 1912. 56 pp.
+
+    The Nam family and the Jukes give equally dark pictures as
+    regards criminality, licentiousness, and alcoholism, and
+    although feeble-mindedness was not as fully investigated in
+    these families as in the Kallikaks and the Hill Folk, the
+    evidence is strong that it was a leading trait. The 784 Nams who
+    were traced included 187 alcoholics, 232 women and 199 men known
+    to be licentious, and 40 who became prisoners. It is estimated
+    that the Nams have already cost the State nearly $1,500,000.[4]
+
+    [4] Estabrook and Davenport: _The Nam Family_. Eugenics Record Office
+    Memoir No. 2. (1912). 85 pp.
+
+    Of 540 Jukes, practically one fifth were born out of wedlock, 37
+    were known to be syphilitic, 53 had been in the poorhouse, 76
+    had been sentenced to prison, and of 229 women of marriageable
+    age 128 were prostitutes. The economic damage inflicted upon the
+    State of New York by the Jukes in seventy-five years was
+    estimated at more than $1,300,000, to say nothing of diseases
+    and other evil influences which they helped to spread.[5]
+
+    [5] R. L. Dugdale: _The Jukes_. (Fourth edition, 1910.) 120 pp. G. P.
+    Putnam's Sons.
+
+But why do the feeble-minded tend so strongly to become delinquent? The
+answer may be stated in simple terms. Morality depends upon two things:
+(a) the ability to foresee and to weigh the possible consequences for
+self and others of different kinds of behavior; and (b) upon the
+willingness and capacity to exercise self-restraint. That there are many
+intelligent criminals is due to the fact that (a) may exist without
+(b). On the other hand, (b) presupposes (a). In other words, not
+all criminals are feeble-minded, but all feeble-minded are at least
+potential criminals. That every feeble-minded woman is a potential
+prostitute would hardly be disputed by any one. Moral judgment, like
+business judgment, social judgment, or any other kind of higher thought
+process, is a function of intelligence. Morality cannot flower and fruit
+if intelligence remains infantile.
+
+All of us in early childhood lacked moral responsibility. We were as
+rank egoists as any criminal. Respect for the feelings, the property
+rights, or any other kind of rights, of others had to be laboriously
+acquired under the whip of discipline. But by degrees we learned that
+only when instincts are curbed, and conduct is made to conform to
+principles established formally or accepted tacitly by our neighbors,
+does this become a livable world for any of us. Without the intelligence
+to generalize the particular, to foresee distant consequences of present
+acts, to weigh these foreseen consequences in the nice balance of
+imagination, morality cannot be learned. When the adult body, with its
+adult instincts, is coupled with the undeveloped intelligence and weak
+inhibitory powers of a 10-year-old child, the only possible outcome,
+except in those cases where constant guardianship is exercised by
+relatives or friends, is some form of delinquency.
+
+Considering the tremendous cost of vice and crime, which in all
+probability amounts to not less than $500,000,000 per year in the United
+States alone, it is evident that psychological testing has found here
+one of its richest applications. Before offenders can be subjected
+to rational treatment a mental diagnosis is necessary, and while
+intelligence tests do not constitute a complete psychological diagnosis,
+they are, nevertheless, its most indispensable part.
+
+INTELLIGENCE TESTS OF SUPERIOR CHILDREN. The number of children with
+very superior ability is approximately as great as the number of
+feeble-minded. The future welfare of the country hinges, in no small
+degree, upon the right education of these superior children. Whether
+civilization moves on and up depends most on the advances made by
+creative thinkers and leaders in science, politics, art, morality, and
+religion. Moderate ability can follow, or imitate, but genius must show
+the way.
+
+Through the leveling influences of the educational lockstep such
+children at present are often lost in the masses. It is a rare child who
+is able to break this lockstep by extra promotions. Taking the country
+over, the ratio of "accelerates" to "retardates" in the school is
+approximately 1 to 10. Through the handicapping influences of poverty,
+social neglect, physical defects, or educational maladjustments, many
+potential leaders in science, art, government, and industry are denied
+the opportunity of a normal development. The use we have made of
+exceptional ability reminds one of the primitive methods of surface
+mining. It is necessary to explore the nation's hidden resources of
+intelligence. The common saying that "genius will out" is one of those
+dangerous half-truths with which too many people rest content.
+
+Psychological tests show that children of superior ability are very
+likely to be misunderstood in school. The writer has tested more than a
+hundred children who were as much above average intelligence as moron
+defectives are below. The large majority of these were found located
+below the school grade warranted by their intellectual level. One third
+had failed to reap any advantage whatever, in terms of promotion, from
+their very superior intelligence. Even genius languishes when kept
+over-long at tasks that are too easy.
+
+Our data show that teachers sometimes fail entirely to recognize
+exceptional superiority in a pupil, and that the degree of such
+superiority is rarely estimated with anything like the accuracy which is
+possible to the psychologist after a one-hour examination. _B. F._, for
+example, was a little over 7½ years old when tested. He was in the
+third grade, and was therefore thought by his teacher to be accelerated
+in school. This boy's intelligence, however, was found to be above the
+12-year level. There is no doubt that his mental ability would have
+enabled him, with a few months of individual instruction, to carry fifth
+or even sixth-grade work as easily as third, and without injury to body
+or mind. Nevertheless, the teacher and both the parents of this child
+had found nothing remarkable about him. In reality he belongs to a grade
+of genius not found oftener than once in several thousand cases.
+
+Another illustration is that of a boy of 10½ years who tested at the
+"average adult" level. He was doing superior work in the sixth grade,
+but according to the testimony of the teacher had "no unusual ability."
+It was ascertained from the parents that this boy, at an age when most
+children are reading fairy stories, had a passion for standard medical
+literature and textbooks in physical science. Yet, after more than a
+year of daily contact with this young genius (who is a relative of
+Meyerbeer, the composer), the teacher had discovered no symptoms of
+unusual ability.[6]
+
+[6] See p. 26 _ff._ for further illustrations of this kind.
+
+Teachers should be better trained in detecting the signs of superior
+ability. Every child who consistently gets high marks in his school work
+with apparent ease should be given a mental examination, and if his
+intelligence level warrants it he should either be given extra
+promotions, or placed in a special class for superior children where
+faster progress can be made. The latter is the better plan, because it
+obviates the necessity of skipping grades; it permits rapid but
+continuous progress.
+
+The usual reluctance of teachers to give extra promotions probably rests
+upon three factors: (1) mere inertia; (2) a natural unwillingness to
+part with exceptionally satisfactory pupils; and (3) the traditional
+belief that precocious children should be held back for fear of dire
+physical or mental consequences.
+
+In order to throw light on the question whether exceptionally bright
+children are specially likely to be one-sided, nervous, delicate,
+morally abnormal, socially unadaptable, or otherwise peculiar, the
+writer has secured rather extensive information regarding 31 children
+whose mental age was found by intelligence tests to be 25 per cent above
+the actual age. This degree of intelligence is possessed by about
+2 children out of 100, and is nearly as far above average intelligence
+as high-grade feeble-mindedness is below. The supplementary information,
+which was furnished in most cases by the teachers, may be summarized as
+follows:--
+
+  1. _Ability special or general._ In the case of 20 out of 31 the
+      ability is decidedly general, and with 2 it is mainly general.
+      The talents of 5 are described as more or less special, but
+      only in one case is it remarkably so. Doubtful 4.
+
+  2. _Health._ 15 are said to be perfectly healthy; 13 have one or
+      more physical defects; 4 of the 13 are described as delicate;
+      4 have adenoids; 4 have eye-defects; 1 lisps; and 1 stutters.
+      These figures are about the same as one finds in any group of
+      ordinary children.
+
+  3. _Studiousness._ "Extremely studious," 15; "usually studious" or
+      "fairly studious," 11; "not particularly studious," 5; "lazy,"
+      0.
+
+  4. _Moral traits._ Favorable traits only, 19; one or more
+      unfavorable traits, 8; no answer, 4. The eight with
+      unfavorable moral traits are described as follows: 2 are "very
+      self-willed"; 1 "needs close watching"; 1 is "cruel to
+      animals"; 1 is "untruthful"; 1 is "unreliable"; 1 is "a
+      bluffer"; 1 is "sexually abnormal," "perverted," and
+      "vicious."
+
+      It will be noted that with the exception of the last child,
+      the moral irregularities mentioned can hardly be regarded,
+      from the psychological point of view, as essentially abnormal.
+      It is perhaps a good rather than a bad sign for a child to be
+      self-willed; most children "need close watching"; and a
+      certain amount of untruthfulness in children is the rule and
+      not the exception.
+
+  5. _Social adaptability._ Socially adaptable, 25; not adaptable,
+      2; doubtful, 4.
+
+  6. _Attitude of other children._ "Favorable," "friendly," "liked
+      by everybody," "much admired," "popular," etc., 26; "not
+      liked," 1; "inspires repugnance," 1; no answer, 1.
+
+  7. _Is child a leader?_ "Yes," 14; "no," or "not particularly,"
+      12; doubtful, 5.
+
+  8. _Is play life normal?_ "Yes," 26; "no," 1; "hardly," 1;
+      doubtful, 3.
+
+  9. _Is child spoiled or vain?_ "No," 22; "yes," 5; "somewhat," 2;
+      no answer, 2.
+
+According to the above data, exceptionally intelligent children are
+fully as likely to be healthy as ordinary children; their ability is far
+more often general than special, they are studious above the average,
+really serious faults are not common among them, they are nearly always
+socially adaptable, are sought after as playmates and companions, their
+play life is usually normal, they are leaders far oftener than other
+children, and notwithstanding their many really superior qualities they
+are seldom vain or spoiled.
+
+It would be greatly to the advantage of such children if their superior
+ability were more promptly and fully recognized, and if (under proper
+medical supervision, of course) they were promoted as rapidly as their
+mental development would warrant. Unless they are given the grade of
+work which calls forth their best efforts, they run the risk of falling
+into lifelong habits of submaximum efficiency. The danger in the case of
+such children is not over-pressure, but under-pressure.
+
+INTELLIGENCE TESTS AS A BASIS FOR GRADING. Not only in the case of
+retarded or exceptionally bright children, but with many others also,
+intelligence tests can aid in correctly placing the child in school.
+
+The pupil who enters one school system from another is a case in point.
+Such a pupil nearly always suffers a loss of time. The indefensible
+custom is to grade the newcomer down a little, because, forsooth, the
+textbooks he has studied may have differed somewhat from those he is
+about to take up, or because the school system from which he comes may
+be looked upon as inferior. Teachers are too often suspicious of all
+other educational methods besides their own. The present treatment
+accorded such children, which so often does them injustice and injury,
+should be replaced by an intelligence test. The hour of time required
+for the test is a small matter in comparison with the loss of a school
+term by the pupils.
+
+Indeed, it would be desirable to make all promotions on the basis
+chiefly of intellectual ability. Hitherto the school has had to rely on
+tests of information because reliable tests of intelligence have not
+until recently been available. As trained Binet examiners become more
+plentiful, the information standard will have to give way to the
+criterion which asks merely that the child shall be able to do the work
+of the next higher grade. The brief intelligence test is not only more
+enlightening than the examination; it is also more hygienic. The school
+examination is often for the child a source of worry and anxiety; the
+mental test is an interesting and pleasant experience.
+
+INTELLIGENCE TESTS FOR VOCATIONAL FITNESS. The time is probably not far
+distant when intelligence tests will become a recognized and widely used
+instrument for determining vocational fitness. Of course, it is not
+claimed that tests are available which will tell us unerringly exactly
+what one of a thousand or more occupations a given individual is best
+fitted to pursue. But when thousands of children who have been tested by
+the Binet scale have been followed out into the industrial world, and
+their success in various occupations noted, we shall know fairly
+definitely the vocational significance of any given degree of mental
+inferiority or superiority. Researches of this kind will ultimately
+determine the minimum "intelligence quotient" necessary for success in
+each leading occupation.
+
+Industrial concerns doubtless suffer enormous losses from the employment
+of persons whose mental ability is not equal to the tasks they are
+expected to perform. The present methods of trying out new employees,
+transferring them to simpler and simpler jobs as their inefficiency
+becomes apparent, is wasteful and to a great extent unnecessary. A
+cheaper and more satisfactory method would be to employ a psychologist
+to examine applicants for positions and to weed out the unfit. Any
+business employing as many as five hundred or a thousand workers, as,
+for example, a large department store, could save in this way several
+times the salary of a well-trained psychologist.
+
+That the industrially inefficient are often of subnormal intelligence
+has already been demonstrated in a number of psychological
+investigations. Of 150 "hoboes" tested under the direction of the writer
+by Mr. Knollin, at least 15 per cent belonged to the moron grade of
+mental deficiency, and almost as many more were border-line cases. To be
+sure, a large proportion were found perfectly normal, and a few even
+decidedly superior in mental ability, but the ratio of mental deficiency
+was ten or fifteen times as high as that holding for the general
+population. Several had as low as 9- or 10-year intelligence, and one
+had a mental level of 7 years. The industrial history of such subjects,
+as given by themselves, was always about what the mental level would
+lead us to expect--unskilled work, lack of interest in accomplishment,
+frequent discharge from jobs, discouragement, and finally the "road."
+
+The above findings have been fully paralleled by Mr. Glenn Johnson and
+Professor Eleanor Rowland, of Reed College, who tested 108 unemployed
+charity cases in Portland, Oregon. Both of these investigators made use
+of the Stanford revision of the Binet scale, which is especially
+serviceable in distinguishing the upper-grade defectives from normals.
+
+It hardly needs to be emphasized that when charity organizations help
+the feeble-minded to float along in the social and industrial world, and
+to produce and rear children after their kind, a doubtful service is
+rendered. A little psychological research would aid the united charities
+of any city to direct their expenditures into more profitable channels
+than would otherwise be possible.
+
+OTHER USES OF INTELLIGENCE TESTS. Another important use of intelligence
+tests is in the study of the factors which influence mental development.
+It is desirable that we should be able to guard the child against
+influences which affect mental development unfavorably; but as long as
+these influences have not been sifted, weighed, and measured, we have
+nothing but conjecture on which to base our efforts in this direction.
+
+When we search the literature of child hygiene for reliable evidence as
+to the injurious effects upon mental ability of malnutrition, decayed
+teeth, obstructed breathing, reduced sleep, bad ventilation,
+insufficient exercise, etc., we are met by endless assertion painfully
+unsupported by demonstrated fact. We have, indeed, very little exact
+knowledge regarding the mental effects of any of the factors just
+mentioned. When standardized mental tests have come into more general
+use, such influences will be easy to detect wherever they are really
+present.
+
+Again, the most important question of heredity is that regarding the
+inheritance of intelligence; but this is a problem which cannot be
+attacked at all without some accurate means of identifying the thing
+which is the object of study. Without the use of scales for measuring
+intelligence we can give no better answer as to the essential difference
+between a genius and a fool than is to be found in legend and fiction.
+
+Applying this to school children, it means that without such tests we
+cannot know to what extent a child's mental performances are determined
+by environment and to what extent by heredity. Is the place of the
+so-called lower classes in the social and industrial scale the result of
+their inferior native endowment, or is their apparent inferiority merely
+a result of their inferior home and school training? Is genius more
+common among children of the educated classes than among the children of
+the ignorant and poor? Are the inferior races really inferior, or are
+they merely unfortunate in their lack of opportunity to learn?
+
+Only intelligence tests can answer these questions and grade the raw
+material with which education works. Without them we can never
+distinguish the results of our educational efforts with a given child
+from the influence of the child's original endowment. Such tests would
+have told us, for example, whether the much-discussed "wonder children,"
+such as the Sidis and Wiener boys and the Stoner girl, owe their
+precocious intellectual prowess to superior training (as their parents
+believe) or to superior native ability. The supposed effects upon mental
+development of new methods of mind training, which are exploited so
+confidently from time to time (e.g., the Montessori method and the
+various systems of sensory and motor training for the feeble-minded),
+will have to be checked up by the same kind of scientific measurement.
+
+In all these fields intelligence tests are certain to play an
+ever-increasing rôle. With the exception of moral character there
+is nothing as significant for a child's future as his grade of
+intelligence. Even health itself is likely to have less influence in
+determining success in life. Although strength and swiftness have always
+had great survival value among the lower animals, these characteristics
+have long since lost their supremacy in man's struggle for existence.
+For us the rule of brawn has been broken, and intelligence has become
+the decisive factor in success. Schools, railroads, factories, and the
+largest commercial concerns may be successfully managed by persons who
+are physically weak or even sickly. One who has intelligence constantly
+measures opportunities against his own strength or weakness and adjusts
+himself to conditions by following those leads which promise most toward
+the realization of his individual possibilities.
+
+All classes of intellects, the weakest as well as the strongest, will
+profit by the application of their talents to tasks which are consonant
+with their ability. When we have learned the lessons which intelligence
+tests have to teach, we shall no longer blame mentally defective workmen
+for their industrial inefficiency, punish weak-minded children because
+of their inability to learn, or imprison and hang mentally defective
+criminals because they lacked the intelligence to appreciate the
+ordinary codes of social conduct.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER II
+
+SOURCES OF ERROR IN JUDGING INTELLIGENCE
+
+
+ARE INTELLIGENCE TESTS SUPERFLUOUS? Binet tells us that he often
+encountered the criticism that intelligence tests are superfluous, and
+that in going to so much trouble to devise his measuring scale he was
+forcing an open door. Those who made this criticism believed that the
+observant teacher or parent is able to make an offhand estimate of a
+child's intelligence which is accurate enough. "It is a stupid teacher,"
+said one, "who needs a psychologist to tell her which pupils are not
+intelligent." Every one who uses intelligence tests meets this attitude
+from time to time.
+
+This should not be surprising or discouraging. It is only natural that
+those who are unfamiliar with the methods of psychology should
+occasionally question their validity or worth, just as there are many
+excellent people who do not "believe in" vaccination against typhoid and
+small pox, operations for appendicitis, etc.
+
+There is an additional reason why the applications of psychology have to
+overcome a good deal of conservatism and skepticism; namely, the fact
+that every one, whether psychologically trained or not, acquires in the
+ordinary experiences of life a certain degree of expertness in the
+observation and interpretation of mental traits. The possession of this
+little fund of practical working knowledge makes most people slow to
+admit any one's claim to greater expertness. When the astronomer tells
+us the distance to Jupiter, we accept his statement, because we
+recognize that our ordinary experience affords no basis for judgment
+about such matters. But every one acquires more or less facility in
+distinguishing the coarser differences among people in intelligence,
+and this half-knowledge naturally generates a certain amount of
+resistance to the more refined method of tests.
+
+It should be evident, however, that we need more than the ability merely
+to distinguish a genius from a simpleton, just as a physician needs
+something more than the ability to distinguish an athlete from a man
+dying of consumption. It is necessary to have a definite and accurate
+diagnosis, one which will differentiate more finely the many degrees and
+qualities of intelligence. Just as in the case of physical illness, we
+need to know not merely that the patient is sick, but also why he is
+sick, what organs are involved, what course the illness will run, and
+what physical work the patient can safely undertake, so in the case of a
+retarded child, we need to know the exact degree of intellectual
+deficiency, what mental functions are chiefly concerned in the defect,
+whether the deficiency is due to innate endowment, to physical illness,
+or to faults of education, and what lines of mental activity the child
+will be able to pursue with reasonable hope of success. In the diagnosis
+of a case of malnutrition, the up-to-date physician does not depend upon
+general symptoms, but instead makes a blood test to determine the exact
+number of red corpuscles per cubic millimeter of blood and the exact
+percentage of hæmoglobin. He has learned that external appearances are
+often misleading. Similarly, every psychologist who is experienced in
+the mental examination of school children knows that his own or the
+teacher's estimate of a child's intelligence is subject to grave and
+frequent error.
+
+THE NECESSITY OF STANDARDS. In the first place, in order to judge an
+individual's intelligence it is necessary to have in mind some standard
+as to what constitutes normal intelligence. This the ordinary parent or
+teacher does not have. In the case of school children, for example, each
+pupil is judged with reference to the average intelligence of the
+class. But the teacher has no means of knowing whether the average for
+her class is above, equal to, or below that for children in general. Her
+standard may be too high, too low, vague, mechanical, or fragmentary.
+The same, of course, holds in the case of parents or any one else
+attempting to estimate intelligence on the basis of common observation.
+
+THE INTELLIGENCE OF RETARDED CHILDREN USUALLY OVERESTIMATED. One of the
+most common errors made by the teacher is to overestimate the
+intelligence of the over-age pupil. This is because she fails to take
+account of age differences and estimates intelligence on the basis of
+the child's school performance in the grade where he happens to be
+located. She tends to overlook the fact that quality of school work is
+no index of intelligence unless age is taken into account. The question
+should be, not, "Is this child doing his school work well?" but rather,
+"In what school grade should a child of this age be able to do
+satisfactory work?" A high-grade imbecile may do average work in the
+first grade, and a high-grade moron average work in the third or fourth
+grade, provided only they are sufficiently over-age for the grade in
+question.
+
+Our experience in testing children for segregation in special classes
+has time and again brought this fallacy of teachers to our attention. We
+have often found one or more feeble-minded children in a class after
+the teacher had confidently asserted that there was not a single
+exceptionally dull child present. In every case where there has been
+opportunity to follow the later school progress of such a child the
+validity of the intelligence test has been fully confirmed.
+
+The following are typical examples of the neglect of teachers to take
+the age factor into account when estimating the intelligence of the
+over-age child:--
+
+    _A. R. Girl, age 11; in low second grade._ She was able to do
+    the work of this grade, not well, but passably. The teacher's
+    judgment as to this child's intelligence was "dull but not
+    defective." What the teacher overlooked was the fact that she
+    had judged the child by a 7-year standard, and that, instead of
+    only being able to do the work of the second grade
+    indifferently, a child of this age should have been equal to the
+    work of the fifth grade. In reality, A. R. is definitely
+    feeble-minded. Although she is from a home of average culture,
+    is 11 years old, and has attended school five years, she has
+    barely the intelligence of the average child of six years.
+
+    _D. C. Boy, age 17; in fifth grade._ His teacher knew that he
+    was dull, but had not thought of him as belonging to the class
+    of feeble-minded. She had judged this boy by the 11-year
+    standard and had perhaps been further misled by his normal
+    appearance and exceptionally satisfactory behavior. The Binet
+    test quickly showed that he had a mental level of approximately
+    9 years. There is little probability that his comprehension will
+    ever surpass that of the average 10-year-old.
+
+    _R. A. Boy, age 17; mental age 11; sixth grade; school work
+    "nearly average"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average."_
+    Test plainly shows this child to be a high-grade moron, or
+    border-liner at best. Had attended school regularly 11 years and
+    had made 6 grades. Teacher had compared child with his
+    12-year-old classmates.
+
+    _H. A. Boy, age 14; mental age 9-6; low fourth grade; school
+    work "inferior"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average."_
+    The teacher blamed the inferior quality of school work to "bad
+    home environment." As a matter of fact, the boy's father is
+    feeble-minded and the normality of the mother is questionable.
+    An older brother is in a reform school. We are perfectly safe in
+    predicting that this boy will not complete the eighth grade even
+    if he attends school till he is 21 years of age.
+
+    _F. I. Boy, age 12-11; mental age 9-4; third grade; school work
+    "average"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average"; social
+    environment "average"; health good and attendance regular._
+    Intelligence and school success are what we should expect of an
+    average 9-year-old.
+
+    _D. A. Boy, age 12; mental age 9-2; third grade; school work
+    "inferior"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average."_
+    Teacher imputes inferior school work to "absence from school and
+    lack of interest in books"; we have yet to find a child with a
+    mental age 25 per cent below chronological age who _was_
+    particularly interested in books or enthusiastic about school.
+
+    _C. U. Girl, age 10; mental age 7-8; second grade; school work
+    "average"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average."_
+    Teacher blames adenoids and bad teeth for retardation. No doubt
+    of child's mental deficiency.
+
+    _P. I. Girl, age 8-10; mental age 6-7; has been in first grade
+    2½ years; school work "average"; teacher's estimate of
+    intelligence "average."_ The mother and one brother of this girl
+    are both feeble-minded.
+
+    _H. O. Girl, age 7-10; mental age 5-2; first grade for 2 years;
+    school work "inferior"; teacher's estimate of intelligence
+    "average."_ The teacher nevertheless adds, "This child is not
+    normal, but her ability to respond to drill shows that she has
+    intelligence." It is of course true that even feeble-minded
+    children of 5-year intelligence are able to profit a little from
+    drill. Their weakness comes to light in their inability to
+    perform higher types of mental activity.
+
+THE INTELLIGENCE OF SUPERIOR CHILDREN USUALLY UNDERESTIMATED. We have
+already mentioned the frequent failure of teachers and parents to
+recognize superior ability.[7] The fallacy here is again largely due to
+the neglect of the age factor, but the resulting error is in the
+opposite direction from that set forth above. The superior child is
+likely to be a year or two younger than the average child of his grade,
+and is accordingly judged by a standard which is too high. The following
+are illustrations:--
+
+[7] See p. 13 _ff._
+
+    _M. L. Girl, age 11-2; mental age "average adult" (16); sixth
+    grade; school work "superior"; teacher's estimate of
+    intelligence "average."_ Teacher credits superior school work to
+    "unusual home advantages." Father a college professor. The
+    teacher considers the child accelerated in school. In reality
+    she ought to be in the second year of high school instead of in
+    the sixth grade.
+
+    _H. A. Boy, age 11; mental age 14; sixth grade; school work
+    "average"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average."_
+    According to the supplementary information the boy is
+    "wonderfully attentive," "studious," and possessed of
+    "all-round ability." The estimate of "average intelligence" was
+    probably the result of comparing him with classmates who
+    averaged about a year older.
+
+    _K. R. Girl, age 6-1; mental age 8-5; second grade; school work
+    "average"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "superior"; social
+    environment "average."_ Is it not evident that a child from
+    ordinary social environment, who does work of average quality in
+    the second grade when barely 6 years of age, should be judged
+    "very superior" rather than merely "superior" in intelligence?
+    The intelligence quotient of this girl is 140, which is not
+    reached by more than one child in two hundred.
+
+    _S. A. Boy, age 8-10; mental age 10-9; fourth grade; school work
+    "average"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average."_
+    Teacher attributed school acceleration to "studiousness" and
+    "delight in school work." It would be more reasonable to infer
+    that these traits are indications of unusually superior
+    intelligence.
+
+OTHER FALLACIES IN THE ESTIMATION OF INTELLIGENCE. Another source
+of error in the teacher's judgment comes from the difficulty in
+distinguishing genuine dullness from the mental condition which results
+sometimes from unfavorable social environment or lack of training.
+
+    _V. P. Boy, age 7._ Had attended school one year and had
+    profited very little from the instruction. He had learned to
+    read very little, spoke chiefly in monosyllables, and seemed
+    "queer." The teacher suspected his intelligence and asked for a
+    mental examination. The Binet test showed that except for
+    vocabulary, which was unusually low, there was practically no
+    mental retardation. Inquiry disclosed the fact that the boy's
+    parents were uneducated deaf-mutes, and that the boy had
+    associated little with other children. Four years later this boy
+    was doing fairly well in school, though a year retarded because
+    of his unfavorable home environment.
+
+    _X. Y. Boy, age 10._ Son of a successful business man, he was
+    barely able to read in the second reader. The Binet test
+    revealed an intelligence level which was absolutely normal. The
+    boy was removed to a special class where he could receive
+    individual attention, and two years later was found doing good
+    work in a regular class of the fifth grade. His bad beginning
+    seemed to have been due to an unfavorable attitude toward school
+    work, due in turn to lack of discipline in the home, and to the
+    fact that because of the father's frequent change of business
+    headquarters the boy had never attended one school longer than
+    three months.
+
+Another source of error in judging intelligence from common observation
+is the tendency to overestimate the intelligence of the sprightly,
+talkative, sanguine child, and to underestimate the intelligence of the
+child who is less emotional, reacts slowly, and talks little. One
+occasionally finds a feeble-minded adult, perhaps of only 9- or 10-year
+intelligence, whose verbal fluency, mental liveliness, and
+self-confidence would mislead the offhand judgment of even the
+psychologist. One individual of this type, a border-line case at best,
+was accustomed to harangue street audiences and had served as "major" in
+"Kelly's Army," a horde of several hundred unemployed men who a few
+years ago organized and started to march from San Francisco to
+Washington.
+
+BINET'S QUESTIONNAIRE ON TEACHERS' METHODS OF JUDGING INTELLIGENCE.[8]
+Aroused by the skepticism so often shown toward his test method, Binet
+decided to make a little study of the methods by which teachers are
+accustomed to arrive at a judgment as to a child's intelligence.
+Accordingly, through the coöperation of the director of elementary
+education in Paris, he secured answers from a number of teachers to the
+following questions:--
+
+[8] See p. 169 _ff._ of reference 2, at end of this book
+
+  1. _By what means do you judge the intelligence of your pupils?_
+  2. _How often have you been deceived in your judgments?_
+
+About 40 replies were received. Most of the answers to the first
+question were vague, one-sided, "verbal," or bookish. Only a few showed
+much psychological discrimination as to what intelligence is and
+what its symptoms are. There was a very general tendency to judge
+intelligence by success in one or more of the school studies. Some
+thought that ability to master arithmetic was a sure criterion. Others
+were influenced almost entirely by the pupil's ability to read. One
+teacher said that the child who can "read so expressively as to make you
+feel the punctuation" is certainly intelligent, an observation which is
+rather good, as far as it goes. A few judged intelligence by the pupil's
+knowledge of such subjects as history and geography, which, as Binet
+points out, is to confound intelligence with the ability to memorize.
+"Memory," says Binet, is a "great simulator of intelligence." It is a
+wise teacher who is not deceived by it. Only a small minority mentioned
+resourcefulness in play, capacity to adjust to practical situations, or
+any other out-of-school criteria.
+
+Some suggested asking the pupil such questions as the following:--
+
+    "Why do you love your parents?" "If it takes three persons seven
+    hours to do a piece of work, would it take seven persons any
+    longer?" "Which would you rather have, a fourth of a pie, or a
+    half of a half?" "Which is heavier, a pound of feathers or a
+    pound of lead?" "If you had twenty cents what would you do with
+    it?"
+
+A great many based their judgment mainly on the general appearance of
+the face and eyes. An "active" or "passive" expression of the eyes was
+looked upon as especially significant. One teacher thought that a mere
+"glance of the eye" was sufficient to display the grade of intelligence.
+If the eyes are penetrating, reflective, or show curiosity, the child
+must be intelligent; if they are heavy and expressionless, he must be
+dull. The mobility of countenance came in for frequent mention, also the
+shape of the head.
+
+No one will deny that intelligence displays itself to a greater or
+less extent in the features; but how, asks Binet, are we going to
+_standardize_ a "glance of the eye" or an "expression of curiosity" so
+that it will serve as an exact measure of intelligence?
+
+The fact is, the more one sees of feeble-minded children, the less
+reliance one comes to place upon facial expression as a sign of
+intelligence. Some children who are only slightly backward have the
+general appearance of low-grade imbeciles. On the other hand, not a few
+who are distinctly feeble-minded are pretty and attractive. With many
+such children a ready smile takes the place of comprehension. If the
+smile is rather sweet and sympathetic, as is often the case, the
+observer is almost sure to be deceived.
+
+As regards the shape of the head, peculiar conformation of the ears, and
+other "stigmata," science long ago demonstrated that these are
+ordinarily of little or no significance.
+
+In reply to the second question, some teachers stated that they never
+made a mistake, while others admitted failure in one case out of three.
+Still others said, "Once in ten years," "once in twenty years," "once in
+a thousand times," etc.
+
+As Binet remarks, the answers to this question are not very enlightening.
+In the first place, the teacher as a rule loses sight of the pupil when
+he has passed from her care, and seldom has opportunity of finding out
+whether his later success belies her judgment or confirms it. Errors go
+undiscovered for the simple reason that there is no opportunity to check
+them up. In the second place, her estimate is so rough that an error
+must be very great in order to have any meaning. If I say that a man is
+six feet and two inches tall, it is easy enough to apply a measuring
+stick and prove the correctness or incorrectness of my assertion. But if
+I say simply that the man is "rather tall," or "very tall," the error
+must be very extreme before we can expose it, particularly since the
+estimate can itself be checked up only by observation and not by
+controlled experiment.
+
+The teachers' answers seem to justify three conclusions:--
+
+1. Teachers do not have a very definite idea of what constitutes
+intelligence. They tend to confuse it variously with capacity for
+memorizing, facility in reading, ability to master arithmetic, etc. On
+the whole, their standard is too academic. They fail to appreciate the
+one-sidedness of the school's demands upon intelligence.
+
+In a quaintly humorous passage discussing this tendency, Binet
+characterizes the child in a class as _dénaturé_, a French word which we
+may translate (though rather too literally) as "denatured." Too often
+this "denatured" child of the classroom is the only child the teacher
+knows.
+
+2. In judging intelligence teachers are too easily deceived by a
+sprightly attitude, a sympathetic expression, a glance of the eye, or a
+chance "bump" on the head.
+
+3. Although a few teachers seem to realize the many possibilities of
+error, the majority show rather undue confidence in the accuracy of
+their judgment.
+
+BINET'S EXPERIMENT ON HOW TEACHERS TEST INTELLIGENCE.[9] Finally, Binet
+had three teachers come to his laboratory to judge the intelligence of
+children whom they had never seen before. Each spent an afternoon in the
+laboratory and examined five pupils. In each case the teacher was left
+free to arrive at a conclusion in her own way. Binet, who remained in
+the room and took notes, recounts with playful humor how the teachers
+were unavoidably compelled to resort to the much-abused test method,
+although their attempts at using it were sometimes, from the
+psychologist's point of view, amusingly clumsy.
+
+[9] See p. 182 _ff._ of reference 2 at end of this book.
+
+One teacher, for example, questioned the children about some canals and
+sluices which were in the vicinity, asking what their purpose was and
+how they worked. Another showed the children some pretty pictures,
+which she had brought with her for the purpose, and asked questions
+about them. Showing the picture of a garret, she asked how a garret
+differs from an ordinary room. One teacher asked whether in building a
+factory it was best to have the walls thick or thin. As King Edward had
+just died, another teacher questioned the children about the details of
+this event, in order to find out whether they were in the habit of
+reading the newspapers, or understood the things they heard others read.
+Other questions related to the names of the streets in the neighborhood,
+the road one should take to reach a certain point in the vicinity, etc.
+Binet notes that many of the questions were special, and were only
+applicable with the children of this particular school.
+
+The method of proposing the questions and judging the responses was also
+at fault. The teachers did not adhere consistently to any definite
+formula in giving a particular test to the different children. Instead,
+the questions were materially altered from time to time. One teacher
+scored the identical response differently for two children, giving one
+child more credit than the other because she had already judged his
+intelligence to be superior. In several cases the examination was
+needlessly delayed in order to instruct the child in what he did not
+know.
+
+The examination ended, quite properly for a teacher's examination, with
+questions about history, literature, the metric system, etc., and with
+the recitation of a fable.
+
+A comparison of the results showed hardly any agreement among the
+estimates of the three teachers. When questioned about the standard that
+had been taken in arriving at their conclusions, one teacher said she
+had taken the answers of the first pupil as a point of departure, and
+that she had judged the other pupils by this one. Another judged all the
+children by a child of her acquaintance whom she knew to be intelligent.
+This was, of course, an unsafe method, because no one could say how the
+child taken as an ideal would have responded to the tests used with the
+five children.
+
+In summarizing the result of his little experiment, Binet points out
+that the teachers employed, as if by instinct, the very method which he
+himself recommends. In using it, however, they made numerous errors.
+Their questions were often needlessly long. Several were "dilemma
+questions," that is, answerable by _yes_ or _no_. In such cases chance
+alone will cause fifty per cent of the answers to be correct. Some of
+the questions were merely tests of school knowledge. Others were
+entirely special, usable only with the children of this particular
+school on this particular day. Not all of the questions were put in the
+same terms, and a given response did not always receive the same score.
+When the children responded incorrectly or incompletely, they were often
+given help, but not always to the same extent. In other words, says
+Binet, it was evident that "the teachers employed very awkwardly a very
+excellent method."
+
+The above remark is as pertinent as it is expressive. As the statement
+implies, the test method is but a refinement and standardization of the
+common-sense approach. Binet remarks that most people who inquire into
+his method of measuring intelligence do so expecting to find something
+very surprising and mysterious; and on seeing how much it resembles the
+methods which common sense employs in ordinary life, they heave a sigh
+of disappointment and say, "Is that all?" Binet reminds us that the
+difference between the scientific and unscientific way of doing a thing
+is not necessarily a difference in the _nature_ of the method; it is
+often merely a difference in _exactness_. Science does the thing better,
+because it does it more accurately.
+
+It was of course not the purpose of Binet to cast a slur upon the good
+sense and judgment of teachers. The teachers who took part in the little
+experiment described above were Binet's personal friends. The errors he
+points out in his entertaining and good-humored account of the
+experiment are inherent in the situation. They are the kind of errors
+which any person, however discriminating and observant, is likely to
+make in estimating the intelligence of a subject without the use of
+standardized tests.
+
+It is the writer's experience that the teacher's estimate of a child's
+intelligence is much more reliable than that of the average parent; more
+accurate even than that of the physician who has not had psychological
+training.
+
+Indeed, it is an exceptional school physician who is able to give any
+very valuable assistance to teachers in the classification of mentally
+exceptional children for special pedagogical treatment.
+
+This is only to be expected, for the physician has ordinarily had much
+less instruction in psychology than the teacher, and of course
+infinitely less experience in judging the mental performances of
+children. Even if graduated from a first-rank medical school, the
+instruction he has received in the important subject of mental
+deficiency has probably been less adequate than that given to the
+students of a standard normal school. As a rule, the doctor has no
+equipment or special fitness which gives him any advantage over the
+teacher in acquiring facility in the use of intelligence tests.
+
+As for parents, it would of course be unreasonable to expect from them a
+very accurate judgment regarding the mental peculiarities of their
+children. The difficulty is not simply that which comes from lack of
+special training. The presence of parental affection renders impartial
+judgment impossible. Still more serious are the effects of habituation
+to the child's mental traits. As a result of such habituation the most
+intelligent parent tends to develop an unfortunate blindness to all
+sorts of abnormalities which exist in his own children.
+
+The only way of escape from the fallacies we have mentioned lies in the
+use of some kind of refined psychological procedure. Binet testing is
+destined to become universally known and practiced in schools, prisons,
+reformatories, charity stations, orphan asylums, and even ordinary
+homes, for the same reason that Babcock testing has become universal in
+dairying. Each is indispensable to its purpose.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER III
+
+DESCRIPTION OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD
+
+
+ESSENTIAL NATURE OF THE SCALE. The Binet scale is made up of an extended
+series of tests in the nature of "stunts," or problems, success in which
+demands the exercise of intelligence. As left by Binet, the scale
+consists of 54 tests, so graded in difficulty that the easiest lie well
+within the range of normal 3-year-old children, while the hardest tax
+the intelligence of the average adult. The problems are designed
+primarily to test native intelligence, not school knowledge or home
+training. They try to answer the question "How intelligent is this
+child?" How much the child has learned is of significance only in so far
+as it throws light on his ability to learn more.
+
+Binet fully appreciated the fact that intelligence is not homogeneous,
+that it has many aspects, and that no one kind of test will display it
+adequately. He therefore assembled for his intelligence scale tests of
+many different types, some of them designed to display differences of
+memory, others differences in power to reason, ability to compare, power
+of comprehension, time orientation, facility in the use of number
+concepts, power to combine ideas into a meaningful whole, the maturity
+of apperception, wealth of ideas, knowledge of common objects, etc.
+
+HOW THE SCALE WAS DERIVED. The tests were arranged in order of
+difficulty, as found by trying them upon some 200 normal children of
+different ages from 3 to 15 years. It was found, for illustration, that
+a certain test was passed by only a very small proportion of the younger
+children, say the 5-year-olds, and that the number passing this test
+increased rapidly in the succeeding years until by the age of 7 or
+8 years, let us say, practically all the children were successful.
+If, in our supposed case, the test was passed by about two thirds to
+three fourths of the normal children aged 7 years, it was considered by
+Binet a test of 7-year intelligence. In like manner, a test passed by
+65 to 75 per cent of the normal 9-year-olds was considered a test of
+9-year intelligence, and so on. By trying out many different tests in
+this way it was possible to secure five tests to represent each age from
+3 to 10 years (excepting age 4, which has only four tests), five for
+age 12, five for 15, and five for adults, making 54 tests in all.
+
+LIST OF TESTS. The following is the list of tests as arranged by Binet
+in 1911, shortly before his untimely death:--
+
+_Age 3:_
+    1. Points to nose, eyes, and mouth.
+    2. Repeats two digits.
+    3. Enumerates objects in a picture.
+    4. Gives family name.
+    5. Repeats a sentence of six syllables.
+
+_Age 4:_
+    1. Gives his sex.
+    2. Names key, knife, and penny.
+    3. Repeats three digits.
+    4. Compares two lines.
+
+_Age 5:_
+    1. Compares two weights.
+    2. Copies a square.
+    3. Repeats a sentence of ten syllables.
+    4. Counts four pennies.
+    5. Unites the halves of a divided rectangle.
+
+_Age 6:_
+    1. Distinguishes between morning and afternoon.
+    2. Defines familiar words in terms of use.
+    3. Copies a diamond.
+    4. Counts thirteen pennies.
+    5. Distinguishes pictures of ugly and pretty faces.
+
+_Age 7:_
+    1. Shows right hand and left ear.
+    2. Describes a picture.
+    3. Executes three commissions, given simultaneously.
+    4. Counts the value of six sous, three of which are double.
+    5. Names four cardinal colors.
+
+_Age 8:_
+    1. Compares two objects from memory.
+    2. Counts from 20 to 0.
+    3. Notes omissions from pictures.
+    4. Gives day and date.
+    5. Repeats five digits.
+
+_Age 9:_
+    1. Gives change from twenty sous.
+    2. Defines familiar words in terms superior to use.
+    3. Recognizes all the pieces of money.
+    4. Names the months of the year, in order.
+    5. Answers easy "comprehension questions."
+
+_Age 10:_
+    1. Arranges five blocks in order of weight.
+    2. Copies drawings from memory.
+    3. Criticizes absurd statements.
+    4. Answers difficult "comprehension questions."
+    5. Uses three given words in not more than two sentences.
+
+_Age 12:_
+    1. Resists suggestion.
+    2. Composes one sentence containing three given words.
+    3. Names sixty words in three minutes.
+    4. Defines certain abstract words.
+    5. Discovers the sense of a disarranged sentence.
+
+_Age 15:_
+    1. Repeats seven digits.
+    2. Finds three rhymes for a given word.
+    3. Repeats a sentence of twenty-six syllables.
+    4. Interprets pictures.
+    5. Interprets given facts.
+
+_Adult:_
+    1. Solves the paper-cutting test.
+    2. Rearranges a triangle in imagination.
+    3. Gives differences between pairs of abstract terms.
+    4. Gives three differences between a president and a king.
+    5. Gives the main thought of a selection which he has heard read.
+
+It should be emphasized that merely to name the tests in this way gives
+little idea of their nature and meaning, and tells nothing about Binet's
+method of conducting the 54 experiments. In order to use the tests
+intelligently it is necessary to acquaint one's self thoroughly with the
+purpose of each test, its correct procedure, and the psychological
+interpretation of different types of response.[10]
+
+[10] See Part II of this volume, and References 1 and 29, for discussion
+and interpretation of the individual tests.
+
+In fairness to Binet, it should also be borne in mind that the scale of
+tests was only a rough approximation to the ideal which the author had
+set himself to realize. Had his life been spared a few years longer, he
+would doubtless have carried the method much nearer perfection.
+
+HOW THE SCALE IS USED. By means of the Binet tests we can judge the
+intelligence of a given individual by comparison with standards of
+intellectual performance for normal children of different ages. In order
+to make the comparison it is only necessary to begin the examination of
+the subject at a point in the scale where all the tests are passed
+successfully, and to continue up the scale until no more successes are
+possible. Then we compare our subject's performances with the standard
+for normal children of the same age, and note the amount of acceleration
+or retardation.
+
+Let us suppose the subject being tested is 9 years of age. If he goes as
+far in the tests as normal 9-year-old children ordinarily go, we can say
+that the child has a "mental age" of 9 years, which in this case is
+normal (our child being 9 years of age). If he goes only as far as
+normal 8-year-old children ordinarily go, we say that his "mental age"
+is 8 years. In like manner, a mentally defective child of 9 years may
+have a "mental age" of only 4 years, or a young genius of 9 years may
+have a mental age of 12 or 13 years.
+
+SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD. Psychologists had
+experimented with intelligence tests for at least twenty years before
+the Binet scale made its appearance. The question naturally suggests
+itself why Binet should have been successful in a field where previous
+efforts had been for the most part futile. The answer to this question
+is found in three essential differences between Binet's method and those
+formerly employed.
+
+1. _The use of age standards._ Binet was the first to utilize the idea
+of age standards, or norms, in the measurement of intelligence. It will
+be understood, of course, that Binet did not set out to invent tests of
+10-year intelligence, 6-year intelligence, etc. Instead, as already
+explained, he began with a series of tests ranging from very easy to
+very difficult, and by trying these tests on children of different ages
+and noting the percentages of successes in the various years, he was
+able to locate them (approximately) in the years where they belonged.
+
+This plan has the great advantage of giving us standards which are
+easily grasped. To say, for illustration, that a given subject has a
+grade of intelligence equal to that of the average child of 8 years is a
+statement whose general import does not need to be explained. Previous
+investigators had worked with subjects the degree of whose intelligence
+was unknown, and with tests the difficulty of which was equally unknown.
+An immense amount of ingenuity was spent in devising tests which were
+used in such a way as to preclude any very meaningful interpretation of
+the responses.
+
+The Binet method enables us to characterize the intelligence of a child
+in a far more definite way than had hitherto been possible. Current
+descriptive terms like "bright," "moderately bright," "dull," "very
+dull," "feeble-minded," etc., have had no universally accepted meaning.
+A child who is designated by one person as "moderately bright" may be
+called "very bright" by another person. The degree of intelligence which
+one calls "moderate dullness," another may call "extreme dullness," etc.
+But every one knows what is meant by the term 8-year mentality, 4-year
+mentality, etc., even if he is not able to define these grades of
+intelligence in psychological terms; and by ascertaining experimentally
+what intellectual tasks children of different ages can perform, we are,
+of course, able to make our age standards as definite as we please.
+
+Why should a device so simple have waited so long for a discoverer? We
+do not know. It is of a class with many other unaccountable mysteries in
+the development of scientific method. Apparently the idea of an
+age-grade method, as this is called, did not come to Binet himself until
+he had experimented with intelligence tests for some fifteen years. At
+least his first provisional scale, published in 1905, was not made up
+according to the age-grade plan. It consisted merely of 30 tests,
+arranged roughly in order of difficulty. Although Binet nowhere gives
+any account of the steps by which this crude and ungraded scale was
+transformed into the relatively complete age-grade scale of 1908, we can
+infer that the original and ingenious idea of utilizing age norms was
+suggested by the data collected with the 1905 scale. However the
+discovery was made, it ranks, perhaps, from the practical point of view,
+as the most important in all the history of psychology.
+
+2. _The kind of mental functions brought into play._ In the second
+place, the Binet tests differ from most of the earlier attempts in that
+they are designed to test the higher and more complex mental processes,
+instead of the simpler and more elementary ones. Hence they set
+problems for the reasoning powers and ingenuity, provoke judgments about
+abstract matters, etc., instead of attempting to measure sensory
+discrimination, mere retentiveness, rapidity of reaction, and the like.
+Psychologists had generally considered the higher processes too complex
+to be measured directly, and accordingly sought to get at them
+indirectly by correlating supposed intelligence with simpler processes
+which could readily be measured, such as reaction time, rapidity of
+tapping, discrimination of tones and colors, etc. While they were
+disputing over their contradictory findings in this line of exploration,
+Binet went directly to the point and succeeded where they had failed.
+
+It is now generally admitted by psychologists that higher intelligence
+is little concerned in such elementary processes as those mentioned
+above. Many of the animals have keen sensory discrimination.
+Feeble-minded children, unless of very low grade, do not differ very
+markedly from normal children in sensitivity of the skin, visual
+acuity, simple reaction time, type of imagery, etc. But in power of
+comprehension, abstraction, and ability to direct thought, in the nature
+of the associative processes, in amount of information possessed, and in
+spontaneity of attention, they differ enormously.
+
+3. _Binet would test "general intelligence."_ Finally, Binet's success
+was largely due to his abandonment of the older "faculty psychology"
+which, far from being defunct, had really given direction to most of the
+earlier work with mental tests. Where others had attempted to measure
+memory attention, sense discrimination, etc., as separate faculties or
+functions, Binet undertook to ascertain the _general level_ of
+intelligence. Others had thought the task easier of accomplishment by
+measuring each division or aspect of intelligence separately, and
+summating the results. Binet, too, began in this way, and it was only
+after years of experimentation by the usual methods that he finally
+broke away from them and undertook, so to speak, to triangulate the
+height of his tower without first getting the dimensions of the
+individual stones which made it up.
+
+The assumption that it is easier to measure a part, or one aspect, of
+intelligence than all of it, is fallacious in that the parts are not
+separate parts and cannot be separated by any refinement of experiment.
+They are interwoven and intertwined. Each ramifies everywhere and
+appears in all other functions. The analogy of the stones of the tower
+does not really apply. Memory, for example, cannot be tested separately
+from attention, or sense-discrimination separately from the associative
+processes. After many vain attempts to disentangle the various
+intellective functions, Binet decided to test their combined functional
+capacity without any pretense of measuring the exact contribution
+of each to the total product. It is hardly too much to say that
+intelligence tests have been successful just to the extent to which they
+have been guided by this aim.
+
+Memory, attention, imagination, etc., are terms of "structural
+psychology." Binet's psychology is dynamic. He conceives intelligence as
+the sum total of those thought processes which consist in mental
+adaptation. This adaptation is not explicable in terms of the old mental
+"faculties." No one of these can explain a single thought process, for
+such process always involves the participation of many functions whose
+separate rôles are impossible to distinguish accurately. Instead of
+measuring the intensity of various mental states (psycho-physics), it is
+more enlightening to measure their combined effect on adaptation. Using
+a biological comparison, Binet says the old "faculties" correspond to
+the separate tissues of an animal or plant, while his own "scheme of
+thought" corresponds to the functioning organ itself. For Binet,
+psychology is the science of behavior.
+
+BINET'S CONCEPTION OF GENERAL INTELLIGENCE. In devising tests of
+intelligence it is, of course, necessary to be guided by some
+assumption, or assumptions, regarding the nature of intelligence. To
+adopt any other course is to depend for success upon happy chance.
+
+However, it is impossible to arrive at a final definition of
+intelligence on the basis of _a-priori_ considerations alone. To demand,
+as critics of the Binet method have sometimes done, that one who would
+measure intelligence should first present a complete definition of it,
+is quite unreasonable. As Stern points out, electrical currents were
+measured long before their nature was well understood. Similar
+illustrations could be drawn from the processes involved in chemistry
+physiology, and other sciences. In the case of intelligence it may be
+truthfully said that no adequate definition can possibly be framed which
+is not based primarily on the symptoms empirically brought to light by
+the test method. The best that can be done in advance of such data is to
+make tentative assumptions as to the probable nature of intelligence,
+and then to subject these assumptions to tests which will show their
+correctness or incorrectness. New hypotheses can then be framed for
+further trial, and thus gradually we shall be led to a conception of
+intelligence which will be meaningful and in harmony with all the
+ascertainable facts.
+
+Such was the method of Binet. Only those unacquainted with Binet's
+more than fifteen years of labor preceding the publication of his
+intelligence scale would think of accusing him of making no effort to
+analyze the mental processes which his tests bring into play. It is true
+that many of Binet's earlier assumptions proved untenable, and in this
+event he was always ready, with exceptional candor and intellectual
+plasticity, to acknowledge his error and to plan a new line of attack.
+
+Binet's conception of intelligence emphasizes three characteristics of
+the thought process: (1) Its tendency to take and maintain a definite
+direction; (2) the capacity to make adaptations for the purpose of
+attaining a desired end; and (3) the power of auto-criticism.[11]
+
+[11] See Binet and Simon: "L'intelligence des imbeciles," in _L'Année
+Psychologique_ (1909), pp. 1-147. The last division of this article is
+devoted to a discussion of the essential nature of the higher thought
+processes, and is a wonderful example of that keen psychological
+analysis in which Binet was so gifted.
+
+How these three aspects of intelligence enter into the performances with
+various tests of the scale is set forth from time to time in our
+directions for giving and interpreting the individual tests.[12] An
+illustration which may be given here is that of the "patience test," or
+uniting the disarranged parts of a divided rectangle. As described by
+Binet, this operation has the following elements: "(1) to keep in mind
+the end to be attained, that is to say, the figure to be formed; (2) to
+try different combinations under the influence of this directing idea,
+which guides the efforts of the subject even though he may not be
+conscious of the fact; and (3) to judge the combination which has been
+made, to compare it with the model, and to decide whether it is the
+correct one."
+
+[12] See especially pages 162 and 238.
+
+Much the same processes are called for in many other of the Binet tests,
+particularly those of arranging weights, rearranging dissected
+sentences, drawing a diamond or square from copy, finding a sentence
+containing three given words, counting backwards, etc.
+
+However, an examination of the scale will show that the choice of tests
+was not guided entirely by any single formula as to the nature of
+intelligence. Binet's approach was a many-sided one. The scale includes
+tests of time orientation, of three or four kinds of memory, of
+apperception, of language comprehension, of knowledge about common
+objects, of free association, of number mastery, of constructive
+imagination, and of ability to compare concepts, to see contradictions,
+to combine fragments into a unitary whole, to comprehend abstract terms,
+and to meet novel situations.
+
+OTHER CONCEPTIONS OF INTELLIGENCE. It is interesting to compare Binet's
+conception of intelligence with the definitions which have been offered
+by other psychologists. According to Ebbinghaus, for example, the
+essence of intelligence lies in comprehending together in a unitary,
+meaningful whole, impressions and associations which are more or less
+independent, heterogeneous, or even partly contradictory. "Intellectual
+ability consists in the elaboration of a whole into its worth and
+meaning by means of many-sided combination, correction, and completion
+of numerous kindred associations.... It is a _combination activity_."
+
+Meumann offers a twofold definition. From the psychological point of
+view, intelligence is the power of independent and creative elaboration
+of new products out of the material given by memory and the senses. From
+the practical point of view, it involves the ability to avoid errors, to
+surmount difficulties, and to adjust to environment.
+
+Stern defines intelligence as "the general capacity of an individual
+consciously to adjust his thinking to new requirements: it is general
+adaptability to new problems and conditions of life."
+
+Spearman, Hart, and others of the English school define intelligence as
+a "common central factor" which participates in all sorts of
+special mental activities. This factor is explained in terms of a
+psycho-physiological hypothesis of "cortex energy," "cerebral
+plasticity," etc.
+
+The above definitions are only to a slight extent contradictory or
+inharmonious. They differ mainly in point of view or in the location of
+the emphasis. Each expresses a part of the truth, and none all of it. It
+will be evident that the conception of Binet is broad enough to include
+the most important elements in each of the other definitions quoted.
+
+GUIDING PRINCIPLES IN CHOICE AND ARRANGEMENT OF TESTS. In choosing his
+tests Binet was guided by the conception of intelligence which we have
+set forth above. Tests were devised which would presumably bring
+into play the various mental processes thought to be concerned in
+intelligence, and then these tests were tried out on normal children of
+different ages. If the percentage of passes for a given test increased
+but little or not at all in going from younger to older children this
+test was discarded. On the other hand, if the proportion of passes
+increased rapidly with age, and if children of a given age, who on other
+grounds were known to be bright, passed more frequently than children of
+the same age who were known to be dull, then the test was judged a
+satisfactory test of intelligence. As we have shown elsewhere,[13]
+practically all of Binet's tests fulfill these requirements reasonably
+well, a fact which bears eloquent testimony to the keen psychological
+insight of their author.
+
+[13] See p. 55.
+
+In arranging the tests into a system Binet's guiding principle was to
+find an arrangement of the tests which would cause an average child of
+any given age to test "at age"; that is, the average 5-year-old must
+show a mental age of 5 years, the average 8-year-old a mental age of
+8 years, etc. In order to secure this result Binet found that his data
+seemed to require the location of an individual test in that year where
+it was passed by about two thirds to three fourths of unselected
+children.
+
+It was in the assembling of the tests that the most serious faults of
+the scale had their origin. Further investigation has shown that a great
+many of the tests were misplaced as much as one year, and several of
+them two years. On the whole, the scale as Binet left it was decidedly
+too easy in the lower ranges, and too difficult in the upper. As a
+result, the average child of 5 years was caused to test at not far from
+6 years, the average child of 12 years not far from 11. In the Stanford
+revision an effort has been made to correct this fault, along with
+certain other generally recognized imperfections.
+
+SOME AVOWED LIMITATIONS OF THE BINET TESTS. The Binet tests have often
+been criticized for their unfitness to perform certain services which in
+reality they were never meant to render. This is unfair. We cannot make
+a just evaluation of the scale without bearing in mind its avowed
+limitations.
+
+For example, the scale does not pretend to measure the entire mentality
+of the subject, but only _general intelligence_. There is no pretense of
+testing the emotions or the will beyond the extent to which these
+naturally display themselves in the tests of intelligence. The scale was
+not designed as a tool for the analysis of those emotional or volitional
+aberrations which are concerned in such mental disorders as hysteria,
+insanity, etc. These conditions do not present a progressive reduction
+of intelligence to the infantile level, and in most of them other
+factors besides intelligence play an important rôle. Moreover, even in
+the normal individual the fruitfulness of intelligence, the direction in
+which it shall be applied, and its methods of work are to a certain
+extent determined by the extraneous factors of emotion and volition.
+
+It should, nevertheless, be pointed out that defects of intelligence, in
+a large majority of cases, also involve disturbances of the emotional
+and volitional functions. We do not expect to find perfectly normal
+emotions or will power of average strength coupled with marked
+intellectual deficiency, and as a matter of fact such a combination is
+rare indeed. In the course of an examination with the Binet tests, the
+experienced clinical psychologist is able to gain considerable insight
+into the subject's emotional and volitional equipment, even though the
+method was designed primarily for another purpose.
+
+A second misunderstanding can be avoided by remembering that the Binet
+scale does not pretend to bring to light the idiosyncrasies of special
+talent, but only to measure the general level of intelligence. It cannot
+be used for the discovery of exceptional ability in drawing, painting,
+music, mathematics, oratory, salesmanship, etc., because no effort is
+made to explore the processes underlying these abilities. It can,
+therefore, never serve as a _detailed chart_ for the vocational guidance
+of children, telling us which will succeed in business, which in art,
+which in medicine, etc. It is not a new kind of phrenology. At the same
+time, as we have already pointed out, _it is capable of bounding roughly
+the vocational territory in which an individual's intelligence will
+probably permit success, nothing else preventing_.[14]
+
+[14] See p. 17.
+
+In the third place, it must not be supposed that the scale can be used
+as a complete pedagogical guide. Although intelligence tests furnish
+data of the greatest significance for pedagogical procedure, they do not
+suggest the appropriate educational methods in detail. These will
+have to be worked out in a practical way for the various grades of
+intelligence, and at great cost of labor and patience.
+
+Finally, in arriving at an estimate of a subject's grade of intelligence
+and his susceptibility to training, it would be a mistake to ignore the
+data obtainable from other sources. No competent psychologist, however
+ardent a supporter of the Binet method he might be, would recommend such
+a policy. Those who accept the method as all-sufficient are as much in
+error as those who consider it as no more important than any one of a
+dozen other approaches. Standardized tests have already become and will
+remain by far the most reliable single method for grading intelligence,
+but the results they furnish will always need to be interpreted in the
+light of supplementary information regarding the subject's personal
+history, including medical record, accidents, play habits, industrial
+efficiency, social and moral traits, school success, home environment,
+etc. Without question, however, the improved Binet tests will contribute
+more than all other data combined to the end of enabling us to forecast
+a child's possibilities of future improvement, and this is the
+information which will aid most in the proper direction of his
+education.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IV
+
+NATURE OF THE STANFORD REVISION AND EXTENSION
+
+
+Although the Binet scale quickly demonstrated its value as an instrument
+for the classification of mentally-retarded and otherwise exceptional
+children, it had, nevertheless, several imperfections which greatly
+limited its usefulness. There was a dearth of tests at the higher mental
+levels, the procedure was so inadequately defined that needless
+disagreement came about in the interpretation of data, and so many of
+the tests were misplaced as to make the results of an examination more
+or less misleading, particularly in the case of very young subjects and
+those near the adult level. It was for the purpose of correcting
+these and certain other faults that the Stanford investigation was
+planned.[15]
+
+[15] The writer wishes to acknowledge his very great indebtedness to
+Miss Grace Lyman, Dr. George Ordahl, Dr. Louise Ellison Ordahl, Miss
+Neva Galbreath, Mr. Wilford Talbert, Dr. J. Harold Williams, Mr. Herbert
+E. Knollin, and Miss Irene Cuneo for their coöperation in making the
+tests on which the Stanford revision is chiefly based. Without their
+loyal assistance the investigation could not have been carried through.
+
+Grateful acknowledgment is also made to the many public school teachers
+and principals for their generous and invaluable coöperation in
+furnishing subjects for the tests, and in supplying, sometimes at
+considerable cost of labor, the supplementary information which was
+called for regarding the pupils tested. Their contribution was made in
+the interest of educational science, and without expectation of personal
+benefits of any kind. Their professional spirit cannot be too highly
+commended.
+
+SOURCES OF DATA. Our revision is the result of several years of work,
+and involved the examination of approximately 2300 subjects, including
+1700 normal children, 200 defective and superior children, and more than
+400 adults.
+
+Tests of 400 of the 1700 normal children had been made by Childs and
+Terman in 1910-11, and of 300 children by Trost, Waddle, and Terman in
+1911-12. For various reasons, however, the results of these tests did
+not furnish satisfactory data for a thoroughgoing revision of the scale.
+Accordingly a new investigation was undertaken, somewhat more extensive
+than the others, and more carefully planned. Its main features may be
+described as follows:--
+
+1. The first step was to assemble as nearly as possible all the results
+which had been secured for each test of the scale by all the workers of
+all countries. The result was a large sheet of tabulated data for each
+individual test, including percentages passing the test at various ages,
+conditions under which the results were secured, method of procedure,
+etc. After a comparative study of these data, and in the light of
+results we had ourselves secured, a provisional arrangement of the tests
+was prepared for try-out.
+
+2. In addition to the tests of the original Binet scale, 40 additional
+tests were included for try-out. This, it was expected, would make
+possible the elimination of some of the least satisfactory tests, and at
+the same time permit the addition of enough new ones to give at least
+six tests, instead of five, for each age group.
+
+3. A plan was then devised for securing subjects who should be as nearly
+as possible representative of the several ages. The method was to select
+a school in a community of average social status, a school attended by
+all or practically all the children in the district where it was
+located. In order to get clear pictures of age differences the tests
+were confined to children who were within two months of a birthday. To
+avoid accidental selection, _all_ the children within two months of a
+birthday were tested, in whatever grade enrolled. Tests of foreign-born
+children, however, were eliminated in the treatment of results. There
+remained tests of approximately 1000 children, of whom 905 were between
+5 and 14 years of age.
+
+4. The children's responses were, for the most part, recorded
+_verbatim_. This made it possible to re-score the records according
+to any desired standard, and thus to fit a test more perfectly to the
+age level assigned it.
+
+5. Much attention was given to securing uniformity of procedure. A
+half-year was devoted to training the examiners and another half-year to
+the supervision of the testing. In the further interests of uniformity
+all the records were scored by one person (the writer).
+
+METHOD OF ARRIVING AT A REVISION. The revision of the scale below
+the 14-year level was based almost entirely on the tests of the
+above-mentioned 1,000 unselected children. The guiding principle was to
+secure an arrangement of the tests and a standard of scoring which would
+cause the median mental age of the unselected children of each age group
+to coincide with the median chronological age. That is, a correct scale
+must cause the _average_ child of 5 years to test exactly at 5, the
+_average_ child at 6 to test exactly at 6, etc. Or, to express the same
+fact in terms of intelligence quotient,[16] a correct scale must give a
+median intelligence quotient of unity, or 100 per cent, for unselected
+children of each age.
+
+[16] The intelligence quotient (often designated as I Q) is the ratio of
+mental age to chronological age. (See pp. 65 _ff._ and 78 _ff._)
+
+If the median mental age resulting at any point from the provisional
+arrangement of tests was too high or too low, it was only necessary to
+change the location of certain of the tests, or to change the standard
+of scoring, until an order of arrangement and a standard of passing were
+found which would throw the median mental age where it belonged. We had
+already become convinced, for reasons too involved for presentation
+here, that no satisfactory revision of the Binet scale was possible on
+any theoretical considerations as to the percentage of passes which an
+individual test ought to show in a given year in order to be considered
+standard for that year.
+
+As was to be expected, the first draft of the revision did not prove
+satisfactory. The scale was still too hard at some points, and too easy
+at others. In fact, three successive revisions were necessary, involving
+three separate scorings of the data and as many tabulations of the
+mental ages, before the desired degree of accuracy was secured. As
+finally revised, the scale gives a median intelligence quotient closely
+approximating 100 for the unselected children of each age from 4 to 14.
+
+Since our school children who were above 14 years and still in the
+grades were retarded left-overs, it was necessary to base the revision
+above this level on the tests of adults. These included 30 business men
+and 150 "migrating" unemployed men tested by Mr. H. E. Knollin, 150
+adolescent delinquents tested by Mr. J. Harold Williams, and 50
+high-school students tested by the writer.
+
+The extension of the scale in the upper range is such that ordinarily
+intelligent adults, little educated, test up to what is called the
+"average adult" level. Adults whose intelligence is known from other
+sources to be superior are found to test well up toward the "superior
+adult" level, and this holds whether the subjects in question are well
+educated or practically unschooled. The almost entirely unschooled
+business men, in fact, tested fully as well as high-school juniors and
+seniors.
+
+Figure 1 shows the distribution of mental ages for 62 adults, including
+the 30 business men and the 32 high-school pupils who were over 16 years
+of age. It will be noted that the middle section of the graph represents
+the "mental ages" falling between 15 and 17. This is the range which we
+have designated as the "average adult" level. Those above 17 are called
+"superior adults," those between 13 and 15, "inferior adults." Subjects
+much over 15 years of age who test in the neighborhood of 12 years may
+ordinarily be considered border-line cases.
+
+[Illustration: FIG. 1. DISTRIBUTION OF MENTAL AGES OF 62 NORMAL ADULTS]
+
+The following method was employed for determining the validity of a
+test. The children of each age level were divided into three groups
+according to intelligence quotient, those testing below 90, those
+between 90 and 109, and those with an intelligence quotient of 110 or
+above. The percentages of passes on each individual test at or near that
+age level were then ascertained separately for these three groups. If a
+test fails to show a decidedly higher proportion of passes in the
+superior I Q group than in the inferior I Q group, it cannot be regarded
+as a satisfactory test of intelligence. On the other hand, a test which
+satisfies this criterion must be accepted as valid or the entire scale
+must be rejected. Henceforth it stands or falls with the scale as a
+whole.
+
+When tried out by this method, some of the tests which have been most
+criticized showed a high degree of reliability; certain others which
+have been considered excellent proved to be so little correlated with
+intelligence that they had to be discarded.
+
+After making a few necessary eliminations, 90 tests remained, or 36 more
+than the number included in the Binet 1911 scale. There are 6 at each
+age level from 3 to 10, 8 at 12, 6 at 14, 6 at "average adult," 6 at
+"superior adult," and 16 alternative tests. The alternative tests, which
+are distributed among the different groups, are intended to be used only
+as substitutes when one or more of the regular tests have been rendered,
+by coaching or otherwise, undesirable.[17]
+
+[17] See p. 137 _ff._ for explanations regarding the calculation of
+mental age and the use of alternative tests.
+
+Of the 36 new tests, 27 were added and standardized in the various
+Stanford investigations. Two tests were borrowed from the Healy-Fernald
+series, one from Kuhlmann, one was adapted from Bonser, and the
+remaining five were amplifications or adaptations of some of the earlier
+Binet tests.
+
+Following is a complete list of the tests of the Stanford revision.
+Those designated _al._ are alternative tests. The guide for giving and
+scoring the tests is presented at length in Part II of this volume.
+
+
+_The Stanford revision and extension_
+
+_Year III._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Points to parts of body. (3 to 4.)
+         Nose; eyes; mouth; hair.
+    2. Names familiar objects. (3 to 5.)
+         Key, penny, closed knife, watch, pencil.
+    3. Pictures, enumeration or better. (At least 3 objects enumerated
+       in one picture.)
+         (a) Dutch Home; (b) River Scene; (c) Post-Office.
+    4. Gives sex.
+    5. Gives last name.
+    6. Repeats 6 to 7 syllables. (1 to 3.)
+   Al. Repeats 3 digits. (1 success in 3 trials. Order correct.)
+
+_Year IV._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Compares lines. (3 trials, no error.)
+    2. Discrimination of forms. (Kuhlmann.) (Not over 3 errors.)
+    3. Counts 4 pennies. (No error.)
+    4. Copies square. (Pencil. 1 to 3.)
+    5. Comprehension, 1st degree. (2 to 3.) (Stanford addition.)
+         "What must you do": "When you are sleepy?" "Cold?" "Hungry?"
+    6. Repeats 4 digits. (1 to 3. Order correct.) (Stanford addition.)
+   Al. Repeats 12 to 13 syllables. (1 to 3 absolutely correct, or 2 with
+       1 error each.)
+
+_Year V._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Comparison of weights. (2 to 3.)
+         3-15; 15-3; 3-15.
+    2. Colors. (No error.)
+         Red; yellow; blue; green.
+    3. Æsthetic comparison. (No error.)
+    4. Definitions, use or better. (4 to 6.)
+         Chair; horse; fork; doll; pencil; table.
+    5. Patience, or divided rectangle. (2 to 3 trials. 1 minute each.)
+    6. Three commissions. (No error. Order correct.)
+   Al. Age.
+
+_Year VI._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Right and left. (No error.)
+         Right hand; left ear; right eye.
+    2. Mutilated pictures. (3 to 4 correct.)
+    3. Counts 13 pennies. (1 to 2 trials, without error.)
+    4. Comprehension, 2d degree. (2 to 3.) "What's the thing for
+       you to do":
+         (a) "If it is raining when you start to school?"
+         (b) "If you find that your house is on fire?"
+         (c) "If you are going some place and miss your car?"
+    5. Coins. (3 to 4.)
+         Nickel; penny; quarter; dime.
+    6. Repeats 16 to 18 syllables. (1 to 3 absolutely correct, or 2
+       with 1 error each.)
+   Al. Morning or afternoon.
+
+_Year VII._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Fingers. (No error.) Right; left; both.
+    2. Pictures, description or better. (Over half of performance
+       description:) Dutch Home; River Scene; Post-Office.
+    3. Repeats 5 digits. (1 to 3. Order correct.)
+    4. Ties bow-knot. (Model shown. 1 minute.) (Stanford addition.)
+    5. Gives differences. (2 to 3.)
+         Fly and butterfly; stone and egg; wood and glass.
+    6. Copies diamond. (Pen. 2 to 3.)
+Al. 1. Names days of week. (Order correct. 2 to 3 checks correct.)
+Al. 2. Repeats 3 digits backwards. (1 to 3.)
+
+_Year VIII._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Ball and field. (Inferior plan or better.) (Stanford addition.)
+    2. Counts 20 to 1. (40 seconds. 1 error allowed.)
+    3. Comprehension, 3d degree. (2 to 3.) "What's the thing for you to
+       do":
+         (a) "When you have broken something which belongs to some one
+             else?"
+         (b) "When you are on your way to school and notice that you are
+             in danger of being tardy?"
+         (c) "If a playmate hits you without meaning to do it?"
+    4. Gives similarities, two things. (2 to 4.) (Stanford addition.)
+         Wood and coal; apple and peach; iron and silver; ship and
+         automobile.
+    5. Definitions superior to use. (2 to 4.)
+         Balloon; tiger; football; soldier.
+    6. Vocabulary, 20 words. (Stanford addition. For list of words used,
+       see record booklet.)
+Al. 1. First six coins. (No error.)
+Al. 2. Dictation. ("See the little boy." Easily legible. Pen. 1 minute.)
+
+_Year IX._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Date. (Allow error of 3 days in _c_, no error in _a_, _b_, or _d_.)
+         (a) day of week; (b) month; (c) day of month; (d) year.
+    2. Weights. (3, 6, 9, 12, 15. Procedure not illustrated. 2 to 3.)
+    3. Makes change. (2 to 3. No coins, paper, or pencil.)
+         10--4; 15--12; 25--4.
+    4. Repeats 4 digits backwards. (1 to 3.) (Stanford addition.)
+    5. Three words. (2 to 3. Oral. 1 sentence or not over 2 coördinate
+       clauses.)
+         Boy, river, ball; work, money, men; desert, rivers, lakes.
+    6. Rhymes. (3 rhymes for two of three words. 1 minute for each part.)
+         Day; mill; spring.
+Al. 1. Months. (15 seconds and 1 error in naming. 2 checks of 3 correct.)
+Al. 2. Stamps, gives total value. (Second trial if individual values are
+       known.)
+
+_Year X._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Vocabulary, 30 words. (Stanford addition.)
+    2. Absurdities. (4 to 5. Warn. Spontaneous correction allowed.) (Four
+       of Binet's, one Stanford.)
+    3. Designs. (1 correct, 1 half correct. Expose 10 seconds.)
+    4. Reading and report. (8 memories. 35 seconds and 2 mistakes in
+       reading.) (Binet's selection.)
+    5. Comprehension, 4th degree. (2 to 3. Question may be repeated.)
+         (a) "What ought you to say when some one asks your opinion
+             about a person you don't know very well?"
+         (b) "What ought you to do before undertaking (beginning)
+             something very important?"
+         (c) "Why should we judge a person more by his actions than by
+             his words?"
+    6. Names 60 words. (Illustrate with clouds, dog, chair, happy.)
+Al. 1. Repeats 6 digits. (1 to 2. Order correct.) (Stanford addition.)
+Al. 2. Repeats 20 to 22 syllables. (1 to 3 correct, or 2 with 1 error
+       each.)
+Al. 3. Form board. (Healy-Fernald Puzzle A. 3 times in 5 minutes.)
+
+_Year XII._ (_8 tests, 3 months each._)
+    1. Vocabulary, 40 words. (Stanford addition.)
+    2. Abstract words. (3 to 5.)
+         Pity; revenge; charity; envy; justice.
+    3. Ball and field. (Superior plan.) (Stanford addition.)
+    4. Dissected sentences. (2 to 3. 1 minute each.)
+    5. Fables. (Score 4; i.e., two correct or the equivalent in half
+       credits.) (Stanford addition.)
+         Hercules and Wagoner; Maid and Eggs; Fox and Crow;
+         Farmer and Stork; Miller, Son, and Donkey.
+    6. Repeats 5 digits backwards. (1 to 3.) (Stanford addition.)
+    7. Pictures, interpretation. (3 to 4. "Explain this picture.")
+         Dutch Home; River Scene; Post-Office; Colonial Home.
+    8. Gives similarities, three things. (3 to 5.) (Stanford addition.)
+         Snake, cow, sparrow; book, teacher, newspaper; wool, cotton,
+         leather; knife-blade, penny, piece of wire; rose, potato,
+         tree.
+
+_Year XIV._ (_6 tests, 4 months each._)
+    1. Vocabulary, 50 words. (Stanford addition.)
+    2. Induction test. (Gets rule by 6th folding.) (Stanford addition.)
+    3. President and king. (Power; accession; tenure. 2 to 3.)
+    4. Problems of fact. (2 to 3.) (Binet's two and one Stanford
+       addition.)
+    5. Arithmetical reasoning. (1 minute each. 2 to 3.) (Adapted from
+       Bonser.)
+    6. Clock. (2 to 3. Error must not exceed 3 or 4 minutes.)
+         6.22. 8.10. 2.46.
+   Al. Repeats 7 digits. (1 to 2. Order correct.)
+
+"AVERAGE ADULT." (_6 tests, 5 months each._)
+    1. Vocabulary, 65 words. (Stanford addition.)
+    2. Interpretation of fables. (Score 8.) (Stanford addition.)
+    3. Difference between abstract words. (3 real contrasts out of 4.)
+         Laziness and idleness; evolution and revolution; poverty and
+         misery; character and reputation.
+    4. Problem of the enclosed boxes. (3 to 4.) (Stanford addition.)
+    5. Repeats 6 digits backwards. (1 to 3.) (Stanford addition.)
+    6. Code, writes "Come quickly." (2 errors. Omission of dot counts
+       half error. Illustrate with "war" and "spy.") (From Healy and
+       Fernald.)
+Al. 1. Repeats 28 syllables. (1 to 2 absolutely correct.)
+Al. 2. Comprehension of physical relations. (2 to 3.) (Stanford addition.)
+         Path of cannon ball; weight of fish in water; hitting distant
+         mark.
+
+"SUPERIOR ADULT." (_6 tests, 6 months each._)
+    1. Vocabulary, 75 words. (Stanford addition.)
+    2. Binet's paper-cutting test. (Draws, folds, and locates holes.)
+    3. Repeats 8 digits. (1 to 3. Order correct.) (Stanford addition.)
+    4. Repeats thought of passage heard. (1 to 2.) (Binet's and Wissler's
+       selections adapted.)
+    5. Repeats 7 digits backwards. (1 to 3.) (Stanford addition.)
+    6. Ingenuity test. (2 to 3. 5 minutes each.) (Stanford addition.)
+
+
+SUMMARY OF CHANGES. A comparison of the above list with either the Binet
+1908 or 1911 series will reveal many changes. On the whole, it differs
+somewhat more from the Binet 1911 scale than from that of 1908. Thus, of
+the 49 tests below the "adult" group in the 1911 scale, 2 are eliminated
+and 29 are relocated. Of these, 25 are moved downward and 4 upward. The
+shifts are as follows:--
+
+    Down 1 year, 18
+    Down 2 years, 4
+    Down 3 years, 2
+    Down 6 years, 1
+      Up 1 year,  3
+      Up 2 years, 1
+
+Of the adult group in Binet's 1911 series 1 is eliminated, 2 are moved
+up to "superior adult," and 1 is moved up to 14. Accordingly, of Binet's
+entire 54 tests, we have eliminated 3 and relocated 32, leaving only 19
+in the positions assigned them by Binet. The 3 eliminated are: repeating
+2 digits, resisting suggestion, and "reversed triangle."
+
+The revision is really more extensive than the above figures would
+suggest, since minor changes have been made in the scoring of a great
+many tests in order to make them fit better the locations assigned them.
+Throughout the scale the procedure and scoring have been worked over and
+made more definite with the idea of promoting uniformity. This phase of
+the revision is perhaps more important than the mere relocation of
+tests. Also, the addition of numerous tests in the upper ranges of the
+scale affects very considerably the mental ages above the level of
+10 or 11 years.
+
+EFFECTS OF THE REVISION ON THE MENTAL AGES SECURED. The most important
+effect of the revision is to reduce the mental ages secured in the lower
+ranges of the scale, and to raise considerably the mental ages above
+10 or 11 years. This difference also obtains, though to a somewhat
+smaller extent, between the Stanford revision and those of Goddard and
+Kuhlmann.
+
+For example, of 104 adult individuals testing by the Stanford revision
+between 12 and 14 years, and who were therefore somewhat above the level
+of feeble-mindedness as that term is usually defined, 50 per cent tested
+below 12 years by the Goddard revision. That the dull and border-line
+adults are so much more readily distinguished from the feeble-minded by
+the Stanford revision than by other Binet series is due as much to the
+addition of tests in the upper groups as to the relocation of existing
+tests.
+
+On the other hand, the Stanford revision causes young subjects to test
+lower than any other version of the Binet scale. At 5 or 6 years the
+mental ages secured by the Stanford revision average from 6 to 10 months
+lower than other revisions yield.
+
+The above differences are more significant than would at first appear.
+An error of 10 months in the mental age of a 5-year-old is as serious as
+an error of 20 months in the case of a 10-year-old. Stating the error in
+terms of the intelligence quotient makes it more evident. Thus, an error
+of 10 months in the mental age of a 5-year-old means an error of almost
+15 per cent in the intelligence quotient. A scale which tests this much
+too low would cause the child with a true intelligence quotient of 75
+(which ordinarily means feeble-mindedness or border-line intelligence)
+to test at 90, or only slightly below normal.
+
+Three serious consequences came from the too great ease of the original
+Binet scale at the lower end, and its too great difficulty at the upper
+end:--
+
+1. In young subjects the higher grades of mental deficiency were
+overlooked, because the scale caused such subjects to test only a little
+below normal.
+
+2. The proportion of feeble-mindedness among adult subjects was greatly
+overestimated, because subjects who were really of the 12- or 13-year
+mental level could only earn a mental age of about 11 years.
+
+3. Confusion resulted in efforts to trace the mental growth of either
+feeble-minded or normal children. For example, by other versions of the
+Binet scale an average 5-year-old will show an intelligence quotient
+probably not far from 110 or 115; at 9, an intelligence quotient of
+about 100; and at 14, an intelligence quotient of about 85 or 90.
+
+By such a scale the true border-line case would test approximately as
+follows:--
+
+    At age 5, 90 I Q (apparently not far below normal).
+    At age 9, 75 I Q (border-line).
+    At age 14, 65 I Q (moron deficiency).
+
+On the other hand, re-tests of children by the Stanford revision have
+been found to yield intelligence quotients almost identical with those
+secured from two to four years earlier by the same tests. Those who
+graded feeble-minded in the first test graded feeble-minded in the
+second test: the dull remained dull, the average remained average, the
+superior remained superior, and always in approximately the same
+degree.[18]
+
+[18] See "Some Problems relating to the Detection of Border-line Cases
+of Mental Deficiency," by Lewis M. Terman and H. E. Knollin, in _Journal
+of Psycho-Asthemes_, June, 1916.
+
+It is unnecessary to emphasize further the importance of having an
+intelligence scale which is equally accurate at all points. Absolute
+perfection in this respect is not claimed for the Stanford revision, but
+it is believed to be at least free from the more serious errors of other
+Binet arrangements.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER V
+
+ANALYSIS OF 1000 INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS
+
+
+An extended account of the 1000 tests on which the Stanford revision is
+chiefly based has been presented in a separate monograph. This chapter
+will include only the briefest summary of some of those results of the
+investigation which contribute to the intelligent use of the revision.
+
+THE DISTRIBUTION OF INTELLIGENCE. The question as to the manner in which
+intelligence is distributed is one of great practical as well as
+theoretical importance. One of the most vital questions which can be
+asked by any nation of any age is the following: "How high is the
+average level of intelligence among our people, and how frequent are the
+various grades of ability above and below the average?" With the
+development of standardized tests we are approaching, for the first time
+in history, a possible answer to this question.
+
+Most of the earlier Binet studies, however, have thrown little light on
+the distribution of intelligence because of their failure to avoid the
+influence of accidental selection in choosing subjects for testing. The
+method of securing subjects for the Stanford revision makes our results
+on this point especially interesting.[19] It is believed that the
+subjects used for this investigation were as nearly representative of
+average American-born children as it is possible to secure.
+
+[19] See p. 52 _ff._ for method used to avoid accidental selection of
+subjects for the Stanford investigation.
+
+The intelligence quotients for these 1000 unselected children were
+calculated, and their distribution was plotted for the ages separately.
+The distribution was found fairly symmetrical at each age from 5 to 14.
+At 15 the range is on either side of 90 as a median, and at 16 on either
+side of 80 as a median. That the 15- and 16-year-olds test low is due to
+the fact that these children are left-over retardates and are below
+average in intelligence.
+
+[Illustration: FIG. 2. DISTRIBUTION OF I Q'S OF 905 UNSELECTED
+CHILDREN. 5-14 YEARS OF AGE]
+
+The I Q's were then grouped in ranges of ten. In the middle group were
+thrown those from 96 to 105; the ascending groups including in order the
+I Q's from 106 to 115, 116 to 125, etc.; correspondingly with the
+descending groups. Figure 2 shows the distribution found by this
+grouping for the 905 children of ages 5 to 14 combined. The subjects
+above 14 are not included in this curve because they are left-overs and
+not representative of their ages.
+
+The distribution for the ages combined is seen to be remarkably
+symmetrical. The symmetry for the separate ages was hardly less marked,
+considering that only 80 to 120 children were tested at each age. In
+fact, the range, including the middle 50 per cent of I Q's, was found
+practically constant from 5 to 14 years. The tendency is for the middle
+50 per cent to fall (approximately) between 93 and 108.
+
+Three important conclusions are justified by the above facts:--
+
+1. Since the frequency of the various grades of intelligence decreases
+_gradually_ and at no point abruptly on each side of the median, it is
+evident that there is no definite dividing line between normality and
+feeble-mindedness, or between normality and genius. Psychologically, the
+mentally defective child does not belong to a distinct type, nor does
+the genius. There is no line of demarcation between either of these
+extremes and the so-called "normal" child. The number of mentally
+defective individuals in a population will depend upon the standard
+arbitrarily set up as to what constitutes mental deficiency. Similarly
+for genius. It is exactly as we should undertake to classify all people
+into the three groups: abnormally tall, normally tall, and abnormally
+short.[20]
+
+[20] See Chapter VI for discussion of the significance of various I Q's.
+
+2. The common opinion that extreme deviations below the median are more
+frequent than extreme deviations above the median seems to have no
+foundation in fact. Among unselected school children, at least, for
+every child of any given degree of deficiency there is another child as
+far above the average I Q as the former is below. We have shown
+elsewhere the serious consequences of neglect of this fact.[21]
+
+[21] See p. 12 _ff._
+
+3. The traditional view that variability in mental traits becomes more
+marked during adolescence is here contradicted, as far as intelligence
+is concerned, for the distribution of I Q's is practically the same at
+each age from 5 to 14. For example, 6-year-olds differ from one another
+fully as much as do 14-year-olds.
+
+THE VALIDITY OF THE INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENT. The facts presented above
+argue strongly for the validity of the I Q as an expression of a child's
+intelligence status. This follows necessarily from the similar nature of
+the distributions at the various ages. The inference is that a child's
+I Q, as measured by this scale, remains relatively constant. Re-tests of
+the same children at intervals of two to five years support the
+inference. Children of superior intelligence do not seem to deteriorate
+as they get older, nor dull children to develop average intelligence.
+Knowing a child's I Q, we can predict with a fair degree of accuracy the
+course of his later development.
+
+The mental age of a subject is meaningless if considered apart from
+chronological age. It is only the ratio of retardation or acceleration
+to chronological age (that is, the I Q) which has significance.
+
+It follows also that if the I Q is a valid expression of intelligence,
+as it seems to be, then the Binet-Simon "age-grade method" becomes
+transformed automatically into a "point-scale method," if one wants to
+use it that way. As such it is superior to any other point scale that
+has been proposed, because it includes a larger number of tests and its
+points have definite meaning.[22]
+
+[22] For discussion of the supposed advantages of the "point-scale
+method," see Yerkes and Bridges: _A New Point Scale for Measuring Mental
+Ability_. (Warwick and York, 1915.)
+
+SEX DIFFERENCES. The question as to the relative intelligence of the
+sexes is one of perennial interest and great social importance. The
+ancient hypothesis, the one which dates from the time when only men
+concerned themselves with scientific hypotheses, took for granted the
+superiority of the male. With the development of individual psychology,
+however, it was soon found that as far as the evidence of mental tests
+can be trusted the _average_ intelligence of women and girls is as high
+as that of men and boys.
+
+If we accept this result we are then confronted with the difficult
+problem of finding an explanation for the fact that so few of those who
+have acquired eminence in the various intellectual fields have been
+women. Two explanations have been proposed: (1) That women become
+eminent less often than men simply for lack of opportunity and stimulus;
+and (2) that while the average intelligence of the sexes is the same,
+extreme variations may be more common in males. It is pointed out that
+not only are there more eminent men than eminent women, but that
+statistics also show a preponderance of males in institutions for the
+mentally defective. Accordingly it is often said that women are grouped
+closely about the average, while men show a wider range of distribution.
+
+[Illustration: FIG. 3. MEDIAN I Q OF 457 BOYS (UNBROKEN LINE) AND
+448 GIRLS (DOTTED LINE) FOR THE AGES 5-14 YEARS]
+
+Many hundreds of articles and books of popular or quasi-scientific
+nature have been written on one aspect or another of this question of
+sex difference in intelligence; but all such theoretical discussions
+taken together are worth less than the results of one good experiment.
+Let us see what our 1000 I Q's have to offer toward a solution of the
+problem.
+
+1. When the I Q's of the boys and girls were treated separately there
+was found a small but fairly constant superiority of the girls up to the
+age of 13 years. At 14, however, the curve for the girls dropped below
+that for boys. This is shown in Figure 3.
+
+The supplementary data, including the teachers' estimates of
+intelligence on a scale of five, the teachers' judgments in regard to
+the quality of the school work, and records showing the age-grade
+distribution of the sexes, were all sifted for evidence as to the
+genuineness of the apparent superiority of the girls age for age. The
+results of all these lines of inquiry support the tests in suggesting
+that the superiority of the girls is probably real even up to and
+including age 14, the apparent superiority of the boys at this age being
+fully accounted for by the more frequent elimination of 14-year-old
+girls from the grades by promotion to the high school.[23]
+
+[23] It will be remembered that this series of tests did not follow up
+and test those who had been promoted to high school.
+
+2. However, the superiority of girls over boys is so slight (amounting
+at most ages to only 2 to 3 points in terms of I Q) that for practical
+purposes it would seem negligible. This offers no support to the opinion
+expressed by Yerkes and Bridges that "at certain ages serious injustice
+will be done individuals by evaluating their scores in the light of
+norms which do not take account of sex differences."
+
+3. Apart from the small superiority of girls, the distribution of
+intelligence in the two sexes is not different. The supposed wider
+variation of boys is not found. Girls do not group themselves about the
+median more closely than do boys. The range of I Q including the middle
+fifty per cent is approximately the same for the two sexes.[24]
+
+[24] For an extensive summary of other data on the variability of the
+sexes see the article by Leta S. Hollingworth, in _The American Journal
+of Sociology_ (January, 1914), pp. 510-30. It is shown that the findings
+of others support the conclusions set forth above.
+
+4. When the results for the individual tests were examined, it was found
+that not many showed very extreme differences as to the per cent of boys
+and girls passing. In a few cases, however, the difference was rather
+marked.
+
+The boys were decidedly better in arithmetical reasoning, giving
+differences between a president and a king, solving the form board,
+making change, reversing hands of clock, finding similarities, and
+solving the "induction test." The girls were superior in drawing designs
+from memory, æsthetic comparison, comparing objects from memory,
+answering the "comprehension questions," repeating digits and sentences,
+tying a bow-knot, and finding rhymes.
+
+Accordingly, our data, which for the most part agree with the results of
+others, justify the conclusion that the intelligence of girls, at least
+up to 14 years, does not differ materially from that of boys either as
+regards the average level or the range of distribution. It may still be
+argued that the mental development of boys beyond the age of 14 years
+lasts longer and extends farther than in the case of girls, but as a
+matter of fact this opinion receives little support from such tests as
+have been made on men and women college students.
+
+The fact that so few women have attained eminence may be due to wholly
+extraneous factors, the most important of which are the following: (1)
+The occupations in which it is possible to achieve eminence are for the
+most part only now beginning to open their doors to women. Women's
+career has been largely that of home-making, an occupation in which
+eminence, in the strict sense of the word, is impossible. (2) Even of
+the small number of women who embark upon a professional career, a
+majority marry and thereafter devote a fairly large proportion of their
+energy to bearing and rearing children. (3) Both the training given to
+girls and the general atmosphere in which they grow up are unfavorable
+to the inculcation of the professional point of view, and as a result
+women are not spurred on by deep-seated motives to constant and
+strenuous intellectual endeavor as men are. (4) It is also possible that
+the emotional traits of women are such as to favor the development of
+the sentiments at the expense of innate intellectual endowment.
+
+INTELLIGENCE OF THE DIFFERENT SOCIAL CLASSES. Of the 1000 children, 492
+were classified by their teachers according to social class into the
+following five groups: _very inferior_, _inferior_, _average_,
+_superior_, and _very superior_. A comparative study was then made of
+the distribution of I Q's for these different groups.[25]
+
+[25] The results of this comparison have been set forth in detail in the
+monograph of source material and some of the conclusions have been set
+forth on p. 115 _ff._ of the present volume.
+
+The data may be summarized as follows:--
+
+    1. The median I Q for children of the superior social class is
+    about 7 points above, and that of the inferior social class
+    about 7 points below, the median I Q of the average social
+    group. This means that by the age of 14 inferior class children
+    are about one year below, and superior class children one year
+    above, the median mental age for all classes taken together.
+
+    2. That the children of the superior social classes make a
+    better showing in the tests is probably due, for the most part,
+    to a superiority in original endowment. This conclusion is
+    supported by five supplementary lines of evidence: (a) the
+    teachers' rankings of the children according to intelligence;
+    (b) the age-grade progress of the children; (c) the quality
+    of the school work; (d) the comparison of older and younger
+    children as regards the influence of social environment; and
+    (e) the study of individual cases of bright and dull children
+    in the same family.
+
+    3. In order to facilitate comparison, it is advisable to express
+    the intelligence of children of all social classes in terms of
+    the same objective scale of intelligence. This scale should be
+    based on the median for all classes taken together.
+
+    4. As regards their responses to individual tests, our children
+    of a given social class were not distinguishable from children
+    of the same intelligence in any other social class.
+
+THE RELATION OF THE I Q TO THE QUALITY OF THE CHILD'S SCHOOL WORK. The
+school work of 504 children was graded by the teachers on a scale of
+five grades: _very inferior_, _inferior_, _average_, _superior_, and
+_very superior_. When this grouping was compared with that made on the
+basis of I Q, fairly close agreement was found. However, in about one
+case out of ten there was rather serious disagreement; a child, for
+example, would be rated as doing _average_ school work when his I Q
+would place him in the _very inferior_ intelligence group.
+
+When the data were searched for explanations of such disagreements it
+was found that most of them were plainly due to the failure of teachers
+to take into account the age of the child when grading the quality of
+his school work.[26] When allowance was made for this tendency there
+were no disagreements which justified any serious suspicion as to the
+accuracy of the intelligence scale. Minor disagreements may, of course,
+be disregarded, since the quality of school work depends in part on
+other factors than intelligence, such as industry, health, regularity of
+attendance, quality of instruction, etc.
+
+[26] See p. 24 _ff._
+
+THE RELATION BETWEEN I Q AND GRADE PROGRESS. This comparison, which was
+made for the entire 1000 children, showed a fairly high correlation, but
+also some astonishing disagreements. Nine-year intelligence was found
+all the way from grade 1 to grade 7, inclusive; 10-year intelligence all
+the way from grade 2 to grade 7; and 12-year intelligence all the way
+from grade 3 to grade 8. Plainly the school's efforts at grading fail to
+give homogeneous groups of children as regards mental ability. On the
+whole, the grade location of the children did not fit their mental ages
+much better than it did their chronological ages.
+
+When the data were examined, it was found that practically every child
+whose grade failed to correspond fairly closely with his mental age was
+either exceptionally bright or exceptionally dull. Those who tested
+between 96 and 105 I Q were never seriously misplaced in school. The
+very dull children, however, were usually located from one to three
+grades above where they belonged by mental age, and the duller the
+child the more serious, as a rule, was the misplacement. On the other
+hand, the very bright children were nearly always located from one to
+three grades below where they belonged by mental age, and the brighter
+the child the more serious the school's mistake. The child of 10-year
+mental age in the second grade, for example, is almost certain to be
+about 7 or 8 years old; the child of 10-year intelligence in the sixth
+grade is almost certain to be 13 to 15 years of age.
+
+All this is due to one fact, and one alone: _the school tends to promote
+children by age rather than ability_. The bright children are held back,
+while the dull children are promoted beyond their mental ability. The
+retardation problem is exactly the reverse of what we have thought it to
+be. It is the bright children who are retarded, and the dull children
+who are accelerated.
+
+The remedy is to be sought in differentiated courses (special classes)
+for both kinds of mentally exceptional children. Just as many special
+classes are needed for superior children as for the inferior. The social
+consequences of suitable educational advantages for children of superior
+ability would no doubt greatly exceed anything that could possibly
+result from the special instruction of dullards and border-line
+cases.[27]
+
+[27] See Chapter VI for further discussion of the school progress
+possible to children of various I Q's.
+
+Special study of the I Q's between 70 and 79 revealed the fact that a
+child of this grade of intelligence _never_ does satisfactory work in
+the grade where he belongs by chronological age. By the time he has
+attended school four or five years, such a child is usually found doing
+"very inferior" to "average" work in a grade from two to four years
+below his age.
+
+On the other hand, the child with an I Q of 120 or above is almost never
+found below the grade for his chronological age, and occasionally he is
+one or two grades above. Wherever located, his work is always "superior"
+or "very superior," and the evidence suggests strongly that it would
+probably remain so even if extra promotions were granted.
+
+CORRELATION BETWEEN I Q AND THE TEACHERS' ESTIMATES OF THE CHILDREN'S
+INTELLIGENCE. By the Pearson formula the correlation found between the
+I Q's and the teachers' rankings on a scale of five was .48. This is
+about what others have found, and is both high enough and low enough to
+be significant. That it is moderately high in so far corroborates the
+tests. That it is not higher means that either the teachers or the tests
+have made a good many mistakes.
+
+When the data were searched for evidence on this point, it was found, as
+we have shown in Chapter II, that the fault was plainly on the part of
+the teachers. The serious mistakes were nearly all made with children
+who were either over age or under age for their grade, mostly the
+former. In estimating children's intelligence, just as in grading their
+school success, the teachers often failed to take account of the age
+factor. For example, the child whose mental age was, say, two years
+below normal, and who was enrolled in a class with children about two
+years younger than himself, was often graded "average" in intelligence.
+
+The tendency of teachers is to estimate a child's intelligence according
+to the quality of his school work _in the grade where he happens to be
+located_. This results in overestimating the intelligence of older,
+retarded children, and underestimating the intelligence of the younger,
+advanced children. The disagreements between the tests and the teachers'
+estimates are thus found, when analyzed, to confirm the validity of the
+test method rather than to bring it under suspicion.
+
+THE VALIDITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL TESTS. The validity of each test was
+checked up by measuring it against the scale as a whole in the manner
+described on p. 55. For example, if 10-year-old children having 11-year
+intelligence succeed with a given test decidedly better than 10-year-old
+children who have 9-year intelligence, then either this test must be
+accepted as valid or the scale as a whole must be rejected. Since we
+know, however, that the scale as a whole has at least a reasonably high
+degree of reliability, this method becomes a sure and ready means of
+judging the worth of a test.
+
+When the tests were tried out in this way it was found that some of
+those which have been most criticized have in reality a high correlation
+with intelligence. Among these are naming the days of the week, giving
+the value of stamps, counting thirteen pennies, giving differences
+between president and king, finding rhymes, giving age, distinguishing
+right and left, and interpretation of pictures. Others having a high
+reliability are the vocabulary tests, arithmetical reasoning, giving
+differences, copying a diamond, giving date, repeating digits in reverse
+order, interpretation of fables, the dissected sentence test, naming
+sixty words, finding omissions in pictures, and recognizing absurdities.
+
+Among the somewhat less satisfactory tests are the following: repeating
+digits (direct order), naming coins, distinguishing forenoon and
+afternoon, defining in terms of use, drawing designs from memory, and
+æsthetic comparison. Binet's "line suggestion" test correlated so little
+with intelligence that it had to be thrown out. The same was also true
+of two of the new tests which we had added to the series for try-out.
+
+Tests showing a medium correlation with the scale as a whole include
+arranging weights, executing three commissions, naming colors, giving
+number of fingers, describing pictures, naming the months, making
+change, giving superior definitions, finding similarities, reading for
+memories, reversing hands of clock, defining abstract words, problems of
+fact, bow-knot, induction test, and comprehension questions.
+
+A test which makes a good showing on this criterion of agreement with
+the scale as a whole becomes immune to theoretical criticisms. Whatever
+it appears to be from mere inspection, it is a real measure of
+intelligence. Henceforth it stands or falls with the scale as a whole.
+
+The reader will understand, of course, that no single test used alone
+will determine accurately the general level of intelligence. A great
+many tests are required; and for two reasons: (1) because intelligence
+has many aspects; and (2) in order to overcome the accidental influences
+of training or environment. If many tests are used no one of them need
+show more than a moderately high correlation with the scale as a whole.
+As stated by Binet, "Let the tests be rough, if there are only enough of
+them."
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VI
+
+THE SIGNIFICANCE OF VARIOUS INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS
+
+
+FREQUENCY OF DIFFERENT DEGREES OF INTELLIGENCE. Before we can interpret
+the results of an examination it is necessary to know how frequently an
+I Q of the size found occurs among unselected children. Our tests of
+1000 unselected children enable us to answer this question with some
+degree of definiteness. A study of these 1000 I Q's shows the following
+significant facts:--
+
+  The lowest   1 % go to 70 or below, the highest   1 % reach 130 or above
+   "    "      2 %  "  " 73  "   "      "    "      2 %   "   128  "   "
+   "    "      3 %  "  " 76  "   "      "    "      3 %   "   125  "   "
+   "    "      5 %  "  " 78  "   "      "    "      5 %   "   122  "   "
+   "    "     10 %  "  " 85  "   "      "    "     10 %   "   116  "   "
+   "    "     15 %  "  " 88  "   "      "    "     15 %   "   113  "   "
+   "    "     20 %  "  " 91  "   "      "    "     20 %   "   110  "   "
+   "    "     25 %  "  " 92  "   "      "    "     25 %   "   108  "   "
+   "    "  33+1/3%  "  " 95  "   "      "    "  33+1/3%   "   106  "   "
+
+Or, to put some of the above facts in another form:--
+
+  The child reaching          110 is equaled or excelled by 20 out of 100
+   "    "       "    (about)  115 "     "    "     "     "  10  "  "   "
+   "    "       "       "     125 "     "    "     "     "   3  "  "   "
+   "    "       "       "     130 "     "    "     "     "   1  "  "   "
+
+Conversely, we may say regarding the subnormals that:--
+
+  The child testing at (about) 90 is equaled or excelled by 80 out of 100
+   "    "      "    "     "    85 "     "    "     "     "  90  "  "   "
+   "    "      "    "     "    75 "     "    "     "     "  97  "  "   "
+   "    "      "    "     "    70 "     "    "     "     "  99  "  "   "
+
+CLASSIFICATION OF INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS. What do the above I Q's imply
+in such terms as feeble-mindedness, border-line intelligence, dullness,
+normality, superior intelligence genius, etc.? When we use these terms
+two facts must be borne in mind: (1) That the boundary lines between
+such groups are absolutely arbitrary, a matter of definition only; and
+(2) that the individuals comprising one of the groups do not make up a
+homogeneous type.
+
+Nevertheless, since terms like the above are convenient and will
+probably continue to be used, it is desirable to give them as much
+definiteness as possible. On the basis of the tests we have made,
+including many cases of all grades of intelligence, the following
+suggestions are offered for the classification of intelligence
+quotients:--
+
+    _I Q_         _Classification_
+
+    Above 140     "Near" genius or genius.
+      120-140     Very superior intelligence.
+      110-120     Superior intelligence.
+       90-110     Normal, or average, intelligence.
+       80- 90     Dullness, rarely classifiable as feeble-mindedness.
+       70- 80     Border-line deficiency, sometimes classifiable as
+                    dullness, often as feeble-mindedness.
+     Below 70     Definite feeble-mindedness.
+
+Of the feeble-minded, those between 50 and 70 I Q include most of the
+morons (high, middle, and low), those between 20 or 25 and 50 are
+ordinarily to be classed as imbeciles, and those below 20 or 25 as
+idiots. According to this classification the adult idiot would range up
+to about 3-year intelligence as the limit, the adult imbecile would have
+a mental level between 3 and 7 years, and the adult moron would range
+from about 7-year to 11-year intelligence.
+
+It should be added, however, that the classification of I Q's for the
+various sub-grades of feeble-mindedness is not very secure, for the
+reason that the exact curves of mental growth have not been worked out
+for such grades. As far as the public schools are concerned this does
+not greatly matter, as they never enroll idiots and very rarely even the
+high-grade imbecile. School defectives are practically all of the moron
+and border-line grades, and these it is important teachers should be
+able to recognize. The following discussions and illustrative cases will
+perhaps give a fairly definite idea of the significance of various
+grades of intelligence.[28]
+
+[28] The clinical descriptions to be given are not complete and are
+designed merely to aid the examiner in understanding the significance of
+intelligence quotients found.
+
+FEEBLE-MINDEDNESS (RARELY ABOVE 75 I Q.) There are innumerable grades of
+mental deficiency ranging from somewhat below average intelligence to
+profound idiocy. In the literal sense every individual below the average
+is more or less mentally weak or feeble. Only a relatively small
+proportion of these, however, are technically known as feeble-minded. It
+is therefore necessary to set forth the criterion as to what constitutes
+feeble-mindedness in the commonly accepted sense of that word.
+
+The definition in most general use is the one framed by the Royal
+College of Physicians and Surgeons of London, and adopted by the English
+Royal Commission on Mental Deficiency. It is substantially as follows:--
+
+_A feeble-minded person is one who is incapable, because of mental
+defect existing from birth or from an early age, (a) of competing on
+equal terms with his normal fellows; or (b) of managing himself or his
+affairs with ordinary prudence._
+
+Two things are to be noted in regard to this definition: In the first
+place, it is stated in terms of social and industrial efficiency. Such
+efficiency, however, depends not merely on the degree of intelligence,
+but also on emotional, moral, physical, and social traits as well. This
+explains why some individuals with I Q somewhat below 75 can hardly be
+classed as feeble-minded in the ordinary sense of the term, while others
+with I Q a little above 75 could hardly be classified in any other
+group.
+
+In the second place, the criterion set up by the definition is not very
+definite because of the vague meaning of the expression "ordinary
+prudence." Even the expression "competing on equal terms" cannot be
+taken literally, else it would include also those who are merely dull.
+It is the second part of the definition that more nearly expresses the
+popular criterion, for as long as an individual manages his affairs in
+such a way as to be self-supporting, and in such a way as to avoid
+becoming a nuisance or burden to his fellowmen, he escapes the
+institutions for defectives and may pass for normal.
+
+The most serious defect of the definition comes from the lax
+interpretation of the term "ordinary prudence," etc. The popular
+standard is so low that hundreds of thousands of high grade defectives
+escape identification as such. Moreover, there are many grades of
+severity in social and industrial competition. For example, most of the
+members of such families as the Jukes, the Nams, the Hill Folk, and the
+Kallikaks are able to pass as normal in their own crude environment, but
+when compelled to compete with average American stock their deficiency
+becomes evident. It is therefore necessary to supplement the social
+criterion with a more strictly psychological one.
+
+For this purpose there is nothing else as significant as the I Q. All
+who test below 70 I Q by the Stanford revision of the Binet-Simon scale
+should be considered feeble-minded, and it is an open question whether
+it would not be justifiable to consider 75 I Q as the lower limit of
+"normal" intelligence. Certainly a large proportion falling between
+70 and 75 can hardly be classed as other than feeble-minded, even
+according to the social criterion.
+
+
+_Examples of feeble-minded school children_
+
+    _F. C. Boy, age 8-6; mental age 4-2; I Q approximately 50._ From
+    a very superior home. Has had the best medical care and other
+    attention. Attended a private kindergarten until rejected
+    because he required so much of the teacher's time and appeared
+    uneducable. Will probably develop to about the 6- or 7-year
+    mental level. High grade imbecile. Has since been committed to a
+    state institution. Cases as low as F. C. very rarely get into
+    the public schools.
+
+
+    _R. W. Boy, age 13-10; mental age 7-6; I Q approximately 55._
+    Home excellent. Is pubescent. Because of age and maturity has
+    been promoted to the third grade, though he can hardly do the
+    work of the second. Has attended school more than six years.
+    Will probably never develop much if any beyond 8 years, and will
+    never be self-supporting. Low-grade moron.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 4. DIAMOND DRAWN BY R. W., AGE 13-10; MENTAL
+    AGE 7-6]
+
+
+    _M. S. Girl, age 7-6; mental age 4-6; I Q 60._ Father a
+    gardener, home conditions and medical attention fair. Has twice
+    attempted first grade, but without learning to read more than a
+    few words. In each case teacher requested parents to withdraw
+    her. "Takes" things. Is considered "foolish" by the other
+    children. Will probably never develop beyond a mental level of
+    8 years.
+
+
+    _R. M. Boy, age 15; mental age 9; I Q 60._ Decidedly superior
+    home environment and care. After attending school eight years is
+    in fifth grade, though he cannot do the work of the fourth
+    grade. Parents unable to teach him to respect property. Boys
+    torment him and make his life miserable. At middle-moron level
+    and has probably about reached the limit of his development. Has
+    since been committed to a state institution.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 5. WRITING FROM DICTATION. R. M., AGE 15;
+    MENTAL AGE 9]
+
+
+    _S. M. Girl, age 19-2; mental age 10; I Q approximately 65 (not
+    counting age beyond 16)._ From very superior family. Has
+    attended public and private schools twelve years and has been
+    promoted to seventh grade, where she cannot do the work. Appears
+    docile and childlike, but is subject to spells of disobedience
+    and stubbornness. Did not walk until 4 years old. Plays with
+    young children. Susceptible to attention from men and has to be
+    constantly guarded. Writing excellent, knows the number
+    combinations, but missed all the absurdities and has the
+    vocabulary of an average 10-year-old. The type from which
+    prostitutes often come.
+
+
+    _R. H. Boy, age 14; mental age 8-4; I Q 65._ Father Irish,
+    mother Spanish. Family comfortable and home care average. Has
+    attended school eight years and is unable to do fourth-grade
+    work satisfactorily. Health excellent and attendance regular.
+    Reads in fourth reader without expression and with little
+    comprehension of what is read. Fair skill in number
+    combinations. Writing and drawing very poor. Cannot use a ruler.
+    Has no conception of an inch.
+
+    R. H. is described as high-tempered, irritable, lacking in
+    physical activity, clumsy, and unsteady. Plays little. Just
+    "stands around." Indifferent to praise or blame, has little
+    sense of duty, plays underhand tricks. Is slow, absent-minded,
+    easily confused, in thought, never shows appreciation or
+    interest. So apathetic that he does not hear commands. Voice
+    droning. Speech poor in colloquial expressions.
+
+    Three years later, at age of 17, was in a special class
+    attempting sixth-grade work. Reported as doing "absolutely
+    nothing" in that grade. Still sullen, indifferent, and slow in
+    grasping directions, and lacking in play interests. "No
+    apperception of anything, but has mastered such mechanical
+    things as reading (calling the words) and the fundamentals in
+    arithmetic."
+
+    In school work, moral traits, and out-of-school behavior R. H.
+    shows himself to be a typical case of moron deficiency.
+
+
+    _I. M. Girl, age 14-2; mental age 9; I Q approximately 65._
+    Father a laborer. Does unsatisfactory work in fourth grade.
+    Plays with little girls. A menace to the morals of the school
+    because of her sex interests and lack of self-restraint. Rather
+    good-looking if one does not hunt for appearances of
+    intelligence. Mental reactions intolerably slow. Will develop
+    but little further and will always pass as feeble-minded in any
+    but the very lowest social environment.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 6. BALL AND FIELD TEST. I. M., AGE 14-2;
+    MENTAL AGE 9]
+
+
+    _G. V. Boy, age 10; mental age 6-4; I Q 65._ Father Spanish,
+    mother English. Family poor but fairly respectable. Brothers and
+    sisters all retarded. In high first grade. Work all very poor
+    except writing, drawing, and hand work, in all of which he
+    excels. Is quiet and inactive, lacks self-confidence, and plays
+    little. Mentally slow, inert, "thick," and inattentive. Health
+    fair.
+
+    Three years later G. V. was in the low third grade and still
+    doing extremely poor work in everything except manual training,
+    drawing, and writing. Is not likely ever to go beyond the fourth
+    or fifth grade however long he remains in school.
+
+
+    _V. J. Girl, age 11-6; mental age 8; I Q 70._ Has been tested
+    three times in the last five years, always with approximately
+    the same result in terms of I Q. Home fair to inferior. Has been
+    in a special class two years and in school altogether nearly six
+    years. Is barely able to do third-grade work. Her
+    feeble-mindedness is recognized by teachers and by other pupils.
+    Belongs at about middle-moron to high-moron level.
+
+
+    _A. W. Boy, age 9-4; mental age 7; I Q 75._ A year and a half
+    ago he tested at 6-2. From superior family, brothers of very
+    superior intelligence. In school three years and has made about
+    a grade and a half. Has higher I Q than V. J. described above,
+    but his deficiency is fully as evident. Is generally recognized
+    as mentally defective. Slyly abstracted one of the pennies used
+    in the test and slipped it into his pocket. Has caused much
+    trouble at school by puncturing bicycle tires. High-grade moron.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 7. DIAMOND DRAWN BY A. W.]
+
+
+    _A. C. Boy, age 12; mental age 8-5; I Q 70._ From Portuguese
+    family of ten children. Has a feeble-minded brother. Parents in
+    comfortable circumstances and respectable. A. C. has attended
+    school regularly since he was 6 years old. Trying unsuccessfully
+    to do the work of the fourth grade. Reads poorly in the third
+    reader. Hesitates, repeats, miscalls words, and never gets the
+    thought. Writes about like a first-grade pupil. Cannot solve
+    such simple problems as "How many marbles can you buy for ten
+    cents if one marble costs five cents?" even when he has marbles
+    and money in his hands. Described by teacher as "mentally slow
+    and inert, inattentive, easily distracted, memory poor, ideas
+    vague and often absurd, does not appreciate stories, slow at
+    comprehending commands." Is also described as "unruly,
+    boisterous, disobedient, stubborn, and lacking sense of
+    propriety. Tattles."
+
+    Three years later, at age of 15, was in a special class and was
+    little if any improved. He had, however, learned the mechanics
+    of reading and had mastered the number combinations.
+    Deficiencies described as "of wide range." Conduct, however, had
+    improved. Was "working hard to get on."
+
+    A. C. must be considered definitely feeble-minded.
+
+
+    _H. S. Boy, age 11; mental age 8-3; I Q approximately 75._ At
+    8 years tested at 6. Parents highly educated, father a scholar.
+    Brother and sister of very superior intelligence. Started to
+    school at 7, but was withdrawn because of lack of progress.
+    Started again at 8 and is now doing poor work in the second
+    grade. Weakly and nervous. Painfully aware of his inability to
+    learn. During the test keeps saying, "I tried anyway," "It's all
+    I can do if I try my best, ain't it?" etc. Regarded defective by
+    other children. Will probably never be able to do work beyond
+    the fourth or fifth grade and is not likely to develop above the
+    11-year level, if as high.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 8. DRAWING DESIGNS FROM MEMORY. H. S.,
+    AGE 11; MENTAL AGE 8-3]
+
+
+    _I. S. Boy, age 9-6; mental age 7; I Q 75._ German parentage.
+    Started to school at 6. Now in low second grade and unable to do
+    the work. Health good. Inattentive, mentally slow and inert,
+    easily distracted, speech is monotone. Equally poor in reading,
+    writing, and numbers. I. S. is described as quiet, sullen,
+    indifferent, lazy, and stubborn. Plays little.
+
+    Three years later had advanced from low second to low fourth
+    grade, but was as poor as ever in his school work. "Miscalls the
+    simplest words." Moral traits unsatisfactory. May reach sixth or
+    seventh grade if he remains in school long enough.
+
+    I. S. learned to walk at 2 years and to talk at 3.
+
+The above are cases of such marked deficiency that there could be no
+disagreement among competent judges in classifying them in the group of
+"feeble-minded." All are definitely institutional cases. It is a matter
+of record, however, that one of the cases, H. S., was diagnosed by a
+physician (without test) as "backward but not a defective." and with the
+added encouragement that "the backwardness will be outgrown." Of course
+the reverse is the case; the deficiency is becoming more and more
+apparent as the boy approaches the age where more is expected of him.
+
+In at least three of the above cases (S. M., I. S., and I. M.) the
+teachers had not identified the backwardness as feeble-mindedness. Not
+far from 2 children out of 100, or 2 out of 1000, in the average public
+school are as defective as some of those just described. Teachers get so
+accustomed to seeing a few of them in every group of 200 or 300 pupils
+that they are likely to regard them as merely dull,--"dreadfully dull,"
+of course,--but not defective.
+
+Children like these, for their own good and that of other pupils, should
+be kept out of the regular classes. They will rarely be equal to the
+work of the fifth grade, however long they attend school. They will
+make a little progress in a well-managed special class, but with the
+approach of adolescence, at latest, the State should take them into
+custodial care for its own protection.
+
+BORDER-LINE CASES (USUALLY BETWEEN 70 AND 80 I Q). The border-line cases
+are those which fall near the boundary generally recognized as such and
+the higher group usually classed as normal but dull. They are the
+doubtful cases, the ones we are always trying (rarely with success) to
+restore to normality.
+
+It must be emphasized, however, that this doubtful group is not marked
+off by definite I Q limits. Some children with I Q as high as 75 or even
+80 will have to be classified as feeble-minded; some as low as 70 I Q
+may be so well endowed in other mental traits that they may manage as
+adults to get along fairly well in a simple environment. The ability to
+compete with one's fellows in the social and industrial world does not
+depend upon intelligence alone. Such factors as moral traits, industry,
+environment to be encountered, personal appearance, and influential
+relatives are also involved. Two children classified above as
+feeble-minded had an I Q as high as 75. In these cases the emotional,
+moral, or physical qualities were so defective as to render a normal
+social life out of the question. This is occasionally true even with an
+I Q as high as 80. Some of the border-line cases, with even less
+intelligence, may be so well endowed in other mental traits that they
+are capable of becoming dependable unskilled laborers, and of supporting
+a family after a fashion.
+
+
+_Examples of border-line deficiency_
+
+    _S. F. Girl, age 17; mental age 11-6; I Q approximately 72
+    (disregarding age above 16 years)._ Father intelligent; mother
+    probably high-grade defective. Lives in a good home with aunt,
+    who is a woman of good sense and skillful in her management of
+    the girl. S. F. has attended excellent schools for eleven years
+    and has recently been promoted to the seventh grade. The teacher
+    admits, however, that she cannot do the work of that grade, but
+    says, "I haven't the heart to let her fail in the sixth grade
+    for the third time." She studies very hard and says she wants to
+    become a teacher! At the time the test was made she was actually
+    studying her books from two to three hours daily at home. The
+    aunt, who is very intelligent, had never thought of this girl as
+    feeble-minded, and had suffered much concern and humiliation
+    because of her inability to teach her to conduct herself
+    properly toward men and not to appropriate other people's
+    property.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 9. BALL AND FIELD TEST S. F., AGE 17; MENTAL
+    AGE 11-6]
+
+    S. F. is ordinarily docile, but is subject to fits of anger and
+    obstinacy. She finally determined to leave her home, threatening
+    to take up with a man unless allowed to work elsewhere. Since
+    then she has been tried out in several families, but after a
+    little while in a place she flies into a rage and leaves. She is
+    a fairly capable houseworker when she tries.
+
+    This young woman is feeble-minded and should be classed as such.
+    She is listed here with the border-line cases simply for the
+    reason that she belongs to a group whose mental deficiency is
+    almost never recognized without the aid of a psychological test.
+    Probably no physician could be found who would diagnose the
+    case, on the basis of a medical examination alone, as one of
+    feeble-mindedness.
+
+
+    _F. H. Boy, age 16-6; mental age 11-5; I Q approximately 72
+    (disregarding age above 16 years)._ Tested for three successive
+    years without change of more than four points in I Q. Father a
+    laborer, dull, subject to fits of rage, and beats the boy.
+    Mother not far from border-line. F. H. has always had the best
+    of school advantages and has been promoted to the seventh grade.
+    Is really about equal to fifth-grade work. Fairly rapid and
+    accurate in number combinations, but cannot solve arithmetical
+    problems which require any reasoning. Reads with reasonable
+    fluency, but with little understanding. Appears exceedingly
+    good-natured, but was once suspended from school for hurling
+    bricks at a fellow pupil. Played a "joke" on another pupil by
+    fastening a dangerous, sharp-pointed, steel paper-file in the
+    pupil's seat for him to sit down on. He is cruel, stubborn, and
+    plays truant, but is fairly industrious when he gets a job as
+    errand or delivery boy. Discharged once for taking money.
+
+    F. H. is generally called "queer," but is not ordinarily thought
+    of as feeble-minded. His deficiency is real, however, and it is
+    altogether doubtful whether he will be able to make a living and
+    to keep out of trouble, though he is now (at age 20) employed as
+    messenger boy for the Western Union at $30 per month. This is
+    considerably less than pick-and-shovel men get in the community
+    where he lives. Delinquents and criminals often belong to this
+    level of intelligence.
+
+
+    _W. C. Boy, age 16-8; mental age 12; I Q 75 (disregarding age
+    above 16 years)._ Father a college professor. All the other
+    children in the family of unusually superior intelligence. When
+    tested (four years ago) was trying to do seventh-grade work, but
+    with little success. Wanted to leave school and learn farming,
+    but father insisted on his getting the usual grammar-school and
+    high-school education. Made $25 one summer by raising vegetables
+    on a vacant lot. In the four years since the test was made he
+    has managed to get into high school. Teachers say that in spite
+    of his best efforts he learns next to nothing, and they regard
+    him as hopelessly dull. Is docile, lacks all aggressiveness,
+    looks stupid, and has head circumference an inch below normal.
+
+    Here is a most pitiful case of the overstimulated backward child
+    in a superior family. Instead of nagging at the boy and urging
+    him on to attempt things which are impossible to his inferior
+    intelligence, his parents should take him out of school and put
+    him at some kind of work which he could do. If the boy had been
+    the son of a common laborer he would probably have left school
+    early and have become a dependable and contented laborer. In a
+    very simple environment he would probably not be considered
+    defective.
+
+
+    _C. P. Boy, age 10-2; mental age 7-11; I Q 78._ Portuguese boy,
+    son of a skilled laborer. One of eleven children, most of whom
+    have about this same grade of intelligence. Has attended school
+    regularly for four years. Is in the third grade, but cannot do
+    the work. Except for extreme stubbornness his social development
+    is fairly normal. Capable in plays and games, but is regarded as
+    impossible in his school work. Like his brother, M. P., the next
+    case to be described, he will doubtless become a fairly reliable
+    laborer at unskilled work and will not be regarded, in his
+    rather simple environment, as a defective. From the
+    psychological point of view, however, his deficiency is real. He
+    will probably never develop beyond the 11- or 12-year level or
+    be able to do satisfactory school work beyond the fifth or sixth
+    grade.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 10. WRITING FROM DICTATION. C. P., AGE 10-2;
+    MENTAL AGE 7-11]
+
+
+    _M. P. Boy, age 14; mental age 10-8; I Q 77._ Has been tested
+    four successive years, I Q being always between 75 and 80.
+    Brother to C. P. above. In school nearly eight years and has
+    been promoted to the fifth grade. At 16 was doing poor work in
+    the sixth grade. Good school advantages, as the father has tried
+    conscientiously to give his children "a good education."
+    Perfectly normal in appearance and in play activities and is
+    liked by other children. Seems to be thoroughly dependable both
+    in school and in his outside work. Will probably become an
+    excellent laborer and will pass as perfectly normal,
+    notwithstanding a grade of intelligence which will not develop
+    above 11 or 12 years.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 11. BALL AND FIELD TEST. M. P., AGE 14;
+    MENTAL AGE 10-8]
+
+What shall we say of cases like the last two which test at high-grade
+moronity or at border-line, but are well enough endowed in moral
+and personal traits to pass as normal in an uncomplicated social
+environment? According to the classical definition of feeble-mindedness
+such individuals cannot be considered defectives. Hardly any one would
+think of them as institutional cases. Among laboring men and servant
+girls there are thousands like them. They are the world's "hewers of
+wood and drawers of water." And yet, as far as intelligence is
+concerned, the tests have told the truth. These boys are uneducable
+beyond the merest rudiments of training. No amount of school instruction
+will ever make them intelligent voters or capable citizens in the true
+sense of the word. Judged psychologically they cannot be considered
+normal.
+
+It is interesting to note that M. P. and C. P. represent the level of
+intelligence which is very, very common among Spanish-Indian and Mexican
+families of the Southwest and also among negroes. Their dullness seems
+to be racial, or at least inherent in the family stocks from which they
+come. The fact that one meets this type with such extraordinary
+frequency among Indians, Mexicans, and negroes suggests quite forcibly
+that the whole question of racial differences in mental traits will have
+to be taken up anew and by experimental methods. The writer predicts
+that when this is done there will be discovered enormously significant
+racial differences in general intelligence, differences which cannot be
+wiped out by any scheme of mental culture.
+
+Children of this group should be segregated in special classes and be
+given instruction which is concrete and practical. They cannot master
+abstractions, but they can often be made efficient workers, able to look
+out for themselves. There is no possibility at present of convincing
+society that they should not be allowed to reproduce, although from a
+eugenic point of view they constitute a grave problem because of their
+unusually prolific breeding.
+
+DULL NORMALS (I Q USUALLY 80 TO 90). In this group are included those
+children who would not, according to any of the commonly accepted social
+standards, be considered feeble-minded, but who are nevertheless far
+enough below the actual average of intelligence among races of western
+European descent that they cannot make ordinary school progress or
+master other intellectual difficulties which average children are equal
+to. A few of this class test as low as 75 to 80 I Q, but the majority
+are not far from 85. The unmistakably normal children who go much below
+this (in California, at least) are usually Mexicans, Indians, or
+negroes.
+
+    _R. G. Negro boy, age 13-5; mental age 10-6; I Q approximately
+    80._ Normal in appearance and conduct, but very dull. Is
+    attempting fifth-grade work in a special class, but is failing.
+    From a fairly good home and has had ordinary school advantages.
+    In the examination his intelligence is very even as far as it
+    goes, but stops rather abruptly after the 10-year tests. Will
+    unquestionably pass as normal among unskilled laborers, but his
+    intelligence will never exceed the 12-year level and he is not
+    likely to advance beyond the seventh grade, if as far.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 12. BALL AND FIELD. R. G., AGE 13-5, MENTAL
+    AGE 10-6]
+
+
+    _F. D. Boy, tested at age 10-2; I Q 83, and again at 14-1;
+    I Q 79._ Mental age in the first test was 8-6 and in the second
+    test 11. Son of a barber. Father dead; mother capable; makes a
+    good home, and cares for her children well. At 10 was doing
+    unsatisfactory work in the fourth grade, and at 12
+    unsatisfactory work in low sixth. Good-looking, normal in
+    appearance and social development, and though occasionally
+    obstinate is usually steady. Any one unacquainted with his poor
+    school work and low I Q would consider him perfectly normal. No
+    physical or moral handicaps of any kind that could possibly
+    account for his retardation. Is simply dull. Needs purely a
+    vocational training, but may be able to complete the eighth
+    grade with low marks by the age of 16 or 17.
+
+
+    _G. G. Girl, age 12-4; mental age 10-10; I Q 82._ From average
+    home. Excellent educational advantages and no physical
+    handicaps. At 12 years was doing very poor work in fifth grade.
+    Appearance, play life, and attitude toward other children
+    normal. Simply dull. Will probably never go beyond the 12- or
+    13-year level and is not likely to get as far as the high
+    school.
+
+Those testing 80 and 90 will usually be able to reach the eighth grade,
+but ordinarily only after from one to three or four failures. They are
+so very numerous (about 15 per cent of the school enrollment) that it is
+doubtful whether we can expect soon to have special classes enough to
+accommodate all. The most feasible solution is a differentiated course
+of study with parallel classes in which every child will be allowed to
+make the best progress of which he is capable, without incurring the
+risk of failure and non-promotion. The so-called Mannheim system, or
+something similar to it, is what we need.
+
+AVERAGE INTELLIGENCE (I Q 90 TO 110). It is often said that the schools
+are made for the average child, but that "the average child does not
+exist." He does exist, and in very large numbers. About 60 per cent of
+all school children test between 90 and 110 I Q, and about 40 per cent
+between 95 and 105. That these children are average is attested by their
+school records as well as by their I Q's. Our records show that, of more
+than 200 children below 14 years of age and with I Q between 95 and 105,
+not one was making much more nor much less than average school progress.
+Four were two years retarded, but in each case this was due to late
+start, illness, or irregular attendance. Children who test close to 90,
+however, often fail to get along satisfactorily, while those testing
+near 110 are occasionally able to win an extra promotion.
+
+The children of this average group are seldom school problems, as far as
+ability to learn is concerned. Nor are they as likely to cause trouble
+in discipline as the dull and border-line cases. It is therefore hardly
+necessary to give illustrative cases here.
+
+The high school, however, does not fit their grade of intelligence as
+well as the elementary and grammar schools. High schools probably enroll
+a disproportionate number of pupils in the I Q range above 100. That is,
+the average intelligence among high-school pupils is above the average
+for the population in general. It is probably not far from 110. College
+students are, of course, a still more selected group, perhaps coming
+chiefly from the range above 115. The child whose school marks are
+barely average in the elementary grades, when measured against children
+in general, will ordinarily earn something less than average marks in
+high school, and perhaps excessively poor marks in college.
+
+SUPERIOR INTELLIGENCE (I Q 110 TO 120). Children of this group
+ordinarily make higher marks and are capable of making somewhat more
+rapid progress than the strictly average child. Perhaps most of them
+could complete the eight grades in seven years as easily as the average
+child does in eight years. They are not usually the best scholars, but
+on a scale of excellent, good, fair, poor, and failure they will usually
+rank as good, though of course the degree of application is a factor. It
+is rare, however, to find a child of this level who is positively
+indolent in his school work or who dislikes school. In high school they
+are likely to win about the average mark.
+
+Intelligence of 110 to 120 I Q is approximately five times as common
+among children of superior social status as among children of inferior
+social status; the proportion among the former being about 24 per cent
+of all, and among the latter only 5 per cent of all. The group is
+made up largely of children of the fairly successful mercantile or
+professional classes.
+
+The total number of children between 110 and 120 is almost exactly the
+same as the number between 80 and 90; namely, about 15 per cent. The
+distance between these two groups (say between 85 and 115) is as great
+as the distance between average intelligence and border-line deficiency,
+and it would be absurd to suppose that they could be taught to best
+advantage in the same classes. As a matter of fact, pupils between
+110 and 120 are usually held back to the rate of progress which the
+average child can make. They are little encouraged to do their best.
+
+VERY SUPERIOR INTELLIGENCE (I Q 120 TO 140). Children of this group are
+better than somewhat above average. They are unusually superior. Not
+more than 3 out of 100 go as high as 125 I Q, and only about 1 out of
+100 as high as 130. In the schools of a city of average population only
+about 1 child in 250 or 300 tests as high as 140 I Q.
+
+In a series of 476 unselected children there was not a single one
+reaching 120 whose social class was described as "below average."[29] Of
+the children of superior social status, about 10 per cent reached 120 or
+better. The 120-140 group is made up almost entirely of children whose
+parents belong to the professional or very successful business classes.
+The child of a skilled laborer belongs here occasionally, the child of a
+common laborer very rarely indeed. At least this is true in the smaller
+cities of California among populations made up of native-born Americans.
+In all probability it would not have been true in the earlier history of
+the country when ordinary labor was more often than now performed by men
+of average intelligence, and it would probably not hold true now among
+certain immigrant populations of good stock, but limited social and
+educational advantages.
+
+[29] In other investigations, however, we have found even brighter
+children from very inferior homes. See p. 117 for an example.
+
+What can children of this grade of ability do in school? The question
+cannot be answered as satisfactorily as one could wish, for the simple
+reason that such children are rarely permitted to do what they can. What
+they do accomplish is as follows: Of 54 children (of the 1000 unselected
+cases) falling in this group, 12½ per cent were advanced in the
+grades two years, approximately 54 per cent were advanced one year,
+28 per cent were in the grade where they belonged by chronological age,
+and three children, or 5½ per cent, were actually retarded one year.
+But wherever located, such children rarely get anything but the highest
+marks, and the evidence goes to show that most of them could easily be
+prepared for high school by the age of 12 years. Serious injury is done
+them by schools which believe in "putting on the brakes."
+
+The following are illustrations of children testing between 130 and 145.
+Not all are taken from the 1000 unselected tests. The writer has
+discovered several children of this grade as a result of lectures before
+teachers' institutes. It is his custom, in such lectures, to ask the
+teachers to bring in for a demonstration test the "brightest child in
+the city" (or county, etc.). The I Q resulting from such a test is
+usually between 130 and 140, occasionally a little higher.
+
+
+_Examples of very superior intelligence_
+
+    _Margaret P. Age 8-10; mental age 11-1; I Q 130._ Father only a
+    skilled laborer (house painter), but a man of unusual
+    intelligence and character for his social class. Home care above
+    average. M. P. has attended school a little less than three
+    years and is completing fourth grade. Marks all "excellent."
+    Health perfect. Social and moral traits of the very best. Is
+    obedient, conscientious, and unusually reliable for her age.
+    Quiet and confident bearing, but no touch of vanity.
+
+    M. P. is known to be related on her father's side to John
+    Wesley, and her maternal grandfather was a highly skilled
+    mechanic and the inventor of an important train-coupling device
+    used on all railroads.
+
+    Although she is not yet 9 years old and is completing the fourth
+    grade, she is still about a grade below where she belongs by
+    mental age. She could no doubt easily be made ready for high
+    school by the age of 12.
+
+
+    _J. R. Girl, age 12-9; mental age 16 (average adult); I Q
+    approximately 130._ Daughter of a university professor. In first
+    year of high school. From first grade up her marks have been
+    nearly all of the A rank. For first semester of high school four
+    of six grades were A, the others B. A wonderfully charming,
+    delightful girl in every respect. Play life perfectly normal.
+
+    _J. R.'s_ parents have moved about a great deal and she has
+    attended eight different schools. She is two years above grade
+    in school, but of this gain only one-half grade was made in
+    school; _the other grade and a half she gained in a little over
+    a year by staying out of school and working a little each day
+    under the instruction of her mother_. But for this she would
+    doubtless now be in the seventh grade instead of in high school.
+    As it is she is at least a grade below where she belongs by
+    mental age. Something better than an average college record may
+    be safely predicted for J. R.
+
+
+    _E. B. Girl, age 7-9; mental age 10-2; I Q 130._ E. B. was
+    selected by the teachers of a small California city as the
+    brightest school child in that city (school population about
+    500). Her parents are said to be unusually intelligent. E. B. is
+    in the third grade, a year advanced, but her mental level shows
+    that she belongs in the fourth. The test was made as a
+    demonstration test in the presence of about 150 teachers, all
+    of whom were charmed by her delightful personality and keen
+    responses. No trace of vanity or queerness of any kind. Health
+    excellent. E. B. ought to be ready for high school at 12; she
+    will really have the intelligence to do high-school work by 11.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 13. BALL AND FIELD TEST. E. B., AGE 7-9;
+    I Q 130]
+
+
+    _L. B. Girl, age 8-6; mental age 11-6; I Q 135._ Tested nearly
+    three years earlier, age 5-11; mental age 7-6; I Q 127. Daughter
+    of a university professor. At age of 8-6 was doing very superior
+    work in the fifth grade. Later, at age of 10-6, is in the
+    seventh grade with all her marks excellent. Has two sisters who
+    test almost as high, both completing the eighth grade at barely
+    12 years of age. L. B. looks rather delicate, and though a
+    little nervous is ordinarily strong. We have known her since her
+    early childhood. Like both her sisters, she is a favorite with
+    young and old, as nearly perfection as the most charming little
+    girl could be.
+
+
+    _R. S. Boy, age 6-5; mental age 9-6; I Q 148._ When tested at
+    age 5-2 he had a mental age of 7-6, I Q 142. Father a university
+    professor. R. S. entered school at exactly 6 years of age, and
+    at the present writing is 7½ years old and is entering the
+    third grade. Leads his class in school and takes delight in the
+    work. Is normal in play life and social traits and is dependable
+    and thoughtful beyond his years. Should enter high school not
+    later than 12; could probably be made ready a year earlier, but
+    as he is somewhat nervous this might not be wise.
+
+
+    _T. F. Boy, age 10-6; mental age 14; I Q 133._ At 13-6 tested at
+    "superior adult," and had vocabulary of 13,000 (also "superior
+    adult"). Son of a college professor. Did not go to school till
+    age of 9 years and was not taught to read till 8½. At this
+    writing he is 15½ years old and is a senior in high school.
+    He will complete the high-school course in three and one-half
+    years with A to B marks, mostly A. Gets his hardest mathematics
+    lessons in five to ten minutes. Science is his play. When he
+    discovered Hodge's _Nature Study and Life_ at age of 11 years he
+    literally slept with the book till he almost knew it by heart.
+    Since age 12 he has given much time to magazines on mechanics
+    and electricity. At 13 he installed a wireless apparatus
+    without other aid than his electrical magazines. He has, for a
+    boy of his age, a rather remarkable understanding of the
+    principles underlying electrical applications. He is known by
+    his playmates as "the boy with a hobby." Stamp collections,
+    butterfly and moth collections (over 70 different varieties),
+    seashore collections, and wireless apparatus all show that the
+    appellation is fully merited. He chooses his hobbies and "rides"
+    them entirely on his own initiative.
+
+
+    _J. S. Boy, age 8-2; mental age 11-4; I Q 138._ Father was a
+    lawyer, parents now dead. Is in high fourth grade. Leads his
+    class. Attractive, healthy, normal-appearing lad. Full of good
+    humor. Is loving and obedient, strongly attached to his foster
+    mother (an aunt). Composes verses and fables for pastime. Here
+    are a couple of verses composed before his eighth birthday. They
+    are reproduced without change of spelling or punctuation:--
+
+        _Christmas_
+
+        Hurrah for Christmas
+        And all it's joy's
+        That come that day
+        For girls and boy's.
+
+
+        _Flowers_
+
+        Flowers in the garden.
+        That is all you see
+        Who likes them best?
+        That's the honey bee.
+
+    J. S. ought to be in the fifth grade, instead of the fourth. He
+    will easily be able to enter college by the age of 15 if he is
+    allowed to make the progress which would be normal to a child of
+    his intelligence. But it is too much to expect that the school
+    will permit this.
+
+
+    _F. McA. Boy, age 10-3; mental age 14-6; I Q 142._ Father a
+    school principal. F. is leading his class of 24 pupils in the
+    high seventh grade. Has received so many extra promotions only
+    because his father insisted that the teachers allow him to try
+    the next grade. The dire consequences which they predicted have
+    never followed. F. is perfectly healthy and one of the most
+    attractive lads the writer has ever seen. He has the normal play
+    instincts, but when not at play he has the dignified bearing of
+    a young prince, although without vanity. His vocabulary is 9000
+    (14 years), and his ability is remarkably even in all
+    directions. F. should easily enter college by the age of 15.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 14. BALL AND FIELD F. McA., AGE 10-3, MENTAL
+    AGE 14-6]
+
+
+    _E. M. Boy, age 6-11; mental age 10; I Q 145._ Learned to read
+    at age of 5 without instruction and shortly afterward had
+    learned from geography maps the capitals of all the States of
+    the Union. Started to school at 7½. Entered the first grade
+    at 9 A.M. and had been promoted to the fourth grade by 3 P.M. of
+    the same day! Has now attended school a half-year and is in the
+    fifth grade, age 7 years, 8 months. Father is on the faculty of
+    a university.
+
+    E. M. is as superior in personal and moral traits as in
+    intelligence. Responsible, sturdy, playful, full of humor,
+    loving, obedient. Health is excellent. Has had no home
+    instruction in school work. His progress has been perfectly
+    natural.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 15. DRAWING DESIGNS FROM MEMORY. E. M.,
+    AGE 6-11; MENTAL AGE 10, I Q 145
+
+    (This performance is satisfactory for year 10)]
+
+The above list of "very superior" children includes only a few of those
+we have tested who belong to this grade of intelligence. Every child in
+the list is so interesting that it is hard to omit any. We have found
+all such children (with one or two exceptions not included here) so
+superior to average children in all sorts of mental and moral traits
+that one is at a loss to understand how the popular superstitions about
+the "queerness" of bright children could have originated or survived.
+Nearly every child we have found with I Q above 140 is the kind one
+feels, before the test is over, one would like to adopt. If the crime of
+kidnaping could ever be forgiven it would be in the case of a child like
+one of these.
+
+GENIUS AND "NEAR" GENIUS. Intelligence tests have not been in use long
+enough to enable us to define genius definitely in terms of I Q. The
+following two cases are offered as among the highest test records of
+which the writer has personal knowledge. It is doubtful whether more
+than one child in 10,000 goes as high as either. One case has been
+reported, however, in which the I Q was not far from 200. Such a
+record, if reliable, is certainly phenomenal.
+
+    _E. F. Russian boy, age 8-5; mental age 13; I Q approximately
+    155._ Mother is a university student apparently of very superior
+    intelligence. E. F. has a sister almost as remarkable as
+    himself. E. F. is in the sixth grade and at the head of his
+    class. Although about four grades advanced beyond his
+    chronological age he is still one grade retarded! He could
+    easily carry seventh-grade work. In all probability E. F. could
+    be made ready for college by the age of 12 years without injury
+    to body or mind. His mother has taken the only sensible course;
+    she has encouraged him without subjecting him to
+    overstimulation.
+
+    E. F. was selected for the test as probably one of the brightest
+    children in a city of a third of a million population. He may
+    not be the brightest in that city, but he is one of the three or
+    four most intelligent the writer has found after a good deal of
+    searching. He is probably equaled by not more than one in
+    several thousand unselected children. How impatiently one waits
+    to see the fruit of such a budding genius!
+
+
+    _B. F. Son of a minister, age 7-8; mental age 12-4; I Q 160._
+    Vocabulary 7000 (12 years). This test was not made by the
+    writer, but by one of his graduate students. The record included
+    the _verbatim_ responses, so that it was easy to verify the
+    scoring. There can be no doubt as to the substantial accuracy
+    of the test. This I Q of 160 is the highest one in the Stanford
+    University records. B. F. has excellent health, normal play
+    interests, and is a favorite among his playfellows. Parents had
+    not thought of him as especially remarkable. He is only in the
+    third grade, and is therefore about three grades below his
+    mental age.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 16. BALL AND FIELD. B. F., AGE 7-8; MENTAL
+    AGE 12-4; I Q 160
+
+    (This is a 12-year performance)]
+
+It is especially noteworthy that not one of the children we have
+described with I Q above 130 has ever had any unusual amount or kind of
+home instruction. In most cases the parents were not aware of their very
+great superiority. Nor can we give the credit to the school or its
+methods. The school has in most cases been a deterrent to their
+progress, rather than a help. These children have been taught in classes
+with average and inferior children, like those described in the first
+part of this chapter. Their high I Q is only an index of their
+extraordinary cerebral endowment. This endowment is for life. There is
+not the remotest probability that any of these children will deteriorate
+to the average level of intelligence with the onset of maturity. Such an
+event would be no less a miracle (barring insanity) than the development
+of an imbecile into a successful lawyer or physician.
+
+IS THE I Q OFTEN MISLEADING? Do the cases described in this chapter give
+a reliable picture as to what one may expect of the various I Q levels?
+Does the I Q furnish anything like a reliable index of an individual's
+general educational possibilities and of his social worth? Are there not
+"feeble-minded geniuses," and are there not children of exceptionally
+high I Q who are nevertheless fools?
+
+We have no hesitation in saying that there is not one case in fifty in
+which there is any serious contradiction between the I Q and the child's
+performances in and out of school. We cannot deny the existence of
+"feeble-minded geniuses," but after a good deal of search we have not
+found one. Occasionally, of course, one finds a feeble-minded person
+who is an expert penman, who draws skillfully, who plays a musical
+instrument tolerably well, or who handles number combinations with
+unusual rapidity; but these are not geniuses; they are not authors,
+artists, musicians, or mathematicians.
+
+As for exceptionally intelligent children who appear feeble-minded, we
+have found but one case, a boy of 10 years with an I Q of about 125.
+This boy, whom we have tested several times and whose development we
+have followed for five years, was once diagnosed by a physician as
+feeble-minded. His behavior among other persons than his familiar
+associates is such as to give this impression. Nothing less than an
+entire chapter would be adequate for a description of this case, which
+is in reality one of disturbed emotional and social development with
+superior intelligence.
+
+It should be emphasized, however, that what we have said about the
+significance of various I Q's holds only for the I Q's secured by the
+use of the Stanford revision. As we have shown elsewhere (p. 62 _ff._)
+the I Q yielded by other versions of the Binet tests are often so
+inaccurate as to be misleading.
+
+We have not found a single child who tested between 70 and 80 I Q by the
+Stanford revision who was able to do satisfactory school work in the
+grade where he belonged by chronological age. Such children are usually
+from two to three grades retarded by the age of 12 years. On the other
+hand, the child with an I Q of 120 or above is almost never found below
+the grade for his chronological age, and occasionally he is one or two
+grades above. Wherever located, his school work is so superior as to
+suggest strongly the desirability of extra promotions. Those who test
+between 96 and 105 are almost never more than one grade above or below
+where they belong by chronological age, and even the small displacement
+of one year is usually determined by illness, age of beginning school,
+etc.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VII
+
+RELIABILITY OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD
+
+
+GENERAL VALUE OF THE METHOD. In a former chapter we have noted certain
+imperfections of the scale devised by Binet and Simon; namely, that many
+of the tests were not correctly located, that the choice of tests was in
+a few cases unsatisfactory, that the directions for giving and scoring
+the tests were sometimes too indefinite, and that the upper and lower
+ranges of the scale especially stood in need of extensions and
+corrections. All of these faults have been quite generally admitted. The
+method itself, however, after being put to the test by psychologists of
+all countries and of all faiths, by the skeptical as well as the
+friendly, has amply demonstrated its value. The agreement on this point
+is as complete as it is regarding the scale's imperfections.
+
+The following quotations from prominent psychologists who have studied
+the method will serve to show how it is regarded by those most entitled
+to an opinion:--
+
+    There can be no question about the fact that the Binet-Simon
+    tests do not make half as frequent or half as great errors in
+    the mental ages (of feeble-minded children) as are included in
+    gradings based on careful, prolonged general observation by
+    experienced observers.[30]
+
+    [30] Dr. F. Kuhlmann: "The Binet-Simon Tests of Intelligence in Grading
+    Feeble-Minded Children," in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_ (1912),
+    p. 189.
+
+    All of the different authors who have made these researches
+    (with Binet's method) are in a general way unanimous in
+    recognizing that the principle of the scale is extremely
+    fortunate, and all believe that it offers the basis of a most
+    useful method for the examination of intelligence.[31]
+
+    [31] Dr. Otto Bobertag: "L'échelle métrique de l'intelligence," in
+    _L'Année Psychologique_ (1912), p. 272.
+
+    It serves as a relatively simple and speedy method of securing,
+    by means accessible to every one, a true insight into the
+    average level of ability of a child between 3 and 15 years of
+    age.[32]
+
+    [32] Dr. Ernest Meumann: _Experimentelle Pädagogik_ (1913), vol. II,
+    p. 277.
+
+    That, despite the differences in race and language, despite the
+    divergences in school organization and in methods of
+    instruction, there should be so decided agreement in the
+    reactions of the children--is, in my opinion, the best
+    vindication of the _principle_ of the tests that one could
+    imagine, because this agreement demonstrates that _the tests do
+    actually reach and discover the general developmental conditions
+    of intelligence_ (so far as these are operative in
+    public-school children of the present cultural epoch), and not
+    mere fragments of knowledge and attainments acquired by
+    chance.[33]
+
+    [33] Dr. W. Stern: _The Psychological Methods of Testing Intelligence._
+    Translated by Whipple (1913), p. 49.
+
+    It is without doubt the most satisfactory and accurate method of
+    determining a child's intelligence that we have, and so far
+    superior to everything else which has been proposed that as yet
+    there is nothing else to be considered.[34]
+
+    [34] Dr. H. H. Goddard: "The Binet Measuring Scale of
+    Intelligence; What it is and How it is to be Used," in _The
+    Training School Bulletin_ (1912).
+
+The value of the method lies both in the swiftness and the accuracy with
+which it works. One who knows how to apply the tests correctly and who
+is experienced in the psychological interpretation of responses can in
+forty minutes arrive at a more accurate judgment as to a subject's
+intelligence than would be possible without the tests after months or
+even years of close observation. The reasons for this have already been
+set forth.[35] The difference is something like that between measuring a
+person's height with a yardstick and estimating it by guess. That this
+is not an unfair statement of the case is well shown by the following
+candid confession by a psychologist who tested 200 juvenile delinquents
+brought before Judge Lindsey's court:--
+
+[35] See this volume, p. 24 _ff._
+
+    As a matter of interest I estimated the mental ages of 150 of my
+    subjects before testing them. In 54 of the estimates the error
+    was not more than one year in either direction; 70 of the
+    subjects were estimated too high, the average error being
+    2 years and 7 months; 26 of the subjects were estimated too low,
+    the average error being 2 years and 2 months. _These figures
+    would seem to imply that an estimate with nothing to support it
+    is wholly unreliable, more especially as many of the estimates
+    were four or five years wide of the mark._[36]
+
+    [36] C. S. Bluemel: "Binet Tests on 200 Delinquents," in _The Training
+    School Bulletin_ (1915), p. 192. (Italics inserted.)
+
+Criticisms of the Binet method have also been frequently voiced, but
+chiefly by persons who have had little experience with it or by those
+whose scientific training hardly justifies an opinion. It cannot be too
+strongly emphasized that eminence in law, medicine, education, or any
+other profession does not of itself enable any one to pass judgment on
+the validity of a psychological method.
+
+DEPENDENCE OF THE SCALE'S RELIABILITY ON THE TRAINING OF THE EXAMINER.
+On this point two radically different opinions have been urged. On the
+one hand, some have insisted that the results of a test made by other
+than a thoroughly trained psychologist are absolutely worthless. At the
+opposite extreme are a few who seem to think that any teacher or
+physician can secure perfectly valid results after a few hours'
+acquaintance with the tests.
+
+The dispute is one which cannot be settled by the assertion of opinion,
+and, unfortunately, thoroughgoing investigations have not yet been made
+as to the frequency and extent of errors made by untrained or partially
+trained examiners. The only study of this kind which has so far been
+reported is the following:--[37]
+
+[37] Samuel C. Kohs: "The Binet Test and the Training of Teachers," in
+_The Training School Bulletin_ (1914), pp. 113-17.
+
+Dr. Kohs gives the results of tests made by 58 inexperienced teachers
+who were taking a summer course in the Training School at Vineland. The
+class met three times a week for instruction in the use of the Binet
+scale. During the first week the students listened to three lectures by
+Dr. Goddard. The second week was given over to demonstration testing.
+Each student saw four children tested, and attended two discussion
+periods of an hour each. During the third, fourth, and fifth weeks each
+student tested one child per week, and observed the testing of two
+others. The student was allowed to carry the test through in his own
+way, but received criticism after it was finished. Twice a week
+Dr. Goddard spent an hour with the class, discussing experimental
+procedure. The subjects tested were feeble-minded children whose exact
+mental ages were already known, and for this reason it was possible to
+check up the accuracy of each student's work.
+
+Kohs's table of results for the trial testing of the 174 children
+showed:--
+
+  (1) That 50 per cent of the work was as exact as any one in the
+      laboratory could make it;
+
+  (2) That in an additional 38 per cent the results were within
+      three fifths of a year of being exact;
+
+  (3) That nearly 90 per cent of the work of the summer students was
+      sufficiently accurate for all practical purposes;
+
+  (4) That the records improved during the brief training so that
+      during the third week only one test missed the real mental age
+      by as much as a year.
+
+Since hardly any of these students had had any previous experience with
+the Binet tests, Dr. Kohs seems to be entirely justified in his
+conclusion that it is possible, in the brief period of six weeks, to
+teach people to use the tests with a reasonable degree of accuracy.
+
+What shall we say of the teacher or of the physician who has not even
+had this amount of instruction? The writer's experience forces him to
+agree with Binet and with Dr. Goddard, that any one with intelligence
+enough to be a teacher, and who is willing to devote conscientious study
+to the mastery of the technique, can use the scale accurately enough to
+get a better idea of a child's mental endowment than he could possibly
+get in any other way. It is necessary, however, for the untrained person
+to recognize his own lack of experience, and in no case would it be
+justifiable to base important action or scientific conclusions upon the
+results of the inexpert examiner. As Binet himself repeatedly insisted,
+the method is not absolutely mechanical, and cannot be made so by
+elaboration of instructions.
+
+It is sometimes held that the examination and classification of backward
+children for special instruction should be carried out by the school
+physicians. The fact is, however, that there is nothing in the
+physician's training to give him any advantage over the ordinary teacher
+in the use of the Binet tests. Because of her more intimate knowledge of
+children and because of her superior tact and adaptability, the average
+teacher is perhaps better equipped than the average physician to give
+intelligence tests.
+
+Finally, it should be emphasized that whatever the previous training or
+experience of the examiner may have been, his ability to adjust to the
+child's personality and his willingness to follow conscientiously the
+directions for giving the tests are important factors in his equipment.
+
+INFLUENCE OF THE SUBJECT'S ATTITUDE. One continually meets such queries
+as, "How do you know the subject did his best?" "Possibly the child was
+nervous or frightened," or, "Perhaps incorrect answers were purposely
+given." All such objections may be disposed of by saying that the
+competent examiner can easily control the experiment in such a way that
+embarrassment is soon replaced by self-confidence, and in such a way
+that effort is kept at its maximum. As for mischievous deception, it
+would be a poor clinicist who could not recognize and deal with the
+little that is likely to arise.
+
+Cautions regarding embarrassment, fatigue, fright, illness, etc. are
+given in Chapter IX. Most of the errors which have been reported along
+this line are such as can nearly always be avoided by ordinary prudence,
+coupled with a little power of observation.[38] We must not charge the
+mistakes of untrained and indiscreet examiners against the validity of
+the method itself.
+
+[38] See, for example, the rather ludicrous "errors" of the Binet method
+reported in _The Psychological Clinic_ for 1915, pp. 140 _ff._ and
+167 _ff._
+
+It is possibly true that even if the examiner is tactful and prudent an
+unfavorable attitude on the part of the subject may occasionally affect
+the results of a test to some extent, but it ought not seriously to
+invalidate one examination out of five hundred. The greatest danger is
+in the case of a young subject who has been recently arrested and
+brought before a court. Even here a little common sense and scientific
+insight should enable one to guard against a mistaken diagnosis.
+
+THE INFLUENCE OF COACHING. It might be supposed that after the
+intelligence scale had been used with a few pupils in a given school all
+of their fellows would soon be apprised of the nature of the tests, and
+so learn the correct responses. Experience shows, however, that there is
+little likelihood of such influence except in the case of a small
+minority of the tests. Experiments in the psychology of testimony have
+demonstrated that children's ability to report upon a complex set of
+experiences is astonishingly weak. In testing with the Stanford revision
+a child is ordinarily given from twenty-four to thirty different tests,
+many of which are made up of three or more items. Of the total forty to
+fifty items the child is ordinarily able to report but few, and these
+not always correctly.
+
+Such tests as memory for sentences and digits, drawing the square and
+diamond, reproducing the designs from memory, comparing weights and
+lines, describing and interpreting pictures, æsthetic comparison,
+vocabulary, dissected sentences, fables, reading for memories, finding
+differences and similarities, arithmetical reasoning, and the form-board
+test, are hardly subject to report at all. While almost any of the other
+tests might, theoretically, be communicated, there is little danger that
+many of them will be. It is assumed, of course, that the examiner will
+take proper precautions to prevent any of his blanks or other materials
+from falling into the hands of those who are to be examined.
+
+The following tests are the ones most subject to the influence of
+coaching: Ball and field, giving date, naming sixty words, finding
+rhymes, changing hands of clock, comprehension of physical relations,
+"induction test," and "ingenuity test."
+
+In several instances we have interviewed children an hour or two after
+they had taken the examination, in order to find out how many of the
+tests they could recall. A boy of 4 years, after repeated questioning,
+could only say: "He showed me some pictures. He had a knife and a penny.
+He told me to shut the door." A girl of 3 years could recall nothing
+whatever that was intelligible.
+
+An 8-year-old boy said: "He made me tie a knot. He asked me about a ship
+and an auto. He wanted me to count backwards. He made me say over some
+things, numbers and things."
+
+A boy of 12 years said: "He told me to say all the words I could think
+of. He said some foolish things and asked what was foolish [he could not
+repeat a single absurdity]. I had to put some blocks together. I had to
+do some problems in arithmetic [he could not repeat a single problem].
+He read some fables to me. [Asked about the fables he was able to recall
+only part of one, that of the fox and the crow.] He showed me the
+picture of a field and wanted to know how to find a ball."
+
+It is evident from the above samples of report that the danger of
+coaching increases considerably with the age of the children concerned.
+With young subjects the danger is hardly present at all; with children
+of the upper-grammar grades, in the high school, and most of all in
+prisons and reformatories, it must be taken into account. Alternative
+tests may sometimes be used to advantage when there is evidence of
+coaching on any of the regular tests. It would be desirable to have two
+or three additional scales which could be used interchangeably with the
+Binet-Simon.
+
+RELIABILITY OF REPEATED TESTS. Will the same tests give consistent
+results when used repeatedly with the same subject? In general we
+may say that they do. Something depends, however, on the age and
+intelligence of the subject and on the time interval between the
+examinations.
+
+Goddard proves that feeble-minded individuals whose intelligence has
+reached its full development continue to test at exactly the same mental
+age by the Binet scale, year after year. In their case, familiarity with
+the tests does not in the least improve the responses. At each retesting
+the responses given at previous examinations are repeated with only the
+most trivial variations. Of 352 feeble-minded children tested at
+Vineland, three years in succession, 109 gave absolutely no variation,
+232 showed a variation of not more than two fifths of a year, while 22
+gained as much as one year in the three tests. The latter, presumably,
+were younger children whose intelligence was still developing.
+
+Goddard has also tested 464 public-school children for three successive
+years. Approximately half of these showed normal progress or more in
+mental age, while most of the remainder showed somewhat less than normal
+progress.
+
+Bobertag's retesting of 83 normal children after an interval of
+a year gave results entirely in harmony with those of Goddard.
+The reapplication of the tests showed absolutely no influence of
+familiarity, the correlation of the two tests being almost perfect
+(.95). Those who tested "at age" in the first test had advanced, on
+the average, exactly one year. Those who tested _plus_ in the first
+test advanced in the twelve months about a year and a quarter, as we
+should expect those to do whose mental development is accelerated.
+Correspondingly, those who tested _minus_ at the first test advanced
+only about three fourths of a year in mental age during the
+interval.[39]
+
+[39] Otto Bobertag: "Ueber Intelligenz Prüfungen," in _Zeitsch. f.
+Angew. Psychol._ (1912), p. 521 _ff._
+
+Our own results with a mixed group of normal, superior, dull and
+feeble-minded children agree fully with the above findings. In this case
+the two tests were separated by an interval of two to four years, and
+the correlation between their results was practically perfect. The
+average difference between the I Q obtained in the second test and that
+obtained in the first was only 4 per cent, and the greatest difference
+found was only 8 per cent.[40]
+
+[40] See _The Stanford Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Scale
+for Measuring Intelligence_. (Warwick and York, 1916.)
+
+The repetition of the test at shorter intervals will perhaps affect the
+result somewhat more, but the influence is much less than one might
+expect. The writer has tested, at intervals of only a few days to a few
+weeks, 14 backward children of 12 to 18 years, and 8 normal children of
+5 to 13 years. The backward children showed an average improvement in
+the second test of about two months in mental age, the normal children
+an average improvement of little more than three months. No child varied
+in the second test more than half a year from the mental age first
+secured. On the whole, normal children profit more from the experience
+of a previous test than do the backward and feeble-minded.
+
+Berry tested 45 normal children and 50 defectives with the Binet 1908
+and 1911 scales at brief intervals. The author does not state which
+scale was applied first, but the mental ages secured by the two scales
+were practically the same when allowance was made for the slightly
+greater difficulty of the 1911 series of tests.[41]
+
+[41] Charles Scott Berry: "A Comparison of the Binet Tests of 1908 and
+1911," in _Journal of Educational Psychology_ (1912), pp. 444-51.
+
+We may conclude, therefore, that while it would probably be desirable
+to have one or more additional scales for alternative use in testing the
+same children at very brief intervals, the same scale may be used for
+repeated tests at intervals of a year or more with little danger of
+serious inaccuracy. Moreover, results like those set forth above are
+important evidence as to the validity of the test method.
+
+INFLUENCE OF SOCIAL AND EDUCATIONAL ADVANTAGES. The criticism has often
+been made that the responses to many of the tests are so much subject to
+the influence of school and home environment as seriously to invalidate
+the scale as a whole. Some of the tests most often named in this
+connection are the following: Giving age and sex; naming common objects,
+colors, and coins; giving the value of stamps; giving date; naming the
+months of the year and the days of the week; distinguishing forenoon and
+afternoon; counting; making change; reading for memories; naming sixty
+words; giving definitions; finding rhymes; and constructing a sentence
+containing three given words.
+
+It has in fact been found wherever comparisons have been made that
+children of superior social status yield a higher average mental age
+than children of the laboring classes. The results of Decroly and Degand
+and of Meumann, Stern, and Binet himself may be referred to in this
+connection. In the case of the Stanford investigation, also, it was
+found that when the unselected school children were grouped in three
+classes according to social status (superior, average, and inferior),
+the average I Q for the superior social group was 107, and that of the
+inferior social group 93. This is equivalent to a difference of one year
+in mental age with 7-year-olds, and to a difference of two years with
+14-year-olds.
+
+However, the common opinion that the child from a cultured home does
+better in tests solely by reason of his superior home advantages is an
+entirely gratuitous assumption. Practically all of the investigations
+which have been made of the influence of nature and nurture on mental
+performance agree in attributing far more to original endowment than to
+environments. Common observation would itself suggest that the social
+class to which the family belongs depends less on chance than on the
+parents' native qualities of intellect and character.
+
+The results of five separate and distinct lines of inquiry based on the
+Stanford data agree in supporting the conclusion that the children of
+successful and cultured parents test higher than children from wretched
+and ignorant homes for the simple reason that their heredity is better.
+The results of this investigation are set forth in full elsewhere.[42]
+
+[42] See _The Stanford Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon
+Measuring Scale of Intelligence_. (Warwick and York, 1916)
+
+It would, of course, be going too far to deny all possibility of
+environmental conditions affecting the result of an intelligence test.
+Certainly no one would expect that a child reared in a cage and denied
+all intercourse with other human beings could by any system of mental
+measurement test up to the level of normal children. There is, however,
+no reason to believe that _ordinary_ differences in social environment
+(apart from heredity), differences such as those obtaining among
+unselected children attending approximately the same general type of
+school in a civilized community, affects to any great extent the
+validity of the scale.
+
+A crucial experiment would be to take a large number of very young
+children of the lower classes and, after placing them in the most
+favorable environment obtainable, to compare their later mental
+development with that of children born into the best homes. No extensive
+study of this kind has been made, but the writer has tested twenty
+orphanage children who, for the most part, had come from very inferior
+homes. They had been in a well-conducted orphanage for from two to
+several years, and had enjoyed during that time the advantages of an
+excellent village school. Nevertheless, all but three tested below
+average, ranging from 75 to 90 I Q.
+
+The impotence of school instruction to neutralize individual differences
+in native endowment will be evident to any one who follows the school
+career of backward children. The children who are seriously retarded in
+school are not normal, and cannot be made normal by any refinement of
+educational method. As a rule, the longer the inferior child attends
+school, the more evident his inferiority becomes. It would hardly be
+reasonable, therefore, to expect that a little incidental instruction in
+the home would weigh very heavily against these same native differences
+in endowment. Cases like the following show conclusively that it does
+not:--
+
+    X is the son of unusually intelligent and well-educated parents.
+    The home is everything one would expect of people of scholarly
+    pursuits and cultivated tastes. But X has always been
+    irresponsible, troublesome, childish, and queer. He learned to
+    walk at 2 years, to talk at 3, and has always been delicate and
+    nervous. When brought for examination he was 8 years old. He had
+    twice attempted school work, but could accomplish nothing and
+    was withdrawn. His play-life was not normal, and other children,
+    younger than himself, abused and tormented him. The Binet tests
+    gave an I Q of approximately 75; that is, the retardation
+    amounted to about two years. The child was examined again three
+    years later. At that time, after attending school two years, he
+    had recently completed the first grade. This time the I Q was
+    73. Strange to say, the mother is encouraged and hopeful because
+    she sees that her boy is learning to read. She does not seem to
+    realize that at his age he ought to be within three years of
+    entering high school.
+
+    The forty-minute test had told more about the mental ability of
+    this boy than the intelligent mother had been able to learn in
+    eleven years of daily and hourly observation. For X is
+    feeble-minded; he will never complete the grammar school; he
+    will never be an efficient worker or a responsible citizen.
+
+    Let us change the picture. Z is a bright-eyed, dark-skinned girl
+    of 9 years. She is dark-skinned because her father is a mixture
+    of Indian and Spanish. The mother is of Irish descent. With her
+    strangely mated parents and two brothers she lives in a dirty,
+    cramped, and poorly furnished house in the country. The parents
+    are illiterate, and the brothers are retarded and dull, though
+    not feeble-minded.
+
+    It is Z's turn to be tested. I inquire the name. It is familiar,
+    for I have already tested the two stupid brothers. I also know
+    her ignorant parents and the miserable cabin in which she lives.
+    The examination begins with the 8-year tests. The responses are
+    quick and accurate. We proceed to the 9-year group. There is no
+    failure, and there is but one minor error. Successes and
+    failures alternate for a while until the latter prevail. Z has
+    tested at 11 years. In spite of her wretched home, she is
+    mentally advanced nearly 25 per cent. By the vocabulary test she
+    is credited with a knowledge of nearly 6000 words, or nearly
+    four times as many as X, the boy of cultured home and scholarly
+    parents, had learned by the age of 8 years.
+
+    Five years have passed. When given the test, Z was in the fourth
+    grade and, as we have already stated, 9 years of age. As a
+    result of the test she was transferred to the fifth grade. Later
+    she skipped again and at the age of 14 is a successful student
+    in the second year of high school. To assay her intelligence and
+    determine its quality was a task of forty-five minutes.
+
+The above cases, each of which could be paralleled by many others which
+we have found, will serve to illustrate the fact that exceptionally
+superior endowment is discoverable by the tests, however unfavorable the
+home from which it comes, and that inferior endowment cannot be
+normalized by all the advantages of the most cultured home. Quoting
+again from Stern, "The tests actually reach and discover the general
+developmental conditions of intelligence, and not mere fragments of
+knowledge and attainments acquired by chance."
+
+
+
+
+PART II
+
+GUIDE FOR THE USE OF THE STANFORD REVISION AND EXTENSION
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VIII
+
+GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
+
+
+NECESSITY OF SECURING ATTENTION AND EFFORT. The child's intelligence is
+to be judged by his success in the performance of certain tasks. These
+tasks may appear to the examiner to be very easy, indeed; but we must
+bear in mind that they are often anything but easy for the child. Real
+effort and attention are necessary for his success, and occasionally
+even his best efforts fall short of the desired result. If the tests are
+to display the child's real intellectual ability it will be necessary,
+therefore, to avoid as nearly as possible every disturbing factor which
+would divide his attention or in any other way injure the quality of
+his responses. To insure this it will be necessary to consider somewhat
+in detail a number of factors which influence effort, such as degree of
+quiet, the nature of surroundings, presence or absence of others, means
+of gaining the child's confidence, the avoidance of embarrassment,
+fatigue, etc.
+
+One should not expect, however, to secure an absolutely equal degree of
+attention from all subjects. The power to give sustained attention to a
+difficult task is characteristically weak in dull and feeble-minded
+children. What we should labor to secure is the maximum attention of
+which the child is capable, and if this is unsatisfactory without
+external cause, we are to regard the fact as symptomatic of inferior
+mental ability, not as an extenuating factor or an excuse for lack of
+success in the tests.
+
+Attention, of course, cannot be normal if any acute physical or mental
+disturbance is present. Toothache, headache, earache, nausea, fever,
+cold, etc., all render the test inadvisable. The same is true of mental
+anxiety or fear, as in the case of the child who has just been arrested
+and brought before the court.
+
+QUIET AND SECLUSION. The tests should be conducted in a quiet room,
+located where the noises of the street and other outside distractions
+cannot enter. A reasonably small room is better than a very large one,
+because it is more homelike. The furnishings of the room should be
+simple. A table and two chairs are sufficient. If the room contains a
+number of unfamiliar objects, such as psychological apparatus, pictures
+on the walls, etc., the attention of the child is likely to be drawn
+away from the tasks which he is given to do. The halls and corridors
+which it is sometimes necessary to use in testing school children are
+usually noisy, cold, or otherwise objectionable.
+
+PRESENCE OF OTHERS. A still more disturbing influence is the presence of
+other persons. Generally speaking, if accurate results are to be secured
+it is not permissible to have any auditor, besides possibly an
+assistant to record the responses. Even the assistant, however quiet and
+unobtrusive, is sometimes a disturbing element. Though something of a
+convenience, the assistant is by no means necessary, after the examiner
+has thoroughly mastered the procedure of the tests and has acquired some
+skill in the use of abbreviations in recording the answers. If an
+assistant or any other person is present, he should be seated somewhat
+behind the child, not too close, and should take no notice of the child
+either when he enters the room or at any time during the examination.
+
+At all events, the presence of parent, teacher, school principal, or
+governess is to be avoided. Contrary to what one might expect, these
+distract the child much more than a strange personality would do. Their
+critical attitude toward the child's performance is very likely to cause
+embarrassment. If the child is alone with the examiner, he is more at
+ease from the mere fact that he does not feel that there is a reputation
+to sustain. The praise so lavishly bestowed upon him by the friendly and
+sympathetic examiner lends to the same effect.
+
+As Binet emphasizes, if the presence of others cannot be avoided, it
+is at least necessary to require of them absolute silence. Parents,
+and sometimes teachers, have an almost irrepressible tendency to
+interrupt the examination with excuses for the child's failures and
+with disturbing explanations which are likely to aid the child in
+comprehending the required task. Without the least intention of doing
+so, they sometimes practically tell the child how to respond. Parents,
+especially, cannot refrain from scolding the child or showing impatience
+when his answers do not come up to expectation. This, of course,
+endangers the child's success still further.
+
+The psychologist is not surprised at such conduct. It would be foolish
+to expect average parents, even apart from their bias in the particular
+case at hand, to adopt the scientific attitude of the trained examiner.
+Since we cannot in a few moments at our disposal make them over into
+psychologists, our only recourse is to deal with them by exclusion.
+
+This is not to say that it is impossible to test a child satisfactorily
+in the presence of others. If the examiner is experienced, and if the
+child is not timid, it is sometimes possible to make a successful test
+in the presence of quite a number of auditors, provided they remain
+silent, refrain from staring, and otherwise conduct themselves with
+discretion. But not even the veteran examiner can always be sure of the
+outcome in demonstration testing.
+
+GETTING INTO "RAPPORT." The examiner's first task is to win the
+confidence of the child and overcome his timidity. Unless _rapport_ has
+first been established, the results of the first tests given are likely
+to be misleading. The time and effort necessary for accomplishing this
+are variable factors, depending upon the personality of both the
+examiner and the subject. In a majority of cases from three to five
+minutes should be sufficient, but in a few cases somewhat more time is
+necessary.
+
+The writer has found that when a strange child is brought to the clinic
+for examination, it is advantageous to go out of doors with him for a
+little walk around the university buildings. It is usually possible to
+return from such a stroll in a few minutes, with the child chattering
+away as though to an old friend. Another approach is to begin by showing
+the child some interesting object, such as a toy, or a form-board, or
+pictures not used in the test. The only danger in this method is that
+the child is likely to find the object so interesting that he may not be
+willing to abandon it for the tests, or that his mind will keep
+reverting to it during the examination.
+
+Still another method is to give the child his seat as soon as he is
+ushered into the room, and, after a word of greeting, which must be
+spoken in a kindly tone but without gushiness, to open up a conversation
+about matters likely to be of interest. The weather, place of residence,
+pets, sports, games, toys, travels, current events, etc., are suitable
+topics if rightly employed. When the child has begun to express himself
+without timidity and it is clear that his confidence has been gained,
+one may proceed, as though in continuance of the conversation, to
+inquire the name, age, and school grade. The examiner notes these down
+in the appropriate blanks, rather unconcernedly, at the same time
+complimenting the child (unless it is clearly a case of serious
+retardation) on the fine progress he has made with his studies.
+
+KEEPING THE CHILD ENCOURAGED. Nothing contributes more to a satisfactory
+_rapport_ than praise of the child's efforts. Under no circumstances
+should the examiner permit himself to show displeasure at a response,
+however absurd it may be. In general, the poorer the response, the
+better satisfied one should appear to be with it. An error is always to
+be passed by without comment, unless it is painfully evident to the
+child himself, in which case the examiner will do well to make some
+excuse for it; e.g., "You are not quite old enough to answer questions
+like that one; but, never mind, you are doing beautifully," etc.
+Exclamations like "fine!" "splendid!" etc., should be used lavishly.
+Almost any innocent deception is permissible which keeps the child
+interested, confident, and at his best level of effort. The examination
+should begin with tests that are fairly easy, in order to give the child
+a little experience with success before the more difficult tests are
+reached.
+
+THE IMPORTANCE OF TACT. It goes without saying that children's
+personalities are not so uniform and simple that we can adhere always to
+a single stereotyped procedure in working our way into their good
+graces. Suggestions like the above have their value, but, like rules of
+etiquette, they must be supported by the tact which comes of intuition
+and cannot be taught. The address which flatters and pleases one child
+may excite disgust in another. The examiner must scent the situation and
+adapt his method to it. One child is timid and embarrassed; another may
+think his mental powers are under suspicion and so react with sullen
+obstinacy; a third may be in an angry mood as a result of a recent
+playground quarrel. Situations like these are, of course, exceptional,
+but in any case it is necessary to create in the child a certain mood,
+or indefinable attitude of mind, before the test begins.
+
+PERSONALITY OF THE EXAMINER. Doubtless there are persons so lacking in
+personal adaptability that success in this kind of work would be for
+them impossible. The wooden, mechanical, matter-of-fact and unresponsive
+personality is as much out of place in the psychological clinic as the
+traditional bull in the china shop. It would make an interesting study
+for some one to investigate, by exact methods, the influence on test
+results of the personality of different examiners who have been equally
+trained in the methods to be employed and who are equally conscientious
+in applying them according to rules.
+
+On the whole, differences of this kind are probably not very great among
+experienced and reasonably competent examiners. Adaptability grows with
+experience and with increase of self-confidence. After a few score tests
+there should be no serious failure from inability to get into _rapport_
+with the child. Even in those rare cases where the child breaks down and
+cries from timidity, or perhaps refuses to answer out of embarrassment,
+the difficulty can be overcome by sufficient tact so that the
+examination may proceed as though nothing had happened.
+
+If the examiner has the proper psychological and personal equipment, the
+testing of twenty or thirty children forms a fairly satisfactory
+apprenticeship. Without psychological training, no amount of experience
+will guarantee absolute accuracy of the results.
+
+THE AVOIDANCE OF FATIGUE. Against the validity of intelligence tests it
+is often argued that the result of an examination depends a great deal
+on the time of day when it is made, whether in the morning hours when
+the mind is at its best, or in the afternoon when it is supposedly
+fatigued. Although no very extensive investigation has been made of this
+influence, there is no evidence that the ordinary fatigue incident to
+school work injures the child's performance appreciably. Our tests of
+1000 children showed no inferiority of results secured from 1 to 4 P.M.,
+as compared with tests made from 9 to 12 A.M.
+
+An explanation for this is not hard to find. Although school work causes
+fatigue, in the sense that a part of the child's available supply of
+mental energy is used up, there is always a reserve of energy sufficient
+to carry the child through a thirty-to fifty-minute test. The fact that
+the required tasks are novel and interesting to a high degree insures
+that the reserve energy will really be brought into play. This
+principle, of course, has its natural limits. The examiner would avoid
+testing a child who was exhausted either from work or play, or a child
+who was noticeably sleepy.
+
+DURATION OF THE EXAMINATION. About the only danger of fatigue lies in
+making the examination too long. Young children show symptoms of
+weariness much more quickly than older children, and it is therefore
+fortunate that not so much time is needed for testing them. The
+following allowances of time will usually be found sufficient:--
+
+    Children  3-5 years old         25-30 minutes
+        "     6-8     "   "         30-40    "
+        "     9-12    "   "         40-50    "
+        "    13-15    "   "         50-60    "
+    Adults                          60-90    "
+
+This allowance ordinarily includes the time necessary for getting into
+_rapport_ with the child, in addition to that actually consumed in the
+tests. But the examiner need not expect to hold fast to any schedule.
+Some subjects respond in a lively manner, others are exasperatingly
+slow. It is more often the mentally retarded child who answers slowly,
+but exceptions to this rule are not uncommon. One 8-year-old boy
+examined by the writer answered so hesitatingly that it required two
+sittings of nearly an hour each to complete the test. The result,
+however, showed a mental age of 11½ years, or an I Q of 143.
+
+It is permissible to hurry the child by an occasional "that's fine; now,
+quickly," etc., but in doing this caution must be exercised, or the
+child's mental process may be blocked. The appearance of nagging must be
+carefully avoided. If the test goes so slowly that it cannot be
+completed in the above limits of time, it is usually best to stop and
+complete the examination at another time. When this is not possible, it
+is advisable to take a ten-minute intermission and a little walk out of
+doors.
+
+Time can be saved by having all the necessary materials close at hand
+and conveniently arranged. The coins should be kept in a separate purse,
+and the pictures, colors, stamps, and designs for drawing should be
+mounted on stiff cardboard which may be punched and kept in a notebook
+cover. The series of sentences, digits, comprehension questions, fables,
+etc., should either be mounted in similar fashion, or else printed in
+full on the record sheets used in the tests. The latter is more
+convenient.[43] All other materials should be kept where they will not
+have to be hunted for.
+
+[43] Examiners will find it a great convenience to use the record
+booklet which has been specially devised for testing with the Stanford
+revision. It contains all the necessary printed material, including
+digits, sentences, absurdities, fables, the vocabulary list, the reading
+selection, the square and diamond for copying, etc., and in addition
+gives with each test the standard for scoring. It is so arranged as to
+afford ample room for a _verbatim_ record of all the child's responses,
+and contains other features calculated to make testing easy and
+accurate. Regarding purchasing of supplies see p. 141.
+
+Besides saving valuable time, a little methodical foresight of this kind
+adds to the success of the test. If the child is kept waiting, the test
+loses its interest and attention strays. See to it, if possible, that no
+lull occurs in the performance.
+
+Inexperienced examiners sometimes waste time foolishly by stopping to
+instruct the child on his failures. This is doubly bad, for besides
+losing time it makes the child conscious of the imperfection of his
+responses and creates embarrassment. Adhere to the purpose of the test,
+which is to ascertain the child's intellectual level, not to instruct
+him.
+
+DESIRABLE RANGE OF TESTING. There are two considerations here of equal
+importance. It is necessary to make the examination thorough, but in the
+pursuit of thoroughness we must be careful not to produce fatigue or
+ennui. Unless there is reason to suspect mental retardation, it is
+usually best to begin with the group of tests just below the child's
+age. However, if there is a failure in the tests of that group, it is
+necessary to go back and try all the tests of the previous group. In
+like manner the examination should be carried up the scale, until a test
+group has been found in which all the tests are failed.
+
+It must be admitted, however, that because of time limitations and
+fatigue, it is not always practicable to adhere to this ideal of
+thoroughness. In testing normal children, little error will result if we
+go back no farther than the year which yielded only one failure, and if
+we stop with the year in which there was only one success. _This is the
+lowest permissible limit of thoroughness._ Defectives are more uneven
+mentally than normal children, and therefore scatter their successes and
+failures over a wider range. With such subjects it is absolutely
+imperative that the test be thorough.
+
+In the case of defectives it is sometimes necessary to begin with random
+testing, until a rough idea is gained of the mental level. But the
+skilled observer soon becomes able to utilize symptoms in the child's
+conversation and conduct and to dispense with most of this preliminary
+exploration.
+
+ORDER OF GIVING THE TESTS. The child's efforts in the tests are
+sometimes markedly influenced by the order in which they are given. If
+language tests or memory tests are given first, the child is likely to
+be embarrassed. More suitable to begin with are those which test
+knowledge or judgment about objective things, such as the pictures,
+weights, stamps, bow-knot, colors, coins, counting pennies, number
+of fingers, right and left, time orientation, ball and field,
+paper-folding, etc. Tests like naming sixty words, finding rhymes,
+giving differences or similarities, making sentences, repeating
+sentences, and drawing are especially unsuitable because they tend to
+provoke self-consciousness.
+
+The tests as arranged in this revision are in the order which it is
+usually best to follow, but one should not hesitate to depart from the
+order given when it seems best in a given case to do so. It is necessary
+to be constantly alert so that when the child shows a tendency to balk
+at a given type of test, such as those of memory, language, numbers,
+drawing, "comprehension," etc., the work can be shifted to more
+agreeable tasks. When the child is at his ease again, it is usually
+possible to return to the troublesome tests with better success. In the
+case of 8-year-old D. C., who is a speech defective but otherwise above
+normal, it was quite impossible at the first sitting to give such tests
+as sentence-making, naming sixty words, reading, repeating sentences,
+giving definitions, etc.; at each test of this type the child's voice
+broke and he was ready to cry, due, no doubt, to sensitiveness regarding
+his speech defect. Others do everything willingly except the drawing and
+copying. The younger children sometimes refuse to repeat the sentences
+or digits. In all such cases it is best to pass on to something else.
+After a few minutes the rejected task may be done willingly.
+
+COAXING TO BE AVOIDED. Although we should always encourage the child to
+believe that he can answer correctly, if he will only try, we must avoid
+the common practice of dragging out responses by too much urging and
+coaxing. The sympathies of the examiner tend to lead him into the habit
+of repeating and explaining the question if the child does not answer
+promptly. This is nearly always a mistake, for the question is one which
+should be understood. Besides, explanations and coaxing are too often
+equivalent to answering the question for the child. It is almost
+impossible to impress this danger sufficiently upon the untrained
+examiner. One who is not familiar with the psychology of suggestion may
+put the answer in the child's mouth without suspecting what he is doing.
+
+ADHERING TO FORMULA. It cannot be too strongly emphasized that unless we
+follow a standardized procedure the tests lose their significance. The
+danger is chiefly that of unintentionally and unconsciously introducing
+variations which will affect the meaning of the test. One who has not
+had a thorough training in the methods of mental testing cannot
+appreciate how numerous are the opportunities for the unconscious
+transformation of a test. Many of these are pointed out in the
+description of the individual tests, but it would be folly to undertake
+to warn the experimenter against every possible error of this kind.
+Sometimes the omission or the addition of a single phrase in giving
+the test will alter materially the significance of the response.
+Only the trained psychologist can vary the formula without risk of
+invalidating the result, and even he must be on his guard. All sorts of
+misunderstandings regarding the correct placing of tests and regarding
+their accuracy or inaccuracy have come about through the failure of
+different investigators to follow the same procedure.
+
+One who would use the tests for any serious purpose, therefore,
+must study the procedure for each and every test until he knows it
+thoroughly. After that a considerable amount of practice is necessary
+before one learns to avoid slips. During the early stages of practice it
+is necessary to refer to the printed instructions frequently in order to
+check up errors before they have become habitual.
+
+The instructions hitherto available are at fault in not defining the
+procedure with sufficient definiteness, and it is the purpose of this
+volume to make good this deficiency as far as possible.
+
+It is too much, however, to suppose that the instructions can be made
+"fool-proof." With whatever definiteness they may be set forth,
+situations are sure to arise which the examiner cannot be formally
+prepared for. There is no limit to the multitude of misunderstandings
+possible. After testing hundreds of children one still finds new
+examples of misapprehension. In a few such cases the instruction may be
+repeated, if there is reason to think the child's hearing was at fault
+or if some extraordinary distraction has occurred. But unless otherwise
+stated in the directions, the repetition of a question is ordinarily to
+be avoided. Supplementary explanations are hardly ever permissible.
+
+In short, numberless situations may arise in the use of a test which may
+injure the validity of the response, events which cannot always be
+dealt with by preconceived rule. Accordingly, although we must urge
+unceasingly the importance of following the standard procedure, it is
+not to be supposed that formulas are an adequate substitute either for
+scientific judgment or for common sense.
+
+SCORING. The exact method of scoring the individual tests is set forth
+in the following chapters. Reference to the record booklet for use in
+testing will show that the records are to be kept in detail. Each
+subdivision of a test should be scored separately, in order that the
+clinical picture may be as complete as possible. This helps in the final
+evaluation of the results. It makes much difference, for example,
+whether success in repeating six digits is earned by repeating all three
+correctly or only one; or whether the child's lack of success with the
+absurdities is due to failure on two, three, four, or all of them. Time
+should be recorded whenever called for in the record blanks.
+
+RECORDING RESPONSES. Plus and minus signs alone are not usually
+sufficient. Whenever possible the entire response should be recorded. If
+the test results are to be used by any other person than the examiner,
+this is absolutely essential. Any other standard of completeness opens
+the door to carelessness and inaccuracy. In nearly all the tests, except
+that of naming sixty words, the examiner will find it possible by the
+liberal use of abbreviations to record practically the entire response
+_verbatim_. In doing so, however, one must be careful to avoid keeping
+the child waiting. Occasionally it is necessary to leave off recording
+altogether because of the embarrassment sometimes aroused in the child
+by seeing his answer written down. The writer has met the latter
+difficulty several times. When for any reason it is not feasible to
+record anything more than score marks, success may be indicated by the
+sign +, failure by -, and half credit by ½. An exceptionally good
+response may be indicated by ++ and an exceptionally poor response by --.
+If there is a slight doubt about a success or failure the sign? may
+be added to the + or -. In general, however, score the response either +
+or -, avoiding half credit as far as it is possible to do so.
+
+If the entire response is not recorded it is necessary to record at
+least the score mark for each test _when the test is given_. It must be
+borne in mind that the scoring is not a purely mechanical affair.
+Instead, the judgment of the examiner must come into play with every
+record made. If the scoring is delayed, there is not only the danger of
+forgetting a response, but the judgment is likely to be influenced by
+the subject's responses to succeeding questions. Our special record
+booklet contains wide margins, so that extended notes and observations
+regarding the child's responses and behavior can be recorded as the test
+proceeds.
+
+SCATTERING OF SUCCESSES. It is sometimes a source of concern to the
+untrained examiner that the successes and failures should be scattered
+over quite an extensive range of years. Why, it may be asked, should not
+a child who has 10-year intelligence answer correctly all the tests up
+to and including group X, and fail on all the tests beyond? There are
+two reasons why such is almost never the case. In the first place, the
+intelligence of an individual is ordinarily not even. There are many
+different kinds of intelligence, and in some of these the subject is
+better endowed than in others. A second reason lies in the fact that no
+test can be purely and simply a test of native intelligence. Given a
+certain degree of intelligence, accidents of experience and training
+bring it about that this intelligence will work more successfully with
+some kinds of material than with others. For both of these reasons there
+results a scattering of successes and failures over three or four years.
+The subject fails first in one or two tests of a group, then in two or
+three tests of the following group, the number of failures increasing
+until there are no successes at all. Success "tapers off" from
+100 per cent to 0. Once in a great while a child fails on several of the
+tests of a given year and succeeds with a majority of those in the next
+higher year. This is only an extreme instance of uneven intelligence or
+of specialized experience, and does not necessarily reflect upon the
+reliability of the tests for children in general. The method of
+calculation given above strikes a kind of average and gives the general
+level of intelligence, which is essentially the thing we want to know.
+
+SUPPLEMENTARY CONSIDERATIONS. It would be a mistake to suppose that any
+set of mental tests could be devised which would give us complete
+information about a child's native intelligence. There are no tests
+which are absolutely pure tests of intelligence. All are influenced to a
+greater or less degree also by training and by social environment. For
+this reason, all the ascertainable facts bearing on such influences
+should be added to the record of the mental examination, and should be
+given due weight in reaching a final conclusion as to the level of
+intelligence.
+
+The following supplementary information should be gathered, when
+possible:--
+
+  1.  Social status (very superior, superior, average, inferior, or
+      very inferior).
+
+  2.  The teacher's estimate of the child's intelligence (very
+      superior, superior, average, inferior, or very inferior).
+
+  3.  School opportunities, including years of attendance,
+      regularity, retardation or acceleration, etc.
+
+  4.  Quality of school work (very superior, superior, average,
+      inferior, or very inferior).
+
+  5.  Physical handicaps, if any (adenoids, diseased tonsils, partial
+      deafness, imperfect vision, malnutrition, etc.).
+
+In addition, the examiner will need to take account of the general
+attitude of the child during the examination. This is provided for in
+the record blanks under the heading "comments." The comments should
+describe as fully as possible the conduct and attitude of the child
+during the examination, with emphasis upon such disturbing factors as
+fear, timidity, unwillingness to answer, overconfidence, carelessness,
+lack of attention, etc. Sometimes, also, it is desirable to verify the
+child's age and to make record of the verification.
+
+Once more let it be urged that no degree of mechanical perfection of the
+tests can ever take the place of good judgment and psychological
+insight. Intelligence is too complicated to be weighed, like a bag of
+grain, by any one who can read figures.
+
+ALTERNATIVE TESTS. The tests designated as "alternative tests" are not
+intended for regular use. Inasmuch as they have been standardized and
+belong in the year group where they are placed, they may be used as
+substitute tests on certain occasions. Sometimes one of the regular
+tests is spoiled in giving it, or the requisite material for it may not
+be at hand. Sometimes there may be reason to suspect that the subject
+has become acquainted with some of the tests. In such cases it is a
+great convenience to have a few substitutes available.
+
+It is necessary, however, to warn against a possible misuse of
+alternative tests. _It is not permissible to count success in an
+alternative test as offsetting failure in a regular test._ This would
+give the subject too much leeway of failure. There are very exceptional
+cases, however, when it is legitimate to break this rule; namely, when
+one of the regular tests would be obviously unfair to the subject being
+tested. In year X, for example, one of the three alternative tests
+should be substituted for the reading test (X, 4) in case we are testing
+a subject who has not had the equivalent of at least two years of
+school work. In year VIII, it would be permissible to substitute the
+alternative test of naming six coins, instead of the vocabulary test, in
+the case of a subject who came from a home where English was not spoken.
+In VII, it would perhaps not be unfair to substitute the alternative
+test, in place of the test of copying a diamond, in the case of a
+subject who, because of timidity or embarrassment, refused to attempt
+the diamond. But it would be going entirely too far to substitute an
+alternative test in the place of every regular test which the subject
+responded to by silence. In the large majority of cases persistent
+silence deserves to be scored failure.
+
+Certain tests have been made alternatives because of their inferior
+value, some because the presence of other tests of similar nature in the
+same year rendered them less necessary.
+
+FINDING MENTAL AGE. As there are six tests in each age group from III to
+X, each test in this part of the scale counts 2 months toward mental
+age. There are eight tests in group XII, which, because of the omission
+of the 11-year group, have a combined value of 24 months, or 3 months
+each. Similarly, each of the six tests in XIV has a value of 4 months
+(24 ÷ 6 = 4). The tests of the "average adult" group are given a value
+of 5 months each, and those of the "superior adult" group a value of
+6 months each. These values are in a sense arbitrary, but they are
+justified in the fact that they are such as to cause ordinary adults to
+test at the "average adult" level.
+
+The calculation of mental age is therefore simplicity itself. The rule
+is: (1) Credit the subject with all the tests below the point where the
+examination begins (remembering that the examination goes back until a
+year group has been found in which all the tests are passed); and (2)
+add to this basal credit 2 months for each test passed successfully up
+to and including year X, 3 months for each test passed in XII, 4 months
+for each test passed in XIV, 5 months for each success in "average
+adult," and 6 months for each success in "superior adult."
+
+For example, let us suppose that a child passes all the tests in VI,
+five of the six tests in VII, three in VIII, two in IX, and one in X.
+The total credit earned is as follows:--
+
+                                                       _Years__Months_
+    Credit presupposed, years I to V                        5
+    Credit earned in VI, 6 tests passed, 2 months each      1
+    Credit earned in VII, 5 tests passed, 2 months each          10
+    Credit earned in VIII, 3 tests passed, 2 months each          6
+    Credit earned in IX, 2 tests passed, 2 months each            4
+    Credit earned in X, 1 test passed, 2 months                   2
+                                                          ----  ----
+        Total credit                                        7    10
+
+Taking a subject who tests higher, let us suppose the following tests
+are passed: All in X, six of the eight in XII, two of the six in XIV,
+and one of the six in "average adult." The total credit is as follows:--
+
+                                                       _Years__Months_
+    Credit presupposed, years I to IX                       9
+    Credit earned in X, 6 tests passed, 2 months each       1
+    Credit earned in XII, 6 tests passed, 3 months each     1     6
+    Credit earned in XIV, 2 tests passed, 4 months each     0     8
+    Credit earned in "average adult," 1 success, 5 months         5
+                                                          ----  ----
+        Total credit                                       12     7
+
+One other point: If one or more tests of a year group have been omitted,
+as sometimes happens either from oversight or lack of time, the question
+arises how the tests which were given in such a year group should be
+evaluated. Suppose, for example, a subject has been given only four of
+the six tests in a given year, and that he passes two, or half of those
+given. In such a case the probability would be that had all six tests
+been given, three would have been passed; that is, one half of all.
+It is evident, therefore, that when a test has been omitted, a
+proportionately larger value should be assigned to each of those given.
+
+If all six tests are given in any year group below XII, each has a value
+of 2 months. If only four are given, each has a value of 3 months
+(12 ÷ 4 = 3). If five tests only are given, each has a value of
+2.4 months (12 ÷ 5 = 2.4). If in year group XII only six of the eight
+tests are given, each has a value of 4 months (24 ÷ 6 = 4). If in the
+"average adult" group only five of the six tests are given, each has a
+value of 6 months instead of the usual 5 months. In this connection it
+will need to be remembered that the six "average adult" tests have a
+combined value of 30 months (6 tests, 5 months each); also that the
+combined value of the six "superior adult" tests is 36 months
+(6 × 6 = 36). Accordingly, if only five of the six "superior adult"
+tests are given, the value of each is 36 ÷ 5 = 7.2 months.
+
+For example, let us suppose that a subject has been tested as follows:
+All the six tests in X were given and all were passed; only six of the
+eight in XII were given and five were passed; five of the six in XIV
+were given and three were passed; five of the six in "average adult"
+were given and one was passed; five were given in "superior adult" and
+no credit earned. The result would be as follows:--
+
+                                                       _Years__Months_
+    Credit presupposed, years I to IX                       9
+    Credit earned in X, 6 given, 6 successes                1
+    Credit earned in XII, 6 given, 5 passed. Unit value
+        of each test given is 24 ÷ 6 = 4. Total value
+        of the 5 tests passed is 5 × 4 or                   1     8
+    Credit earned in XIV, 5 tests given, 3 passed. Unit
+        value of each of the 5 given is 24 ÷ 5 = 4.8.
+        Value of the 3 passed is 3 × 4.8, or                0    14+
+    Credit earned in "average adult," 5 tests given,
+        1 passed. Unit value of the 5 tests given is
+        30 ÷ 5 = 6. Value of the 1 success                  0     6
+    Credit earned in "superior adult"                       0     0
+                                                          ----  ----
+          Total credit                                     13     4+
+
+The calculation of mental age is really simpler than our verbal
+illustrations make it appear. After the operation has been performed
+twenty or thirty times, it can be done in less than a half-minute
+without danger of error.
+
+THE USE OF THE INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENT. As elsewhere explained, the mental
+age alone does not tell us what we want to know about a child's
+intelligence status. The significance of a given number of years of
+retardation or acceleration depends upon the age of the child. A
+3-year-old child who is retarded one year is ordinarily feeble-minded; a
+10-year-old retarded one year is only a little below normal. The child
+who at 3 years of age is retarded one year will probably be retarded two
+years at the age of 6, three years at the age of 9, and four years at
+the age of 12.
+
+What we want to know, therefore, is the ratio existing between mental
+age and real age. This is the intelligence quotient, or I Q. To find it
+we simply divide mental age (expressed in years and months) by real age
+(also expressed in years and months). The process is easier if we
+express each age in terms of months alone before dividing. The division
+can, of course, be performed almost instantaneously and with much less
+danger of error by the use of a slide rule or a division table. One who
+has to calculate many intelligence quotients should by all means use
+some kind of mechanical help.
+
+HOW TO FIND THE I Q OF ADULT SUBJECTS. Native intelligence, in so far as
+it can be measured by tests now available, appears to improve but little
+after the age of 15 or 16 years. It follows that in calculating the I Q
+of an adult subject, it will be necessary to disregard the years he has
+lived beyond the point where intelligence attains its final development.
+
+Although the location of this point is not exactly known, it will be
+sufficiently accurate for our purpose to assume its location at
+16 years. Accordingly, any person over 16 years of age, however old, is
+for purposes of calculating I Q considered to be just 16 years old. If a
+youth of 18 and a man of 60 years both have a mental age of 12 years,
+the I Q in each case is 12 ÷ 16, or .75.
+
+The significance of various values of the I Q is set forth
+elsewhere.[44] Here it need only be repeated that 100 I Q means exactly
+average intelligence; that nearly all who are below 70 or 75 I Q are
+feeble-minded; and that the child of 125 I Q is about as much above the
+average as the high-grade feeble-minded individual is below the average.
+For ordinary purposes all who fall between 95 and 105 I Q may be
+considered as average in intelligence.
+
+[44] See Chapter VI.
+
+MATERIAL FOR USE IN TESTING. It is strongly recommended that in testing
+by the Stanford revision the regular Stanford record booklets be
+used. These are so arranged as to make testing accurate, rapid, and
+convenient. They contain square, diamond, round field, vocabulary list,
+fables, sentences, digits, and selections for memory tests, the reading
+selection barred for scoring, the dissected sentences, arithmetical
+problems, etc. One is required for each child tested.[45]
+
+[45] Houghton Mifflin Company will supply all the printed material
+needed in the tests, including the lines for the forms for VI, 2, the
+four pictures for "enumeration," "description," and "interpretation,"
+the pictures for V, 3 and VI, 2, the colors, designs for X, 3, the code
+for Average Adult 6, and score cards for square, diamond, designs, and
+ball-and-field.
+
+This is all the material required for the use of the Stanford revision,
+except the five weights for IX, 2, and V, 1, and the Healy-Fernald
+Construction Puzzle for X. These may be purchased of C. H. Stoelting &
+Co., 3037 Carroll Avenue, Chicago. It is not necessary, however, to have
+the weights and the Construction Puzzle, as the presence of one or
+more alternative tests in each year makes it possible to substitute
+other tests instead of those requiring these materials. This saves
+considerable expense. Apart from these, which may either be made at home
+(see pages 278, 279) or dispensed with, the only necessary equipment for
+using the Stanford revision is a copy of this book with the accompanying
+set of printed matter, and the record booklets. The record booklets are
+supplied only in packages of 25.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IX
+
+Instructions For Year III
+
+
+III, 1. POINTING TO PARTS OF THE BODY
+
+PROCEDURE. After getting the child's attention, say: "_Show me your
+nose._" "_Put your finger on your nose._" Same with eyes, mouth, and
+hair.
+
+Tact is often necessary to overcome timidity. If two or three
+repetitions of the instruction fail to bring a response, point to the
+child's chin or ear and say: "_Is this your nose?_" "_No?_" "_Then where
+is your nose?_" Sometimes, after one has tried two or three parts of the
+test without eliciting any response, the child may suddenly release his
+inhibitions and answer all the questions promptly. In case of persistent
+refusal to respond it is best not to harass the child for an answer, but
+to leave the test for a while and return to it later. This is a rule
+which applies generally throughout the scale. In the case of one
+exceptionally timid little girl, it was impossible to get any response
+by the usual procedure, but immediately when a doll was shown the child
+pointed willingly to its nose, eyes, mouth, and hair. The device was
+successful because it withdrew the child's attention from herself and
+centered it upon something objective.
+
+SCORING. _Three responses out of four_ must be correct. Instead of
+pointing, the child sometimes responds by winking the eyes, opening the
+mouth, etc., which is counted as satisfactory.
+
+REMARKS. Binet's purpose in this test is to ascertain whether the
+subject is capable of comprehending simple language. The ability to
+comprehend and use language is indeed one of the most reliable
+indications of the grade of mental development. The appreciation of
+gestures comes first, then the comprehension of language heard, next the
+ability to repeat words and sentences mechanically, and finally the
+ability to use language as a means of communication. The present test,
+however, is not more strictly a test of language comprehension than the
+others of the 3-year group, and in any case it could not be said to mark
+the _beginning_ of the power to comprehend spoken language. That is
+fairly well advanced by the age of 2 years. The test closely resembles
+III, 2 (naming familiar objects), and III, 3 (enumeration of objects in
+a picture), except that it brings in a personal element and gives some
+clue to the development of the sense of self. All the data agree in
+locating the test at year III.
+
+
+III, 2. NAMING FAMILIAR OBJECTS
+
+PROCEDURE. Use a key, a penny, a closed knife, a watch, and an ordinary
+lead pencil. The key should be the usual large-sized doorkey, not one of
+the Yale type. The penny should not be too new, for the freshly made,
+untarnished penny resembles very little the penny usually seen. Any
+ordinary pocket knife may be used, and it is to be shown unopened. The
+formula is, "_What is this?_" or, "_Tell me what this is._"
+
+SCORING. There must be at least _three correct responses out of five_. A
+response is not correct unless the object is named. It is not sufficient
+for the child merely to show that he knows its use. A child, for
+example, may take the pencil and begin to mark with it, or go to the
+door and insert the key in the lock, but this is not sufficient. At the
+same time we must not be too arbitrary about requiring a particular
+name. "Cent" or "pennies" for "penny" is satisfactory, but "money" is
+not. The watch is sometimes called "a clock" or "a tick-tock," and we
+shall perhaps not be too liberal if we score these responses _plus_.
+"Pen" for "pencil," however, is unsatisfactory. Substitute names for
+"key" and "knife" are rarely given. Mispronunciations due to baby-talk
+are of course ignored.
+
+REMARKS. The purpose of this test is to find out whether the child has
+made the association between familiar objects and their names. The
+mental processes necessary to enable the child to pass this test are
+very elementary, and yet, as far as they go, they are fundamental.
+Learning the names of objects frequently seen is a form of mental
+activity in which the normally endowed child of 2 to 4 years finds great
+satisfaction. Any marked retardation in making such associations is a
+grave indication of the lack of that spontaneity which is so necessary
+for the development of the higher grades of intelligence. It would be
+entirely beside the point, therefore, to question the validity of the
+test on the ground that a given child may not have been _taught_ the
+names of the objects used. Practically all children 3 years old, however
+poor their environment, have made the acquaintance of at least three of
+the five objects, and if intelligence is normal they have learned their
+names as a result of spontaneous inquiry.
+
+Always use the list of objects here given, because it has been
+standardized. Any improvised selection would be sure to contain some
+objects either less or more familiar than those in the standardized
+list. Note also that three correct responses out of five are sufficient.
+If we required five correct answers out of six (like Kuhlmann), or three
+out of three (like Binet, Goddard, and Huey), the test would probably
+belong at the 4-year level. Binet states that this test is materially
+harder than that of naming objects in a picture, since in the latter the
+child selects from a number of objects in the picture those he knows
+best, while in the former test he must name the objects we have
+arbitrarily chosen. This difference does not hold, however, if we
+require only three correct responses out of five for passing the test of
+naming objects, instead of Binet's three out of three. All else being
+equal, it is of course easier to recognize and name a real object shown
+than it is to recognize and name it from a picture.
+
+
+III, 3. ENUMERATION OF OBJECTS IN PICTURES
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the three pictures designated as "Dutch Home," "River
+Scene," and "Post-Office." Say, "_Now I am going to show you a pretty
+picture._" Then, holding the first one before the child, close enough to
+permit distinct vision, say: "_Tell me what you see in this picture._"
+If there is no response, as sometimes happens, due to embarrassment or
+timidity, repeat the request in this form: "_Look at the picture and
+tell me everything you can see in it._" If there is still no response,
+say: "_Show me the ..._" (naming some object in the picture). Only one
+question of this type, however, is permissible. If the child answers
+correctly, say: "_That is fine; now tell me everything you see in the
+picture._" From this point the responses nearly always follow without
+further coaxing. Indeed, if _rapport_ has been properly cultivated
+before the test begins, the first question will ordinarily be
+sufficient. If the child names one or two things in a picture and then
+stops, urge him on by saying "_And what else_" Proceed with pictures _b_
+and _c_ in the same manner.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the child enumerates as many as _three_
+objects in _one_ picture _spontaneously_; that is, without intervening
+questions or urging. Anything better than enumeration (as description
+or interpretation) is also acceptable, but description is rarely
+encountered before 5 years and interpretation rarely before 9 or 10.[46]
+
+[46] See instructions for VII, 2, and XII, 7.
+
+REMARKS. The purpose of the test in this year is to find out whether the
+sight of a familiar object in a picture provokes recognition and calls
+up the appropriate name.[47] The average child of 3 or 4 years is in
+what Binet calls "the identification stage"; that is, familiar objects
+in a picture will be identified but not described, their relations to
+one another will not be grasped.
+
+[47] For a discussion of the significance of the different types of
+response, enumeration, description, and interpretation, see VII, 2, and
+XII, 7.
+
+In giving the test, always present the pictures in the same order,
+first Dutch Home, then River Scene, then Post-Office. The order of
+presentation will no doubt seem to the uninitiated too trivial a matter
+to insist upon, but a little experience teaches one that an apparently
+insignificant change in the procedure may exert a considerable influence
+upon the response. Some pictures tend more strongly than others to
+provoke a particular type of response. Some lend themselves especially
+to enumeration, others to description, others to interpretation. The
+pictures used in the Stanford revision have been selected from a number
+which have been tried because they are more uniform in this respect
+than most others in use. However, they are not without their
+differences, picture _b_, for example, tending more than the others to
+provoke description.
+
+There seems to be no disagreement as to the proper location of this
+test.
+
+
+III, 4. GIVING SEX
+
+PROCEDURE. If the subject is a boy, the formula is: "_Are you a little
+boy or a little girl?_" If a girl, "_Are you a little girl or a little
+boy?_" This variation in the formula is necessary because of the
+tendency in young children to repeat mechanically the last word of
+anything that is said to them. If there is no response, say: "_Are you a
+little girl?_" (if a boy); or, "_Are you a little boy?_" (if a girl). If
+the answer to the last question is "no" (or a shake of the head), we
+then say: "_Well, what are you? Are you a little boy or a little girl?_"
+(or _vice versa_).
+
+SCORING. The response is satisfactory if it indicates that the child has
+really made the discrimination, but we must be cautious about accepting
+any other response than the direct answer, "A little girl," or, "A
+little boy." "Yes" and "no" in response to the second question must be
+carefully checked up.
+
+REMARKS. Binet and Goddard say that 3-year-olds cannot pass this test
+and that 4-year-olds almost never fail. We can accept the last part of
+this statement, but not the first part. Nearly all of our 3-year-old
+subjects succeed with it.
+
+The test probably has nothing to do with sex consciousness, as such.
+Success in it would seem to depend on the ability to discriminate
+between familiar class names which are in a certain degree related.
+
+
+III, 5. GIVING THE FAMILY NAME
+
+PROCEDURE. The child is asked, "_What is your name?_" If the answer, as
+often happens, includes only the first name (Walter, for example), say:
+"_Yes, but what is your other name? Walter what?_" If the child is
+silent, or if he only repeats the first name, say: "_Is your name
+Walter ... ?_" (giving a fictitious name, as Jones, Smith, etc.). This
+question nearly always brings the correct answer if it is known.
+
+SCORING. Simply + or -. No attention is paid to faults of pronunciation.
+
+REMARKS. There is unanimous agreement that this test belongs in the
+3-year group. Although the child has not had as much opportunity to
+learn the family name as his first name, he is almost certain to have
+heard it more or less, and if his intelligence is normal the interest in
+self will ordinarily cause it to be remembered.
+
+The critic of the intelligence scale need not be unduly exercised over
+the fact that there may be an occasional child of 3 years who has never
+heard his family name. We have all read of such children, but they
+are so extremely rare that the chances of a given 3-year-old being
+unjustly penalized for this reason are practically negligible. In
+the second place, contingencies of this nature are throughout the
+scale consistently allowed for in the percentage of passes required
+for locating a test. Since (in the year groups below XIV) the
+individual tests are located at the age level where they are passed by
+60 to 70 per cent of unselected children of that age, it follows that
+the child of average ability _is expected_ to fail on about one third of
+the tests of his age group. The plan of the scale is such as to warrant
+this amount of leeway. But even granting the possibility that one
+subject out of a hundred or so may be unjustly penalized for lack of
+opportunity to acquire the knowledge which the test calls for, the
+injustice done does not greatly alter the result. A single test affects
+mental age only to the extent of two months, and the chances of two such
+injustices occurring with the same child are very slight. Herein lies
+the advantage of a multiplicity of tests. No test considered by itself
+is very dependable, but two dozen tests, properly arranged, are almost
+infinitely reliable.
+
+
+III, 6. REPEATING SIX TO SEVEN SYLLABLES
+
+PROCEDURE. Begin by saying: "_Can you say 'mamma'? Now, say 'nice
+kitty.'_" Then ask the child to say, "_I have a little dog._" Speak the
+sentence distinctly and with expression, but in a natural voice and not
+too slowly. If there is no response, the first sentence may be repeated
+two or three times. Then give the other two sentences: "_The dog runs
+after the cat_," and, "_In summer the sun is hot._" A great deal of tact
+is sometimes necessary to enlist the child's coöperation in this test.
+If he cannot be persuaded to try, the alternative test of three digits
+may be substituted.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if at least _one sentence is repeated
+without error after a single reading_. "Without error" is to be taken
+literally; there must be no omission, insertion, or transposition
+of words. Ignore indistinctness of articulation and defects of
+pronunciation as long as they do not mutilate the sentence beyond easy
+recognition.
+
+REMARKS. The test does not presuppose that the child should have
+the ability to make and use sentences like these for purposes of
+communication, or even that he should know the meaning of all the words
+they contain. Its purpose is to bring out the ability of the child to
+repeat a six-syllable series of more or less familiar language sounds.
+As every one knows, the normal child of 2 or 3 years is constantly
+imitating the speech of those around him and finds this a great source
+of delight. Long practice in the semi-mechanical repetition of language
+sounds is necessary for the learning of speech coördinations and is
+therefore an indispensable preliminary to the purposeful use of
+language. High-grade idiots and the lowest grade of imbeciles never
+acquire much facility in the repetition of language heard. The test gets
+at one of the simplest forms of mental integration.
+
+Binet says that children of 3 years _never_ repeat sentences of
+ten syllables. This is not strictly true, for six out of nineteen
+3-year-olds succeeded in doing so. All the data agree, however, that the
+_average_ child of 3 years repeats only six to seven syllables
+correctly.
+
+
+III. ALTERNATIVE TEST: REPEATING THREE DIGITS
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the following digits: 6-4-1, 3-5-2, 8-3-7. Begin with two
+digits, as follows: "_Listen; say 4-2_." "_Now, say 6-4-1_." "_Now, say
+3-5-2_," etc. Pronounce the digits in a distinct voice and with
+perfectly uniform emphasis at a rate just a little faster than one per
+second. Two per second, as recommended by Binet, is too rapid.
+
+Young subjects, because of their natural timidity in the presence of
+strangers, sometimes refuse to respond to this test. With subjects under
+5 or 6 years of age it is sometimes necessary in such cases to re-read
+the first series of digits several times in order to secure a response.
+The response thus secured, however, is not counted in scoring, the
+purpose of the re-reading being merely to break the child's silence. The
+second and third series may be read but once. With the digits tests
+above year IV the re-reading of a series is never permissible.
+
+SCORING. Passed if the child repeats correctly, _after a single reading,
+one series out of the three_ series given. Not only must the correct
+digits be given, but the order also must be correct.
+
+REMARKS. Others, on the basis of rather scanty data, have usually
+located this test at the 4-year level. Our results show that with the
+procedure described above it is fully as easy as the test of repeating
+sentences of 6 to 7 syllables.[48]
+
+[48] See p. 194 _ff._ for further discussion of the digits test.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER X
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR IV
+
+
+IV, 1. COMPARISON OF LINES
+
+PROCEDURE. Present the appropriate accompanying card with the lines in
+horizontal position. Point to the lines and say: "_See these lines. Look
+closely and tell me which one is longer. Put your finger on the longest
+one._" We use the superlative as well as the comparative form of _long_
+because it is often more familiar to young subjects. If the child does
+not respond, say: "_Show me which line is the biggest._" Then withdraw
+the card, turn it about a few times, and present it again with the
+position of the two lines reversed, saying: "_Now show me the longest._"
+Turn the card again and make a third presentation.
+
+SCORING. All three comparisons must be made correctly; or if only two
+responses out of three are correct, all three pairs are again shown,
+just as before, and if there is no error this time, the test is passed.
+The standard, therefore, is _three correct responses out of three, or
+five out of six_.
+
+Sometimes the child points, but at no particular part of the card. In
+such cases it may be difficult to decide whether he has failed to
+comprehend and to make the discrimination or has only been careless in
+pointing. It is then necessary to repeat the experiment until the
+evidence is clear.
+
+REMARKS. As noted by Binet, success in this test depends on the
+comprehension of the verbal directions rather than on actual
+discrimination of length. The child who would unerringly choose the
+larger of two pieces of candy might fail on the comparison of lines.
+However, since the child must correctly compare the lines three times in
+succession, or at least in five out of six trials, _willingness to
+attend_ also plays a part. The attention of the low-grade imbecile, or
+even of the normal child of 3 years, is not very obedient to the
+suggestions of the experimenter. It may be gained momentarily, but it is
+not easily held to the same task for more than a few seconds. Hence some
+children who perfectly comprehend this task fail to make a succession of
+correct comparisons because they are unable or unwilling to bring to
+bear even the small amount of attention which is necessary. This does
+not in the least condone the failure, for it is exactly in such
+voluntary control of mental processes that we find one of the most
+characteristic differences between bright and dull, or mature and
+immature subjects.
+
+There has been little disagreement as to the proper location of this
+test.
+
+
+IV, 2. DISCRIMINATION OF FORMS
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the forms supplied with this book. First, place the
+circle of the duplicate set at "X", and say: "_Show me one like
+this_," at the same time passing the finger around the circumference of
+the circle. If the child does not respond, say: "_Do you see all of
+these things?_" (running the finger over the various forms); "_And do
+you see this one?_" (pointing again to the circle); "_Now, find me
+another one just like this._" Use the square next, then the triangle,
+and the others in any order.
+
+Correct the child's first error by saying: "_No, find one just like
+this_" (again passing the finger around the outline of the form at "X").
+Make no comment on errors after the first one, proceeding at once with
+the next card, but each time the choice is correct encourage the child
+with a hearty "That's good," or something similar.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _seven out of ten_ choices, are correct,
+the first corrected error being counted.
+
+REMARKS. In the test of discriminating forms, unlike the test of
+comparing lines, lack of success is less often due to inability to
+understand the task than to failure to discriminate. The test may be
+regarded as a variation of the form-board test. It displays the
+subject's ability to compare and contrast successive visual perceptions
+of form. The accurate perception of even a fairly simple form requires
+the integration of a number of sensory elements into one whole. The
+forms used in this test have meaning. They are far from nonsense figures
+even for the (normal) child of 4 years, who has, of course, never heard
+about "triangles," "squares," "rectangles," etc. The meaning present at
+this level of intelligence is probably a compound of such factors as
+appreciation of symmetry and direction, and discrimination of quantity
+and number.
+
+Another element in success, especially in the latter part of the
+experiment, is the ability to make an _attentive_ comparison between the
+form shown and the others. The child may be satisfied to point to the
+first form his eye happens to fall upon. Far from being a legitimate
+excuse for failure, such an exhibition of inattention and of weakness of
+the critical faculty is symptomatic of a mental level below 4 years.
+
+In addition to counting the number of errors made, it is interesting to
+note with what forms they occur. To match the circle with the ellipse or
+the octagon, for example, is a less serious error than to match it with
+the square or triangle.
+
+This test was devised and standardized by Dr. Fred Kuhlmann. It is
+inserted here without essential alteration, except that the size
+recommended for the forms is slightly reduced and minor changes have
+been made in the wording of the directions. Our own results are
+favorable to the test and to the location assigned it by its author.
+
+
+IV, 3. COUNTING FOUR PENNIES
+
+PROCEDURE. Place four pennies in a horizontal row before the child. Say:
+"_See these pennies. Count them and tell me how many there are. Count
+them with your finger, this way_" (pointing to the first one on the
+child's left)--"_One_"--"_Now, go ahead._" If the child simply gives the
+number (whether right or wrong) without pointing, say: "_No; count them
+with your finger, this way_," starting him off as before. Have him count
+them aloud.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed only if the counting tallies with the
+pointing. It is not sufficient merely to state the correct number
+without pointing.
+
+REMARKS. Contrary to what one might think, this is not to any great
+extent a test of "schooling." Practically all children of this age have
+had opportunity to learn to count as far as four, and with normal
+children the spontaneous interest in number is such that very few
+4-year-olds, even from inferior social environment, fail to pass the
+test.
+
+While success requires more than the ability to repeat the number names
+by rote, it does not presuppose any power of calculation or a mastery of
+the number concepts from one to four. Many children who will readily
+say, mechanically, "one, two, three, four," when started off, are not
+able to pass the test. On the other hand, it is not expected that the
+child who passes will also necessarily understand that four is made up
+of two two's, or four one's, or three plus one, etc.
+
+Binet, Goddard, and Kuhlmann place this test in the 5-year group, but
+three separate series of tests made for the Stanford revision, as well
+as nearly all the statistics available from other sources, show that it
+belongs at 4 years.
+
+
+IV, 4. COPYING A SQUARE
+
+PROCEDURE. Place before the child a cardboard on which is drawn in heavy
+black lines a square about 1¼ inches on a side.[49] Give the child a
+pencil and say: "_You see that_ (pointing to the square). _I want you to
+make one just like it. Make it right here_ (showing where it is to be
+drawn). _Go ahead. I know you can do it nicely._"
+
+[49] No material is needed if the regular Stanford record blanks are
+used, as these all contain the square and diamond.
+
+Avoid such an expression as, "_I want you to draw a figure like that._"
+The child may not know the meaning of either _draw_ or _figure_. Also,
+in pointing to the model, take care not to run the finger around the
+four sides.
+
+Children sometimes have a deep-seated aversion to drawing on request and
+a bit of tactful urging may be necessary. Experience and tact will
+enable the experimenter in all but the rarest cases to come out
+victorious in these little battles with balky wills. Give three trials,
+saying each time: "_Make it exactly like this_," pointing to model.
+Make sure that the child is in an easy position and that the paper used
+is held so it cannot slip.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if at least _one drawing out of the three_
+is as good as those marked + on the score card. Young subjects usually
+reduce figures in drawing from copy, but size is wholly disregarded in
+scoring. It is of more importance that the right angles be fairly well
+preserved than that the lines should be straight or the corners entirely
+closed. The scoring of this test should be rather liberal.
+
+REMARKS. After the three copies have been made say: "_Which one do you
+like best?_" In this way we get an idea of the subject's power of
+auto-criticism, a trait in which the mentally retarded are nearly always
+behind normal children of their own age. Normal children, when young,
+reveal the same weakness to a certain extent. It is especially
+significant when the subject shows complete satisfaction with a very
+poor performance.
+
+Observe whether the child makes each part with careful effort, looking
+at the model from time to time, or whether the strokes are made in a
+haphazard way with only an initial glance at the original. The latter
+procedure is quite common with young or retarded subjects. Curiously
+enough, the first trial is more successful than either of the others,
+due perhaps to a waning of effort and attention.
+
+Note that pencil is used instead of pen and that only one success is
+necessary. Binet gives only one trial and requires pen. Goddard allows
+pencil, but permits only one trial. Kuhlmann requires pen and passes the
+child only when two trials out of three are successful. But these
+authors locate the test at 5 years. Our results show that nearly three
+fourths of 4-year-olds succeed with pencil in one out of three trials if
+the scoring is liberal. It makes a great deal of difference whether pen
+or pencil is used, and whether two successes are required or only one.
+No better illustration could be given of the fact that without
+thoroughgoing standardization of procedure and scoring the best mental
+test may be misleading as to the degree of intelligence it indicates.
+
+Copying a square is one of three drawing tests used in the Binet scale,
+the others being the diamond (year VII), and the designs to be copied
+from memory (year X). These tests do not to any great extent test what
+is usually known as "drawing ability." Only the square and the diamond
+tests are strictly comparable with one another, the other having a
+psychologically different purpose. In none of them does success seem to
+depend very much on the amount of previous instruction in drawing. To
+copy a figure like a square or a diamond requires first of all an
+appreciation of spacial relationships. The figure must be perceived as a
+whole, not simply as a group of meaningless lines. In the second place,
+success depends upon the ability to use the visual impression in guiding
+a rather complex set of motor coördinations. The latter is perhaps the
+main difficulty, and is one which is not fully overcome, at least for
+complicated movements, until well toward adult life.
+
+It is interesting to compare the square and the diamond as to relative
+difficulty. They have the same number of lines and in each case the
+opposite sides are parallel; but whereas 4-year intelligence is equal to
+the task of copying a square, the diamond ordinarily requires 7-year
+intelligence. Probably no one could have foreseen that a change in the
+angles would add so much to the difficulty of the figure. It would be
+worth while to devise and standardize still more complicated figures.
+
+
+IV, 5. COMPREHENSION, FIRST DEGREE
+
+PROCEDURE. After getting the child's attention, say: "_What must you do
+when you are sleepy?_" If necessary the question may be repeated a
+number of times, using a persuasive and encouraging tone of voice. No
+other form of question may be substituted. About twenty seconds may be
+allowed for an answer, though as a rule subjects of 4 or 5 years usually
+answer quite promptly or not at all.
+
+Proceed in the same way with the other two questions: "_What ought you
+to do when you are cold?_" "_What ought you to do when you are hungry?_"
+
+SCORING. There must be _two correct responses out of three_. No one form
+of answer is required. It is sufficient if the question is comprehended
+and given a reasonably sensible answer. The following are samples of
+correct responses:--
+
+  (a) "Go to bed." "Go to sleep." "Have my mother get me ready for
+      bed." "Lie still, not talk, and I'll soon be asleep."
+  (b) "Put on a coat" (or "cloak," "furs," "wrap up," etc.).
+      "Build a fire." "Run and I'll soon get warm." "Get close to
+      the stove." "Go into the house," or, "Go to bed," may possibly
+      deserve the score _plus_, though they are somewhat doubtful
+      and are certainly inferior to the responses just given.
+  (c) "Eat something." "Drink some milk." "Buy a lunch." "Have my
+      mamma spread some bread and butter," etc.
+
+With the comprehension questions in this year it is nearly always easy
+to decide whether the response is acceptable, failure being indicated
+usually either by silence or by an absurd or irrelevant answer. One
+8-year-old boy who had less than 4-year intelligence answered all three
+questions by putting his finger on his eye and saying: "I'd do that."
+"Have to cry" is a rather common incorrect response.
+
+REMARKS. The purpose of these questions is to ascertain whether the
+child can comprehend the situations suggested and give a reasonably
+pertinent reply. The first requirement, of course, is to understand the
+language; the second is to tell how the situation suggested should be
+met.
+
+The question may be raised whether a given child might not fail to
+answer the questions correctly and yet have the intelligence to do the
+appropriate thing if the real situation were present. This is at least
+conceivable, but since it would not be practicable to make the subject
+actually cold, sleepy, or hungry in order to observe his behavior, we
+must content ourselves with suggesting a situation to be imagined. It
+probably requires more intelligence to tell what one ought to do in a
+situation which has to be imagined than to do the right thing when the
+real situation is encountered.
+
+The comprehension questions of this year had not been standardized until
+the Stanford investigation of 1913-14. Questions _a_ and _b_ were
+suggested by Binet in 1905, while _c_ is new. They make an excellent
+test of 4-year intelligence.
+
+
+IV, 6. REPEATING FOUR DIGITS
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_Now, listen. I am going to say over some numbers and
+after I am through, I want you to say them exactly like I do. Listen
+closely and get them just right--4-7-3-9._" Same with 2-8-5-4 and
+7-2-6-1. The examiner should consume nearly four seconds in pronouncing
+each series, and should practice in advance until this speed can be
+closely approximated. If the child refuses to respond, the first series
+may be repeated as often as may be necessary to prove an attempt, but
+_success with a series which has been re-read may not be counted_. The
+second and third series may be pronounced but once.
+
+SCORING. Passed if the child repeats correctly, _after a single reading,
+one series out of the three_ series given. The order must be correct.
+
+REMARKS. The test of repeating four digits was not included by Binet in
+the scale and seems not to have been used by any of the Binet workers.
+It is passed by about three fourths of our 4-year-olds.
+
+
+IV. ALTERNATIVE TEST: REPEATING TWELVE TO THIRTEEN SYLLABLES
+
+The three sentences are:--
+
+  (a) "_The boy's name is John. He is a very good boy._"
+  (b) "_When the train passes you will hear the whistle blow._"
+  (c) "_We are going to have a good time in the country._"
+
+PROCEDURE. Get the child's attention and say: "_Listen, say this: 'Where
+is kitty?'_" After the child responds, add: "_Now say this ..._,"
+reading the first sentence in a natural voice, distinctly and with
+expression. If the child is too timid to respond, the first sentence may
+be re-read, but in this case the response is not counted. _Re-reading is
+permissible only with the first sentence._
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if at least _one sentence is repeated
+without error after a single reading_. As in the alternative test of
+year III, we ignore ordinary indistinctness and defects of pronunciation
+due to imperfect language development, but the sentence must be repeated
+without addition, omission, or transposition of words.
+
+REMARKS. Sentences of twelve syllables had not been standardized
+previous to the Stanford revision, but Binet locates memory for ten
+syllables at year V, and others have followed his example. Our own data
+show that even 4-year-olds are usually able to repeat twelve syllables
+with the procedure here set forth.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XI
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR V
+
+
+V, 1. COMPARISON OF WEIGHTS
+
+MATERIALS. It is necessary to have two weights, identical in shape,
+size, and appearance, weighing respectively 3 and 15 grams.[50] If
+manufactured weights are not at hand, it is easy to make satisfactory
+substitutes by taking stiff cardboard pill-boxes, about 1¼ inches in
+diameter, and filling them with cotton and shot to the desired weight.
+The shot must be embedded in the center of the cotton so as to prevent
+rattling. After the box has been loaded to the exact weight, the lid
+should be glued on firmly. If one does not have access to laboratory
+scales, it is always possible to secure the help of a druggist in the
+rather delicate task of weighing the boxes accurately. A set of pill-box
+weights will last through hundreds of tests, if handled carefully, but
+they will not stand rough usage. The manufactured blocks are more
+durable, and so more satisfactory in the long run. If the weights are
+not at hand, the alternative test may be substituted.
+
+[50] The weights required for this test, and also for IX, 2, may be
+purchased of C. H. Stoelting & Co., 3037 Carroll Avenue, Chicago,
+Illinois.
+
+PROCEDURE. Place the 3- and 15-gram weights on the table before the
+child some two or three inches apart. Say: "_You see these blocks. They
+look just alike, but one of them is heavy and one is light. Try them and
+tell me which one is heavier._" If the child does not respond, repeat
+the instructions, saying this time, "_Tell me which one is the
+heaviest._" (Many American children have heard only the superlative form
+of the adjective used in the comparison of two objects.)
+
+Sometimes the child merely points to one of the boxes or picks up one at
+random and hands it to the examiner, thinking he is asked to _guess_
+which is heaviest. We then say: "_No, that is not the way. You must take
+the boxes in your hands and try them, like this_" (illustrating by
+lifting with one hand, first one box and then the other, a few inches
+from the table). Most children of 5 years are then able to make the
+comparison correctly. Very young subjects, however, or older ones who
+are retarded, sometimes adopt the rather questionable method of lifting
+both weights in the same hand at once. This is always an unfavorable
+sign, especially if one of the blocks is placed in the hand on top of
+the other block.
+
+After the first trial, the weights are shuffled and again presented for
+comparison as before, _this time with the positions reversed_. The third
+trial follows with the blocks in the same position as in the first
+trial. Some children have a tendency to stereotyped behavior, which in
+this test shows itself by choosing always the block on a certain
+side. Hence the necessity of alternating the positions.[51] Reserve
+commendation until all three trials have been given.
+
+[51] For discussion of "stereotypy" see p. 203.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _two of the three_ comparisons are
+correct. If there is reason to suspect that the successful responses
+were due to lucky guesses, the test should be entirely repeated.
+
+REMARKS. This test is decidedly more difficult than that of comparing
+lines (IV, 1). It is doubtful, however, if we can regard the difference
+as one due primarily to the relative difficulty of visual discrimination
+and muscular discrimination. In fact, the test with weights hardly taxes
+sensory discrimination at all when used with children of 5-year
+intelligence. Success depends, in the first place, on the ability to
+understand the instructions; and in the second place, on the power to
+hold the instructions in mind long enough to guide the process of making
+the comparison. The test presupposes, in elementary form, a power which
+is operative in all the higher independent processes of thought, the
+power to neglect the manifold distractions of irrelevant sensations and
+ideas and to drive direct toward a goal. Here the goal is furnished by
+the instruction, "Try them and see which is heavier." This must be held
+firmly enough in mind to control the steps necessary for making the
+comparison. Ideas of piling the blocks on top of one another, throwing
+them, etc., must be inhibited. Sometimes the low-grade imbecile starts
+off in a very promising way, then apparently forgets the instructions
+(loses sight of the goal), and begins to play with the boxes in a random
+way. His mental processes are not consecutive, stable, or controlled. He
+is blown about at the mercy of every gust of momentary interest.
+
+There is very general agreement in the assignment of this test to
+year V.
+
+
+V, 2. NAMING COLORS
+
+MATERIALS. Use saturated red, yellow, blue, and green papers, about
+2 × 1 inch in size, pasted one half inch apart on white or gray
+cardboard. For sake of uniformity it is best to match the colors
+manufactured especially for this test.[52]
+
+[52] Printed cards showing these colors are included in the set of
+material furnished by the publishers of this book.
+
+PROCEDURE. Point to the colors in the order, red, yellow, blue, green.
+Bring the finger close to the color designated, in order that there may
+be no mistake as to which one is meant, and say: "_What is the name of
+that color?_" Do not say: "_What color is that?_" or, "_What kind of a
+color is that?_" Such a formula might bring the answer, "The first
+color"; or, "A pretty color." Still less would it do to say: "_Show me
+the red_," "_Show me the yellow_," etc. This would make it an entirely
+different test, one that would probably be passed a year earlier than
+the Binet form of the experiment. Nor is it permissible, after a color
+has been miscalled, to return to it and again ask its name.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed only if _all_ the colors are named correctly
+and without marked uncertainty. However, prefixing the adjective "dark,"
+or "light," before the name of a color is overlooked.
+
+REMARKS. Naming colors is not a test of color discrimination, for that
+capacity is well developed years below the level at which this test is
+used. All 5-year-olds who are not color blind discriminate among the
+four primary colors here used as readily as adults do. As stated by
+Binet, it is a test of the "verbalization of color perception." It tells
+us whether the child has associated the names of the four primary colors
+with his perceptual imagery of those colors.
+
+The _ability_ to make simple associations between a sense impression and
+a name is certainly present in normal children some time before the
+above color associations are actually made. Many objects of experience
+are correctly named two or three years earlier, and it may seem at
+first a little strange that color names are learned so late. But it must
+be remembered that the child does not have numerous opportunities to
+observe and hear the names of several colors at once, nor does the
+designation of colors by their names ordinarily have much practical
+value for the young child. When he finally learns their names, it is
+more because of his spontaneous interest in the world of sense. Lack of
+such spontaneous interest is always an unfavorable sign, and it is not
+surprising, therefore, that imbecile intelligence has ordinarily never
+taken the trouble to associate colors with their names. Girls are
+somewhat superior to boys in this test, due probably to a greater
+natural interest in colors.
+
+Binet originally placed this test in year VIII, changing it to year VII
+in the 1911 scale. Goddard places it in year VII, while Kuhlmann omits
+it altogether. With a single exception, all the actual statistics with
+normal children justify the location of the test in year V. Bobertag's
+figures are the exception, opposed to which are Rowe, Winch, Dumville,
+Dougherty, Brigham, and all three of the Stanford investigations.
+
+The test is probably more subject to the influence of home environment
+than most of the other tests of the scale, and if the social status of
+the child is low, failure would not be especially significant until
+after the age of 6 years. On the whole it is an excellent test.
+
+
+V, 3. ÆSTHETIC COMPARISON
+
+Use the three pairs of faces supplied with the printed forms. It goes
+without saying that improvised drawings may not be substituted for
+Binet's until they have first been standardized.
+
+PROCEDURE. Show the pairs in order from top to bottom. Say: "_Which of
+these two pictures is the prettiest?_" Use both the comparative and the
+superlative forms of the adjective. Do not use the question, "Which face
+is the uglier (ugliest)?" unless there is some difficulty in getting the
+child to respond. It is not permitted, in case of an incorrect response,
+to give that part of the test again and to allow the child a chance to
+correct his answer; or, in case this is done, we must consider only the
+original response in scoring.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed only if all _three_ comparisons are made
+correctly. Any marked uncertainty is failure. Sometimes the child
+laughingly designates the ugly picture as the prettier, yet shows by his
+amused expression that he is probably conscious of its peculiarity or
+absurdity. In such cases "pretty" seems to be given the meaning of
+"funny" or "amusing." Nevertheless, we score this response as failure,
+since it betokens a rather infantile tolerance of ugliness.
+
+REMARKS. From the psychological point of view this is a most interesting
+test. One might suppose that æsthetic judgment would be relatively
+independent of intelligence. Certainly no one could have known in
+advance of experience that intellectual retardation would reveal itself
+in weakness of the æsthetic sense about as unmistakably as in memory,
+practical judgment, or the comprehension of language. But such is the
+case. The development of the æsthetic sense parallels general mental
+growth rather closely. The imbecile of 4-year intelligence, even though
+he may have lived forty years, has no more chance of passing this test
+than any other test in year V. It would be profitable to devise and
+standardize a set of pictures of the same general type which would
+measure a less primitive stage of æsthetic development.
+
+The present test was located by Binet in year VI and has been retained
+in that year in other revisions; but three separate Stanford
+investigations, as well as the statistics of Winch, Dumville, Brigham,
+Rowe, and Dougherty, warrant its location in year V.
+
+
+V, 4. GIVING DEFINITIONS IN TERMS OF USE
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the words: _Chair_, _horse_, _fork_, _doll_, _pencil_,
+and _table_. Say: "_You have seen a chair. You know what a chair is.
+Tell me, what is a chair?_" And so on with the other words, always in
+the order in which they are named above.
+
+Occasionally there is difficulty in getting a response, which is
+sometimes due merely to the child's unwillingness to express his
+thoughts in sentences. The earlier tests require only words and phrases.
+In other cases silence is due to the rather indefinite form of the
+question. The child could answer, but is not quite sure what is expected
+of him. Whatever the cause, a little tactful urging is nearly always
+sufficient to bring a response. In this test we have not found the
+difficulty of overcoming silence nearly as great as others have stated
+it to be. In consecutive tests of 150 5- and 6-year-old children we
+encountered unbreakable silence with 8 words out of the total 900
+(150 × 6). This is less than 1 per cent. But tactful encouragement is
+sometimes necessary, and it is best to take the precaution of not giving
+the test until _rapport_ has been well established.
+
+The urging should take the following form: "_I'm sure you know what a
+... is. You have seen a .... Now, tell me, what is a ... ?_" That is, we
+merely repeat the question with a word of encouragement and in a
+coaxing tone of voice. It would not at all do to introduce other
+questions, like, "_What does a ... look like?_" or, "_What is a ...
+for?_" "_What do people do with a ... ?_"
+
+Sometimes, instead of attempting a definition (of _doll_, for example),
+the child begins to talk in a more or less irrelevant way, as "I have a
+great big doll. Auntie gave it to me for Christmas," etc. In such cases
+we repeat the question and say, "_Yes, but tell me; what is a doll?_"
+This is usually sufficient to bring the little chatter-box back to the
+task.
+
+Unless it is absolutely necessary to give the child lavish
+encouragement, it is best to withhold approval or disapproval until the
+test has been finished. If the first response is a poor one and we
+pronounce it "fine" or "very good," we tempt the child to persist in his
+low-grade type of definition. By withholding comment until the last word
+has been defined, we give greater play to spontaneity and initiative.
+
+SCORING. As a rule, children of 5 and 6 years define an object in terms
+of use, stating what it does, what it is for, what people do with it,
+etc. Definitions by description, by telling what substance it is made
+of, and by giving the class to which it belongs are grouped together as
+"definitions superior to use." It is not before 8 years that two thirds
+of the children spontaneously give a large proportion of definitions in
+terms superior to use.
+
+The test is passed in year V if _four words out of the six_ are defined
+in terms of use (or better than use). The following are examples of
+satisfactory responses:--
+
+    _Chair_: "To sit on." "You sit on it." "It is made of wood and
+    has legs and back," etc.
+
+    _Horse_: "To drive." "To ride." "What people drive." "To pull
+    the wagon." "It is big and has four legs," etc.
+
+    _Fork_: "To eat with." "To stick meat with." "It is hard and has
+    three sharp things," etc.
+
+    _Doll_: "To play with." "What you dress and put to bed." "To
+    rock," etc.
+
+    _Pencil_: "To write with." "To draw." "They write with it." "It
+    is sharp and makes a black mark."
+
+    _Table_: "To eat on." "What you put the dinner on." "Where you
+    write." "It is made of wood and has legs."
+
+Examples of failure are such responses as the following: "A chair is a
+chair"; "There is a chair"; or simply, "There" (pointing to a chair). We
+record such responses without pressing for a further definition. About
+the only other type of failure is silence.
+
+REMARKS. It is not the purpose of this test to find out whether the
+child knows the meaning of the words he is asked to define. Words have
+purposely been chosen which are perfectly familiar to all normal
+children of 5 years. But with young children there is a difference
+between knowing a word and giving a definition of it. Besides, we desire
+to find out how the child apperceives the word, or rather the object for
+which it stands; whether the thing is thought of in terms of use,
+appearance (shape, size, color, etc.), material composing it, or class
+relationships.
+
+This test, because it throws such interesting light on the maturity of
+the child's apperceptive processes, is one of the most valuable of all.
+It is possible to differentiate at least a half-dozen degrees of
+excellence in definitions, according to the intellectual maturity of the
+subject. A volume, indeed, could be written on the development of word
+definitions and the growth of meanings; but we will postpone further
+discussion until VIII, 5. Our concern at present is to know that
+children of 5 years should at least be able to define four of these six
+words in terms of use.
+
+Binet placed the test in year VI, but our own figures and those of
+nearly all the other investigations indicate that it is better located
+in year V.
+
+
+V, 5. THE GAME OF PATIENCE
+
+MATERIAL. Prepare two rectangular cards, each 2 × 3 inches, and divide
+one of them into two triangles by cutting it along one of its diagonals.
+
+PROCEDURE. Place the uncut card on the table with one of its longer
+sides to the child. By the side of this card, a little nearer the child
+and a few inches apart, lay the two halves of the divided rectangle with
+their hypothenuses turned from each other as follows:
+
+[Illustration]
+
+Then say to the child: "_I want you to take these two pieces_ (touching
+the two triangles) _and put them together so they will look exactly like
+this_" (pointing to the uncut card). If the child hesitates, we repeat
+the instructions with a little urging. Say nothing about hurrying, as
+this is likely to cause confusion. Give three trials, of one minute
+each. If only one trial is given, success is too often a result of
+chance moves; but luck is not likely to bring two successes in three
+trials. If the first trial is a failure, move the cut halves back to
+their original position and say: "_No; put them together so they will
+look like this_" (pointing to the uncut card). Make no other comment of
+approval or disapproval. Disregard in silence the inquiring looks of the
+child who tries to read his success or failure in your face.
+
+If one of the pieces is turned over, the task becomes impossible, and it
+is then necessary to turn the piece back to its original position and
+begin over, not counting this trial. Have the under side of the pieces
+marked so as to avoid the risk of presenting one of them to the child
+wrong side up.
+
+SCORING. There must be _two successes in three trials_. About the only
+difficulty in scoring is that of deciding what constitutes a trial. We
+count it a trial when the child brings the pieces together and (after
+few or many changes) leaves them in some position. Whether he succeeds
+after many moves, or leaves the pieces with approval in some absurd
+position, or gives up and says he cannot do it, his effort counts as one
+trial. A single trial may involve a number of unsuccessful changes of
+position in the two cards, but these changes may not consume altogether
+more than one minute.
+
+REMARKS. As aptly described by Binet, the operation has the following
+elements: "(1) To keep in mind the end to be attained, that is to say,
+the figure to be formed. It is necessary to comprehend this end and not
+to lose sight of it. (2) To try different combinations under the
+influence of this directing idea, which guides the efforts of the child
+even though he be unconscious of the fact. (3) To judge the formed
+combination, compare it with the model, and decide whether it is the
+correct one."
+
+It may be classed, therefore, as one of the many forms of the
+"combination method." Elements must be combined into some kind of whole
+under the guidance of a directing idea. In this respect it has something
+in common with the form-board test, the Ebbinghaus test, and the test
+with dissected sentences (XII, 4). Binet designates it a "test of
+patience," because success in it depends upon a certain willingness to
+persist in a line of action under the control of an idea.
+
+Not all failures in this test are equally significant. A bright child of
+5 years sometimes fails, but usually not without many trial combinations
+which he rejects one after another as unsatisfactory. A dull child of
+the same age often stops after he has brought the pieces into any sort
+of juxtaposition, however absurd, and may be quite satisfied with his
+foolish effort. His mind is not fruitful and he lacks the power of
+auto-criticism.
+
+It would be well worth while to work out a new and somewhat more
+difficult "test of patience," but with special care to avoid the
+puzzling features of the usual games of anagrams. The one given us by
+Binet is rather easy for year V, though plainly somewhat too difficult
+for year IV.
+
+
+V, 6. THREE COMMISSIONS
+
+PROCEDURE. After getting up from the chair and moving with the child to
+the center of the room, say: "_Now, I want you to do something for me.
+Here's a key. I want you to put it on that chair over there; then I want
+you to shut (or open) that door, and then bring me the box which you see
+over there_ (pointing in turn to the objects designated). _Do you
+understand? Be sure to get it right. First, put the key on the chair,
+then shut_ (open) _the door, then bring me the box_ (again pointing).
+_Go ahead._" Stress the words _first_ and _then_ so as to emphasize the
+order in which the commissions are to be executed.
+
+Give the commissions always in the above order. Do not repeat the
+instructions again or give any further aid whatever, even by the
+direction of the gaze. If the child stops or hesitates it is never
+permissible to say: "_What next?_" Have the self-control to leave the
+child alone with his task.
+
+SCORING. _All three commissions must be executed and in the proper
+order._ Failure may result, therefore, either from leaving out one or
+more of the commands or from changing the order. The former is more
+often the case.
+
+REMARKS. Success depends first on the ability to comprehend the
+commands, and secondly, on the ability to hold them in mind. It is
+therefore a test of memory, though of a somewhat different kind from
+that involved in repeating digits or sentences. It is an excellent test,
+for it throws light on a kind of intelligence which is demanded in all
+occupations and in everyday life. A more difficult test of the same type
+ought to be worked out for a higher age level.
+
+Binet originally located this test in year VI, but in 1911 changed it to
+year VII. This is unfortunate, for the three Stanford investigations, as
+well as the statistics of all other investigators, show conclusively
+that it is easy enough for year V.
+
+
+V. ALTERNATIVE TEST: GIVING AGE
+
+PROCEDURE. The formula is simply, "_How old are you?_" The child of this
+age is, of course, not expected to know the date of his birthday, but
+merely how many years old he is.
+
+SCORING. About the only danger in scoring is in the failure to verify
+the child's response. Some children give an incorrect answer with
+perfect assurance, and it is therefore always necessary to verify.
+
+REMARKS. Inability to give the age may or may not be significant. If the
+child has arrived at the age of 7 or 8 years and has had anything like a
+normal social environment, failure in the test is an extremely
+unfavorable sign. But if the child is an orphan or has grown up in
+neglect, ignorance of age has little significance for intelligence.
+About all we can say is that if a child gives his age correctly, it is
+because he has had sufficient interest and intelligence to remember
+verbal statements which have been made concerning him in his presence.
+He may even pass the test without attaching any definite meaning to the
+word "year." On the other hand, if he has lived seven or eight years in
+a normal environment, it is safe to assume that he has heard his age
+given many times, and failure to remember it would then indicate either
+a weak memory or a grave inferiority of spontaneous interests, or both.
+Normal children have a natural interest in the things they hear said
+about themselves, while the middle-grade imbecile of even 40 years may
+fail to remember his age, however often he may have heard it stated.
+
+Binet placed the test in year VI of the 1908 series, but omitted it
+altogether in 1911. Kuhlmann and Goddard also omit it, perhaps wisely.
+Nevertheless, it is always interesting to give as a supplementary test.
+Children from good homes acquire the knowledge about a year earlier than
+those from less favorable surroundings. Unselected children of
+California ordinarily pass the test at 5 years.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VI
+
+
+VI, 1. DISTINGUISHING RIGHT AND LEFT
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the child: "_Show me your right hand._" After this is
+responded to, say: "_Show me your left ear._" Then: "_Show me your right
+eye._" Stress the words _left_ and _ear_ rather strongly and equally;
+also _right_ and _eye_. If there is one error, repeat the test, this
+time with left hand, right ear, and left eye. Carefully avoid giving any
+help by look of approval or disapproval, by glancing at the part of the
+body indicated, or by supplementary questions.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if all three questions are answered
+correctly, or if, in case of one error, the three additional questions
+are all answered correctly. The standard, therefore, _is three out of
+three, or five out of six_.
+
+The chief danger of variation among different examiners in scoring
+comes from double responses. For example, the child may point first to
+one ear and then to the other. In all cases of double response, the rule
+is to count the second response and disregard the first. This holds
+whether the first response was wrong and the second right, or _vice
+versa_.
+
+REMARKS. It is interesting to follow the child's acquisitions
+of language distinctions relating to spacial orientation. Other
+distinctions of this type are those between up and down, above and
+below, near and far, before and behind, etc. As Bobertag has pointed
+out, the child first masters such distinctions as up and down, above and
+below, before and behind, etc., and arrives at a knowledge of right and
+left rather tardily.
+
+How may we explain the late distinction of right and left as compared
+with up and down? At least four theories may be advanced: (1) Something
+depends on the frequency with which children have occasion to make the
+respective distinctions. (2) It may be explained on the supposition that
+kinæsthetic sensations are more prominently involved in distinctions of
+up and down than in distinctions of right and left. It is certainly true
+that, in distinguishing the two sides of a thing, less bodily movement
+is ordinarily required than in distinctions of its upper and lower
+aspects. The former demands only a shift of the eyes, the latter often
+requires an upward or downward movement of the head. (3) It may be due
+to the fact that the appearance of an object is more affected by
+differences in vertical orientation than by those of horizontal
+orientation. We see an object now from one side, now from the other, and
+the two aspects easily blend, while the two aspects corresponding to
+above and below are not viewed in such rapid succession and so remain
+much more distinct from one another in the child's mind. Or, (4), the
+difference may be mainly a matter of language. The child undoubtedly
+hears the words _up_ and _down_ much oftener than _right_ and _left_,
+and thus learns their meaning earlier. Horizontal distinctions are
+commonly made in such terms as _this side_ and _that side_, or merely by
+pointing, while in the case of vertical distinctions the words _up_ and
+_down_ are used constantly. This last explanation is a very plausible
+one, but it is very probable that other factors are also involved.
+
+The distinction between right and left has a certain inherent and more
+or less mysterious difficulty. To convince one's self of this it is only
+necessary to try a little experiment on the first fifty persons one
+chances to meet. The experiment is as follows. Say: "I am going to ask
+you a question and I want you to answer it as quickly as you can." Then
+ask: "Which is your right hand?" About forty persons out of fifty will
+answer correctly without a second's hesitation, several will require two
+or three seconds to respond, while a few, possibly four or five
+per cent, will grow confused and perhaps be unable to respond for five
+or ten seconds. Some very intelligent adults cannot possibly tell which
+is the right or left hand without first searching for a scar or some
+other distinguishing mark which is known to be on a particular hand.
+Others resort to incipient movements of writing, and since, of course,
+every one knows which hand he writes with, the writing movements
+automatically initiated give the desired clue. One bright little girl of
+8 years responded by trying to wink first one eye and then the other.
+Asked why she did this, she said she knew she could wink her left eye,
+but not her right! One who is resourceful enough to adopt such an
+ingenious method is surely not less intelligent than the one who is able
+to respond by a direct instead of an intermediate association.
+
+It seems that normal people never encounter a corresponding difficulty
+in distinguishing up and down. The writer has questioned several hundred
+without finding a single instance, whereas a great many have to employ
+some intermediate association in order to distinguish right and left. It
+is the "p's and q's" that children must be told to mind; not the "p's
+and b's." The former is a horizontal, the latter a vertical distinction.
+
+Considering the difficulty which normal adults sometimes have in
+distinguishing right and left, is it fair to use this test as a measure
+of intelligence? We may answer in the affirmative. It is fair because
+normal adults, notwithstanding momentary uncertainty, are invariably
+able to make the distinction, if not by direct association, then by an
+intermediate one. We overlook the momentary confusion and regard only
+the correctness of the response. Subjects who are below middle-grade
+imbecile, however long they have lived, seldom pass the test.
+
+This test found a place in year VI of Binet's 1908 scale, but was
+shifted to year VII in the 1911 revision. The Stanford statistics, and
+all other available data, with the exception of Bobertag's, justify its
+retention in year VI. It is possible that the children of different
+nations do not have equal opportunity and stimulus for learning the
+distinction between right and left, but the data show that as far as
+American and English children are concerned we have a right to expect
+this knowledge in children of 6 years.
+
+
+VI, 2. FINDING OMISSIONS IN PICTURES
+
+PROCEDURE. Show the pictures to the child one at a time in the order in
+which they are lettered, _a_, _b_, _c_, _d_. When the first picture is
+shown (that with the eye lacking), say: "_There is something wrong with
+this face. It is not all there. Part of it is left out. Look carefully
+and tell me what part of the face is not there._" Often the child gives
+an irrelevant answer; as, "The feet are gone," "The stomach is not
+there," etc. These statements are true, but they do not satisfy the
+requirements of the test, so we say: "_No; I am talking about the face.
+Look again and tell me what is left out of the face._" If the correct
+response does not follow, we point to the place where the eye should be
+and say: "_See, the eye is gone._" When picture _b_ is shown we say
+merely: "_What is left out of this face?_" Likewise with picture _c_.
+For picture _d_ we say: "_What is left out of this picture?_" No help of
+any kind is given unless (if necessary) with the first picture. With the
+others we confine ourselves to the single question, and the answer
+should be given promptly, say within twenty to twenty-five seconds.
+
+SCORING. Passed if the omission is correctly pointed out in _three out
+of four_ of the pictures. Certain minor errors we may overlook, such as
+"eyes" instead of "eye" for the first picture; "nose and one ear"
+instead of merely "nose" for the third; "hands" instead of "arms" for
+the fourth, etc. Errors like the following, however, count as failure:
+"The other eye," or "The other ear" for the first or third; "The ears"
+for the fourth, etc.
+
+REMARKS. The test is one of the two or three dozen forms of the
+so-called "completion test," all of which have it in common that from
+the given parts of a whole the missing parts are to be found. The whole
+to be completed may be a word, a sentence, a story, a picture, a group
+of pictures, an object, or in fact almost anything. Sometimes all the
+parts of the whole are given and only the arrangement or order is to be
+found, as in the test with dissected sentences.
+
+Further discussion of the completion test will be found in connection
+with test 4, year XII. For the present we will only observe that
+notwithstanding a certain similarity among the tests of this type, they
+do not all call into play the same mental processes. The factor most
+involved may be verbal language coherence, visual perception of form,
+the association of abstract ideas, etc. To pass Binet's test with
+mutilated pictures requires, (1) that the parts of the picture be
+perceived as constituting a whole; and (2) that the idea of a human face
+or form be so easily and so clearly reproducible that it may act, even
+before it comes fully into consciousness, as a model or pattern, for the
+criticism of the picture shown. The younger the child, the less
+adequate, in this sense, is his perceptual familiarity with common
+objects. In standardizing a series of "absurd pictures," the writer has
+found that normal children of 3 years often see nothing wrong in a
+picture which shows a cat with two legs or a hen with four legs. Such
+children would, of course, never mistake a cat for a hen. Their trouble
+lies in the inability to call up in clear form a "free idea" of a cat or
+a hen for comparison with the perceptual presentation offered by the
+picture. Middle-grade imbeciles of adult age have much the same
+difficulty as normal children of 4 years in recognizing mutilations or
+absurdities in pictures of familiar objects.
+
+Binet first placed this test in year VII, changing it to year VIII in
+the 1911 revision. In other revisions it has been retained in year VII,
+although all the available statistics except Bobertag's warrant its
+location in year VI.
+
+
+VI, 3. COUNTING THIRTEEN PENNIES
+
+PROCEDURE. The procedure is the same as in the test of counting four
+pennies (year IV, test 3). If the first response contains only a minor
+error, such as the omission of a number in counting, failure to tally
+with the finger, etc., a second trial is given.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if there is _one success in two trials_.
+Success requires that the counting should tally with the pointing. It is
+not sufficient merely to state the number of pennies without pointing,
+for unless the child points and counts aloud we cannot be sure that his
+correct answer may not be the joint result of two errors in opposite
+directions and equal; for example, if one penny were skipped and
+another were counted twice the total result would still be correct, but
+the performance would not satisfy the requirements.
+
+REMARKS. Does success in this test depend upon intelligence or upon
+schooling? The answer is, intelligence mainly. There are possibly a few
+normal 6-year-old children who could not pass the test for lack of
+instruction, but children of this age usually have enough spontaneous
+interest in numbers to acquire facility in counting as far as 13 without
+formal teaching. Certainly, inability to do so by the age of 7 years is
+a suspicious sign unless the child's environment has been extraordinarily
+unfavorable. On the other hand, feeble-minded adults of the 5-year level
+usually have to have a great deal of instruction before they acquire
+the ability to count 13, and many of them are hardly able to learn it at
+all. So much does our learning depend on original endowment.
+
+Binet originally placed this test in year VII, but moved it to year VI
+in 1911. All the statistics, without exception, show that this change
+was justified. Bobertag says that nearly all 7-year-olds who are not
+feeble-minded can pass it, a statement with which we can fully agree.
+
+
+VI, 4. COMPREHENSION, SECOND DEGREE
+
+PROCEDURE. The questions used in this year are:--
+
+  (a) "_What's the thing to do if it is raining when you start to
+      school?_"
+  (b) "_What's the thing to do if you find that your house is on
+      fire?_"
+  (c) "_What's the thing to do if you are going some place and
+      miss your train (car)?_"
+
+Note that the wording of the first part of the questions is slightly
+different from that in year IV, test 5.
+
+If there is no response, or if the child looks puzzled, the question may
+be repeated once or twice. The form of the question must not under any
+circumstances be altered. Question _b_, for example, would be materially
+changed if we should say: "_Suppose you were to come home from school
+and find that your house was burning up. What would you do?_" The
+expression "burning up" would probably be much less likely to suggest
+calling a fireman than would the words "on fire."
+
+SCORING. _Two out of three_ must be answered correctly. The harder the
+comprehension questions are, the greater the variety of answers and the
+greater the difficulty of scoring. Because of the difficulty many
+examiners find in scoring this test, we will list the most common
+satisfactory, unsatisfactory, and doubtful responses to each question.
+
+(a) _If it is raining when you start to school_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Take umbrella," "Bring a parasol," "Put on
+    rubbers," "Wear an overcoat," etc. This type of response
+    occurred 61 times out of 72 successes. "Have my father bring me"
+    also counts _plus_.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Go home," "Stay at home," "Stay in the
+    house," "Have the rainbow," "Stay in school," etc. "Stay at
+    home" is the most common failure and might at first seem to the
+    examiner to be a satisfactory response. As a matter of fact,
+    this answer rests on a slight misunderstanding of the question,
+    the import of which is that one is to go to school and it is
+    raining.
+
+    _Doubtful._ "Run" as an answer is a little more troublesome. It
+    may reasonably be scored _plus_ if it can be ascertained that
+    the child is accustomed to meet the situation in this way. It is
+    a common response with children in those regions of the
+    Southwest where rains are so infrequent that umbrellas are
+    rarely used. "Bring my lunch" may be considered a satisfactory
+    response in case the child is in the habit of so doing on rainy
+    days.
+
+(b) _If you find that your house is on fire_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Ring the fire alarm," "Call the firemen," "Call
+    for help," "Put water on it," etc.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ The most common failure, accounting for nearly
+    half of all, is to suggest finding other shelter; _e.g._, "Go to
+    the hotel," "Get another house," "Stay with your friends,"
+    "Build a new house," etc. Others are: "Tell them you are sorry
+    it burned down," "Be careful and not let it burn again," "Have
+    it insured," "Cry," "Call the policeman," etc.
+
+    _Doubtful._ Instead of suggesting measures to put out the fire,
+    a good many children suggest mere escape or the saving of
+    household articles. Responses of this type are: "Jump out of the
+    windows," "Save yourself," "Get out as fast as you can," "Save
+    the baby," "Get my dolls and jewelry and hurry and get out."
+    These answers are about one seventh as frequent as the perfectly
+    satisfactory ones, and the rule for scoring them is a matter of
+    some importance. Under certain circumstances the logical thing
+    to do would be to save one's self or valuables without wasting
+    time trying to call help. There may be no help in reach, or a
+    fire which the child imagines may be too far along for help to
+    be effective. In order to avoid the possibility of doing a
+    subject an injustice, it may be desirable to score such answers
+    _plus_. We must not be too arbitrary.
+
+(c) _If you miss your train_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ The answer we expect is, "Wait for another,"
+    "Take the next car," or something to that effect. This type of
+    answer includes about 85 per cent of the responses which do not
+    belong obviously in the unsatisfactory group. "Take a jitney" is
+    a modern variation of this response which must be counted as
+    satisfactory.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ These are endless. One continues to meet new
+    examples of absurdity, however many children one has tested. The
+    possibilities are literally inexhaustible, but the following are
+    among the most common: "Wait for it to come back," "Have to
+    walk," "Be mad," "Don't swear," "Run and try to catch it," "Try
+    to jump on," "Don't go to that place," "Go to the next station,"
+    etc.
+
+    _Doubtful._ The main doubtful response is, "Go home again,"
+    "Come back next day and catch another," etc. In small or
+    isolated towns having only one or two trains per day, this is
+    the logical thing to do, and in such cases the score is _plus_.
+    Fortunately, only about one answer in ten gives rise to any
+    difference of opinion among even partly trained examiners.
+
+REMARKS. The three comprehension questions of this group were all
+suggested by Binet in 1905. Only one of them, however, "What would you
+do if you were going some place and missed your train?" was incorporated
+in the 1908 or 1911 series, and this was used in year X with seven
+others much harder. The other two remained unstandardized previous to
+the Stanford investigation.[53]
+
+[53] For general discussion of the comprehension questions as a test,
+see p. 158.
+
+
+VI, 5. NAMING FOUR COINS
+
+PROCEDURE. Show a nickel, a penny, a quarter, and a dime, asking each
+time: "_What is that?_" If the child misunderstands and answers,
+"Money," or "A piece of money," we say: "_Yes, but what do you call that
+piece of money?_" Show the coins always in the order given above.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _three of the four_ questions are
+correctly answered. Any correct designation of a coin is satisfactory,
+including provincialisms like "two bits" for the 25-cent piece, etc. If
+the child changes his response for a coin, we count the second answer
+and ignore the first. No supplementary questions are permissible.
+
+REMARKS. Some of the critics of the Binet scale regard this test as of
+little value, because, they say, the ability to identify pieces of money
+depends entirely on instruction or other accidents of environment. The
+figures show, however, that it is not greatly influenced by differences
+of social environment, although children from poor homes do slightly
+better with it than those from homes of wealth and culture. The fact
+seems to be that practically all children by the age of 6 years have
+had opportunity to learn the names of the smaller coins, and if they
+have failed to learn them it betokens a lack of that spontaneity of
+interest in things which we have mentioned so often as a fundamental
+presupposition of intelligence. It is by no means a test of mere
+mechanical memory.
+
+This test was given a place in year VII of Binet's 1908 scale, the coins
+used being the 1-sou, 2-sous, 10-sous, and 5-franc pieces. It was
+omitted from the Binet 1911 revision and also from that of Goddard.
+Kuhlmann retains it in year VII. Others, however, have required all four
+coins to be correctly named, and when this standard is used the test is
+difficult enough for year VII. Germany has six coins up to and including
+the 1-mark piece, all of which could be named by 76 per cent of
+Bobertag's 7-year-olds. With the coins and the standard of scoring used
+in the Stanford revision the test belongs well in year VI.
+
+
+VI, 6. REPEATING SIXTEEN TO EIGHTEEN SYLLABLES
+
+The sentences are:--
+
+  (a) "_We are having a fine time. We found a little mouse in the
+      trap._"
+  (b) "_Walter had a fine time on his vacation. He went fishing
+      every day._"
+  (c) "_We will go out for a long walk. Please give me my pretty
+      straw hat._"
+
+PROCEDURE. The instructions should be given as follows: "_Now, listen. I
+am going to say something and after I am through I want you to say it
+over just like I do. Understand? Listen carefully and be sure to say
+exactly what I say._" Then read the first sentence rather slowly, in a
+distinct voice, and with expression. If the response is not too bad,
+praise the child's efforts. Then proceed with the second and third
+sentences, prefacing each with an exhortation to "say exactly what I
+say."
+
+In this year and in the memory-for-sentences test of later years it is
+not permissible to re-read even the first sentence. The only reason for
+allowing a repetition of one of the sentences in the earlier test of
+this kind was to overcome the child's timidity. With children of 6 years
+or upward we seldom encounter the timidity which sometimes makes it so
+hard to secure responses in some of the tests of the earlier years.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed _if at least one sentence out of three is
+repeated without error, or if two are repeated with not more than one
+error each_. A single omission, insertion, or transposition counts as an
+error. Faults of pronunciation are of course overlooked. It is not
+sufficient that the thought be reproduced intact; the exact language
+must be repeated. The responses should be recorded _verbatim_. This is
+easily done if record blanks used for scoring have the sentences printed
+in full.
+
+REMARKS. In this test and in later tests of memory for sentences, it is
+interesting to ask after each response: "_Did you get it right?_" As in
+the tests with digits, it is an unfavorable sign when the child is
+perfectly satisfied with a very poor response.
+
+It is evident that tests of this type give opportunity for different
+degrees of failure. To repeat only a half or a third of each sentence is
+much more serious than to make but one error in each sentence (one word
+omitted, inserted, or misplaced). It would be possible to use the same
+sentences at three or four different age levels, by setting the
+appropriate standard for success at each age. If the standard is one
+sentence out of three repeated with no more than two errors, the test
+belongs in year V. If we require two absolutely correct responses out of
+three, the test belongs at about year VII. The shifting standard is
+rendered unnecessary, however, by the use of other tests of the same
+kind, easier ones in the lower years and more difficult ones in the
+upper.
+
+Sentences of sixteen syllables found a place in Binet's 1908 scale and
+were correctly located in year VI, but later revisions, including that
+of Binet, have omitted the test.
+
+
+VI. ALTERNATIVE TEST: FORENOON AND AFTERNOON
+
+PROCEDURE. If it is morning, ask: "_Is it morning or afternoon?_" If it
+is afternoon, put the question in the reverse form, "_Is it afternoon or
+morning?_" This precaution is necessary because of the tendency of some
+children to choose always the latter of two alternatives. Do not
+cross-question the child or give any suggestion that might afford a clue
+as to the correct answer.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the correct response is given with
+apparent assurance. If the child says he is not sure but _thinks_ it
+forenoon (or afternoon, as the case may be), we score the response a
+failure even if the answer happens to be correct. However, this type of
+response is not often encountered.
+
+REMARKS. It is interesting to follow the child's development with regard
+to orientation in time. This development proceeds much more slowly than
+we are wont to assume. Certain distinctions with regard to space, as up
+and down, come much earlier. As Binet remarks, schools sometimes try to
+teach the events of national history to children whose time orientation
+is so rudimentary that they do not even know morning from afternoon!
+
+The test has two rather serious faults: (1) It gives too much play to
+chance, for since only two alternatives are offered, guesses alone would
+give about fifty per cent of correct responses. (2) We cannot be sure
+that the verbal distinction between forenoon and afternoon always
+corresponds the two divisions of the day. It is possible that the
+temporal discrimination precedes the formation of the correct verbal
+association.
+
+This test was included in the year VI group of the 1908 scale, but was
+omitted from the 1911 revision. Nearly all the data except Bobertag's
+show that it is rather easy for year VI, though too difficult for
+year V. Bobertag's figures would place the test in year VII. Possibly
+the corresponding German words are not as easy to learn as our _morning_
+and _afternoon_.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XIII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VII
+
+
+VII, 1. GIVING THE NUMBER OF FINGERS
+
+PROCEDURE. "_How many fingers have you on one hand?_" "_How many on the
+other hand?_" "_How many on both hands together?_" If the child begins
+to count in response to any of the questions, say: "_No, don't count.
+Tell me without counting._" Then repeat the question.
+
+SCORING. Passed _if all three questions are answered correctly and
+promptly_ without the necessity of counting. Some subjects do not
+understand the question to include the thumbs. We disregard this if the
+number of fingers exclusive of thumbs is given correctly.
+
+REMARKS. Like the two tests of counting pennies, this one, also, throws
+light on the child's spontaneous interest in numbers. However, the
+mental processes it calls into play are a little less simple than those
+required for mere counting. If the child is able to give the number of
+fingers, it is ordinarily because he has previously counted them and has
+remembered the result. The memory would hardly be retained but for a
+certain interest in numbers as such. Middle-grade imbeciles of even
+adult age seldom remember how many fingers they have, however often
+they may have been told. They are not able to form accurate concepts of
+other than the simplest number relationships, and numbers have little
+interest or meaning for them.
+
+Binet gave this test a place in year VII of the 1908 series, but omitted
+it in the 1911 revision. Goddard omits it, while Kuhlmann retains it in
+year VII, where, according to our own figures, it unmistakably belongs.
+Bobertag finds it rather easy for year VII, though too difficult for
+year VI.
+
+Our data prove that this test fulfills the requirements of a good test.
+It shows a rapid but even rise from year V to year VIII in the per cent
+passing, the agreement among the different testers is extraordinarily
+close, and it is relatively little influenced by training and social
+environment. For these reasons, and because it is so easy to give and
+score with uniformity, it well deserves a place in the scale.
+
+
+VII, 2. DESCRIPTION OF PICTURES
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the same pictures as in III, 3, presenting them always in
+the following order: Dutch Home, River Scene, Post-Office. The formula
+for the test in this year is somewhat different from that of year III.
+Say: "_What is this picture about? What is this a picture of?_" Use the
+double question, and follow the formula exactly. It would ruin the test
+to say: "_Tell me everything you see in this picture_," for this form of
+question tends to provoke the enumeration response even with intelligent
+children of this age.
+
+When there is no response, the question may be repeated as often as is
+necessary to break the silence.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _two of the three_ pictures are described
+or interpreted. Interpretation, however, is seldom encountered at this
+age. Often the response consists of a mixture of enumeration and
+description. The rule is that the reaction to a picture should not
+be scored _plus_ unless it is made up chiefly of description (or
+interpretation).
+
+Study of the following samples of satisfactory responses will give a
+fairly definite idea of the requirements for satisfactory description:--
+
+_Picture (a): satisfactory responses_
+
+    "The little girl is crying. The mother is looking at her and
+    there is a little kitten on the floor."
+
+    "The mother is watching the baby, and the cat is looking at a
+    hole in the floor, and there is a lamp and a table so I guess
+    it's a dining room."
+
+    "The little girl has wooden shoes. Her mother is sitting in a
+    chair and has a funny cap on her head. The cat is sitting on the
+    floor and there is a basket by the mother and a table with
+    something on it."
+
+    "It's about Holland. The little Dutch girl is crying and the
+    mother is sitting down."
+
+    "A little Dutch girl and her mother and that's a kitten, and the
+    little girl has her hand up as if she was doing something to her
+    forehead. She has shoes that curve up in front."
+
+    "Dutch lady, and the little baby doesn't want to come to her
+    mother and the cat is looking for some mice."
+
+    "The mother is sitting down and the little one has her hands up
+    over her eyes. There's a pail by the mother and a chair with
+    some clothes on it and a table with dishes. And here's a lamp
+    and here's some curtains."
+
+_Picture (b): satisfactory responses_
+
+    "Some people in a boat. The water is high and if they don't look
+    out the boat will tip over."
+
+    "Some Indians and a lady and man. They are in a boat on the
+    river and the boat is about to upset, and there are some dead
+    trees going to fall."
+
+    "There's a lot of water coming up to drown the people. There are
+    two people in the boat and the boat is sinking."
+
+    "There's some people sailing in a canoe and the woman is leaning
+    over on the man because she is afraid."
+
+    "There's an Indian and some white people in the boat. I suppose
+    they are out for a ride in a canoe."
+
+    "Picture about some man and lady in a canoe and going down to
+    the sea."
+
+    "They are taking a boat ride on the ocean and the water is up so
+    high that one of them is scared. Here are some trees and two of
+    them are going to fall down. Here's a little place or bridge you
+    can stand on. The man is touching this one's head and this one
+    has his hand on the cover."
+
+    "The water is splashing all over. There's trees on this bank and
+    there's a rock and some trees falling down. The people have a
+    blanket over them."
+
+_Picture (c): satisfactory responses_
+
+    "A man selling eggs and two men reading the paper together and
+    two men watching."
+
+    "A few men reading a newspaper and one has a basket of eggs and
+    this one has been fishing."
+
+    "There's a man with a basket of eggs and another is reading the
+    paper and a woman is hanging out clothes. There's a house near."
+
+    "There's a man trying to read the paper and the others want to
+    read it too. Here's a lady walking up to the barn. There are
+    houses over there and one man has a basket."
+
+    "There's a big brick house and five men by it and a man with a
+    basket of eggs and a post-office sign and a lady going home."
+
+    "They are all looking at the paper. He is looking over the other
+    man's shoulder and this one is looking at the back of the paper.
+    There's a woman cleaning up her back yard and some coops for
+    hens."
+
+    "A man reading a paper, a man with eggs, a woman and a tree and
+    another house. That man has an apron on. This is the
+    post-office."
+
+Unsatisfactory responses are those made up entirely or mainly of
+enumeration. A phrase or two of description intermingled with a larger
+amount of enumeration counts _minus_. Sometimes the description is
+satisfactory as far as it goes, but is exceedingly brief. In such cases
+a little tactful urging ("_Go ahead_," etc.) will extend the response
+sufficiently to reveal its true character.
+
+REMARKS. Description is better than enumeration because it involves
+putting the elements of a picture together in a simple way or noting
+their qualities. This requires a higher type of mental association
+(combinative power) than mere enumeration. An unusually complete
+description indicates relative wealth of mental content and facility of
+association.
+
+Binet placed this test in year VII, and it seems to have been retained
+in this location in all revisions except Bobertag's. However, the
+statistics of various workers show much disagreement. Lack of agreement
+is easily accounted for by the fact that different investigators have
+used different series of pictures and doubtless also different standards
+for success. The pictures used by Binet have little action or detail and
+are therefore rather difficult for description. On the other hand, the
+Jingleman-Jack pictures used by Kuhlmann represent such familiar
+situations and have so much action that even 5- or 6-year intelligence
+seldom fails with them. The pictures we employ belong without question
+in year VII.
+
+No better proof than the above could be found to show how ability of a
+given kind does not make its appearance suddenly. There is no one time
+in the life of even a single child when the power to describe pictures
+suddenly develops. On the contrary, pictures of a certain type will
+ordinarily provoke description, rather than enumeration, as early as
+5 or 6 years; others not before 7 or 8 years, or even later.
+
+
+VII, 3. REPEATING FIVE DIGITS
+
+PROCEDURE. Use: 3-1-7-5-9; 4-2-3-8-5; 9-8-1-7-6. Tell the child to
+listen and to say after you just what you say. Then read the first
+series of digits at a slightly faster rate than one per second, in a
+distinct voice, and with perfectly uniform emphasis. _Avoid rhythm._
+
+In previous tests with digits, it was permissible to re-read the first
+series if the child refused to respond. In this year, and in the digits
+tests of later years, this is not permissible. Warning is not given as
+to the number of digits to be repeated. Before reading each series, get
+the child's attention. Do not stare at the child during the response, as
+this is disconcerting. Look aside or at the record sheet.
+
+SCORING. Passed if the child repeats correctly, after a single reading,
+_one series out of the three_ series given. The order must be correct.
+
+REMARKS. Psychologically the repetition of digits differs from the
+repetition of sentences mainly in the fact that digits have less meaning
+(fewer associations) than the words of a sentence. It is because they
+are not as well knit together in meaning that three digits tax the
+memory as much as six syllables making up a sentence.
+
+Testing auditory memory for digits is one of the oldest of intelligence
+tests. It is easy to give and lends itself well to exact quantitative
+standardization. Its value has been questioned, however, on two grounds:
+(1) That it is not a test of pure memory, but depends largely on
+attention; and (2) that the results are too much influenced by the
+child's type of imagery. As to the first objection, it is true that more
+than one mental function is brought into play by the test. The same may
+be said of every other test in the Binet scale and for that matter of
+any test that could be devised. It is impossible to isolate any function
+for separate testing. In fact, the functions called memory, attention,
+perception, judgment, etc., never operate in isolation. There are no
+separate and special "faculties" corresponding to such terms, which are
+merely convenient names for characterizing mental processes of various
+types. In any test it is "general ability" which is operative, perhaps
+now _chiefly_ in remembering, at another time _chiefly_ in sensory
+discrimination, again in reasoning, etc.
+
+The second objection, that the test is largely invalidated by the
+existence of imagery types, is not borne out by the facts. Experiments
+have shown that pure imagery types are exceedingly rare, and that
+children, especially, are characterized by "mixed" imagery. There are
+probably few subjects so lacking in auditory imagery as to be placed at
+a serious disadvantage in this test.
+
+Lengthening a series by the addition of a single digit adds greatly to
+the difficulty. While four digits can usually be repeated by children of
+4 years, five digits belong in year VII and six in year X.
+
+It is always interesting to note the type of errors made. The most
+common error is to omit one or more of the digits, usually in the first
+part of the series. If the child's ability is decidedly below the test
+he may give only the last two or three out of the five or six heard.
+Substitutions are also quite frequent, and if so many substitutions are
+made as to give a series quite unlike that which the child has heard, it
+is an unfavorable sign, indicating weakness of the critical sense which
+is so often found with low-level intelligence. In case of extreme
+weakness of the power of auto-criticism, the child in response to the
+series 9-8-1-7-6-, may say 1-2-3-4-5-6, or perhaps merely a couple of
+digits like 8-6, and still express complete satisfaction with his absurd
+response. After each series, therefore, the examiner should say, "_Was
+it right?_"[54] Very young subjects, however, have a tendency to answer
+"yes" to any question of this type, and it is therefore best not to call
+for criticism of a performance below the age of 6 or 7 years.
+
+[54] "_Was it wrong?_" is not an equivalent question and should not be
+used.
+
+Digit series of a given length are not always of equal difficulty, and
+for this reason it is never wise to use series improvised at the moment
+of the experiment. We must avoid especially series of regularly
+ascending or descending value, the repetition at regular intervals of a
+particular digit, and all other peculiarities of arrangement which would
+favor the grouping of the digits for easier retention.
+
+It remains to mention two or three further cautions in regard to
+procedure. It is best to begin with a series about one digit below the
+child's expected ability. If the child has a probable intelligence of
+about 6 or 7 years, we should begin with four digits; in case of
+probable 10-year intelligence we begin with five digits, etc. On the
+other hand, we should avoid beginning too far down, because then the
+result is too much complicated by the effects of practice and fatigue.
+
+It is not necessary, and often it is not expedient, to give the digits
+tests of all the different years in succession; that is, without other
+tests intervening. While this may be permissible with older children, in
+young children the power of sustained attention is so weak that no
+single kind of test should occupy more than two or three minutes.
+Children below 6 or 7 years should ordinarily be given the tests in the
+order in which they are listed in the record booklet.
+
+In his 1911 revision of the scale Binet unfortunately shifted this test
+from year VII to year VIII. Goddard follows his example, but Kuhlmann
+retains it in year VII. The data from more than a dozen leading
+investigations in America, England, and Germany agree in showing that
+the test should remain in year VII.
+
+
+VII, 4. TYING A BOW-KNOT
+
+PROCEDURE. Prepare a shoestring tied in a bow-knot around a stick. The
+knot should be an ordinary "double bow," with wings not over three or
+four inches long. Make this ready in advance of the experiment and show
+the child only the completed knot.
+
+Place the model before the subject with the wings pointing to the right
+and left, and say: "_You know what kind of knot this is, don't you? It
+is a bow-knot. I want you to take this other piece of string and tie the
+same kind of knot around my finger._" At the same time give the child a
+piece of shoestring, of the same length as that which is tied around the
+stick, and hold out a finger pointed toward the child and in convenient
+position for the operation. It is better to have the subject tie the
+string around the examiner's finger than around a pencil or other object
+because the latter often falls out of the string and is otherwise
+awkward to handle.
+
+Some children who assert that they do not know how to tie a bow-knot are
+sometimes nevertheless successful when urged to try. It is always
+necessary, therefore, to secure an actual trial.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if a double bow-knot (both ends folded in)
+is made _in not more than a minute_. A single bow-knot (only one end
+folded in) counts half credit, because children are often accustomed to
+use the single bow altogether. The usual plain common knot, which
+precedes the bow-knot proper, must not be omitted if the response is to
+count as satisfactory, for without this preliminary plain knot a
+bow-knot will not hold and is of no value. To be satisfactory the knot
+should also be drawn up reasonably close, not left gaping.
+
+REMARKS. This test, which had not before been standardized, was
+suggested to the writer by the late Dr. Huey, who in a conversation
+once remarked upon the frequent inability of feeble-minded adults to
+perform the little motor tasks which are universally learned by normal
+persons in childhood. The test was therefore incorporated in the
+Stanford trial series of 1913-14 and tried with 370 non-selected
+children within two months of the 6th, 7th, 8th, or 9th birthday. It was
+expected that the test would probably be found to belong at about the
+8-year level, but it proved to be easy enough for year VII, where
+69 per cent of the children passed it. Only 35 per cent of the
+6-year-olds succeeded, but after that age the per cent passing increased
+rapidly to 94 per cent at 9 years.
+
+This little experiment, simple as it is, seems to fulfill reasonably
+well the requirements of a good test. The main objection which might be
+brought against it is that it is much subject to the influence of
+training. If this were true in any marked degree, the mentally retarded
+children of 7-year intelligence should be expected to succeed better
+with it than mentally advanced children of the same mental level, since
+the former would have had at least two or three years more in which to
+learn the task. A comparison of the two groups, however, shows no great
+difference. The factor of age, apart from mental age, affects the
+results so little that it is evident we have here a real test of
+intelligence.
+
+It would, of course, be easy to imagine a child of 7 years who had not
+had reasonable opportunity to make the acquaintance of bow-knots or to
+learn to tie them. But such children are seldom encountered in the ages
+above 6 or 7. Of 68 7-year-olds who were asked whether they had ever
+seen a bow-knot ("a knot like that") only two replied in the negative.
+It cannot be denied, however, that specific instruction and special
+stimulus to practice do play a certain part. This is suggested by the
+fact that girls excel the boys somewhat at each age, doubtless because
+bow-knots play a larger rôle in feminine apparel. Social status affects
+the results in only a moderate degree, though it might be supposed that
+poor ragamuffins, on the one hand, and children of the very rich, on the
+other, would both make a poor showing in this test; the former because
+of their scanty apparel, the latter because they sometimes have servants
+to dress them.
+
+The following are probably the chief factors determining success with
+this test: (1) Interest in common objective things; (2) ability to form
+permanent associative connections between successive motor coördinations
+(memory for a series of acts); and (3) skill in the acquisition of
+voluntary motor control. The last factor is probably much less important
+than the other two. Motor awkwardness often prolongs the time from the
+usual ten or fifteen seconds to thirty or forty seconds, but it is
+rarely a cause of a failure. The important thing is to be able to
+reproduce the appropriate succession of acts, acts which nearly all
+children of 7 years, under the joint stimulus of example and spontaneous
+interest, have before performed or tried to perform.
+
+
+VII, 5. GIVING DIFFERENCES FROM MEMORY
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_What is the difference between a fly and a
+butterfly?_" If the child does not seem to understand, say: "_You know
+flies, do you not? You have seen flies? And you know the butterflies!
+Now, tell me the difference between a fly and a butterfly._" Proceed in
+the same way with _stone and egg_, and _wood and glass_. A little
+coaxing is sometimes necessary to secure a response, but supplementary
+questions and suggestions of every kind are to be avoided. For example,
+it would not be permissible for the examiner to say: "_Which is larger,
+a fly or a butterfly?_" This would give the child his cue and he would
+immediately answer, "A butterfly." The child must be left to find a
+difference by himself. Sometimes a difference is given, but without any
+indication as to its direction, as, for example, "One is bigger than the
+other" (for fly and butterfly). It is then permissible to ask: "_Which
+is bigger?_"
+
+SCORING. Passed if a real difference is given in _two out of three
+comparisons_. It is not necessary, however, that an _essential_
+difference be given; the difference may be trivial, only it must be a
+real one. The following are samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory
+responses:--
+
+_Fly and butterfly_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Butterfly is larger." "Butterfly has bigger
+    wings." "Fly is black and a butterfly is not." "Butterfly is
+    yellow (or white, etc.) and fly is black." "Fly bites you and
+    butterfly don't." "Butterfly has powder on its wings, fly does
+    not." "Fly flies straighter." "Butterfly is outdoors and a fly
+    is in the house." "Flies are more dangerous to our health."
+    "Flies haven't anything to sip honey with." "Butterfly doesn't
+    live as long as a fly." "Butterfly comes from a caterpillar."
+
+    Sometimes a double contrast is meant, but not fully expressed;
+    as, "A fly is small and a butterfly is pretty." Here the thought
+    is probably correct, only the language is awkward.
+
+    Of 102 correct responses, 70 were in terms of size, or size plus
+    color or form; 12 were in terms of both form and color; 6 in
+    terms of color alone; and the rest scattered among such
+    responses as those mentioned above.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ These are mostly misstatements of facts; as:
+    "Fly is bigger." "Fly has legs and butterfly hasn't." "Butterfly
+    has no feet and fly has." "Butterfly makes butter." "Fly is a
+    fly and a butterfly is not." Failures due to misstatement of
+    fact are of endless variety. If an indefinite response is given,
+    like "The fly is different," or "They don't look alike," we ask,
+    "_How is it different?_" or, "_Why don't they look alike?_" It
+    is satisfactory if the child then gives a correct answer.
+
+_Stone and egg_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Stone is harder." "Egg is softer." "Egg breaks
+    easier." "Egg breaks and stone doesn't." "Stone is heavier."
+    "Egg is white and stone is not." "Egg has a shell and stone does
+    not." "Eggs have a white and a yellow in them." "You put eggs in
+    a pudding." "An egg is rounder than a stone." We may also accept
+    statements which are only qualifiedly true; as, "You can break
+    an egg, but not a stone." Likewise double but incomplete
+    comparisons are satisfactory; as, "An egg you fry and a stone
+    you throw," "A stone is tough and an egg you eat," etc.
+
+    A little over three fourths of the comparisons made by children
+    of 6, 7, and 8 years are in terms of hardness. The other
+    responses are widely scattered.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "A stone is bigger (or smaller) than an egg."
+    "A stone is square and an egg is round." "An egg is yellow and a
+    stone is white." "Stones are red (or black, etc.) and eggs are
+    white." "An egg is to eat and a stone is to plant." "An egg is
+    round and a stone is sometimes round."
+
+    It will be noted that the above responses are partly true and
+    partly false. The error they contain renders them unacceptable.
+    Most of the failures are due to misstatements as to size, shape,
+    or color, but occasionally one meets a bizarre answer.
+
+_Wood and glass_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Glass breaks easier than wood." "Glass breaks
+    and wood does not." "Wood is stronger than glass." "Glass you
+    can see through and wood you can't." "Glass cuts you and wood
+    doesn't." "You get splinters from wood and you don't from
+    glass." "Glass melts and wood doesn't." "Wood burns and glass
+    doesn't." "Wood has bark and glass hasn't." "Wood grows and
+    glass doesn't." "Glass is heavier than wood." "Glass glistens in
+    the sun and wood does not."
+
+    An incomplete double comparison is also counted satisfactory;
+    as, "Wood you can burn and glass you can see through."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Wood is black and glass is white." (Color
+    differences are always unsatisfactory in this comparison unless
+    transparency is also mentioned.) "Glass is square and wood is
+    round." "Glass is bigger than wood" (or _vice versa_). "Wood is
+    oblong and glass is square." "Glass is thin and wood is thick."
+    "Wood is made out of trees and glass out of windows." "There is
+    no glass in wood."
+
+    The two most frequent types of failures are misstatements
+    regarding color and thickness. The other failures are widely
+    scattered.
+
+REMARKS. The test is one which all the critics agree in commending,
+largely because it is so little influenced by ordinary school
+experience. Its excellence lies mainly, however, in the fact that it
+throws light upon the character of the child's higher thought processes,
+for thinking means essentially the association of ideas on the basis of
+differences or similarities. Nearly all thought processes, from the most
+complex to the very simplest, involve to a greater or less degree one or
+the other of these two types of association. They are involved in the
+simple judgments made by children, in the appreciation of puns, in
+mechanical inventions, in the creation of poetry, in the scientific
+classification of natural phenomena, and in the origination of the
+hypotheses of science or philosophy.
+
+The ability to note differences precedes somewhat the ability to note
+resemblances, though the contrary has sometimes been asserted by
+logician-psychologists. The difficulty of the test is greatly increased
+by the fact that the objects to be compared are not present to the
+senses, which means that the free ideas must be called up for comparison
+and contrast. Failure may result either from weakness in the power of
+ideational representation of objects, or from the inadequacy of the
+associations themselves, or from both. Probably both factors are usually
+involved.
+
+Intellectual development is especially evident in increased ability to
+note _essential_ differences and likenesses, as contrasted with those
+which are trivial, superficial, and accidental. To distinguish an egg
+from a stone on the basis of one being organic, the other inorganic
+matter requires far higher intelligence than to distinguish them on the
+basis of shape, color, fragibility, etc. It is not till well toward the
+adult stage that the ability to give very essential likenesses and
+differences becomes prominent, and when we get a comparison of this type
+from a child of 7 or 8 years it is a very favorable sign.
+
+It would be well worth while to standardize a new test of this kind for
+use in the upper years and especially adapted to display the ability to
+give essential likenesses and differences. At year VII we must accept as
+satisfactory any real difference.
+
+One point remains. In the tests of giving differences and similarities,
+it is well to make note of any tendency to _stereotypy_, by which is
+meant the mechanical reappearance of the same idea, or element, in
+successive responses. For example, the child begins by comparing fly and
+butterfly on the basis of size; as, "A butterfly is bigger than a fly."
+So far, this is quite satisfactory; but the child with a tendency to
+stereotypy finds himself unable to get away from the dominating idea of
+size and continues to make it the basis of the other comparisons: "A
+stone is larger than an egg," "Wood is larger than glass," etc. In case
+of stereotypy in all three responses, we should have to score the total
+response failure even though the idea employed happened to fit all three
+parts of the question. As a rule it is encountered only with very young
+children or with older children who are mentally retarded. It is
+therefore an unfavorable sign.
+
+Although this test has been universally used in year VIII, all the
+available statistics, with the exception of Bobertag's and Bloch's,
+indicate that it is decidedly too easy for that year. Binet himself says
+that nearly all 7-year-olds pass it. Goddard finds 97 per cent passing
+at year VIII, and Dougherty 90 per cent at year VI. With the standard of
+scoring given in the present revision, and with the substitution of
+_stone and egg_ instead of the more difficult _paper and cloth_, the
+test is unquestionably easy enough for year VII.
+
+
+VII, 6. COPYING A DIAMOND
+
+PROCEDURE. On a white cardboard draw in heavy black lines a diamond with
+the longer diagonal three inches and the shorter diagonal an inch and a
+half. The specially prepared record booklet contains the diamond as well
+as many other conveniences.
+
+Place the model before the child with the longer diagonal pointing
+directly toward him, and giving him _pen and ink_ and paper, say: "_I
+want you to draw one exactly like this._" Give three trials, saying each
+time: "_Make it exactly like this one._" In repeating the above formula,
+merely point to the model; do not pass the fingers around its edge.
+
+Unlike the test of copying a square in year IV, there is seldom any
+difficulty in getting the child to try this one. By the age of 7 the
+child has grown much less timid and has become more accustomed to the
+use of writing materials.
+
+Note whether the child draws each part carefully, looking at the model
+from time to time, or whether the strokes are made in a more or less
+haphazard manner with only an initial glance at the original.
+
+After each trial, say to the child: "_Is it good?_" And after the three
+copies have been made say: "_Which one is the best?_" Retarded children
+are sometimes entirely satisfied with the most nondescript drawings
+imaginable, but they are more likely correctly to pick out the best of
+three than to render a correct judgment about the worth of each drawing
+separately.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _two of the three_ drawings are at least
+as good as those marked satisfactory on the score card. The diamond
+should be drawn approximately in the correct position, and the diagonals
+must not be reversed. Disregard departures from the model with respect
+to size.
+
+REMARKS. The test is a good one. Age and training, apart from
+intelligence, affect it only moderately. There are few adult imbeciles
+of 6-year intelligence who are able to pass it, while but few subjects
+who have reached the 8-year level fail on it.[55]
+
+[55] For further discussion of drawing tests, see V, 1, and X, 3.
+
+This test was located in year VII of the 1908 scale, but was shifted to
+year VI in Binet's 1911 revision. The change was without justification,
+for Binet expressly states, both in 1908 and 1911, that only half of the
+6-year-olds succeed with it. The large majority of investigations have
+given too low a proportion of successes at 6 years to warrant its
+location at that age, particularly if pen is required instead of pencil.
+Location at year VI would be warranted only on the condition that the
+use of pencil be permitted and only one success required in three
+trials.
+
+
+VII, ALTERNATIVE TEST 1: NAMING THE DAYS OF THE WEEK
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_You know the days of the week, do you not? Name the
+days of the week for me._" Sometimes the child begins by naming various
+annual holidays, as Christmas, Fourth of July, etc. Perhaps he has not
+comprehended the task; at any rate, we give him one more trial by
+stopping him and saying: "_No; that is not what I mean. I want you to
+name the days of the week._" No supplementary questions are permissible,
+and we must be careful not to show approval or disapproval in our looks
+as the child is giving his response.
+
+If the days have been named in correct order, we check up the response
+to see whether the real order of days is known or whether the names have
+only been repeated mechanically. This is done by asking the following
+questions: "_What day comes before Tuesday?_" "_What day comes before
+Thursday?_" "_What day comes before Friday?_"
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if, within _fifteen seconds_, the days of
+the week are _all named in correct order_, and if the child succeeds in
+at least _two of the three check questions_. We disregard the point of
+beginning.
+
+REMARKS. The test has been criticized as too dependent on rote memory.
+Bobertag says a child may pass it without having any adequate conception
+of "week," "yesterday," "day before yesterday," etc. This criticism
+holds if the test is given according to the older procedure, but does
+not apply with the procedure above recommended. The "checking-up"
+questions enable us at once to distinguish responses that are given by
+rote from those which rest upon actual knowledge.
+
+The test has been shown to be much more influenced by age, apart from
+intelligence, than most other tests of the scale. Notwithstanding this
+fault, it seems desirable to keep the test, at least as an alternative,
+because it forms one of a group which may be designated as tests of time
+orientation. The others of this group are: "_Distinguishing forenoon and
+afternoon_" (VI), "_Giving the date_" and "_Naming the months_" (IX). It
+would be well if we had even more of this type, for interest in the
+passing of time and in the names of time divisions is closely correlated
+with intelligence. One reason for the inferiority of the dull and
+feeble-minded in tests of this type is that their mental associations
+are weaker and less numerous. The greater poverty of their associations
+brings it about that their remembered experiences are less definitely
+located in time with reference to other events.
+
+The test was located in year IX of the 1908 scale, but was omitted from
+the 1911 revision. Kuhlmann also omits it, while Goddard places it in
+year VIII. The statistics from every American investigation, however,
+warrant its location in year VII. It may be located in year VIII only on
+the condition that the child be required to name the days backwards, and
+that within a rather low time limit.
+
+
+VII, ALTERNATIVE TEST 2: REPEATING THREE DIGITS REVERSED
+
+PROCEDURE. The digits used are: 2-8-3; 4-2-7; 5-9-6. The test should be
+given after, but not immediately after, the tests of repeating digits
+forwards.
+
+Say to the child: "_Listen carefully. I am going to read some numbers
+again, but this time I want you to say them backwards. For example, if I
+should say 1-2-3, you would say 3-2-1. Do you understand?_" When it is
+evident that the child has grasped the instructions, say: "_Ready now;
+listen carefully, and be sure to say the numbers backwards._" Then read
+the series at the same rate and in the same manner as in the other
+digits tests. It is not permissible to re-read any of the series.
+
+If the first series is repeated forwards instead of backwards series
+exhort the child to listen carefully and to be sure to repeat the
+numbers backwards.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _one series out of three_ is repeated
+backwards without error.
+
+REMARKS. The test of repeating digits backwards was suggested by
+Bobertag in 1911, but appears not to have been used or standardized
+previous to the Stanford investigation.
+
+It is very much harder to repeat a series of digits backwards in the
+direct order at year VII, and six at year X. Reversing the order places
+three digits in year VII, four in year X, five in year XII, and six in
+"average adult." Even intelligent adults sometimes have difficulty in
+repeating six digits backwards, once in three trials.
+
+As a test of intelligence this test is better than that of repeating
+digits in the direct order. It is less mechanical and makes a much
+heavier demand on attention. The digits must be so firmly fixated in
+memory that they can be held there long enough to be told off, one by
+one, backwards.
+
+Feeble-minded children find this test especially difficult, perhaps
+mainly because of its element of novelty. School children are often
+asked to write numbers dictated by the teacher, and even the very dull
+acquire a certain proficiency in doing so; but the test of repeating
+digits backwards requires a certain facility in adjusting to a new task,
+exactly the sort of thing in which the feeble-minded are so markedly
+deficient.
+
+As a rule the response consumes much more time than in the other digits
+test. This is particularly true when the series to be repeated backwards
+contains four or more digits. The chance of success is greatly increased
+if the subject first thinks the series through two or three times in the
+direct order before attempting the reverse order. The subject who
+responds immediately is likely to begin correctly, but to give the first
+part of the original series in the direct order. For example, 6-5-2-8 is
+given 8-2-6-5.
+
+Sometimes the child gives one or two numbers and then stops, having
+completely lost the rest of the series in the stress of adjusting to the
+novel and relatively difficult task of beginning with the final digit.
+In such cases the feeble-minded are prone to fill in with any numbers
+they may happen to think of. A good method for the subject is to break
+the series up into groups and to give each group separately. Thus,
+6-5-2-8 is given 8-2 (pause) 5-6. As a rule only the more intelligent
+subjects adopt this method. One 12-year-old girl attending high school
+was able to repeat eight digits backwards by the aid of this device.
+
+It would be well worth while to investigate the relation of this test to
+imagery type. Such a study would have to make use of adult subjects
+trained in introspection. It would seem that success might be favored by
+the ability to translate the auditory impression into visual imagery, so
+that the remembered numbers could be read off as from a book; but this
+may or may not be the case. At any rate, success seems to depend largely
+upon the ability to manipulate mental imagery.
+
+The degree of certainty as to the correctness of the response is usually
+much less than in repeating digits forwards.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XIV
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VIII
+
+
+VIII, 1. THE BALL-AND-FIELD TEST (SCORE 2, INFERIOR PLAN)
+
+PROCEDURE. Draw a circle about two and one half inches in diameter,
+leaving a small gap in the side next the child. Say: "_Let us suppose
+that your baseball has been lost in this round field. You have no idea
+what part of the field it is in. You don't know what direction it came
+from, how it got there, or with what force it came. All you know is
+that the ball is lost somewhere in the field. Now, take this pencil and
+mark out a path to show me how you would hunt for the ball so as to be
+sure not to miss it. Begin at the gate and show me what path you would
+take._"[56]
+
+[56] The Stanford record booklet contains the circle ready for use.
+
+Give the instructions always as worded above. Avoid using an expression
+like, "_Show me how you would walk around in the field_"; the word
+_around_ might suggest a circular path.
+
+Sometimes the child merely points or tells how he would go. It is then
+necessary to say: "_No; you must mark out your path with the pencil so I
+can see it plainly._" Other children trace a path only a little way and
+stop, saying: "Here it is." We then say: "_But suppose you have not
+found it yet. Which direction would you go next?_" In this way the child
+must be kept tracing a path until it is evident whether any plan governs
+his procedure.
+
+SCORING. The performances secured with this test are conveniently
+classified into four groups, representing progressively higher types.
+The first two types represent failures; the third is satisfactory at
+year VIII, the fourth at year XII. They may be described as follows:--
+
+    _Type a_ (failure). The child fails to comprehend the
+    instructions and either does nothing at all or else, perhaps,
+    takes the pencil and makes a few random strokes which could not
+    be said to constitute a search.
+
+    _Type b_ (also failure). The child comprehends the instructions
+    and carries out a search, but without any definite plan. Absence
+    of plan is evidenced by the crossing and re-crossing of paths,
+    or by "breaks." A break means that the pencil is lifted up and
+    set down in another part of the field. Sometimes only two or
+    three fragments of paths are drawn, but more usually the field
+    is pretty well filled up with random meanderings which cross
+    each other again and again. Other illustrations of type _b_ are:
+    A single straight or curved line going direct to the ball, short
+    haphazard dashes or curves, bare suggestion of a fan or spiral.
+
+    _Type c_ (satisfactory at year VIII). A successful performance
+    at year VIII is characterized by the presence of a plan, but one
+    ill-adapted to the purpose. That some forethought is exercised
+    is evidenced, (1) by fewer crossings, (2) by a tendency either
+    to make the lines more or less parallel or else to give them
+    some kind of symmetry, and (3) by fewer breaks. The
+    possibilities of type _c_ are almost unlimited, and one is
+    continually meeting new forms. We have distinguished more than
+    twenty of these, the most common of which may be described as
+    follows:--
+
+     1. Very rough or zigzag circles or similarly imperfect spirals.
+     2. Segments of curves joined in a more or less symmetrical fashion.
+     3. Lines going back and forth across the field, joined at the ends
+        and not intended to be parallel.
+     4. The "wheel plan," showing lines radiating from near the center
+        of the field toward the circumference.
+     5. The "fan plan," showing a number of lines radiating (usually)
+        from the gate and spreading out over the field.
+     6. "Fan ellipses" or "fan spirals" radiating from the gate like the
+        lines just described.
+     7. The "leaf plan," "rib plan," or "tree plan," with lines branching
+        off from a trunk line like ribs, veins of a leaf, or branches of
+        a tree.
+     8. Parallel lines which cross at right angles and mark off the field
+        like a checkerboard.
+     9. Paths making one or more fairly symmetrical geometrical figures,
+        like a square, a diamond, a star, a hexagon, etc.
+    10. A combination of two or more of the above plans.
+
+    _Type d_ (satisfactory at year XII). Performances of this type
+    meet perfectly, or almost perfectly, the logical requirements of
+    the problem. The paths are almost or quite parallel, and there
+    are no intersections or breaks. The possibilities of type _d_
+    are fewer and embrace chiefly the  following:--
+
+     1. A spiral, perfect or almost perfect, and beginning either at
+     the gate or at the center of the field. 2. Concentric circles.
+     3. Transverse lines, parallel or almost so, and joined at the
+     ends.
+
+Up to about 4 years most children failed entirely to comprehend the
+task. By the age of 6 years the task is usually understood, but the
+search is conducted without plan. Type _c_ is not attained by two
+thirds before the mental level of 8 years, and score 3 ordinarily not
+until 11 or 12 years.
+
+Grading presents some difficulties because of occasional border-line
+performances which have a value almost midway between the types _b_ and
+_c_ or between _c_ and _d_. Frequent reference to the scoring card will
+enable the examiner, after a little experience, to score nearly all the
+doubtful performances satisfactorily.
+
+REMARKS. The ball-and-field problem may be called a test of practical
+judgment. Unlike a majority of the other tests, it gives the subject a
+chance to show how well he can meet the demands of a real, rather
+than an imagined, situation. Tests like this, involving practical
+adjustments, are valuable in rounding out the scale, which, as left by
+Binet, placed rather excessive emphasis on abstract reasoning and the
+comprehension of language. The test requires little time and always
+arouses the child's interest.
+
+Our analysis of the responses of nearly 1500 subjects shows that
+improvement with increasing mental age is steady and fairly rapid.
+Occasionally, however, one meets a high-grade performance with children
+of 6 or 7 years, and a low-grade performance with adults of average
+intelligence. Like all the other tests of the scale, it is unreliable
+when used alone.
+
+
+VIII, 2. COUNTING BACKWARDS FROM 20 TO 1
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the child: "_You can count backwards, can you not? I
+want you to count backwards for me from 20 to 1. Go ahead._" In the
+great majority of cases this is sufficient; the child comprehends the
+task and begins. If he does not comprehend, and is silent, or starts in,
+perhaps, to count forwards from 1 or 20, say: "_No; I want you to count
+backwards from 20 to 1, like this: 20-19-18, and clear on down to 1.
+Now, go ahead._"
+
+Insist upon the child trying it even though he asserts he cannot do it.
+In many such cases an effort is crowned with success. Say nothing about
+hurrying, as this confuses some subjects. Prompting is not permissible.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the child counts from 20 to 1 _in not
+over forty seconds and with not more than a single error_ (one omission
+or one transposition). Errors which the child spontaneously corrects are
+not counted as errors.
+
+REMARKS. The statistics on this test agree remarkably well. It is
+plainly too easy for year IX, and no one has found it easy enough for
+year VII. The main lack of uniformity has been in the adherence to a
+time limit. Binet required that the task be completed in twenty seconds,
+and Goddard and most others adhere rather strictly to this rule.
+Kuhlmann, however, allows thirty seconds if there is no error and twenty
+seconds if one error is committed. We agree with Bobertag that owing to
+the nature of this test we should not be pedantic about the time. While
+a majority of children who are able to count backwards do the task in
+twenty seconds, there are some intelligent but deliberate subjects who
+require as much as thirty-five or forty seconds. If the counting is done
+with assurance and without stumbling, there is no reason why we should
+not allow even forty seconds. Beyond this, however, our generosity
+should not go, because of the chance it would give for the use of
+special devices such as counting forwards each time to the next number
+wanted.
+
+It may be said that counting backwards is a test of schooling, and to a
+certain extent this is true. It is reasonable to suppose that special
+training would enable the child to pass the test a little earlier than
+he would otherwise be able to do, though it is doubtful whether many
+children below 7 years of age have had enough of such training to
+influence the performance very materially. On the other hand, when the
+child has reached an intelligence level of 8 or at most 9 years, he is
+ordinarily able to count from 20 to 1 whether he has ever tried it
+before or not.
+
+What psychological factors are involved in this test? It presupposes, in
+the first place, the ability to count from 1 to 20. But this alone does
+not guarantee success in counting backwards. Something more is required
+than a mere rote memory for the number names in their order from 1 up to
+20. The quantitative relationships of the numbers must also be
+apprehended if the task is to be performed smoothly without a great deal
+of special training. In addition to being reasonably secure in his
+knowledge of the number relationships involved, the child must be able
+to give sustained attention until the task is completed. His mental
+processes must be dominated by the guiding idea, "count backwards."
+Associations which do not harmonize with this aim, or which fail to
+further it, must be inhibited. Even momentary relaxation of attention
+means a loss of directive force in the guiding idea and the dominance of
+better known associations which may be suggested by the task, but are
+out of harmony with it. Thus, if a child momentarily loses sight of the
+end after counting backwards successfully from 20 to 14, he is likely to
+be overpowered by the law of habit and begin counting forwards,
+14-15-16-17, etc. We may regard the test, therefore, as a test of
+attention, or prolonged thought control. The ability to exercise
+unbroken vigilance for a period of twenty or thirty seconds is rarely
+found below the level of 7- or 8-year intelligence.
+
+
+VIII, 3. COMPREHENSION, THIRD DEGREE
+
+The questions for this year are:--
+
+  (a) "_What's the thing for you to do when you have broken
+      something which belongs to some one else?_"
+  (b) "_What's the thing for you to do when you notice on your way
+      to school that you are in danger of being tardy?_"
+  (c) "_What's the thing for you to do if a playmate hits you
+      without meaning to do it?_"
+
+The procedure is the same as in previous comprehension questions.[57]
+Each question may be repeated once or twice, but its form must not be
+changed. No explanations are permissible.
+
+[57] See IV, 5, and VI, 4.
+
+SCORING:--
+
+_Question a (If you have broken something)_
+
+    _Satisfactory responses_ are those suggesting either restitution
+    or apology, or both. Confession is not satisfactory unless
+    accompanied by apology. The following are satisfactory: "Buy a
+    new one." "Pay for it." "Give them something instead of it."
+    "Have my father mend it." "Apologize." "Tell them I'm sorry,
+    that I did not mean to break it," etc. Of 92 correct answers, 76
+    suggested restitution, while 16 suggested apology, or apology
+    and restitution.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Tell them I did it." "Go tell my mother."
+    "Feel sorry." "Be ashamed." "Pick it up," etc. Mere confession
+    accounts for over 20 per cent of all failures.
+
+_Question b (In danger of being tardy)_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ The expected response is, "Hurry," "Walk
+    faster," or something to that effect. One bright city boy said
+    he would take a car. Of the answers not obviously incorrect,
+    nearly 95 per cent suggest hurrying. The rule ordinarily
+    recommended is to grade all other responses _minus_. But this
+    rule is too sweeping to be followed blindly. One who would use
+    intelligence tests must learn to discriminate. "I would go back
+    home and not go to school that day" is a good answer in those
+    cases (fortunately rare) in which children are forbidden by the
+    teacher to enter the schoolroom if tardy. "Go back home and get
+    mother to write an excuse" would be good policy if by so doing
+    the child might escape the danger of incurring an extreme
+    penalty. When teachers inflict absurd penalties for unexcused
+    tardiness, it is the part of wisdom for children to incur no
+    risks! When such a response is given, it is well to inquire into
+    the school's method of dealing with tardiness and to score the
+    response accordingly.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Go to the principal." "Tell the teacher I
+    couldn't help it." "Have to get an excuse." "Go to school
+    anyway." "Get punished." "Not do it again." "Not play hooky."
+    "Start earlier next time," etc.
+
+    Lack of success results oftenest from failure to get the exact
+    shade of meaning conveyed by the question. It is implied, of
+    course, that something is to be done at once to avoid tardiness;
+    but the subject of dull comprehension may suggest a suitable
+    thing to do in case tardiness has been incurred. Hence the
+    response, "I would go to the principal and explain." Answers of
+    this type are always unsatisfactory.
+
+_Question c (Playmate hits you)_
+
+    _Satisfactory responses_ are only those which suggest either
+    excusing or overlooking the act. These ideas are variously
+    expressed as follows: "I would excuse him" (about half of all
+    the correct answers). "I would say 'yes' if he asked my pardon."
+    "I would say it was all right." "I would take it for a joke." "I
+    would just be nice to him." "I would go right on playing." "I
+    would take it kind-hearted." "I would not fight or run and tell
+    on him." "I would not blame him for it." "Ask him to be more
+    careful," etc.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory responses_ are all those not of the above two
+    types; as: "I would hit them back." "I would not hit them back,
+    but I would get even some other way." "Tell them not to do it
+    again." "Tell them to 'cut it out.'" "Tell him it's a wrong
+    thing to do." "Make him excuse himself." "Make him say he's
+    sorry." "Would not play with him." "Tell my mamma." "I would ask
+    him why he did it." "He'd say 'excuse me' and I'd say 'thank
+    you.'" "He should excuse me." "He is supposed to say 'excuse
+    me.'"
+
+REMARKS. All three comprehension questions of this year were used by
+Binet, Goddard, Huey, and others in year X; two of them in the "easy
+series" and one in the "hard series." The Stanford data show that they
+belong at the 8-year level on the standard of scoring above set forth.
+The three differ little among themselves in difficulty, but all of them
+are decidedly easier than the other five used by Binet. It would be
+absurd to go on using the comprehension questions as Binet bunched them,
+eight together, ranging in difficulty from one which is easy enough for
+6-year intelligence ("What's the thing to do if you miss your train?")
+to one which is hard for the 12-year level ("Why is a bad act done when
+one is angry more excusable than the same act done when one is not
+angry?").
+
+
+VIII, 4. GIVING SIMILARITIES; TWO THINGS
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the child: "_I am going to name two things which are
+alike in some way, and I want you to tell me how they are alike. Wood
+and coal: in what way are they alike?_" Proceed in the same manner
+with:--
+
+    _An apple and a peach._
+    _Iron and silver._
+    _A ship and an automobile._
+
+After the first pair the formula may be abbreviated to "_In what way are
+... and ... alike?_" It is often necessary to insist a little if the
+child is silent or says he does not know, but in doing this we must
+avoid supplementary questions and suggestions. In giving the first pair,
+for example, it would not be permissible to ask such additional
+questions as, "_What do you use wood for? What do you use coal for? And
+now, how are wood and coal alike?_" This is really putting the answer in
+the child's mouth. It is only permissible to repeat the original
+question in a persuasive tone of voice, and perhaps to add: "_I'm sure
+you can tell me how ... and ... are alike_," or something to that
+effect.
+
+A very common mistake which the child makes is to give differences
+instead of similarities. This tendency is particularly strong if test 5,
+year VII (giving differences), has been given earlier in the sitting,
+but it happens often enough in other cases also to suggest that finding
+differences is, to a much greater extent than finding similarities, the
+child's preferred method of making a comparison. When a difference is
+given, instead of a similarity, we say: "_No, I want you to tell me how
+they are alike. In what way are ... and ... alike?_" Unless the child is
+of rather low intelligence level this is sufficient, but the mentally
+retarded sometimes continue to give differences persistently in spite
+of repeated admonitions, or if they cease to do so for one or two
+comparisons, they are likely to repeat the mistake in the latter part of
+the test.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if a likeness is given in _two out of four_
+comparisons. We accept as satisfactory any real likeness, whether
+fundamental or superficial, though, of course, the more essential the
+resemblance, the better indication it is of intelligence. The following
+are samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory answers:--[58]
+
+[58] For aid in classifying the responses in this and certain other
+tests the writer is indebted to Miss Grace Lyman.
+
+(a) _Wood and coal_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Both burn." "Both keep you warm." "Both are
+    used for fuel." "Both are vegetable matter." "Both come from the
+    ground." "Can use them both for running engines." "Both hard."
+    "Both heavy." "Both cost money."
+
+    Of 80 correct answers, 64, or 80 per cent, referred in one way
+    or another to combustibility.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ Most frequent is the persistent giving of a
+    difference instead of a similarity. This accounts for a little
+    over half of all the failures. About half of the remainder are
+    cases of inability to give any response. Incorrect statements
+    with regard to color are rather common. Sample failures of this
+    type are: "Both are black," or "Both the same color." Other
+    failures are: "Both are dirty on the outside;" "You can't break
+    them;" "Coal burns better;" "Wood is lighter than coal," etc.
+
+(b) _An apple and a peach_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Both are round." "Both the same shape." "They
+    are about the same color." "Both nearly always have some red on
+    them." "Both good to eat." "Can make pies of both of them."
+    "Both can be cooked." "Both mellow when they are ripe." "Both
+    have a stem" (or seeds, skin, etc.). "Both come from trees."
+    "Can be dried in the same way." "Both are fruits." "Both green
+    (in color) when they are not ripe."
+
+    Of 82 correct answers, 25 per cent mention color; 25 per cent,
+    form; 22 per cent, edibility; 20 per cent, having stem, seed, or
+    skin; and 5 per cent, that both grow on trees.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Both taste the same." "Both have a lot of
+    seeds." "Both have a fuzzy skin." "An apple is bigger than a
+    peach." "One is red and one is white," etc.
+
+    Again, over 50 per cent of the failures are due to giving
+    differences and about 18 per cent to silence.
+
+(c) _Iron and silver_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Both are metals" (or mineral). "Both come out
+    of the ground." "Both cost money." "Both are heavy." "Both are
+    hard." "Both can be melted." "Both can be bent." "Both used for
+    utensils." "You manufacture things out of both of them." "Both
+    can be polished."
+
+    These are named most frequently in the following order: (1)
+    hardness, (2) origin from the ground, (3) heaviness, (4) use in
+    making things.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Both thin" (or thick). "Sometimes they are
+    the same shape." "Both the same color." "A little silver and
+    lots of iron weigh the same." "Both made by the same company."
+    "They rust the same." "You can't eat them" (!)[59]
+
+    [59] One is here reminded of the puzzling conundrum, "Why is a
+    brick like an elephant?" The answer being, "Because neither can
+    climb a tree!" A response of this type states a fact, but because
+    of its bizarre nature should hardly be counted satisfactory.
+
+    Of 60 failures, 32 were due to giving differences and 14 to
+    silence or unwillingness to hazard a reply.
+
+(d) _A ship and an automobile_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Both means of travel." "Both go." "You ride in
+    them." "Both take you fast." "They both use fuel." "Both run by
+    machinery." "Both have a steering gear." "Both have engines in
+    them." "Both have wood in them." "Both can be wrecked." "Both
+    break if they hit a rock."
+
+    About 45 per cent of the answers are in terms of running or
+    travel, 37 per cent in terms of machinery or structure, the rest
+    scattered.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Both black" (or some other color). "Both very
+    big." "They are made alike." "Both run on wheels." "Ship is for
+    the water and automobile for the land." "Ship goes on water and
+    an automobile sometimes goes in water." "An auto can go faster."
+    "Ship is run by coal and automobile by gasoline."
+
+    Of 51 failures, 32 were due to giving differences and 14 to
+    failure to reply.
+
+REMARKS. The test of finding similarities was first used by Binet in
+1905. Our results show that it is fully as satisfactory as the test of
+giving differences. The test reveals in a most interesting way one of
+the fundamental weaknesses of the feeble mind. Young normal children,
+say of 7 or 8 years, often fail to pass, but it is the feeble-minded who
+give the greatest number of absurd answers and who also find greatest
+difficulty in resisting the tendency to give differences.[60]
+
+[60] For further discussion of the processes involved, see VII, 5.
+
+
+VIII, 5. GIVING DEFINITIONS SUPERIOR TO USE
+
+PROCEDURE. The words for this year are _balloon_, _tiger_, _football_,
+and _soldier_. Ask simply: "_What is a balloon?_" etc.
+
+If it appears that any of the words are not familiar to the child,
+substitution may be made from the following: _automobile_,
+_battle-ship_, _potato_, _store_.
+
+Make no comments on the responses until all the words have been given.
+In case of silence or hesitation in answering, the question may be
+repeated with a little encouragement; but supplementary questions are
+never in order. Ordinarily there is no difficulty in securing a response
+to the definition test of this year. The trouble comes in scoring the
+response.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if two of the four words are defined in
+terms superior to use. "Superior to use" includes chiefly: (a)
+Definitions which describe the object or tell something of its nature
+(form, size, color, appearance, etc.); (b) definitions which give the
+substance or the materials or parts composing it; and (c) those which
+tell what class the object belongs to or what relation it bears to
+other classes of objects.
+
+It is possible to distinguish different grades of definitions in each of
+the above classes. A definition by description (type _a_) may be brief
+and partial, mentioning only one or two qualities or characteristics, or
+it may be relatively rich and complete. Likewise with definitions of
+type _b_. Classificatory definitions (type _c_) are of particularly
+uneven value, the lowest order being those which subsume the object to
+be defined under a remote class and give few if any characteristics to
+distinguish it from other members of the same class; as, for example, "A
+football is a thing you can have fun with," or, "A soldier is a person."
+The best classificatory definitions are those which subsume the object
+under the next higher class and give the more essential traits (perhaps
+a number of them) which distinguish the object from others of the class
+named; as, for example, "A tiger is a large animal like a cat; it lives
+in the jungle and eats men and other animals," or, "A soldier is a man
+who goes to war." These shades of distinction give interesting and
+valuable clues to the maturity and richness of the apperceptive
+processes, but for purposes of scoring it is necessary merely to decide
+whether the definition is given in terms superior to use.
+
+The following are samples of satisfactory definitions, those for each
+word being arranged roughly in the order of their value from excellent
+to barely passing:--
+
+(a) _Balloon_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "A balloon is a means of traveling through the
+    air." "It is a kind of airship, made of cloth and filled with
+    air so it can go up." "It is big and made of cloth. It has gas
+    in it and carries people up in a basket that's fastened on to
+    the bottom." "It is a thing you hold by a string and it goes
+    up." "It is like a big bag with air in it." "It is a big thing
+    that goes up."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To go up in the air." "What you go up in."
+    "When you go up." "They go up in it." "It's full of gas." "To
+    carry you up." "A balloon is a balloon," etc. "It is big." "They
+    go up," etc.
+
+(b) _Tiger_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "It is a wild animal of the cat family." "It is
+    an animal that's a cousin to the lion." "It is an animal that
+    lives in the jungle." "It is a wild animal." "It looks like a
+    big cat." "It lives in the woods and eats flesh." "Something
+    that eats people."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To eat you up." "To kill people." "To travel
+    in the circus." "What eats people." "It is a tiger," etc. "You
+    run from it," etc.
+
+(c) _Football_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "It is a leather bag filled with air and made
+    for kicking." "It is a ball you kick." "It is a thing you play
+    with." "It is made of leather and is stuffed with air." "It is a
+    thing you kick." "It is brown and filled with air." "It is a
+    thing shaped like a watermelon."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To kick." "To play with." "What they play
+    with." "Boys play with it." "It's filled with air." "It is a
+    football." "It is a basket ball." "It is round." "You kick it."
+
+(d) _Soldier_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "A man who goes to war." "A brave man." "A man
+    that walks up and down and carries a gun." "It is a man who
+    minds his captain and stands still and walks straight." "It is a
+    man who goes to war and shoots." "It is a man who stands
+    straight and marches."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To shoot." "To go to war." "It is a soldier."
+    "A soldier that marches." "He fights." "He shoots." "What
+    fights," etc. "When you march and shoot."
+
+Silence accounts for only a small proportion of the failures with
+children of 8, 9, and 10 years.
+
+REMARKS. The "use definitions" sometimes given at this age are usually
+of slightly better quality than those given in year V. Younger children
+more often use the infinitive form, "to play with" (doll), "to drive"
+(horse), "to eat on" (table), etc. Use definitions of this year more
+often begin with "they," or "what"; as, "they go up in it" (balloon),
+"they kick it" (football), etc.
+
+Why, it may be asked, is the use definition regarded as inferior to the
+descriptive or the classificatory definition? Is not the use to which an
+object may be put the most essential thing about it, for the child at
+least? Is it not more important to know that a fork is to eat with than
+to be able to name the material it is made of? Is not the use primary
+and does it not determine most of the physical characteristics of the
+object?
+
+The above questions may sound reasonable, but they are based on poor
+psychology. We must rest our case upon the facts. The first lesson which
+the student of child psychology must learn is that it is unsafe to set
+up criteria of intelligence, of maturity, or of any other mental trait
+on the basis of theoretical considerations. Experiment teaches that
+normal children of 5 or 6 years, also older feeble-minded persons of the
+5-year intelligence level, define objects in terms of use; also that
+normal children of 8 or 9 years and older feeble-minded persons of this
+mental level have for the most part developed beyond the stage of use
+definitions into the descriptive or classificatory stage. An ounce of
+fact is worth a ton of theory.
+
+The test has usually been located in year IX, with the requirement of
+three successes out of five trials and with somewhat more rigid scoring
+of the individual definitions. When only two successes are required in
+four trials, and when scored leniently, the test belongs at the 8-year
+level.
+
+
+VIII, 6. VOCABULARY; TWENTY DEFINITIONS, 3600 WORDS
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the list of words given in the record booklet. Say to the
+child: "_I want to find out how many words you know. Listen; and when I
+say a word you tell me what it means._" If the child can read, give him
+a printed copy of the word list and let him look at each word as you
+pronounce it.
+
+The words are arranged approximately (though not exactly) in the order
+of their difficulty, and it is best to begin with the easier words and
+proceed to the harder. With children under 9 or 10 years, begin with the
+first. Apparently normal children of 10 years may safely be credited
+with the first ten words without being asked to define them. Apparently
+normal children of 12 may begin with word 16, and 15-year-olds with
+word 21. Except with subjects of almost adult intelligence there is no
+need to give the last ten or fifteen words, as these are almost never
+correctly defined by school children. A safe rule to follow is to
+continue until eight or ten successive words have been missed and to
+score the remainder _minus_ without giving them.
+
+The formula is as follows: "What is an _orange_?" "What is a _bonfire_?"
+"_Roar_; what does _roar_ mean?" "_Gown_; what is a _gown_?" "What does
+_tap_ mean?" "What does _scorch_ mean?" "What is a _puddle_?" etc.
+
+Some children at first show a little hesitation about answering,
+thinking that a strictly formal definition is expected. In such cases a
+little encouragement is necessary; as: "_You know what a bonfire is. You
+have seen a bonfire. Now, what is a bonfire?_" If the child still
+hesitates, say: "_Just tell me in your own words; say it any way you
+please. All I want is to find out whether you know what a bonfire is._"
+Do not torture the child, however, by undue insistence. If he persists
+in his refusal to define a word which he would ordinarily be expected to
+know, it is better to pass on to the next one and to return to the
+troublesome word later. Above all, avoid helping the child by
+illustrating the use of a word in a sentence. Adhere strictly to the
+formula given above. If the definition as given does not make it clear
+whether the child has the correct idea, say: "_Explain_," or, "_I don't
+understand; explain what you mean._"
+
+Encourage the child frequently by saying: "That's fine. You are doing
+beautifully. You know lots of words," etc. Never tell the child his
+definition is not correct, and never ask for a different definition.
+
+Avoid saying anything which would suggest a model form of definition, as
+the type of definition which the child spontaneously chooses throws
+interesting light on the degree of maturity of the apperceptive
+processes. Record all definitions _verbatim_ if possible, or at least
+those which are exceptionally good, poor, or doubtful.
+
+SCORING. Credit a response in full if it gives one correct meaning for
+the word, regardless of whether that meaning is the most common one, and
+regardless of whether it is the original or a derived meaning.
+Occasionally half credit may be given, but this should be avoided as far
+as possible.
+
+To find the entire vocabulary, multiply the number of words known by
+180. (This list is made up of 100 words selected by rule from a
+dictionary containing 18,000 words.) Thus, the child who defines
+20 words correctly has a vocabulary of 20 × 180 = 3600 words; 50 correct
+definitions would mean a vocabulary of 9000 words, etc. The following
+are the standards for different years, as determined by the vocabulary
+reached by 60 to 65 per cent of the subjects of the various mental
+levels:--
+
+     8 years          20 words    vocabulary  3,600
+    10 years          30 words    vocabulary  5,400
+    12 years          40 words    vocabulary  7,200
+    14 years          50 words    vocabulary  9,000
+    Average adult     65 words    vocabulary 11,700
+    Superior adult    75 words    vocabulary 13,500
+
+Although the form of the definition is significant, it is not taken into
+consideration in scoring. The test is intended to explore the range of
+ideas rather than the evolution of thought forms. When it is evident
+that the child has one fairly correct meaning for a word, he is given
+full credit for it, however poorly the definition may have been stated.
+
+While there is naturally some difficulty now and then in deciding
+whether a given definition is correct, this happens much less frequently
+than one would expect. In order to get a definite idea of the extent of
+error due to the individual differences among examiners, we have had the
+definitions of 25 subjects graded independently by 10 different persons.
+The result showed an average difference below 3 in the number of
+definitions scored _plus_. Since these subjects attempted on an average
+about 60 words, the average number of doubtful definitions per subject
+was below 5 per cent of the number attempted.
+
+An idea of the degree of leniency to be exercised may be had from the
+following examples of definitions, which are mostly of low grade, but
+acceptable unless otherwise indicated:--
+
+   1. _Orange._ "An orange is to eat." "It is yellow and grows on a
+      tree." (Both full credit.)
+
+   2. _Bonfire._ "You burn it outdoors." "You burn some leaves or
+      things." "It's a big fire." (All full credit.)
+
+   3. _Roar._ "A lion roars." "You holler loud." (Full credit.)
+
+   4. _Gown._ "To sleep in." "It's a nightie." "It's a nice gown that
+      ladies wear." (All full credit.)
+
+   7. _Puddle._ "You splash in it." "It's just a puddle of water."
+      (Both full credit.)
+
+   9. _Straw._ "It grows in the field." "It means wheat-straw." "The
+      horses eat it." (All full credit.)
+
+  10. _Rule._ "The teacher makes rules." "It means you can't do
+      something." "You make marks with it," i.e., a ruler, often
+      called a _rule_ by school children. (All full credit.)
+
+  11. _Afloat._ "To float on the water." "A ship floats." (Both full
+      credit.)
+
+  12. _Eyelash._ If the child says, "It's over the eye," tell him to
+      point to it, as often the word is confused with _eyebrow_.
+
+  14. _Copper._ "It's a penny." "It means some copper wire." (Both
+      full credit.)
+
+  15. _Health._ "It means good health or bad health." "It means
+      strong." (Both full credit.)
+
+  17. _Guitar._ "You play on it." (Full credit.)
+
+  18. _Mellow._ If the child says, "It means a mellow apple," ask
+      what kind of apple that would be. For full credit the answer
+      must be "soft," "mushy," etc.
+
+  19. _Pork._ If the answer is "meat," ask what animal it comes
+      from. Half credit if wrong animal is named.
+
+  21. _Plumbing._ "You fix pipes." (Full credit.)
+
+  25. _Southern._ If the answer is "Southern States," or
+      "Southern California," say: "_Yes; but what does 'southern'
+      mean?_" Do not credit unless explanation is forthcoming.
+
+  26. _Noticeable._ "You notice a thing." (Full credit.)
+
+  29. _Civil._ "Civil War." (Failure unless explained.) "It means to
+      be nice." (Full credit.)
+
+  30. _Treasury._ Give half credit for definitions like "Valuables,"
+      "Lots of money," etc.; i.e., if the word is confused with
+      _treasure._
+
+  32. _Ramble._ "To go about fast." (Half credit.)
+
+  38. _Nerve._ Half credit if the slang use is defined, "You've got
+      nerve," etc.
+
+  41. _Majesty._ "What you say to a king." (Full credit.)
+
+  45. _Sportive._ "To like sports." (Half credit.) "Playful" or
+      "happy." (Full credit.)
+
+  46. _Hysterics._ "You laugh and cry at the same time." "A kind of
+      sickness." "A kind of fit." (All full credit.)
+
+  48. _Repose._ "You pose again." (Failure.)
+
+  52. _Coinage._ "A place where they make money." (Half credit.)
+
+  56. _Dilapidated._ "Something that's very old." (Half credit.)
+
+  58. _Conscientious._ "You're careful how you do your work." (Full
+      credit.)
+
+  60. _Artless._ "No art." (Failure unless correctly explained.)
+
+  61. _Priceless._ "It has no price." (Failure.)
+
+  66. _Promontory._ "Something prominent." (Failure unless child can
+      explain what it refers to.)
+
+  68. _Milksop._ "You sop up milk." (Failure.)
+
+  73. _Harpy._ "A kind of bird." (Full credit.)
+
+  80. _Exaltation._ "You feel good." (Full credit.)
+
+  85. _Retroactive._ "Acting backward." (Full credit.)
+
+  92. _Theosophy._ "A religion." (Full credit.)
+
+It is seen from the above examples that a very liberal standard has been
+used. Leniency in judging definitions is necessary because the child's
+power of expression lags farther behind his understanding than is true
+of adults, and also because for the young subject the word has a
+relatively less unitary existence.
+
+REMARKS. Our vocabulary test was derived by selecting the last word
+of every sixth column in a dictionary containing approximately
+18,000 words, presumably the 18,000 most common words in the language.
+The test is based on the assumption that 100 words selected according to
+some arbitrary rule will be a large enough sampling to afford a fairly
+reliable index of a subject's entire vocabulary. Rather extensive
+experimentation with this list and others chosen in a similar manner
+has proved that the assumption is justified. Tests of the same
+75 individuals with five different vocabulary tests of this type showed
+that the average difference between two tests of the same person was
+less than 5 per cent. This means that any one of the five tests used is
+reliable enough for all practical purposes. It is of no special
+importance that a given child's vocabulary is 8000 rather than 7600; the
+significance lies in the fact that it is approximately 8000 and not
+4000, 12,000, or some other widely different number.
+
+It may seem to the reader almost incredible that so small a sampling of
+words would give a reliable index of an individual's vocabulary. That it
+does so is due to the operation of the ordinary laws of chance. It is
+analogous to predicting the results of an election when only a small
+proportion of the ballots have been counted. It is known that a ballot
+box contains 600 votes, and if when only 30 have been counted it is
+found that they are divided between two candidates in the proportion of
+20 and 10, it is safe to predict that a complete count will give the two
+candidates approximately 400 and 200 respectively.[61] In 1914 about
+1,000,000 votes were cast for governor in California, and when only
+10,000 votes had been counted, or a hundredth of all, it was announced
+and conceded that Governor Johnson had been reëlected by the 150,000
+plurality. The completed count gave him 188,505 plurality. The error was
+less than 4 per cent of the total vote.
+
+[61] Supposing the ballots to have been shuffled.
+
+The vocabulary test has a far higher value than any other single test of
+the scale. Used with children of English-speaking parents (with children
+whose home language is not English it is of course unreliable), it
+probably has a higher value than any three other tests in the scale. Our
+statistics show that in a large majority of cases the vocabulary test
+alone will give us an intelligence quotient within 10 per cent of that
+secured by the entire scale. Out of hundreds of English-speaking
+children we have not found one testing significantly above age who had a
+significantly low vocabulary; and correspondingly, those who test much
+below age never have a high vocabulary.
+
+Occasionally, however, a subject tests somewhat higher or lower in
+vocabulary than the mental age would lead us to expect. This is often
+the case with dull children in cultured homes and with very intelligent
+children whose home environment has not stimulated language development.
+But even in these cases we are not seriously misled, for the dull child
+of fortunate home surroundings shows his dullness in the quality of his
+definitions if not in their quantity; while the bright child of
+illiterate parents shows his intelligence in the aptness and accuracy of
+his definitions.
+
+We have not worked out a satisfactory method of scoring the quality of
+definitions in our vocabulary test, but these differences will be
+readily observed by the trained examiner. Definitions in terms of use
+and definitions which are slightly inaccurate or hazy are quite
+characteristic of the lower mental ages. Children of the lower mental
+age have also a tendency to venture wild guesses at words they do not
+know. This is especially characteristic of retarded subjects and is
+another example of their weakness of auto-criticism. One feeble-minded
+boy of 12 years, with a mental age of 8 years, glibly and confidently
+gave definitions for every one of the hundred words. About 70 of the
+definitions were pure nonsense.
+
+This vocabulary test was arranged and partially standardized by Mr.
+H. G. Childs and the writer in 1911. Many experiments since then have
+proved its value as a test of intelligence.
+
+
+VIII, ALTERNATIVE TEST 1: NAMING SIX COINS
+
+PROCEDURE is exactly as in VI, 5 (naming four coins). The dollar should
+be shown before the half-dollar.
+
+SCORING. _All six coins must be correctly named._ If a response is
+changed the rule is to count the second answer and ignore the first.
+
+REMARKS. Binet used nine pieces and required knowledge of all at year X
+(1908), but at year IX in the 1911 revision. Most other workers have
+used the same method, with the test located in either year IX or year X.
+
+
+VIII, ALTERNATIVE TEST 2: WRITING FROM DICTATION
+
+PROCEDURE. Give the child pen, ink, and paper, place him in a
+comfortable position for writing, and say: "_I want you to write
+something for me as nicely as you can. Write these words: 'See the
+little boy.' Be sure to write it all: 'See the little boy.'_"
+
+Do not dictate the words separately, but give the sentence as a whole.
+Further repetition of the sentence is not permissible, as ability to
+remember what has been dictated is a part of the test. Copy, of course,
+must not be shown.
+
+SCORING. Passed if the sentence is written legibly enough to be easily
+recognized, and if no word has been omitted. Ordinary mistakes of
+spelling are disregarded. The rule is that the mistake in spelling must
+not mutilate the word beyond easy recognition. The performance may be
+graded by the use of Thorndike's handwriting scale. The handwriting of
+8-year-old children who have been in school not less than one year or
+more than two usually falls between quality 7 and quality 9 on this
+scale, but we shall, perhaps, not be too liberal if we consider a
+performance satisfactory which does not grade below quality 6, provided
+it is not seriously mutilated by errors, omissions, etc.[62]
+
+[62] See scoring card for samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory
+performances.
+
+REMARKS. This test found a place in year VIII of Binet's 1908 scale, but
+has been omitted from all the other revisions, including Binet's own.
+Bobertag did not even regard the test as worthy of a trial. The
+universal criticism has been that it is a test of schooling rather than
+of intelligence. That the performance depends, in a certain sense, upon
+special instruction is self-evident. Without such instruction no child
+of 8 years, however intelligent, would be able to pass the test. Nature
+does not give us a conventionalized language, either written or spoken.
+It must be acquired. It is also true that a high-grade feeble-minded
+child, say 8 years of age and of 6-year intelligence, is sometimes
+(though not always) able to pass the test after two years of
+school instruction. It is exceedingly improbable, however, that a
+feeble-minded subject with less than 6-year intelligence will ever be
+able to pass this test, however long he remains in school.
+
+The conclusions to be drawn from these facts are as follows: (1)
+Inability to pass the test should not be counted against the child
+unless it is known that he has had at least a full year of the usual
+school instruction. (2) Ability to pass the test after only two years of
+school instruction is almost certain proof that the child has reached a
+mental level of at least 6 years. (3) Failure to pass the test must be
+regarded as a grave symptom in the case of the child 9 or more years of
+age who is known to have attended school as much as two years. (4) For
+mental levels higher than 8 years the test has hardly any diagnostic
+value, since feeble-minded persons of 8- or 9-year intelligence can
+usually be taught to write quite legibly.
+
+If the limitations above set forth are kept in mind, the test is by no
+means without value, and is always worth giving as a supplementary test.
+Learning to write simple sentences from dictation is no mean
+accomplishment. It demands, in the first place, a fairly complete
+mastery of rather difficult muscular coördinations. Moreover, these
+coördinations must be firmly associated with the corresponding letters
+and words, for if the writing coördinations are not fairly automatic, so
+much attention will be required to carry them out that the child will
+not be able to remember what he has been told to write. The necessity of
+remembering the passage acts as a distraction, and writing from
+dictation is therefore a more difficult task than writing from copy.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XV
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR IX
+
+
+IX, 1. GIVING THE DATE
+
+PROCEDURE. Ask the following questions in order:--
+
+  (a) "_What day of the week is it to-day?_"
+  (b) "_What month is it?_"
+  (c) "_What day of the month is it?_"
+  (d) "_What year is it?_"
+
+If the child misunderstands and gives the day of the month for the day
+of the week, or _vice versa_, we merely repeat the question with
+suitable emphasis, but give no other help.
+
+SCORING. An error of three days in either direction is allowed for _c_,
+but _a_, _b_, and _d_ must all be given correctly. If the child makes an
+error and spontaneously corrects it, the change is allowed, but
+corrections must not be called for or suggested.
+
+REMARKS. Binet originally located this test in year IX, but
+unfortunately moved it to year VIII in the 1911 revision. Kuhlmann,
+Goddard, and Huey all retain it in year IX, where, according to our own
+data, it unquestionably belongs. With the exception of Binet's 1911
+results, the statistics for the test are in remarkably close agreement
+for children in France, Germany, England, and Eastern and Western United
+States. It seems that practically all children in civilized countries
+have ample opportunity to learn the divisions of the year, month, and
+week, and to become oriented with respect to these divisions. Special
+instruction is doubtless capable of hastening time orientation to a
+certain degree, but not greatly. Binet tells of a French _école
+maternelle_ attended by children 4 to 6 years of age, where instruction
+was given daily in regard to the date, and yet not a single one of the
+children was able to pass this test. This is a beautiful illustration of
+the futility of precocious teaching. In spite of well-meant instruction,
+it is not until the age of 8 or 9 years that children have enough
+comprehension of time periods, and sufficient interest in them, to keep
+very close track of the date. Failure to pass the test at the age of
+10 or 11 years is a decidedly unfavorable sign, unless the error is very
+slight.
+
+The fact that normal adults are occasionally unable to give the day of
+the month is no argument against the validity of the test, since the
+system of tests is so constructed as to allow for accidental failures on
+any particular test. As a matter of fact, very nearly 100 per cent of
+normal 12-year-old children pass this test.
+
+The unavoidable fault of the test is its lack of uniformity in
+difficulty at different dates. It is easier for school children to give
+the day of the week on Monday or Friday than on Tuesday, Wednesday, or
+Thursday. Mistakes in giving the day of the month are less likely to
+occur at the beginning or end of the month than at any other time, while
+mistakes in naming the month are most likely to occur then.
+
+It is interesting to compare the four parts of this test in regard to
+difficulty. Binet and Bobertag both state that ability to name the year
+comes last, but they give no figures. Our own data show that the four
+parts of the test are of almost exactly the same difficulty and that
+this is true at all ages.
+
+
+IX, 2. ARRANGING FIVE WEIGHTS
+
+Use the five weights, 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 grams. Be sure that the
+weights are identical in appearance. The weights may be made as
+described under V, 1, or they may be purchased of C. H. Stoelting & Co.,
+Chicago, Illinois. If no weights are at hand one of the alternative
+tests may be substituted.
+
+PROCEDURE. Place the five boxes on the table in an irregular group
+before the child and say: "_See the boxes. They all look alike, don't
+they? But they are not alike. Some of them are heavy, some are not quite
+so heavy, and some are still lighter. No two weigh the same. Now, I want
+you to find the heaviest one and place it here. Then find the one that
+is just a little lighter and put it here. Then put the next lighter one
+here, and the next lighter one here, and the lightest of all at this
+end_ (pointing each time at the appropriate spot). _Do you understand?_"
+Whatever the child answers, in order to make sure that he does
+understand, we repeat the instructions thus: "_Remember now, that no two
+weights are the same. Find the heaviest one and put it here, the next
+heaviest here, and lighter, lighter, until you have the very lightest
+here. Ready; go ahead._"
+
+It is best to follow very closely the formula here given, otherwise
+there is danger of stating the directions so abstractly that the subject
+could not comprehend them. A formula like "_I want you to arrange the
+blocks in a gradually decreasing series according to weight_" would be
+Greek to most children of 10 years.
+
+If the subject still seems at a loss to know what to do, the
+instructions may be again repeated. But no further help of any kind may
+be given. Do not tell the subject to take the blocks one at a time in
+the hand and try them, and do not illustrate by hefting the blocks
+yourself. It is a part of the test to let the subject find his own
+method.
+
+Give three trials, shuffling the boxes after each. Do not repeat the
+instructions before the second and third trials unless the subject has
+used an absurd procedure in the previous trial.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the blocks are arranged in the correct
+order _twice out of three trials_. Always record the order of
+arrangement and note the number and extent of displacement. Obviously an
+arrangement like 12-6-15-3-9 is very much more serious than one like
+15-12-6-9-3, but we require that two trials be absolutely without error.
+
+Scoring is facilitated if the blocks are marked on the bottom so that
+they may be easily identified. It is then necessary to exercise some
+care to see that the subject does not examine the bottom of the blocks
+for a clue as to the correct order.
+
+REMARKS. Binet originally located this test in year IX, but in his 1911
+revision changed it to year VIII. Other revisions have retained it in
+year IX. The correct location depends upon the weights used and upon the
+procedure and scoring. Kuhlmann uses weights of 3, 9, 18, 27, 36, and
+45 grams, and this probably makes the test easier. Bobertag tried two
+sets of boxes, one set being of larger dimensions than the other. The
+larger gave decidedly the more errors. If we require only one success in
+three trials the test could be located a year or two lower in the scale,
+while three successes as a standard would require that it be moved
+upward possibly as much as two years.
+
+Much depends also on whether the child is left to find his own method,
+and on this there has been much difference of procedure. Kuhlmann,
+Bobertag, and Wallin illustrate the correct method of making the
+comparison by first hefting and arranging the weights while the subject
+looks on. We prefer to keep the test in its original form, and with the
+procedure and scoring we have used it is well located in year IX.
+
+Wallin carries his assistance still further by saying, after the first
+block has been placed, "Now, find the heaviest of the four," and after
+the second has been placed, "Now, find the heaviest of the three," etc.
+Finally, when the arrangement has been made, he tells the subject to try
+them again to make sure the order is correct, allowing the subject to
+make whatever changes he thinks necessary. This procedure robs the test
+of its most valuable features. The experiment was not devised primarily
+as a test of sensory discrimination, for it has long been recognized
+that individuals who have developed as far as the 9- or 10-year level of
+intelligence are ordinarily but little below normal in sensory capacity.
+
+Psychologically, the test resembles that of comparing weights in V, 1.
+Success depends, in the first place, upon the correct comprehension of
+the task and the setting of a goal to be attained; secondly, upon the
+choice of a suitable method for realizing the goal; and finally, upon
+the ability to keep the end clearly in consciousness until all the steps
+necessary for its attainment have been gone through. Elementary as are
+the processes involved, they represent the prototype of all purposeful
+behavior. The statesman, the lawyer, the teacher, the physician, the
+carpenter, all in their own way and with their own materials, are
+continually engaged in setting goals, choosing means, and inhibiting the
+multitudinous appeals of irrelevant and distracting ideas.
+
+In this experiment the subject may fail in any one of the three
+requirements of the test or in all of them. (1) He may not comprehend
+the instructions and so be unable to set the goal. (2) Though
+understanding what is expected of him, he may adopt an absurd method of
+carrying out the task. Or (3) he may lose sight of the end and begin to
+play with the blocks, stacking them on top of one another, building
+trains, tossing them about, etc. Sometimes the guiding idea is not
+completely lost, but is weakened or rendered only partially operative.
+In such a case the subject may compare some of the blocks carefully,
+place others without trying them at all, but continue in his
+half-rational, half-irrational procedure until all the blocks have been
+arranged.
+
+It is essential, therefore, to supplement the mere record of success or
+failure by jotting down a brief but accurate description of the
+performance. Note any hesitation or inability to grasp the instructions.
+Note especially any absurd procedure, such as placing all the blocks
+without hefting any of them, comparing only some of them, holding them
+up and shaking them, hefting two at once in the same hand, etc. The
+ideal method, of course, is to try all the blocks carefully before
+placing any of them, then to make a tentative arrangement, and finally,
+to correct this tentative arrangement by means of individual
+comparisons. A slight departure from this method does not always bring
+failure, but it renders success less probable. As a rule it is only the
+very intelligent children of 10 years who think to test out their first
+arrangement by making a final and additional trial of each block in
+turn. Contrary to what might be supposed, success is slightly favored by
+hefting the blocks successively with one hand rather than by taking one
+in each hand for simultaneous comparison, but as the child cannot be
+expected to know this, we must regard the two methods as equally
+logical.
+
+The test of arranging weights has met universal praise. Its special
+advantage is that it tests the subject's intelligence in the
+manipulation of _things_ rather than his capacity for dealing with
+_abstractions_. It tests his ability to do something rather than his
+ability to express himself in language. It throws light upon certain
+factors of motor adaptation and practical judgment which play a great
+part in the everyday life of the average human being. It depends as
+little upon school, perhaps, as any other test of the scale, and it is
+readily usable with children of all nations without danger of being
+materially altered in translation Moreover, it is always an interesting
+test for the child. Bobertag goes so far as to say that any 8- or 9-year
+child who passes this test cannot possibly be feeble-minded. This may be
+true; but the converse is hardly the case; that is, the failure of older
+children is by no means certain proof of mental retardation. The same
+observation, however, applies equally well to many other of the Binet
+tests, some of which correlate more closely with true mental age than
+this one. A rather considerable fraction of normal 12-year-olds fail on
+it, and it is in fact somewhat less dependable than certain other tests
+if we wish to differentiate between 9-year and 11-year intelligence. But
+it is a test we could ill afford to eliminate.[63]
+
+[63] Compare with V, 1.
+
+
+IX, 3. MAKING CHANGE
+
+PROCEDURE. Ask the following questions in the order here given:--
+
+  (a) "_If I were to buy 4 cents worth of candy and should give
+      the storekeeper 10 cents, how much money would I get back?_"
+  (b) "_If I bought 13 cents worth and gave the storekeeper
+      15 cents, how much would I get back?_"
+  (c) "_If I bought 4 cents worth and gave the storekeeper
+      25 cents, how much would I get back?_"
+
+Coins are not used, and the subject is not allowed the help of pencil
+and paper. If the subject forgets the statement of the problem, it is
+permissible to repeat it once, but only once. The response should be
+made in ten or fifteen seconds for each problem.
+
+SCORING, The test is passed if _two out of three_ problems are answered
+correctly in the allotted time. In case two answers are given to a
+problem, we follow the usual rule of counting the second and ignoring
+the first.
+
+REMARKS. Problems of this nature, when thoroughly standardized, are
+extremely valuable as tests of intelligence. The difficulty of the test,
+as we have used it, does not lie in the subtraction of 4 from 10, 12
+from 15, etc. Such subtractions, when given as problems in subtraction,
+are readily solved by practically all normal 8-year-olds who have
+attended school as much as two years. The problems of the test have a
+twofold difficulty: (1) The statement of the problem must be
+comprehended and held in mind until the solution has been arrived at;
+(2) the problem is so stated that the subject must himself select the
+fundamental operation which applies. The latter difficulty is somewhat
+the greater of the two, addition sometimes being employed instead of
+subtraction.
+
+It is just such difficulties as this that prove so perplexing to the
+feeble-minded. High-grade defectives, although they require more than
+the usual amount of drill and are likely to make occasional errors, are
+nevertheless capable of learning to add, subtract, multiply, and divide
+fairly well. Their main trouble comes in deciding which of these
+operations a given problem calls for. They can master routine, but as
+regards initiative, judgment, and power to reason they are little
+educable. The psychology and pedagogy of mental deficiency is epitomized
+in this statement.
+
+There has been little disagreement as to the proper location of the test
+of making change, but various procedures have been employed. Coins have
+generally been employed, in which case the subject is actually allowed
+to make the change. Most other revisions have also given only a single
+problem, usually 4 cents out of 20 cents, or 4 out of 25, or 9 out of
+25. It is evident that these are not all of equal difficulty. There is
+general agreement, however, that normal children of 9 years should be
+able to make simple change.
+
+
+IX, 4. REPEATING FOUR DIGITS REVERSED
+
+The series are 6-5-2-8; 4-9-3-7; 3-6-2-9.
+
+PROCEDURE AND SCORING. Exactly as in VII, alternate test 2.[64]
+
+[64] See discussion, p. 207 _ff._
+
+
+IX, 5. USING THREE WORDS IN A SENTENCE
+
+PROCEDURE The words used are:--
+
+  (a) _Boy_, _ball_, _river_.
+  (b) _Work_, _money_, _men_.
+  (c) _Desert_, _rivers_, _lakes_.
+
+Say: "_You know what a sentence is, of course. A sentence is made up of
+some words which say something. Now, I am going to give you three words,
+and you must make up a sentence that has all three words in it. The
+three words are 'boy,' 'ball,' 'river.' Go ahead and make up a sentence
+that has all three words in it._" The others are given in the same way.
+
+Note that the subject is not shown the three words written down, and
+that the reply is to be given orally.
+
+If the subject does not understand what is wanted, the instruction may
+be repeated, but it is not permissible to illustrate what a sentence is
+by giving one. There must be no preliminary practice.
+
+A curious misunderstanding which is sometimes encountered comes from
+assuming that the sentence must be constructed entirely of the three
+words given. If it appears that the subject is stumbling over this
+difficulty, we explain: "_The three words must be put with some other
+words so that all of them together will make a sentence._"
+
+Nothing is said about hurrying, but if a sentence is not given within
+one minute the rule is to count that part of the test a failure and to
+proceed to the next trio of words.
+
+Give only one trial for each part of the test.
+
+Do not specially caution the child to avoid giving more than one
+sentence, as this is implied in the formula used and should be
+understood.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _two of the three_ sentences are
+satisfactory. In order to be satisfactory a sentence must fulfill the
+following requirements: (1) It must either be a simple sentence, or, if
+compound, must not contain more than two distinct ideas; and (2) it must
+not express an absurdity.
+
+Slight changes in one or more of the key words are disregarded, as
+_river_ for _rivers_, etc.
+
+The scoring is difficult enough to justify rather extensive
+illustration.
+
+(a) _Boy, ball, river_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ An analysis of 128 satisfactory responses gave
+    the following classification:--
+
+    (1) Simple sentence containing a simple subject and a simple
+    predicate; as: "The boy threw his ball into the river." "The boy
+    lost his ball in the river." "The boy's ball fell into the
+    river." "The boy swam into the river after his ball," etc. This
+    group contains 76 per cent of the correct responses.
+
+    (2) A sentence with a simple subject and a compound predicate;
+    as: "A boy went to the river and took his ball with him." About
+    8 per cent of all were of this type.
+
+    (3) A complex sentence containing a relative clause (2 per cent
+    only); as: "The boy ran after his ball which was rolling toward
+    the river."
+
+    (4) A compound sentence containing two independent clauses
+    (about 14 per cent); as: "The boy had a ball and he lost it in
+    the river."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ The failures fall into four chief groups:--
+
+    (1) Sentences with three clauses (or else three separate
+    sentences).
+
+    (2) Sentences containing an absurdity.
+
+    (3) Sentences which omit one of the key words.
+
+    (4) Silence, due ordinarily to inability to comprehend the task.
+
+    Group 1 includes 78 per cent of the failures; group 2, about
+    12 per cent; and group 3 and 4 about 5 per cent each. Samples of
+    group 1 are: "There was a boy, and he bought a ball, and it fell
+    into the river." "I saw a boy, and he had a ball, and he was
+    playing by the river." Illustration of an absurd sentence, "The
+    boy was swimming in the river and he was playing ball."
+
+(b) _Work, money, men_
+
+    _Satisfactory_:--
+
+    (1) Sentence with a simple subject and simple predicate
+    (including 75 per cent of 116 satisfactory responses); as: "Men
+    work for their money." "Men get money for their work," etc.
+
+    (2) A complex sentence with a relative clause (12 per cent of
+    correct answers); as: "Men who work earn much money." "It is
+    easy for men to earn money if they are willing to work," etc.
+
+    (3) A compound sentence with two independent, coördinate clauses
+    (13 per cent); as: "Men work and they earn money." "Some men
+    have money and they do not work."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory_:--
+
+    (1) Three clauses; as: "I know a man and he has money, and he
+    works at the store."
+
+    (2) Sentences which are absurd or meaningless; as: "Men work
+    with their money."
+
+    (3) Omission of one of the words.
+
+    (4) Inability to respond.
+
+(c) _Desert, rivers, lakes_
+
+    _Satisfactory_:--
+
+    (1) Sentences with a simple subject and a simple predicate
+    (including 84 per cent of 126 correct answers); as: "There are
+    no rivers or lakes in the desert." "The desert has one river and
+    one lake," etc.
+
+    (2) A complex sentence with a relative clause (only 2 per cent);
+    as: "In the desert there was a river which flowed into a lake."
+
+    (3) A compound sentence with two independent, coördinate clauses
+    (11 per cent); as: "We went to the desert, and it had no rivers
+    or lakes."
+
+    (4) A compound, complex sentence (3 per cent of all); as: "There
+    was a desert, and near by there was a river that emptied into a
+    lake."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory_:--
+
+    (1) Sentences with three clauses (40 per cent of all failures);
+    as: "A desert is dry, rivers are long, lakes are rough."
+
+    (2) Sentences containing an absurdity (12 per cent of the
+    failures): as: "a desert is dry, rivers are long, lakes are
+    filled with swimming boys." "The lake went through the desert
+    and the river." "There was a desert and rivers and lakes in the
+    forest." "The desert is full of rivers and lakes."
+
+    (3) Omission of one of the words (40 per cent of the failures).
+
+    (4) Inability to respond (8 per cent).
+
+REMARKS. The test of constructing a sentence containing given words was
+first used by Masselon and is known as "the Masselon experiment."
+Meumann, who used it in a rather extended experiment,[65] finds it a
+good test of intelligence and a reliable index as to the richness,
+definiteness, and maturity of the associative processes. As Meumann
+shows, it is instructive to study the qualitative differences between
+the responses of bright and dull children, apart from questions of
+sentence structure. These differences are especially discernible
+in (a) the logical qualities of the associations, and (b) the
+definiteness of statement. As regards (a), bright children are much
+more likely to use the given words as keystones in the construction of a
+sentence which would be logically suggested by them. For example,
+_donkey_, _blows_, suggest some such sentence as, "The donkey receives
+blows because he is lazy." In like manner we have found that the words
+_work_, _money_, _men_ usually suggest to the more intelligent children
+a sentence like "Men work for their money" (or "because they need
+money," etc.), while the dull child is more likely to give some such
+sentence as "The men have work and they don't have much money." That is,
+the sentence of the dull child, even though correct in structure and
+free enough from outright absurdity to satisfy the standard of scoring
+which we have set forth, is likely to express ideas which are more or
+less nondescript, ideas not logically suggested by the set of words
+given.
+
+[65] "Ueber eine neue Methode der Intelligenzprüfung und über den Wert
+der Kombinationsmethoden," in _Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie
+und Experimentelle Pädagogik_ (1912), pp. 145-63.
+
+The experiment is one of the many forms of the "completion test," or
+"the combination method." As we have already noted, the power to combine
+more or less separate and isolated elements into a logical whole is one
+of the most essential features of intelligence. The ability to do so in
+a given case depends, in the first place, upon the number and logical
+quality of the associations which have previously been made with each of
+the given elements separately, and in the second place, upon the
+readiness with which these ideational stores yield up the particular
+associations necessary for weaving the given words into some kind of
+unity. The child must pass from what is given to what is not given but
+merely suggested. This requires a certain amount of invention. Scattered
+fragments must be conceived as the skeleton of a thought, and this
+skeleton, or partial skeleton, must be assembled and made whole. The
+task is analogous to that which confronts the palæontologist, who is
+able to reconstruct, with a high degree of certainty, the entire
+skeleton of an extinct animal from the evidence furnished by three or
+four fragments of bones. It is no wonder, therefore, that subjects whose
+ideational stores are scanty, and whose associations are based upon
+accidental rather than logical connections, find the test one of
+peculiar difficulty. Invention thrives in a different soil.
+
+Binet located this test in year X. Goddard and Kuhlmann assign it the
+same location, though their actual statistics agree closely with our
+own. Our procedure makes the test somewhat easier than that of Binet,
+who gave only one trial and used the somewhat more difficult words
+_Paris_, _river_, _fortune_. Others have generally followed the Binet
+procedure, merely substituting for Paris the name of a city better known
+to the subject. Binet's requirement of a written response also makes the
+test harder.
+
+Perhaps the greatest obstacle to uniformity in the use of the test comes
+from the difficulty of scoring, particularly in deciding whether the
+sentence contains enough absurdity to disqualify it, and whether it
+expresses three separate ideas or only two. It is hoped that the rather
+large variety of sample responses which we have given will reduce these
+difficulties to a minimum.
+
+An additional word is necessary in regard to what constitutes an
+absurdity in (b). A sentence like "There are some rivers and lakes in
+the desert" is not an absurdity in certain parts of Western United
+States. In Professor Ordahl's tests at Reno, Nevada, many children whose
+intelligence was altogether above suspicion gave this reply. The
+statement is, indeed, perfectly true for the semi-arid region in the
+vicinity of Reno known as "the desert." On the other hand, such
+sentences as "The desert is full of rivers and lakes," or "There are
+forty rivers and lakes in the desert," can hardly be considered
+satisfactory. Similar difficulties are presented by (c), though not so
+frequently. "Men who work do not have money" expresses, unfortunately,
+more truth than nonsense.
+
+
+IX, 6. FINDING RHYMES
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the child: "_You know what a rhyme is, of course. A
+rhyme is a word that sounds like another word. Two words rhyme if they
+end in the same sound. Understand?_" Whether the child says he
+understands or not, we proceed to illustrate what a rhyme is, as
+follows: "_Take the two words 'hat' and 'cat.' They sound alike and so
+they make a rhyme. 'Hat,' 'rat,' 'cat,' 'bat' all rhyme with one
+another._"
+
+That is, we first explain what a rhyme is and then we give an
+illustration. A large majority of American children who have reached the
+age of 9 years understand perfectly what a rhyme is, without any
+illustration. A few, however, think they understand, but do not; and in
+order to insure that all are given equal advantage it is necessary never
+to omit the illustration.
+
+After the illustration say: "_Now, I am going to give you a word and you
+will have one minute to find as many words as you can that rhyme with
+it. The word is 'day.' Name all the words you can think of that rhyme
+with 'day.'_"
+
+If the child fails with the first word, before giving the second we
+repeat the explanation and give sample rhymes for _day_; otherwise we
+proceed without further explanation to _mill_ and _spring_, saying,
+"_Now, you have another minute to name all the words you can think of
+that rhyme with 'mill,'_" etc. Apart from the mention of "one minute"
+say nothing to suggest hurrying, as this tends to throw some children
+into mental confusion.
+
+SCORING. Passed if in _two out of the three_ parts of the experiment the
+child finds _three words_ which rhyme with the word given, the time
+limit for each series being _one minute_. Note that in each case there
+must be three words in addition to the word given. These must be real
+words, not meaningless syllables or made-up words. However, we should be
+liberal enough to accept such words as _ding_ (from "ding-dong ") for
+_spring_, _Jill_ (see "Jack and Jill") for _mill_, _Fay_ (girl's name)
+for _day_, etc.
+
+REMARKS. At first thought it would seem that the demands made by this
+test upon intelligence could not be very great. Sound associations
+between words may be contrasted unfavorably with associations like those
+of cause and effect, part to whole, whole to part, opposites, etc. But
+when we pass from _a-priori_ considerations to an examination of the
+actual data, we find that the giving of rhymes is closely correlated
+with general intelligence.
+
+The 9-year-olds who test at or above 10 years nearly always do well in
+finding rhymes, while 9-year-olds who test as low as 8 years seldom
+pass. When a test thus shows high correlation with the scale as a whole,
+we must either accept the test as valid or reject the scale altogether.
+While the feeble-minded do not do as well in this test as normal
+children of corresponding mental age, the percentage successes for them
+rises rapidly between mental age 8 and mental age 10 or 11.
+
+Closer psychological analysis of the processes involved will show why
+this is true. To find rhymes for a given word means that one must hunt
+out verbal associations under the direction of a guiding idea. Every
+word has innumerable associations and many of these tend, in greater or
+less degree, to be aroused when the stimulus word is given. In order to
+succeed with the test, however, it is necessary to inhibit all
+associations which are not relevant to the desired end. The directing
+idea must be held so firmly in mind that it will really direct the
+thought associations. Besides acting to inhibit the irrelevant, it must
+create a sort of magnetic stress (to borrow a figure from physics) which
+will give dominance to those associative tendencies pointing in the
+right direction. Even the feeble-minded child of imbecile grade has in
+his vocabulary a great many words which rhyme with _day_, _mill_, and
+_spring_. He fails on the test because his verbal associations cannot be
+subjugated to the influence of a directing idea. The end to be attained
+does not dominate consciousness sufficiently to create more than a faint
+stress. Instead of a single magnetic pole there is a conflict of forces.
+The result is either chaos or partial success. _Mill_ may suggest
+_hill_, and then perhaps the directing idea becomes suddenly inoperative
+and the child gives _mountain_, _valley_, or some other irrelevant
+association. The lack of associations, however, is a more frequent cause
+of failure than inability to inhibit the irrelevant.
+
+If any one supposes that finding rhymes does not draw upon the higher
+mental powers, let him try the experiment upon himself in various stages
+of mental efficiency, say at 9 A.M., when mentally refreshed by a good
+night of sleep and again when fatigued and sleepy. Poets questioned by
+Galton on this point all testified to the greater difficulty of finding
+rhymes when mentally fatigued. In this and in many other respects the
+mental activities of the fatigued or sleepy individual approach the type
+of mentation which is normal to the feeble-minded.
+
+It is important to note that adults make a less favorable showing
+in this test than normal children of corresponding mental age,
+Mr. Knollin's "hoboes" of 12-year intelligence doing hardly as well as
+school children of 10-year intelligence. Those who are habitually
+employed in school exercises probably acquire an adeptness in verbal
+associations which is later gradually lost in the preoccupations of real
+life.
+
+There has been more disagreement as to the proper location of this test
+than of any other test of the Binet scale. Binet placed it in year XII
+of the 1908 scale, but shifted it to year XV in 1911. Kuhlmann retains
+it in year XII, while Goddard drops it down to year XI. However, when we
+examine the actual statistics for normal children we do not find very
+marked disagreement, and such disagreement as is present can be largely
+accounted for by variations in procedure and by differing conclusions
+drawn from identical data. In the first place, Binet gave but one trial.
+This, of course, makes the test much harder than when three trials are
+given and only two successes are required. To make one trial equal in
+difficulty to three trials we should perhaps need to demand only two
+rhymes, instead of three, in the one trial. In the second place, the
+word used by Binet (_obeissance_) is much harder than one-syllable words
+like _day_, _mill_, and _spring_. Finally, the wide shift of the test
+from year XII to year XV was not justified by the statistics of Binet
+himself, and the figures of Kuhlmann and Goddard are really in
+exceptionally close agreement with our own, notwithstanding the fact
+that Goddard required three successes instead of two. In four series of
+tests, considered together, we have found 62 per cent passing at
+year IX, 81 per cent at year X, 83 per cent at year XI, and 94 per cent
+at year XII.
+
+
+IX, ALTERNATIVE TEST 1: NAMING THE MONTHS
+
+PROCEDURE. Simply ask the subject to "_name all the months of the
+year_." Do not start him off by naming one month; give no look of
+approval or disapproval as the months are being named, and make no
+suggestions or comments of any kind.
+
+When the months have been named, we "check up" the performance by
+asking: "_What month comes before April?_" "_What month comes before
+July?_" "_What month comes before November?_"
+
+SCORING. Passed if the months are named in about _fifteen or twenty
+seconds with no more than one error_ of omission, repetition, or
+displacement, and if _two out of the three check questions_ are answered
+correctly. Disregard place of beginning.
+
+REMARKS. Some are inclined to consider this test of little value,
+because of its supposed dependence on accidental training. With this
+opinion we cannot fully agree. The arguments already given in favor of
+the retention of naming the days of the week (year VII), apply equally
+well in the present case. It has been shown, however, that age, apart
+from intelligence, does have some effect on the ability to name the
+months. Defective adults of 9-year intelligence do about as well with it
+as normal children of 10-year intelligence.
+
+The test appears in year X of Binet's 1908 scale and in year IX of the
+1911 revision. Goddard places it correctly in year IX, while Kuhlmann
+and Bobertag have omitted it.
+
+
+IX, ALTERNATIVE TEST 2: COUNTING THE VALUE OF STAMPS
+
+PROCEDURE. Place before the subject a cardboard on which are pasted
+three 1-cent and three 2-cent stamps arranged as follows: 111222. Be
+sure to lay the card so that the stamps will be right side up for the
+child. Say: "_You know, of course, how much a stamp like this costs_
+(pointing to a 1-cent stamp). _And you know how much one like this
+costs_ (pointing to a 2-cent stamp). _Now, how much money would it take
+to buy all these stamps?_"
+
+Do not tell the individual values of the stamps if these are not known,
+for it is a part of the test to ascertain whether the child's
+spontaneous curiosity has led him to find out and remember their values.
+If the individual values are known, but the first answer is wrong, a
+second trial may be given. In such cases, however, it is necessary to be
+on guard against guessing.
+
+If the child merely names an incorrect sum without saying anything to
+indicate how he arrived at his answer, it is well to tell him to figure
+it up aloud. "_Tell me how you got it._"
+
+SCORING. Passed if the correct value is given in not over fifteen
+seconds.
+
+REMARKS. The value of this test may be questioned on two grounds: (1)
+That it has an ambiguous significance, since failure to pass it may
+result either from incorrect addition or from lack of knowledge of the
+individual values of the stamps; (2) that familiarity with stamps and
+their values is so much a matter of accident and special instruction
+that the test is not fair.
+
+Both criticisms are in a measure valid. The first, however, applies
+equally well to a great many useful intelligence tests. In fact, it is
+only a minority in which success depends on but one factor. The other
+criticism has less weight than would at first appear. While it is, of
+course, not impossible for an intelligent child to arrive at the age of
+9 years without having had reasonable opportunity to learn the cost of
+the common postage stamps, the fact is that a large majority have had
+the opportunity and that most of those of normal intelligence have taken
+advantage of it. It is necessary once more to emphasize the fact that in
+its method of locating a test the Binet system makes ample allowance for
+"accidental" failures.
+
+Like the tests of naming coins, repeating the names of the days of the
+week or the months of the year, giving the date, tying a bow-knot,
+distinguishing right and left, naming the colors, etc., this one also
+throws light on the child's spontaneous interest in common objects. It
+is mainly the children of deficient intellectual curiosity who do not
+take the trouble to learn these things at somewhere near the expected
+age.
+
+The test was located in year VIII of the Binet scale. However, Binet
+used coins, three single and three double sous. Since we do not have
+either a half-cent or a 2-cent coin, it has been necessary to substitute
+postage stamps. This changes the nature of the test and makes it much
+harder. It becomes less a test of ability to do a simple sum, and more a
+test of knowledge as to the value of the stamps used. That the test is
+easy enough for year VIII when it can be given in the original form is
+indicated by all the French, German, and English statistics available,
+but four separate series of Stanford tests agree in finding it too hard
+for year VIII when stamps are substituted and the test is carried out
+according to the procedure described above.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XVI
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR X
+
+
+X, 1. VOCABULARY (THIRTY DEFINITIONS, 5400 WORDS)
+
+PROCEDURE AND SCORING AS IN VIII, 6. At year X, thirty words should be
+correctly defined.
+
+
+X, 2. DETECTING ABSURDITIES
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the child: "_I am going to read a sentence which has
+something foolish in it, some nonsense. I want you to listen carefully
+and tell me what is foolish about it._" Then read the sentences, rather
+slowly and in a matter-of-fact voice, saying after each: "_What is
+foolish about that?_" The sentences used are the following:--
+
+  (a) "_A man said: 'I know a road from my house to the city which
+      is downhill all the way to the city and downhill all the way
+      back home.'_"
+  (b) "_An engineer said that the more cars he had on his train the
+      faster he could go._"
+  (c) "_Yesterday the police found the body of a girl cut into
+      eighteen pieces. They believe that she killed herself._"
+  (d) "_There was a railroad accident yesterday, but it was not very
+      serious. Only forty-eight people were killed._"
+  (e) "_A bicycle rider, being thrown from his bicycle in an
+      accident, struck his head against a stone and was instantly
+      killed. They picked him up and carried him to the hospital,
+      and they do not think he will get well again._"
+
+Each should ordinarily be answered within thirty seconds. If the child
+is silent, the sentence should be repeated; but no other questions or
+suggestions of any kind are permissible. Such questions as "_Could the
+road be downhill both ways?_" or, "_Do you think the girl could have
+killed herself?_" would, of course, put the answer in the child's mouth.
+It is even best to avoid laughing as the sentence is read.
+
+Owing to the child's limited power of expression it is not always easy
+to judge from the answer given whether the absurdity has really been
+detected or not. In such cases ask him to explain himself, using some
+such formula as: "_I am not sure I know what you mean. Explain what you
+mean. Tell me what is foolish in the sentence I read._" This usually
+brings a reply the correctness or incorrectness of which is more
+apparent, while at the same time the formula is so general that it
+affords no hint as to the correct answer. Additional questions must be
+used with extreme caution.
+
+SCORING. Passed if the absurdity is detected in _four out of the five_
+statements. The following are samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory
+answers:--
+
+(a) _The road downhill_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "If it was downhill to the city it would be
+    uphill coming back." "It can't be downhill both directions."
+    "That could not be." "That is foolish. (Explain.) Because it
+    must be uphill one way or the other." "That would be a funny
+    road. (Explain.) No road can be like that. It can't be downhill
+    both ways."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Perhaps he took a little different road
+    coming back." "I guess it is a very crooked road." "Coming back
+    he goes around the hill." "The man lives down in a valley." "The
+    road was made that way so it would be easy." "Just a road. I
+    don't see anything foolish." "He should say, 'a road which
+    goes.'"
+
+(b) _What the engineer said_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "If he has more cars he will go slower." "It is
+    the other way. If he wants to go faster he mustn't have so many
+    cars." "The man didn't mean what he said, or else it was a slip
+    of the tongue." "That's the way it would be if he was going
+    downhill." "Foolish, because the cars don't help pull the
+    train." "He ought to say _slower_, not _faster_."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "A long train is nicer." "The engine pulls
+    harder if the train has lots of cars." "That's all right. I
+    suppose he likes a big train." "Nothing foolish; when I went to
+    the city I saw a train that had lots of cars and it was going
+    awfully fast." "He should have said, 'the faster I can _run_.'"
+
+(c) _The girl who was thought to have killed herself_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "She could not have cut herself into eighteen
+    pieces." "She would have been dead before that." "She might have
+    cut two or three pieces off, but she couldn't do the rest."
+    (Laughing) "Well, she may have killed herself; but if she did
+    it's a sure thing that some one else came along after and
+    chopped her up." "That policeman must have been a fool.
+    (Explain.) To think that she could chop herself into eighteen
+    pieces."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "_Think_ that she killed herself; they _know_
+    she did." "They can't be sure. Some one may have killed her."
+    "It was a foolish girl to kill herself." "How can they tell who
+    killed her?" "No girl would kill herself unless she was crazy."
+    "It ought to read: 'They think that she committed suicide.'"
+
+(d) _The railroad accident_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "That was very serious." "I should like to know
+    what you would call a serious accident!" "You could say it was
+    not serious if two or three people were killed, but
+    forty-eight,--that is serious."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "It was a foolish mistake that made the
+    accident." "They couldn't help it. It was an accident." "It
+    might have been worse." "Nothing foolish; it's just sad."
+
+(e) _The bicycle rider_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "How could he get well after he was already
+    killed?" "Why, he's already dead." "No use to take a dead man to
+    the hospital." "They ought to have taken him to a grave-yard!"
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Foolish to fall off of a bicycle. He should
+    have known how to ride." "They ought to have carried him home.
+    (Why?) So his folks could get a doctor." "He should have been
+    more careful." "Maybe they can cure him if he isn't hurt very
+    bad." "There's nothing foolish in that."
+
+REMARKS. The detection of absurdities is one of the most ingenious and
+serviceable tests of the entire scale. It is little influenced by
+schooling, and it comes nearer than any other to being a test of
+that species of mother-wit which we call common sense. Like the
+"comprehension questions," it may be called a test of judgment, using
+this term in the colloquial and not in the logical sense. The stupid
+person, whether depicted in literature, proverb, or the ephemeral joke
+column, is always (and justly, it would seem) characterized by a huge
+tolerance for absurd contradictions and by a blunt sensitivity for the
+fine points of a joke. Intellectual discrimination and judgment are
+inferior. The ideas do not cross-light each other, but remain relatively
+isolated. Hence, the most absurd contradictions are swallowed, so to
+speak, without arousing the protest of the critical faculty. The latter,
+indeed, is only a name for the tendency of intellectually irreconcilable
+elements to clash. If there is no clash, if the elements remain apart,
+it goes without saying that there will be no power of criticism.
+
+The critical faculty begins its development in the early years and
+strengthens _pari passu_ with the growing wealth of inter-associations
+among ideas; but in the average child it is not until the age of about
+10 years that it becomes equal to tasks like those presented in this
+test. Eight-year intelligence hardly ever scores more than two or three
+correct answers out of five. By 12, the critical ability has so far
+developed that the test is nearly always passed. It is an invaluable
+test for the higher grades of mental deficiency.
+
+As a test of the critical powers Binet first used "trap questions"; as,
+for example, "Is snow red or black?" The results were disappointing, for
+it was found that owing to timidity, deference, and suggestibility
+normal children often failed on such questions. Deference is more marked
+in normal than in feeble-minded children, and it is because of the
+influence of this trait that it is necessary always to forewarn the
+subject that the sentence to be given contains nonsense.
+
+Binet located the test in year XI of the 1908 scale, but changed it to
+year X in 1911. Goddard and Kuhlmann retain it in year XI. The large
+majority of the statistics, including those of Goddard and Kuhlmann,
+warrant the location of the test in year X. Not all have used the same
+absurdities, and these have not been worded uniformly. Most have
+required three successes out of five, but Bobertag and Kuhlmann require
+three out of four; Bobertag's procedure is also different in that he
+does not forewarn the child that an absurdity is to follow.
+
+The present form of the test is the result of three successive
+refinements. It will be noted that we have made two substitutions in
+Binet's list of absurdities. Those omitted from the original scale are:
+"_I have three brothers--Paul, Ernest, and myself_," and, "_If I were
+going to commit suicide I would not choose Friday, because Friday is an
+unlucky day and would bring me misfortune._" The last has a puzzling
+feature which makes it much too hard for year X, and the other is
+objectionable with children who are accustomed to hear a foreign
+language in which the form of expression used in the absurdity is
+idiomatically correct.
+
+The two we have substituted for these objectionable absurdities are,
+"The road downhill" and "What the engineer said." The five we have
+used, though of nearly equal difficulty, are here listed in the order
+from easiest to hardest. Our series as a whole is slightly easier than
+Binet's.
+
+
+X, 3. DRAWING DESIGNS FROM MEMORY
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the designs shown on the accompanying printed form. If
+copies are used they must be exact in size and shape. Before showing the
+card say: "_This card has two drawings on it. I am going to show them to
+you for ten seconds, then I will take the card away and let you draw
+from memory what you have seen. Examine both drawings carefully and
+remember that you have only ten seconds._"
+
+Provide pencil and paper and then show the card for ten seconds, holding
+it at right angles to the child's line of vision and with the designs in
+the position given in the plate. Have the child draw the designs
+immediately after they are removed from sight.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _one of the designs is reproduced
+correctly and the other about half correctly_. "Correctly" means that
+the _essential plan_ of the design has been grasped and reproduced.
+Ordinary irregularities due to lack of motor skill or to hasty execution
+are disregarded. "Half correctly" means that some essential part of the
+design has been omitted or misplaced, or that parts have been added.
+
+The sample reproductions shown on the scoring card will serve as a
+guide. It will be noted that an inverted design, or one whose right and
+left sides have been transposed, is counted only half correct, however
+perfect it many be in other respects; also that design _b_ is counted
+only half correct if the inner rectangle is not located off center.
+
+REMARKS. Binet states that the main factors involved in success are
+"attention, visual memory, and a little analysis." The power of rapid
+analysis would seem to be the most important, for if the designs are
+analyzed they may be reproduced from a verbal memory of the analysis.
+Without some analysis it would hardly be possible to remember the
+designs at all, as one of them contains thirteen lines and the other
+twelve. The memory span for unrelated objects is far too limited to
+permit us to grasp and retain that number of unrelated impressions.
+Success is possible only by grouping the lines according to their
+relationships, so that several of them are given a unitary value and
+remembered as one. In this manner, the design to the right, which is
+composed of twelve lines, may be reduced to four elements: (1) The outer
+rectangle; (2) the inner rectangle; (3) the off-center position of the
+inner rectangle; and (4) the joining of the angles. Of course the child
+does not ordinarily make an analysis as explicit as this; but analysis
+of some kind, even though it be unconscious, is necessary to success.
+
+Ability to pass the test indicates the presence, in a certain definite
+amount, of the tendency for the contents of consciousness to fuse into a
+meaningful whole. Failure indicates that the elements have maintained
+their unitary character or have fused inadequately. It is seen,
+therefore, that the test has a close kinship with the test of memory for
+sentences. The latter, also, permits the fusion or grouping of
+impressions according to meaning, with the result that five or six times
+as many meaningful syllables as nonsense syllables or digits can be
+retained.
+
+Binet had many more failures on design _a_ than on design _b_. This was
+probably due to the fact that he showed the designs with our _b_ to the
+left. A majority of subjects, probably because of the influence of
+reading habits, examine first the figure to the left, and because of the
+short time allowed for the inspection are unable to devote much time to
+the design at the right. We have placed the design of greater intrinsic
+difficulty at the left, with the result that the failures are almost
+equally divided between the two.
+
+Binet used this test in his unstandardized series of 1905, omitted it in
+1908, but included it in the 1911 revision, locating it in year X.
+Except for Goddard, who recommends year XI, there is rather general
+agreement that the test belongs at year X. Our own data show that it may
+be placed either at year X or year XI, according as the grading is rigid
+or lenient.
+
+
+X, 4. READING FOR EIGHT MEMORIES
+
+MATERIAL. We use Binet's selection, slightly adapted, as follows:--
+
+    _New York, September 5th. A fire last night burned three houses
+    near the center of the city. It took some time to put it out.
+    The loss was fifty thousand dollars, and seventeen families lost
+    their homes. In saving a girl, who was asleep in a bed, a
+    fireman was burned on the hands._
+
+The copy of the selection used by the subject should be printed in heavy
+type and should not contain the bars dividing it into memories. The
+Stanford record booklet contains the selection in two forms, one
+suitable for use in scoring, the other in heavy type to be read by the
+subject.
+
+PROCEDURE. Hand the selection to the subject, who should be seated
+comfortably in a good light, and say: "_I want you to read this for me
+as nicely as you can._" The subject must read aloud.
+
+Pronounce all the words which the subject is unable to make out, not
+allowing more than five seconds' hesitation in such a case.
+
+Record all errors made in reading the selection, and the exact time. By
+"error" is meant the omission, substitution, transposition, or
+mispronunciation of one word.
+
+The subject is not warned in advance that he will be asked to report
+what he has read, but as soon as he has finished reading, put the
+selection out of sight and say: "_Very well done. Now, I want you to
+tell me what you read. Begin at the first and tell everything you can
+remember._" After the subject has repeated everything he can recall and
+has stopped, say: "_And what else? Can you remember any more of it?_"
+Give no other aid of any kind. It is of course not permissible, when the
+child stops, to prompt him with such questions as, "_And what next?
+Where were the houses burned? What happened to the fireman?_" etc. The
+report must be spontaneous.
+
+Now and then, though not often, a subject hesitates or even refuses to
+try, saying he is unable to do it. Perhaps he has misunderstood the
+request and thinks he is expected to repeat the selection word for word,
+as in the tests of memory for sentences. We urge a little and repeat:
+"_Tell me in your own words all you can remember of it._" Others
+misunderstand in a different way, and thinking they are expected to tell
+merely what the story is about, they say: "It was about some houses that
+burned." In such cases we repeat the instructions with special emphasis
+on the words _all you can remember_.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed _if the selection is read in thirty-five
+seconds with not more than two errors, and if the report contains at
+least eight "memories."_ By underscoring the memories correctly
+reproduced, and by interlineations to show serious departures from the
+text, the record can be made complete with a minimum of trouble.
+
+The main difficulty in scoring is to decide whether a memory has been
+reproduced correctly enough to be counted. Absolutely literal
+reproduction is not expected. The rule is to count all memories whose
+thought is reproduced with only minor changes in the wording. "It took
+quite a while" instead of "it took some time" is satisfactory; likewise,
+"got burnt" for "was burned"; "who was sleeping" for "who was asleep";
+"are homeless" for "lost their homes"; "in the middle" for "near the
+center"; "a big fire" for "a fire," etc.
+
+Memories as badly mutilated as the following, however, are not counted:
+"A lot of buildings" for "three houses;" "a man" for "a fireman"; "who
+was sick" for "who was asleep"; etc. Occasionally we may give half
+credit, as in the case of "was seventeen thousand dollars" for "was
+fifty thousand dollars"; "and fifteen families" for "and seventeen
+families," etc.
+
+REMARKS. Are we warranted in using at all as a measure of intelligence a
+test which depends as much on instruction as this one does? Many are
+inclined to answer this question in the negative. The test has been
+omitted from the revisions of Goddard, Kuhlmann, and Binet himself. As
+regards Binet's earlier test of reading for two memories, in year VIII,
+there could hardly be any difference of opinion. The ability to read at
+that age depends so much on the accident of environment that the test is
+meaningless unless we know all about the conditions which have
+surrounded the child.
+
+The use of the test in year X, however, is a very different matter.
+There are comparatively few children of that age who will fail to pass
+it for lack of the requisite school instruction. Children of 10 years
+who have attended school with reasonable regularity for three years are
+practically always able to read the selection in thirty-five seconds and
+without over two mistakes unless they are retarded almost to the
+border-line of mental deficiency. Of our 10-year-olds who failed to meet
+the test, only a fourth did so because of inability to meet the reading
+requirements as regards time or mistakes. The remaining failures were
+caused by inadequate report, and most of these subjects were of the
+distinctly retarded group.
+
+We may conclude, therefore, that given anything approaching normal
+educational advantages, the test is really a measure of intelligence.
+Used with due caution, it is perhaps as valuable as any other test in
+the scale. It is only necessary, in case of failure, to ascertain the
+facts regarding the child's educational opportunities. Even this
+precaution is superfluous in case the subject tests as low as 8 years by
+the remainder of the scale. A safe rule is to omit the test from the
+calculation of mental age if the subject has not attended school the
+equivalent of two or three years.
+
+It has been contended by some that tests in which success depends upon
+language mastery cannot be real tests of intelligence. By such critics
+language tests have been set over against intelligence tests as
+contrasting opposites. It is easy to show, however, that this view is
+superficial and psychologically unsound. Every one who has an
+acquaintance with the facts of mental growth knows that language mastery
+of some degree is the _sine qua non_ of conceptual thinking. Language
+growth, in fact, mirrors the entire mental development. There are few
+more reliable indications of a subject's stage of intellectual maturity
+than his mastery of language.
+
+The rate of reading, for example, is a measure of the rate of
+association. Letters become associated together in certain combinations
+making words, words into word groups and sentences. Recognition is for
+the most part an associative process. Rapid and accurate association
+will mean ready recognition of the printed form. Since language units
+(whether letters, words, or word groups) have more or less preferred
+associations according to their habitual arrangement into larger units,
+it comes about that in the normal mind under normal conditions these
+preferred sequences arouse the apperceptive complex necessary to make a
+running recognition rapid and easy. It is reasonable to suppose that in
+the subnormal mind the habitual common associations are less firmly
+fixed, thus diminishing the effectiveness of the ever-changing
+apperceptive expectancy. Reading is, therefore, largely dependent on
+what James calls the "fringe of consciousness" and the "consciousness of
+meaning." In reading connected matter, every unit is big with a mass of
+tendencies. The smaller and more isolated the unit, the greater is the
+number of possibilities. Every added unit acts as a modifier limiting
+the number of tendencies, until we have finally, in case of a large
+mental unit, a fairly manageable whole. When the most logical and
+suitable of these associations arise easily from subconsciousness to
+consciousness, recognition is made easy, and their doing so will depend
+on whether the habitual relations of the elements have left permanent
+traces in the mind.
+
+The reading of the subnormal subject bears a close analogy to the
+reading of nonsense matter by the normal person. It has been ascertained
+by experiment that such reading requires about twice as much time as the
+reading of connected matter. This is true for the reason that out of
+thousands of associations possible with each word, no particular
+association is favored. The apperceptive expectancy, practically _nil_
+in the reading of nonsense material, must be decidedly deficient in all
+poor reading.
+
+Furthermore, in the case of the ordinary reader there is a feeling of
+rightness or wrongness about the thought sequences. That less
+intelligent subjects have this sense of fitness to a much less degree is
+evidenced by their passing over words so mutilated in pronunciation as
+to deprive them of all meaning. The transposition of letters and words,
+and the failure to observe marks of punctuation, point to the same
+thing. In other words, all the reading of the stupid subject is with
+material which to him is more or less nonsensical.[66]
+
+[66] See "Genius and Stupidity," by Lewis M. Terman, in _Pedagogical
+Seminary_, September, 1906, p. 340 _ff._
+
+A little observation will convince one that mentally retarded subjects,
+even when they possess a reasonable degree of fluency in recognizing
+printed words, do not sense shades of meaning. Their reading is by small
+units. Words and phrases do not fuse into one mental content, but remain
+relatively unconnected. The expression is monotonous and the voice has
+more of the unnatural "schoolroom" pitch. They read more slowly, more
+often misplace the emphasis, and miscall more words. In short, one who
+has psychological insight and is acquainted with reading standards can
+easily detect the symptoms of intellectual inferiority by hearing a dull
+subject read a brief selection.
+
+The giving of memories is also significant. Feeble-minded adults who
+have been well schooled are sometimes able to read the words of the text
+fairly fluently, but are usually unable to give more than a scanty
+report of what has been read. The scope of attention has been exhausted
+in the mere recognition and pronouncing of words. In general, the
+greater the mechanical difficulties which a subject encounters, the less
+adequate is his report of memories.
+
+The test has, however, one real fault. School children have a certain
+advantage in it over older persons _of the same mental age_ whose school
+experience is less recent. Adult subjects tend to give their report in
+less literal form. It is necessary, therefore, to give credit for the
+reproduction of the ideas of the passage rather than for strictly
+literal "memories."
+
+The selection we have used is, with minor changes, the same as Binet's.
+His selection was divided into nineteen memories. The one here given has
+twenty-one memories. Binet used the test both in year VIII and year IX,
+requiring two memories at year VIII and six memories at year IX. When we
+require eight memories, as we have done, the test becomes difficult
+enough for non-selected school children of 10 years. Location in year X
+seems preferable, because it insures that the child will almost
+certainly have had the schooling requisite for learning to read a
+selection of this difficulty, even if he has started to school at a
+later age than is customary. Naturally, placing the test higher in the
+scale makes it more a test of report and less a test of ability to
+recognize and pronounce printed words.
+
+
+X, 5. COMPREHENSION, FOURTH DEGREE
+
+The questions for this year are:--
+
+  (a) "_What ought you to say when some one asks your opinion
+      about a person you don't know very well?_"
+  (b) "_What ought you to do before undertaking (beginning)
+      something very important?_"
+  (c) "_Why should we judge a person more by his actions than by
+      his words?_"
+
+The PROCEDURE is the same as for the previous comprehension tests. Each
+question may be repeated, but its form must not be changed. It is not
+permissible to make any explanation whatever as to the meaning of the
+question, except to substitute _beginning_ for _undertaking_ when (b)
+seems not to be comprehended.
+
+SCORING. _Two out of the three_ questions must be answered
+satisfactorily. Study of the following classified responses should make
+scoring fairly easy in most cases:--
+
+(a) _When some one asks your opinion_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "I would say I don't know him very well"
+    (42 per cent of the correct answers). "Tell him what I know and
+    no more" (34 per cent of correct answers). "I would say that I'd
+    rather not express any opinion about him" (20 per cent of the
+    correct answers). "Tell him to ask some one else." "I would not
+    express any opinion."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ Unsatisfactory responses are due either to
+    failure to grasp the import of the question, or to inability to
+    suggest the appropriate action demanded by the situation.
+
+    The latter form of failure is the more common; e.g.: "I'd say
+    they are nice." "Say you like them." "Say what I think." "Say
+    it's none of their business." "Tell them I mind my own
+    business." "Say I would get acquainted with them." "Say that I
+    don't talk about people." "Say I didn't know how he looked."
+    "Tell them you ought not to say such things; you might get into
+    trouble." "I wouldn't say anything." "I would try to answer."
+    "Say I did not know his name," etc.
+
+    The following are samples of failure due to mistaking the import
+    of the question: "I'd say, 'How do you do?'" "Say,'I'm glad to
+    meet you.'"
+
+(b) _Before undertaking something important_
+
+    _Satisfactory responses_ fall into the following classes:--
+    (1) Brief statement of preliminary consideration; as: "Think
+        about it." "Look it over." "Plan it all out." "Make your
+        plans." "Stop and think," etc.
+    (2) Special emphasis on preliminary preparation and correct
+        procedure; as: "Find out the best way to do it." "Find out
+        what it is." "Get everything ready." "Do every little thing
+        that would help you." "Get all the details you can." "Take
+        your time and figure it out," etc.
+    (3) Asking help; as: "Ask some one to help you who knows all
+        about it." "Pray, if you are a Christian." "Ask advice,"
+        etc.
+    (4) Preliminary testing of ability, self-analysis, etc.; as:
+        "Try something easier first." "Practice and make sure I
+        could do it." "Learn how to do it," etc.
+    (5) Consider the wisdom or propriety of doing it: "Think whether
+        it would be best to do it." "See whether it would be
+        possible."
+
+    About 65 per cent of the correct responses belong either to
+    group (1) or (2), about 20 per cent to group (3), and most of
+    the remainder to group (4).
+
+    _Unsatisfactory responses_ are of the following types:--
+    (1) Due to mistaking the import of the question; e.g.: "Ask for
+        it." "Ought to say please." "Ask whose it is." Replies of
+        this kind can be nearly all eliminated by repeating the
+        question, using _beginning_ instead of _undertaking_.
+    (2) Replies more or less absurd or irrelevant; as: "Promise to
+        do your best." "Wash your face and hands." "Get a lot of
+        insurance." "Dress up and take a walk." "Tell your name."
+        "Know whether it's correct." "Begin at the beginning." "Say
+        you will do it." "See if it's a fake." "Go to school a long
+        time." "Pass an examination." "Do what is right." "Add up
+        and see how much it will cost." "Say I would do it." "Just
+        start doing it." "Go away." "Consult a doctor." "See if you
+        have time," etc.
+
+(c) _Why we should judge a person more by his actions than by his words_
+
+    _Satisfactory responses_ fall into the following classes:--
+    (1) Words and deeds both mentioned and contrasted in
+        reliability; as: "Actions speak louder than words" (this in
+        8 per cent of successes). "You can tell more by his actions
+        than by his words." "He might talk nice and do bad things."
+        "Sometimes people say things and don't do them." "It's not
+        what you say but what you do that counts." "Talk is cheap;
+        when he does a thing you can believe it." "People don't do
+        everything they say." "A man might steal but talk like a
+        nice man." Over 45 per cent of all correct responses belong
+        to group (1).
+    (2) Acts stressed without mention of words; as: "You can tell by
+        his actions whether he is good or not." "If he _acts_ nice
+        he _is_ nice." "Actions show for themselves." Group (2)
+        contains about 25 per cent of the correct responses.
+    (3) Emphasis on unreliability of words; as: "You can't tell by
+        his words, he might lie or boast." "Because you can't always
+        believe what people say." (Group (3) contains 15 per cent of
+        the correct responses.)
+    (4) Responses which state that a man's deeds are sometimes
+        better than his words; as: "He might talk ugly and still not
+        do bad things." "Some really kind-hearted people scold and
+        swear." "A man's words may be worse than his deeds," etc.
+        Group (4) contains over 10 per cent of the correct
+        responses.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory responses_ are usually due to inability to
+    comprehend the meaning of the question. If there is a complete
+    lack of comprehension the result is either silence or a totally
+    irrelevant response. If there is partial comprehension of the
+    question the response may be partially relevant, but fail to
+    make the expected distinction.
+
+    The following are sample failures: "You could tell by his words
+    that he was educated." "It shows he is polite if he acts nice."
+    "Sometimes people aren't polite." "Actions show who he might
+    be." "Acts may be foolish." "Words ain't right." "A man might be
+    dumb." "A fellow don't know what he says." "Some people can
+    talk, but don't have control of themselves." "You can tell by
+    his acts whether he goes with bad people." "If he doesn't act
+    right you know he won't talk right." "Actions show if he has
+    manners." "Might get embarrassed and not talk good." "He may not
+    know how to express his thoughts." "He might be a rich man but a
+    poor talker." "He might say the wrong thing and afterwards be
+    sorry for it," etc. (The last four are nearer correct than the
+    others, but they fall just short of expressing the essential
+    contrast.)
+
+REMARKS. For discussion of the comprehension questions as a test of
+intelligence, see page 158.
+
+Binet used eight questions, three "easy" and five "difficult," and
+required that five out of eight be answered correctly in year X. The
+eight were as follows:--
+
+  (1) What to do when you have missed your train.
+  (2) When you have been struck by a playmate, etc.
+  (3) When you have broken something, etc.
+  (4) When about to be late for school.
+  (5) When about to undertake something important.
+  (6) Why excuse a bad act committed in anger more readily than a bad
+      act committed without anger.
+  (7) What to do if some one asks your opinion, etc.
+  (8) Why can you judge a person better by his actions, etc.
+
+As we have shown, questions 1, 2, 3, and 4 are much too easy for year X.
+Question 6 is hard enough for year XII. We have omitted it because it
+was not needed and is not entirely satisfactory.
+
+
+X, 6. NAMING SIXTY WORDS
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_Now, I want to see how many different words you can
+name in three minutes. When I say ready, you must begin and name the
+words as fast as you can, and I will count them. Do you understand? Be
+sure to do your very best, and remember that just any words will do,
+like 'clouds,' 'dog,' 'chair,' 'happy'--Ready; go ahead!_"
+
+The instructions may be repeated if the subject does not understand what
+is wanted. As a rule the task is comprehended instantly and entered into
+with great zest.
+
+Do not stare at the child, and do not say anything as the test proceeds
+unless there is a pause of fifteen seconds. In this event say: "_Go
+ahead, as fast as you can. Any words will do._" Repeat this urging after
+every pause of fifteen seconds.
+
+Some subjects, usually rather intelligent ones, hit upon the device of
+counting or putting words together in sentences. We then break in with:
+"_Counting_ (or _sentences_, as the case may be) _not allowed. You must
+name separate words. Go ahead._"
+
+Record the individual words if possible, and mark the end of each
+half-minute. If the words are named so rapidly that they cannot be taken
+down, it is easy to keep the count by making a pencil stroke for each
+word. If the latter method is employed, repeated words may be indicated
+by making a cross instead of a single stroke. Always make record of
+repetitions.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _sixty_ words, exclusive of repetitions,
+are named in three minutes. It is not allowable to accept twenty words
+in one minute or forty words in two minutes as an equivalent of the
+expected score. Only real words are counted.
+
+REMARKS. Scoring, as we have seen, takes account only of the number of
+words. It is instructive, however, to note the kind of words given. Some
+subjects, more often those of the 8- or 9-year intelligence level, give
+mainly isolated, detached words. As well stated by Binet, "Little
+children exhaust an idea in naming it. They say, for example, _hat_, and
+then pass on to another word without noticing that hats differ in color,
+in form, have various parts, different uses and accessories, and that in
+enumerating all these they could find a large number of words."
+
+Others quickly take advantage of such relationships and name many parts
+of an object before leaving it, or name a number of other objects
+belonging to the same class. _Hat_, for example, suggests _cap_, _hood_,
+_coat_, _shirt_, _shoes_, _stockings_, etc. _Pencil_ suggests _book_,
+_slate_, _paper_, _desk_, _ink_, _map_, _school-yard_, _teacher_, etc.
+Responses of this type may be made up of ten or a dozen plainly distinct
+word groups.
+
+Another type of response consists in naming only objects present, or
+words which present objects immediately suggest. It is unfortunate that
+this occurs, since rooms in which testing is done vary so much with
+respect to furnishings. The subject who chooses this method is obviously
+handicapped if the room is relatively bare. One way to avoid this
+influence is to have all subjects name the words with eyes closed, but
+the distraction thus caused is sometimes rather disturbing. It is
+perhaps best for the present to adhere to the original procedure, and to
+follow the rule of making tests in a room containing few furnishings in
+addition to the necessary table and chairs.
+
+A fourth type of response is that including a large proportion of
+unusual or abstract words. This is the best of all, and is hardly ever
+found except with subjects who are above the 11-year intelligence level.
+
+It goes without saying that a response need not belong entirely to any
+one of the above types. Most responses, in fact, are characterized by a
+mixture of two or three of the types, one of them perhaps being
+dominant.
+
+Though not without its shortcomings, the test is interesting and
+valuable. Success in it does not, as one might suppose, depend solely
+upon the size of the vocabulary. Even 8-year-olds ordinarily know the
+meaning of more than 3000 words, and by 10 years the vocabulary usually
+exceeds 5000 words, or eighty times as many as the child is expected to
+name in three minutes. The main factors in success are two, (1) richness
+and variety of previously made associations with common words; and (2)
+the readiness of these associations to reinstate themselves. The young
+or the retarded subject fishes in the ocean of his vocabulary with a
+single hook, so to speak. He brings up each time only one word. The
+subject endowed with superior intelligence employs a net (the idea of a
+class, for example) and brings up a half-dozen words or more. The latter
+accomplishes a greater amount and with less effort; but it requires
+intelligence and will power to avoid wasting time with detached words.
+
+One is again and again astonished at the poverty of associations which
+this test discloses with retarded subjects. For twenty or thirty seconds
+such children may be unable to think of a single word. It would be
+interesting if at such periods we could get a glimpse into the subject's
+consciousness. There must be some kind of mental content, but it seems
+too vague to be crystallized in words. The ready association of thoughts
+with definite words connotes a relatively high degree of intellectual
+advancement. Language forms are the short-hand of thought; without
+facile command of language, thinking is vague, clumsy, and ineffective.
+Conversely, vague mental content entails language shortage.
+
+Occasionally a child of 11- or 12-year intelligence will make a poor
+showing in this test. When this happens it is usually due either to
+excessive embarrassment or to a strange persistence in running down all
+the words of a given class before launching out upon a new series.
+Occasionally, too, an intelligent subject wastes time in thinking up a
+beautiful list of big or unusual words. As stated by Bobertag, success
+is favored by a certain amount of "intellectual nonchalance," a
+willingness to ignore sense and a readiness to break away from a train
+of associations as soon as the "point of diminishing returns" has been
+reached. This doubtless explains why adults sometimes make such a
+surprisingly poor showing in the test. They have less "intellectual
+nonchalance" than children, are less willing to subordinate such
+considerations as completeness and logical connection to the demands of
+speed. Knollin's unemployed men of 12- to 13-year intelligence succeeded
+no better than school children of the 10-year level.
+
+We do not believe, however, that this fault is serious enough to warrant
+the elimination of the test. The fact is that in a large majority of
+cases the score which it yields agrees fairly closely with the result of
+the scale as a whole. Subjects more than a year or two below the mental
+age of 10 years seldom succeed. Those more than a year or two above the
+10-year level seldom fail.
+
+There is another reason why the test should be retained, it often has
+significance beyond that which appears in the mere number of words
+given. The naming of unusual and abstract words is an instance of this.
+An unusually large number of repetitions has symptomatic significance
+in the other direction. It indicates a tendency to mental stereotypy, so
+frequently encountered in testing the feeble-minded. The proportion of
+repetitions made by normal children of the 10- or 11-year intelligence
+level rarely exceeds 2 or 3 per cent of the total number of words named;
+those of older retarded children of the same level occasionally reach
+6 or 8 per cent.
+
+It is conceivable, of course, that a more satisfactory test of this
+general nature could be devised; such, for example, as having the
+subject name all the words he can of a given class (four-footed animals,
+things to eat, articles of household furniture, trees, birds, etc.). The
+main objection to this form of the test is that the performance would in
+all probability be more influenced by environment and formal instruction
+than is the case with the test of naming sixty words.
+
+One other matter remains to be mentioned; namely, the relative number of
+words named in the half-minute periods. As would be expected, the rate
+of naming words decreases as the test proceeds. In the case of the
+10-year-olds, we find the average number of words for the six successive
+half-minutes to be as follows:--
+
+    18, 12½, 10½, 9, 8½, 7.
+
+Some subjects maintain an almost constant rate throughout the test,
+others rapidly exhaust themselves, while a very few make a bad beginning
+and improve as they go. As a rule it is only the very intelligent who
+improve after the first half-minute. On the other hand, mentally
+retarded subjects and very young normals exhaust themselves so quickly
+that only a few words are named in the last minute.
+
+Binet first located this test in year XI, but shifted it to year XII in
+1911. Goddard and Kuhlmann retain it in year XI, though Goddard's
+statistics suggest year X as the proper location, and Kuhlmann's even
+suggest year IX. Kuhlmann, however, accepts fifty words as satisfactory
+in case the response contains a considerable proportion of abstract or
+unusual words. All the American statistics except Rowe's agree in
+showing that the test is easy enough for year X.
+
+
+X, ALTERNATIVE TEST 1: REPEATING SIX DIGITS
+
+The digit series used are 3-7-4-8-5-9; and 5-2-1-7-4-6.
+
+The PROCEDURE and SCORING are the same as in VII, 3, except that only
+two trials are given, one of which must be correct. The test is somewhat
+too easy for year 10 when three trials are given.
+
+The test of repeating six digits did not appear in the Binet scale and
+seems not to have been standardized until inserted in the Stanford
+series.
+
+
+X, ALTERNATIVE TEST 2: REPEATING TWENTY TO TWENTY-TWO SYLLABLES
+
+The sentences for this year are:--
+
+  (a) "_The apple tree makes a cool, pleasant shade on the ground
+      where the children are playing._"
+  (b) "_It is nearly half-past one o'clock; the house is very
+      quiet and the cat has gone to sleep._"
+  (c) "_In summer the days are very warm and fine; in winter it
+      snows and I am cold._"
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING exactly as in VI, 6.
+
+REMARKS. It is interesting to note that five years of mental growth are
+required to pass from the ability to repeat sixteen or eighteen
+syllables (year VI) to the ability to repeat twenty or twenty-two
+syllables. Similarly in memory for digits. Five digits are almost as
+easy at year VII as six at year X. Two explanations are available: (1)
+The increased difficulty may be accounted for by a relatively slow
+growth of memory power after the age of 6 or 7 years; or (2) the
+increase in difficulty may be real, expressing an inner law as to the
+behavior of the memory span in dealing with material of increasing
+length. Both factors are probably involved.
+
+This is another of the Stanford additions to the scale. Average children
+of 10 years ordinarily pass it, but older, retarded children of 10-year
+mental age make a poorer showing. In the case of mentally retarded
+adults, especially, the verbal memory is less exact than that of school
+children of the same mental age.
+
+
+X, ALTERNATIVE TEST 3: CONSTRUCTION PUZZLE A (HEALY AND FERNALD)
+
+MATERIAL. Use the form-board pictured on page 279. This may be
+purchased of C. H. Stoelting & Co., Chicago, Illinois. A home-made one
+will do as well if care is taken to get the dimensions exact.
+Quarter-inch wood should be used. The inside of the frame should be
+3 × 4 inches, and the dimensions of the blocks should be as follows:
+1+3/16 × 3; 1 × 1½; 1 × 2¾; 1 × 1½; 1¼ × 2.
+
+PROCEDURE. Place the frame on the table before the subject, the short
+side nearest him. The blocks are placed in an irregular position on the
+side of the frame away from the subject. Take care that the board with
+the blocks in place is not exposed to view in advance of the experiment.
+
+Say: "_I want you to put these blocks in this frame so that all the
+space will be filled up. If you do it rightly they will all fit in and
+there will be no space left over. Go ahead._"
+
+Do not tell the subject to see how quickly he can do it. Say nothing
+that would even suggest hurrying, for this tends to call forth the
+trial-and-error procedure even with intelligent subjects.
+
+[Illustration]
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the child succeeds in fitting the blocks
+into place _three times in a total time of five minutes for the three
+trials_.
+
+The method of procedure is fully as important as the time, but is not so
+easily scored in quantitative terms. Nevertheless, the examiner should
+always take observations on the method employed, noting especially
+any tendency to make and to repeat moves which lead to obvious
+impossibilities; i.e., moves which leave a space obviously unfitted to
+any of the remaining pieces. Some subjects repeat an absurd move many
+times over; others make an absurd move, but promptly correct it; others,
+and these are usually the bright ones, look far enough ahead to avoid
+error altogether.
+
+REMARKS. This test was devised by Professor Freeman, was adapted
+slightly by Healy and Fernald, and was first standardized by
+Dr. Kuhlmann. Miss Gertrude Hall has also standardized it, but on a
+different procedure from that described above.[67]
+
+[67] _Eugenics and Social Welfare Bulletin_, No. 5, The State Board of
+Charities, Albany, New York.
+
+The test has a lower correlation with intelligence than most of the
+other tests of the scale. Many bright children of 10-year intelligence
+adopt the trial-and-error method and have little success, while retarded
+older children of only 8-year intelligence sometimes succeed. Age, apart
+from intelligence, seems to play an important part in determining the
+nature of the performance. A favorable feature of the test, however, is
+the fact that it makes no demand on language ability and that it brings
+into play an aspect of intelligence which is relatively neglected by the
+remainder of the scale. For this reason it is at least worth keeping as
+an alternative test.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XVII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR XII
+
+
+XII, 1. VOCABULARY (FORTY DEFINITIONS, 7200 WORDS)
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING as in previous vocabulary tests.[68] In this case
+forty words must be defined.
+
+[68] See VIII, 6.
+
+
+XII, 2. DEFINING ABSTRACT WORDS
+
+PROCEDURE. The words to be defined are _pity_, _revenge_, _charity_,
+_envy_, and _justice_. The formula is, "_What is pity? What do we mean
+by pity?_" and so on with the other words. If the meaning of the
+response is not clear, ask the subject to explain what he means. If the
+definition is in terms of the word itself, as "Pity means to pity
+someone," "Revenge is to take revenge," etc., it is then necessary to
+say: "_Yes, but what does it mean to pity some one?_" or, "_What does it
+mean to take revenge?_" etc. Only supplementary questions of this kind
+are permissible.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _three of the five_ words are
+satisfactorily defined. The definition need not be strictly logical nor
+the language elegant. It is sufficient if the definition shows that the
+meaning of the word is known. Definitions which define by means of an
+illustration are acceptable. The following are samples of satisfactory
+and unsatisfactory responses:--
+
+(a) _Pity_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "To be sorry for some one." "To feel
+    compassion." "To have sympathy for a person." "To feel bad for
+    some one." "It means you help a person out and don't like to
+    have him suffer." "To have a feeling for people when they are
+    treated wrong." "If anybody gets hurt real bad you pity them."
+    "It's when you feel sorry for a tramp and give him something to
+    eat." "If some one is in trouble and you know how it feels to be
+    in that condition, you pity him." "You see something that's
+    wrong and have your feeling aroused."
+
+    Of 130 correct responses, 85, or 65 per cent, defined _pity_ as
+    "to feel sorry for some one," or words to that effect. Less than
+    10 per cent defined by means of illustration.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To think of the poor." "To be good to
+    others." "To help." "It means sorrow." "Mercy." "To cheer people
+    up." "It means 'What a pity!'" "To be ashamed." "To be sick or
+    poor." "It's when you break something."
+
+    Apart from inability to reply, which accounts for nearly one
+    fourth of the failures, there is no predominant type of
+    unsatisfactory response.
+
+(b) _Revenge_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "To get even with some one." "To get back on
+    him." "To do something to the one who has done something to
+    you." "To hurt them back." "To pay it back," or "Do something
+    back." "To do something mean in return." "To square up with a
+    person." "When somebody slaps you, you slap back." "You kill a
+    person if he does something to you."
+
+    The expression "to get even" was found in 42 per cent of 120
+    correct answers; "to pay it back," or "To do something back," in
+    20 per cent; "To get back on him," in 17 per cent. About
+    8 per cent were illustrations.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To be mad." "You try to hurt them." "To
+    fight." "You hate a person." "To kill them." "It means hateful."
+    "To try again." "To think evil of some one." "To hate some one
+    who has done you wrong." "To let a person off." "To go away from
+    something."
+
+    Inability to reply accounts for a little over 40 per cent of the
+    failures.
+
+(c) _Charity_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "To give to the poor." "To help those who are
+    needy." "It is charity if you are poor and somebody helps you."
+    "To give to somebody without pay."
+
+    Of 110 correct replies, 72 per cent were worded substantially
+    like the first or second given above.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "A person who helps the poor." "A place where
+    poor people get food and things." "It is a good life." "To be
+    happy." "To be poor." "Charity is being treated good." "It is to
+    be charitable." "Charity is selling something that is not worth
+    much." "It means to be good" or "to be kind."
+
+    When the last named response is given, we should say: "_Explain
+    what you mean._" If this brings an amplification of the response
+    to "It means to do things for the poor," or the equivalent, the
+    score is _plus_. "Charity means love" is also _minus_ if the
+    statement cannot be further explained and is merely rote memory
+    of the passage in the 13th chapter of 1st Corinthians. Simply
+    "To help" or "To give" is unsatisfactory. Half of the failures
+    are due to inability to reply.
+
+(d) _Envy_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "You envy some one who has something you want."
+    "It's the way you feel when you see some one with something
+    nicer than you have." "It's when a poor girl sees a rich girl
+    with nice dresses and things." "You hate some one because
+    they've got something you want." "Jealousy" (satisfactory if
+    subject can explain what _jealousy_ means; otherwise it is
+    _minus_). "It's when you see a person better off than you are."
+
+    Nearly three fourths of the correct responses say in substance,
+    "You envy a person who has something you want." Most of the
+    others are concrete illustrations.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To hate some one," or simply "To hate." "You
+    don't like 'em." "Bad feeling toward any one." "To be a great
+    man or woman." "Not to be nice to people." "What we do to our
+    enemies."
+
+    Inability to respond accounts for 55 per cent of the failures.
+
+(e) _Justice_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "To give people what they deserve." "It means
+    that everybody is treated the same way, whether he is rich or
+    poor." "It's what you get when you go to court." "If one does
+    something and gets punished, that's justice." "To do the square
+    thing." "To give everybody his dues." "Let every one have what's
+    coming to him." "To do the right thing by any one." "If two
+    people do the same thing and they let one go without punishing,
+    that is not justice."
+
+    Approximately 38 per cent of 102 correct responses referred to
+    treating everybody the same way; 25 per cent to "doing the
+    square thing", 12 per cent were concrete illustrations; and
+    4 per cent were definitions of what justice is not.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "It means to have peace." "It is where they
+    have court." "It's the Courthouse." "To be honest." "Where one
+    is just" (_minus_, unless further explained). "To do right"
+    (_minus_, unless in explaining _right_ the subject gives a
+    definition of _justice_).
+
+    It is very necessary, in case of such answers as "Justice is to
+    do right," "To be just," etc., that the subject be urged to
+    explain further what he means. "To do right" includes nearly
+    12 per cent of all answers, and is given by the very brightest
+    children. Most of these are able, when urged, to complete the
+    definition in a satisfactory manner.
+
+REMARKS. The reader may be surprised that the ability to define common
+abstract words should develop so late. Most children who have had
+anything like ordinary home or school environment have doubtless heard
+all of these words countless times before the age of 12 years.
+Nevertheless, the statistics from the test show unmistakably that before
+this age such words have but limited and vague meaning. Other vocabulary
+studies confirm this fact so completely that we may say there is hardly
+any trait in which 12- to 14-year intelligence more uniformly excels
+that of the 9- or 10-year level.
+
+This is readily understandable when we consider the nature of abstract
+meanings and the intellectual processes by which we arrive at them.
+Unlike such words as _tree_, _house_, etc., the ideas they contain are
+not the immediate result of perceptual processes, in which even childish
+intelligence is adept, but are a refined and secondary product of
+relationships between other ideas. They require the logical processes of
+comparison, abstraction, and generalization. One cannot see justice, for
+example, but one is often confronted with situations in which justice or
+injustice is an element; and given a certain degree of abstraction and
+generalization, out of such situations the idea of justice will
+gradually be evolved.
+
+The formation and use of abstract ideas, of one kind or another,
+represent, _par excellence_, the "higher thought processes." It is not
+without significance that delinquents who test near the border-line of
+mental deficiency show such inferior ability in arriving at correct
+generalizations regarding matters of social and moral relationships. We
+cannot expect a mind of defective generalizing ability to form very
+definite or correct notions about justice, law, fairness, ownership
+rights, etc.; and if the ideas themselves are not fairly clear, the
+rules of conduct based upon them cannot make a very powerful appeal.[69]
+
+[69] See also p. 298 _ff._
+
+Binet used the words _charity_, _justice_, and _kindness_, and required
+two successes. In the 1911 revision he shifted the test from year XI to
+year XII, where it more nearly belongs. Goddard also places it in
+year XII and uses Binet's words, translating _bonté_, however, as
+_goodness_ instead of _kindness_. Kuhlmann retains the test in year XI
+and adds _bravery_ and _revenge_, requiring three correct definitions
+out of five. Bobertag uses _pity_, _envy_, and _justice_, requires two
+correct definitions, and finds the test just hard enough for year XII.
+
+After using the words _goodness_ and _kindness_ in two series of tests,
+we have discarded them as objectionable in that they give rise to so
+many doubtful definitions. Even intelligent children often say:
+"Goodness means to do something good," "Kindness means to be kind to
+some one," etc. These definitions in a circle occur less than half as
+often with _pity_, _revenge_, and _envy_, which are also superior to
+_charity_ and _justice_ in this respect.
+
+The relative difficulty of our five words is indicated by the order in
+which we have listed them in the test (i.e., beginning with the easiest
+and ending with the hardest). On the standard of three correct
+definitions, these words fit very accurately in year XII.
+
+
+XII, 3. THE BALL-AND-FIELD TEST (SUPERIOR PLAN)
+
+PROCEDURE, as in year VIII, test 1.
+
+SCORING. Score 3 (or superior plan) is required for passing in
+year XII.[70]
+
+[70] See scoring card.
+
+
+XII, 4. DISSECTED SENTENCES
+
+The following disarranged sentences are used:--
+
+    FOR THE STARTED AN WE COUNTRY EARLY AT HOUR
+
+    TO ASKED PAPER MY TEACHER CORRECT I MY
+
+    A DEFENDS DOG GOOD HIS BRAVELY MASTER
+
+These should be printed in type like that used above. The Stanford
+record booklet contains the sentences in convenient form.
+
+It is not permissible to substitute written words or printed script, as
+that would make the test harder. All the words should be printed in caps
+in order that no clue shall be given as to the first word in a sentence.
+For a similar reason the period is omitted.
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_Here is a sentence that has the words all mixed up so
+that they don't make any sense. If the words were changed around in the
+right order they would make a good sentence. Look carefully and see if
+you can tell me how the sentence ought to read._"
+
+Give the sentences in the order in which they are listed in the record
+booklet. Do not tell the subject to see how quickly he can do it,
+because with this test any suggestion of hurrying is likely to produce a
+kind of mental paralysis. If the subject has no success with the first
+sentence in one minute, read it off correctly for him, somewhat slowly,
+and pointing to each word as it is spoken. Then proceed to the second
+and third, allowing one minute for each.
+
+Give no further help. It is not permissible, in case an incorrect
+response is given, to ask the subject to try again, or to say: "_Are you
+sure that is right?_" "_Are you sure you have not left out any words?_"
+etc. Instead, maintain absolute silence. However, the subject is
+permitted to make as many changes in his response as he sees fit,
+provided he makes them spontaneously and within the allotted time.
+Record the entire response.
+
+Once in a great while the subject misunderstands the task and thinks the
+only requirement is to use all the words given, and that it is permitted
+to add as many other words as he likes. It is then necessary to repeat
+the instructions and to allow a new trial.
+
+SCORING. _Two sentences out of three must be correctly given within the
+minute allotted to each._ It is understood, of course, that if the first
+sentence has to be read for the subject, both the other responses must
+be given correctly.
+
+A sentence is not counted correct if a single word is omitted, altered,
+or inserted, or if the order given fails to make perfect sense.
+
+Certain responses are not absolutely incorrect, but are objectionable as
+regards sentence structure, or else fail to give the exact meaning
+intended. These are given half credit. Full credit on one, and half
+credit on each of the other two, is satisfactory. The following are
+samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory responses:--
+
+(a)
+    _Satisfactory._
+       "We started for the country at an early hour."
+       "At an early hour we started for the country."
+       "We started at an early hour for the country."
+    _Unsatisfactory._
+       "We started early at an hour for the country."
+       "Early at an hour we started for the country."
+       "We started early for the country."
+    _Half credit._
+       "For the country at an early hour we started."
+       "For the country we started at an early hour."
+
+(b)
+    _Satisfactory._
+       "I asked my teacher to correct my paper."
+    _Unsatisfactory._
+       "My teacher asked to correct my paper."
+       "To correct my paper I asked my teacher."
+    _Half credit._
+       "My teacher I asked to correct my paper."
+
+(c)
+    _Satisfactory._
+       "A good dog defends his master bravely."
+       "A good dog bravely defends his master."
+    _Unsatisfactory._
+       "A dog defends his master bravely."
+       "A bravely dog defends his master."
+       "A good dog defends his bravely master."
+       "A good brave dog defends his master."
+    _Half credit._
+       "A dog defends his good master bravely."
+       "A dog bravely defends his good master."
+       "A good master bravely defends his dog."
+
+REMARKS. This is an excellent test. It involves no knowledge which may
+not be presupposed at the age in which it is given, and success
+therefore depends very little on experience. The worst that can be urged
+against it is that it may possibly be influenced to a certain extent by
+the amount of reading the subject has done. But this has not been
+demonstrated. At any rate, the test satisfies the most important
+requirement of a test of intelligence; namely, the percentage of
+successes increases rapidly and steadily from the lower to the higher
+levels of mental age.
+
+This experiment can be regarded as a variation of the completion test.
+Binet tells us, in fact, that it was directly suggested by the
+experiment of Ebbinghaus. As will readily be observed, however, it
+differs to a certain extent from the Ebbinghaus completion test.
+Ebbinghaus omits parts of a sentence and requires the subject to supply
+the omissions. In this test we give all the parts and require the
+formation of a sentence by rearrangement. The two experiments are
+psychologically similar in that they require the subject to relate given
+fragments into a meaningful whole. Success depends upon the ability of
+intelligence to utilize hints, or clues, and this in turn depends on the
+logical integrity of the associative processes. All but the highest
+grade of the feeble-minded fail with this test.
+
+This test is found in year XI of Binet's 1908 series and in year XII of
+his 1911 revision. Goddard and Kuhlmann retain it in the original
+location. That it is better placed in year XII is indicated by all the
+available statistics with normal children, except those of Goddard. With
+this exception, the results of various investigators for year XII are in
+remarkably close agreement, as the following figures will show:--
+
+    _Per cent passing at year XII_
+
+    Binet                           66
+    Kuhlmann                        68
+    Bobertag                        78
+    Dougherty                       64
+    Strong                          72
+    Léviste and Morlé               70
+    Stanford series (1911)          62
+    Stanford series (1913)          57
+    Stanford series (1914)          62
+    Princeton data                  61
+
+This agreement is noteworthy considering that no two experiments seem to
+have used exactly the same arrangement of words, and that some have
+presented the words of a sentence in a single line, others in two or
+three lines. A single line would appear to be somewhat easier.
+
+
+XII, 5. INTERPRETATION OF FABLES (SCORE 4)
+
+The following fables are used:--
+
+(a) _Hercules and the Wagoner_
+
+    _A man was driving along a country road, when the wheels
+    suddenly sank in a deep rut. The man did nothing but look at the
+    wagon and call loudly to Hercules to come and help him. Hercules
+    came up, looked at the man, and said: "Put your shoulder to the
+    wheel, my man, and whip up your oxen." Then he went away and
+    left the driver._
+
+(b) _The Milkmaid and her Plans_
+
+    _A milkmaid was carrying her pail of milk on her head, and was
+    thinking to herself thus: "The money for this milk will buy
+    4 hens; the hens will lay at least 100 eggs; the eggs will
+    produce at least 75 chicks; and with the money which the chicks
+    will bring I can buy a new dress to wear instead of the ragged
+    one I have on." At this moment she looked down at herself,
+    trying to think how she would look in her new dress; but as she
+    did so the pail of milk slipped from her head and dashed upon
+    the ground. Thus all her imaginary schemes perished in a moment._
+
+(c) _The Fox and the Crow_
+
+    _A crow, having stolen a bit of meat, perched in a tree and held
+    it in her beak. A fox, seeing her, wished to secure the meat,
+    and spoke to the crow thus: "How handsome you are! and I have
+    heard that the beauty of your voice is equal to that of your
+    form and feathers. Will you not sing for me, so that I may judge
+    whether this is true?" The crow was so pleased that she opened
+    her mouth to sing and dropped the meat, which the fox
+    immediately ate._
+
+(d) _The Farmer and the Stork_
+
+    _A farmer set some traps to catch cranes which had been eating
+    his seed. With them he caught a stork. The stork, which had not
+    really been stealing, begged the farmer to spare his life,
+    saying that he was a bird of excellent character, that he was
+    not at all like the cranes, and that the farmer should have pity
+    on him. But the farmer said: "I have caught you with these
+    robbers, and you will have to die with them."_
+
+(e) _The Miller, His Son, and the Donkey_
+
+    _A miller and his son were driving their donkey to a neighboring
+    town to sell him. They had not gone far when a child saw them
+    and cried out: "What fools those fellows are to be trudging
+    along on foot when one of them might be riding." The old man,
+    hearing this, made his son get on the donkey, while he himself
+    walked. Soon, they came upon some men. "Look," said one of them,
+    "see that lazy boy riding while his old father has to walk." On
+    hearing this, the miller made his son get off, and he climbed on
+    the donkey himself. Farther on they met a company of women, who
+    shouted out: "Why, you lazy old fellow, to ride along so
+    comfortably while your poor boy there can hardly keep pace by
+    the side of you!" And so the good-natured miller took his boy up
+    behind him and both of them rode. As they came to the town a
+    citizen said to them, "Why, you cruel fellows! You two are
+    better able to carry the poor little donkey than he is to carry
+    you." "Very well," said the miller, "we will try." So both of
+    them jumped to the ground, got some ropes, tied the donkey's
+    legs to a pole and tried to carry him. But as they crossed the
+    bridge the donkey became frightened, kicked loose and fell into
+    the stream._
+
+PROCEDURE. Present the fables in the order in which they are given
+above. The method is to say to the subject:
+
+"_You know what a fable is? You have heard fables?_" Whatever the
+answer, proceed to explain a fable as follows: "_A fable, you know, is a
+little story, and is meant to teach us a lesson. Now, I am going to read
+a fable to you. Listen carefully, and when I am through I will ask you
+to tell me what lesson the fable teaches us. Ready; listen._" After
+reading the fable, say: "_What lesson does that teach us?_" Record the
+response _verbatim_ and proceed with the next as follows: "_Here is
+another. Listen again and tell me what lesson this fable teaches us_,"
+etc.
+
+As far as possible, avoid comment or commendation until all the fables
+have been given. If the first answer is of an inferior type and we
+express too much satisfaction with it, we thereby encourage the
+subject to continue in his error. On the other hand, never express
+dissatisfaction with a response, however absurd or _malapropos_ it may
+be. Many subjects are anxious to know how well they are doing and
+continually ask, "Did I get that one right?" It is sufficient to say,
+"You are getting along nicely," or something to that effect. Offer no
+comments, suggestions, or questions which might put the subject on the
+right track. This much self-control is necessary if we would make the
+conditions of the test uniform for all subjects.
+
+The only occasion when a supplementary question is permissible is in
+case of a response whose meaning is not clear. Even then we must be
+cautious and restrict ourselves to some such question as, "_What do you
+mean?_" or, "_Explain; I don't quite understand what you mean_." The
+scoring of fables is somewhat difficult at best, and this additional
+question is often sufficient to place the response very definitely in
+the right or wrong column.
+
+SCORING. Give score 2, i.e., 2 points, for a correct answer, and 1 for
+an answer which deserves half credit. The test is passed in year XII
+_if 4 points are earned_; that is, if two responses are correct or if
+one is correct and two deserve half credit.
+
+Score 2 means that the fable has been correctly interpreted and that the
+lesson it teaches has been stated in general terms.
+
+There are two types of response which may be given half credit. They
+include (1) the interpretations which are stated in general terms and
+are fairly plausible, but are not exactly correct; and (2) those which
+are perfectly correct as to substance, but are not generalized.
+
+We overlook ordinary faults of expression and regard merely the
+essential meaning of the response.
+
+The only way to explain the method is by giving copious illustrations.
+If the following sample responses are carefully studied, a reasonable
+degree of expertness in scoring fables may be acquired with only a
+limited amount of actual practice. The sampling may appear to the reader
+needlessly prolix, but experience has taught us that in giving
+directions for the scoring of tests error always lies on the side of
+taking too much for granted.
+
+(a) _Hercules and the Wagoner_
+
+    _Full credit; score 2._ "God helps those who help themselves."
+    "Do not depend on others." "Help yourself before calling for
+    help." "It teaches that we should rely upon ourselves."
+
+    The following are not quite so good, but are nevertheless
+    considered satisfactory. "We should always try, even if it looks
+    hard and we think we can't do it." "When in trouble try to get
+    out of it yourself." "We've got to do things without help." "Not
+    to be lazy."
+
+    _Half credit; score 1._ This is most often given for the
+    response which contains the correct idea, but states it in terms
+    of the concrete situation, e.g.: "The man ought to have tried
+    himself first." "Hercules wanted to teach the man to help
+    himself." "The driver was too much inclined to depend on
+    others." "The man was too lazy. He should not have called for
+    help until he had tried to get out by himself." "To get out and
+    try instead of watching."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory; score 0._ Failures are mainly of five
+    varieties: (1) generalized interpretations which entirely miss
+    the point; (2) crude interpretations which not only miss the
+    point, but are also stated in terms of the concrete situation;
+    (3) irrelevant or incoherent remarks; (4) efforts to repeat the
+    story; and (5) inability to respond.
+
+    Sample failures of type (1), entirely incorrect generalizations:
+    "Teaches us to look where we are going." "Not to ask for
+    anything when there is no one to help." "To help those who are
+    in trouble." "Teaches us to be polite." "How to help others."
+    "Not to be cruel to horses." "Always to do what people tell you"
+    (or "obey orders," etc.). "Not to be foolish" (or stupid, etc.).
+    "If you would have a thing well done, do it yourself."
+
+    Failures of type (2), crude interpretations stated in concrete
+    terms: "How to get out of the mud." "Not to get stuck in the
+    mud." "To carry a stick along to pry yourself out if you get
+    into a mud-hole." "To help any one who is stuck in the mud."
+    "Taught Hercules to help the horses along and not whip them too
+    hard." "Not to be mean like Hercules."
+
+    Failures of type (3), irrelevant responses: "It was foolish not
+    to thank him." "He should have helped the driver." "Hercules was
+    mean." "If any one helps himself the horses will try." "The
+    driver should have done what Hercules told him." "He wanted the
+    man to help the oxen."
+
+    Type (4): Efforts to repeat the story.
+
+    Type (5): Inability to respond.
+
+(b) _The Maid and the Eggs_
+
+    _Full credit; score 2._ "Teaches us not to build air-castles."
+    "Don't count your chickens before they are hatched." "Not to
+    plan too far ahead." Slightly inferior, but still acceptable:
+    "Never make too many plans." "Don't count on the second thing
+    till you have done the first."
+
+    _Half credit; score 1._ "It teaches us not to have our minds on
+    the future when we carry milk on the head." "She was building
+    air-castles and so lost her milk." "She was planning too far
+    ahead."
+
+    The responses just given are examples of fairly correct
+    interpretations in non-generalized terms. The following are
+    examples of generalized interpretations which fall below the
+    accuracy required for full credit: "Never make plans." "Not to
+    be too proud." "To keep our mind on what we are doing." "Don't
+    cross a bridge till you come to it." "Don't count your _eggs_
+    before they are hatched." "Not to be wanting things; learn to
+    wait." "Not to imagine; go ahead and do it."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory; score 0._ Type (1), entirely incorrect
+    generalization: "That money does not buy everything." "Not to be
+    greedy." "Not to be selfish." "Not to waste things." "Not to
+    take risks like that." "Not to think about clothes." "Count your
+    chickens before they are hatched."
+
+    Type (2), very crude interpretations stated in concrete terms:
+    "Not to carry milk on the head." "Teaches her to watch and not
+    throw down her head." "To carry her head straight." "Not to
+    spill milk." "To keep your chickens and you will make more
+    money."
+
+    Type (3), irrelevant responses: "She wanted the money." "Teaches
+    us to read and write" (18-year-old of 8-year intelligence).
+    "About a girl who was selling some milk."
+
+    Type (4), effort to repeat the story.
+
+    Type (5), inability to respond.
+
+(c) _The Fox and the Crow_
+
+    _Full credit; score 2._ "Teaches us not to listen to flattery."
+    "Don't let yourself be flattered." "It is not safe to believe
+    people who flatter us." "We had better look out for people who
+    brag on us."
+
+    _Half credit; score 1._ Correct idea in concrete terms: "The
+    crow was so proud of herself that she lost all she had." "The
+    crow listened to flattery and got left." "Not to be proud and
+    let people think you can sing when you can't." "If anybody
+    brags on you don't sing or do what he tells you."
+
+    Pertinent but somewhat inferior generalizations: "Not to be too
+    proud." "Pride goes before a fall." "To be on our guard against
+    people who are our enemies." "Not to do everything people tell
+    you." "Don't trust every slick fellow you meet."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory; score 0._ Type (1), incorrect generalization:
+    "Not to go with people you don't know." "Not to be selfish." "To
+    share your food." "Look before you leap." "Not to listen to
+    evil." "Not to steal." "Teaches honesty." "Not to covet." "Think
+    for yourself." "Teaches wisdom." "Never listen to advice."
+    "Never let any one get ahead of you." "To figure out what they
+    are going to do." "Never try to do two things at once." "How to
+    get what you want."
+
+    Type (2), very crude interpretation stated in terms of the
+    concrete situation: "Not to sing before you eat." "Not to hold a
+    thing in your mouth; eat it." "To eat a thing before you think
+    of your beauty." "To swallow it before you sing." "To be on your
+    watch when you have food in your mouth."
+
+    Type (3), irrelevant responses: "The fox was greedy." "The fox
+    was slicker than what the crow was." "The crow ought not to have
+    opened her mouth." "The crow should just have shaken her head."
+    "It served the crow right for stealing the meat." "The fox
+    wanted the meat and just told the crow that to get it."
+    "Foolishness." "Guess that's where the old fox got his
+    name--'Old Foxy'--Don't teach us anything."
+
+    Type (4), efforts to repeat the story.
+
+    Type (5), inability to respond.
+
+(d) _The Farmer and the Stork_
+
+    _Full credit; score 2._ "You are judged by the company you
+    keep." "Teaches us to keep out of bad company." "Birds of a
+    feather flock together." "If you go with bad people you are
+    counted like them." "We should choose our friends carefully."
+    "Don't go with bad people." "Teaches us to avoid the appearance
+    of evil."
+
+    _Half credit; score 1._ "The stork should not have been with the
+    cranes." "Teaches him not to go with robbers." "Don't go with
+    people who are not of your nation." "Not to follow others."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory; score 0._ Type (1), incorrect generalization:
+    "Not to steal." "Not to tell lies." "Not to give excuses." "A
+    poor excuse is better than none." "Not to trust what people
+    say." "Not to listen to excuses." "Not to harm animals that do
+    no harm." "To have pity on others." "Not to be cruel." "To be
+    kind to birds." "Not to blame people for what they don't do."
+    "Teaches that those who do good often suffer for those who do
+    evil." "To tend to your own business." "Not to meddle with other
+    people's things." "Not to trespass on people's property." "Not
+    to think you are so nice." "To keep out of mischief."
+
+    Type (2), very crude interpretations in concrete terms: "Taught
+    the stork to look where it stepped and not walk into a trap."
+    "Taught the stork to keep out of the man's field." "Not to take
+    the seeds."
+
+    Type (3), irrelevant responses: "The farmer was right; storks do
+    eat grain." "Served the stork right, he was stealing too." "He
+    should try to help the stork out of the field."
+
+    Type (4), efforts to repeat the story.
+
+    Type (5), inability to reply.
+
+(e) _The Miller, His Son, and the Donkey_
+
+    _Full credit; score 2._ "When you try to please everybody you
+    please nobody." "Don't listen to everybody; you can't please
+    them all." "Don't take every one's advice." "Don't try to do
+    what everybody tells you." "Use your own judgment." "Have a mind
+    of your own." "Make up your mind and stick to it." "Don't be
+    wishy-washy." "Have confidence in your own opinions."
+
+    _Half credit; score 1._ Interpretations which are generalized
+    but somewhat inferior: "Never take any one's advice" (too
+    sweeping a conclusion). "Don't take foolish advice." "Take your
+    own advice." "It teaches us that people don't always agree."
+
+    Correct idea but not generalized: "They were fools to listen to
+    everybody." "They should have walked or rode just as they
+    thought best, without listening to other people."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory; score 0._ Type (1), incorrect generalization:
+    "To do right." "To do what people tell you." "To be kind to old
+    people." "To be polite." "To serve others." "Not to be cruel to
+    animals." "To have sympathy for beasts of burden." "To be
+    good-natured." "Not to load things on animals that are small."
+    "That it is always better to leave things as they are." "That
+    men were not made for beasts of burden."
+
+    Type (2), very crude interpretations stated in concrete terms:
+    "Not to try to carry the donkey." "That walking is better than
+    riding." "The people should have been more polite to the old
+    man." "That the father should be allowed to ride."
+
+    Type (3), irrelevant responses: "The men were too heavy for the
+    donkey." "They ought to have stayed on and they would not have
+    fallen into the stream." "It teaches about a man and he lost his
+    donkey."
+
+    Type (4), efforts to repeat the story.
+
+    Type (5), inability to respond.
+
+REMARKS. The fable test, or the "test of generalization," as it may
+aptly be named, was used by the writer in a study of the intellectual
+processes of bright and dull boys in 1905,[71] and was further
+standardized by the writer and Mr. Childs in 1911.[72] It has proved its
+worth in a number of investigations. It has been necessary, however, to
+simplify the rather elaborate method of scoring which was proposed in
+1911, not because of any logical fault of the method, but because of the
+difficulty in teaching examiners to use the system correctly. The method
+explained above is somewhat coarser, but it has the advantage of being
+much easier to learn.
+
+[71] "Genius and Stupidity," in _Pedagogical Seminary_, vol. xiii,
+pp. 307-73.
+
+[72] "A Tentative Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Measuring
+Scale of Intelligence," _Journal of Educational Psychology_ (1912).
+
+The generalization test presents for interpretation situations which are
+closely paralleled in the everyday social experience of human beings. It
+tests the subject's ability to understand motives underlying acts or
+attitudes. It gives a clue to the status of the social consciousness.
+This is highly important in the diagnosis of the upper range of mental
+defectiveness. The criterion of the subnormal's fitness for life outside
+an institution is his ability to understand social relations and to
+adjust himself to them. Failure of a subnormal to meet this criterion
+may lead him to break common conventions, and to appear disrespectful,
+sulky, stubborn, or in some other way queer and exceptional. He is
+likely to be misunderstood, because he so easily misunderstands others.
+The skein of human motives is too complex for his limited intelligence
+to untangle.
+
+Ethnological studies have shown in an interesting way the social origin
+of the moral judgment. The rectitude of the moral life, therefore,
+depends on the accuracy of the social judgment. It would be interesting
+to know what proportion of offenders have transgressed moral codes
+because of continued failure to grasp the essential lessons presented
+by human situations.
+
+For the intelligent child even the common incidents of life carry an
+endless succession of lessons in right conduct. On the average school
+playground not an hour passes without some happening which is fraught
+with a moral hint to those who have intelligence enough to generalize
+the situation. A boy plays unfairly and is barred from the game. One
+bullies his weaker companion and arouses the anger and scorn of all his
+fellows. Another vents his braggadocio and feels at once the withering
+scorn of those who listen. Laziness, selfishness, meanness, dishonesty,
+ingratitude, inconstancy, inordinate pride, and the countless other
+faults all have their social penalties. The child of normal intelligence
+sees the point, draws the appropriate lesson and (provided emotions and
+will are also normal) applies it more or less effectively as a guide to
+his own conduct. To the feeble-minded child, all but lacking in the
+power of abstraction and generalization, the situation conveys no such
+lesson. It is but a muddle of concrete events without general
+significance; or even if its meaning is vaguely apprehended, the powers
+of inhibition are insufficient to guarantee that right action will
+follow.
+
+It is for this reason that the generalization test is so valuable in the
+mental examinations of delinquents. It presents a moral situation,
+imagined, to be sure, but none the less real to the individual of normal
+comprehension. It tells us quickly whether the subject tested is able to
+see beyond the incidents of the given situation and to grasp their wider
+relations--whether he is able to generalize the concrete.
+
+The following responses made by feeble-minded delinquents from
+16 to 21 years of age demonstrate sufficiently their inability to
+comprehend the moral situation:--
+
+    _Hercules and the Wagoner._ "Teaches you to look where you are
+    going." "Not to help any one who is stuck in the mud." "Not to
+    whip oxen." "Teaches that Hercules was mean." "Teaches us to
+    carry a stick along to pry the wheels out."
+
+    _The Fox and the Crow._ "Not to sing when eating." "To keep away
+    from strangers." "To swallow it before you sing." "Not to be
+    stingy." "Not to listen to evil." "The fox was wiser than the
+    crow." "Not to be selfish with food." "Not to do two things at
+    once." "To hang on to what you've got."
+
+    _The Farmer and the Stork._ "Teaches the stork to look where he
+    steps." "Not to be cruel like the farmer." "Not to tell lies."
+    "Not to butt into other people's things." "To be kind to birds."
+    "Teaches us how to get rid of troublesome people." "Never go
+    with anything else."
+
+The following are the responses of an 18-year-old delinquent
+(intelligence level 10 years) to the five fables:--
+
+    _Maid and Eggs._ "She was thinking about getting the dress and
+    spilled the milk. Teaches selfishness."
+
+    _Hercules and the Wagoner._ "He wanted to help the oxen out."
+
+    _Fox and Crow._ "Guess that's where the fox got his name--'Old
+    Foxy.' Don't teach us anything."
+
+    _Farmer and Stork._ "Try and help the stork out of the field."
+
+    _Miller, Son, and Donkey._ "They was all big fools and mean to
+    the donkey."
+
+One does not require very profound psychological insight to see that a
+person of this degree of comprehension is not promising material for
+moral education. His weakness in the ability to generalize a moral
+situation is not due to lack of instruction, but is inherent in the
+nature of his mental processes, all of which have the infantile quality
+of average 9- or 10-year intelligence. Well-instructed normal children
+of 10 years ordinarily succeed no better. The ability to draw the
+correct lesson from a social situation is little developed below the
+mental level of 12 or 13 years.
+
+The test is also valuable because it throws light on the subject's
+ability to appreciate the finer shades of meaning. The mentally retarded
+often show marked inferiority in this respect. They sense, perhaps, in a
+general way the trend of the story, but they fail to comprehend much
+that to us seems clearly expressed. They do not get what is left for the
+reader to infer, because they are insensible to the thought fringes. It
+is these which give meaning to the fable. The dull subject may be able
+to image the objects and activities described, but taken in the rough
+such imagery gets him nowhere.
+
+Finally, the test is almost free from the danger of coaching. The
+subject who has been given a number of fables along with twenty-five or
+thirty other tests can as a rule give only hazy and inaccurate testimony
+as to what he has been put through. Moreover, we have found that, even
+if a subject has previously heard a fable, that fact does not materially
+increase his chances of giving a correct interpretation. If the
+situation depicted in the fable is beyond the subject's power of
+comprehension even explicit instruction has little effect upon the
+quality of the response.
+
+Incidentally, this observation raises the question whether the use of
+proverbs, mottoes, fables, poetry, etc., in the moral instruction of
+children may not often be futile because the material is not fitted to
+the child's power of comprehension. Much of the school's instruction in
+history and literature has a moral purpose, but there is reason to
+suspect that in this field schools often make precocious attempts in
+"generalizing" exercises.
+
+
+XII, 6. REPEATING FIVE DIGITS REVERSED
+
+The series are 3-1-8-7-9; 6-9-4-8-2; 5-2-9-6-1.
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING. Exactly as in years VII and IX.[73]
+
+[73] See discussion, p. 207 _ff._
+
+
+XII, 7. INTERPRETATION OF PICTURES
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the same pictures as in III, 1, and VII, 2, and the
+additional picture _d_. Present in the same order. The formula to begin
+with is identical with that in VII, 2: "_Tell me what this picture is
+about. What is this a picture of?_" This formula is chosen because it
+does not suggest specifically either description or interpretation, and
+is therefore adapted to show the child's spontaneous or natural mode of
+apperception. However, in case, this formula fails to bring spontaneous
+interpretation for three of the four pictures, we then return to those
+pictures on which the subject has failed and give a second trial with
+the formula: "_Explain this picture_." A good many subjects who failed
+to interpret the pictures spontaneously do so without difficulty when
+the more specific formula is used.
+
+If the response is so brief as to be difficult to classify, the subject
+should be urged to amplify by some such injunction as "_Go ahead_," or
+"_Explain what you mean_."
+
+One more caution. It is necessary to refrain from voicing a single word
+of commendation or approval until all the pictures have been responded
+to. A moment's thought will reveal the absolute necessity of adhering to
+this rule. Often a subject will begin by giving an inferior type of
+response (description, say) to the first picture, but with the second
+picture adjusts better to the task and responds satisfactorily. If in
+such a case the first (unsatisfactory) response were greeted with an
+approving "That's fine, you are doing splendidly," the likelihood of any
+improvement taking place as the test proceeds would be greatly lessened.
+
+SCORING. _Three pictures out of four_ must be satisfactorily
+interpreted. "Satisfactorily" means that the interpretation given should
+be reasonably plausible; not necessarily the exact one the artist had in
+mind, yet not absurd. The following classified responses will serve as
+a fairly secure guide for scoring:--
+
+(a) _Dutch Home_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Child has spilled something and is getting a
+    scolding." "The baby has hurt herself and the mother is
+    comforting her." "The baby is crying because she is hungry and
+    the mother has nothing to give her." "The little girl has been
+    naughty and is about to be punished." "The baby is crying
+    because she does not like her dinner." "There's bread on the
+    table and the mother won't let the little girl have it and so
+    she is crying." "The baby is begging for something and is crying
+    because her mamma won't give it to her." "It's a poor family.
+    The father is dead and they don't have enough to eat."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "The baby is crying and the mother is looking
+    at her" (description). "It's in Holland, and there's a little
+    girl crying, and a mamma, and there's a dish on the table"
+    (mainly description). "The mother is teaching the child to walk"
+    (absurd interpretation).
+
+(b) _River Scene_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Man and lady eloping to get married and an
+    Indian to row for them." "I think it represents a honeymoon
+    trip." "In frontier days and a man and his wife have been
+    captured by the Indians." "It's a perilous journey and they have
+    engaged the Indian to row for them."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "They are shooting the rapids." "An Indian
+    rowing a man and his wife down the river" (mainly description).
+    "A storm at sea" (absurd interpretation). "Indians have rescued
+    a couple from a shipwreck." "They have been up the river and
+    are riding down the rapids."
+
+    The following responses are somewhat doubtful, but should
+    probably be scored _minus_: "People going out hunting and have
+    Indian for a guide." "The man has rescued the woman from the
+    Indians." "It's a camping trip."
+
+(c) _Post-Office_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "It's a lot of old farmers. They have come to
+    the post-office to get the paper, which only comes once a week,
+    and they are all happy." "There's something funny in the paper
+    about one of the men and they are all laughing about it." "They
+    are reading about the price of eggs, and they look very happy so
+    I guess the price has gone up." "It's a bunch of country
+    politicians reading the election news."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "A man has just come out of the post-office
+    and is reading to his friends." "It's a little country town and
+    they are looking at the paper." "A man is reading the paper and
+    the others are looking on and laughing." "Some men are reading a
+    paper and laughing, and the other man has brought some eggs to
+    market, and it's in a little country town." (All the above are
+    mainly description.)
+
+    Responses like the following are somewhat better, but hardly
+    satisfactory: "They are reading something funny in the paper."
+    "They are reading the ads." "They are laughing about something
+    in the newspaper," etc.
+
+(d) _Colonial Home_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "They are lovers and have quarreled." "The man
+    has to go away for a long time, maybe to war, and she is afraid
+    he won't return." "He has proposed and she has rejected him, and
+    she is crying because she hated to disappoint him." "The woman
+    is crying because her husband is angry and leaving her." "The
+    man is a messenger and has brought the woman bad news."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "The husband is leaving and the dog is looking
+    at the lady." "It's a picture to show how people dressed in
+    colonial times." "The lady is crying and the man is trying to
+    comfort her." "The man is going away. The woman is angry because
+    he is going. The dog has a ball in its mouth and looks happy,
+    and the man looks sad."
+
+    Such responses as the following are doubtful, but rather _minus_
+    than _plus_: "A picture of George Washington's home." "They
+    have lost their money and they are sad" (gratuitous
+    interpretation). "The man has struck the woman."
+
+    Doubt sometimes arises as to the proper scoring of imaginative
+    or gratuitous interpretations. The following are samples of
+    such: (a) "The little girl is crying because she wants a new
+    dress and the mother is telling her she can have one when
+    Christmas comes if she will be good." (b) "The man and woman
+    have gone up the river to visit some friends and an Indian guide
+    is bringing them home." (c) "Some old Rubes are reading about
+    a circus that's going to come." (d) "Napoleon leaving his
+    wife."
+
+Sometimes these imaginative responses are given by very bright subjects,
+under the impression that they are asked to "make up" a story based on
+the picture. We may score them _plus_, provided they are not too much
+out of harmony with the situation and actions represented in the
+picture. Interpretations so gratuitous as to have little or no bearing
+upon the scene depicted should be scored _minus_.
+
+REMARKS. The test of picture interpretation has been variously located
+from 12 to 15 years. It cannot be too strongly emphasized that
+everything depends on the nature of the pictures used, the form in which
+the question is put, and the standard for scoring. The Jingleman-Jack
+pictures used by Kuhlmann are as easy to interpret at 10 years as the
+Stanford pictures at 12. Spontaneous interpretation ("What is this a
+picture of?" or "What do you see in this picture?") comes no more
+readily at 14 years than provoked interpretation ("Explain this
+picture") at 12. The standard of scoring is no less important. If with
+the Stanford pictures we require three satisfactory responses out of
+four, the test belongs at the 12-year level, but the standard of two
+correct out of four can be met a year or two earlier.
+
+Even after we have agreed upon a given series of pictures, the formula
+for giving the test, and upon the requisite number of passes, there
+remains still the question as to the proper degree of liberality in
+deciding what constitutes interpretation. There is no single point in
+mental development where the "ability to interpret pictures" sweeps in
+with a rush. Like the development of most other abilities, it comes by
+slow degrees, beginning even as early as 6 years.
+
+The question is, therefore, to decide whether a given response contains
+as much and as good interpretation as we have a right to expect at the
+age level where the test has been placed. It is imperative for any one
+who would use the scale correctly to acquaint himself thoroughly with
+the procedure and standards described above.
+
+
+XII, 8. GIVING SIMILARITIES, THREE THINGS
+
+PROCEDURE. The procedure is the same as in VIII, 4, but with the
+following words:--
+
+  (a) _Snake_, _cow_, _sparrow_.
+  (b) _Book_, _teacher_, _newspaper_.
+  (c) _Wool_, _cotton_, _leather_.
+  (d) _Knife-blade_, _penny_, _piece of wire_.
+  (e) _Rose_, _potato_, _tree_.
+
+As before, a little tactful urging is occasionally necessary in order to
+secure a response.
+
+SCORING. _Three satisfactory responses out of five_ are necessary for
+success. Any real similarity is acceptable, whether fundamental or
+superficial, although the giving of fundamental likenesses is especially
+symptomatic of good intelligence.
+
+Failures may be classified under four heads: (1) Leaving one of the
+words out of consideration; (2) giving a difference instead of a
+similarity; (3) giving a similarity that is not real or that is too
+bizarre or far-fetched; and (4) inability to respond. Types (1), (3),
+and (4) are almost equally numerous, while type (2) is not often
+encountered at this level of intelligence.
+
+This test provokes doubtful responses somewhat oftener than the earlier
+test of giving similarities. Those giving greatest difficulty are the
+indefinite statements like "All are useful," "All are made of the same
+material," etc. Fortunately, in most of these cases an additional
+question is sufficient to determine whether the subject has in mind a
+real similarity. Questions suitable for this purpose are: "Explain what
+you mean," "In what respect are they all useful?" "What material do
+you mean?" etc. Of course it is only permissible to make use of
+supplementary questions of this kind when they are necessary in order to
+clarify a response which has already been made.
+
+While the amateur examiner is likely to have more or less trouble in
+deciding upon scores, this difficulty rapidly disappears with
+experience. The following samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory
+responses will serve as a fairly adequate guide in dealing with doubtful
+cases:--
+
+(a) _Snake_, _cow_, _sparrow_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "All are animals" (or creatures, etc.). "All
+    live on the land." "All have blood" (or flesh, bones, eyes,
+    skin, etc.). "All move about." "All breathe air." "All are
+    useful" (_plus_ only if subject can give a use which they have
+    in common). "All have a little intelligence" (or sense,
+    instinct, etc.).
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "All have legs." "All are dangerous." "All
+    feed on grain" (or grass, etc.). "All are much afraid of man."
+    "All frighten you." "All are warm-blooded." "All get about the
+    same way." "All walk on the ground." "All can bite." "All
+    holler." "All drink water." "A snake crawls, a cow walks, and a
+    sparrow flies" (or some other difference). "They are not alike."
+
+(b) _Book_, _teacher_, _newspaper_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "All teach." "You learn from all." "All give you
+    information." "All help you get an education." "All are your
+    good friends" (_plus_ if subject can explain how). "All are
+    useful" (_plus_ if subject can explain how).
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "All tell you the news." "A teacher writes,
+    and a book and newspaper have writing." "They are not alike."
+    "All read." "All use the alphabet."
+
+(c) _Wool_, _cotton_, _leather_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "All used for clothing." "We wear them all."
+    "All grow" (_plus_ if subject can explain). "All have to be sent
+    to the factory to be made into things." "All are useful" (_plus_
+    if subject can give a use which all have in common). "All are
+    valuable" (_plus_ if explained).
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "All come from plants." "All grow on animals."
+    "All came off the top of something." "All are things." "They are
+    pretty." "All spell alike." "All are furry" (or soft, hard,
+    etc.).
+
+(d) _Knife-blade_, _penny_, _piece of wire_
+
+    _Satisfactory_. "All are made from minerals" (or metals). "All
+    come from mines." "All are hard material."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "All are made of steel" (or copper, iron,
+    etc.). "All are made of the same metal." "All cut." "All bend
+    easily." "All are used in building a house." "All are
+    worthless." "All are useful in fixing things." "All have an
+    end." "They are small." "All weigh the same." "Can get them all
+    at a hardware store." "You can buy things with all of them."
+    "You buy them with money." "One is sharp, one is round, and one
+    is long" (or some other difference).
+
+    Such answers as "All are found in a boy's pocket," or "Boys like
+    them," are not altogether bad, but hardly deserve to be called
+    satisfactory. "All are useful" is _minus_ unless the subject can
+    give a use which they have in common, which in this case he is
+    not likely to do. Bizarre uses are also _minus_; as, "All are
+    good for a watch fob," "Can use all for paper weights," etc.
+
+(e) _Rose_, _potato_, _tree_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "All are plants." "All grow from the ground."
+    "All have leaves" (or roots, etc.). "All have to be planted."
+    "All are parts of nature." "All have colors."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "All are pretty." "All bear fruit." "All have
+    pretty flowers." "All grow on bushes." "All are valuable" (or
+    useful). "They grow close to a house." "All are ornamental."
+    "All are shrubbery."
+
+REMARKS. The words of each series lend themselves readily to
+classification into a next higher class. This is the best type of
+response, but with most of the series it accounts for less than two
+thirds of the successes among subjects of 12-year intelligence. The
+proportion is less than one third for subjects of 10-year intelligence
+and nearly three fourths at the 14-year level. It would be possible and
+very desirable to devise and standardize an additional test of this
+kind, but requiring the giving of an essential resemblance or
+classificatory similarity.
+
+For discussion of the psychological factors involved in the similarities
+test, see VII, 5.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XVIII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR XIV.
+
+
+XIV, 1. VOCABULARY (FIFTY DEFINITIONS, 9000 WORDS)
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING, as in VIII, X, and XII. At year XIV fifty words
+must be correctly defined.
+
+
+XIV, 2. INDUCTION TEST: FINDING A RULE
+
+PROCEDURE. Provide six sheets of thin blank paper, say 8½ × 11 inches.
+Take the first sheet, and telling the subject to watch what you do, fold
+it once, and in the middle of the folded edge tear out or cut out a
+small notch; then ask the subject to tell you _how many holes there will
+be in the paper when it is unfolded_. The correct answer, _one_, is
+nearly always given without hesitation. But whatever the answer, unfold
+the paper and hold it up broadside for the subject's inspection. Next,
+take another sheet, fold it once as before and say: "_Now, when we
+folded it this way and tore out a piece, you remember it made one hole
+in the paper. This time we will give the paper another fold and see how
+many holes we shall have._" Then proceed to fold the paper again, this
+time in the other direction, and tear out a piece from the folded side
+and ask how many holes there will be when the paper is unfolded. After
+recording the answer, unfold the paper, hold it up before the subject so
+as to let him see the result. The answer is often incorrect and the
+unfolded sheet is greeted with an exclamation of surprise. The governing
+principle is seldom made out at this stage of the experiment. But
+regardless of the correctness or incorrectness of the first and second
+answers, proceed with the third sheet. Fold it once and say: "_When we
+folded it this way there was one hole._" Then fold it again and say:
+"_And when we folded it this way there were two holes._" At this point
+fold the paper a third time and say: "_Now, I am folding it again. How
+many holes will it have this time when I unfold it?_" Record the answer
+and again unfold the paper while the subject looks on.
+
+Continue in the same manner with sheets four, five, and six, adding one
+fold each time. In folding each sheet recapitulate the results with the
+previous sheets, saying (with the sixth, for example): "_When we folded
+it this way there was one hole, when we folded it again there were two,
+when we folded it again there were four, when we folded it again there
+were eight, when we folded it again there were sixteen; now, tell me
+how many holes there will be if we fold it once more._" In the
+recapitulation avoid the expression "_When we folded it once, twice,
+three times_," etc., as this often leads the subject to double the
+numeral heard instead of doubling the number of holes in the previously
+folded sheet. After the answer is given, do not fail to unfold the paper
+and let the subject view the result.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed _if the rule is grasped by the time the
+sixth sheet is reached_; that is, the subject may pass after five
+incorrect responses, provided the sixth is correct and the governing
+rule can then be given. It is not permissible to ask for the rule until
+all six parts of the experiment have been given. Nothing must be said
+which could even suggest the operation of a rule. Often, however, the
+subject grasps the principle after two or three steps and gives it
+spontaneously. In this case it is unnecessary to proceed with the
+remaining steps.
+
+REMARKS. This test was first used by the writer in a comparative study
+of the intellectual processes of bright and dull boys in 1905, but it
+was not standardized until 1914. Rather extensive data indicate that it
+is a genuine test of intelligence. Of 14-year-old school children
+testing between 96 and 105 I Q, 59 per cent passed this test; of
+14-year-olds testing below 96 I Q, 41 per cent passed; of those testing
+above 105, 71 per cent passed. That is, the test agrees well with the
+results obtained by the scale as a whole. Of "average adults" only
+10 per cent fail; and of "superior adults," fewer than 5 per cent. As a
+rule, the higher the grade of intelligence, the fewer the steps
+necessary for grasping the rule. Of the superior adults, only
+35 per cent fail to get the rule as early as the end of the fourth step.
+
+The test is little affected by schooling, and apart from differences in
+intelligence it is little influenced by age. Other advantages of the
+test are the keen interest it always arouses and its independence of
+language ability. It has been used successfully with immigrant subjects
+who had been in this country but a few months.
+
+We have named the experiment an "induction test." It might be supposed
+that the solution would ordinarily be arrived at by deduction, or by an
+_a-priori_ logical analysis of the principle involved. This, however, is
+rarely the case. Not one average adult out of ten reasons out the
+situation in this purely logical manner. It is ordinarily only after one
+or more mistakes have been made and have been exposed by the examiner
+holding up the unfolded paper to view that the correct principle is
+grasped. In the absence of deductive reasoning the subject must note
+that each unfolded sheet contains twice as many holes as the previous
+one, and must infer that folding the paper again will again double the
+number. The ability tested is the ability to generalize from
+particulars where the common element of the particulars can be discerned
+only by the selective action of attention, in this case attention to the
+fact that each number is the double of its predecessor.
+
+
+XIV, 3. GIVING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN A PRESIDENT AND A KING
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_There are three main differences between a president
+and a king; what are they?_" If the subject stops after one difference
+is given, we urge him on, if possible, until three are given.
+
+SCORING. The three differences relate to power, tenure, and manner of
+accession. Only these differences are considered correct, and the
+successful response must include at least two of the three. We disregard
+crudities of expression and note merely whether the subject has the
+essential idea. As regards power, for example, any of the following
+responses are satisfactory: "The king is absolute and the president is
+not." "The king rules by himself, but the president rules with the help
+of the people." "Kings can have things their own way more than
+presidents can," etc.
+
+It may be objected that the reverse of this is sometimes true, that the
+king of to-day often has less power than the average president.
+Sometimes subjects mention this fact, and when they do we credit them
+with this part of the test. As a matter of fact, however, this answer is
+seldom given.
+
+Sometimes the subject does not stop until he has given a half-dozen or
+more differences, and in such cases the first three differences may be
+trivial and some of the later ones essential. The question then arises
+whether we should disregard the errors and pass the subject on his later
+correct responses. The rule in such cases is to ask the subject to pick
+out the "three main differences."
+
+Sometimes accession and tenure are given in the form of a single
+contrast, as: "The president is elected, but the king inherits his
+throne and rules for life." This answer entitles the subject to credit
+for both accession and tenure, the contrast as regards tenure being
+plainly implied.
+
+Unsatisfactory contrasts are of many kinds and are often amusing. Some
+of the most common are the following:--
+
+    "A king wears a crown." "A king has jewels." "A king sits on a
+    throne." ("A king sets on a thorn" as one feeble-minded boy put
+    it!) "A king lives in a palace." "A king has courtiers." "A king
+    is very dignified." "A king dresses up more." "A president has
+    less pomp and ceremony." "A president is more ready to receive
+    the people." "A king sits on a chair all the time and a
+    president does not." "No differences; it's just names." "A
+    president does not give titles." "A king has a larger salary."
+    "A king has royal blood." "A king is in more danger." "They have
+    a different title." "A king is more cruel." "Kings have people
+    beheaded." "A king rules in a monarchy and a president in a
+    republic." "A king rules in a foreign country." "A president is
+    elected and a king fights for his office." "A president appoints
+    governors and a king does not." "A president lets the lawyers
+    make the laws." "Everybody works for a king."
+
+It is surprising to see how often trivial differences like the above are
+given. About thirty "average adults" out of a hundred, including
+high-school students, give at least one unsatisfactory contrast.
+
+The test has been criticized as depending too much on schooling. The
+criticism is to a certain extent valid when the test is used with young
+subjects, say of 10 or 12 years. It is not valid, however, if the use of
+the test is confined to older subjects. With the latter, it is not a
+test of knowledge, but of the discriminative capacity to deal with
+knowledge already in the possession of the subject. It would be
+difficult to find an adult, not actually feeble-minded, who is ignorant
+of the facts called for: That the king inherits his throne, while the
+president is elected; that the tenure of the king is for life, and that
+of the president for a term of years; that kings ordinarily have, or are
+supposed to have, more power. Even the relatively stupid adult knows
+this; but he also knows that kings are different from presidents in
+having crowns, thrones, palaces, robes, courtiers, larger pay, etc., and
+he makes no discrimination as regards the relative importance of these
+differences.
+
+The test is psychologically related to that of giving differences in
+year VII and to the two tests of finding similarities; but it differs
+from these in requiring a comparison based on fundamental rather than
+accidental distinctions. The idea is good and should be worked out in
+additional tests of the same type.
+
+The test first appeared in the Binet revised scale of 1911. Kuhlmann
+omits it, and besides our own there are few statistics bearing on it.
+Our results show that if two essential differences are required, the
+test belongs where we have placed it, but that if only one essential
+difference is required, the test is easy enough for year XII.
+
+
+XIV, 4. PROBLEM QUESTIONS
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the subject: "_Listen, and see if you can understand
+what I read._" Then read the following three problems, rather slowly and
+with expression, pausing after each long enough for the subject to find
+an answer:--
+
+  (a) "_A man who was walking in the woods near a city stopped
+      suddenly, very much frightened, and then ran to the nearest
+      policeman, saying that he had just seen hanging from the limb
+      of a tree a ... a what?_"
+  (b) "_My neighbor has been having queer visitors. First a doctor
+      came to his house, then a lawyer, then a minister (preacher or
+      priest). What do you think happened there?_"
+  (c) "_An Indian who had come to town for the first time in his
+      life saw a white man riding along the street. As the white man
+      rode by, the Indian said--'The white man is lazy; he walks
+      sitting down.' What was the white man riding on that caused
+      the Indian to say, 'He walks sitting down'?_"
+
+Do not ask questions calculated to draw out the correct response, but
+wait in silence for the subject's spontaneous answer. It is permissible,
+however, to re-read the passage if the subject requests it.
+
+SCORING. _Two responses out of three must be satisfactory._ The
+following explanations and examples will make clear the requirements of
+the test:--
+
+(a) _What the man saw hanging_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ The only correct answer for the first is "A man
+    who had hung himself" (or who had committed suicide, been
+    hanged, etc.). We may also pass the following answer: "Dead
+    branches that looked like a man hanging."
+
+    A good many subjects answer simply, "A man." This answer cannot
+    be scored because of the impossibility of knowing what is in the
+    subject's mind, and in such cases it is always necessary to say:
+    "_Explain what you mean._" The answer to this interrogation
+    always enables us to score the response.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ There is an endless variety of failures: "A
+    snake," "A monkey," "A robber," or "A tramp" being the most
+    common. Others include such answers as "A bear," "A tiger," "A
+    wild cat," "A cat," "A bird," "An eagle," "A bird's nest," "A
+    hornet's nest," "A leaf," "A swing," "A boy in a swing," "A
+    basket of flowers," "An egg," "A ghost," "A white sheet,"
+    "Clothes," "A purse," etc.
+
+(b) _My neighbor_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ The expected answer is "A death," "Some one has
+    died," etc. We must always check up this response, however, by
+    asking what the lawyer came for, and this must also be answered
+    correctly.
+
+    While it is expected that the subject will understand that the
+    doctor came to attend a sick person, the lawyer to make his
+    will, and the minister to preach the funeral, there are a few
+    other ingenious interpretations which pass as satisfactory. For
+    example, "A man got hurt in an accident; the doctor came to make
+    him well, the lawyer to see about damages, and then he died and
+    the preacher came for the funeral." Or, "A man died, the lawyer
+    came to help the widow settle the estate and the preacher came
+    for the funeral." We can hardly expect the 14-year-old child to
+    know that it is not the custom to settle an estate until after
+    the funeral.
+
+    The following excellent response was given by an enlightened
+    young eugenist: "A marriage; the doctor came to examine them and
+    see if they were fit to marry, the lawyer to arrange the
+    marriage settlement, and the minister to marry them." The
+    following logical responses occurred once each: "A murder. The
+    doctor came to examine the body, the lawyer to get evidence, and
+    the preacher to preach the funeral." "An unmarried girl has
+    given birth to a child. The lawyer was employed to get the man
+    to marry her and then the preacher came to perform the wedding
+    ceremony." Perhaps some will consider this interpretation too
+    far-fetched to pass. But it is perfectly logical and,
+    unfortunately, represents an occurrence which is not so very
+    rare.
+
+    If an incorrect answer is first given and then corrected, the
+    correction is accepted.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ The failures again are quite varied, but are
+    most frequently due to failure to understand the lawyer's
+    mission. Of 66 tabulated failures, 26 are accounted for in this
+    way, while only 6 are due to inability to state the part played
+    by the minister. The most common incorrect responses are: "A
+    baby born" (accounting for 5 out of 66 failures); "A divorce"
+    (very common with the children tested by Dr. Ordahl, at Reno,
+    Nevada!); "A marriage"; "A divorce and a remarriage"; "A
+    dinner"; "An entertainment"; "Some friends came to chat," etc.
+    In 20 failures out of 66, marriage was incorrectly connected
+    with a will, a divorce, the death of a child, etc.
+
+    The following are not bad, but hardly deserve to pass: "Sickness
+    and trouble; the lawyer and minister came to help him out of
+    trouble." Or, "Somebody was sick; the lawyer wanted his money
+    and the minister came to see how he was." A few present a still
+    more logical interpretation, but so far-fetched that it is
+    doubtful whether they should count as passes; for example: "A
+    man and his wife had a fight. One got hurt and had to have the
+    doctor, then they had a lawyer to get them divorced, then the
+    minister came to marry one of them." Again, "Some one is dying
+    and is getting married and making his will before he dies."
+
+(c) _What the man was riding on_
+
+    The only correct response is "Bicycle." The most common error is
+    _horse_ (or _donkey_), accounting for 48 out of 71 tabulated
+    failures. Vehicles, like _wagon_, _buggy_, _automobile_, or
+    _street car_, were mentioned in 14 out of 71 failures. Bizarre
+    replies are: "A cripple in a wheel chair"; "A person riding on
+    some one's back," etc.
+
+REMARKS. The experiment is a form of the completion test. Elements of a
+situation are given, out of which the entire situation is to be
+constructed. This phase of intelligence has already been discussed.[74]
+
+[74] See IX, 5, and XII, 4.
+
+While it is generally admitted that the underlying idea of this test is
+good, some have criticized Binet's selection of problems. Meumann thinks
+the lawyer element of the second is so unfamiliar to children as to
+render that part of the test unfair. Several "armchair" critics have
+mentioned the danger of nervous shock from the first problem. Bobertag
+throws out the test entirely and substitutes a completion test modeled
+after that of Ebbinghaus. Our own results are altogether favorable to
+the test. If it is used in year XIV, Meumann's objection hardly holds,
+for American children of that age do ordinarily know something about
+making wills. As for the danger of shock from the first problem, we have
+never once found the slightest evidence of this much-feared result. The
+subject always understands that the situation depicted is hypothetical,
+and so answers either in a matter-of-fact manner or with a laugh.
+
+The bicycle problem is our own invention. Binet used the other two and
+required both to be answered correctly. The test was located in year XII
+of the 1908 scale, and in year XV of the 1911 revision. Goddard and
+Kuhlmann retain it in the original location. The Stanford results of
+1911, 1912, 1914, and 1915 agree in showing the test too difficult for
+year XII, even when only two out of three correct responses are
+required. If the original form of the experiment is used, it is
+exceedingly difficult for year XV. As here given it fits well at
+year XIV.
+
+
+XIV, 5. ARITHMETICAL REASONING
+
+PROCEDURE. The following problems, printed in clear type, are shown one
+at a time to the subject, who reads each problem aloud and (with the
+printed problem still before him) finds the answer without the use of
+pencil or paper.
+
+  (a) _If a man's salary is $20 a week and he spends $14 a week,
+      how long will it take him to save $300?_
+  (b) _If 2 pencils cost 5 cents, how many pencils can you buy for
+      50 cents?_
+  (c) _At 15 cents a yard, how much will 7 feet of cloth cost?_
+
+Only one minute is allowed for each problem, but nothing is said about
+hurrying. While one problem is being solved, the others should be hidden
+from view. It is not permissible, if the subject gives an incorrect
+answer, to ask him to solve the problem again. The following exception,
+however, is made to this rule: If the answer given to the third problem
+indicates that the word _yard_ has been read as _feet_, the subject is
+asked to read the problem through again carefully (aloud) and to tell
+how he solved it. No further help of any kind may be given.
+
+SCORING. _Two of the three_ problems must be solved correctly within the
+minute allotted to each. No credit is allowed for correct method if the
+answer is wrong.
+
+REMARKS. We have selected these problems from the list used by Bonser in
+his _Study of the Reasoning Ability of Children in the Fourth, Fifth,
+and Sixth School Grades_.[75]
+
+[75] Columbia University Contributions to Education, no. 37, 1910.
+
+Our tests of 279 "at age" children between 12 and 15 years reveal the
+surprising fact that the test as here used and scored is not passed by
+much over half of the children of any age in the grades below the
+high-school age. Of the high-school pupils 19 per cent failed to pass,
+21 per cent of ordinarily successful business men (!), and 27 per cent
+of Knollin's unemployed men testing up to the "average adult" level. To
+find average intelligence cutting such a sorry figure raises the
+question whether the ancient definition of man as "the rational animal"
+is justified by the facts. The truth is, _average_ intelligence does not
+do a great deal of abstract, logical reasoning, and the little it does
+is done usually under the whip of necessity.
+
+At first thought these problems will doubtless appear to the reader to
+be mere tests of schooling. It is true, of course, that in solving them
+the subject makes use of knowledge which is ordinarily obtained in
+school; but this knowledge (that is, knowledge of reading and of
+addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division) is possessed by
+practically all adults who are not feeble-minded, and by many who are.
+Success, therefore, depends upon the ability to apply this knowledge
+readily and accurately to the problems given--precisely the kind of
+ability in which a deficiency cannot be made good by school training. We
+can teach even morons how to read problems and how to add, subtract,
+multiply, and divide with a fair degree of accuracy; the trouble comes
+when they try to decide which of these processes the problem calls for.
+This may require intelligence of high or low order, according to the
+difficulty of the problem. As for the present test, we have shown that
+almost totally unschooled men of "average adult" intelligence pass this
+test as frequently as high-school seniors of the same mental level.
+
+
+XIV, 6. REVERSING HANDS OF CLOCK
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the subject: "_Suppose it is six twenty-two o'clock,
+that is, twenty-two minutes after six; can you see in your mind where
+the large hand would be, and where the small hand would be?_" Subjects
+of 12- to 14-year intelligence practically always answer this in the
+affirmative. Then continue: "_Now, suppose the two hands of the clock
+were to trade places, so that the large hand takes the place where the
+small hand was, and the small hand takes the place where the large hand
+was. What time would it then be?_"
+
+Repeat the test with the hands at 8.10 (10 minutes after 8), and again
+with the hands at 2.46 (14 minutes before 3).
+
+The subject is not allowed to look at a clock or watch, or to aid
+himself by drawing, but must work out the problem mentally. As a rule
+the answer is given within a few seconds or not at all. If an answer is
+not forthcoming within two minutes the score is failure.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _two of the three_ problems are solved
+within the following range of accuracy: the first solution is considered
+correct if the answer falls between 4.30 and 4.35, inclusive; the second
+if the answer falls between 1.40 and 1.45, and the third if the answer
+falls between 9.10 and 9.15.
+
+REMARKS. It appears that success in the test chiefly depends upon
+voluntary control over constructive visual imagery. Weakness of visual
+imagery may account for the failure of a considerable percentage of
+adults to pass the test. Visual imagery, however, is not absolutely
+necessary to success. One 8-year-old prodigy, who had 12-year
+intelligence, arrived in forty seconds at a strictly mathematical
+solution for the second problem, as follows: "If it is 2.46, and the
+hands trade places, then the little hand has gone about one fourth of
+the distance from 9 o'clock to 10 o'clock. One fourth of 60 minutes is
+15 minutes, and so the time would be 15 minutes after 9 o'clock." Such a
+solution is certainly possible by the use of verbal imagery of any type.
+
+The test shows a high correlation with mental age, but more than most
+others it is subject to the influence of cribbing. For this reason,
+other positions of the clock hands should be tried out for the purpose
+of finding substitute experiments of equal difficulty. Until such
+experiments have been made, it will be necessary to confine the
+experiment to the three positions here presented.
+
+Schooling seems to have no influence whatever on the percentage of
+passes.
+
+This test was first used by Binet in 1905, but was not included in
+either the 1908 or 1911 series. Goddard and Kuhlmann both include the
+test in their revisions, placing it in year XV. They give only two
+problems (our _a_ and _c_) and require that both be answered correctly.
+Neither Goddard nor Kuhlmann, however, indicates the degree of error
+permitted.
+
+Something depends upon original position of the hands. Binet used 6.20
+and 2.46. For some reason the 2.46 arrangement is much more difficult
+than either 8.10 or 6.22, yielding almost twice as many failures as
+either of the other positions.
+
+
+XIV, ALTERNATIVE TESTS: REPEATING SEVEN DIGITS
+
+This time, as in year X, only two series are given, one of which must be
+repeated without error. The two series are: 2-1-8-3-4-3-9 and
+9-7-2-8-4-7-5. Note that in none of the tests of repeating digits is it
+permissible to warn the subject of the number to be given.
+
+REMARKS. Binet originally placed this test in year XII, giving three
+trials, but later moved it to year XV. Goddard and Kuhlmann retain it in
+year XII. Our data show that when three trials are given the test is too
+easy for year XIV, but that it fits this age when only two trials are
+allowed; that after the age of 12 or 14 years memory for relatively
+meaningless material, like digits or nonsense syllables, improves but
+little; and that above this level it does not correlate very closely
+with intelligence.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XIX
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR "AVERAGE ADULT"
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, 1: VOCABULARY (SIXTY-FIVE DEFINITIONS, 11,700 WORDS)
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING, as in previous vocabulary tests.[76] At the
+average adult level sixty-five words should be correctly defined.
+
+[76] See VIII, 6.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, 2: INTERPRETATION OF FABLES (SCORE 8)
+
+PROCEDURE. As in year XII, test 6. Use the same fables.
+
+SCORING. The method of scoring is the same as for XII, but the total
+score must be 8 points to satisfy the requirements at this level.
+
+REMARKS. For discussion of test, see XII, 5.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, 3: DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ABSTRACT TERMS
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: _What is the difference between_:--
+
+  (a) _Laziness and idleness?_
+  (b) _Evolution and revolution?_
+  (c) _Poverty and misery?_
+  (d) _Character and reputation?_
+
+SCORING. _Three correct contrasting definitions out of four_ are
+necessary for a pass. It is not sufficient merely to give a correct
+meaning for each word of a pair; the subject must point out a difference
+between the two words so as to make a real contrast. For example, if the
+subject defines _evolution_ as a "growth" or "gradual change," and
+_revolution_ as the turning of a wheel on its axis, the experimenter
+should say: "_Yes, but I want you to tell me the difference between
+evolution and revolution._" If the contrast is not then forthcoming the
+response is marked _minus_.
+
+The following are sample definitions which may be considered
+acceptable:--
+
+    (a) _Laziness and idleness._ "It is laziness if you won't
+    work, and idleness if you are willing to work but haven't any
+    job." "Lots of men are idle who are not lazy and would like to
+    work if they had something to do." "Laziness means you don't
+    want to work; idleness means you are not doing anything just
+    now." "Idle people may be lazy, or they may just happen to be
+    out of a job." "It is laziness when you don't like to work, and
+    idleness when you are not working." "An idle person might be
+    willing to work; a lazy man won't work." "Laziness comes from
+    within; idleness may be forced upon one." "Laziness is aversion
+    to activity; idleness is simply the state of inactivity."
+    "Laziness is idleness from choice or preference; idleness means
+    doing nothing."
+
+    The essential contrast, accordingly, is that _laziness refers to
+    unwillingness to work; idleness to the mere fact of inactivity_.
+    This contrast must be expressed, however clumsily.
+
+    (b) _Evolution and revolution._ "Evolution is a gradual
+    change; revolution is a sudden change." "Evolution is natural
+    development; revolution is sudden upheaval." "Evolution means an
+    unfolding or development; revolution means a complete upsetting
+    of everything." "Evolution is the gradual development of a
+    country or government; revolution is a quick change of
+    government." "Evolution takes place by natural force; a
+    revolution is caused by an outside force." "Evolution is growth;
+    revolution is a quick change from existing conditions."
+    "Evolution is a natural change; revolution is a violent
+    change." "Evolution is growth step by step; revolution is more
+    sudden and radical in its action." "Evolution is a change
+    brought about by peaceful development, while revolution is
+    brought about by an uprising."
+
+    The essential distinction, accordingly, is that _evolution means
+    a gradual, natural, or slow change, while revolution means a
+    sudden, forced, or violent change_. Non-contrasting definitions,
+    even when the individual terms are defined correctly, are not
+    satisfactory.
+
+    (c) _Poverty and misery._ "Poverty is when you are poor;
+    misery means suffering." "Only the poor are in poverty, but
+    everybody can be miserable." "Poverty is the lowest stage of
+    poorness; misery means pain." "The poor are not always
+    miserable, and the rich are miserable sometimes." "Poverty means
+    to be in want; misery comes from any kind of suffering or
+    anguish." "The poor are in poverty; the sick are in misery."
+    "Poverty is the condition of being very poor financially; misery
+    is a feeling which any class of people can have." "One who is
+    poor is in poverty; one who is wretched or doesn't enjoy life is
+    in misery." "Poverty comes from lack of money; misery, from lack
+    of happiness or comfort." "Misery means distress. It can come
+    from poverty or many other things."
+
+    (d) _Character and reputation._ "Character is what you are;
+    reputation is what people say about you." "You have character if
+    you are honest; but you might be honest and still have a bad
+    reputation among people who misjudge you." "Character is your
+    real self; reputation is the opinion people have about you."
+    "Your character depends upon yourself; reputation depends on
+    what others think of you." "Character means your real morals;
+    reputation is the way you are known in the world." "A man has a
+    good character if he would not do evil; but a man may have a
+    good reputation and still have a bad character."
+
+A little practice and a good deal of discrimination are necessary for
+the correct grading of responses to this test. Subjects are often so
+clumsy in expression that their responses are anything but clear. It is
+then necessary to ask them to explain what they mean. Further
+questioning, however, is not permissible. For uniformity in scoring it
+is necessary to bear in mind that the definitions given must, in order
+to be satisfactory, express the essential distinction between the two
+words.
+
+REMARKS. What we have said regarding the psychological significance of
+test 2, year XII, applies equally well here. The test on the whole is a
+valuable one. Our statistics show that it is not, as some critics have
+thought, mainly a test of schooling.
+
+The main criticism to be made is that it imposes a somewhat difficult
+task upon the power of language expression. For this reason it is
+necessary in scoring to disregard clumsiness of expression and to look
+only to the essential correctness or incorrectness of the thought.
+
+This test first appeared in year XIII of Binet's 1908 scale. The terms
+used were "happiness and honor"; "evolution and revolution"; "event and
+advent"; "poverty and misery"; "pride and pretension." In the 1911
+revision, "happiness and honor" and "pride and pretension" were dropped,
+and the other three pairs were moved up to the adult group, two out of
+three successes being required for a pass. Kuhlmann places it in
+year XV, using "happiness and honor" instead of our "character and
+reputation," and requires three successes out of five.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, 4: PROBLEM OF THE ENCLOSED BOXES
+
+PROCEDURE. Show the subject a cardboard box about one inch on a side.
+Say: "_You see this box; it has two smaller boxes inside of it, and each
+one of the smaller boxes contains a little tiny box. How many boxes are
+there altogether, counting the big one?_" To be sure that the subject
+understands repeat the statement of the problem: "_First the large box,
+then two smaller ones, and each of the smaller ones contains a little
+tiny box._"
+
+Record the response, and, showing another box, say: "_This box has two
+smaller boxes inside, and each of the smaller boxes contains two tiny
+boxes. How many altogether? Remember, first the large box, then two
+smaller ones, and each smaller one contains two tiny boxes._"
+
+The third problem, which is given in the same way, states that there are
+_three_ smaller boxes, each of which contains _three_ tiny boxes.
+
+In the fourth problem there are _four_ smaller boxes, each containing
+_four_ tiny boxes.
+
+The problem must be given orally, and the solution must be found without
+the aid of pencil or paper. Only one half-minute is allowed for each
+problem. Note that each problem is stated twice.
+
+A correction is permitted, provided it is offered spontaneously and does
+not seem to be the result of guessing. Guessing can be checked up by
+asking the subject to explain the solution.
+
+SCORING. _Three of the four_ problems must be solved correctly within
+the half-minute allotted to each.
+
+REMARKS. Success depends, in the first place, upon ability to comprehend
+the statement of the problem and to hold its conditions in mind.
+Subjects much below the 12-year level of intelligence are often unable
+to do this.
+
+Granting that the problem has been comprehended, success seems to depend
+chiefly upon the facility with which the constructive imagination
+manipulates concrete visual imagery. In this respect it resembles the
+problem of reversing the hands of a clock. With some subjects, however,
+verbal imagery alone is operative. Tactual imagery would, of course,
+serve the purpose as well.
+
+This is as good a place as any to emphasize the fact that the
+introspective study of mental imagery has little to contribute to the
+measurement of intelligence. Intelligence tests are concerned with the
+total result of a thought process, rather than with the imagery supports
+of that process. Thought may be carried on almost equally well by
+various kinds of imagery. As Galton showed, a person can be taught to
+carry on arithmetical processes by the use of smell imagery. The kind of
+imagery employed is the product of slight, innate preferences
+complicated by the more or less accidental effects of habit.
+
+We may say that imagery is to thinking what scaffolding is to
+architecture. The important thing is the completed building rather than
+the nature of the scaffolding employed in erecting it. No one thinks of
+blaming the ill construction of a building upon the kind of scaffolding
+used, for if the architect and builder are competent satisfactory
+scaffolding will be found. Just as little are deficiencies or
+peculiarities of imagery the real cause of low-order intelligence. We
+cannot increase intelligence by formal drill in the use of supposedly
+important kinds of mental imagery, any more than we can transform a
+plain carpenter into a Michael Angelo by instructing him in the use of
+scaffolding materials such as were employed in the construction of St.
+Peter's Cathedral.
+
+This test is of our own invention and has been brought to its present
+form only after a good deal of preliminary experimentation. It
+correlates fairly well with mental age as determined by the scale as a
+whole. It was passed by 55 per cent of high-school pupils and by
+65 per cent of unschooled business men. Success in it is thus seen not
+to depend upon schooling.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, 5: REPEATING SIX DIGITS REVERSED
+
+The series used are: 4-7-1-9-5-2; 5-8-3-2-9-4; and 7-5-2-6-3-8.
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING, as in year VII, alternative 2.
+
+REMARKS. The test is passed by approximately half of "average adults"
+and by three fourths of "superior adults." It shows no effect of
+schooling, the uneducated business men even surpassing our high-school
+students.
+
+For the higher levels of intelligence, especially, the test is superior
+to that of repeating digits in the direct order. It is less mechanical
+and makes heavier demands upon higher intelligence.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, 6: USING A CODE
+
+PROCEDURE. Show the subject the code given on the accompanying form.
+Say: "_See these diagrams here. Look and you will see that they contain
+all the letters of the alphabet. Now, examine the arrangement of the
+letters. They go_ (pointing) _a b c, d e f, g h i, j k l, m n o, p q r,
+s t u v, w x y z. You see the letters in the first two diagrams are
+arranged in the up-and-down order_ (pointing again), _and the letters in
+the other two diagrams run in just the opposite way from the hands of a
+clock_ (pointing). _Look again and you will see that the second diagram
+is drawn just like the first, except that each letter has a dot with it,
+and that the last diagram is like the third except that here, also, each
+letter has a dot. Now, all of this represents a code; that is, a secret
+language. It is a real code, one that was used in the Civil War for
+sending secret messages. This is the way it works: we draw the lines
+which hold a letter, but leave out the letter. Here, for example, is the
+way we would write 'spy?'_" Then write the word _spy_, pointing out
+carefully where each letter comes from, and emphasizing the fact that
+the dot must be used in addition to the lines in writing any letter in
+the second or the fourth diagram. Illustrate also with _war_.
+
+Then add: "_I am going to have you write something for me; remember now,
+how the letters go, first_ (pointing, as before) _a b c, d e f, g h i,
+then j k l, m n o, p q r, then s t u v, then w x y z. And don't forget
+the dots for the letters in this diagram and this one_" (pointing). At
+this point, take away the diagrams and tell the subject to write the
+words _come quickly_. Say nothing about hurrying.
+
+The subject is given a pencil, but is allowed to draw only the symbols
+for the words _come quickly_. He is not permitted to reproduce the
+entire code and then to copy the code letters from his reproduction.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the words are written in _six minutes and
+without more than two errors_. Omission of a dot counts as only a half
+error.
+
+REMARKS. It is not easy to analyze the mental functions which contribute
+to success in the code test. Contrary to what might be supposed, success
+does not necessarily depend upon getting and retaining a visual picture
+of the diagrams. Kinæsthetic imagery will answer the purpose just as
+well, or the original visual impression may even be translated at once
+into auditory-verbal imagery and remembered as such. The significance of
+the test must be expressed in other terms than the kind of imagery it
+may happen to bring into play.
+
+Healy and Fernald describe the task of writing a code sentence without
+copy as one which requires "close attention and steadiness of purpose."
+They also emphasize the fact that the attention must be directed inward,
+since there is no object of interest before the senses and since no
+special stimulus to attention is offered by the experimenter.
+Observations we have made on subjects during the test confirm this view
+as to the factors involved.
+
+That inability to remember the code as a whole is not a common cause of
+failure is shown by the fact that subjects above 12-year intelligence
+who have failed on the test are nearly always able to reproduce the
+diagrams and insert the letters in their proper places. To give the code
+form of a given letter without copy, however, makes a much heavier
+demand on attention. Nearly all subjects find it necessary to trace the
+code form, in imagination, from the beginning up to each letter whose
+code form is sought. Subjects of superior intelligence, however,
+sometimes hit upon the device of remembering the position of the
+individual key letters e.g. (the first letter of each figure) from
+which, as a base, any desired letter form may be quickly sought out.
+
+The test correlates well with mental age, but for some reason not
+apparent it is passed by a larger percentage of high-school pupils than
+unschooled adults of the same mental level.
+
+The code test was first described by Healy and Fernald in their "Tests
+for Practical Mental Classification."[77] The authors gave no data,
+however, which would indicate the mental level to which the test
+belongs. Dr. Goddard incorporated it in year XV of his revision of the
+Binet scale, but also fails to give statistics. The location given
+the test in the Stanford revision is based on tests of nearly
+500 individuals ranging from a mental level of 12 years to that of
+"superior adult." It appears that the test is considerably more
+difficult than most had thought it to be.
+
+[77] _Psychological Review Monographs_ (1911), vol. XIII, no. 2, p. 51.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, ALTERNATIVE TEST 1: REPEATING TWENTY-EIGHT SYLLABLES
+
+The sentences for this test are:--
+
+  (a) _Walter likes very much to go on visits to his grandmother,
+      because she always tells him many funny stories._
+  (b) _Yesterday I saw a pretty little dog in the street. It had
+      curly brown hair, short legs, and a long tail._
+
+PROCEDURE. Exactly as in VI, 6. Emphasize that the sentence must be
+repeated without a single change of any sort. Get attention before
+giving each sentence.
+
+SCORING. Passed _if one sentence is repeated without a single error_. In
+VI and X we scored the response as satisfactory if one sentence was
+repeated without error, or if two were repeated with not more than one
+error each.
+
+REMARKS. The test of repeating sentences is not as satisfactory in the
+higher intelligence levels as in the lower. It is too mechanical to tax
+very heavily the higher thought processes. It does, however, have a
+certain correlation with intelligence. Contrary to what one would have
+expected, uneducated adults of "average adult" intelligence surpassed
+our high-school students of the same mental level.
+
+Binet located this test in year XII of the 1908 series, but shifted it
+to year XV in 1911. The American versions of the Binet scale have
+usually retained it in year XII, though Goddard admits that the
+sentences are somewhat too difficult for that year. Kuhlmann puts the
+test in year XII, but reduces the sentences to twenty-four syllables and
+permits one re-reading. We give only two trials and our sentences are
+considerably more difficult. With the procedure and scoring we have
+used, the test is rather easy for the "average adult" group, but a
+little too hard for year XIV.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, ALTERNATIVE TEST 2: COMPREHENSION OF PHYSICAL RELATIONS
+
+
+(a) _Problem regarding the path of a cannon ball_
+
+PROCEDURE. Draw on a piece of paper a horizontal line six or eight
+inches long. Above it, an inch or two, draw a short horizontal line
+about an inch long and parallel to the first. Tell the subject that the
+long line represents the perfectly level ground of a field, and that the
+short line represents a cannon. Explain that the cannon is "_pointed
+horizontally (on a level) and is fired across this perfectly level
+field_." After it is clear that these conditions of the problem are
+comprehended, we add: "_Now, suppose that this cannon is fired off and
+that the ball comes to the ground at this point here_ (pointing to the
+farther end of the line which represents the field). _Take this pencil
+and draw a line which will show what path the cannon ball will take from
+the time it leaves the mouth of the cannon till it strikes the ground._"
+
+SCORING. There are four types of response: (1) A straight diagonal line
+is drawn from the cannon's mouth to the point where the ball strikes.
+(2) A straight line is drawn from the cannon's mouth running
+horizontally until almost directly over the goal, at which point the
+line drops almost or quite vertically. (3) The path from the cannon's
+mouth first rises considerably from the horizontal, at an angle perhaps
+of between ten to forty-five degrees, and finally describes a gradual
+curve downward to the goal. (4) The line begins almost on a level and
+drops more rapidly toward the end of its course.
+
+Only the last is satisfactory. Of course, nothing like a mathematically
+accurate solution of the problem is expected. It is sufficient if the
+response belongs to the fourth type above instead of being absurd, as
+the other types described are. Any one who has ever thrown stones should
+have the data for such an approximate solution. Not a day of schooling
+is necessary.
+
+
+(b) _Problem as to the weight of a fish in water_
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the subject: "_You know, of course, that water holds
+up a fish that is placed in it. Well, here is a problem. Suppose we have
+a bucket which is partly full of water. We place the bucket on the
+scales and find that with the water in it it weighs exactly 45 pounds.
+Then we put a 5-pound fish into the bucket of water. Now, what will the
+whole thing weigh?_"
+
+SCORING. Many subjects even as low as 9- or 10-year intelligence will
+answer promptly, "Why, 45 pounds and 5 pounds makes 50 pounds, of
+course." But this is not sufficient. We proceed to ask, with serious
+demeanor: "_How can this be correct, since the water itself holds up the
+fish?_" The young subject who has answered so glibly now laughs
+sheepishly and apologizes for his error, saying that he answered without
+thinking, etc. This response is scored failure without further
+questioning.
+
+Other subjects, mostly above the 14-year level, adhere to the answer
+"50 pounds," however strongly we urge the argument about the water
+holding up the fish. In response to our question, "_How can that be the
+case?_" it is sufficient if the subject replies that "The weight is
+there just the same; the scales have to hold up the bucket and the
+bucket has to hold up the water," or words to that effect. Only some
+such response as this is satisfactory. If the subject keeps changing his
+answer or says that he _thinks_ the weight would be 50 pounds, but is
+not certain, the score is failure.
+
+
+(c) _Difficulty of hitting a distant mark_
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the subject: "_You know, do you not, what it means
+when they say a gun 'carries 100 yards'? It means that the bullet goes
+that far before it drops to amount to anything._" All boys and most
+girls more than a dozen years old understand this readily. If the
+subject does not understand, we explain again what it means for a gun
+"to carry" a given distance. When this part is clear, we proceed as
+follows: "_Now, suppose a man is shooting at a mark about the size of a
+quart can. His rifle carries perfectly more than 100 yards. With such a
+gun is it any harder to hit the mark at 100 yards than it is at
+50 yards?_" After the response is given, we ask the subject to explain.
+
+SCORING. Simply to say that it would be easier at 50 yards is not
+sufficient, nor can we pass the response which merely states that it is
+"easier to aim" at 50 yards. The correct principle must be given, one
+which shows the subject has appreciated the fact that a small deviation
+from the "bull's-eye" at 50 yards, due to incorrect aim, becomes a
+larger deviation at 100 yards. However, the subject is not required to
+know that the deviation at 100 yards is exactly twice as great as at
+50 yards. A certain amount of questioning is often necessary before we
+can decide whether the subject has the correct principle in mind.
+
+SCORING THE ENTIRE TEST. _Two of the three problems_ must be solved in
+such a way as to satisfy the requirements above set forth.
+
+REMARKS. These problems were devised by the writer. They yield
+interesting results, when properly given, but are not without their
+faults. Sometimes a very superior subject fails, while occasionally an
+inferior subject unexpectedly succeeds. On the whole, however the test
+correlates fairly well with mental age. At the 14-year level less than
+50 per cent pass; of "average adults," from 60 to 75 per cent are
+successful. Few "superior adults" fail.
+
+The test as here given is little influenced by the formal instruction
+given in the grades or the high school. In fact, 80 per cent of our
+uneducated business men, as contrasted with 65 per cent of high-school
+juniors and seniors, passed the test. Success probably depends in the
+main upon previous interest in physical relationships and upon the
+ability to understand phenomena of this kind which the subject has had
+opportunity to observe.
+
+It would be interesting to standardize a longer series of problems
+designed to test a subject's comprehension of common physical
+relationships. In the first few months of life a normal child learns
+that objects unsupported fall to the ground. Later he learns that fire
+burns; that birds fly in the air; that fish do not sink in the water;
+that water does not run uphill; that it is easy to lift a leg or arm as
+one lies prone in the water; that mud is thrown from a rotating wheel
+(and always in the same direction); that a stone which is flying
+through the air swiftly is more dangerous than one which is moving
+slowly; that it is more dangerous to be run over by a train than by a
+buggy; that it is hard to run against a strong wind; that cyclones blow
+down trees and houses; that a rapidly moving train creates a stronger
+wind than a slower train; that a feather falls through the air with less
+speed than a stone; that a falling object gains momentum; that a heavy
+moving object is harder to stop than a light object moving at the same
+rate; that freezing water bursts pipes; that sounds sometimes give
+echoes; that rainbows cannot be approached; that a lamp seems dim by
+daylight; that by day the stars are not visible and the moon only barely
+visible; that the headlights of an approaching automobile or train are
+blinding; that if the room in which we are reading is badly lighted we
+must hold the book nearer to the eyes; that running makes the heart beat
+faster and increases the rate of breathing; that if we are cold we can
+get warm by running; that whirling rapidly makes us dizzy; that heat or
+exercise will cause perspiration, etc.
+
+Although the causes of some of these phenomena are not understood even
+by intelligent adults without some instruction, the facts themselves are
+learned by the normal individual from his own experience. The higher the
+mental level and the greater the curiosity, the more observant one is
+about such matters and the more one learns. Many items of knowledge such
+as we have mentioned could and should be standardized for various mental
+levels. In devising tests of this kind we should, of course, have to
+look out for the influences of formal instruction.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XX
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR "SUPERIOR ADULT"
+
+
+SUPERIOR ADULT, 1: VOCABULARY (SEVENTY-FIVE DEFINITIONS, 13,500 WORDS)
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING, as in previous vocabulary tests. At the "superior
+adult" level seventy-five words should be known.
+
+The test is passed by only one third of those at the "average adult"
+level, but by about 90 per cent of "superior adults." Ability to pass
+the test is relatively independent of the number of years the subject
+has attended school, our business men showing even a higher percentage
+of passes than high-school pupils.
+
+
+SUPERIOR ADULT, 2: BINET'S PAPER-CUTTING TEST
+
+PROCEDURE. Take a piece of paper about six inches square and say:
+"_Watch carefully what I do. See, I fold the paper this way_ (folding it
+once over in the middle), _then I fold it this way_ (folding it again in
+the middle, but at right angles to the first fold). _Now, I will cut out
+a notch right here_" (indicating). At this point take scissors and cut
+out a small notch from the middle of the side which presents but one
+edge. Throw the fragment which has been cut out into the waste-basket or
+under the table. Leave the folded paper exposed to view, but pressed
+flat against the table. Then give the subject a pencil and a second
+sheet of paper like the one already used and say: "_Take this piece of
+paper and make a drawing to show how the other sheet of paper would look
+if it were unfolded. Draw lines to show the creases in the paper and
+show what results from the cutting._"
+
+The subject is not permitted to fold the second sheet, but must solve
+the problem by the imagination unaided.
+
+Note that we do not say, "_Draw the holes_," as this would inform the
+subject that more than one hole is expected.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed _if the creases in the paper are properly
+represented, if the holes are drawn in the correct number, and if they
+are located correctly_, that is, both on the same crease and each about
+halfway between the center of the paper and the side. The shape of the
+holes is disregarded.
+
+Failure may be due to error as regards the creases or the number and
+location of the holes, or it may involve any combination of the above
+errors.
+
+REMARKS. Success seems to depend upon constructive visual imagination.
+The subject must first be able to construct in imagination the creases
+which result from the folding, and secondly, to picture the effects of
+the cutting as regards number of holes and their location. It appears
+that a solution is seldom arrived at, even in the case of college
+students, by logical mathematical thinking. Our unschooled subjects even
+succeeded somewhat better than high-school and college students of the
+same mental level.
+
+Binet placed this test in year XIII of the 1908 scale, but shifted it to
+the adult group in the 1911 revision. Goddard retains it in the adult
+group, while Kuhlmann places it in year XV. There have also been certain
+variations in the procedure employed. As given in the Stanford revision
+the test is passed by hardly any subjects below the 14-year level, but
+by about one third of "average adults" and by the large majority of
+"superior adults."
+
+
+SUPERIOR ADULT, 3: REPEATING EIGHT DIGITS
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING, the same as in previous tests with digits
+reversed. The series used are: 7-2-5-3-4-8-9-6; 4-9-8-5-3-7-6-2; and
+8-3-7-9-5-4-8-2.
+
+Guard against rhythm and grouping in reading the digits and do not give
+warning as to the number to be given.
+
+The test is passed by about one third of "average adults" and by over
+two thirds of "superior adults." The test shows no marked difference
+between educated and uneducated subjects of the same mental level.
+
+
+SUPERIOR ADULT, 4: REPEATING THOUGHT OF PASSAGE
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_I am going to read a little selection of about six or
+eight lines. When I am through I will ask you to repeat as much of it as
+you can. It doesn't make any difference whether you remember the exact
+words or not, but you must listen carefully so that you can tell me
+everything it says._" Then read the following selections, pausing after
+each for the subject's report, which should be recorded _verbatim_:--
+
+  (a) "_Tests such as we are now making are of value both for the
+      advancement of science and for the information of the person
+      who is tested. It is important for science to learn how people
+      differ and on what factors these differences depend. If we can
+      separate the influence of heredity from the influence of
+      environment, we may be able to apply our knowledge so as to
+      guide human development. We may thus in some cases correct
+      defects and develop abilities which we might otherwise
+      neglect._"
+  (b) "_Many opinions have been given on the value of life. Some
+      call it good, others call it bad. It would be nearer correct
+      to say that it is mediocre; for on the one hand, our
+      happiness is never as great as we should like, and on the
+      other hand, our misfortunes are never as great as our enemies
+      would wish for us. It is this mediocrity of life which
+      prevents it from being radically unjust._"
+
+Sometimes the subject hesitates to begin, thinking, in spite of our
+wording of the instructions, that a perfect reproduction is expected.
+Others fall into the opposite misunderstanding and think that they are
+prohibited from using the words of the text and must give the thought
+entirely in their own language. In cases of hesitation we should urge
+the subject a little and remind him that he is to express the thought of
+the selection in whatever way he prefers; that the main thing is to tell
+what the selection says.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the subject is able to repeat in
+reasonably consecutive order the main thoughts of at least one of the
+selections. Neither elegance of expression nor _verbatim_ repetition is
+expected. We merely want to know whether the leading thoughts in the
+selection have been grasped and remembered.
+
+All grades of accuracy are found, both in the comprehension of the
+selection and in the recall, and it is not always easy to draw the line
+between satisfactory and unsatisfactory responses. The following sample
+performances will serve as a guide:--
+
+_Selection (a)_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "The tests which we are making are given for the
+    advancement of science and for the information of the person
+    tested. By scientific means we will be able to separate
+    characteristics derived from heredity and environment and to
+    treat each class separately. By doing so we can more accurately
+    correct defects."
+
+    "Tests like these are for two purposes. First to develop a
+    science, and second to apply it to the person to help him. The
+    tests are to find out how you differ from another and to measure
+    the difference between your heredity and environment."
+
+    "These tests are given to see if we can separate heredity and
+    environment and to see if we can find out how one person differs
+    from another. We can then correct these differences and teach
+    people more effectively."
+
+    "The tests that we are now making are valuable along both
+    scientific and personal lines. By using them it can be found out
+    where a person is weak and where he is strong. We can then
+    strengthen his weak points and remedy some things that would
+    otherwise be neglected. They are of great benefit to science and
+    to the person concerned."
+
+    "Tests such as we are now making are of great importance because
+    they aim to show in what respects we differ from others and why,
+    and if they do this they will be able to guide us into the right
+    channel and bring success instead of failure."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Tests such as we are now making are of value
+    both for the advancement of science and for the information of
+    the person interested. It is necessary to know this."
+
+    "Such tests as we are now making show about the human mind and
+    show in what channels we are fitted. It is the testing of each
+    individual between his effects of inheritancy and environment."
+
+    "It is very interesting for us to study science for two reasons;
+    first, to test our mental ability, and second for the further
+    development of science."
+
+    "Tests such as we are now making help in two ways; it helps the
+    scientists and it gives information to the people."
+
+    "Tests are being given to pupils to-day to better them and to
+    aid science for generations to come. If each person knows
+    exactly his own beliefs and ideas and faults he can find out
+    exactly what kind of work he is fitted for by heredity. The
+    tests show that environment doesn't count, for if you are all
+    right you will get along anyway." (Note invention.)
+
+_Selection (b)_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "There are different opinions about life. Some
+    call it good and some bad. It would be more correct to say that
+    it is middling, because we are never as happy as we would like
+    to be and we are never as sad as our enemies want us to be."
+
+    "One hears many judgments about life. Some say it is good, while
+    others say it is bad. But it is really neither of the extremes.
+    Life is mediocre. We do not have as much good as we desire, nor
+    do we have as much misfortune as others want us to have.
+    Nevertheless, we have enough good to keep life from being
+    unjust."
+
+    "Some people have different views of life from others. Some say
+    it is bad, others say it is good. It is better to class life as
+    mediocre, as it is never as good as we wish it, and on the other
+    hand, it might be worse."
+
+    "Some people think differently of life. Some think it good, some
+    bad, others mediocre, which is nearest correct. It brings
+    unhappiness to us, but not as much as our enemies want us to
+    have."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Some say life is good, some say it is
+    mediocre. Even though some say it is mediocre they say it is
+    right."
+
+    "There are two sides of life. Some say it is good while others
+    say it is bad. To some, life is happy and they get all they can
+    out of life. For others life is not happy and therefore they
+    fail to get all there is in life."
+
+    "One hears many different judgments of life. Some call it good,
+    some call it bad. It brings unhappiness and it does not have
+    enough pleasure. It should be better distributed."
+
+    "There are different opinions of the value of life. Some say it
+    is good and some say it is bad. Some say it is mediocrity. Some
+    think it brings happiness while others do not."
+
+    "Nowadays there is much said about the value of life. Some say
+    it is good, while others say it is bad. A person should not have
+    an ill feeling toward the value of life, and he should not be
+    unjust to any one. Honesty is the best policy. People who are
+    unjust are more likely to be injured by their enemies." (Note
+    invention.)
+
+REMARKS. Contrary to what the subject is led to expect, the test is less
+a test of memory than of ability to comprehend the drift of an abstract
+passage. A subject who fully grasps the meaning of the selection as it
+is read is not likely to fail because of poor memory. Mere verbal memory
+improves but little after the age of 14 or 15 years, as is shown by the
+fact that our adults do little better than eighth-grade children in
+repeating sentences of twenty-eight syllables. On the other hand, adult
+intelligence is vastly superior in the comprehension and retention of a
+logically presented group of abstract ideas.
+
+There is nothing in which stupid persons cut a poorer figure than in
+grappling with the abstract. Their thinking clings tenaciously to the
+concrete; their concepts are vague or inaccurate; the interrelations
+among their concepts are scanty in the extreme; and such poor mental
+stores as they have are little available for ready use.
+
+A few critics have objected to the use of tests demanding abstract
+thinking, on the ground that abstract thought is a very special aspect
+of intelligence and that facility in it depends almost entirely on
+occupational habits and the accidents of education. Some have even gone
+so far as to say that we are not justified, on the basis of any number
+of such tests, in pronouncing a subject backward or defective. It is
+supposed that a subject who has no capacity in the use of abstract ideas
+may nevertheless have excellent intelligence "along other lines." In
+such cases, it is said, we should not penalize the subject for his
+failures in handling abstractions, but substitute, instead, tests
+requiring motor coördination and the manipulation of things, tests in
+which the supposedly dull child often succeeds fairly well.
+
+From the psychological point of view, such a proposal is naïvely
+unpsychological. It is in the very essence of the higher thought
+processes to be conceptual and abstract. What the above proposal amounts
+to is, that if the subject is not capable of the more complex and
+strictly human type of thinking, we should ignore this fact and estimate
+his intelligence entirely on the ability he displays to carry on mental
+operations of a more simple and primitive kind. This would be like
+asking the physician to ignore the diseased parts of his patient's body
+and to base his diagnosis on an examination of the organs which are
+sound!
+
+The present test throws light in an interesting way on the integrity of
+the critical faculty. Some subjects are unwilling to extend the report
+in the least beyond what they know to be approximately correct, while
+others with defective powers of auto-criticism manufacture a report
+which draws heavily on the imagination, perhaps continuing in garrulous
+fashion as long as they can think of anything having the remotest
+connection with any thought in the selection. We have included, for each
+selection, one illustration of this type in the sample failures given
+above.
+
+The worst fault of the test is its susceptibility to the influence of
+schooling. Our uneducated adults of even "superior adult" intelligence
+often fail, while about two thirds of high-school pupils succeed. The
+unschooled adults have a marked tendency either to give a summary which
+is inadequate because of its extreme brevity, or else to give a
+criticism of the thought which the passage contains.
+
+This test first appeared in Binet's 1911 revision, in the adult group.
+Binet used only selection (b), and in a slightly more difficult form
+than we have given above. Goddard gives the test like Binet and retains
+it in the adult group. Kuhlmann locates it in year XV, using only
+selection (a). On the basis of over 300 tests of adults we find the
+test too difficult for the "average adult" level, even on the basis of
+only one success in two trials and when scored on the rather liberal
+standard above set forth.
+
+
+SUPERIOR ADULT, 5: REPEATING SEVEN DIGITS REVERSED
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING, the same as in previous tests of this kind. The
+series are: 4-1-6-2-5-9-3; 3-8-2-6-4-7-5; and 9-4-5-2-8-3-7.
+
+We have collected fewer data on this test than on any of the others, as
+it was added later to the test series. As far as we have used it we have
+found few "average adults" who pass, while about half the "superior
+adults" do so.
+
+
+SUPERIOR ADULT, 6: INGENUITY TEST
+
+PROCEDURE. Problem _a_ is stated as follows:--
+
+    _A mother sent her boy to the river and told him to bring back
+    exactly 7 pints of water. She gave him a 3-pint vessel and a
+    5-pint vessel. Show me how the boy can measure out exactly
+    7 pints of water, using nothing but these two vessels and not
+    guessing at the amount. You should begin by filling the 5-pint
+    vessel first. Remember, you have a 3-pint vessel and a 5-pint
+    vessel and you must bring back exactly 7 pints._
+
+The problem is given orally, but may be repeated if necessary.
+
+The subject is not allowed pencil or paper and is requested to give his
+solution orally as he works it out. It is then possible to make a
+complete record of the method employed.
+
+The subject is likely to resort to some such method as to "fill the
+3-pint vessel two thirds full," or, "I would mark the inside of the
+5-pint vessel so as to show where 4 pints come to," etc. We inform the
+subject that such a method is not allowable; that this would be
+guessing, since he could not be sure when the 3-pint vessel was two
+thirds full (or whether he had marked off his 5-pint vessel accurately).
+Tell him he must _measure_ out the water without any guesswork. Explain
+also, that it is a fair problem, not a "catch."
+
+Say nothing about pouring from one vessel to another, but if the subject
+asks whether this is permissible the answer is "yes."
+
+The time limit for each problem is 5 minutes. If the subject fails on
+the first problem, we explain the solution in full and then proceed to
+the next.
+
+The second problem is like the first, except that a 5-pint vessel and a
+7-pint vessel are given, to get 8 pints, the subject being told to begin
+by filling the 5-pint vessel.
+
+In the third problem 4 and 9 are given, to get 7, the instruction being
+to "begin by filling the 4-pint vessel."
+
+Note that in each problem we instruct the subject how to begin. This is
+necessary in order to secure uniformity of conditions. It is possible to
+solve all of the problems by beginning with either of the two vessels,
+but the solution is made very much more difficult if we begin in the
+direction opposite from that recommended.
+
+Give no further aid. It is necessary to refrain from comment of every
+kind.
+
+SCORING. _Two of the three_ problems must be solved correctly within the
+5 minutes allotted to each.
+
+REMARKS. We have called this a test of ingenuity. The subject who is
+given the problem finds himself involved in a difficulty from which he
+must extricate himself. Means must be found to overcome an obstacle.
+This requires practical judgement and a certain amount of inventive
+ingenuity. Various possibilities must be explored and either accepted
+for trial or rejected. If the amount of invention called for seems to
+the reader inconsiderable, let it be remembered that the important
+inventions of history have not as a rule had a Minerva birth, but
+instead have developed by successive stages, each involving but a small
+step in advance.
+
+It is unnecessary to emphasize at length the function of invention in
+the higher thought processes. In one form or another it is present in
+all intellectual activity; in the creation and use of language, in art,
+in social adjustments, in religion, and in philosophy, as truly as in
+the domains of science and practical affairs. Certainly this is true if
+we accept Mason's broad definition of invention as including "every
+change in human activity made designedly and systematically."[78] From
+the psychological point of view, perhaps, Mason is justified in looking
+upon the great inventor as "an epitome of the genius of the world." To
+develop a Krag-Joergensen from a bow and arrow, a "velvet-tipped"
+lucifer match from the primitive fire-stick, or a modern piano from the
+first crude, stringed, musical instrument has involved much the same
+intellectual processes as have been operative in transforming fetishism
+and magic into religion and philosophy, or scattered fragments of
+knowledge into science.
+
+[78] Otis T. Mason: _The Origins of Inventions_. (London, 1902.)
+
+Psychologically, invention depends upon the constructive imagination;
+that is, upon the ability to abstract from what is immediately present
+to the senses and to picture new situations with their possibilities and
+consequences. Images are united in order to form new combinations.
+
+As we have several times emphasized, the decisive intellectual
+differences among human beings are not greatly dependent upon mere sense
+discrimination or native retentiveness. Far more important than the raw
+mass of sense data is the correct shooting together of the sense
+elements in memory and imagination. This is but another name for
+invention. It is the synthetic, or apperceptive, activity of the mind
+that gives the "seven-league boots" to genius. It is, however, a kind of
+ability which is possessed by all minds to a greater or less degree. Any
+test has its value which gives a clue, as this test does, to the
+subject's ability in this direction.
+
+The test was devised by the writer and used in 1905 in a study of the
+intellectual processes of bright and dull boys, but it was not at that
+time standardized. It has been found to belong at a much higher mental
+level than was at first supposed. Only an insignificant number pass the
+test below the mental age of 14 years, and about two thirds of "average
+adults" fail. Of our "superior adults" somewhat more than 75 per cent
+succeed. Formal education influences the test little or not at all, the
+unschooled business men making a somewhat better showing than the
+high-school students.
+
+
+
+
+SELECTED REFERENCES
+
+
+The following classified lists include only the most important
+references under each topic. So many investigations have been made with
+the Binet-Simon tests in the last few years, and so many articles have
+been written in evaluation of the method, that a complete bibliography
+of the subject would require thirty or forty pages. Those who desire to
+make a more thorough study of the literature are referred to the
+admirable annotated bibliography compiled by Samuel C. Kohs, and
+published by Warwick & York, Baltimore. Kohs's Bibliography contains
+254 references, and is complete to January 1, 1914.
+
+
+BINET-SIMON TESTS OF NORMAL CHILDREN
+
+   1. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Le développement de l'intelligence
+      chez les enfants"; in _Année psychologique_ (1908), vol. 14,
+      pp. 1-94.
+
+      Exposition of the original 1908 scale with results.
+
+   2. Binet, A. "Nouvelles recherches sur la mesure du niveau
+      intellectuel chez les enfants d'école"; in _Année
+      psychologique_ (1911), vol. 17, pp. 145-201.
+
+      Presents the 1911 revision.
+
+   3. Bobertag, O. "Ueber Intelligenzprüfungen (nach der Methode von
+      Binet und Simon)"; in _Zeitschrift für angewande Psychologie_
+      (1911), vol. 5, pp. 105-203; and (1912), vol. 6, pp. 495-537.
+
+      Analysis of 400 cases and criticism of method and results.
+
+   4. Dougherty, M. L. "Report on the Binet-Simon Tests given to Four
+      Hundred and Eighty-three Children in the Public Schools of
+      Kansas City, Kansas"; in _Journal of Educational Psychology_
+      (1913), vol. 4, pp. 338-52.
+
+   5. Goddard, H. H. "The Binet-Simon Measuring Scale for
+      Intelligence, Revised"; in _Training School Bulletin_ (1911),
+      vol. 8, pp. 56-62.
+
+   6. Hoffman, A. "Vergleichende Intelligenzprüfungen an Vorschülern
+      und Volksschülern"; in _Zeitschrift für angewande Psychologie_
+      (1913), vol. 8, pp. 102-20.
+
+      One hundred and fifty-six subjects. Ages seven, nine, and ten.
+
+   7. Johnston, Katherine L. "Binet's Method for the Measurement of
+      Intelligence; Some Results"; in _Journal of Experimental
+      Pedagogy_ (1911), vol. 1, pp. 24-31.
+
+      Results of 200 tests of school children.
+
+   8. Kuhlmann, F. "Some Results of Examining 1000 Public-School
+      Children with a Revision of the Binet-Simon Tests of
+      Intelligence by Untrained Teachers"; in _Journal of
+      Psycho-Asthenics_ (1914), vol. 18, pp. 150-79, and 233-69.
+
+   9. Phillips, Byron A. "The Binet Tests applied to Colored
+      Children"; in _Psychological Clinic_ (1914), pp. 190-96.
+
+      A comparison of 86 colored and 137 white children.
+
+  10. Rogers, Agnes L., _and_ McIntyre, J. L. "The Measurement of
+      Intelligence in Children by the Binet-Simon Scale"; in
+      _British Journal of Psychology_ (1914), vol. 7, pp. 265-300.
+
+  11. Rowe, E. C. "Five Hundred Forty-Seven White and Two Hundred
+      Sixty-Eight Indian Children tested by the Binet-Simon Tests";
+      in _Pedagogical Seminary_ (1914), vol. 21, pp. 454-69.
+
+  12. Strong, Alice C. "Three Hundred Fifty White and Colored
+      Children measured by the Binet-Simon Measuring Scale of
+      Intelligence"; in _Pedagogical Seminary_ (1913), vol. 20,
+      pp. 485-515.
+
+  13. Terman, L. M., _and_ Childs, H. G. "A Tentative Revision and
+      Extension of the Binet-Simon Measuring Scale of Intelligence"; in
+      _Journal of Educational Psychology_ (1912), vol. 3, pp. 61-74,
+      133-43, 198-208, and 277-89.
+
+      Results of 396 tests of California school-children.
+
+  14. Terman, Lyman, Ordahl, Galbreath, _and_ Talbert. _The Stanford
+      Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Measuring Scale of
+      Intelligence._ (1916.)
+
+      Detailed analysis of the results secured by testing 1000
+      unselected school-children within two months of a birthday.
+
+  15. Weintrob, J. _and_ R. "The Influence of Environment on Mental
+      Ability as shown by the Binet Tests"; in _Journal of
+      Educational Psychology_ (1912), pp. 577-86.
+
+  16. Winch, W. H. "Binet's Mental Tests: What They Are, and What We
+      Can Do with Them"; in _Child Study_ (London), 1913, 1914,
+      1915, and 1916.
+
+      An extended series of articles setting forth results of tests with
+      normal children, and giving valuable criticisms and suggestions.
+
+
+BINET-SIMON TESTS OF THE FEEBLE-MINDED
+
+  17. Chotzen, F. "Die Intelligenzprüfungsmethode von Binet-Simon
+      bei schwachsinnigen Kindern"; in _Zeitschrift für angewande
+      Psychologie_ (1912), vol. 6, pp. 411-94.
+
+      A critical study of the results of 280 tests.
+
+  18. Goddard, H. H. "Four Hundred Feeble-Minded Children classified
+      by the Binet Method"; in _Pedagogical Seminary_ (1910),
+      vol. 17, pp. 387-97; also in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_
+      (1910), vol. 15, pp. 17-30.
+
+      Offers important evidence of the value of the Binet-Simon method.
+
+  19. Kuhlmann, F. "The Binet and Simon Tests of Intelligence in
+      Grading Feeble-Minded Children"; in _Journal of
+      Psycho-Asthenics_ (1912), vol. 16, pp. 173-93.
+
+      Analysis of results from 1300 cases.
+
+
+BINET-SIMON TESTS OF DELINQUENTS
+
+  20. Bluemel, C. S. "Binet Tests on Two Hundred Juvenile
+      Delinquents"; in _Training School Bulletin_ (1915),
+      pp. 187-93.
+
+  21. Goddard, H. H. _The Criminal Imbecile._ The Macmillan Company.
+      (1915.) 157 pages.
+
+      An analysis of the mentality of three murderers of moron or
+      borderline intelligence.
+
+  22. Goddard, H. H. "The Responsibility of Children in the Juvenile
+      Court"; in _Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology_
+      (September, 1912).
+
+      Analysis of 100 tests of juvenile delinquents.
+
+  23. Healy, William. _The Individual Delinquent._ Little, Brown &
+      Co. (1915.) 830 pages.
+
+      A textbook on delinquents. Gives results of many Binet-Simon
+      tests.
+
+  24. Spaulding, Edith R. "The Results of Mental and Physical
+      Examination of Four Hundred Women Offenders"; in _Journal of
+      Criminal Law and Criminology_ (1915), pp. 704-17.
+
+  25. Sullivan, W. C. "La mesure du développement intellectuel chez
+      les jeunes délinquantes"; in _Année psychologique_ (1912),
+      vol. 18, pp. 341-61.
+
+  26. Williams, J. Harold. _A Study of 150 Delinquent Boys._
+      Bulletin no. 1, Research Laboratory of the Buckel Foundation.
+      (1915.) 15 pages.
+
+      The Stanford revision used. Report of over 400 cases to follow.
+
+
+BINET-SIMON TESTS OF SUPERIOR CHILDREN
+
+  27. Jeronutti, A. "Ricerche psicologiche sperimentali sugli alunni
+      molto intelligenti"; in _Lab. di Psicol. Sperim. della Reg.
+      Univ. Roma_. (1912)
+
+      Out of fifteen hundred school and kindergarten children, ages five
+      to twelve, fourteen were selected by the teachers as the
+      brightest. The Binet test showed them to be from one to three
+      years in advance of their chronological ages.
+
+  28. Terman, L. M. "The Mental Hygiene of Exceptional Children"; in
+      _Pedagogical Seminary_ (1915), vol. 22, pp. 529-37.
+
+      Data on 31 children testing above 120 I. Q.
+
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR GIVING THE BINET-SIMON TESTS
+
+  29. Binet, A., _and_ Simon, Th. _A Method of Measuring the
+      Development of Intelligence in Young Children._ Chicago
+      Medical Book Company. (1915.) 82 pages.
+
+      Authorized translation of Binet's final instructions for giving
+      the tests.
+
+  30. Goddard, H. H. "A Measuring Scale of Intelligence"; in
+      _Training School Bulletin_ (1910), vol. 6, pp. 146-55.
+
+      Condensed translation of Binet's 1908 _Measuring Scale of
+      Intelligence_.
+
+  31. Goddard, H. H. "The Binet-Simon Measuring Scale for
+      Intelligence, Revised"; in _Training School Bulletin_ (1911),
+      vol. 8, pp. 56-62.
+
+  32. Goddard, H. H. "Standard Method for Giving the Binet Test"; in
+      _Training School Bulletin_ (1913), vol. 10, pp. 23-30.
+
+  33. Kuhlmann, F. "A Revision of the Binet-Simon System for
+      Measuring the Intelligence of Children"; Monograph Supplement
+      of _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_ (September, 1912), 41 pages.
+
+  34. Wallin, J. E. W. "A Practical Guide for the Administration of
+      the Binet-Simon Scale for Measuring Intelligence"; in _The
+      Psychological Clinic_ (1911), vol. 5, pp. 217-38.
+
+
+CRITICISMS AND EVALUATIONS OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD
+
+  35. Berry, C. S. "A Comparison of the Binet Tests of 1908 and
+      1911"; in _Journal of Educational Psychology_ (1912), vol. 3,
+      pp. 444-51.
+
+  36. Bobertag, O. "Ueber Intelligenzprüfungen (nach der Methode von
+      Binet und Simon)"; in _Zeitschrift für angewande Psychologie_.
+      (A, 1911), vol. 5, pp. 105-203; (B, 1912), vol. 6,
+      pp. 495-537.
+
+      Accepts the method and gives valuable suggestions for improvement.
+
+  37. Brigham, Carl C. "An Experimental Critique of the Binet-Simon
+      Scale"; in _Journal of Educational Psychology_ (1914),
+      pp. 439-48.
+
+      Finds the scale 96% efficient.
+
+  38. Goddard, H. H. "The Reliability of the Binet-Simon Measuring
+      Scale of Intelligence"; in _Proceedings of the Fourth
+      International Congress of School Hygiene_ (1913), vol. 5,
+      pp. 693-99.
+
+      Application of the theory of probability to the results proves the
+      extremely small liability of error.
+
+  39. Kohs, Samuel C. "The Practicability of the Binet Scale and the
+      Question of the Borderline Case"; in _Training School
+      Bulletin_ (1916), pp. 211-23.
+
+      Analysis of cases showing the reliability of the scale.
+
+  40. Kuhlmann, F. "Binet and Simon's System for Measuring the
+      Intelligence of Children"; in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_
+      (1911), vol. 15, pp. 79-92.
+
+      Finds the method of the greatest value.
+
+  41. Kuhlmann, F. "A Reply to Dr. L. P. Ayres's Criticism of the
+      Binet and Simon System for Measuring the Intelligence of
+      Children"; in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_ (1911), vol. 16,
+      pp. 58-67.
+
+      Many of the Ayres criticisms are shown to be unfounded.
+
+  42. Meumann, E. _Vorlesungen zur Einführung in die Experimentelle
+      Pädagogik_ (1913), vol. 2, pp. 130-300.
+
+      Summary of the literature on Binet tests up to 1913. Accepts the
+      method but gives suggestions for improvement. This summary and
+      other writings of Meumann on the psychology of endowment are
+      reviewed by Lewis M. Terman in a series of four articles in
+      the _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_ for 1915.
+
+  43. Otis, A. S. "Some Logical and Mathematical Aspects of the
+      Measurement of Intelligence by the Binet-Simon Method"; in
+      _The Psychological Review_ (April and June, 1916).
+
+      Considers the Binet-Simon method imperfect from the mathematical
+      point of view.
+
+  44. Schmitt, Clara. _Standardization of Tests for Defective
+      Children._ Psychological Monographs (1915), no. 83, 181 pages.
+
+      Contains (pp. 52-67) a discussion of the "Fallacies and
+      Inadequacies of the Binet-Simon Series." Most of the
+      criticisms here given are either superficial or unfair, some
+      of them apparently being due to a lack of acquaintance with
+      Binet's writings.
+
+  45. Stern, W. _The Psychological Methods of Measuring
+      Intelligence._ Translated by G. M. Whipple. (1913.) 160 pages.
+
+      A splendid critical discussion of the Binet-Simon method. Should
+      be read by every one who would use the scale.
+
+  46. Terman, L. M. "Suggestions for Revising, Extending, and
+      Supplementing the Binet Intelligence Tests"; in _Journal of
+      Psycho-Asthenics_ (1913), vol. 18, pp. 20-33.
+
+  47. Terman, L. M. "Psychological Principles Underlying the
+      Binet-Simon Scale and Some Practical Considerations for its
+      Correct Use"; in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_ (1913),
+      vol. 18, pp. 93-104.
+
+  48. Terman, L. M. "A Report of the Buffalo Conference on the
+      Binet-Simon Tests of Intelligence"; in _Pedagogical Seminary_
+      (1913), vol. 20, pp. 549-54.
+
+      Abstracts of papers presented at the above conference.
+
+  49. Terman, Lyman, Ordahl, Galbreath, _and_ Talbert. _The Stanford
+      Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Scale for Measuring
+      Intelligence._ (1916.)
+
+      Contains a chapter on the validity of the individual tests and on
+      considerations relating to the formation of an intelligence
+      scale.
+
+  50. Terman _and_ Knollin. "The Detection of Borderline Deficiency
+      by the Binet-Simon Method"; in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_
+      (June, 1916).
+
+      A comparison of the accuracy of the Stanford and other revisions
+      with borderline cases.
+
+  51. Trèves _and_ Saffiotti. "L'échelle métrique de l'intelligence
+      modifiée selon la méthode Trèves-Saffiotti"; in _Année
+      Psychologique_ (1912), pp. 327-40.
+
+      Criticize the age-grade method of measuring intelligence and
+      propose a substitute.
+
+  52. Wallin, J. E. W. _Experimental Studies of Mental Defectives. A
+      Critique of the Binet-Simon Tests._ Warwick & York. (1912.)
+
+      Criticism based on the use of the scale with epileptics.
+
+  53. Yerkes _and_ Bridges. _A Point Scale for Measuring Mental
+      Ability._ Warwick & York.
+
+      Authors think the point scale preferable to the Binet-Simon
+      method.
+
+
+BOOKS ON MENTAL DEFICIENCY
+
+  54. Binet, A., _and_ Simon, Th. _Mentally Defective Children._
+      Translated from the French by W. B. Drummond. Longmans, Green
+      & Co. (1914.) 171 pages.
+
+      Discusses the psychology, pedagogy, and medical examination of
+      defectives.
+
+  55. Goddard, H. H. _Feeble-Mindedness; Its Causes and
+      Consequences._ The Macmillan Company. (1913.) 599 pages.
+
+      The most important single volume on the subject. Extensive data on
+      the causes of feeble-mindedness and excellent clinical  pictures
+      of all grades of mental defects.
+
+  56. Goddard, H. H. _The Kallikak Family._ The Macmillan Company.
+      (1914.) 121 pages.
+
+      An epoch-making study of the hereditary transmission of mental
+      deficiency in a degenerate family.
+
+  57. Holmes, Arthur. _The Conservation of the Child._ J. B.
+      Lippincott Company. (1912.) 345 pages.
+
+      Methods of examination and treatment of defective children.
+
+  58. Holmes, Arthur. _The Backward Child._ Bobbs-Merrill Company.
+      (1915.)
+
+      A popular treatment of the handling of backward children.
+
+  59. Huey, E. B. _Backward and Feeble-Minded Children._ Warwick &
+      York. (1912.) 221 pages.
+
+      Devoted mainly to clinical accounts of borderline cases.
+
+  60. Lapage, C. P. _Feeble-Mindedness in Children of School Age._
+      The University Press, Manchester, England. (1911.) 359 pages.
+
+  61. Sherlock, E. B. _The Feeble-Minded; A Guide to Study and
+      Practice._ The Macmillan Company. (1911.) 327 pages.
+
+  62. Tredgold, A. F. _Mental Deficiency (Amentia)._ Baillière,
+      Tindall, and Cox. London, England. (2d ed. 1914.) 491 pages.
+
+      The best medical treatment of the subject.
+
+
+STUDIES OF THE PROGRESS OF CHILDREN THROUGH THE GRADES
+
+  63. Ayres, Leonard P. _Laggards in our Schools._ The Russell Sage
+      Foundation. (1909.) 236 pages.
+
+      Interesting and instructive discussion of school retardation and
+      its causes.
+
+  64. Blan, Louis B. _A Special Study of the Incidence of
+      Retardation._ Teachers College, Columbia University,
+      Contributions to Education, no. 40. (1911.) 111 pages.
+
+      Review of the literature and a statistical study of the progress
+      of 4579 children.
+
+  65. Keyes, C. H. _Progress Through the Grades of City Schools._
+      Teachers College, Columbia University, Contributions to
+      Education, no. 42. (1911.) 79 pages.
+
+      Important study of the progress of several thousand children.
+
+  66. Strayer, George D. _Age and Grade Census of Schools and
+      Colleges._ Bulletin no. 451, U.S. Bureau of Education. (1911.)
+      144 pages.
+
+      Statistics of the age-grade status of the children in 318 cities.
+
+  67. See also the _Reports_ of leading school surveys, such as
+      those of New York, Salt Lake City, Butte, Springfield (Mass.),
+      Denver, Cleveland, etc.
+
+
+REFERENCES ON THE SPECIAL CLASS FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
+
+  68. Huey, E. B. "The Education of Defectives and the Training of
+      Teachers for Special Classes"; in _Journal of Educational
+      Psychology_ (1913), pp. 545-50.
+
+  69. Goddard, H. H. _School Training of Defective Children._ World
+      Book Company. (1914.) 97 pages.
+
+      Based on his survey of the treatment of backward children in the
+      schools of New York City.
+
+  70. Holmes, W. H. _School Organization and the Individual Child._
+      The Davis Press, Worcester, Massachusetts. (1912.) 211 pages.
+
+      A comprehensive account of the efforts which have been made to
+      adjust the school to the capacities of individual children.
+
+  71. Maennel, B. _Auxiliary Education._ Translated from the German
+      by Emma Sylvester. Doubleday, Page & Co. (1909.) 267 pages.
+
+  72. Van Sickle, J. H., Witmer, L., _and_ Ayres, L. P. _Provision
+      for Exceptional Children in Public Schools._ Bulletin no. 461,
+      U.S. Bureau of Education. (1911.) 92 pages.
+
+  73. Shaer, I. "Special Classes for Bright Children in an English
+      Elementary School"; in _Journal of Educational Psychology_
+      (1913), pp. 209-22.
+
+  74. Stern, W. "The Supernormal Child"; in _Journal of Educational
+      Psychology_ (1911), pp. 143-48 and 181-90.
+
+      A strong plea for special classes for superior children.
+
+  75. Vaney, V. _Les classes pour enfants arrières._ Bulletin de la
+      Société libre pour l'étude psychologique de l'enfant (1911),
+      pp. 53-152.
+
+      Report of the French National Commission appointed to investigate
+      methods of treatment and training.
+
+  76. Witmer, L. _The Special Class for Backward Children._ The
+      Psychological Clinic Press, Philadelphia. (1911.) 275 pages.
+
+      An account of the special class conducted in connection with the
+      University of Pennsylvania Summer School.
+
+
+LIST OF BINET'S MOST IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE MEASUREMENT OF
+INTELLIGENCE
+
+  77. Binet, A. _L'Étude experimentale de l'intelligence._ Paris:
+      Schleicher frères. (1903.)
+
+  78. Binet, A. "A Propos de la mesure de l'intelligence"; in _Année
+      psychologique_ (1905), vol. 11, pp. 69-82.
+
+  79. Binet, A. _Les enfants anormaux; guide pour l'admission des
+      enfants anormaux dans les classes de perfectionnement._ Paris:
+      Colin (1907.)
+
+  80. Binet, A. _Comment les instituteurs jugent-ils l'intelligence
+      d'un ecolier?_ Bulletin de la Société libre pour l'étude
+      psychologique de l'enfant (1910), no. 10, pp. 172-82.
+
+  81. Binet, A. "Nouvelles recherches sur la mesure du niveau
+      intellectuel chez les enfants d'école"; in _Année
+      psychologique_ (1911), vol. 17, pp. 145-201.
+
+  82. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Sur la nécessité d'établir un
+      diagnostique scientifique des états inférieurs de
+      l'intelligence"; in _Année psychologique_ (1905), vol. 11,
+      pp. 163-90.
+
+  83. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Méthodes nouvelles pour le
+      diagnostique du niveau intellectuel des anormaux"; in _Année
+      psychologique_ (1905), vol. 11, pp. 191-244.
+
+  84. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Application des Méthodes nouvelles
+      au diagnostique du niveau intellectuel chez des enfants
+      normaux et anormaux d'hospice et d'école primaire"; in _Année
+      psychologique_ (1905), vol. 11, pp. 245-336.
+
+  85. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Le développement de l'intelligence
+      chez les enfants"; in _Année psychologique_ (1908), vol. 14,
+      pp. 1-94.
+
+  86. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Langage et pensée"; in _Année
+      psychologique_ (1908), vol. 14, pp. 284-339.
+
+  87. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "L'intelligence des imbeciles"; in
+      _Année psychologique_ (1909), vol. 15, pp. 1-147.
+
+  88. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Nouvelle théorie psychologique et
+      clinique de la démence"; in _Année psychologique_ (1909),
+      vol. 15, pp. 168-272.
+
+  89. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. _La mesure du développement de
+      l'intelligence chez les jeunes enfants._ Bulletin de la
+      Société libre pour l'étude psychologique de l'enfant (1911),
+      no. 11, pp. 187-256.
+
+
+
+
+SUGGESTIONS FOR A TEACHER'S PRIVATE LIBRARY
+
+
+ON EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
+
+  Ayres, L. P. _Laggards in our Schools._ The Russell Sage
+      Foundation. (1909.) 236 pages.
+
+      Treats the amount and causes of school retardation.
+
+  Binet, A., _and_ Simon, Th. _Mentally Defective Children._
+      Translated from the French by W. B. Drummond. Longmans, Green
+      & Co. (1914.) 171 pages.
+
+      Discusses the psychology, pedagogy and medical examination of
+      defectives.
+
+  Binet, A., _and_ Simon, Th. _A Method of Measuring the Development
+      of Intelligence in Young Children._ Chicago Medical Book
+      Company. (1915.) 82 pages.
+
+      Authorized translation of Binet's final instructions for giving
+      the tests.
+
+  Goddard, H. H. _Feeble-Mindedness; Its Causes and Consequences._
+      The Macmillan Company. (1913.) 599 pages.
+
+      The most important single volume on the subject.
+
+  Goddard, H. H. _The Kallikak Family._ The Macmillan Company.
+      (1914.) 121 pages.
+
+      A study of the hereditary transmission of mental deficiency in one
+      family.
+
+  Goddard, H. H. _School Training of Defective Children._ World Book
+      Company. (1914.) 97 pages.
+
+      Admirable treatment of the entire subject.
+
+  Goddard, H. H. _The Criminal Imbecile._ The Macmillan Company.
+      (1915.) 157 pages.
+
+      An analysis of three murderers of borderline intelligence.
+
+  Holmes, Arthur. _The Conservation of the Child._ J. B. Lippincott
+      Company. (1912.) 345 pages.
+
+      Methods of examination and treatment of defective children.
+
+  Holmes, Arthur. _The Backward Child._ The Bobbs-Merrill Co.
+      (1915.)
+
+      A popular treatment of the subject.
+
+  Holmes, W. H. _School Organization and the Individual Child._ The
+      Davis Press, Worcester, Massachusetts. (1912) 211 pages.
+
+      A comprehensive account of methods of adjusting school work to the
+      capacity of the individual child.
+
+  Huey, E. B. _Backward and Feeble-Minded Children._ Warwick & York.
+      (1912.) 221 pages.
+
+      Clinical studies of borderline cases.
+
+  Kelynack, T. N. (_Editor_). _Defective Children._ John Bale, Sons,
+      and Daniellson, London. (1915.) 447 pages.
+
+      Written by many authors and devoted to all kinds of physical and
+      mental defects.
+
+  Kuhlmann, F. "A Revision of the Binet-Simon System for Measuring
+      the Intelligence of Children." Monograph Supplement of
+      _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_. (1912.) 41 pages.
+
+      Contains instructions for use of the Kuhlmann revision.
+
+  Stern, W. _The Psychological Method of Measuring Intelligence._
+      Translated from the German by G. M. Whipple. Warwick & York.
+      (1913.) 160 pages.
+
+  Terman, Lyman, Ordahl, Galbreath, _and_ Talbert. _The Stanford
+      Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Scale for Measuring
+      Intelligence._ (1916.)
+
+      Extended analysis of 1000 tests. Data on the relation of
+      intelligence to school success, social status, etc.
+
+  Terman, Lewis M. _The Hygiene of the School Child._ Houghton
+      Mifflin Company. (1914.) 417 pages.
+
+      Devoted to the physical defects of school children.
+
+  Tredgold, A. F. _Mental Deficiency (Amentia)._ Baillière, Tindall
+      & Cox, London. (1914.) 491 pages.
+
+      The best medical treatment of the subject.
+
+  Whipple, G. M. _Manual of Mental and Physical Tests._ Warwick &
+      York. Vol. I (1914), 365 pages; vol. II (1915), 336 pages.
+
+      The best treatment of mental tests other than those of the Binet
+      system.
+
+  Witmer, L. _The Special Class for Backward Children._ The
+      Psychological Clinic Press, Philadelphia. (1911.) 275 pages.
+
+      Problems encountered in connection with the special class.
+
+
+MAGAZINES
+
+  _The Training School Bulletin._ Published monthly by the Training
+      School, Vineland, New Jersey. Edited by H. H. Goddard and
+      E. R. Johnstone.
+
+  _The Psychological Clinic._ Published monthly by the Psychological
+      Clinic Press, Philadelphia. Edited by Lightner Witmer.
+
+  _The Journal of Delinquency._ Published bi-monthly by the Whittier
+      State School, Whittier, California. Edited by Williams,
+      Goddard, Terman, and others.
+
+  _The Journal of Psycho-Asthenics._ Published quarterly at
+      Faribault, Minnesota. Organ of the American Association for
+      the Study of the Feeble-Minded. Edited by A. C. Rogers and F.
+      Kuhlmann.
+
+  _The Journal of Educational Psychology._ Published by Warwick &
+      York, Baltimore. Edited by J. Carleton Bell.
+
+
+
+
+INDEX
+
+
+  Abstract thought, tests of, 344.
+
+  Absurdities, 255 _ff._
+
+  Adolescence, and variability in intelligence, 67.
+
+  Adult intelligence, 54.
+
+  Adults, how to find I Q of adults, 140.
+
+  Æsthetic comparison, 165 _ff._
+
+  Age, test of giving age, 173 _ff._
+
+  Age standards, 40.
+
+  Alternative tests, 136.
+
+  Amateur testing, 107 _ff._
+
+  Apperception, 169.
+
+  Arithmetical reasoning, 319 _ff._
+
+  Association processes, 274.
+
+  Attention, during the test, 121.
+
+  Attitude of the subject, 109.
+
+  Auto-criticism, 156, 171, 195.
+
+  Average intelligence, 94 _ff._
+
+
+  Ball and field test, 210 _ff._, 286.
+
+  Berry, C. S., 114.
+
+  Binet,
+    on how teachers judge intelligence, 28 _ff._;
+    Binet's conception of intelligence, 44 _ff._, 123, 149, 151, 154,
+      156, 159, 165, 171, 173, 180, 181, 183, 185, 186, 190, 196, 203,
+      205, 217, 231, 232, 234, 247, 251, 252, 254, 258, 260, 261, 264,
+      276, 285, 289, 315, 322, 327, 333, 339, 345.
+
+  Binet-Simon method,
+    nature and derivation of the scale, 36 _ff._, 47 _ff._;
+    limitations of, 48 _ff._
+
+  Bloch, 203.
+
+  Bluemel, C. S., 107.
+
+  Bobertag, Otto, 106, 113, 176, 178, 180, 181, 185, 188, 190, 203, 206,
+    232, 237, 240, 252, 275, 285, 318.
+
+  Borderline intelligence, 79, 87 _ff._
+
+  Bow-knot, test of tying, 196 _ff._
+
+  Brigham, 165, 166.
+
+
+  Change, test of making change, 240 _ff._
+
+  Childs, H. G., 231, 298.
+
+  Coaching, 110 _ff._
+
+  Code test, 330 _ff._
+
+  Color naming, 163 _ff._
+
+  Combination method, 171. _See also_ Completion test.
+
+  Commissions, 172 _ff._
+
+  Comparison of lines, 151 _ff._
+
+  Completion test, 179, 246, 289.
+
+  Comprehension questions, 157 _ff._, 181 _ff._, 215 _ff._, 268 _ff._
+
+  Conditions favorable to testing, 121 _ff._
+
+  Counting,
+    four pennies, 154;
+    thirteen pennies, 180;
+    counting backwards, 213.
+
+  Crime,
+    relation to feeble-mindedness, 8 _ff._;
+    cost of, 12.
+
+  Cuneo, Irene, 51.
+
+
+  Davenport, C. B., 10.
+
+  Definitions,
+    in terms of use, 167;
+    superior to use, 221;
+    of abstract words, 281 _ff._, and 324 _ff._
+    _See also_ Vocabulary tests.
+
+  "Degenerate" families, 9 _ff._
+
+  Delinquency, relation to feeble-mindedness, 7 _ff._
+
+  Diamond, test of copying diamond, 204.
+
+  Differences, test of finding, 199, 313 _ff._
+
+  Digits. _See_ Memory for digits.
+
+  Discrimination of forms, 152 _ff._
+
+  Dissected sentences, 286 _ff._
+
+  Distribution of intelligence, 65 _ff._, 78 _ff._
+
+  Dougherty, 165, 166, 203.
+
+  Drawing, 156, 204, 260.
+
+  Dull normals, 92 _ff._
+
+  Dumville, 165, 166.
+
+
+  Ebbinghaus, 289, 318.
+
+  Emotion, 49.
+
+  Enclosed boxes, 327 _ff._
+
+  Endowment, 4, 19 _ff._
+
+  Environment, influence on test, 114 _ff._
+
+  Eugenics, 9 _ff._
+
+  Examination, duration of, 127 _ff._
+
+  Examiner, qualifications of, 124 _ff._
+
+
+  Fables, interpretation of, 290 _ff._
+
+  Fatigue, influence of, on test, 126 _ff._
+
+  Feeble-minded, proportion of school-children feeble-minded, 6.
+
+  Feeble-mindedness,
+    value of tests for, 5 _ff._;
+    psychological analysis, 23;
+    definition, 80;
+    examples, 82 _ff._
+
+  Fernald, G. G., 8.
+
+  Fernald, Grace, 56, 278, 280, 332.
+
+  Fingers, test of giving number of, 189 _ff._
+
+  Freeman, Frank N., 280.
+
+  Functions, tested by Binet scale, 42 _ff._
+
+
+  Galbreath, Neva, 51.
+
+  Galton, 328.
+
+  General intelligence, 42 _ff._
+
+  Generalization, tests of, 298.
+
+  Genius. _See_ Superior intelligence.
+
+  Goddard, H. H., 8, 106, 112, 154, 156, 165, 173, 185, 190, 196, 203,
+    206, 213, 234, 245, 251, 252, 259, 264, 276, 285, 289, 319, 322,
+    323, 332, 333, 339, 345.
+
+  Grading, value of intelligence tests in, 16.
+
+
+  Hall, Gertrude, 280.
+
+  Healy-Fernald, 56, 278, 280, 332.
+
+  Heredity, use of tests in the study of, 19.
+
+  Hill folk, 10.
+
+  Hollingworth, Leta S., 71.
+
+  Huey, E. B., 197, 217, 234.
+
+
+  Imagery, 195, 209, 321, 339.
+
+  Induction test, 310 _ff._
+
+  Ingenuity test, 346.
+
+  Intelligence,
+    analysis of, _see_ remarks under instructions for each test;
+    superior, 12 _ff._, 95 _ff._,
+    teachers' estimates of, 13, 24, 26, 28, 75;
+    general, 42 _ff._;
+    definitions of, 44 _ff._
+
+  Intelligence quotient, 53, 55, 63, 65 _ff._;
+    validity of, 68;
+    classification and significance, 79 _ff._, 140 _ff._
+
+
+  Jukes family, 10.
+
+
+  Kallikak family, 9.
+
+  Knollin, H. E., 18, 51, 54, 63.
+
+  Kohs, S. C., 107 _ff._
+
+  Kuhlmann, F., 56, 105, 153, 154, 156, 165, 173, 185, 190, 193, 196,
+    206, 214, 217, 234, 247, 251, 252, 259, 264, 276, 280, 285, 289,
+    315, 319, 322, 323, 327, 333, 339, 345.
+
+
+  Language comprehension, 143, 144.
+
+  Limitations of the Binet scale, 48 _ff._
+
+  Lombroso, 7.
+
+  Lyman, Grace, 51.
+
+
+  Mason, Otis, 347.
+
+  Masselon, 245.
+
+  Material used in the tests, 141.
+
+  Memory,
+    for sentences, 149 _ff._, 160, 185, 332;
+    for passages, 340;
+    for designs, 260;
+    for digits, 150, 159, 193, 207, 242, 277, 301, 322, 329, 340, 345.
+
+  Mental age, 39 _ff._;
+    effect of Stanford revision on, 62;
+    how to calculate, 137 _ff._
+
+  Mental deficiency. _See_ Feeble-mindedness.
+
+  Meumann, Ernst, 46, 106, 245, 318.
+
+  Moral development, dependence of, on intelligence, 11 _ff._
+
+
+  Nam family, 10.
+
+  Name, test of giving name, 147 _ff._
+
+  Naming coins, 184 _ff._, 231.
+
+  Naming familiar objects, 143 _ff._
+
+  Normals, dull, 92 _ff._
+
+
+  Ordahl, Dr. George, 8.
+
+  Ordahl, Louise Ellison, 8.
+
+
+  Paper-cutting test, 338.
+
+  Physical defects, effects of, on intelligence, 19.
+
+  Physical relations, comprehension of, 333 _ff._
+
+  Physicians, as Binet testers, 34.
+
+  Pictures,
+    enumeration of objects in, 145;
+    description of, 190 _ff._;
+    interpretation of, 302;
+    finding omissions in, 178.
+
+  Pointing to parts of body, 142 _ff._
+
+  Practical judgment, 212.
+
+  President and king, giving differences between, 313.
+
+  Problem questions, 315 _ff._
+
+  Procedure, necessity of uniformity in, 32 _ff._, 131 _ff._
+
+  Promotions, on basis of intelligence tests, 16 _ff._
+
+
+  Race differences, 91.
+
+  Range of testing, 129.
+
+  Rapport, 124 _ff._
+
+  Reading, test of reading for memories, 262.
+
+  Record booklet, 128.
+
+  Recording responses, 133 _ff._
+
+  Reliability of the scale, 76 _ff._, 105 _ff._
+
+  Repeated tests, 112 _ff._
+
+  Retardation,
+    cost of, 1, 13 _ff._;
+    training of retarded children, 4 _ff._, 24 _ff._, 73 _ff._
+
+  Reversing hands of clock, 321 _ff._
+
+  Rhymes, test of finding, 248.
+
+  Right and left, 175 _ff._
+
+  Rowe, E. P., 165, 166, 277.
+
+  Rowland, Eleanor, 18.
+
+
+  Scattering of successes, 134 _ff._
+
+  School success and intelligence, 73 _ff._
+
+  Scoring, 132. _See also_ instructions for scoring each test.
+
+  Seclusion during test, 122.
+
+  Sex, test of giving, 146 _ff._
+
+  Sex differences in intelligence, 68 _ff._
+
+  Similarities, test of finding, 217 _ff._, 306 _ff._
+
+  Sixty words, 272 _ff._
+
+  Social class and intelligence, 72 _ff._, 114 _ff._
+
+  Spearman, C., definition of intelligence, 46.
+
+  Special classes, 5.
+
+  Square, test of copying, 155 _ff._
+
+  Stamps, test of counting value of, 252.
+
+  Standardization, value of, 30.
+
+  Stanford revision of the Binet scale, 51 _ff._
+
+  Stereotypy, 203.
+
+  Stern, W., 46, 106, 118.
+
+  Stigmata, 7.
+
+  Structural psychology, 43.
+
+  Superior intelligence, tests of superior children, 12 _ff._, 95 _ff._
+
+  Supplementary information, 135.
+
+
+  Teachers' estimates of intelligence, 13, 24, 26, 28, 75.
+
+  Terman, Lewis M., 63, 267, 298.
+
+  Three words, test of using, in a sentence, 242 _ff._
+
+  Time orientation,
+    forenoon and afternoon, 187 _ff._;
+    days of the week, 205 _ff._;
+    giving date, 234 _ff._;
+    naming months, 251 _ff._
+
+
+  Unemployment, relation of, to intelligence, 18.
+
+
+  Validity of the tests, 76 _ff._
+
+  Vocabulary tests, 224, 255, 281, 310, 324, 338.
+
+  Vocational guidance, use of intelligence tests in, 17, 49.
+
+  Volition, 49.
+
+
+  Waddle, Charles, 52.
+
+  Wallin, 237.
+
+  Weights, comparison of, 161, 236 _ff._
+
+  Williams, Dr. J. Harold, 9, 54.
+
+  Winch, W. H., 165, 166.
+
+  Writing from dictation, 231 _ff._
+
+
+  Yerkes, R. M., 70.
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Measurement of Intelligence, by 
+Lewis Madison Terman
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE MEASUREMENT OF INTELLIGENCE ***
+
+***** This file should be named 20662-0.txt or 20662-0.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        https://www.gutenberg.org/2/0/6/6/20662/
+
+Produced by Audrey Longhurst, Laura Wisewell and the Online
+Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+https://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+https://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at https://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit https://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
+donations.  To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     https://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/20662-0.zip b/20662-0.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4158059
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-0.zip
diff --git a/20662-h.zip b/20662-h.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b2e4033
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h.zip
diff --git a/20662-h/20662-h.htm b/20662-h/20662-h.htm
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f08c898
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/20662-h.htm
@@ -0,0 +1,14917 @@
+<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN"
+    "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd">
+
+<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" lang="en" xml:lang="en">
+  <head>
+    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" />
+    <title>The Project Gutenberg eBook of The Measurement of Intelligence, by Lewis M. Terman</title>
+
+<style type="text/css">
+
+body{   margin-left: 10%;
+        margin-right: 10%;
+    }
+p {     margin-top: .75em;
+        margin-bottom: .75em;
+        text-align: justify;
+        line-height:1.3;
+    }
+body > p { text-indent:2em;
+        margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0;}
+blockquote.smaller > p { text-indent:2.25em;
+        margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0;}
+.pagenum  {
+        position: absolute;
+        left: 92%;
+        font-size: 13px;
+        font-weight: normal;
+        font-variant:normal; font-style:normal;
+        text-indent: 0em; text-align:right;
+        color: silver;
+        background-color: #FFF;
+    }
+span[title].pagenum:after {
+        content: "[" attr(title) "] ";
+    }
+
+/* HEADINGS ETC */
+p.title {font-size: 130%;
+        text-align:center;
+        font-weight:bold;
+        text-indent:0;
+        margin-top:2em;
+    }
+small { font-size:80%; }
+.title small {font-size:70%;}
+h1,h2,h3,h4,h5 {
+        text-align: center;
+        clear: both;
+    }
+h3 {    font-size:100%; }
+h3.runin {display:run-in; margin-right:0.5em;
+        font-size:100%; }
+h4.runin {display:run-in; margin-right:0.5em;
+        font-size:100%; }
+h4 {    font-weight:normal; font-style:italic;
+        margin-bottom:0.5em;}
+h5 {    margin-bottom:0.5em; margin-top:0.5em;}
+hr {    width:45%;
+        margin-top: 1em;
+        margin-left: auto;
+        margin-right: auto;
+        clear: both;
+    }
+hr.major { width:75%; margin-top:2.5em; margin-bottom: 2.5em;}
+hr.minor { width:30%; margin-top:0.5em; margin-bottom: 0.5em;}
+
+/* STYLES */
+.center { text-align: center; text-indent:0;
+        margin-right:auto; margin-left:auto;
+}
+.smcap {font-variant:small-caps;}
+.allsc {text-transform:lowercase; font-variant:small-caps;}
+i {     font-variant: normal; }
+sup {vertical-align:baseline;
+        position:relative; bottom:0.4em;
+        font-size: .7em; }
+sub {vertical-align:bottom;
+        font-size: .7em; }
+a[href] { color:#0000CC; }
+.sf {   font-family:sans-serif,serif; }
+.smaller {font-size:90%; line-height:1.2;}
+
+/* IMAGES */
+img {   padding: 6px;
+        margin: 6px;    }
+p.caption {margin-top:2px; margin-bottom:0.5em;
+        font-size:smaller;
+        line-height:1.2;
+        text-align:center;}
+.figcenter   {margin: auto; text-align: center; margin-bottom:1em;}
+
+/* FOOTNOTES */
+.footnotes  {border: dashed 1px; margin-top:1em; clear:both;}
+.footnote   {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%;
+        font-size: 0.9em;}
+.footnote .label  {position: absolute;
+        right: 85%;
+        text-align: right;}
+.fnanchor {vertical-align:baseline;
+        position:relative; bottom:0.4em;
+        font-size: .8em;
+        text-decoration: none;}
+.runin .fnanchor {position:inherit; vertical-align:super; }
+/* TRANSNOTES */
+ins.correction {  text-decoration:none;
+        border-bottom: thin dotted gray;    }
+/* ToC */
+.toc p { position:relative; width:90%;
+        font-variant:small-caps;
+        margin-bottom:0.25em; margin-top:0.25em;}
+.toc ul { list-style-type:none;
+        width:80%; padding-left:10%;
+        text-align:justify;
+        margin-top:0; margin-left:0; }
+.toc ul li {display:inline;}
+.toc ul ul {display:inline; padding-left:0;}
+.toc ol {position: relative;
+        width:80%; padding-left:10%; margin-left:0;}
+.toc h4 { margin-top:1.5em; margin-bottom:0;
+        font-weight:bold; font-style:normal;}
+/* LISTS */
+ol, ul {    margin-left:0; padding-left:2em;
+        text-align:justify; }
+ol.alph {list-style-type:lower-alpha; font-style:italic; }
+span.u {font-style:normal; }
+ol.smaller, ul.smaller { padding-left:2.25em; } /* 90% of 2.25 = 2 */
+ul { list-style-type:none; }
+    body > ul.IX {margin-left:10%; font-size:90%;}
+    .IX li { margin-top:0; }
+li {    margin-top: 0.25em;
+        line-height: 1.2; }
+ul.indent li { text-indent:-2em; margin-left:2em;}
+ol ol li p { margin-left:2em; text-indent:0;
+        margin-top:0; margin-bottom:0;}
+ol ol { margin-bottom:1em; }
+.off {list-style-type:none; }
+span.ralign { position: absolute;
+        right: -10%;
+        top: auto;
+        font-variant:normal;  }
+div.refs li p {font-size:90%; margin-top:0;}
+/* TABLES */
+table {margin: 0.5em auto 0.5em auto;
+        border-collapse:collapse;
+        text-align:left;}
+caption {padding-top:1em;
+        margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto;}
+td {    vertical-align:top; }
+th {    padding: 0.25em 0.5em 0.25em 0.5em;
+        font-weight:normal;
+        text-align:center;}
+.tdr0 { text-align:right; padding-right: 0.25em;}
+.tdr {  text-align:right; padding-right: 2em;}
+.tdl0 { text-align:left; padding-left: 0.25em;}
+.tdlh { text-align:left; text-indent:-2.25em; padding-left:2.5em; }
+.ditto { text-align:center; letter-spacing:0.5em; }
+table.graph { text-align:center;
+        caption-side:bottom;
+        margin:1em auto 1em auto; }
+table.graph caption { margin-bottom:1em;}
+table.graph td {vertical-align:bottom; padding:0; margin:0;}
+table.graph img {border:2px solid black; margin:0; }
+table.space td {text-align:left; padding-right:2em; padding-left:2em;}
+table.az { margin-left:auto; margin-right:auto;
+        width:70%;
+        margin-bottom:2em;
+    }
+table.az td {text-align:center;}
+
+/* POETRY AND BLOCKQUOTES */
+blockquote { margin-left:0;  margin-right:0; }
+p.quotsig { text-indent:-2em; margin-left:4em;
+        margin-top:0;}
+
+    </style>
+  </head>
+<body>
+
+
+<pre>
+
+Project Gutenberg's The Measurement of Intelligence, by Lewis Madison Terman
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: The Measurement of Intelligence
+       An Explanation of and a Complete Guide for the Use of the
+              Stanford Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon
+              Intelligence Scale
+
+Author: Lewis Madison Terman
+
+Editor: Ellwood P. Cubberley
+
+Release Date: February 25, 2007 [EBook #20662]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: UTF-8
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE MEASUREMENT OF INTELLIGENCE ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Audrey Longhurst, Laura Wisewell and the Online
+Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+
+
+
+
+</pre>
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+<p class="title">RIVERSIDE TEXTBOOKS<br />
+IN EDUCATION</p>
+
+<p class="title">EDITED BY ELLWOOD P. CUBBERLEY<br />
+<small>
+PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION<br />
+LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY</small></p>
+<hr class="minor" />
+
+<p class="title" style="margin-top:0.5em;">DIVISION OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
+UNDER THE EDITORIAL DIRECTION
+OF ALEXANDER INGLIS<br />
+<small>
+PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION<br />
+HARVARD UNIVERSITY</small>
+</p>
+
+<hr class="major" />
+
+<h1>THE MEASUREMENT<br />
+OF INTELLIGENCE</h1>
+<p class="center" style="font-weight:bold;">
+AN EXPLANATION OF AND A
+COMPLETE GUIDE FOR THE USE OF THE
+STANFORD REVISION AND EXTENSION OF
+<br /><br />
+<em>The Binet-Simon Intelligence Scale</em></p>
+
+
+<h2><small>BY</small>
+<br />
+LEWIS M. TERMAN
+<br />
+<small>PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION<br />
+LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY</small></h2>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 100px;">
+<img src="images/logo.png" width="100" height="132" alt="Publisher logo, reads &lsquo;THE RIVERSIDE PRESS CAMBRIDGE TOUT BIEN OU RIEN&rsquo;." title="" />
+</div>
+
+<p class="title" style="font-size:90%;">HOUGHTON MIFFLIN COMPANY<br />
+BOSTON NEW YORK CHICAGO SAN FRANCISCO<br />
+The Riverside Press Cambridge
+</p>
+
+<hr class="major" />
+
+<p class="center">COPYRIGHT, 1916, BY LEWIS M. TERMAN</p>
+<p class="center" style="margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:3em;">ALL RIGHTS RESERVED</p>
+
+
+<p class="center">The Riverside Press<br />
+CAMBRIDGE &middot; MASSACHUSETTS<br />
+PRINTED IN THE U.S.A.
+</p>
+
+<hr class="major" />
+
+<p class="center">To the Memory<br />
+OF<br /><br />
+<big>ALFRED BINET<br /><br /></big>
+PATIENT RESEARCHER, CREATIVE THINKER, UNPRETENTIOUS SCHOLAR;<br />
+INSPIRING AND FRUITFUL DEVOTEE<br />
+OF<br />
+INDUCTIVE AND DYNAMIC<br />
+PSYCHOLOGY
+</p>
+
+<hr class="major" />
+
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;vii">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_vii" id="Page_vii"></a>EDITOR&#8217;S INTRODUCTION</h2>
+
+
+<p>The present volume appeals to the editor of this series as one of the
+most significant books, viewed from the standpoint of the future of our
+educational theory and practice, that has been issued in years. Not only
+does the volume set forth, in language so simple that the layman can
+easily understand, the large importance for public education of a
+careful measurement of the intelligence of children, but it also
+describes the tests which are to be given and the entire procedure of
+giving them. In a clear and easy style the author sets forth scientific
+facts of far-reaching educational importance, facts which it has cost
+him, his students, and many other scientific workers, years of
+painstaking labor to accumulate.</p>
+
+<p>Only very recently, practically only within the past half-dozen years,
+have scientific workers begun to appreciate fully the importance of
+intelligence tests as a guide to educational procedure, and up to the
+present we have been able to make but little use of such tests in our
+schools. The conception in itself has been new, and the testing
+procedure has been more or less unrefined and technical. The following
+somewhat popular presentation of the idea and of the methods involved,
+itself based on a scientific monograph which the author is publishing
+elsewhere, serves for the first time to set forth in simple language the
+technical details of giving such intelligence tests.</p>
+
+<p>The educational significance of the results to be obtained from careful
+measurements of the intelligence of children can hardly be
+overestimated. Questions relating to the choice of studies, vocational
+guidance, schoolroom procedure,<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;viii">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_viii" id="Page_viii"></a> the grading of pupils, promotional
+schemes, the study of the retardation of children in the schools,
+juvenile delinquency, and the proper handling of subnormals on the one
+hand and gifted children on the other,&mdash;all alike acquire new meaning
+and significance when viewed in the light of the measurement of
+intelligence as outlined in this volume. As a guide to the
+interpretation of the results of other forms of investigation relating
+to the work, progress, and needs of children, intelligence tests form a
+very valuable aid. More than all other forms of data combined, such
+tests give the necessary information from which a pupil&#8217;s possibilities
+of future mental growth can be foretold, and upon which his further
+education can be most profitably directed.</p>
+
+<p>The publication of this revision and extension of the original
+Binet-Simon scale for measuring intelligence, with the closer adaptation
+of it to American conditions and needs, should mark a distinct step in
+advance in our educational procedure. It means the perfection of another
+and a very important measuring stick for evaluating educational
+practices, and in particular for diagnosing individual possibilities and
+needs. Just now the method is new, and its use somewhat limited, but it
+is the confident prediction of many students of the subject that, before
+long, intelligence tests will become as much a matter of necessary
+routine in schoolroom procedure as a blood-count now is in physical
+diagnosis. That our schoolroom methods will in turn become much more
+intelligent, and that all classes of children, but especially the gifted
+and the slow, will profit by such intellectual diagnosis, there can be
+but little question.</p>
+
+<p>That any parent or teacher, without training, can give these tests, the
+author in no way contends. However, the observations of Dr.&nbsp;Kohs, cited
+in <a href="#CHAPTER_VII">Chapter&nbsp;VII</a>, as well as the experience of the author and others who
+have given courses in intelligence testing to teachers, alike indicate
+that<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;ix">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_ix" id="Page_ix"></a> sufficient skill to enable teachers and school principals to give
+such tests intelligently is not especially difficult to acquire. This
+being the case it may be hoped that the requisite training to enable
+them to handle these tests may be included, very soon, as a part of the
+necessary pedagogical equipment of those who aspire to administrative
+positions in our public and private schools.</p>
+
+<p>Besides being of special importance to school officers and to students
+of education in colleges and normal schools, this volume can confidently
+be recommended to physicians and social workers, and to teachers and
+parents interested in intelligence measurements, as at once the simplest
+and the best explanation of the newly-evolved intelligence tests, which
+has so far appeared in print.</p>
+
+<p class="smcap" style="text-align:right; margin-right:2em;">
+Ellwood P. Cubberley.
+<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;x">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_x" id="Page_x"></a></p>
+
+
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;xi">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_xi" id="Page_xi"></a><a name="PREFACE" id="PREFACE"></a>PREFACE</h2>
+
+
+<p>The constant and growing use of the Binet-Simon intelligence scale in
+public schools, institutions for defectives, reform schools, juvenile
+courts, and police courts is sufficient evidence of the intrinsic worth
+of the method. It is generally recognized, however, that the
+serviceableness of the scale has hitherto been seriously limited, both
+by the lack of a sufficiently detailed guide and by a number of
+recognized imperfections in the scale itself. The Stanford revision and
+extension has been worked out for the purpose of correcting as many as
+possible of these imperfections, and it is here presented with a rather
+minute description of the method as a whole and of the individual tests.</p>
+
+<p>The aim has been to present the explanations and instructions so clearly
+and in such an untechnical form as to make the book of use, not only to
+the psychologist, but also to the rank and file of teachers, physicians,
+and social workers. More particularly, it is designed as a text for use
+in normal schools, colleges, and teachers&#8217; reading-circles.</p>
+
+<p>While the use of the intelligence scale for research purposes and for
+accurate diagnosis will of necessity always be restricted to those who
+have had extensive training in experimental psychology, the author
+believes that the time has come when its wider use for more general
+purposes should be encouraged.</p>
+
+<p>However, it cannot be too strongly emphasized that no one, whatever his
+previous training may have been, can make proper use of the scale unless
+he is willing to learn the method of procedure and scoring down to the
+minutest detail. A general acquaintance with the nature of the
+individual tests is by no means sufficient.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;xii">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_xii" id="Page_xii"></a>Perhaps the best way to learn the method will be to begin by studying
+the book through, in order to gain a general acquaintance with the
+tests; then, if possible, to observe a few examinations; and finally to
+take up the procedure for detailed study in connection with practice
+testing. Twenty or thirty tests, made with constant reference to the
+procedure as described in Part&nbsp;II, should be sufficient to prepare the
+teacher or physician to make profitable use of the scale.</p>
+
+<p>The Stanford revision of the scale is the result of a number of
+investigations, made possible by the co&ouml;peration of the author&#8217;s
+graduate students. Grateful acknowledgment is especially due to
+Professor H.&nbsp;G. Childs, Miss Grace Lyman, Dr.&nbsp;George Ordahl, Dr.&nbsp;Louise
+Ellison Ordahl, Miss Neva Galbreath, Mr.&nbsp;Wilford Talbert, Mr.&nbsp;J. Harold
+Williams, and Mr.&nbsp;Herbert E. Knollin. Without their assistance this book
+could not have been written.</p>
+
+<p class="quotsig smcap">
+Stanford University,<br />
+<i>April, 1916</i>.
+</p>
+
+
+<div class="toc">
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;xiii">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_xiii" id="Page_xiii"></a><a name="CONTENTS" id="CONTENTS"></a>CONTENTS</h2>
+
+
+<h3>PART&nbsp;I. PROBLEMS AND RESULTS</h3>
+
+<h4>CHAPTER&nbsp;I</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_I">The Uses of Intelligence Tests</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_3">3</a></span></p>
+
+<ul>
+<li><a href="#Intelligence_tests_of_retarded_school_children">Intelligence tests of retarded school children.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Intelligence_tests_of_the_feeble-minded">Intelligence tests of the feeble-minded.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Intelligence_tests_of_delinquents">Intelligence tests of delinquents.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Intelligence_tests_of_superior_children">Intelligence tests of superior children.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Intelligence_tests_as_a_basis_for_grading">Intelligence tests as a basis for grading.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Intelligence_tests_for_vocational_fitness">Intelligence tests for vocational fitness.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Other_uses_of_intelligence_tests">Other uses of intelligence tests.</a></li>
+</ul>
+
+<h4>CHAPTER&nbsp;II</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_II">Sources of Error in Judging Intelligence</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_22">22</a></span></p>
+
+<ul>
+<li><a href="#Are_intelligence_tests_superfluous">Are intelligence tests superfluous?</a></li>
+<li><a href="#The_necessity_of_standards">The necessity of standards.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#The_intelligence_of_retarded_children_usually_overestimated">The intelligence of retarded children usually overestimated.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#The_intelligence_of_superior_children_usually_underestimated">The intelligence of superior children usually underestimated.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Other_fallacies_in_the_estimation_of_intelligence">Other fallacies in the estimation of intelligence.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Binets_questionnaire_on_teachers_methods_of_judging_intelligence">Binet&#8217;s questionnaire on teachers&#8217; methods of judging intelligence.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Binets_experiment_on_how_teachers_test_intelligence">Binet&#8217;s experiment on how teachers test intelligence.</a></li>
+</ul>
+
+<h4>CHAPTER&nbsp;III</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_III">Description of the Binet-Simon Method</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_36">36</a></span></p>
+
+<ul>
+<li><a href="#Essential_nature_of_the_scale">Essential nature of the scale.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#How_the_scale_was_derived">How the scale was derived.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#List_of_tests">List of tests.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#How_the_scale_is_used">How the scale is used.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Special_characteristics_of_the_Binet-Simon_method">Special characteristics of the Binet-Simon method.</a>
+<ul>
+  <li><a href="#The_use_of_age_standards">The use of age standards.</a></li>
+  <li><a href="#The_kind_of_mental_functions_brought_into_play">The kind of mental functions brought into play.</a></li>
+  <li><a href="#Binet_would_test_general_intelligence">Binet would test &ldquo;general intelligence.&rdquo;</a></li>
+</ul></li>
+<li><a href="#Binets_conception_of_general_intelligence">Binet&#8217;s conception of general intelligence.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Other_conceptions_of_intelligence">Other conceptions of intelligence.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Guiding_principles_in_choice_and_arrangement_of_tests">Guiding principles in choice and arrangement of tests.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Some_avowed_limitations_of_the_Binet_tests">Some avowed limitations of the Binet tests.</a></li>
+</ul>
+
+<h4>CHAPTER&nbsp;IV</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_IV">Nature of the Stanford Revision and Extension</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_51">51</a></span></p>
+
+<ul>
+<li><a href="#Sources_of_data">Sources of data.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Method_of_arriving_at_a_revision">Method of arriving at a revision.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#List_of_tests_in_the_Stanford_revision_and_extension">List of tests in the Stanford revision and extension.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Summary_of_changes">Summary of changes.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Effects_of_the_revision_on_the_mental_ages_secured">Effects of the revision on the mental ages secured.</a></li>
+</ul>
+
+<h4><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;xiv">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_xiv" id="Page_xiv"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;V</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_V">Analysis of one Thousand Intelligence Quotients</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_65">65</a></span></p>
+
+<ul>
+<li><a href="#The_distribution_of_intelligence">The distribution of intelligence.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#The_validity_of_the_intelligence_quotient">The validity of the intelligence quotient.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Sex_differences">Sex differences.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Intelligence_of_the_different_social_classes">Intelligence of the different social classes.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#The_relation_of_the_I_Q_to_the_quality_of_the_childs_school_work">The relation of the I&nbsp;Q to the quality of the child&#8217;s school work.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#The_relation_between_I_Q_and_grade_progress">The relation between I&nbsp;Q and grade progress.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Correlation_between_I_Q_and_the_teachers_estimates_of_the_childrens_intelligence">Correlation between I&nbsp;Q and the teachers&#8217; estimates of the children&#8217;s intelligence.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#The_validity_of_the_individual_tests">The validity of the individual tests.</a></li>
+</ul>
+
+<h4>CHAPTER&nbsp;VI</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_VI">The Significance of Various Intelligence Quotients</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_78">78</a></span></p>
+
+<ul>
+<li><a href="#Frequency_of_different_degrees_of_intelligence">Frequency of different degrees of intelligence.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Classification_of_intelligence_quotients">Classification of intelligence quotients.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Feeble-mindedness">Feeble-mindedness.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Border-line_cases">Border-line cases.</a>
+  <ul>
+    <li><a href="#Examples_of_border-line_deficiency">Examples of border-line deficiency.</a></li>
+  </ul></li>
+<li><a href="#Dull_normals">Dull normals.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Average_intelligence">Average intelligence.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Superior_intelligence">Superior intelligence.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Very_superior_intelligence">Very superior intelligence.</a>
+  <ul>
+    <li><a href="#Examples_of_very_superior_intelligence">Examples of very superior intelligence.</a></li>
+  </ul></li>
+<li><a href="#Genius_and_near_genius">Genius and &ldquo;near&rdquo; genius.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Is_the_I_Q_often_misleading">Is the I&nbsp;Q often misleading?</a></li>
+</ul>
+
+<h4>CHAPTER&nbsp;VII</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_VII">Reliability of the Binet-Simon Method</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_105">105</a></span></p>
+
+<ul>
+<li><a href="#General_value_of_the_method">General value of the method.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Dependence_of_the_scales_reliability_on_the_training_of_the_examiner">Dependence of the scale&#8217;s reliability on the training of the examiner.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Influence_of_the_subjects_attitude">Influence of the subject&#8217;s attitude.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#The_influence_of_coaching">The influence of coaching.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Reliability_of_repeated_tests">Reliability of repeated tests.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Influence_of_social_and_educational_advantages">Influence of social and educational advantages.</a></li>
+</ul>
+
+
+<h3>PART&nbsp;II
+<br />
+GUIDE FOR THE USE OF THE STANFORD
+<br />
+REVISION AND EXTENSION</h3>
+
+<h4>CHAPTER&nbsp;VIII</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_VIII">General Instructions</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_121">121</a></span></p>
+
+<ul>
+<li><a href="#Necessity_of_securing_attention_and_effort">Necessity of securing attention and effort.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Quiet_and_seclusion">Quiet and seclusion.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Presence_of_others">Presence of others.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Getting_into_rapport">Getting into <i>rapport</i>.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Keeping_the_child_encouraged">Keeping the child encouraged.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#The_importance_of_tact">The importance of tact.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Personality_of_the_examiner">Personality of the examiner.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#The_avoidance_of_fatigue">The avoidance of fatigue.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Duration_of_the_examination">Duration of the examination.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Desirable_range_of_testing">Desirable range of testing.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Order_of_giving_the_tests">Order of giving the tests.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Coaxing_to_be_avoided">Coaxing to be avoided.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Adhering_to_formula">Adhering to formula.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Scoring">Scoring.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Recording_responses">Recording responses.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Scattering_of_successes">Scattering of successes.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Supplementary_considerations">Supplementary considerations.</a></li>
+<li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;xv">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_xv" id="Page_xv"></a><a href="#Alternative_tests">Alternative tests.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Finding_mental_age">Finding mental age.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#The_use_of_the_intelligence_quotient">The use of the intelligence quotient.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#How_to_find_the_I_Q_of_adult_subjects">How to find the I&nbsp;Q of adult subjects.</a></li>
+<li><a href="#Material_for_use_in_testing">Material for use in testing.</a></li>
+</ul>
+
+<h4>CHAPTER&nbsp;IX</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_IX"><span class="smcap">Instructions for Year&nbsp;III</span></a></p>
+
+
+<ol>
+<li><a href="#III_1">Pointing to parts of the body</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_142">142</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#III_2">Naming familiar objects</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_143">143</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#III_3">Enumeration of objects in pictures</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_145">145</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#III_4">Giving sex</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_146">146</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#III_5">Giving the family name</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_147">147</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#III_6">Repeating six to seven syllables</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_149">149</a></span></li>
+<li class="off"><a href="#III_alt">Alternative test: Repeating three digits</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_150">150</a></span></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h4>CHAPTER&nbsp;X</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_X"><span class="smcap">Instructions for Year&nbsp;IV</span></a></p>
+
+
+<ol>
+<li><a href="#IV_1">Comparison of lines</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_151">151</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#IV_2">Discrimination of forms</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_152">152</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#IV_3">Counting four pennies</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_154">154</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#IV_4">Copying a square</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_155">155</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#IV_5">Comprehension, first degree</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_157">157</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#IV_6">Repeating four digits</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_159">159</a></span></li>
+<li class="off"><a href="#IV_alt">Alternative test: Repeating twelve to thirteen syllables</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_160">160</a></span></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h4>CHAPTER&nbsp;XI</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_XI"><span class="smcap">Instructions for Year&nbsp;V</span></a></p>
+
+
+<ol>
+<li><a href="#V_1">Comparison of weights</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_161">161</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#V_2">Naming colors</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_163">163</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#V_3">&AElig;sthetic comparison</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_165">165</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#V_4">Giving definitions in terms of use</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_167">167</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#V_5">The game of patience</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_169">169</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#V_6">Three commissions</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_172">172</a></span></li>
+<li class="off"><a href="#V_alt">Alternative test: Giving age</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_173">173</a></span></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h4>CHAPTER&nbsp;XII</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_XII">Instructions for Year&nbsp;VI</a></p>
+
+
+<ol>
+<li><a href="#VI_1">Distinguishing right and left</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_175">175</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#VI_2">Finding omissions in pictures</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_178">178</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#VI_3">Counting thirteen pennies</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_180">180</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#VI_4">Comprehension, second degree</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_181">181</a></span></li>
+<li><!--<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;xvi">&nbsp;</span>--><a name="Page_xvi" id="Page_xvi"></a><a href="#VI_5">Naming four coins</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_184">184</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#VI_6">Repeating sixteen to eighteen syllables</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_185">185</a></span></li>
+<li class="off"><a href="#VI_alt">Alternative test: Forenoon and afternoon</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_187">187</a></span></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h4>CHAPTER&nbsp;XIII</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_XIII">Instructions for Year&nbsp;VII</a></p>
+
+
+<ol>
+<li><a href="#VII_1">Giving the number of fingers</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_189">189</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#VII_2">Description of pictures</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_190">190</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#VII_3">Repeating five digits</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_193">193</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#VII_4">Tying a bow-knot</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_196">196</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#VII_5">Giving differences from memory</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_199">199</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#VII_6">Copying a diamond</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_204">204</a></span></li>
+<li class="off"><a href="#VII_alt1">Alternative test&nbsp;1: Naming the days of the week</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_205">205</a></span></li>
+<li class="off"><a href="#VII_alt2">Alternative test&nbsp;2: Repeating three digits reversed</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_207">207</a></span></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h4>CHAPTER&nbsp;XIV</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_XIV">Instructions for Year&nbsp;VIII</a></p>
+
+
+<ol>
+<li><a href="#VIII_1">The ball-and-field test</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_210">210</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#VIII_2">Counting backwards from 20&nbsp;to&nbsp;1</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_213">213</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#VIII_3">Comprehension, third degree</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_215">215</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#VIII_4">Giving similarities, two things</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_217">217</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#VIII_5">Giving definitions superior to use</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_221">221</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#VIII_6">Vocabulary (20&nbsp;definitions, 3600&nbsp;words)</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_224">224</a></span></li>
+<li class="off"><a href="#VIII_alt1">Alternative test&nbsp;1: Naming six coins</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_231">231</a></span></li>
+<li class="off"><a href="#VIII_alt2">Alternative test&nbsp;2: Writing from dictation</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_231">231</a></span></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h4>CHAPTER&nbsp;XV</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_XV">Instructions for Year&nbsp;IX</a></p>
+
+
+<ol>
+<li><a href="#IX_1">Giving the date</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_234">234</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#IX_2">Arranging five weights</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_236">236</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#IX_3">Making change</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_240">240</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#IX_4">Repeating four digits reversed</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_242">242</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#IX_5">Using three words in a sentence</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_242">242</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#IX_6">Finding rhymes</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_248">248</a></span></li>
+<li class="off"><a href="#IX_alt1">Alternative test&nbsp;1: Naming the months</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_251">251</a></span></li>
+<li class="off"><a href="#IX_alt2">Alternative test&nbsp;2: Counting the value of stamps</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_252">252</a></span></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h4>CHAPTER&nbsp;XVI</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_XVI">Instructions for Year&nbsp;X</a></p>
+
+
+<ol>
+<li><a href="#X_1">Vocabulary (30&nbsp;definitions, 5400&nbsp;words)</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_255">255</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#X_2">Detecting absurdities</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_255">255</a></span></li>
+<li><!--<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;xvii">&nbsp;</span>--><a name="Page_xvii" id="Page_xvii"></a><a href="#X_3">Drawing designs from memory</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_260">260</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#X_4">Reading for eight memories</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_262">262</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#X_5">Comprehension, fourth degree</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_268">268</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#X_6">Naming sixty words</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_272">272</a></span></li>
+<li class="off"><a href="#X_alt1">Alternative test&nbsp;1: Repeating six digits</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_277">277</a></span></li>
+<li class="off"><a href="#X_alt2">Alternative test&nbsp;2: Repeating twenty to twenty-two syllables</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_277">277</a></span></li>
+<li class="off"><a href="#X_alt3">Alternative test&nbsp;3: Healy&#8217;s Construction Puzzle A</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_278">278</a></span></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h4>CHAPTER&nbsp;XVII</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_XVII">Instructions for Year&nbsp;XII</a></p>
+
+
+<ol>
+<li><a href="#XII_1">Vocabulary (40&nbsp;definitions, 7200&nbsp;words)</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_281">281</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#XII_2">Defining abstract words</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_281">281</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#XII_3">The ball-and-field test (superior plan)</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_286">286</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#XII_4">Dissected sentences</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_286">286</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#XII_5">Interpretation of fables (score&nbsp;4)</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_290">290</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#XII_6">Repeating five digits reversed</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_301">301</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#XII_7">Interpretation of pictures</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_302">302</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#XII_8">Giving similarities, three things</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_306">306</a></span></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h4>CHAPTER&nbsp;XVIII</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_XVIII">Instructions for Year&nbsp;XIV</a></p>
+
+
+<ol>
+<li><a href="#XIV_1">Vocabulary (50&nbsp;definitions, 9000&nbsp;words)</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_310">310</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#XIV_2">Induction test: finding a rule</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_310">310</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#XIV_3">Giving differences between a president and a king</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_313">313</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#XIV_4">Problem questions</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_315">315</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#XIV_5">Arithmetical reasoning</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_319">319</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#XIV_6">Reversing hands of a clock</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_321">321</a></span></li>
+<li class="off"><a href="#XIV_alt">Alternative test: Repeating seven digits</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_322">322</a></span></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h4>CHAPTER&nbsp;XIX</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_XIX">Instructions for &ldquo;Average Adult&rdquo;</a></p>
+
+
+<ol>
+<li><a href="#Average_adult_1">Vocabulary (65&nbsp;definitions, 11,700&nbsp;words)</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_324">324</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#Average_adult_2">Interpretation of fables (score 8)</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_324">324</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#Average_adult_3">Differences between abstract terms</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_324">324</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#Average_adult_4">Problem of the enclosed boxes</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_327">327</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#Average_adult_5">Repeating six digits reversed</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_329">329</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#Average_adult_6">Using a code</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_330">330</a></span></li>
+<li class="off"><a href="#Average_adult_alt1">Alternative test&nbsp;1: Repeating twenty-eight syllables</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_332">332</a></span></li>
+<li class="off"><a href="#Average_adult_alt2">Alternative test&nbsp;2: Comprehension of physical relations</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_333">333</a></span></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h4><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;xviii">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_xviii" id="Page_xviii"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;XX</h4>
+
+<p><a href="#CHAPTER_XX">Instructions for &ldquo;Superior Adult&rdquo;</a></p>
+
+
+<ol>
+<li><a href="#Superior_adult_1">Vocabulary (75&nbsp;definitions, 13,500&nbsp;words)</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_338">338</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#Superior_adult_2">Binet&#8217;s paper-cutting test</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_338">338</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#Superior_adult_3">Repeating eight digits</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_340">340</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#Superior_adult_4">Repeating thought of passage</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_340">340</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#Superior_adult_5">Repeating seven digits reversed</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_345">345</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#Superior_adult_6">Ingenuity test</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_345">345</a></span></li>
+</ol>
+
+<p><a href="#SELECTED_REFERENCES">SELECTED REFERENCES</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_349">349</a></span></p>
+
+<p><a href="#INDEX">INDEX</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_359">359</a></span></p>
+
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;xix">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_xix" id="Page_xix"></a><a name="FIGURES_AND_DIAGRAMS" id="FIGURES_AND_DIAGRAMS"></a>FIGURES AND DIAGRAMS</h2>
+
+
+
+<ol>
+<li><a href="#fig01">Distribution of Mental Ages of 62 Normal Adults</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_55">55</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#fig02">Distribution of I&nbsp;Q&#8217;s of 905 Unselected Children, 5&ndash;14&nbsp;Years of Age</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_66">66</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#fig03">Median I&nbsp;Q of 457&nbsp;Boys and 448&nbsp;Girls, for the Ages 5&ndash;14&nbsp;Years</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_69">69</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#fig04">Diamond drawn by R.&nbsp;W.; Age&nbsp;13-10; Mental Age&nbsp;7-6</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_82">82</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#fig05">Writing from Dictation. R.&nbsp;M., Age&nbsp;15; Mental Age&nbsp;9</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_83">83</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#fig06">Ball and Field Test. I.&nbsp;M., Age&nbsp;14-2; Mental Age&nbsp;9</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_84">84</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#fig07">Diamond drawn by A.&nbsp;W.</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_85">85</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#fig08">Drawing Designs from Memory. H.&nbsp;S., Age&nbsp;11; Mental Age&nbsp;8-3</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_86">86</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#fig09">Ball and Field Test. S.&nbsp;F., Age&nbsp;17; Mental Age&nbsp;11-6</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_88">88</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#fig10">Writing from Dictation. C.&nbsp;P., Age&nbsp;10-2; Mental Age&nbsp;7-11</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_90">90</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#fig11">Ball and Field Test. M.&nbsp;P., Age&nbsp;14; Mental Age&nbsp;10-8</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_91">91</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#fig12">Ball and Field Test. R.&nbsp;G., Age&nbsp;13-5; Mental Age&nbsp;10-6</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_93">93</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#fig13">Ball and Field Test. E.&nbsp;B., Age&nbsp;7-9; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;130</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_98">98</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#fig14">Ball and Field Test. F.&nbsp;McA., Age&nbsp;10-3; Mental Age&nbsp;14-6</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_100">100</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#fig15">Drawing Designs from Memory. E.&nbsp;M., Age&nbsp;6-11; Mental Age&nbsp;10, I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;145</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_101">101</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#fig16">Ball and Field Test. B.&nbsp;F., Age&nbsp;7-8; Mental Age&nbsp;12-4; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;160</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_102">102</a></span></li>
+<li><a href="#rectangle">Healy and Fernald Construction Puzzle</a> <span class="ralign"><a href="#Page_279">279</a></span></li>
+</ol>
+</div>
+
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;1">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_1" id="Page_1"></a>THE MEASUREMENT OF INTELLIGENCE
+<br />
+PART&nbsp;I
+<br />
+PROBLEMS AND RESULTS<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;2">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_2" id="Page_2"></a></h2>
+
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h1><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;3">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_3" id="Page_3"></a><a name="THE_MEASUREMENT_OF_INTELLIGENCE" id="THE_MEASUREMENT_OF_INTELLIGENCE"></a>THE MEASUREMENT OF<br />
+INTELLIGENCE</h1>
+
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><a name="CHAPTER_I" id="CHAPTER_I"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;I
+<br />
+<small>THE USES OF INTELLIGENCE TESTS</small></h2>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Intelligence_tests_of_retarded_school_children" id="Intelligence_tests_of_retarded_school_children"></a>Intelligence tests of retarded school children.</h3>
+
+<p>Numerous studies of the
+age-grade progress of school children have afforded convincing evidence
+of the magnitude and seriousness of the retardation problem. Statistics
+collected in hundreds of cities in the United States show that between a
+third and a half of the school children fail to progress through the
+grades at the expected rate; that from 10&nbsp;to&nbsp;15&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent are retarded
+two years or more; and that from 5&nbsp;to&nbsp;8&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent are retarded at least
+three years. More than 10&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the $400,000,000 annually expended
+in the United States for school instruction is devoted to re-teaching
+children what they have already been taught but have failed to learn.</p>
+
+<p>The first efforts at reform which resulted from these findings were
+based on the supposition that the evils which had been discovered could
+be remedied by the individualizing of instruction, by improved methods
+of promotion, by increased attention to children&#8217;s health, and by other
+reforms in school administration. Although reforms along these lines
+have been productive of much good, they have nevertheless been in a
+measure disappointing. The trouble was, they were too often based upon
+the assumption that under the right conditions all children would be<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;4">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_4" id="Page_4"></a>
+equally, or almost equally, capable of making satisfactory school
+progress. Psychological studies of school children by means of
+standardized intelligence tests have shown that this supposition is not
+in accord with the facts. It has been found that children do not fall
+into two well-defined groups, the &ldquo;feeble-minded&rdquo; and the &ldquo;normal.&rdquo;
+Instead, there are many grades of intelligence, ranging from idiocy on
+the one hand to genius on the other. Among those classed as normal, vast
+individual differences have been found to exist in original mental
+endowment, differences which affect profoundly the capacity to profit
+from school instruction.</p>
+
+<p>We are beginning to realize that the school must take into account, more
+seriously than it has yet done, the existence and significance of these
+differences in endowment. Instead of wasting energy in the vain attempt
+to hold mentally slow and defective children up to a level of progress
+which is normal to the average child, it will be wiser to take account
+of the inequalities of children in original endowment and to
+differentiate the course of study in such a way that each child will be
+allowed to progress at the rate which is normal to him, whether that
+rate be rapid or slow.</p>
+
+<p>While we cannot hold all children to the same standard of school
+progress, we can at least prevent the kind of retardation which involves
+failure and the repetition of a school grade. It is well enough
+recognized that children do not enter with very much zest upon school
+work in which they have once failed. Failure crushes self-confidence and
+destroys the spirit of work. It is a sad fact that a large proportion of
+children in the schools are acquiring the habit of failure. The remedy,
+of course, is to measure out the work for each child in proportion to
+his mental ability.</p>
+
+<p>Before an engineer constructs a railroad bridge or trestle, <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;5">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_5" id="Page_5"></a>he studies
+the materials to be used, and learns by means of tests exactly the
+amount of strain per unit of size his materials will be able to
+withstand. He does not work empirically, and count upon patching up the
+mistakes which may later appear under the stress of actual use. The
+educational engineer should emulate this example. Tests and forethought
+must take the place of failure and patchwork. Our efforts have been too
+long directed by &ldquo;trial and error.&rdquo; It is time to leave off guessing and
+to acquire a scientific knowledge of the material with which we have to
+deal. When instruction must be repeated, it means that the school, as
+well as the pupil, has failed.</p>
+
+<p>Every child who fails in his school work or is in danger of failing
+should be given a mental examination. The examination takes less than
+one hour, and the result will contribute more to a real understanding of
+the case than anything else that could be done. It is necessary to
+determine whether a given child is unsuccessful in school because of
+poor native ability, or because of poor instruction, lack of interest,
+or some other removable cause.</p>
+
+<p>It is not sufficient to establish any number of special classes, if they
+are to be made the dumping-ground for all kinds of troublesome
+cases&mdash;the feeble-minded, the physically defective, the merely backward,
+the truants, the incorrigibles, etc. Without scientific diagnosis and
+classification of these children the educational work of the special
+class must blunder along in the dark. In such diagnosis and
+classification our main reliance must always be in mental tests,
+properly used and properly interpreted.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Intelligence_tests_of_the_feeble-minded" id="Intelligence_tests_of_the_feeble-minded"></a>Intelligence tests of the feeble-minded.</h3>
+
+<p>Thus far intelligence tests
+have found their chief application in the identification and grading of
+the feeble-minded. Their value for this purpose is twofold. In the first
+place, it is necessary to ascertain the degree of defect before it is
+possible to decide <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;6">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_6" id="Page_6"></a>intelligently upon either the content or the method
+of instruction suited to the training of the backward child. In the
+second place, intelligence tests are rapidly extending our conception of
+&ldquo;feeble-mindedness&rdquo; to include milder degrees of defect than have
+generally been associated with this term. The earlier methods of
+diagnosis caused a majority of the higher grade defectives to be
+overlooked. Previous to the development of psychological methods the
+low-grade moron was about as high a type of defective as most physicians
+or even psychologists were able to identify as feeble-minded.</p>
+
+<p>Wherever intelligence tests have been made in any considerable number in
+the schools, they have shown that not far from 2&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the
+children enrolled have a grade of intelligence which, however long they
+live, will never develop beyond the level which is normal to the average
+child of 11&nbsp;or&nbsp;12&nbsp;years. The large majority of these belong to the moron
+grade; that is, their mental development will stop somewhere between the
+7-year and 12-year level of intelligence, more often between 9&nbsp;and&nbsp;12.</p>
+
+<p>The more we learn about such children, the clearer it becomes that they
+must be looked upon as real defectives. They may be able to drag along
+to the fourth, fifth, or sixth grades, but even by the age of
+16&nbsp;or&nbsp;18&nbsp;years they are never able to cope successfully with the more
+abstract and difficult parts of the common-school course of study. They
+may master a certain amount of rote learning, such as that involved in
+reading and in the manipulation of number combinations but they cannot
+be taught to meet new conditions effectively or to think, reason, and
+judge as normal persons do.</p>
+
+<p>It is safe to predict that in the near future intelligence tests will
+bring tens of thousands of these high-grade defectives under the
+surveillance and protection of society. <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;7">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_7" id="Page_7"></a>This will ultimately result in
+curtailing the reproduction of feeble-mindedness and in the elimination
+of an enormous amount of crime, pauperism, and industrial inefficiency.
+It is hardly necessary to emphasize that the high-grade cases, of the
+type now so frequently overlooked, are precisely the ones whose
+guardianship it is most important for the State to assume.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Intelligence_tests_of_delinquents" id="Intelligence_tests_of_delinquents"></a>Intelligence tests of delinquents.</h3>
+
+<p>One of the most important facts
+brought to light by the use of intelligence tests is the frequent
+association of delinquency and mental deficiency. Although it has long
+been recognized that the proportion of feeble-mindedness among offenders
+is rather large, the real amount has, until recently, been
+underestimated even by the most competent students of criminology.</p>
+
+<p>The criminologists have been accustomed to give more attention to the
+physical than to the mental correlates of crime. Thus, Lombroso and his
+followers subjected thousands of criminals to observation and
+measurement with regard to such physical traits as size and shape of the
+skull, bilateral asymmetries, anomalies of the ear, eye, nose, palate,
+teeth, hands, fingers, hair, dermal sensitivity, etc. The search was for
+physical &ldquo;stigmata&rdquo; characteristic of the &ldquo;criminal type.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Although such studies performed an important service in creating a
+scientific interest in criminology, the theories of Lombroso have been
+wholly discredited by the results of intelligence tests. Such tests have
+demonstrated, beyond any possibility of doubt, that the most important
+trait of at least 25&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of our criminals is mental weakness. The
+physical abnormalities which have been found so common among prisoners
+are not the stigmata of criminality, but the physical accompaniments of
+feeble-mindedness. They have no diagnostic significance except in so far
+as they are indications of mental deficiency. Without <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;8">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_8" id="Page_8"></a>exception, every
+study which has been made of the intelligence level of delinquents has
+furnished convincing testimony as to the close relation existing between
+mental weakness and moral abnormality. Some of these findings are as
+follows:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p>Miss Renz tested 100&nbsp;girls of the Ohio State Reformatory and
+reported 36&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent as certainly feeble-minded. In every one of
+these cases the commitment papers had given the pronouncement
+&ldquo;intellect sound.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Under the direction of Dr.&nbsp;Goddard the Binet tests were given to
+100 juvenile court cases, chosen at random, in Newark, New
+Jersey. Nearly half were classified as feeble-minded. One boy
+17&nbsp;years old had 9-year intelligence; another of 15&frac12; had
+8-year intelligence.</p>
+
+<p>Of 56 delinquent girls 14&nbsp;to&nbsp;20&nbsp;years of age tested by Hill and
+Goddard, almost half belonged either to the 9- or the 10-year
+level of intelligence.</p>
+
+<p>Dr. G.&nbsp;G. Fernald&#8217;s tests of 100&nbsp;prisoners at the Massachusetts
+State Reformatory showed that at least 25&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent were
+feeble-minded.</p>
+
+<p>Of 1186&nbsp;girls tested by Miss Dewson at the State Industrial
+School for Girls at Lancaster, Pennsylvania, 28&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent were
+found to have subnormal intelligence.</p>
+
+<p>Dr. Katherine Bement Davis&#8217;s report on 1000&nbsp;cases entered in the
+Bedford Home for Women, New York, stated that there was no doubt
+but that at least 157 were feeble-minded. Recently there has
+been established at this institution one of the most important
+research laboratories of the kind in the United States, with a
+trained psychologist, Dr. Mabel Fernald, in charge.</p>
+
+<p>Of 564&nbsp;prostitutes investigated by Dr. Anna Dwyer in connection
+with the Municipal Court of Chicago, only 3&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent had gone
+beyond the fifth grade in school. Mental tests were not made,
+but from the data given it is reasonably certain that half or
+more were feeble-minded.</p>
+
+<p>Tests, by Dr. George Ordahl and Dr. Louise Ellison Ordahl, of
+cases in the Geneva School for Girls, Geneva, Illinois, showed
+that, on a conservative basis of classification, at least
+18&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent were feeble-minded. At the Joliet Prison, Illinois,
+the same authors found 50&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the female prisoners
+feeble-minded, <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;9">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_9" id="Page_9"></a>and 26&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the male prisoners. At the St.
+Charles School for Boys 26&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent were feeble-minded.</p>
+
+<p>Tests, by Dr.&nbsp;J. Harold Williams, of 150&nbsp;delinquents in the
+Whittier State School for Boys, Whittier, California, gave
+28&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent feeble-minded and 25&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent at or near the
+border-line. About 300 other juvenile delinquents tested by
+Mr.&nbsp;Williams gave approximately the same figures. As a result of
+these findings a research laboratory has been established at the
+Whittier School, with Dr.&nbsp;Williams in charge. In the girls&#8217;
+division of the Whittier School, Dr. Grace Fernald collected a
+large amount of psychological data on more than 100 delinquent
+girls. The findings of this investigation agree closely with
+those of Dr.&nbsp;Williams for the boys.</p>
+
+<p>At the State Reformatory, Jeffersonville, Indiana, Dr. von
+Klein-Schmid, in an unusually thorough psychological study of
+1000 young adult prisoners, finds the proportion of
+feeble-mindedness not far from 50&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent.</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>But it is needless to multiply statistics. Those given are but samples.
+Tests are at present being made in most of the progressive prisons,
+reform schools, and juvenile courts throughout the country, and while
+there are minor discrepancies in regard to the actual percentage who are
+feeble-minded, there is no investigator who denies the fearful r&ocirc;le
+played by mental deficiency in the production of vice, crime, and
+delinquency.<a name="FNanchor_1_1" id="FNanchor_1_1"></a><a href="#Footnote_1_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a></p>
+
+<p>Heredity studies of &ldquo;degenerate&rdquo; families have confirmed, in a striking
+way, the testimony secured by intelligence tests. Among the best known
+of such families are the &ldquo;Kallikaks,&rdquo; the &ldquo;Jukes,&rdquo; the &ldquo;Hill Folk,&rdquo; the
+&ldquo;Nams,&rdquo; the &ldquo;Zeros,&rdquo; and the &ldquo;Ishmaelites.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>The Kallikak family.</i> Martin Kallikak was a youthful soldier in
+the Revolutionary War. At a tavern frequented by the militia he
+met a feeble-minded girl, by whom he became the father of a
+feeble-minded son. In 1912 there were 480 known direct
+descendants of this temporary union. It is known that 36 of
+these were <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;10">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_10" id="Page_10"></a>illegitimates, that 33 were sexually immoral, that 24
+were confirmed alcoholics, and that 8 kept houses of ill-fame.
+The explanation of so much immorality will be obvious when it is
+stated that of the 480&nbsp;descendants, 143 were known to be
+feeble-minded, and that many of the others were of questionable
+mentality.</p>
+
+<p>A few years after returning from the war this same Martin
+Kallikak married a respectable girl of good family. From this
+union 496&nbsp;individuals have been traced in direct descent, and in
+this branch of the family there were no illegitimate children,
+no immoral women, and only one man who was sexually loose. There
+were no criminals, no keepers of houses of ill-fame, and only
+two confirmed alcoholics. Again the explanation is clear when it
+is stated that this branch of the family did not contain a
+single feeble-minded individual. It was made up of doctors,
+lawyers, judges, educators, traders, and landholders.<a name="FNanchor_2_2" id="FNanchor_2_2"></a><a href="#Footnote_2_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a></p>
+
+<p><i>The Hill Folk.</i> The Hill Folk are a New England family of which
+709&nbsp;persons have been traced. Of the married women, 24&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent
+had given birth to illegitimate offspring, and 10&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent were
+prostitutes. Criminal tendencies were clearly shown in
+24&nbsp;members of the family, while alcoholism was still more
+common. The proportion of feeble-minded was 48&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent. It was
+estimated that the Hill Folk have in the last sixty years cost
+the State of Massachusetts, in charitable relief, care of
+feeble-minded, epileptic, and insane, conviction and punishment
+for crime, prostitution pauperism, etc., at least $500,000.<a name="FNanchor_3_3" id="FNanchor_3_3"></a><a href="#Footnote_3_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a></p>
+
+<p>The Nam family and the Jukes give equally dark pictures as
+regards criminality, licentiousness, and alcoholism, and
+although feeble-mindedness was not as fully investigated in
+these families as in the Kallikaks and the Hill Folk, the
+evidence is strong that it was a leading trait. The 784&nbsp;Nams who
+were traced included 187&nbsp;alcoholics, 232&nbsp;women and 199&nbsp;men known
+to be licentious, and 40 who became prisoners. It is estimated
+that the Nams have already cost the State nearly $1,500,000.<a name="FNanchor_4_4" id="FNanchor_4_4"></a><a href="#Footnote_4_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a></p>
+
+<p>Of 540&nbsp;Jukes, practically one fifth were born out of wedlock, 37
+were known to be syphilitic, 53 had been in the poorhouse, 76
+<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;11">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_11" id="Page_11"></a>had been sentenced to prison, and of 229&nbsp;women of marriageable
+age 128 were prostitutes. The economic damage inflicted upon the
+State of New York by the Jukes in seventy-five years was
+estimated at more than $1,300,000, to say nothing of diseases
+and other evil influences which they helped to spread.<a name="FNanchor_5_5" id="FNanchor_5_5"></a><a href="#Footnote_5_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a>
+</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>But why do the feeble-minded tend so strongly to become delinquent? The
+answer may be stated in simple terms. Morality depends upon two things:
+(<i>a</i>) the ability to foresee and to weigh the possible consequences for
+self and others of different kinds of behavior; and (<i>b</i>) upon the
+willingness and capacity to exercise self-restraint. That there are many
+intelligent criminals is due to the fact that (<i>a</i>) may exist without
+(<i>b</i>). On the other hand, (<i>b</i>) presupposes (<i>a</i>). In other words, not
+all criminals are feeble-minded, but all feeble-minded are at least
+potential criminals. That every feeble-minded woman is a potential
+prostitute would hardly be disputed by any one. Moral judgment, like
+business judgment, social judgment, or any other kind of higher thought
+process, is a function of intelligence. Morality cannot flower and fruit
+if intelligence remains infantile.</p>
+
+<p>All of us in early childhood lacked moral responsibility. We were as
+rank egoists as any criminal. Respect for the feelings, the property
+rights, or any other kind of rights, of others had to be laboriously
+acquired under the whip of discipline. But by degrees we learned that
+only when instincts are curbed, and conduct is made to conform to
+principles established formally or accepted tacitly by our neighbors,
+does this become a livable world for any of us. Without the intelligence
+to generalize the particular, to foresee distant consequences of present
+acts, to weigh these foreseen consequences in the nice balance of
+imagination,<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;12">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_12" id="Page_12"></a> morality cannot be learned. When the adult body, with its
+adult instincts, is coupled with the undeveloped intelligence and weak
+inhibitory powers of a 10-year-old child, the only possible outcome,
+except in those cases where constant guardianship is exercised by
+relatives or friends, is some form of delinquency.</p>
+
+<p>Considering the tremendous cost of vice and crime, which in all
+probability amounts to not less than $500,000,000 per year in the United
+States alone, it is evident that psychological testing has found here
+one of its richest applications. Before offenders can be subjected to
+rational treatment a mental diagnosis is necessary, and while
+intelligence tests do not constitute a complete psychological diagnosis,
+they are, nevertheless, its most indispensable part.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Intelligence_tests_of_superior_children" id="Intelligence_tests_of_superior_children"></a>Intelligence tests of superior children.</h3>
+
+<p>The number of children with
+very superior ability is approximately as great as the number of
+feeble-minded. The future welfare of the country hinges, in no small
+degree, upon the right education of these superior children. Whether
+civilization moves on and up depends most on the advances made by
+creative thinkers and leaders in science, politics, art, morality, and
+religion. Moderate ability can follow, or imitate, but genius must show
+the way.</p>
+
+<p>Through the leveling influences of the educational lockstep such
+children at present are often lost in the masses. It is a rare child who
+is able to break this lockstep by extra promotions. Taking the country
+over, the ratio of &ldquo;accelerates&rdquo; to &ldquo;retardates&rdquo; in the school is
+approximately 1&nbsp;to&nbsp;10. Through the handicapping influences of poverty,
+social neglect, physical defects, or educational maladjustments, many
+potential leaders in science, art, government, and industry are denied
+the opportunity of a normal development. The use we have made of
+exceptional ability reminds one of the primitive methods of surface
+mining. <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;13">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_13" id="Page_13"></a>It is necessary to explore the nation&#8217;s hidden resources of
+intelligence. The common saying that &ldquo;genius will out&rdquo; is one of those
+dangerous half-truths with which too many people rest content.</p>
+
+<p>Psychological tests show that children of superior ability are very
+likely to be misunderstood in school. The writer has tested more than a
+hundred children who were as much above average intelligence as moron
+defectives are below. The large majority of these were found located
+below the school grade warranted by their intellectual level. One third
+had failed to reap any advantage whatever, in terms of promotion, from
+their very superior intelligence. Even genius languishes when kept
+over-long at tasks that are too easy.</p>
+
+<p>Our data show that teachers sometimes fail entirely to recognize
+exceptional superiority in a pupil, and that the degree of such
+superiority is rarely estimated with anything like the accuracy which is
+possible to the psychologist after a one-hour examination. <i>B.&nbsp;F.</i>, for
+example, was a little over 7&frac12;&nbsp;years old when tested. He was in the
+third grade, and was therefore thought by his teacher to be accelerated
+in school. This boy&#8217;s intelligence, however, was found to be above the
+12-year level. There is no doubt that his mental ability would have
+enabled him, with a few months of individual instruction, to carry fifth
+or even sixth-grade work as easily as third, and without injury to body
+or mind. Nevertheless, the teacher and both the parents of this child
+had found nothing remarkable about him. In reality he belongs to a grade
+of genius not found oftener than once in several thousand cases.</p>
+
+<p>Another illustration is that of a boy of 10&frac12;&nbsp;years who tested at the
+&ldquo;average adult&rdquo; level. He was doing superior work in the sixth grade,
+but according to the testimony of the teacher had &ldquo;no unusual ability.&rdquo;
+It was ascertained <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;14">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_14" id="Page_14"></a>from the parents that this boy, at an age when most
+children are reading fairy stories, had a passion for standard medical
+literature and textbooks in physical science. Yet, after more than a
+year of daily contact with this young genius (who is a relative of
+Meyerbeer, the composer), the teacher had discovered no symptoms of
+unusual ability.<a name="FNanchor_6_6" id="FNanchor_6_6"></a><a href="#Footnote_6_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a></p>
+
+<p>Teachers should be better trained in detecting the signs of superior
+ability. Every child who consistently gets high marks in his school work
+with apparent ease should be given a mental examination, and if his
+intelligence level warrants it he should either be given extra
+promotions, or placed in a special class for superior children where
+faster progress can be made. The latter is the better plan, because it
+obviates the necessity of skipping grades; it permits rapid but
+continuous progress.</p>
+
+<p>The usual reluctance of teachers to give extra promotions probably rests
+upon three factors: (1) mere inertia; (2) a natural unwillingness to
+part with exceptionally satisfactory pupils; and (3) the traditional
+belief that precocious children should be held back for fear of dire
+physical or mental consequences.</p>
+
+<p>In order to throw light on the question whether exceptionally bright
+children are specially likely to be one-sided, nervous, delicate,
+morally abnormal, socially unadaptable, or otherwise peculiar, the
+writer has secured rather extensive information regarding 31&nbsp;children
+whose mental age was found by intelligence tests to be 25&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent above
+the actual age. This degree of intelligence is possessed by about
+2&nbsp;children out of 100, and is nearly as far above average intelligence
+as high-grade feeble-mindedness is below. The supplementary information,
+which was furnished in most cases by the teachers, may be summarized as
+follows:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol class="smaller">
+<li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;15">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_15" id="Page_15"></a>
+<i>Ability special or general.</i> In the case of 20 out of 31
+the ability is decidedly general, and with 2 it is mainly
+general. The talents of 5 are described as more or less
+special, but only in one case is it remarkably so. Doubtful
+4.</li>
+
+<li><i>Health.</i> 15 are said to be perfectly healthy; 13 have one
+or more physical defects; 4 of the 13 are described as
+delicate; 4 have adenoids; 4 have eye-defects; 1 lisps; and
+1 stutters. These figures are about the same as one finds in
+any group of ordinary children.</li>
+
+<li><i>Studiousness.</i> &ldquo;Extremely studious,&rdquo; 15; &ldquo;usually
+studious&rdquo; or &ldquo;fairly studious,&rdquo; 11; &ldquo;not particularly
+studious,&rdquo; 5; &ldquo;lazy,&rdquo; 0.</li>
+
+<li><i>Moral traits.</i> Favorable traits only, 19; one or more
+unfavorable traits, 8; no answer, 4. The eight with
+unfavorable moral traits are described as follows: 2 are
+&ldquo;very self-willed&rdquo;; 1 &ldquo;needs close watching&rdquo;; 1 is &ldquo;cruel to
+animals&rdquo;; 1 is &ldquo;untruthful&rdquo;; 1 is &ldquo;unreliable&rdquo;; 1 is &ldquo;a
+bluffer&rdquo;; 1 is &ldquo;sexually abnormal,&rdquo; &ldquo;perverted,&rdquo; and
+&ldquo;vicious.&rdquo;
+
+<p>It will be noted that with the exception of the last child,
+the moral irregularities mentioned can hardly be regarded,
+from the psychological point of view, as essentially
+abnormal. It is perhaps a good rather than a bad sign for a
+child to be self-willed; most children &ldquo;need close
+watching&rdquo;; and a certain amount of untruthfulness in
+children is the rule and not the exception.</p></li>
+
+<li><i>Social adaptability.</i> Socially adaptable, 25; not
+adaptable, 2; doubtful, 4.</li>
+
+<li><i>Attitude of other children.</i> &ldquo;Favorable,&rdquo; &ldquo;friendly,&rdquo;
+&ldquo;liked by everybody,&rdquo; &ldquo;much admired,&rdquo; &ldquo;popular,&rdquo; etc., 26;
+&ldquo;not liked,&rdquo; 1; &ldquo;inspires repugnance,&rdquo; 1; no answer, 1.</li>
+
+<li><i>Is child a leader?</i> &ldquo;Yes,&rdquo; 14; &ldquo;no,&rdquo; or &ldquo;not
+particularly,&rdquo; 12; doubtful, 5.</li>
+
+<li><i>Is play life normal?</i> &ldquo;Yes,&rdquo; 26; &ldquo;no,&rdquo; 1; &ldquo;hardly,&rdquo; 1;
+doubtful, 3.</li>
+
+<li><i>Is child spoiled or vain?</i> &ldquo;No,&rdquo; 22; &ldquo;yes,&rdquo; 5; &ldquo;somewhat,&rdquo;
+2; no answer, 2.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>According to the above data, exceptionally intelligent children are
+fully as likely to be healthy as ordinary children; their ability is far
+more often general than special, <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;16">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_16" id="Page_16"></a>they are studious above the average,
+really serious faults are not common among them, they are nearly always
+socially adaptable, are sought after as playmates and companions, their
+play life is usually normal, they are leaders far oftener than other
+children, and notwithstanding their many really superior qualities they
+are seldom vain or spoiled.</p>
+
+<p>It would be greatly to the advantage of such children if their superior
+ability were more promptly and fully recognized, and if (under proper
+medical supervision, of course) they were promoted as rapidly as their
+mental development would warrant. Unless they are given the grade of
+work which calls forth their best efforts, they run the risk of falling
+into lifelong habits of submaximum efficiency. The danger in the case of
+such children is not over-pressure, but under-pressure.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Intelligence_tests_as_a_basis_for_grading" id="Intelligence_tests_as_a_basis_for_grading"></a>Intelligence tests as a basis for grading.</h3>
+
+<p>Not only in the case of
+retarded or exceptionally bright children, but with many others also,
+intelligence tests can aid in correctly placing the child in school.</p>
+
+<p>The pupil who enters one school system from another is a case in point.
+Such a pupil nearly always suffers a loss of time. The indefensible
+custom is to grade the newcomer down a little, because, forsooth, the
+textbooks he has studied may have differed somewhat from those he is
+about to take up, or because the school system from which he comes may
+be looked upon as inferior. Teachers are too often suspicious of all
+other educational methods besides their own. The present treatment
+accorded such children, which so often does them injustice and injury,
+should be replaced by an intelligence test. The hour of time required
+for the test is a small matter in comparison with the loss of a school
+term by the pupils.</p>
+
+<p>Indeed, it would be desirable to make all promotions on <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;17">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_17" id="Page_17"></a>the basis
+chiefly of intellectual ability. Hitherto the school has had to rely on
+tests of information because reliable tests of intelligence have not
+until recently been available. As trained Binet examiners become more
+plentiful, the information standard will have to give way to the
+criterion which asks merely that the child shall be able to do the work
+of the next higher grade. The brief intelligence test is not only more
+enlightening than the examination; it is also more hygienic. The school
+examination is often for the child a source of worry and anxiety; the
+mental test is an interesting and pleasant experience.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Intelligence_tests_for_vocational_fitness" id="Intelligence_tests_for_vocational_fitness"></a>Intelligence tests for vocational fitness.</h3>
+
+<p>The time is probably not far
+distant when intelligence tests will become a recognized and widely used
+instrument for determining vocational fitness. Of course, it is not
+claimed that tests are available which will tell us unerringly exactly
+what one of a thousand or more occupations a given individual is best
+fitted to pursue. But when thousands of children who have been tested by
+the Binet scale have been followed out into the industrial world, and
+their success in various occupations noted, we shall know fairly
+definitely the vocational significance of any given degree of mental
+inferiority or superiority. Researches of this kind will ultimately
+determine the minimum &ldquo;intelligence quotient&rdquo; necessary for success in
+each leading occupation.</p>
+
+<p>Industrial concerns doubtless suffer enormous losses from the employment
+of persons whose mental ability is not equal to the tasks they are
+expected to perform. The present methods of trying out new employees,
+transferring them to simpler and simpler jobs as their inefficiency
+becomes apparent, is wasteful and to a great extent unnecessary. A
+cheaper and more satisfactory method would be to employ a psychologist
+to examine applicants for positions and to weed out the unfit. Any
+business employing as many <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;18">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_18" id="Page_18"></a>as five hundred or a thousand workers, as,
+for example, a large department store, could save in this way several
+times the salary of a well-trained psychologist.</p>
+
+<p>That the industrially inefficient are often of subnormal intelligence
+has already been demonstrated in a number of psychological
+investigations. Of 150 &ldquo;hoboes&rdquo; tested under the direction of the writer
+by Mr.&nbsp;Knollin, at least 15&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent belonged to the moron grade of
+mental deficiency, and almost as many more were border-line cases. To be
+sure, a large proportion were found perfectly normal, and a few even
+decidedly superior in mental ability, but the ratio of mental deficiency
+was ten or fifteen times as high as that holding for the general
+population. Several had as low as 9- or 10-year intelligence, and one
+had a mental level of 7&nbsp;years. The industrial history of such subjects,
+as given by themselves, was always about what the mental level would
+lead us to expect&mdash;unskilled work, lack of interest in accomplishment,
+frequent discharge from jobs, discouragement, and finally the &ldquo;road.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>The above findings have been fully paralleled by Mr. Glenn Johnson and
+Professor Eleanor Rowland, of Reed College, who tested 108 unemployed
+charity cases in Portland, Oregon. Both of these investigators made use
+of the Stanford revision of the Binet scale, which is especially
+serviceable in distinguishing the upper-grade defectives from normals.</p>
+
+<p>It hardly needs to be emphasized that when charity organizations help
+the feeble-minded to float along in the social and industrial world, and
+to produce and rear children after their kind, a doubtful service is
+rendered. A little psychological research would aid the united charities
+of any city to direct their expenditures into more profitable channels
+than would otherwise be possible.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Other_uses_of_intelligence_tests" id="Other_uses_of_intelligence_tests"></a>Other uses of intelligence tests.</h3>
+
+<p>Another important use<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;19">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_19" id="Page_19"></a> of intelligence
+tests is in the study of the factors which influence mental development.
+It is desirable that we should be able to guard the child against
+influences which affect mental development unfavorably; but as long as
+these influences have not been sifted, weighed, and measured, we have
+nothing but conjecture on which to base our efforts in this direction.</p>
+
+<p>When we search the literature of child hygiene for reliable evidence as
+to the injurious effects upon mental ability of malnutrition, decayed
+teeth, obstructed breathing, reduced sleep, bad ventilation,
+insufficient exercise, etc., we are met by endless assertion painfully
+unsupported by demonstrated fact. We have, indeed, very little exact
+knowledge regarding the mental effects of any of the factors just
+mentioned. When standardized mental tests have come into more general
+use, such influences will be easy to detect wherever they are really
+present.</p>
+
+<p>Again, the most important question of heredity is that regarding the
+inheritance of intelligence; but this is a problem which cannot be
+attacked at all without some accurate means of identifying the thing
+which is the object of study. Without the use of scales for measuring
+intelligence we can give no better answer as to the essential difference
+between a genius and a fool than is to be found in legend and fiction.</p>
+
+<p>Applying this to school children, it means that without such tests we
+cannot know to what extent a child&#8217;s mental performances are determined
+by environment and to what extent by heredity. Is the place of the
+so-called lower classes in the social and industrial scale the result of
+their inferior native endowment, or is their apparent inferiority merely
+a result of their inferior home and school training? Is genius more
+common among children of the educated classes than among the children of
+the ignorant and poor? <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;20">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_20" id="Page_20"></a>Are the inferior races really inferior, or are
+they merely unfortunate in their lack of opportunity to learn?</p>
+
+<p>Only intelligence tests can answer these questions and grade the raw
+material with which education works. Without them we can never
+distinguish the results of our educational efforts with a given child
+from the influence of the child&#8217;s original endowment. Such tests would
+have told us, for example, whether the much-discussed &ldquo;wonder children,&rdquo;
+such as the Sidis and Wiener boys and the Stoner girl, owe their
+precocious intellectual prowess to superior training (as their parents
+believe) or to superior native ability. The supposed effects upon mental
+development of new methods of mind training, which are exploited so
+confidently from time to time (e.g., the Montessori method and the
+various systems of sensory and motor training for the feeble-minded),
+will have to be checked up by the same kind of scientific measurement.</p>
+
+<p>In all these fields intelligence tests are certain to play an
+ever-increasing r&ocirc;le. With the exception of moral character there is
+nothing as significant for a child&#8217;s future as his grade of
+intelligence. Even health itself is likely to have less influence in
+determining success in life. Although strength and swiftness have always
+had great survival value among the lower animals, these characteristics
+have long since lost their supremacy in man&#8217;s struggle for existence.
+For us the rule of brawn has been broken, and intelligence has become
+the decisive factor in success. Schools, railroads, factories, and the
+largest commercial concerns may be successfully managed by persons who
+are physically weak or even sickly. One who has intelligence constantly
+measures opportunities against his own strength or weakness and adjusts
+himself to conditions by following those leads which promise most toward
+the realization of his individual possibilities.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;21">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_21" id="Page_21"></a>All classes of intellects, the weakest as well as the strongest, will
+profit by the application of their talents to tasks which are consonant
+with their ability. When we have learned the lessons which intelligence
+tests have to teach, we shall no longer blame mentally defective workmen
+for their industrial inefficiency, punish weak-minded children because
+of their inability to learn, or imprison and hang mentally defective
+criminals because they lacked the intelligence to appreciate the
+ordinary codes of social conduct.</p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_1_1" id="Footnote_1_1"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_1_1">[1]</a></span> See <a href="#SELECTED_REFERENCES">References</a> at end of volume.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_2_2" id="Footnote_2_2"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_2_2">[2]</a></span> H.&nbsp;H. Goddard: <i>The Kallikak Family</i>. (1914.) 141&nbsp;pp.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_3_3" id="Footnote_3_3"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_3_3">[3]</a></span> Danielson and Davenport: <i>The Hill Folk</i>. Eugenics Record
+Office, Memoir No.&nbsp;1. 1912. 56&nbsp;pp.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_4_4" id="Footnote_4_4"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_4_4">[4]</a></span> Estabrook and Davenport: <i>The Nam Family</i>. Eugenics Record
+Office Memoir No.&nbsp;2. (1912). 85&nbsp;pp.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_5_5" id="Footnote_5_5"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_5_5">[5]</a></span> R.&nbsp;L. Dugdale: <i>The Jukes</i>. (Fourth edition, 1910.) 120&nbsp;pp.
+G.&nbsp;P. Putnam&#8217;s Sons.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_6_6" id="Footnote_6_6"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_6_6">[6]</a></span> See p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_26">26</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i> for further illustrations of this kind.</p></div>
+
+</div>
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;22">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_22" id="Page_22"></a><a name="CHAPTER_II" id="CHAPTER_II"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;II
+<br />
+<small>SOURCES OF ERROR IN JUDGING INTELLIGENCE</small></h2>
+
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Are_intelligence_tests_superfluous" id="Are_intelligence_tests_superfluous"></a>Are intelligence tests superfluous?</h3>
+
+<p>Binet tells us that he often
+encountered the criticism that intelligence tests are superfluous, and
+that in going to so much trouble to devise his measuring scale he was
+forcing an open door. Those who made this criticism believed that the
+observant teacher or parent is able to make an offhand estimate of a
+child&#8217;s intelligence which is accurate enough. &ldquo;It is a stupid teacher,&rdquo;
+said one, &ldquo;who needs a psychologist to tell her which pupils are not
+intelligent.&rdquo; Every one who uses intelligence tests meets this attitude
+from time to time.</p>
+
+<p>This should not be surprising or discouraging. It is only natural that
+those who are unfamiliar with the methods of psychology should
+occasionally question their validity or worth, just as there are many
+excellent people who do not &ldquo;believe in&rdquo; vaccination against typhoid and
+small pox, operations for appendicitis, etc.</p>
+
+<p>There is an additional reason why the applications of psychology have to
+overcome a good deal of conservatism and skepticism; namely, the fact
+that every one, whether psychologically trained or not, acquires in the
+ordinary experiences of life a certain degree of expertness in the
+observation and interpretation of mental traits. The possession of this
+little fund of practical working knowledge makes most people slow to
+admit any one&#8217;s claim to greater expertness. When the astronomer tells
+us the distance to Jupiter, we accept his statement, because we
+<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;23">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_23" id="Page_23"></a>recognize that our ordinary experience affords no basis for judgment
+about such matters. But every one acquires more or less facility in
+distinguishing the coarser differences among people in intelligence,
+and this half-knowledge naturally generates a certain amount of
+resistance to the more refined method of tests.</p>
+
+<p>It should be evident, however, that we need more than the ability merely
+to distinguish a genius from a simpleton, just as a physician needs
+something more than the ability to distinguish an athlete from a man
+dying of consumption. It is necessary to have a definite and accurate
+diagnosis, one which will differentiate more finely the many degrees and
+qualities of intelligence. Just as in the case of physical illness, we
+need to know not merely that the patient is sick, but also why he is
+sick, what organs are involved, what course the illness will run, and
+what physical work the patient can safely undertake, so in the case of a
+retarded child, we need to know the exact degree of intellectual
+deficiency, what mental functions are chiefly concerned in the defect,
+whether the deficiency is due to innate endowment, to physical illness,
+or to faults of education, and what lines of mental activity the child
+will be able to pursue with reasonable hope of success. In the diagnosis
+of a case of malnutrition, the up-to-date physician does not depend upon
+general symptoms, but instead makes a blood test to determine the exact
+number of red corpuscles per cubic millimeter of blood and the exact
+percentage of h&aelig;moglobin. He has learned that external appearances are
+often misleading. Similarly, every psychologist who is experienced in
+the mental examination of school children knows that his own or the
+teacher&#8217;s estimate of a child&#8217;s intelligence is subject to grave and
+frequent error.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="The_necessity_of_standards" id="The_necessity_of_standards"></a>The necessity of standards.</h3>
+
+<p>In the first place, in order to judge an
+individual&#8217;s intelligence it is necessary to have <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;24">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_24" id="Page_24"></a>in mind some standard
+as to what constitutes normal intelligence. This the ordinary parent or
+teacher does not have. In the case of school children, for example, each
+pupil is judged with reference to the average intelligence of the
+class. But the teacher has no means of knowing whether the average for
+her class is above, equal to, or below that for children in general. Her
+standard may be too high, too low, vague, mechanical, or fragmentary.
+The same, of course, holds in the case of parents or any one else
+attempting to estimate intelligence on the basis of common observation.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="The_intelligence_of_retarded_children_usually_overestimated" id="The_intelligence_of_retarded_children_usually_overestimated"></a>The intelligence of retarded children usually overestimated.</h3>
+
+<p>One of the
+most common errors made by the teacher is to overestimate the
+intelligence of the over-age pupil. This is because she fails to take
+account of age differences and estimates intelligence on the basis of
+the child&#8217;s school performance in the grade where he happens to be
+located. She tends to overlook the fact that quality of school work is
+no index of intelligence unless age is taken into account. The question
+should be, not, &ldquo;Is this child doing his school work well?&rdquo; but rather,
+&ldquo;In what school grade should a child of this age be able to do
+satisfactory work?&rdquo; A high-grade imbecile may do average work in the
+first grade, and a high-grade moron average work in the third or fourth
+grade, provided only they are sufficiently over-age for the grade in
+question.</p>
+
+<p>Our experience in testing children for segregation in special classes
+has time and again brought this fallacy of teachers to our attention. We
+have often found one or more feeble-minded children in a class after the
+teacher had confidently asserted that there was not a single
+exceptionally dull child present. In every case where there has been
+opportunity to follow the later school progress of such a child the
+validity of the intelligence test has been fully confirmed.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;25">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_25" id="Page_25"></a>The following are typical examples of the neglect of teachers to take
+the age factor into account when estimating the intelligence of the
+over-age child:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>A.&nbsp;R. Girl, age&nbsp;11; in low second grade.</i> She was able to do
+the work of this grade, not well, but passably. The teacher&#8217;s
+judgment as to this child&#8217;s intelligence was &ldquo;dull but not
+defective.&rdquo; What the teacher overlooked was the fact that she
+had judged the child by a 7-year standard, and that, instead of
+only being able to do the work of the second grade
+indifferently, a child of this age should have been equal to the
+work of the fifth grade. In reality, A.&nbsp;R. is definitely
+feeble-minded. Although she is from a home of average culture,
+is 11&nbsp;years old, and has attended school five years, she has
+barely the intelligence of the average child of six years.</p>
+
+<p><i>D.&nbsp;C. Boy, age&nbsp;17; in fifth grade.</i> His teacher knew that he
+was dull, but had not thought of him as belonging to the class
+of feeble-minded. She had judged this boy by the 11-year
+standard and had perhaps been further misled by his normal
+appearance and exceptionally satisfactory behavior. The Binet
+test quickly showed that he had a mental level of approximately
+9&nbsp;years. There is little probability that his comprehension will
+ever surpass that of the average 10-year-old.</p>
+
+<p><i>R.&nbsp;A. Boy, age&nbsp;17; mental age&nbsp;11; sixth grade; school work
+&ldquo;nearly average&rdquo;; teacher&#8217;s estimate of intelligence &ldquo;average.&rdquo;</i>
+Test plainly shows this child to be a high-grade moron, or
+border-liner at best. Had attended school regularly 11&nbsp;years and
+had made 6&nbsp;grades. Teacher had compared child with his
+12-year-old classmates.</p>
+
+<p><i>H.&nbsp;A. Boy, age&nbsp;14; mental age&nbsp;9-6; low fourth grade; school
+work &ldquo;inferior&rdquo;; teacher&#8217;s estimate of intelligence &ldquo;average.&rdquo;</i>
+The teacher blamed the inferior quality of school work to &ldquo;bad
+home environment.&rdquo; As a matter of fact, the boy&#8217;s father is
+feeble-minded and the normality of the mother is questionable.
+An older brother is in a reform school. We are perfectly safe in
+predicting that this boy will not complete the eighth grade even
+if he attends school till he is 21&nbsp;years of age.</p>
+
+<p><i>F.&nbsp;I. Boy, age&nbsp;12-11; mental age&nbsp;9-4; third grade; school work
+&ldquo;average&rdquo;; teacher&#8217;s estimate of intelligence &ldquo;average&rdquo;; social
+environment &ldquo;average&rdquo;; health good and attendance regular.</i>
+Intelligence and school success are what we should expect of an
+average 9-year-old.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;26">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_26" id="Page_26"></a><i>D.&nbsp;A. Boy, age&nbsp;12; mental age&nbsp;9-2; third grade; school work
+&ldquo;inferior&rdquo;; teacher&#8217;s estimate of intelligence &ldquo;average.&rdquo;</i>
+Teacher imputes inferior school work to &ldquo;absence from school and
+lack of interest in books&rdquo;; we have yet to find a child with a
+mental age&nbsp;25&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent below chronological age who <em>was</em>
+particularly interested in books or enthusiastic about school.</p>
+
+<p><i>C.&nbsp;U. Girl, age&nbsp;10; mental age&nbsp;7-8; second grade; school work
+&ldquo;average&rdquo;; teacher&#8217;s estimate of intelligence &ldquo;average.&rdquo;</i>
+Teacher blames adenoids and bad teeth for retardation. No doubt
+of child&#8217;s mental deficiency.</p>
+
+<p><i>P.&nbsp;I. Girl, age&nbsp;8-10; mental age&nbsp;6-7; has been in first grade
+2&frac12;&nbsp;years; school work &ldquo;average&rdquo;; teacher&#8217;s estimate of
+intelligence &ldquo;average.&rdquo;</i> The mother and one brother of this girl
+are both feeble-minded.</p>
+
+<p><i>H.&nbsp;O. Girl, age&nbsp;7-10; mental age&nbsp;5-2; first grade for 2&nbsp;years;
+school work &ldquo;inferior&rdquo;; teacher&#8217;s estimate of intelligence
+&ldquo;average.&rdquo;</i> The teacher nevertheless adds, &ldquo;This child is not
+normal, but her ability to respond to drill shows that she has
+intelligence.&rdquo; It is of course true that even feeble-minded
+children of 5-year intelligence are able to profit a little from
+drill. Their weakness comes to light in their inability to
+perform higher types of mental activity.</p></blockquote>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="The_intelligence_of_superior_children_usually_underestimated" id="The_intelligence_of_superior_children_usually_underestimated"></a>The intelligence of superior children usually underestimated.</h3>
+
+<p>We have
+already mentioned the frequent failure of teachers and parents to
+recognize superior ability.<a name="FNanchor_7_7" id="FNanchor_7_7"></a><a href="#Footnote_7_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a> The fallacy here is again largely due to
+the neglect of the age factor, but the resulting error is in the
+opposite direction from that set forth above. The superior child is
+likely to be a year or two younger than the average child of his grade,
+and is accordingly judged by a standard which is too high. The following
+are illustrations:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>M.&nbsp;L. Girl, age&nbsp;11-2; mental age &ldquo;average adult&rdquo; (16); sixth
+grade; school work &ldquo;superior&rdquo;; teacher&#8217;s estimate of
+intelligence &ldquo;average.&rdquo;</i> Teacher credits superior school work to
+&ldquo;unusual home advantages.&rdquo; Father a college professor. The
+teacher considers the child accelerated in school. In reality
+she ought to be in the second year of high school instead of in
+the sixth grade.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;27">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_27" id="Page_27"></a><i>H.&nbsp;A. Boy, age&nbsp;11; mental age&nbsp;14; sixth grade; school work
+&ldquo;average&rdquo;; teacher&#8217;s estimate of intelligence &ldquo;average.&rdquo;</i>
+According to the supplementary information the boy is
+&ldquo;wonderfully attentive,&rdquo; &ldquo;studious,&rdquo; and possessed of
+&ldquo;all-round ability.&rdquo; The estimate of &ldquo;average intelligence&rdquo; was
+probably the result of comparing him with classmates who
+averaged about a year older.</p>
+
+<p><i>K.&nbsp;R. Girl, age&nbsp;6-1; mental age&nbsp;8-5; second grade; school work
+&ldquo;average&rdquo;; teacher&#8217;s estimate of intelligence &ldquo;superior&rdquo;; social
+environment &ldquo;average.&rdquo;</i> Is it not evident that a child from
+ordinary social environment, who does work of average quality in
+the second grade when barely 6&nbsp;years of age, should be judged
+&ldquo;very superior&rdquo; rather than merely &ldquo;superior&rdquo; in intelligence?
+The intelligence quotient of this girl is 140, which is not
+reached by more than one child in two hundred.</p>
+
+<p><i>S.&nbsp;A. Boy, age&nbsp;8-10; mental age&nbsp;10-9; fourth grade; school work
+&ldquo;average&rdquo;; teacher&#8217;s estimate of intelligence &ldquo;average.&rdquo;</i>
+Teacher attributed school acceleration to &ldquo;studiousness&rdquo; and
+&ldquo;delight in school work.&rdquo; It would be more reasonable to infer
+that these traits are indications of unusually superior
+intelligence.</p></blockquote>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Other_fallacies_in_the_estimation_of_intelligence" id="Other_fallacies_in_the_estimation_of_intelligence"></a>Other fallacies in the estimation of intelligence.</h3>
+
+<p>Another source of
+error in the teacher&#8217;s judgment comes from the difficulty in
+distinguishing genuine dullness from the mental condition which results
+sometimes from unfavorable social environment or lack of training.</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>V.&nbsp;P. Boy, age&nbsp;7.</i> Had attended school one year and had
+profited very little from the instruction. He had learned to
+read very little, spoke chiefly in monosyllables, and seemed
+&ldquo;queer.&rdquo; The teacher suspected his intelligence and asked for a
+mental examination. The Binet test showed that except for
+vocabulary, which was unusually low, there was practically no
+mental retardation. Inquiry disclosed the fact that the boy&#8217;s
+parents were uneducated deaf-mutes, and that the boy had
+associated little with other children. Four years later this boy
+was doing fairly well in school, though a year retarded because
+of his unfavorable home environment.</p>
+
+<p><i>X.&nbsp;Y. Boy, age&nbsp;10.</i> Son of a successful business man, he was
+barely able to read in the second reader. The Binet test
+revealed an intelligence level which was absolutely normal. The
+boy was<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;28">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_28" id="Page_28"></a> removed to a special class where he could receive
+individual attention, and two years later was found doing good
+work in a regular class of the fifth grade. His bad beginning
+seemed to have been due to an unfavorable attitude toward school
+work, due in turn to lack of discipline in the home, and to the
+fact that because of the father&#8217;s frequent change of business
+headquarters the boy had never attended one school longer than
+three months.</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>Another source of error in judging intelligence from common observation
+is the tendency to overestimate the intelligence of the sprightly,
+talkative, sanguine child, and to underestimate the intelligence of the
+child who is less emotional, reacts slowly, and talks little. One
+occasionally finds a feeble-minded adult, perhaps of only 9- or 10-year
+intelligence, whose verbal fluency, mental liveliness, and
+self-confidence would mislead the offhand judgment of even the
+psychologist. One individual of this type, a border-line case at best,
+was accustomed to harangue street audiences and had served as &ldquo;major&rdquo; in
+&ldquo;Kelly&#8217;s Army,&rdquo; a horde of several hundred unemployed men who a few
+years ago organized and started to march from San Francisco to
+Washington.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Binets_questionnaire_on_teachers_methods_of_judging_intelligence" id="Binets_questionnaire_on_teachers_methods_of_judging_intelligence"></a>Binet&#8217;s questionnaire on teachers&#8217; methods of judging intelligence.<a name="FNanchor_8_8" id="FNanchor_8_8"></a><a href="#Footnote_8_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a></h3>
+
+<p>
+Aroused by the skepticism so often shown toward his test method, Binet
+decided to make a little study of the methods by which teachers are
+accustomed to arrive at a judgment as to a child&#8217;s intelligence.
+Accordingly, through the co&ouml;peration of the director of elementary
+education in Paris, he secured answers from a number of teachers to the
+following questions:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol class="smaller">
+<li><i>By what means do you judge the intelligence of your pupils?</i></li>
+<li><i>How often have you been deceived in your judgments?</i></li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>About 40&nbsp;replies were received. Most of the answers to the first
+question were vague, one-sided, &ldquo;verbal,&rdquo; or <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;29">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_29" id="Page_29"></a>bookish. Only a few showed
+much psychological discrimination as to what intelligence is and what
+its symptoms are. There was a very general tendency to judge
+intelligence by success in one or more of the school studies. Some
+thought that ability to master arithmetic was a sure criterion. Others
+were influenced almost entirely by the pupil&#8217;s ability to read. One
+teacher said that the child who can &ldquo;read so expressively as to make you
+feel the punctuation&rdquo; is certainly intelligent, an observation which is
+rather good, as far as it goes. A few judged intelligence by the pupil&#8217;s
+knowledge of such subjects as history and geography, which, as Binet
+points out, is to confound intelligence with the ability to memorize.
+&ldquo;Memory,&rdquo; says Binet, is a &ldquo;great simulator of intelligence.&rdquo; It is a
+wise teacher who is not deceived by it. Only a small minority mentioned
+resourcefulness in play, capacity to adjust to practical situations, or
+any other out-of-school criteria.</p>
+
+<p>Some suggested asking the pupil such questions as the following:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p>&ldquo;Why do you love your parents?&rdquo; &ldquo;If it takes three persons seven
+hours to do a piece of work, would it take seven persons any
+longer?&rdquo; &ldquo;Which would you rather have, a fourth of a pie, or a
+half of a half?&rdquo; &ldquo;Which is heavier, a pound of feathers or a
+pound of lead?&rdquo; &ldquo;If you had twenty cents what would you do with
+it?&rdquo;</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>A great many based their judgment mainly on the general appearance of
+the face and eyes. An &ldquo;active&rdquo; or &ldquo;passive&rdquo; expression of the eyes was
+looked upon as especially significant. One teacher thought that a mere
+&ldquo;glance of the eye&rdquo; was sufficient to display the grade of intelligence.
+If the eyes are penetrating, reflective, or show curiosity, the child
+must be intelligent; if they are heavy and expressionless, he must be
+dull. The mobility of countenance came in for frequent mention, also the
+shape of the head.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;30">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_30" id="Page_30"></a>No one will deny that intelligence displays itself to a greater or less
+extent in the features; but how, asks Binet, are we going to
+<em>standardize</em> a &ldquo;glance of the eye&rdquo; or an &ldquo;expression of curiosity&rdquo; so
+that it will serve as an exact measure of intelligence?</p>
+
+<p>The fact is, the more one sees of feeble-minded children, the less
+reliance one comes to place upon facial expression as a sign of
+intelligence. Some children who are only slightly backward have the
+general appearance of low-grade imbeciles. On the other hand, not a few
+who are distinctly feeble-minded are pretty and attractive. With many
+such children a ready smile takes the place of comprehension. If the
+smile is rather sweet and sympathetic, as is often the case, the
+observer is almost sure to be deceived.</p>
+
+<p>As regards the shape of the head, peculiar conformation of the ears, and
+other &ldquo;stigmata,&rdquo; science long ago demonstrated that these are
+ordinarily of little or no significance.</p>
+
+<p>In reply to the second question, some teachers stated that they never
+made a mistake, while others admitted failure in one case out of three.
+Still others said, &ldquo;Once in ten years,&rdquo; &ldquo;once in twenty years,&rdquo; &ldquo;once in
+a thousand times,&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+<p>As Binet remarks, the answers to this question are not very
+enlightening. In the first place, the teacher as a rule loses sight of
+the pupil when he has passed from her care, and seldom has opportunity
+of finding out whether his later success belies her judgment or confirms
+it. Errors go undiscovered for the simple reason that there is no
+opportunity to check them up. In the second place, her estimate is so
+rough that an error must be very great in order to have any meaning. If
+I say that a man is six feet and two inches tall, it is easy enough to
+apply a measuring stick and prove the correctness or incorrectness of my
+assertion. But if I say simply that the man is &ldquo;rather tall,&rdquo; <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;31">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_31" id="Page_31"></a>or &ldquo;very
+tall,&rdquo; the error must be very extreme before we can expose it,
+particularly since the estimate can itself be checked up only by
+observation and not by controlled experiment.</p>
+
+<p>The teachers&#8217; answers seem to justify three conclusions:&mdash;</p>
+
+<p>1. Teachers do not have a very definite idea of what constitutes
+intelligence. They tend to confuse it variously with capacity for
+memorizing, facility in reading, ability to master arithmetic, etc. On
+the whole, their standard is too academic. They fail to appreciate the
+one-sidedness of the school&#8217;s demands upon intelligence.</p>
+
+<p>In a quaintly humorous passage discussing this tendency, Binet
+characterizes the child in a class as <i>d&eacute;natur&eacute;</i>, a French word which we
+may translate (though rather too literally) as &ldquo;denatured.&rdquo; Too often
+this &ldquo;denatured&rdquo; child of the classroom is the only child the teacher
+knows.</p>
+
+<p>2. In judging intelligence teachers are too easily deceived by a
+sprightly attitude, a sympathetic expression, a glance of the eye, or a
+chance &ldquo;bump&rdquo; on the head.</p>
+
+<p>3. Although a few teachers seem to realize the many possibilities of
+error, the majority show rather undue confidence in the accuracy of
+their judgment.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Binets_experiment_on_how_teachers_test_intelligence" id="Binets_experiment_on_how_teachers_test_intelligence"></a>Binet&#8217;s experiment on how teachers test intelligence.<a name="FNanchor_9_9" id="FNanchor_9_9"></a><a href="#Footnote_9_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a></h3>
+
+<p>Finally, Binet
+had three teachers come to his laboratory to judge the intelligence of
+children whom they had never seen before. Each spent an afternoon in the
+laboratory and examined five pupils. In each case the teacher was left
+free to arrive at a conclusion in her own way. Binet, who remained in
+the room and took notes, recounts with playful humor how the teachers
+were unavoidably compelled to resort to the much-abused test method,
+although their attempts at using it were sometimes, from the
+psychologist&#8217;s point of view, amusingly clumsy.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;32">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_32" id="Page_32"></a>One teacher, for example, questioned the children about some canals and
+sluices which were in the vicinity, asking what their purpose was and
+how they worked. Another showed the children some pretty pictures,
+which she had brought with her for the purpose, and asked questions
+about them. Showing the picture of a garret, she asked how a garret
+differs from an ordinary room. One teacher asked whether in building a
+factory it was best to have the walls thick or thin. As King Edward had
+just died, another teacher questioned the children about the details of
+this event, in order to find out whether they were in the habit of
+reading the newspapers, or understood the things they heard others read.
+Other questions related to the names of the streets in the neighborhood,
+the road one should take to reach a certain point in the vicinity, etc.
+Binet notes that many of the questions were special, and were only
+applicable with the children of this particular school.</p>
+
+<p>The method of proposing the questions and judging the responses was also
+at fault. The teachers did not adhere consistently to any definite
+formula in giving a particular test to the different children. Instead,
+the questions were materially altered from time to time. One teacher
+scored the identical response differently for two children, giving one
+child more credit than the other because she had already judged his
+intelligence to be superior. In several cases the examination was
+needlessly delayed in order to instruct the child in what he did not
+know.</p>
+
+<p>The examination ended, quite properly for a teacher&#8217;s examination, with
+questions about history, literature, the metric system, etc., and with
+the recitation of a fable.</p>
+
+<p>A comparison of the results showed hardly any agreement among the
+estimates of the three teachers. When questioned about the standard that
+had been taken in arriving at their conclusions, one teacher said she
+had taken <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;33">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_33" id="Page_33"></a>the answers of the first pupil as a point of departure, and
+that she had judged the other pupils by this one. Another judged all the
+children by a child of her acquaintance whom she knew to be intelligent.
+This was, of course, an unsafe method, because no one could say how the
+child taken as an ideal would have responded to the tests used with the
+five children.</p>
+
+<p>In summarizing the result of his little experiment, Binet points out
+that the teachers employed, as if by instinct, the very method which he
+himself recommends. In using it, however, they made numerous errors.
+Their questions were often needlessly long. Several were &ldquo;dilemma
+questions,&rdquo; that is, answerable by <em>yes</em> or <em>no</em>. In such cases chance
+alone will cause fifty per&nbsp;cent of the answers to be correct. Some of
+the questions were merely tests of school knowledge. Others were
+entirely special, usable only with the children of this particular
+school on this particular day. Not all of the questions were put in the
+same terms, and a given response did not always receive the same score.
+When the children responded incorrectly or incompletely, they were often
+given help, but not always to the same extent. In other words, says
+Binet, it was evident that &ldquo;the teachers employed very awkwardly a very
+excellent method.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>The above remark is as pertinent as it is expressive. As the statement
+implies, the test method is but a refinement and standardization of the
+common-sense approach. Binet remarks that most people who inquire into
+his method of measuring intelligence do so expecting to find something
+very surprising and mysterious; and on seeing how much it resembles the
+methods which common sense employs in ordinary life, they heave a sigh
+of disappointment and say, &ldquo;Is that all?&rdquo; Binet reminds us that the
+difference between the scientific and unscientific way of doing a thing
+is not necessarily a difference in the <em>nature</em> <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;34">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_34" id="Page_34"></a>of the method; it is
+often merely a difference in <em>exactness</em>. Science does the thing better,
+because it does it more accurately.</p>
+
+<p>It was of course not the purpose of Binet to cast a slur upon the good
+sense and judgment of teachers. The teachers who took part in the little
+experiment described above were Binet&#8217;s personal friends. The errors he
+points out in his entertaining and good-humored account of the
+experiment are inherent in the situation. They are the kind of errors
+which any person, however discriminating and observant, is likely to
+make in estimating the intelligence of a subject without the use of
+standardized tests.</p>
+
+<p>It is the writer&#8217;s experience that the teacher&#8217;s estimate of a child&#8217;s
+intelligence is much more reliable than that of the average parent; more
+accurate even than that of the physician who has not had psychological
+training.</p>
+
+<p>Indeed, it is an exceptional school physician who is able to give any
+very valuable assistance to teachers in the classification of mentally
+exceptional children for special pedagogical treatment.</p>
+
+<p>This is only to be expected, for the physician has ordinarily had much
+less instruction in psychology than the teacher, and of course
+infinitely less experience in judging the mental performances of
+children. Even if graduated from a first-rank medical school, the
+instruction he has received in the important subject of mental
+deficiency has probably been less adequate than that given to the
+students of a standard normal school. As a rule, the doctor has no
+equipment or special fitness which gives him any advantage over the
+teacher in acquiring facility in the use of intelligence tests.</p>
+
+<p>As for parents, it would of course be unreasonable to expect from them a
+very accurate judgment regarding the mental peculiarities of their
+children. The difficulty is <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;35">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_35" id="Page_35"></a>not simply that which comes from lack of
+special training. The presence of parental affection renders impartial
+judgment impossible. Still more serious are the effects of habituation
+to the child&#8217;s mental traits. As a result of such habituation the most
+intelligent parent tends to develop an unfortunate blindness to all
+sorts of abnormalities which exist in his own children.</p>
+
+<p>The only way of escape from the fallacies we have mentioned lies in the
+use of some kind of refined psychological procedure. Binet testing is
+destined to become universally known and practiced in schools, prisons,
+reformatories, charity stations, orphan asylums, and even ordinary
+homes, for the same reason that Babcock testing has become universal in
+dairying. Each is indispensable to its purpose.</p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_7_7" id="Footnote_7_7"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_7_7">[7]</a></span> See p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_13">13</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_8_8" id="Footnote_8_8"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_8_8">[8]</a></span> See p.&nbsp;169&nbsp;<i>ff.</i> of reference&nbsp;<a href="#ref2">2</a>, at end of this book</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_9_9" id="Footnote_9_9"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_9_9">[9]</a></span> See p.&nbsp;182&nbsp;<i>ff.</i> of reference&nbsp;<a href="#ref2">2</a> at end of this book.</p></div>
+
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;36">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_36" id="Page_36"></a><a name="CHAPTER_III" id="CHAPTER_III"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;III
+<br />
+<small>DESCRIPTION OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD</small></h2>
+
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Essential_nature_of_the_scale" id="Essential_nature_of_the_scale"></a>Essential nature of the scale.</h3>
+
+<p>The Binet scale is made up of an extended
+series of tests in the nature of &ldquo;stunts,&rdquo; or problems, success in which
+demands the exercise of intelligence. As left by Binet, the scale
+consists of 54&nbsp;tests, so graded in difficulty that the easiest lie well
+within the range of normal 3-year-old children, while the hardest tax
+the intelligence of the average adult. The problems are designed
+primarily to test native intelligence, not school knowledge or home
+training. They try to answer the question &ldquo;How intelligent is this
+child?&rdquo; How much the child has learned is of significance only in so far
+as it throws light on his ability to learn more.</p>
+
+<p>Binet fully appreciated the fact that intelligence is not homogeneous,
+that it has many aspects, and that no one kind of test will display it
+adequately. He therefore assembled for his intelligence scale tests of
+many different types, some of them designed to display differences of
+memory, others differences in power to reason, ability to compare, power
+of comprehension, time orientation, facility in the use of number
+concepts, power to combine ideas into a meaningful whole, the maturity
+of apperception, wealth of ideas, knowledge of common objects, etc.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="How_the_scale_was_derived" id="How_the_scale_was_derived"></a>How the scale was derived.</h3>
+
+<p>The tests were arranged in order of
+difficulty, as found by trying them upon some 200 normal children of
+different ages from 3&nbsp;to&nbsp;15&nbsp;years. It was found, for illustration, that
+a certain test was passed <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;37">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_37" id="Page_37"></a>by only a very small proportion of the younger
+children, say the 5-year-olds, and that the number passing this test
+increased rapidly in the succeeding years until by the age of
+7&nbsp;or&nbsp;8&nbsp;years, let us say, practically all the children were successful.
+If, in our supposed case, the test was passed by about two thirds to
+three fourths of the normal children aged 7&nbsp;years, it was considered by
+Binet a test of 7-year intelligence. In like manner, a test passed by
+65&nbsp;to&nbsp;75&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the normal 9-year-olds was considered a test of
+9-year intelligence, and so on. By trying out many different tests in
+this way it was possible to secure five tests to represent each age from
+3&nbsp;to&nbsp;10&nbsp;years (excepting age&nbsp;4, which has only four tests), five for
+age&nbsp;12, five for 15, and five for adults, making 54&nbsp;tests in all.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="List_of_tests" id="List_of_tests"></a>List of tests.</h3>
+
+<p>The following is the list of tests as arranged by Binet
+in 1911, shortly before his untimely death:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol class="smaller">
+<li class="off"><i>Age&nbsp;3:</i>
+<ol>
+<li>Points to nose, eyes, and mouth.</li>
+<li>Repeats two digits.</li>
+<li>Enumerates objects in a picture.</li>
+<li>Gives family name.</li>
+<li>Repeats a sentence of six syllables.</li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li class="off"><i>Age&nbsp;4:</i>
+<ol>
+<li>Gives his sex.</li>
+<li>Names key, knife, and penny.</li>
+<li>Repeats three digits.</li>
+<li>Compares two lines.</li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li class="off"><i>Age&nbsp;5:</i>
+<ol>
+<li>Compares two weights.</li>
+<li>Copies a square.</li>
+<li>Repeats a sentence of ten syllables.</li>
+<li>Counts four pennies.</li>
+<li>Unites the halves of a divided rectangle.</li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li class="off"><i>Age&nbsp;6:</i>
+<ol>
+<li>Distinguishes between morning and afternoon.</li>
+<li>Defines familiar words in terms of use.</li>
+<li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;38">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_38" id="Page_38"></a>Copies a diamond.</li>
+<li>Counts thirteen pennies.</li>
+<li>Distinguishes pictures of ugly and pretty faces.</li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li class="off"><i>Age&nbsp;7:</i>
+<ol>
+<li>Shows right hand and left ear.</li>
+<li>Describes a picture.</li>
+<li>Executes three commissions, given simultaneously.</li>
+<li>Counts the value of six sous, three of which are double.</li>
+<li>Names four cardinal colors.</li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li class="off"><i>Age&nbsp;8:</i>
+<ol>
+<li>Compares two objects from memory.</li>
+<li>Counts from 20&nbsp;to&nbsp;0.</li>
+<li>Notes omissions from pictures.</li>
+<li>Gives day and date.</li>
+<li>Repeats five digits.</li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li class="off"><i>Age&nbsp;9:</i>
+<ol>
+<li>Gives change from twenty sous.</li>
+<li>Defines familiar words in terms superior to use.</li>
+<li>Recognizes all the pieces of money.</li>
+<li>Names the months of the year, in order.</li>
+<li>Answers easy &ldquo;comprehension questions.&rdquo;</li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li class="off"><i>Age&nbsp;10:</i>
+<ol>
+<li>Arranges five blocks in order of weight.</li>
+<li>Copies drawings from memory.</li>
+<li>Criticizes absurd statements.</li>
+<li>Answers difficult &ldquo;comprehension questions.&rdquo;</li>
+<li>Uses three given words in not more than two sentences.</li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li class="off"><i>Age&nbsp;12:</i>
+<ol>
+<li>Resists suggestion.</li>
+<li>Composes one sentence containing three given words.</li>
+<li>Names sixty words in three minutes.</li>
+<li>Defines certain abstract words.</li>
+<li>Discovers the sense of a disarranged sentence.</li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li class="off"><i>Age&nbsp;15:</i>
+<ol>
+<li>Repeats seven digits.</li>
+<li>Finds three rhymes for a given word.</li>
+<li>Repeats a sentence of twenty-six syllables.</li>
+<li>Interprets pictures.</li>
+<li>Interprets given facts.</li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li class="off"><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;39">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_39" id="Page_39"></a><i>Adult:</i>
+<ol>
+<li>Solves the paper-cutting test.</li>
+<li>Rearranges a triangle in imagination.</li>
+<li>Gives differences between pairs of abstract terms.</li>
+<li>Gives three differences between a president and a king.</li>
+<li>Gives the main thought of a selection which he has heard read.</li>
+</ol></li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>It should be emphasized that merely to name the tests in this way gives
+little idea of their nature and meaning, and tells nothing about Binet&#8217;s
+method of conducting the 54&nbsp;experiments. In order to use the tests
+intelligently it is necessary to acquaint one&#8217;s self thoroughly with the
+purpose of each test, its correct procedure, and the psychological
+interpretation of different types of response.<a name="FNanchor_10_10" id="FNanchor_10_10"></a><a href="#Footnote_10_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a></p>
+
+<p>In fairness to Binet, it should also be borne in mind that the scale of
+tests was only a rough approximation to the ideal which the author had
+set himself to realize. Had his life been spared a few years longer, he
+would doubtless have carried the method much nearer perfection.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="How_the_scale_is_used" id="How_the_scale_is_used"></a>How the scale is used.</h3>
+
+<p>By means of the Binet tests we can judge the
+intelligence of a given individual by comparison with standards of
+intellectual performance for normal children of different ages. In order
+to make the comparison it is only necessary to begin the examination of
+the subject at a point in the scale where all the tests are passed
+successfully, and to continue up the scale until no more successes are
+possible. Then we compare our subject&#8217;s performances with the standard
+for normal children of the same age, and note the amount of acceleration
+or retardation.</p>
+
+<p>Let us suppose the subject being tested is 9&nbsp;years of age. If he goes as
+far in the tests as normal 9-year-old children ordinarily go, we can say
+that the child has a &ldquo;mental <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;40">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_40" id="Page_40"></a>age&rdquo; of 9&nbsp;years, which in this case is
+normal (our child being 9&nbsp;years of age). If he goes only as far as
+normal 8-year-old children ordinarily go, we say that his &ldquo;mental age&rdquo;
+is 8&nbsp;years. In like manner, a mentally defective child of 9&nbsp;years may
+have a &ldquo;mental age&rdquo; of only 4&nbsp;years, or a young genius of 9&nbsp;years may
+have a mental age of 12&nbsp;or&nbsp;13&nbsp;years.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Special_characteristics_of_the_Binet-Simon_method" id="Special_characteristics_of_the_Binet-Simon_method"></a>Special characteristics of the Binet-Simon method.</h3>
+
+<p>Psychologists had
+experimented with intelligence tests for at least twenty years before
+the Binet scale made its appearance. The question naturally suggests
+itself why Binet should have been successful in a field where previous
+efforts had been for the most part futile. The answer to this question
+is found in three essential differences between Binet&#8217;s method and those
+formerly employed.</p>
+
+<h4 class="runin"><a name="The_use_of_age_standards" id="The_use_of_age_standards"></a><span class="u">1.</span> The use of age standards.</h4>
+
+<p>Binet was the first to utilize the idea
+of age standards, or norms, in the measurement of intelligence. It will
+be understood, of course, that Binet did not set out to invent tests of
+10-year intelligence, 6-year intelligence, etc. Instead, as already
+explained, he began with a series of tests ranging from very easy to
+very difficult, and by trying these tests on children of different ages
+and noting the percentages of successes in the various years, he was
+able to locate them (approximately) in the years where they belonged.</p>
+
+<p>This plan has the great advantage of giving us standards which are
+easily grasped. To say, for illustration, that a given subject has a
+grade of intelligence equal to that of the average child of 8&nbsp;years is a
+statement whose general import does not need to be explained. Previous
+investigators had worked with subjects the degree of whose intelligence
+was unknown, and with tests the difficulty of which was equally unknown.
+An immense amount of ingenuity was spent in devising tests which were
+used in such a way as to <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;41">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_41" id="Page_41"></a>preclude any very meaningful interpretation of
+the responses.</p>
+
+<p>The Binet method enables us to characterize the intelligence of a child
+in a far more definite way than had hitherto been possible. Current
+descriptive terms like &ldquo;bright,&rdquo; &ldquo;moderately bright,&rdquo; &ldquo;dull,&rdquo; &ldquo;very
+dull,&rdquo; &ldquo;feeble-minded,&rdquo; etc., have had no universally accepted meaning.
+A child who is designated by one person as &ldquo;moderately bright&rdquo; may be
+called &ldquo;very bright&rdquo; by another person. The degree of intelligence which
+one calls &ldquo;moderate dullness,&rdquo; another may call &ldquo;extreme dullness,&rdquo; etc.
+But every one knows what is meant by the term 8-year mentality, 4-year
+mentality, etc., even if he is not able to define these grades of
+intelligence in psychological terms; and by ascertaining experimentally
+what intellectual tasks children of different ages can perform, we are,
+of course, able to make our age standards as definite as we please.</p>
+
+<p>Why should a device so simple have waited so long for a discoverer? We
+do not know. It is of a class with many other unaccountable mysteries in
+the development of scientific method. Apparently the idea of an
+age-grade method, as this is called, did not come to Binet himself until
+he had experimented with intelligence tests for some fifteen years. At
+least his first provisional scale, published in 1905, was not made up
+according to the age-grade plan. It consisted merely of 30&nbsp;tests,
+arranged roughly in order of difficulty. Although Binet nowhere gives
+any account of the steps by which this crude and ungraded scale was
+transformed into the relatively complete age-grade scale of 1908, we can
+infer that the original and ingenious idea of utilizing age norms was
+suggested by the data collected with the 1905 scale. However the
+discovery was made, it ranks, perhaps, from the practical point of view,
+as the most important in all the history of psychology.<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;42">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_42" id="Page_42"></a></p>
+
+<h4 class="runin"><a name="The_kind_of_mental_functions_brought_into_play" id="The_kind_of_mental_functions_brought_into_play"></a><span class="u">2.</span> The kind of mental functions brought into play.</h4>
+
+<p>In the second
+place, the Binet tests differ from most of the earlier attempts in that
+they are designed to test the higher and more complex mental processes,
+instead of the simpler and more elementary ones. Hence they set
+problems for the reasoning powers and ingenuity, provoke judgments about
+abstract matters, etc., instead of attempting to measure sensory
+discrimination, mere retentiveness, rapidity of reaction, and the like.
+Psychologists had generally considered the higher processes too complex
+to be measured directly, and accordingly sought to get at them
+indirectly by correlating supposed intelligence with simpler processes
+which could readily be measured, such as reaction time, rapidity of
+tapping, discrimination of tones and colors, etc. While they were
+disputing over their contradictory findings in this line of exploration,
+Binet went directly to the point and succeeded where they had failed.</p>
+
+<p>It is now generally admitted by psychologists that higher intelligence
+is little concerned in such elementary processes as those mentioned
+above. Many of the animals have keen sensory discrimination.
+Feeble-minded children, unless of very low grade, do not differ very
+markedly from normal children in sensitivity of the skin, visual acuity,
+simple reaction time, type of imagery, etc. But in power of
+comprehension, abstraction, and ability to direct thought, in the nature
+of the associative processes, in amount of information possessed, and in
+spontaneity of attention, they differ enormously.</p>
+
+<h4 class="runin"><a name="Binet_would_test_general_intelligence" id="Binet_would_test_general_intelligence"></a><span class="u">3.</span> Binet would test &ldquo;general intelligence.&rdquo;</h4>
+
+<p>Finally, Binet&#8217;s success
+was largely due to his abandonment of the older &ldquo;faculty psychology&rdquo;
+which, far from being defunct, had really given direction to most of the
+earlier work with mental tests. Where others had attempted to measure
+memory attention, sense discrimination, etc., as separate <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;43">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_43" id="Page_43"></a>faculties or
+functions, Binet undertook to ascertain the <em>general level</em> of
+intelligence. Others had thought the task easier of accomplishment by
+measuring each division or aspect of intelligence separately, and
+summating the results. Binet, too, began in this way, and it was only
+after years of experimentation by the usual methods that he finally
+broke away from them and undertook, so to speak, to triangulate the
+height of his tower without first getting the dimensions of the
+individual stones which made it up.</p>
+
+<p>The assumption that it is easier to measure a part, or one aspect, of
+intelligence than all of it, is fallacious in that the parts are not
+separate parts and cannot be separated by any refinement of experiment.
+They are interwoven and intertwined. Each ramifies everywhere and
+appears in all other functions. The analogy of the stones of the tower
+does not really apply. Memory, for example, cannot be tested separately
+from attention, or sense-discrimination separately from the associative
+processes. After many vain attempts to disentangle the various
+intellective functions, Binet decided to test their combined functional
+capacity without any pretense of measuring the exact contribution of
+each to the total product. It is hardly too much to say that
+intelligence tests have been successful just to the extent to which they
+have been guided by this aim.</p>
+
+<p>Memory, attention, imagination, etc., are terms of &ldquo;structural
+psychology.&rdquo; Binet&#8217;s psychology is dynamic. He conceives intelligence as
+the sum total of those thought processes which consist in mental
+adaptation. This adaptation is not explicable in terms of the old mental
+&ldquo;faculties.&rdquo; No one of these can explain a single thought process, for
+such process always involves the participation of many functions whose
+separate r&ocirc;les are impossible to distinguish accurately. Instead of
+measuring the intensity of various mental states (psycho-physics), it is
+more <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;44">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_44" id="Page_44"></a>enlightening to measure their combined effect on adaptation. Using
+a biological comparison, Binet says the old &ldquo;faculties&rdquo; correspond to
+the separate tissues of an animal or plant, while his own &ldquo;scheme of
+thought&rdquo; corresponds to the functioning organ itself. For Binet,
+psychology is the science of behavior.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Binets_conception_of_general_intelligence" id="Binets_conception_of_general_intelligence"></a>Binet&#8217;s conception of general intelligence.</h3>
+
+<p>In devising tests of
+intelligence it is, of course, necessary to be guided by some
+assumption, or assumptions, regarding the nature of intelligence. To
+adopt any other course is to depend for success upon happy chance.</p>
+
+<p>However, it is impossible to arrive at a final definition of
+intelligence on the basis of <i>a-priori</i> considerations alone. To demand,
+as critics of the Binet method have sometimes done, that one who would
+measure intelligence should first present a complete definition of it,
+is quite unreasonable. As Stern points out, electrical currents were
+measured long before their nature was well understood. Similar
+illustrations could be drawn from the processes involved in chemistry
+physiology, and other sciences. In the case of intelligence it may be
+truthfully said that no adequate definition can possibly be framed which
+is not based primarily on the symptoms empirically brought to light by
+the test method. The best that can be done in advance of such data is to
+make tentative assumptions as to the probable nature of intelligence,
+and then to subject these assumptions to tests which will show their
+correctness or incorrectness. New hypotheses can then be framed for
+further trial, and thus gradually we shall be led to a conception of
+intelligence which will be meaningful and in harmony with all the
+ascertainable facts.</p>
+
+<p>Such was the method of Binet. Only those unacquainted with Binet&#8217;s more
+than fifteen years of labor preceding the publication of his
+intelligence scale would think of <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;45">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_45" id="Page_45"></a>accusing him of making no effort to
+analyze the mental processes which his tests bring into play. It is true
+that many of Binet&#8217;s earlier assumptions proved untenable, and in this
+event he was always ready, with exceptional candor and intellectual
+plasticity, to acknowledge his error and to plan a new line of attack.</p>
+
+<p>Binet&#8217;s conception of intelligence emphasizes three characteristics of
+the thought process: (1) Its tendency to take and maintain a definite
+direction; (2) the capacity to make adaptations for the purpose of
+attaining a desired end; and (3) the power of auto-criticism.<a name="FNanchor_11_11" id="FNanchor_11_11"></a><a href="#Footnote_11_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a></p>
+
+<p>How these three aspects of intelligence enter into the performances with
+various tests of the scale is set forth from time to time in our
+directions for giving and interpreting the individual tests.<a name="FNanchor_12_12" id="FNanchor_12_12"></a><a href="#Footnote_12_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a> An
+illustration which may be given here is that of the &ldquo;patience test,&rdquo; or
+uniting the disarranged parts of a divided rectangle. As described by
+Binet, this operation has the following elements: &ldquo;(1) to keep in mind
+the end to be attained, that is to say, the figure to be formed; (2) to
+try different combinations under the influence of this directing idea,
+which guides the efforts of the subject even though he may not be
+conscious of the fact; and (3) to judge the combination which has been
+made, to compare it with the model, and to decide whether it is the
+correct one.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Much the same processes are called for in many other of the Binet tests,
+particularly those of arranging weights, rearranging dissected
+sentences, drawing a diamond or square from copy, finding a sentence
+containing three given words, counting backwards, etc.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;46">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_46" id="Page_46"></a>However, an examination of the scale will show that the choice of tests
+was not guided entirely by any single formula as to the nature of
+intelligence. Binet&#8217;s approach was a many-sided one. The scale includes
+tests of time orientation, of three or four kinds of memory, of
+apperception, of language comprehension, of knowledge about common
+objects, of free association, of number mastery, of constructive
+imagination, and of ability to compare concepts, to see contradictions,
+to combine fragments into a unitary whole, to comprehend abstract terms,
+and to meet novel situations.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Other_conceptions_of_intelligence" id="Other_conceptions_of_intelligence"></a>Other conceptions of intelligence.</h3>
+
+<p>It is interesting to compare Binet&#8217;s
+conception of intelligence with the definitions which have been offered
+by other psychologists. According to Ebbinghaus, for example, the
+essence of intelligence lies in comprehending together in a unitary,
+meaningful whole, impressions and associations which are more or less
+independent, heterogeneous, or even partly contradictory. &ldquo;Intellectual
+ability consists in the elaboration of a whole into its worth and
+meaning by means of many-sided combination, correction, and completion
+of numerous kindred associations.... It is a <em>combination activity</em>.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Meumann offers a twofold definition. From the psychological point of
+view, intelligence is the power of independent and creative elaboration
+of new products out of the material given by memory and the senses. From
+the practical point of view, it involves the ability to avoid errors, to
+surmount difficulties, and to adjust to environment.</p>
+
+<p>Stern defines intelligence as &ldquo;the general capacity of an individual
+consciously to adjust his thinking to new requirements: it is general
+adaptability to new problems and conditions of life.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Spearman, Hart, and others of the English school define <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;47">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_47" id="Page_47"></a>intelligence as
+a &ldquo;common central factor&rdquo; which participates in all sorts of special
+mental activities. This factor is explained in terms of a
+psycho-physiological hypothesis of &ldquo;cortex energy,&rdquo; &ldquo;cerebral
+plasticity,&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+<p>The above definitions are only to a slight extent contradictory or
+inharmonious. They differ mainly in point of view or in the location of
+the emphasis. Each expresses a part of the truth, and none all of it. It
+will be evident that the conception of Binet is broad enough to include
+the most important elements in each of the other definitions quoted.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Guiding_principles_in_choice_and_arrangement_of_tests" id="Guiding_principles_in_choice_and_arrangement_of_tests"></a>Guiding principles in choice and arrangement of tests.</h3>
+
+<p>In choosing his
+tests Binet was guided by the conception of intelligence which we have
+set forth above. Tests were devised which would presumably bring into
+play the various mental processes thought to be concerned in
+intelligence, and then these tests were tried out on normal children of
+different ages. If the percentage of passes for a given test increased
+but little or not at all in going from younger to older children this
+test was discarded. On the other hand, if the proportion of passes
+increased rapidly with age, and if children of a given age, who on other
+grounds were known to be bright, passed more frequently than children of
+the same age who were known to be dull, then the test was judged a
+satisfactory test of intelligence. As we have shown elsewhere,<a name="FNanchor_13_13" id="FNanchor_13_13"></a><a href="#Footnote_13_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a>
+practically all of Binet&#8217;s tests fulfill these requirements reasonably
+well, a fact which bears eloquent testimony to the keen psychological
+insight of their author.</p>
+
+<p>In arranging the tests into a system Binet&#8217;s guiding principle was to
+find an arrangement of the tests which would cause an average child of
+any given age to test &ldquo;at age&rdquo;; that is, the average 5-year-old must
+show a mental age of 5&nbsp;years, the average 8-year-old a mental age of
+8&nbsp;years, etc. <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;48">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_48" id="Page_48"></a>In order to secure this result Binet found that his data
+seemed to require the location of an individual test in that year where
+it was passed by about two thirds to three fourths of unselected
+children.</p>
+
+<p>It was in the assembling of the tests that the most serious faults of
+the scale had their origin. Further investigation has shown that a great
+many of the tests were misplaced as much as one year, and several of
+them two years. On the whole, the scale as Binet left it was decidedly
+too easy in the lower ranges, and too difficult in the upper. As a
+result, the average child of 5&nbsp;years was caused to test at not far from
+6&nbsp;years, the average child of 12&nbsp;years not far from 11. In the Stanford
+revision an effort has been made to correct this fault, along with
+certain other generally recognized imperfections.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Some_avowed_limitations_of_the_Binet_tests" id="Some_avowed_limitations_of_the_Binet_tests"></a>Some avowed limitations of the Binet tests.</h3>
+
+<p>The Binet tests have often
+been criticized for their unfitness to perform certain services which in
+reality they were never meant to render. This is unfair. We cannot make
+a just evaluation of the scale without bearing in mind its avowed
+limitations.</p>
+
+<p>For example, the scale does not pretend to measure the entire mentality
+of the subject, but only <em>general intelligence</em>. There is no pretense of
+testing the emotions or the will beyond the extent to which these
+naturally display themselves in the tests of intelligence. The scale was
+not designed as a tool for the analysis of those emotional or volitional
+aberrations which are concerned in such mental disorders as hysteria,
+insanity, etc. These conditions do not present a progressive reduction
+of intelligence to the infantile level, and in most of them other
+factors besides intelligence play an important r&ocirc;le. Moreover, even in
+the normal individual the fruitfulness of intelligence, the direction in
+which it shall be applied, and its methods of work <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;49">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_49" id="Page_49"></a>are to a certain
+extent determined by the extraneous factors of emotion and volition.</p>
+
+<p>It should, nevertheless, be pointed out that defects of intelligence, in
+a large majority of cases, also involve disturbances of the emotional
+and volitional functions. We do not expect to find perfectly normal
+emotions or will power of average strength coupled with marked
+intellectual deficiency, and as a matter of fact such a combination is
+rare indeed. In the course of an examination with the Binet tests, the
+experienced clinical psychologist is able to gain considerable insight
+into the subject&#8217;s emotional and volitional equipment, even though the
+method was designed primarily for another purpose.</p>
+
+<p>A second misunderstanding can be avoided by remembering that the Binet
+scale does not pretend to bring to light the idiosyncrasies of special
+talent, but only to measure the general level of intelligence. It cannot
+be used for the discovery of exceptional ability in drawing, painting,
+music, mathematics, oratory, salesmanship, etc., because no effort is
+made to explore the processes underlying these abilities. It can,
+therefore, never serve as a <em>detailed chart</em> for the vocational guidance
+of children, telling us which will succeed in business, which in art,
+which in medicine, etc. It is not a new kind of phrenology. At the same
+time, as we have already pointed out, <em>it is capable of bounding roughly
+the vocational territory in which an individual&#8217;s intelligence will
+probably permit success, nothing else preventing</em>.<a name="FNanchor_14_14" id="FNanchor_14_14"></a><a href="#Footnote_14_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a></p>
+
+<p>In the third place, it must not be supposed that the scale can be used
+as a complete pedagogical guide. Although intelligence tests furnish
+data of the greatest significance for pedagogical procedure, they do not
+suggest the appropriate educational methods in detail. These will have
+to <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;50">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_50" id="Page_50"></a>be worked out in a practical way for the various grades of
+intelligence, and at great cost of labor and patience.</p>
+
+<p>Finally, in arriving at an estimate of a subject&#8217;s grade of intelligence
+and his susceptibility to training, it would be a mistake to ignore the
+data obtainable from other sources. No competent psychologist, however
+ardent a supporter of the Binet method he might be, would recommend such
+a policy. Those who accept the method as all-sufficient are as much in
+error as those who consider it as no more important than any one of a
+dozen other approaches. Standardized tests have already become and will
+remain by far the most reliable single method for grading intelligence,
+but the results they furnish will always need to be interpreted in the
+light of supplementary information regarding the subject&#8217;s personal
+history, including medical record, accidents, play habits, industrial
+efficiency, social and moral traits, school success, home environment,
+etc. Without question, however, the improved Binet tests will contribute
+more than all other data combined to the end of enabling us to forecast
+a child&#8217;s possibilities of future improvement, and this is the
+information which will aid most in the proper direction of his
+education.</p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_10_10" id="Footnote_10_10"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_10_10">[10]</a></span> See <a href="#PART_II">Part&nbsp;II</a> of this volume, and <a href="#SELECTED_REFERENCES">References</a> 1&nbsp;and&nbsp;29, for
+discussion and interpretation of the individual tests.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_11_11" id="Footnote_11_11"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_11_11">[11]</a></span> See Binet and Simon: &ldquo;<span lang="fr">L&#8217;intelligence des imbeciles</span>,&rdquo; in
+<i lang="fr">L&#8217;Ann&eacute;e Psychologique</i> (1909), pp.&nbsp;1&ndash;147. The last division of this
+article is devoted to a discussion of the essential nature of the higher
+thought processes, and is a wonderful example of that keen psychological
+analysis in which Binet was so gifted.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_12_12" id="Footnote_12_12"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_12_12">[12]</a></span> See especially pages <a href="#Page_162">162</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a href="#Page_238">238</a>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_13_13" id="Footnote_13_13"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_13_13">[13]</a></span> See p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_55">55</a>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_14_14" id="Footnote_14_14"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_14_14">[14]</a></span> See p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_17">17</a>.</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;51">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_51" id="Page_51"></a><a name="CHAPTER_IV" id="CHAPTER_IV"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;IV
+<br />
+<small>NATURE OF THE STANFORD REVISION AND EXTENSION</small></h2>
+
+
+<p>Although the Binet scale quickly demonstrated its value as an instrument
+for the classification of mentally-retarded and otherwise exceptional
+children, it had, nevertheless, several imperfections which greatly
+limited its usefulness. There was a dearth of tests at the higher mental
+levels, the procedure was so inadequately defined that needless
+disagreement came about in the interpretation of data, and so many of
+the tests were misplaced as to make the results of an examination more
+or less misleading, particularly in the case of very young subjects and
+those near the adult level. It was for the purpose of correcting these
+and certain other faults that the Stanford investigation was
+planned.<a name="FNanchor_15_15" id="FNanchor_15_15"></a><a href="#Footnote_15_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a></p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Sources_of_data" id="Sources_of_data"></a>Sources of data.</h3>
+
+<p>Our revision is the result of several years of work,
+and involved the examination of approximately 2300&nbsp;subjects, including
+1700&nbsp;normal children, <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;52">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_52" id="Page_52"></a>200&nbsp;defective and superior children, and more than
+400&nbsp;adults.</p>
+
+<p>Tests of 400 of the 1700 normal children had been made by Childs and
+Terman in 1910&ndash;11, and of 300&nbsp;children by Trost, Waddle, and Terman in
+1911&ndash;12. For various reasons, however, the results of these tests did
+not furnish satisfactory data for a thoroughgoing revision of the scale.
+Accordingly a new investigation was undertaken, somewhat more extensive
+than the others, and more carefully planned. Its main features may be
+described as follows:&mdash;</p>
+
+<p>1. The first step was to assemble as nearly as possible all the results
+which had been secured for each test of the scale by all the workers of
+all countries. The result was a large sheet of tabulated data for each
+individual test, including percentages passing the test at various ages,
+conditions under which the results were secured, method of procedure,
+etc. After a comparative study of these data, and in the light of
+results we had ourselves secured, a provisional arrangement of the tests
+was prepared for try-out.</p>
+
+<p>2. In addition to the tests of the original Binet scale, 40 additional
+tests were included for try-out. This, it was expected, would make
+possible the elimination of some of the least satisfactory tests, and at
+the same time permit the addition of enough new ones to give at least
+six tests, instead of five, for each age group.</p>
+
+<p>3. A plan was then devised for securing subjects who should be as nearly
+as possible representative of the several ages. The method was to select
+a school in a community of average social status, a school attended by
+all or practically all the children in the district where it was
+located. In order to get clear pictures of age differences the tests
+were confined to children who were within two months of a birthday. To
+avoid accidental selection, <em>all</em> the children within two months of a<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;53">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_53" id="Page_53"></a>
+birthday were tested, in whatever grade enrolled. Tests of foreign-born
+children, however, were eliminated in the treatment of results. There
+remained tests of approximately 1000&nbsp;children, of whom 905 were between
+5&nbsp;and&nbsp;14&nbsp;years of age.</p>
+
+<p>4. The children&#8217;s responses were, for the most part, recorded
+<i>verbatim</i>. This made it possible to re-score the records according to
+any desired standard, and thus to fit a test more perfectly to the age
+level assigned it.</p>
+
+<p>5. Much attention was given to securing uniformity of procedure. A
+half-year was devoted to training the examiners and another half-year to
+the supervision of the testing. In the further interests of uniformity
+all the records were scored by one person (the writer).</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Method_of_arriving_at_a_revision" id="Method_of_arriving_at_a_revision"></a>Method of arriving at a revision.</h3>
+
+<p>The revision of the scale below the
+14-year level was based almost entirely on the tests of the
+above-mentioned 1,000 unselected children. The guiding principle was to
+secure an arrangement of the tests and a standard of scoring which would
+cause the median mental age of the unselected children of each age group
+to coincide with the median chronological age. That is, a correct scale
+must cause the <em>average</em> child of 5&nbsp;years to test exactly at 5, the
+<em>average</em> child at 6 to test exactly at 6, etc. Or, to express the same
+fact in terms of intelligence quotient,<a name="FNanchor_16_16" id="FNanchor_16_16"></a><a href="#Footnote_16_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a> a correct scale must give a
+median intelligence quotient of unity, or 100&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent, for unselected
+children of each age.</p>
+
+<p>If the median mental age resulting at any point from the provisional
+arrangement of tests was too high or too low, it was only necessary to
+change the location of certain of the tests, or to change the standard
+of scoring, until an <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;54">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_54" id="Page_54"></a>order of arrangement and a standard of passing were
+found which would throw the median mental age where it belonged. We had
+already become convinced, for reasons too involved for presentation
+here, that no satisfactory revision of the Binet scale was possible on
+any theoretical considerations as to the percentage of passes which an
+individual test ought to show in a given year in order to be considered
+standard for that year.</p>
+
+<p>As was to be expected, the first draft of the revision did not prove
+satisfactory. The scale was still too hard at some points, and too easy
+at others. In fact, three successive revisions were necessary, involving
+three separate scorings of the data and as many tabulations of the
+mental ages, before the desired degree of accuracy was secured. As
+finally revised, the scale gives a median intelligence quotient closely
+approximating 100 for the unselected children of each age from 4&nbsp;to&nbsp;14.</p>
+
+<p>Since our school children who were above 14&nbsp;years and still in the
+grades were retarded left-overs, it was necessary to base the revision
+above this level on the tests of adults. These included 30 business men
+and 150 &ldquo;migrating&rdquo; unemployed men tested by Mr. H.&nbsp;E. Knollin, 150
+adolescent delinquents tested by Mr. J. Harold Williams, and 50
+high-school students tested by the writer.</p>
+
+<p>The extension of the scale in the upper range is such that ordinarily
+intelligent adults, little educated, test up to what is called the
+&ldquo;average adult&rdquo; level. Adults whose intelligence is known from other
+sources to be superior are found to test well up toward the &ldquo;superior
+adult&rdquo; level, and this holds whether the subjects in question are well
+educated or practically unschooled. The almost entirely unschooled
+business men, in fact, tested fully as well as high-school juniors and
+seniors.</p>
+
+<p><a href="#fig01">Figure&nbsp;1</a> shows the distribution of mental ages for 62&nbsp;<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;55">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_55" id="Page_55"></a>adults, including
+the 30 business men and the 32 high-school pupils who were over 16&nbsp;years
+of age. It will be noted that the middle section of the graph represents
+the &ldquo;mental ages&rdquo; falling between 15&nbsp;and&nbsp;17. This is the range which we
+have designated as the &ldquo;average adult&rdquo; level. Those above 17 are called
+&ldquo;superior adults,&rdquo; those between 13&nbsp;and&nbsp;15, &ldquo;inferior adults.&rdquo; Subjects
+much over 15&nbsp;years of age who test in the neighborhood of 12&nbsp;years may
+ordinarily be considered border-line cases.</p>
+
+<div class="center">
+<table class="graph smaller" summary="Bar graph">
+<caption><span class="smcap">Fig.&nbsp;1.</span> DISTRIBUTION OF MENTAL AGES OF 62 NORMAL ADULTS</caption>
+  <tr>
+    <td><a name="fig01" id="fig01"></a><img src="images/trans.jpg" alt="" style="width:5em; height:0.4em;" /></td>
+    <td><img src="images/trans.jpg" alt="" style="width:5em; height:4.4em;" /></td>
+    <td><img src="images/trans.jpg" alt="" style="width:5em; height:14.9em;" /></td>
+    <td><img src="images/trans.jpg" alt="" style="width:5em; height:4.0em;" /></td>
+    <td><img src="images/trans.jpg" alt="" style="width:5em; height:1.2em;" /></td>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+    <th scope="col">13 to 13&nbsp;11</th>
+    <th scope="col">14 to 14&nbsp;11</th>
+    <th scope="col">15 to 15&nbsp;11</th>
+    <th scope="col">17 to 17&nbsp;11</th>
+    <th scope="col">18 to 18&nbsp;11</th>
+  </tr>
+  <tr>
+    <td>1.6%</td>
+    <td>17.7%</td>
+    <td>59.7%</td>
+    <td>16.2%</td>
+    <td>4.8%</td>
+  </tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<p>The following method was employed for determining the validity of a
+test. The children of each age level were divided into three groups
+according to intelligence quotient, those testing below 90, those
+between 90&nbsp;and&nbsp;109, and those with an intelligence quotient of 110 or
+above. The percentages of passes on each individual test at or near that
+age level were then ascertained separately for these three groups. If a
+test fails to show a decidedly higher proportion of passes in the
+superior I&nbsp;Q group than in the inferior I&nbsp;Q group, it cannot be regarded
+as a satisfactory test of intelligence. On the other hand, a test which
+satisfies this criterion must be accepted as valid or the entire scale
+must be rejected. Henceforth it stands or falls with the scale as a
+whole.</p>
+
+<p>When tried out by this method, some of the tests which have been most
+criticized showed a high degree of <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;56">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_56" id="Page_56"></a>reliability; certain others which
+have been considered excellent proved to be so little correlated with
+intelligence that they had to be discarded.</p>
+
+<p>After making a few necessary eliminations, 90&nbsp;tests remained, or 36 more
+than the number included in the Binet 1911 scale. There are 6 at each
+age level from 3&nbsp;to&nbsp;10, 8&nbsp;at 12, 6&nbsp;at 14, 6 at &ldquo;average adult,&rdquo; 6 at
+&ldquo;superior adult,&rdquo; and 16 alternative tests. The alternative tests, which
+are distributed among the different groups, are intended to be used only
+as substitutes when one or more of the regular tests have been rendered,
+by coaching or otherwise, undesirable.<a name="FNanchor_17_17" id="FNanchor_17_17"></a><a href="#Footnote_17_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a></p>
+
+<p>Of the 36 new tests, 27 were added and standardized in the various
+Stanford investigations. Two tests were borrowed from the Healy-Fernald
+series, one from Kuhlmann, one was adapted from Bonser, and the
+remaining five were amplifications or adaptations of some of the earlier
+Binet tests.</p>
+
+<p>Following is a complete list of the tests of the Stanford revision.
+Those designated <em>al.</em> are alternative tests. The guide for giving and
+scoring the tests is presented at length in Part&nbsp;II of this volume.</p>
+
+<h4><a name="List_of_tests_in_the_Stanford_revision_and_extension" id="List_of_tests_in_the_Stanford_revision_and_extension"></a>
+The Stanford revision and extension
+</h4>
+
+<ol class="smaller off">
+<li><i><a href="#CHAPTER_IX">Year&nbsp;III</a>.</i> (<i>6&nbsp;tests, 2&nbsp;months each.</i>)
+<ol>
+  <li>Points to parts of body. (3&nbsp;to&nbsp;4.)
+    <p>Nose; eyes; mouth; hair.</p></li>
+  <li>Names familiar objects. (3&nbsp;to&nbsp;5.)
+    <p>Key, penny, closed knife, watch, pencil.</p></li>
+  <li>Pictures, enumeration or better. (At least 3&nbsp;objects enumerated in one picture.)
+    <p>(<i>a</i>) Dutch Home;&nbsp; (<i>b</i>) River Scene;&nbsp; (<i>c</i>) Post-Office.</p></li>
+  <li>Gives sex.</li>
+  <li>Gives last name.</li>
+  <li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;57">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_57" id="Page_57"></a>Repeats 6&nbsp;to&nbsp;7 syllables. (1&nbsp;to&nbsp;3.)</li>
+  <li class="off">Al. Repeats 3&nbsp;digits. (1&nbsp;success in 3&nbsp;trials. Order correct.)</li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li><i><a href="#CHAPTER_X">Year&nbsp;IV</a>.</i> (<i>6&nbsp;tests, 2&nbsp;months each.</i>)
+<ol>
+  <li>Compares lines. (3&nbsp;trials, no error.)</li>
+  <li>Discrimination of forms. (Kuhlmann.) (Not over 3&nbsp;errors.)</li>
+  <li>Counts 4&nbsp;pennies. (No error.)</li>
+  <li>Copies square. (Pencil. 1&nbsp;to&nbsp;3.)</li>
+  <li>Comprehension, 1st degree. (2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3.) (Stanford addition.)
+    <p>&ldquo;What must you do&rdquo;: &ldquo;When you are sleepy?&rdquo; &ldquo;Cold?&rdquo; &ldquo;Hungry?&rdquo;</p></li>
+  <li>Repeats 4&nbsp;digits. (1&nbsp;to&nbsp;3. Order correct.) (Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li class="off">Al. Repeats 12&nbsp;to&nbsp;13 syllables. (1&nbsp;to&nbsp;3 absolutely correct, or 2 with 1&nbsp;error each.)</li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li><i><a href="#CHAPTER_XI">Year&nbsp;V</a>.</i> (<i>6&nbsp;tests, 2&nbsp;months each.</i>)
+<ol>
+  <li>Comparison of weights. (2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3.)
+    <p style="word-spacing:0.5em;">3&ndash;15; 15&ndash;3; 3&ndash;15.</p></li>
+  <li>Colors. (No error.)
+    <p>Red; yellow; blue; green.</p></li>
+  <li>&AElig;sthetic comparison. (No error.)</li>
+  <li>Definitions, use or better. (4&nbsp;to&nbsp;6.)
+    <p>Chair; horse; fork; doll; pencil; table.</p></li>
+  <li>Patience, or divided rectangle. (2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3 trials. 1&nbsp;minute each.)</li>
+  <li>Three commissions. (No error. Order correct.)</li>
+  <li class="off">Al. Age.</li>
+</ol></li>
+<li><i><a href="#CHAPTER_XII">Year&nbsp;VI</a>.</i> (<i>6&nbsp;tests, 2&nbsp;months each.</i>)
+<ol>
+  <li>Right and left. (No error.)
+    <p>Right hand; left ear; right eye.</p></li>
+  <li>Mutilated pictures. (3&nbsp;to&nbsp;4 correct.)</li>
+  <li>Counts 13&nbsp;pennies. (1&nbsp;to&nbsp;2 trials, without error.)</li>
+  <li>Comprehension, 2d degree. (2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3.) &ldquo;What&#8217;s the thing for you to do&rdquo;:
+    <ol class="alph">
+      <li><span class="u">&ldquo;If it is raining when you start to school?&rdquo;</span></li>
+      <li><span class="u">&ldquo;If you find that your house is on fire?&rdquo;</span></li>
+      <li><span class="u">&ldquo;If you are going some place and miss your car?&rdquo;</span></li>
+    </ol></li>
+  <li>Coins. (3&nbsp;to&nbsp;4.)
+    <p>Nickel; penny; quarter; dime.</p></li>
+  <li>Repeats 16&nbsp;to&nbsp;18 syllables. (1&nbsp;to&nbsp;3 absolutely correct, or 2 with 1&nbsp;error each.)</li>
+  <li class="off">Al. Morning or afternoon.</li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;58">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_58" id="Page_58"></a><i><a href="#CHAPTER_XIII">Year&nbsp;VII</a>.</i> (<i>6&nbsp;tests, 2&nbsp;months each.</i>)
+<ol>
+  <li>Fingers. (No error.) Right; left; both.</li>
+  <li>Pictures, description or better. (Over half of performance description:) Dutch Home; River Scene; Post-Office.</li>
+  <li>Repeats 5&nbsp;digits. (1&nbsp;to&nbsp;3. Order correct.)</li>
+  <li>Ties bow-knot. (Model shown. 1&nbsp;minute.) (Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li>Gives differences. (2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3.)
+    <p>Fly and butterfly; stone and egg; wood and glass.</p></li>
+  <li>Copies diamond. (Pen. 2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3.)</li>
+  <li class="off">Al.&nbsp;1. Names days of week. (Order correct. 2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3 checks correct.)</li>
+  <li class="off">Al.&nbsp;2. Repeats 3&nbsp;digits backwards. (1&nbsp;to&nbsp;3.)</li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li><i><a href="#CHAPTER_XIV">Year&nbsp;VIII</a>.</i> (<i>6&nbsp;tests, 2&nbsp;months each</i>.)
+<ol>
+  <li>Ball and field. (Inferior plan or better.) (Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li>Counts 20&nbsp;to&nbsp;1. (40&nbsp;seconds. 1&nbsp;error allowed.)</li>
+  <li>Comprehension, 3d degree. (2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3.) &ldquo;What&#8217;s the thing for you to do&rdquo;:
+    <ol class="alph">
+      <li><span class="u">&ldquo;When you have broken something which belongs to some one else?&rdquo;</span></li>
+      <li><span class="u">&ldquo;When you are on your way to school and notice that you are in danger of being tardy?&rdquo;</span></li>
+      <li><span class="u">&ldquo;If a playmate hits you without meaning to do it?&rdquo;</span></li>
+    </ol></li>
+  <li>Gives similarities, two things. (2&nbsp;to&nbsp;4.) (Stanford addition.)
+    <p>Wood and coal; apple and peach; iron and silver; ship and automobile.</p></li>
+  <li>Definitions superior to use. (2&nbsp;to&nbsp;4.)
+    <p>Balloon; tiger; football; soldier.</p></li>
+  <li>Vocabulary, 20&nbsp;words. (Stanford addition. For list of words used, see record booklet.)</li>
+  <li class="off">Al.&nbsp;1. First six coins. (No error.)</li>
+  <li class="off">Al.&nbsp;2. Dictation. (&ldquo;See the little boy.&rdquo; Easily legible. Pen. 1&nbsp;minute.)</li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li><i><a href="#CHAPTER_XV">Year&nbsp;IX</a>.</i> (<i>6&nbsp;tests, 2&nbsp;months each</i>.)
+  <ol>
+  <li>Date. (Allow error of 3&nbsp;days in <i>c</i>, no error in <i>a</i>, <i>b</i>, or <i>d</i>.)
+    <ol class="alph">
+      <li><span class="u">day of week;</span></li>
+      <li><span class="u">month;</span></li>
+      <li><span class="u">day of month;</span></li>
+      <li><span class="u">year.</span></li>
+    </ol></li>
+  <li>Weights. (3, 6, 9, 12, 15. Procedure not illustrated. 2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3.)</li>
+  <li>Makes change. (2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3. No coins, paper, or pencil.)
+    <p>10&nbsp;&minus;&nbsp;4;&nbsp; 15&nbsp;&minus;&nbsp;12;&nbsp; 25&nbsp;&minus;&nbsp;4.</p></li>
+  <li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;59">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_59" id="Page_59"></a>Repeats 4&nbsp;digits backwards. (1&nbsp;to&nbsp;3.) (Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li>Three words. (2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3. Oral. 1&nbsp;sentence or not over 2&nbsp;co&ouml;rdinate clauses.)
+    <p>Boy, river, ball; work, money, men; desert, rivers, lakes.</p></li>
+  <li>Rhymes. (3&nbsp;rhymes for two of three words. 1&nbsp;minute for each part.)
+    <p>Day; mill; spring.</p></li>
+  <li class="off">Al.&nbsp;1. Months. (15&nbsp;seconds and 1&nbsp;error in naming. 2&nbsp;checks of 3&nbsp;correct.)</li>
+  <li class="off">Al.&nbsp;2. Stamps, gives total value. (Second trial if individual values are known.)</li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li><i><a href="#CHAPTER_XVI">Year&nbsp;X</a>.</i> (<i>6&nbsp;tests, 2&nbsp;months each</i>.)
+<ol>
+  <li>Vocabulary, 30&nbsp;words. (Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li>Absurdities. (4&nbsp;to&nbsp;5. Warn. Spontaneous correction allowed.)
+  (Four of Binet&#8217;s, one Stanford.)</li>
+  <li>Designs. (1&nbsp;correct, 1&nbsp;half correct. Expose 10&nbsp;seconds.)</li>
+  <li>Reading and report. (8&nbsp;memories. 35&nbsp;seconds and 2&nbsp;mistakes in reading.) (Binet&#8217;s selection.)</li>
+  <li>Comprehension, 4th degree. (2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3. Question may be repeated.)
+    <ol class="alph">
+      <li><span class="u">&ldquo;What ought you to say when some one asks your opinion about a person you don&#8217;t know very well?&rdquo;</span></li>
+      <li><span class="u">&ldquo;What ought you to do before undertaking (beginning) something very important?&rdquo;</span></li>
+      <li><span class="u">&ldquo;Why should we judge a person more by his actions than by his words?&rdquo;</span></li>
+    </ol></li>
+  <li>Names 60&nbsp;words. (Illustrate with clouds, dog, chair, happy.)</li>
+  <li class="off">Al.&nbsp;1. Repeats 6&nbsp;digits. (1&nbsp;to&nbsp;2. Order correct.) (Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li class="off">Al.&nbsp;2. Repeats 20&nbsp;to&nbsp;22 syllables. (1&nbsp;to&nbsp;3 correct, or 2 with 1&nbsp;error each.)</li>
+  <li class="off">Al.&nbsp;3. Form board. (Healy-Fernald Puzzle A. 3&nbsp;times in 5&nbsp;minutes.)</li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li><i><a href="#CHAPTER_XVII">Year&nbsp;XII</a>.</i> (<i>8&nbsp;tests, 3&nbsp;months each.</i>)
+<ol>
+  <li>Vocabulary, 40&nbsp;words. (Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li>Abstract words. (3&nbsp;to&nbsp;5.)
+    <p>Pity; revenge; charity; envy; justice.</p></li>
+  <li>Ball and field. (Superior plan.) (Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li>Dissected sentences. (2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3. 1&nbsp;minute each.)</li>
+  <li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;60">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_60" id="Page_60"></a>Fables. (Score&nbsp;4; i.e., two correct or the equivalent in half credits.) (Stanford addition.)
+    <p>Hercules and Wagoner; Maid and Eggs; Fox and Crow;
+    Farmer and Stork; Miller, Son, and Donkey.</p></li>
+  <li>Repeats 5&nbsp;digits backwards. (1&nbsp;to&nbsp;3.) (Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li>Pictures, interpretation. (3&nbsp;to&nbsp;4. &ldquo;Explain this picture.&rdquo;)
+    <p>Dutch Home; River Scene; Post-Office; Colonial Home.</p></li>
+  <li>Gives similarities, three things. (3&nbsp;to&nbsp;5.) (Stanford addition.)
+    <p>Snake, cow, sparrow; book, teacher, newspaper; wool, cotton, leather; knife-blade, penny, piece of wire; rose, potato, tree.</p></li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li><i><a href="#CHAPTER_XVIII">Year&nbsp;XIV</a>.</i> (<i>6&nbsp;tests, 4&nbsp;months each.</i>)
+<ol>
+  <li>Vocabulary, 50&nbsp;words. (Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li>Induction test. (Gets rule by 6th folding.) (Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li>President and king. (Power; accession; tenure. 2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3.)</li>
+  <li>Problems of fact. (2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3.) (Binet&#8217;s two and one Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li>Arithmetical reasoning. (1&nbsp;minute each. 2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3.) (Adapted from Bonser.)</li>
+  <li>Clock. (2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3. Error must not exceed 3&nbsp;or&nbsp;4&nbsp;minutes.)
+    <p style="word-spacing:1em;">6.22. 8.10. 2.46.</p></li>
+  <li class="off">Al. Repeats 7&nbsp;digits. (1&nbsp;to&nbsp;2. Order correct.)</li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li>&ldquo;<span class="smcap"><a href="#CHAPTER_XIX">Average Adult</a></span>.&rdquo; (<i>6&nbsp;tests, 5&nbsp;months each.</i>)
+<ol>
+  <li>Vocabulary, 65&nbsp;words. (Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li>Interpretation of fables. (Score&nbsp;8.) (Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li>Difference between abstract words. (3 real contrasts out of 4.)
+    <p>Laziness and idleness; evolution and revolution; poverty and misery; character and reputation.</p></li>
+  <li>Problem of the enclosed boxes. (3&nbsp;to&nbsp;4.) (Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li>Repeats 6&nbsp;digits backwards. (1&nbsp;to&nbsp;3.) (Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li>Code, writes &ldquo;Come quickly.&rdquo; (2&nbsp;errors. Omission of dot counts half error. Illustrate with &ldquo;war&rdquo; and &ldquo;spy.&rdquo;) (From Healy and Fernald.)</li>
+  <li class="off">Al.&nbsp;1. Repeats 28&nbsp;syllables. (1&nbsp;to&nbsp;2 absolutely correct.)</li>
+  <li class="off">Al.&nbsp;2. Comprehension of physical relations. (2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3.) (Stanford addition.)
+    <p>Path of cannon ball; weight of fish in water; hitting distant mark.</p></li>
+</ol></li>
+
+<li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;61">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_61" id="Page_61"></a>&ldquo;<span class="smcap"><a href="#CHAPTER_XX">Superior Adult</a></span>.&rdquo; (<i>6&nbsp;tests, 6&nbsp;months each.</i>)
+<ol>
+  <li>Vocabulary, 75&nbsp;words. (Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li>Binet&#8217;s paper-cutting test. (Draws, folds, and locates holes.)</li>
+  <li>Repeats 8&nbsp;digits. (1&nbsp;to&nbsp;3. Order correct.) (Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li>Repeats thought of passage heard. (1&nbsp;to&nbsp;2.) (Binet&#8217;s and
+  Wissler&#8217;s selections adapted.)</li>
+  <li>Repeats 7&nbsp;digits backwards. (1&nbsp;to&nbsp;3.) (Stanford addition.)</li>
+  <li>Ingenuity test. (2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3. 5&nbsp;minutes each.) (Stanford addition.)</li>
+</ol></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Summary_of_changes" id="Summary_of_changes"></a>Summary of changes.</h3>
+
+<p>A comparison of the above list with either the Binet
+1908 or 1911 series will reveal many changes. On the whole, it differs
+somewhat more from the Binet 1911 scale than from that of 1908. Thus, of
+the 49&nbsp;tests below the &ldquo;adult&rdquo; group in the 1911 scale, 2 are eliminated
+and 29 are relocated. Of these, 25 are moved downward and 4 upward. The
+shifts are as follows:&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="center">
+<table class="smaller" summary="Movements of Binet&#8217;s adult tests in the Stanford revision">
+<tr><td>Down&nbsp;</td><td>1&nbsp;year, </td><td class="tdr0">18</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Down&nbsp;</td><td>2&nbsp;years,</td><td class="tdr0"> 4</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Down&nbsp;</td><td>3&nbsp;years,</td><td class="tdr0"> 2</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Down&nbsp;</td><td>6&nbsp;years,</td><td class="tdr0"> 1</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Up</td><td>1&nbsp;year,</td><td class="tdr0">3</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Up</td><td>2&nbsp;years,</td><td class="tdr0">1</td></tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<p>Of the adult group in Binet&#8217;s 1911 series 1 is eliminated, 2 are moved
+up to &ldquo;superior adult,&rdquo; and 1 is moved up to 14. Accordingly, of Binet&#8217;s
+entire 54&nbsp;tests, we have eliminated 3 and relocated 32, leaving only 19
+in the positions assigned them by Binet. The 3 eliminated are: repeating
+2&nbsp;digits, resisting suggestion, and &ldquo;reversed triangle.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>The revision is really more extensive than the above figures would
+suggest, since minor changes have been made in the scoring of a great
+many tests in order to make them fit better the locations assigned them.
+Throughout the scale the procedure and scoring have been worked over and
+made more definite with the idea of promoting uniformity. This phase of
+the revision is perhaps more <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;62">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_62" id="Page_62"></a>important than the mere relocation of
+tests. Also, the addition of numerous tests in the upper ranges of the
+scale affects very considerably the mental ages above the level of
+10&nbsp;or&nbsp;11&nbsp;years.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Effects_of_the_revision_on_the_mental_ages_secured" id="Effects_of_the_revision_on_the_mental_ages_secured"></a>Effects of the revision on the mental ages secured.</h3>
+
+<p>The most important
+effect of the revision is to reduce the mental ages secured in the lower
+ranges of the scale, and to raise considerably the mental ages above
+10&nbsp;or&nbsp;11&nbsp;years. This difference also obtains, though to a somewhat
+smaller extent, between the Stanford revision and those of Goddard and
+Kuhlmann.</p>
+
+<p>For example, of 104&nbsp;adult individuals testing by the Stanford revision
+between 12&nbsp;and&nbsp;14&nbsp;years, and who were therefore somewhat above the level
+of feeble-mindedness as that term is usually defined, 50&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent tested
+below 12&nbsp;years by the Goddard revision. That the dull and border-line
+adults are so much more readily distinguished from the feeble-minded by
+the Stanford revision than by other Binet series is due as much to the
+addition of tests in the upper groups as to the relocation of existing
+tests.</p>
+
+<p>On the other hand, the Stanford revision causes young subjects to test
+lower than any other version of the Binet scale. At 5&nbsp;or&nbsp;6&nbsp;years the
+mental ages secured by the Stanford revision average from 6&nbsp;to&nbsp;10&nbsp;months
+lower than other revisions yield.</p>
+
+<p>The above differences are more significant than would at first appear.
+An error of 10&nbsp;months in the mental age of a 5-year-old is as serious as
+an error of 20&nbsp;months in the case of a 10-year-old. Stating the error in
+terms of the intelligence quotient makes it more evident. Thus, an error
+of 10&nbsp;months in the mental age of a 5-year-old means an error of almost
+15&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent in the intelligence quotient. A scale which tests this much
+too low would cause the child with a true intelligence quotient of 75
+(which ordinarily means <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;63">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_63" id="Page_63"></a>feeble-mindedness or border-line intelligence)
+to test at 90, or only slightly below normal.</p>
+
+<p>Three serious consequences came from the too great ease of the original
+Binet scale at the lower end, and its too great difficulty at the upper
+end:&mdash;</p>
+
+<p>1. In young subjects the higher grades of mental deficiency were
+overlooked, because the scale caused such subjects to test only a little
+below normal.</p>
+
+<p>2. The proportion of feeble-mindedness among adult subjects was greatly
+overestimated, because subjects who were really of the 12- or 13-year
+mental level could only earn a mental age of about 11&nbsp;years.</p>
+
+<p>3. Confusion resulted in efforts to trace the mental growth of either
+feeble-minded or normal children. For example, by other versions of the
+Binet scale an average 5-year-old will show an intelligence quotient
+probably not far from 110&nbsp;or&nbsp;115; at 9, an intelligence quotient of
+about 100; and at 14, an intelligence quotient of about 85&nbsp;or&nbsp;90.</p>
+
+<p>By such a scale the true border-line case would test approximately as
+follows:&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="center">
+<table class="smaller" summary="The I&nbsp;Q given by the Binet test to a theoretical border-line case">
+<tr><td class="tdr0">At age&nbsp;5, 90&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q</td><td>(apparently not far below normal).</td></tr>
+<tr><td class="tdr0">At age&nbsp;9, 75&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q </td><td>(border-line).</td></tr>
+<tr><td class="tdr0">At age&nbsp;14, 65&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q</td><td>(moron deficiency).</td></tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<p>On the other hand, re-tests of children by the Stanford revision have
+been found to yield intelligence quotients almost identical with those
+secured from two to four years earlier by the same tests. Those who
+graded feeble-minded in the first test graded feeble-minded in the
+second test: the dull remained dull, the average remained average, the
+superior remained superior, and always in approximately the same
+degree.<a name="FNanchor_18_18" id="FNanchor_18_18"></a><a href="#Footnote_18_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;64">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_64" id="Page_64"></a>It is unnecessary to emphasize further the importance of having an
+intelligence scale which is equally accurate at all points. Absolute
+perfection in this respect is not claimed for the Stanford revision, but
+it is believed to be at least free from the more serious errors of other
+Binet arrangements.</p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_15_15" id="Footnote_15_15"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_15_15">[15]</a></span> The writer wishes to acknowledge his very great
+indebtedness to Miss Grace Lyman, Dr. George Ordahl, Dr. Louise Ellison
+Ordahl, Miss Neva Galbreath, Mr. Wilford Talbert, Dr. J. Harold
+Williams, Mr. Herbert E. Knollin, and Miss Irene Cuneo for their
+co&ouml;peration in making the tests on which the Stanford revision is
+chiefly based. Without their loyal assistance the investigation could
+not have been carried through.
+</p><p>
+Grateful acknowledgment is also made to the many public school teachers
+and principals for their generous and invaluable co&ouml;peration in
+furnishing subjects for the tests, and in supplying, sometimes at
+considerable cost of labor, the supplementary information which was
+called for regarding the pupils tested. Their contribution was made in
+the interest of educational science, and without expectation of personal
+benefits of any kind. Their professional spirit cannot be too highly
+commended.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_16_16" id="Footnote_16_16"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_16_16">[16]</a></span> The intelligence quotient (often designated as I&nbsp;Q) is the
+ratio of mental age to chronological age. (See pp. <a href="#Page_65">65</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i> and
+<a href="#Page_78">78</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>)</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_17_17" id="Footnote_17_17"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_17_17">[17]</a></span> See p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_137">137</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i> for explanations regarding the
+calculation of mental age and the use of alternative tests.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_18_18" id="Footnote_18_18"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_18_18">[18]</a></span> See &ldquo;Some Problems relating to the Detection of
+Border-line Cases of Mental Deficiency,&rdquo; by Lewis M. Terman and H.&nbsp;E.
+Knollin, in <i>Journal of Psycho-Asthemes</i>, June, 1916.</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;65">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_65" id="Page_65"></a><a name="CHAPTER_V" id="CHAPTER_V"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;V
+<br />
+<small>ANALYSIS OF 1000 INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS</small></h2>
+
+
+<p>An extended account of the 1000&nbsp;tests on which the Stanford revision is
+chiefly based has been presented in a separate monograph. This chapter
+will include only the briefest summary of some of those results of the
+investigation which contribute to the intelligent use of the revision.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="The_distribution_of_intelligence" id="The_distribution_of_intelligence"></a>The distribution of intelligence.</h3>
+
+<p>The question as to the manner in which
+intelligence is distributed is one of great practical as well as
+theoretical importance. One of the most vital questions which can be
+asked by any nation of any age is the following: &ldquo;How high is the
+average level of intelligence among our people, and how frequent are the
+various grades of ability above and below the average?&rdquo; With the
+development of standardized tests we are approaching, for the first time
+in history, a possible answer to this question.</p>
+
+<p>Most of the earlier Binet studies, however, have thrown little light on
+the distribution of intelligence because of their failure to avoid the
+influence of accidental selection in choosing subjects for testing. The
+method of securing subjects for the Stanford revision makes our results
+on this point especially interesting.<a name="FNanchor_19_19" id="FNanchor_19_19"></a><a href="#Footnote_19_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a> It is believed that the
+subjects used for this investigation were as nearly representative of
+average American-born children as it is possible to secure.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;66">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_66" id="Page_66"></a>The intelligence quotients for these 1000 unselected children were
+calculated, and their distribution was plotted for the ages separately.
+The distribution was found fairly symmetrical at each age from 5&nbsp;to&nbsp;14.
+At 15 the range is on either side of 90 as a median, and at 16 on either
+side of 80 as a median. That the 15- and 16-year-olds test low is due to
+the fact that these children are left-over retardates and are below
+average in intelligence.</p>
+
+<div class="center">
+<table class="graph smaller" summary="Bar graph">
+<caption><span class="smcap">Fig.&nbsp;2.</span> DISTRIBUTION OF I&nbsp;Q&#8217;S OF 905 UNSELECTED
+CHILDREN. 5&ndash;14&nbsp;YEARS OF AGE</caption>
+<tr>
+  <td><a name="fig02" id="fig02"></a><img src="images/trans.jpg" alt="" style="width:4.5em; height:0.2em;" /></td>
+  <td><img src="images/trans.jpg" alt="" style="width:4.5em; height:0.6em;" /></td>
+  <td><img src="images/trans.jpg" alt="" style="width:4.5em; height:2.2em;" /></td>
+  <td><img src="images/trans.jpg" alt="" style="width:4.5em; height:5.0em;" /></td>
+  <td><img src="images/trans.jpg" alt="" style="width:4.5em; height:8.5em;" /></td>
+  <td><img src="images/trans.jpg" alt="" style="width:4.5em; height:6.0em;" /></td>
+  <td><img src="images/trans.jpg" alt="" style="width:4.5em; height:2.2em;" /></td>
+  <td><img src="images/trans.jpg" alt="" style="width:4.5em; height:0.6em;" /></td>
+  <td><img src="images/trans.jpg" alt="" style="width:4.5em; height:0.1em;" /></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <th scope="col">56&ndash;65</th>
+  <th scope="col">66&ndash;75</th>
+  <th scope="col">76&ndash;85</th>
+  <th scope="col">86&ndash;95</th>
+  <th scope="col">96&ndash;105</th>
+  <th scope="col">106&ndash;115</th>
+  <th scope="col">116&ndash;125</th>
+  <th scope="col">126&ndash;135</th>
+  <th scope="col">136&ndash;145</th>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td>.33%</td>
+  <td>2.3%</td>
+  <td>8.6%</td>
+  <td>20.1%</td>
+  <td>33.9%</td>
+  <td>23.1%</td>
+  <td>9.0%</td>
+  <td>2.3%</td>
+  <td>.55%</td>
+</tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<p>The I&nbsp;Q&#8217;s were then grouped in ranges of ten. In the middle group were
+thrown those from 96&nbsp;to&nbsp;105; the ascending groups including in order the
+I&nbsp;Q&#8217;s from 106&nbsp;to&nbsp;115, 116&nbsp;to&nbsp;125, etc.; correspondingly with the
+descending groups. <a href="#fig02">Figure&nbsp;2</a> shows the distribution found by this
+grouping for the 905 children of ages 5&nbsp;to&nbsp;14 combined. The subjects
+above 14 are not included in this curve because they are left-overs and
+not representative of their ages.</p>
+
+<p>The distribution for the ages combined is seen to be remarkably
+symmetrical. The symmetry for the separate ages was hardly less marked,
+considering that only 80&nbsp;to&nbsp;120 children were tested at each age. In
+fact, the range, including the middle 50&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of I&nbsp;Q&#8217;s, was found
+practically constant from 5&nbsp;to&nbsp;14&nbsp;years. The tendency is <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;67">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_67" id="Page_67"></a>for the middle
+50&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent to fall (approximately) between 93&nbsp;and&nbsp;108.</p>
+
+<p>Three important conclusions are justified by the above facts:&mdash;</p>
+
+<p>1. Since the frequency of the various grades of intelligence decreases
+<em>gradually</em> and at no point abruptly on each side of the median, it is
+evident that there is no definite dividing line between normality and
+feeble-mindedness, or between normality and genius. Psychologically, the
+mentally defective child does not belong to a distinct type, nor does
+the genius. There is no line of demarcation between either of these
+extremes and the so-called &ldquo;normal&rdquo; child. The number of mentally
+defective individuals in a population will depend upon the standard
+arbitrarily set up as to what constitutes mental deficiency. Similarly
+for genius. It is exactly as we should undertake to classify all people
+into the three groups: abnormally tall, normally tall, and abnormally
+short.<a name="FNanchor_20_20" id="FNanchor_20_20"></a><a href="#Footnote_20_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a></p>
+
+<p>2. The common opinion that extreme deviations below the median are more
+frequent than extreme deviations above the median seems to have no
+foundation in fact. Among unselected school children, at least, for
+every child of any given degree of deficiency there is another child as
+far above the average I&nbsp;Q as the former is below. We have shown
+elsewhere the serious consequences of neglect of this fact.<a name="FNanchor_21_21" id="FNanchor_21_21"></a><a href="#Footnote_21_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a></p>
+
+<p>3. The traditional view that variability in mental traits becomes more
+marked during adolescence is here contradicted, as far as intelligence
+is concerned, for the distribution of I&nbsp;Q&#8217;s is practically the same at
+each age from 5&nbsp;to&nbsp;14. For example, 6-year-olds differ from one another
+fully as much as do 14-year-olds.<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;68">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_68" id="Page_68"></a></p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="The_validity_of_the_intelligence_quotient" id="The_validity_of_the_intelligence_quotient"></a>The validity of the intelligence quotient.</h3>
+
+<p>The facts presented above
+argue strongly for the validity of the I&nbsp;Q as an expression of a child&#8217;s
+intelligence status. This follows necessarily from the similar nature of
+the distributions at the various ages. The inference is that a child&#8217;s
+I&nbsp;Q, as measured by this scale, remains relatively constant. Re-tests of
+the same children at intervals of two to five years support the
+inference. Children of superior intelligence do not seem to deteriorate
+as they get older, nor dull children to develop average intelligence.
+Knowing a child&#8217;s I&nbsp;Q, we can predict with a fair degree of accuracy the
+course of his later development.</p>
+
+<p>The mental age of a subject is meaningless if considered apart from
+chronological age. It is only the ratio of retardation or acceleration
+to chronological age (that is, the I&nbsp;Q) which has significance.</p>
+
+<p>It follows also that if the I&nbsp;Q is a valid expression of intelligence,
+as it seems to be, then the Binet-Simon &ldquo;age-grade method&rdquo; becomes
+transformed automatically into a &ldquo;point-scale method,&rdquo; if one wants to
+use it that way. As such it is superior to any other point scale that
+has been proposed, because it includes a larger number of tests and its
+points have definite meaning.<a name="FNanchor_22_22" id="FNanchor_22_22"></a><a href="#Footnote_22_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a></p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Sex_differences" id="Sex_differences"></a>Sex differences.</h3>
+
+<p>The question as to the relative intelligence of the
+sexes is one of perennial interest and great social importance. The
+ancient hypothesis, the one which dates from the time when only men
+concerned themselves with scientific hypotheses, took for granted the
+superiority of the male. With the development of individual psychology,
+however, it was soon found that as far as the evidence of mental tests
+can be trusted the <em>average</em> intelligence of women and girls is as high
+as that of men and boys.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;69">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_69" id="Page_69"></a>If we accept this result we are then confronted with the difficult
+problem of finding an explanation for the fact that so few of those who
+have acquired eminence in the various intellectual fields have been
+women. Two explanations have been proposed: (1) That women become
+eminent less often than men simply for lack of opportunity and stimulus;
+and (2) that while the average intelligence of the sexes is the same,
+extreme variations may be more common in males. It is pointed out that
+not only are there more eminent men than eminent women, but that
+statistics also show a preponderance of males in institutions for the
+mentally defective. Accordingly it is often said that women are grouped
+closely about the average, while men show a wider range of distribution.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 450px;">
+<a name="fig03" id="fig03"></a>
+<img src="images/fig03.png" width="450" height="278" alt="Graph which shows the IQ of both boys and girls fairly constant over age groups, with girls slightly above boys until age 14." title="" />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.&nbsp;3.</span> MEDIAN I&nbsp;Q OF 457&nbsp;BOYS (UNBROKEN LINE) AND
+448&nbsp;GIRLS (DOTTED LINE) FOR THE AGES 5&ndash;14&nbsp;YEARS</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>Many hundreds of articles and books of popular or quasi-scientific
+nature have been written on one aspect or another of this question of
+sex difference in intelligence; but all such theoretical discussions
+taken together are worth <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;70">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_70" id="Page_70"></a>less than the results of one good experiment.
+Let us see what our 1000&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q&#8217;s have to offer toward a solution of the
+problem.</p>
+
+<p>1. When the I&nbsp;Q&#8217;s of the boys and girls were treated separately there
+was found a small but fairly constant superiority of the girls up to the
+age of 13&nbsp;years. At 14, however, the curve for the girls dropped below
+that for boys. This is shown in <a href="#fig03">Figure&nbsp;3</a>.</p>
+
+<p>The supplementary data, including the teachers&#8217; estimates of
+intelligence on a scale of five, the teachers&#8217; judgments in regard to
+the quality of the school work, and records showing the age-grade
+distribution of the sexes, were all sifted for evidence as to the
+genuineness of the apparent superiority of the girls age for age. The
+results of all these lines of inquiry support the tests in suggesting
+that the superiority of the girls is probably real even up to and
+including age&nbsp;14, the apparent superiority of the boys at this age being
+fully accounted for by the more frequent elimination of 14-year-old
+girls from the grades by promotion to the high school.<a name="FNanchor_23_23" id="FNanchor_23_23"></a><a href="#Footnote_23_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a></p>
+
+<p>2. However, the superiority of girls over boys is so slight (amounting
+at most ages to only 2&nbsp;to&nbsp;3&nbsp;points in terms of I&nbsp;Q) that for practical
+purposes it would seem negligible. This offers no support to the opinion
+expressed by Yerkes and Bridges that &ldquo;at certain ages serious injustice
+will be done individuals by evaluating their scores in the light of
+norms which do not take account of sex differences.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>3. Apart from the small superiority of girls, the distribution of
+intelligence in the two sexes is not different. The supposed wider
+variation of boys is not found. Girls do not group themselves about the
+median more closely <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;71">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_71" id="Page_71"></a>than do boys. The range of I&nbsp;Q including the middle
+fifty per&nbsp;cent is approximately the same for the two sexes.<a name="FNanchor_24_24" id="FNanchor_24_24"></a><a href="#Footnote_24_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a></p>
+
+<p>4. When the results for the individual tests were examined, it was found
+that not many showed very extreme differences as to the per&nbsp;cent of boys
+and girls passing. In a few cases, however, the difference was rather
+marked.</p>
+
+<p>The boys were decidedly better in arithmetical reasoning, giving
+differences between a president and a king, solving the form board,
+making change, reversing hands of clock, finding similarities, and
+solving the &ldquo;induction test.&rdquo; The girls were superior in drawing designs
+from memory, &aelig;sthetic comparison, comparing objects from memory,
+answering the &ldquo;comprehension questions,&rdquo; repeating digits and sentences,
+tying a bow-knot, and finding rhymes.</p>
+
+<p>Accordingly, our data, which for the most part agree with the results of
+others, justify the conclusion that the intelligence of girls, at least
+up to 14&nbsp;years, does not differ materially from that of boys either as
+regards the average level or the range of distribution. It may still be
+argued that the mental development of boys beyond the age of 14&nbsp;years
+lasts longer and extends farther than in the case of girls, but as a
+matter of fact this opinion receives little support from such tests as
+have been made on men and women college students.</p>
+
+<p>The fact that so few women have attained eminence may be due to wholly
+extraneous factors, the most important of which are the following: (1)
+The occupations in which it is possible to achieve eminence are for the
+most part only now beginning to open their doors to women. Women&#8217;s
+career has been largely that of home-making, <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;72">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_72" id="Page_72"></a>an occupation in which
+eminence, in the strict sense of the word, is impossible. (2) Even of
+the small number of women who embark upon a professional career, a
+majority marry and thereafter devote a fairly large proportion of their
+energy to bearing and rearing children. (3) Both the training given to
+girls and the general atmosphere in which they grow up are unfavorable
+to the inculcation of the professional point of view, and as a result
+women are not spurred on by deep-seated motives to constant and
+strenuous intellectual endeavor as men are. (4) It is also possible that
+the emotional traits of women are such as to favor the development of
+the sentiments at the expense of innate intellectual endowment.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Intelligence_of_the_different_social_classes" id="Intelligence_of_the_different_social_classes"></a>Intelligence of the different social classes.</h3>
+
+<p>Of the 1000&nbsp;children, 492
+were classified by their teachers according to social class into the
+following five groups: <em>very inferior</em>, <em>inferior</em>, <em>average</em>,
+<em>superior</em>, and <em>very superior</em>. A comparative study was then made of
+the distribution of I&nbsp;Q&#8217;s for these different groups.<a name="FNanchor_25_25" id="FNanchor_25_25"></a><a href="#Footnote_25_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a></p>
+
+<p>The data may be summarized as follows:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p>1. The median I&nbsp;Q for children of the superior social class is
+about 7&nbsp;points above, and that of the inferior social class
+about 7&nbsp;points below, the median I&nbsp;Q of the average social
+group. This means that by the age of 14 inferior class children
+are about one year below, and superior class children one year
+above, the median mental age for all classes taken together.</p>
+
+<p>2. That the children of the superior social classes make a
+better showing in the tests is probably due, for the most part,
+to a superiority in original endowment. This conclusion is
+supported by five supplementary lines of evidence: (<i>a</i>) the
+teachers&#8217; rankings of the children according to intelligence;
+(<i>b</i>) the age-grade progress of the children; (<i>c</i>) the quality
+of the school work; (<i>d</i>) the comparison of older and younger
+children as regards the influence <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;73">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_73" id="Page_73"></a>of social environment; and
+(<i>e</i>) the study of individual cases of bright and dull children
+in the same family.</p>
+
+<p>3. In order to facilitate comparison, it is advisable to express
+the intelligence of children of all social classes in terms of
+the same objective scale of intelligence. This scale should be
+based on the median for all classes taken together.</p>
+
+<p>4. As regards their responses to individual tests, our children
+of a given social class were not distinguishable from children
+of the same intelligence in any other social class.</p></blockquote>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="The_relation_of_the_I_Q_to_the_quality_of_the_childs_school_work" id="The_relation_of_the_I_Q_to_the_quality_of_the_childs_school_work"></a>The relation of the I&nbsp;Q to the quality of the child&#8217;s school work.</h3>
+
+<p>The
+school work of 504&nbsp;children was graded by the teachers on a scale of
+five grades: <em>very inferior</em>, <em>inferior</em>, <em>average</em>, <em>superior</em>, and
+<em>very superior</em>. When this grouping was compared with that made on the
+basis of I&nbsp;Q, fairly close agreement was found. However, in about one
+case out of ten there was rather serious disagreement; a child, for
+example, would be rated as doing <em>average</em> school work when his I&nbsp;Q
+would place him in the <em>very inferior</em> intelligence group.</p>
+
+<p>When the data were searched for explanations of such disagreements it
+was found that most of them were plainly due to the failure of teachers
+to take into account the age of the child when grading the quality of
+his school work.<a name="FNanchor_26_26" id="FNanchor_26_26"></a><a href="#Footnote_26_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a> When allowance was made for this tendency there
+were no disagreements which justified any serious suspicion as to the
+accuracy of the intelligence scale. Minor disagreements may, of course,
+be disregarded, since the quality of school work depends in part on
+other factors than intelligence, such as industry, health, regularity of
+attendance, quality of instruction, etc.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="The_relation_between_I_Q_and_grade_progress" id="The_relation_between_I_Q_and_grade_progress"></a>The relation between I&nbsp;Q and grade progress.</h3>
+
+<p>This comparison, which was
+made for the entire 1000&nbsp;children, showed a fairly high correlation, but
+also some astonishing disagreements. Nine-year intelligence was found
+all the <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;74">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_74" id="Page_74"></a>way from grade&nbsp;1 to grade&nbsp;7, inclusive; 10-year intelligence all
+the way from grade&nbsp;2 to grade&nbsp;7; and 12-year intelligence all the way
+from grade&nbsp;3 to grade&nbsp;8. Plainly the school&#8217;s efforts at grading fail to
+give homogeneous groups of children as regards mental ability. On the
+whole, the grade location of the children did not fit their mental ages
+much better than it did their chronological ages.</p>
+
+<p>When the data were examined, it was found that practically every child
+whose grade failed to correspond fairly closely with his mental age was
+either exceptionally bright or exceptionally dull. Those who tested
+between 96&nbsp;and&nbsp;105&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q were never seriously misplaced in school. The
+very dull children, however, were usually located from one to three
+grades above where they belonged by mental age, and the duller the
+child the more serious, as a rule, was the misplacement. On the other
+hand, the very bright children were nearly always located from one to
+three grades below where they belonged by mental age, and the brighter
+the child the more serious the school&#8217;s mistake. The child of 10-year
+mental age in the second grade, for example, is almost certain to be
+about 7&nbsp;or&nbsp;8&nbsp;years old; the child of 10-year intelligence in the sixth
+grade is almost certain to be 13&nbsp;to&nbsp;15&nbsp;years of age.</p>
+
+<p>All this is due to one fact, and one alone: <em>the school tends to promote
+children by age rather than ability</em>. The bright children are held back,
+while the dull children are promoted beyond their mental ability. The
+retardation problem is exactly the reverse of what we have thought it to
+be. It is the bright children who are retarded, and the dull children
+who are accelerated.</p>
+
+<p>The remedy is to be sought in differentiated courses (special classes)
+for both kinds of mentally exceptional children. Just as many special
+classes are needed for superior children as for the inferior. The social
+consequences <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;75">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_75" id="Page_75"></a>of suitable educational advantages for children of superior
+ability would no doubt greatly exceed anything that could possibly
+result from the special instruction of dullards and border-line
+cases.<a name="FNanchor_27_27" id="FNanchor_27_27"></a><a href="#Footnote_27_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a></p>
+
+<p>Special study of the I&nbsp;Q&#8217;s between 70&nbsp;and&nbsp;79 revealed the fact that a
+child of this grade of intelligence <em>never</em> does satisfactory work in
+the grade where he belongs by chronological age. By the time he has
+attended school four or five years, such a child is usually found doing
+&ldquo;very inferior&rdquo; to &ldquo;average&rdquo; work in a grade from two to four years
+below his age.</p>
+
+<p>On the other hand, the child with an I&nbsp;Q of 120 or above is almost never
+found below the grade for his chronological age, and occasionally he is
+one or two grades above. Wherever located, his work is always &ldquo;superior&rdquo;
+or &ldquo;very superior,&rdquo; and the evidence suggests strongly that it would
+probably remain so even if extra promotions were granted.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Correlation_between_I_Q_and_the_teachers_estimates_of_the_childrens_intelligence" id="Correlation_between_I_Q_and_the_teachers_estimates_of_the_childrens_intelligence"></a>Correlation between I&nbsp;Q and the teachers&#8217; estimates of the children&#8217;s
+intelligence.</h3>
+
+<p>By the Pearson formula the correlation found between the
+I&nbsp;Q&#8217;s and the teachers&#8217; rankings on a scale of five was .48. This is
+about what others have found, and is both high enough and low enough to
+be significant. That it is moderately high in so far corroborates the
+tests. That it is not higher means that either the teachers or the tests
+have made a good many mistakes.</p>
+
+<p>When the data were searched for evidence on this point, it was found, as
+we have shown in <a href="#CHAPTER_II">Chapter&nbsp;II</a>, that the fault was plainly on the part of
+the teachers. The serious mistakes were nearly all made with children
+who were either over age or under age for their grade, mostly the
+former. <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;76">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_76" id="Page_76"></a>In estimating children&#8217;s intelligence, just as in grading their
+school success, the teachers often failed to take account of the age
+factor. For example, the child whose mental age was, say, two years
+below normal, and who was enrolled in a class with children about two
+years younger than himself, was often graded &ldquo;average&rdquo; in intelligence.</p>
+
+<p>The tendency of teachers is to estimate a child&#8217;s intelligence according
+to the quality of his school work <em>in the grade where he happens to be
+located</em>. This results in overestimating the intelligence of older,
+retarded children, and underestimating the intelligence of the younger,
+advanced children. The disagreements between the tests and the teachers&#8217;
+estimates are thus found, when analyzed, to confirm the validity of the
+test method rather than to bring it under suspicion.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="The_validity_of_the_individual_tests" id="The_validity_of_the_individual_tests"></a>The validity of the individual tests.</h3>
+
+<p>The validity of each test was
+checked up by measuring it against the scale as a whole in the manner
+described on p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_55">55</a>. For example, if 10-year-old children having 11-year
+intelligence succeed with a given test decidedly better than 10-year-old
+children who have 9-year intelligence, then either this test must be
+accepted as valid or the scale as a whole must be rejected. Since we
+know, however, that the scale as a whole has at least a reasonably high
+degree of reliability, this method becomes a sure and ready means of
+judging the worth of a test.</p>
+
+<p>When the tests were tried out in this way it was found that some of
+those which have been most criticized have in reality a high correlation
+with intelligence. Among these are naming the days of the week, giving
+the value of stamps, counting thirteen pennies, giving differences
+between president and king, finding rhymes, giving age, distinguishing
+right and left, and interpretation of pictures. Others having a high
+reliability are the vocabulary tests, arithmetical <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;77">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_77" id="Page_77"></a>reasoning, giving
+differences, copying a diamond, giving date, repeating digits in reverse
+order, interpretation of fables, the dissected sentence test, naming
+sixty words, finding omissions in pictures, and recognizing absurdities.</p>
+
+<p>Among the somewhat less satisfactory tests are the following: repeating
+digits (direct order), naming coins, distinguishing forenoon and
+afternoon, defining in terms of use, drawing designs from memory, and
+&aelig;sthetic comparison. Binet&#8217;s &ldquo;line suggestion&rdquo; test correlated so little
+with intelligence that it had to be thrown out. The same was also true
+of two of the new tests which we had added to the series for try-out.</p>
+
+<p>Tests showing a medium correlation with the scale as a whole include
+arranging weights, executing three commissions, naming colors, giving
+number of fingers, describing pictures, naming the months, making
+change, giving superior definitions, finding similarities, reading for
+memories, reversing hands of clock, defining abstract words, problems of
+fact, bow-knot, induction test, and comprehension questions.</p>
+
+<p>A test which makes a good showing on this criterion of agreement with
+the scale as a whole becomes immune to theoretical criticisms. Whatever
+it appears to be from mere inspection, it is a real measure of
+intelligence. Henceforth it stands or falls with the scale as a whole.</p>
+
+<p>The reader will understand, of course, that no single test used alone
+will determine accurately the general level of intelligence. A great
+many tests are required; and for two reasons: (1) because intelligence
+has many aspects; and (2) in order to overcome the accidental influences
+of training or environment. If many tests are used no one of them need
+show more than a moderately high correlation with the scale as a whole.
+As stated by Binet, &ldquo;Let the tests be rough, if there are only enough of
+them.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_19_19" id="Footnote_19_19"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_19_19">[19]</a></span> See p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_52">52</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i> for method used to avoid accidental
+selection of subjects for the Stanford investigation.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_20_20" id="Footnote_20_20"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_20_20">[20]</a></span> See <a href="#CHAPTER_VI">Chapter&nbsp;VI</a> for discussion of the significance of
+various I&nbsp;Q&#8217;s.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_21_21" id="Footnote_21_21"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_21_21">[21]</a></span> See p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_12">12</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_22_22" id="Footnote_22_22"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_22_22">[22]</a></span> For discussion of the supposed advantages of the
+&ldquo;point-scale method,&rdquo; see Yerkes and Bridges: <i>A New Point Scale for
+Measuring Mental Ability</i>. (Warwick and York, 1915.)</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_23_23" id="Footnote_23_23"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_23_23">[23]</a></span> It will be remembered that this series of tests did not
+follow up and test those who had been promoted to high school.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_24_24" id="Footnote_24_24"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_24_24">[24]</a></span> For an extensive summary of other data on the variability
+of the sexes see the article by Leta S. Hollingworth, in <i>The American
+Journal of Sociology</i> (January, 1914), pp.&nbsp;510&ndash;30. It is shown that the
+findings of others support the conclusions set forth above.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_25_25" id="Footnote_25_25"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_25_25">[25]</a></span> The results of this comparison have been set forth in
+detail in the monograph of source material and some of the conclusions
+have been set forth on p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_115">115</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i> of the present volume.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_26_26" id="Footnote_26_26"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_26_26">[26]</a></span> See p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_24">24</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_27_27" id="Footnote_27_27"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_27_27">[27]</a></span> See <a href="#CHAPTER_VI">Chapter&nbsp;VI</a> for further discussion of the school
+progress possible to children of various I&nbsp;Q&#8217;s.</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;78">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_78" id="Page_78"></a><a name="CHAPTER_VI" id="CHAPTER_VI"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;VI
+<br />
+<small>THE SIGNIFICANCE OF VARIOUS INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS</small></h2>
+
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Frequency_of_different_degrees_of_intelligence" id="Frequency_of_different_degrees_of_intelligence"></a>Frequency of different degrees of intelligence.</h3>
+
+<p>Before we can interpret
+the results of an examination it is necessary to know how frequently an
+I&nbsp;Q of the size found occurs among unselected children. Our tests of
+1000 unselected children enable us to answer this question with some
+degree of definiteness. A study of these 1000&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q&#8217;s shows the following
+significant facts:&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="center">
+<table class="tdr0 smaller" summary="Percentiles of the I&nbsp;Q distribution">
+<tr>
+  <td>The&nbsp;lowest</td>
+  <td>1%</td>
+  <td>&nbsp;go&nbsp;to&nbsp;</td>
+  <td>70</td>
+  <td>&nbsp;or&nbsp;below,&nbsp;the&nbsp;highest</td>
+  <td>1%</td>
+  <td>&nbsp;reach&nbsp;</td>
+  <td>130</td>
+  <td>&nbsp;or&nbsp;above</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="ditto">" "</td>
+  <td>2%</td>
+  <td class="ditto"> ""</td>
+  <td>73</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " "</td>
+  <td>2%</td>
+  <td class="ditto">"</td>
+  <td>128</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" "</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="ditto">" "</td>
+  <td>3%</td>
+  <td class="ditto"> ""</td>
+  <td>76</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " "</td>
+  <td>3%</td>
+  <td class="ditto">"</td>
+  <td>125</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" "</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="ditto">" "</td>
+  <td>5%</td>
+  <td class="ditto"> ""</td>
+  <td>78</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " "</td>
+  <td>5%</td>
+  <td class="ditto">"</td>
+  <td>122</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" "</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="ditto">" "</td>
+  <td>10%</td>
+  <td class="ditto"> ""</td>
+  <td>85</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " "</td>
+  <td>10%</td>
+  <td class="ditto">"</td>
+  <td>116</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" "</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="ditto">" "</td>
+  <td>15%</td>
+  <td class="ditto"> ""</td>
+  <td>88</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " "</td>
+  <td>15%</td>
+  <td class="ditto">"</td>
+  <td>113</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" "</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="ditto">" "</td>
+  <td>20%</td>
+  <td class="ditto"> ""</td>
+  <td>91</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " "</td>
+  <td>20%</td>
+  <td class="ditto">"</td>
+  <td>110</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" "</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="ditto">" "</td>
+  <td>25%</td>
+  <td class="ditto"> ""</td>
+  <td>92</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " "</td>
+  <td>25%</td>
+  <td class="ditto">"</td>
+  <td>108</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" "</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="ditto">" "</td>
+  <td>33&#8531;%</td>
+  <td class="ditto"> ""</td>
+  <td>95</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " "</td>
+  <td>33&#8531;%</td>
+  <td class="ditto">"</td>
+  <td>106</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" "</td>
+</tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<p>Or, to put some of the above facts in another form:&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="center">
+<table class="tdr0 smaller" summary="Proportion excelling given supernormal I&nbsp;Q scores">
+<tr>
+  <td>The&nbsp;child&nbsp;reaching&nbsp;</td>
+  <td>110</td>
+  <td>&nbsp;is&nbsp;equaled&nbsp;or&nbsp;excelled&nbsp;by&nbsp;</td>
+  <td>20</td>
+  <td>&nbsp;out&nbsp;of&nbsp;100</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td><span class="ditto">" ""</span> (about)&nbsp;</td>
+  <td>115</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " " "</td>
+  <td>10</td>
+  <td class="ditto">"""</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " "</td>
+  <td>125</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " " "</td>
+  <td>3</td>
+  <td class="ditto">"""</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " "</td>
+  <td>130</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " " "</td>
+  <td>1</td>
+  <td class="ditto">"""</td>
+</tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<p>Conversely, we may say regarding the subnormals that:&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="center">
+<table class="center smaller" summary="Proportion excelling given subnormal I&nbsp;Q scores">
+<tr>
+  <td>The child testing at (about)&nbsp;</td>
+  <td>90</td>
+  <td>&nbsp;is equaled or excelled by&nbsp;</td>
+  <td>80</td>
+  <td>&nbsp;out of 100</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " " "</td>
+  <td>85</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " " "</td>
+  <td>90</td>
+  <td class="ditto">"""</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " " "</td>
+  <td>75</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " " "</td>
+  <td>97</td>
+  <td class="ditto">"""</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " " "</td>
+  <td>70</td>
+  <td class="ditto">" " " " "</td>
+  <td>99</td>
+  <td class="ditto">"""</td>
+</tr>
+</table><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;79">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_79" id="Page_79"></a>
+</div>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Classification_of_intelligence_quotients" id="Classification_of_intelligence_quotients"></a>Classification of intelligence quotients.</h3>
+
+<p>What do the above I&nbsp;Q&#8217;s imply
+in such terms as feeble-mindedness, border-line intelligence, dullness,
+normality, superior intelligence genius, etc.? When we use these terms
+two facts must be borne in mind: (1) That the boundary lines between
+such groups are absolutely arbitrary, a matter of definition only; and
+(2) that the individuals comprising one of the groups do not make up a
+homogeneous type.</p>
+
+<p>Nevertheless, since terms like the above are convenient and will
+probably continue to be used, it is desirable to give them as much
+definiteness as possible. On the basis of the tests we have made,
+including many cases of all grades of intelligence, the following
+suggestions are offered for the classification of intelligence
+quotients:&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="center">
+<table class="smaller" style="width:80%;" summary="Names given to different grades of intelligence">
+<tr>
+  <th><i>I&nbsp;Q</i></th>
+  <th><i>Classification</i></th>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="tdr">Above&nbsp;140</td>
+  <td class="tdlh">&ldquo;Near&rdquo; genius or genius.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="tdr">120&ndash;140</td>
+  <td class="tdlh">Very superior intelligence.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="tdr">110&ndash;120</td>
+  <td class="tdlh">Superior intelligence.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="tdr">90&ndash;110</td>
+  <td class="tdlh">Normal, or average, intelligence.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="tdr">80&ndash;&nbsp; 90</td>
+  <td class="tdlh">Dullness, rarely classifiable as feeble-mindedness.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="tdr">70&ndash;&nbsp; 80</td>
+  <td class="tdlh">Border-line deficiency, sometimes classifiable as dullness,
+  often as feeble-mindedness.</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="tdr">Below&nbsp;70</td>
+  <td class="tdlh">Definite feeble-mindedness.</td>
+</tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<p>Of the feeble-minded, those between 50&nbsp;and&nbsp;70&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q include most of the
+morons (high, middle, and low), those between 20&nbsp;or&nbsp;25 and 50 are
+ordinarily to be classed as imbeciles, and those below 20&nbsp;or&nbsp;25 as
+idiots. According to this classification the adult idiot would range up
+to about 3-year intelligence as the limit, the adult imbecile would have
+a mental level between 3&nbsp;and&nbsp;7&nbsp;years, and the adult moron would range
+from about 7-year to 11-year intelligence.</p>
+
+<p>It should be added, however, that the classification of I&nbsp;Q&#8217;s for the
+various sub-grades of feeble-mindedness is not very secure, for the
+reason that the exact curves of mental growth have not been worked out
+for such grades. <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;80">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_80" id="Page_80"></a>As far as the public schools are concerned this does
+not greatly matter, as they never enroll idiots and very rarely even the
+high-grade imbecile. School defectives are practically all of the moron
+and border-line grades, and these it is important teachers should be
+able to recognize. The following discussions and illustrative cases will
+perhaps give a fairly definite idea of the significance of various
+grades of intelligence.<a name="FNanchor_28_28" id="FNanchor_28_28"></a><a href="#Footnote_28_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a></p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Feeble-mindedness" id="Feeble-mindedness"></a>Feeble-mindedness (rarely above 75&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q.)</h3>
+
+<p>There are innumerable grades of
+mental deficiency ranging from somewhat below average intelligence to
+profound idiocy. In the literal sense every individual below the average
+is more or less mentally weak or feeble. Only a relatively small
+proportion of these, however, are technically known as feeble-minded. It
+is therefore necessary to set forth the criterion as to what constitutes
+feeble-mindedness in the commonly accepted sense of that word.</p>
+
+<p>The definition in most general use is the one framed by the Royal
+College of Physicians and Surgeons of London, and adopted by the English
+Royal Commission on Mental Deficiency. It is substantially as follows:&mdash;</p>
+
+<p><em>A feeble-minded person is one who is incapable, because of mental
+defect existing from birth or from an early age, (a) of competing on
+equal terms with his normal fellows; or (b) of managing himself or his
+affairs with ordinary prudence.</em></p>
+
+<p>Two things are to be noted in regard to this definition: In the first
+place, it is stated in terms of social and industrial efficiency. Such
+efficiency, however, depends not merely on the degree of intelligence,
+but also on emotional, moral, physical, and social traits as well. This
+explains why some individuals with I&nbsp;Q somewhat below 75 can <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;81">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_81" id="Page_81"></a>hardly be
+classed as feeble-minded in the ordinary sense of the term, while others
+with I&nbsp;Q a little above 75 could hardly be classified in any other
+group.</p>
+
+<p>In the second place, the criterion set up by the definition is not very
+definite because of the vague meaning of the expression &ldquo;ordinary
+prudence.&rdquo; Even the expression &ldquo;competing on equal terms&rdquo; cannot be
+taken literally, else it would include also those who are merely dull.
+It is the second part of the definition that more nearly expresses the
+popular criterion, for as long as an individual manages his affairs in
+such a way as to be self-supporting, and in such a way as to avoid
+becoming a nuisance or burden to his fellowmen, he escapes the
+institutions for defectives and may pass for normal.</p>
+
+<p>The most serious defect of the definition comes from the lax
+interpretation of the term &ldquo;ordinary prudence,&rdquo; etc. The popular
+standard is so low that hundreds of thousands of high grade defectives
+escape identification as such. Moreover, there are many grades of
+severity in social and industrial competition. For example, most of the
+members of such families as the Jukes, the Nams, the Hill Folk, and the
+Kallikaks are able to pass as normal in their own crude environment, but
+when compelled to compete with average American stock their deficiency
+becomes evident. It is therefore necessary to supplement the social
+criterion with a more strictly psychological one.</p>
+
+<p>For this purpose there is nothing else as significant as the I&nbsp;Q. All
+who test below 70&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q by the Stanford revision of the Binet-Simon scale
+should be considered feeble-minded, and it is an open question whether
+it would not be justifiable to consider 75&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q as the lower limit of
+&ldquo;normal&rdquo; intelligence. Certainly a large proportion falling between
+70&nbsp;and&nbsp;75 can hardly be classed as other than feeble-minded, even
+according to the social criterion.</p>
+
+
+<h4>Examples of feeble-minded school children</h4>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;82">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_82" id="Page_82"></a><i>F.&nbsp;C. Boy, age&nbsp;8-6; mental age&nbsp;4-2; I&nbsp;Q approximately 50.</i> From
+a very superior home. Has had the best medical care and other
+attention. Attended a private kindergarten until rejected
+because he required so much of the teacher&#8217;s time and appeared
+uneducable. Will probably develop to about the 6- or 7-year
+mental level. High grade imbecile. Has since been committed to a
+state institution. Cases as low as F.&nbsp;C. very rarely get into
+the public schools.</p></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>R.&nbsp;W. Boy, age&nbsp;13-10; mental age&nbsp;7-6; I&nbsp;Q approximately 55.</i>
+Home excellent. Is pubescent. Because of age and maturity has
+been promoted to the third grade, though he can hardly do the
+work of the second. Has attended school more than six years.
+Will probably never develop much if any beyond 8&nbsp;years, and will
+never be self-supporting. Low-grade moron.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 350px;">
+<a name="fig04" id="fig04"></a>
+<img src="images/fig04.png" width="350" height="250" alt="Drawing shows two wavy blobs and then something like a pentagon." title="" />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.&nbsp;4.</span> DIAMOND DRAWN BY R.&nbsp;W., AGE&nbsp;13-10; MENTAL
+AGE&nbsp;7-6</p>
+</div></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>M.&nbsp;S. Girl, age&nbsp;7-6; mental age&nbsp;4-6; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;60.</i> Father a
+gardener, home conditions and medical attention fair. Has twice
+attempted first grade, but without learning to read more than a
+few words. In each case teacher requested parents to withdraw
+her. &ldquo;Takes&rdquo; things. Is considered &ldquo;foolish&rdquo; by the other
+children. Will probably never develop beyond a mental level of
+8&nbsp;years.</p></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>R.&nbsp;M. Boy, age&nbsp;15; mental age&nbsp;9; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;60.</i> Decidedly superior
+home environment and care. After attending school eight years <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;83">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_83" id="Page_83"></a>is
+in fifth grade, though he cannot do the work of the fourth
+grade. Parents unable to teach him to respect property. Boys
+torment him and make his life miserable. At middle-moron level
+and has probably about reached the limit of his development. Has
+since been committed to a state institution.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 500px;">
+<a name="fig05" id="fig05"></a>
+<img src="images/fig05.png" width="500" height="86" alt="Handwriting: The [Unclear: pretty?] little boy." title="" />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.&nbsp;5.</span> WRITING FROM DICTATION. R.&nbsp;M., AGE&nbsp;15;
+MENTAL AGE&nbsp;9</p>
+</div></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>S.&nbsp;M. Girl, age&nbsp;19-2; mental age&nbsp;10; I&nbsp;Q approximately&nbsp;65 (not
+counting age beyond 16).</i> From very superior family. Has
+attended public and private schools twelve years and has been
+promoted to seventh grade, where she cannot do the work. Appears
+docile and childlike, but is subject to spells of disobedience
+and stubbornness. Did not walk until 4&nbsp;years old. Plays with
+young children. Susceptible to attention from men and has to be
+constantly guarded. Writing excellent, knows the number
+combinations, but missed all the absurdities and has the
+vocabulary of an average 10-year-old. The type from which
+prostitutes often come.</p></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>R.&nbsp;H. Boy, age&nbsp;14; mental age&nbsp;8-4; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;65.</i> Father Irish,
+mother Spanish. Family comfortable and home care average. Has
+attended school eight years and is unable to do fourth-grade
+work satisfactorily. Health excellent and attendance regular.
+Reads in fourth reader without expression and with little
+comprehension of what is read. Fair skill in number
+combinations. Writing and drawing very poor. Cannot use a ruler.
+Has no conception of an inch.</p>
+
+<p>R.&nbsp;H. is described as high-tempered, irritable, lacking in
+physical activity, clumsy, and unsteady. Plays little. Just
+&ldquo;stands around.&rdquo; Indifferent to praise or blame, has little
+sense of duty, plays underhand tricks. Is slow, absent-minded,
+easily confused, in thought, never shows appreciation or
+interest. So apathetic that he does not hear commands. Voice
+droning. Speech poor in colloquial expressions.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;84">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_84" id="Page_84"></a>Three years later, at age of 17, was in a special class
+attempting sixth-grade work. Reported as doing &ldquo;absolutely
+nothing&rdquo; in that grade. Still sullen, indifferent, and slow in
+grasping directions, and lacking in play interests. &ldquo;No
+apperception of anything, but has mastered such mechanical
+things as reading (calling the words) and the fundamentals in
+arithmetic.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>In school work, moral traits, and out-of-school behavior R.&nbsp;H.
+shows himself to be a typical case of moron deficiency.</p></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>I.&nbsp;M. Girl, age&nbsp;14-2; mental age&nbsp;9; I&nbsp;Q approximately 65.</i>
+Father a laborer. Does unsatisfactory work in fourth grade.
+Plays with little girls. A menace to the morals of the school
+because of her sex interests and lack of self-restraint. Rather
+good-looking if one does not hunt for appearances of
+intelligence. Mental reactions intolerably slow. Will develop
+but little further and will always pass as feeble-minded in any
+but the very lowest social environment.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 200px;">
+<a name="fig06" id="fig06"></a>
+<img src="images/fig06.png" width="200" height="201" alt="Circle has only 3 lines, from the gate to about 2/3 of the way up the field." title="" />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.&nbsp;6.</span> BALL AND FIELD TEST. I.&nbsp;M., AGE&nbsp;14-2;
+MENTAL AGE&nbsp;9</p>
+</div></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>G.&nbsp;V. Boy, age&nbsp;10; mental age&nbsp;6-4; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;65.</i> Father Spanish,
+mother English. Family poor but fairly respectable. Brothers and
+sisters all retarded. In high first grade. Work all very poor
+except writing, drawing, and hand work, in all of which he
+excels. Is quiet and inactive, lacks self-confidence, and plays
+little. Mentally slow, inert, &ldquo;thick,&rdquo; and inattentive. Health
+fair.</p>
+
+<p>Three years later G.&nbsp;V. was in the low third grade and still
+doing extremely poor work in everything except manual training,
+drawing, and writing. Is not likely ever to go beyond the fourth
+or fifth grade however long he remains in school.</p></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>V.&nbsp;J. Girl, age&nbsp;11-6; mental age&nbsp;8; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;70.</i> Has been tested
+three times in the last five years, always with approximately
+the same result in terms of I&nbsp;Q. Home fair to inferior. Has been
+in a special class two years and in school altogether nearly six
+years. Is barely able to do third-grade work. Her
+feeble-mindedness is <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;85">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_85" id="Page_85"></a>recognized by teachers and by other pupils.
+Belongs at about middle-moron to high-moron level.</p></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>A.&nbsp;W. Boy, age&nbsp;9-4; mental age&nbsp;7; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;75.</i> A year and a half
+ago he tested at 6-2. From superior family, brothers of very
+superior intelligence. In school three years and has made about
+a grade and a half. Has higher I&nbsp;Q than V.&nbsp;J. described above,
+but his deficiency is fully as evident. Is generally recognized
+as mentally defective. Slyly abstracted one of the pennies used
+in the test and slipped it into his pocket. Has caused much
+trouble at school by puncturing bicycle tires. High-grade moron.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 300px;">
+<a name="fig07" id="fig07"></a>
+<img src="images/fig07.png" width="300" height="154" alt="Two shapes drawn, both like a triangle with one wavy side." title="" />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.&nbsp;7.</span> DIAMOND DRAWN BY A.&nbsp;W.</p>
+</div></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>A.&nbsp;C. Boy, age&nbsp;12; mental age&nbsp;8-5; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;70.</i> From Portuguese
+family of ten children. Has a feeble-minded brother. Parents in
+comfortable circumstances and respectable. A.&nbsp;C. has attended
+school regularly since he was 6&nbsp;years old. Trying unsuccessfully
+to do the work of the fourth grade. Reads poorly in the third
+reader. Hesitates, repeats, miscalls words, and never gets the
+thought. Writes about like a first-grade pupil. Cannot solve
+such simple problems as &ldquo;How many marbles can you buy for ten
+cents if one marble costs five cents?&rdquo; even when he has marbles
+and money in his hands. Described by teacher as &ldquo;mentally slow
+and inert, inattentive, easily distracted, memory poor, ideas
+vague and often absurd, does not appreciate stories, slow at
+comprehending commands.&rdquo; Is also described as &ldquo;unruly,
+boisterous, disobedient, stubborn, and lacking sense of
+propriety. Tattles.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Three years later, at age of 15, was in a special class and was
+little if any improved. He had, however, learned the mechanics
+of reading and had mastered the number combinations.
+Deficiencies described as &ldquo;of wide range.&rdquo; Conduct, however, had
+improved. Was &ldquo;working hard to get on.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>A.&nbsp;C. must be considered definitely feeble-minded.</p></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>H.&nbsp;S. Boy, age&nbsp;11; mental age&nbsp;8-3; I&nbsp;Q approximately 75.</i> At
+8&nbsp;years tested at 6. Parents highly educated, father a scholar.
+<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;86">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_86" id="Page_86"></a>Brother and sister of very superior intelligence. Started to
+school at 7, but was withdrawn because of lack of progress.
+Started again at 8 and is now doing poor work in the second
+grade. Weakly and nervous. Painfully aware of his inability to
+learn. During the test keeps saying, &ldquo;I tried anyway,&rdquo; &ldquo;It&#8217;s all
+I can do if I try my best, ain&#8217;t it?&rdquo; etc. Regarded defective by
+other children. Will probably never be able to do work beyond
+the fourth or fifth grade and is not likely to develop above the
+11-year level, if as high.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 350px;">
+<a name="fig08" id="fig08"></a>
+<img src="images/fig08.png" width="350" height="99" alt="Drawing resembles a square with two wavy lines coming from one corner, alongside another odd shape with a rough rectangle inside it." title="" />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.&nbsp;8.</span> DRAWING DESIGNS FROM MEMORY. H.&nbsp;S.,
+AGE&nbsp;11; MENTAL AGE&nbsp;8-3</p>
+</div></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>I.&nbsp;S. Boy, age&nbsp;9-6; mental age&nbsp;7; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;75.</i> German parentage.
+Started to school at 6. Now in low second grade and unable to do
+the work. Health good. Inattentive, mentally slow and inert,
+easily distracted, speech is monotone. Equally poor in reading,
+writing, and numbers. I.&nbsp;S. is described as quiet, sullen,
+indifferent, lazy, and stubborn. Plays little.</p>
+
+<p>Three years later had advanced from low second to low fourth
+grade, but was as poor as ever in his school work. &ldquo;Miscalls the
+simplest words.&rdquo; Moral traits unsatisfactory. May reach sixth or
+seventh grade if he remains in school long enough.</p>
+
+<p>I.&nbsp;S. learned to walk at 2&nbsp;years and to talk at 3.</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>The above are cases of such marked deficiency that there could be no
+disagreement among competent judges in classifying them in the group of
+&ldquo;feeble-minded.&rdquo; All are definitely institutional cases. It is a matter
+of record, however, that one of the cases, H.&nbsp;S., was diagnosed by a
+physician (without test) as &ldquo;backward but not a defective.&rdquo; and with the
+added encouragement that &ldquo;the backwardness <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;87">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_87" id="Page_87"></a>will be outgrown.&rdquo; Of course
+the reverse is the case; the deficiency is becoming more and more
+apparent as the boy approaches the age where more is expected of him.</p>
+
+<p>In at least three of the above cases (S.&nbsp;M., I.&nbsp;S., and I.&nbsp;M.) the
+teachers had not identified the backwardness as feeble-mindedness. Not
+far from 2&nbsp;children out of 100, or 2 out of 1000, in the average public
+school are as defective as some of those just described. Teachers get so
+accustomed to seeing a few of them in every group of 200&nbsp;or&nbsp;300 pupils
+that they are likely to regard them as merely dull,&mdash;&ldquo;dreadfully dull,&rdquo;
+of course,&mdash;but not defective.</p>
+
+<p>Children like these, for their own good and that of other pupils, should
+be kept out of the regular classes. They will rarely be equal to the
+work of the fifth grade, however long they attend school. They will
+make a little progress in a well-managed special class, but with the
+approach of adolescence, at latest, the State should take them into
+custodial care for its own protection.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Border-line_cases" id="Border-line_cases"></a>Border-line cases (usually between 70&nbsp;and&nbsp;80&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q).</h3>
+
+<p>The border-line cases
+are those which fall near the boundary generally recognized as such and
+the higher group usually classed as normal but dull. They are the
+doubtful cases, the ones we are always trying (rarely with success) to
+restore to normality.</p>
+
+<p>It must be emphasized, however, that this doubtful group is not marked
+off by definite I&nbsp;Q limits. Some children with I&nbsp;Q as high as 75 or even
+80 will have to be classified as feeble-minded; some as low as 70&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q
+may be so well endowed in other mental traits that they may manage as
+adults to get along fairly well in a simple environment. The ability to
+compete with one&#8217;s fellows in the social and industrial world does not
+depend upon <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;88">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_88" id="Page_88"></a>intelligence alone. Such factors as moral traits, industry,
+environment to be encountered, personal appearance, and influential
+relatives are also involved. Two children classified above as
+feeble-minded had an I&nbsp;Q as high as 75. In these cases the emotional,
+moral, or physical qualities were so defective as to render a normal
+social life out of the question. This is occasionally true even with an
+I&nbsp;Q as high as 80. Some of the border-line cases, with even less
+intelligence, may be so well endowed in other mental traits that they
+are capable of becoming dependable unskilled laborers, and of supporting
+a family after a fashion.</p>
+
+
+<h4><a name="Examples_of_border-line_deficiency" id="Examples_of_border-line_deficiency"></a>Examples of border-line deficiency</h4>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>S.&nbsp;F. Girl, age&nbsp;17; mental age&nbsp;11-6; I&nbsp;Q approximately 72
+(disregarding age above 16&nbsp;years).</i> Father intelligent; mother
+probably high-grade defective. Lives in a good home with aunt,
+who is a woman of good sense and skillful in her management of
+the girl. S.&nbsp;F. has attended excellent schools for eleven years
+and has recently been promoted to the seventh grade. The teacher
+admits, however, that she cannot do the work of that grade, but
+says, &ldquo;I haven&#8217;t the heart to let her fail in the sixth grade
+for the third time.&rdquo; She studies very hard and says she wants to
+become a teacher! At the time the test was made she was actually
+studying her books from two to three hours daily at home. The
+aunt, who is very intelligent, had never thought of this girl as
+feeble-minded, and had suffered much concern and humiliation
+because of her inability to teach her to conduct herself
+properly toward men and not to appropriate other people&#8217;s
+property.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 200px;">
+<a name="fig09" id="fig09"></a>
+<img src="images/fig09.png" width="200" height="226" alt="Circle has one line entering at the gate and forming a scribble in the middle." title="" />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.&nbsp;9.</span> BALL AND FIELD TEST S.&nbsp;F., AGE&nbsp;17; MENTAL
+AGE&nbsp;11-6</p>
+</div>
+
+<p>S.&nbsp;F. is ordinarily docile, but is subject to fits of anger and
+obstinacy. She finally determined to leave her home, threatening
+to take up with a man unless allowed to work elsewhere. Since
+then she has been tried out in several families, but after a
+little while in <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;89">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_89" id="Page_89"></a>a place she flies into a rage and leaves. She is
+a fairly capable houseworker when she tries.</p>
+
+<p>This young woman is feeble-minded and should be classed as such.
+She is listed here with the border-line cases simply for the
+reason that she belongs to a group whose mental deficiency is
+almost never recognized without the aid of a psychological test.
+Probably no physician could be found who would diagnose the
+case, on the basis of a medical examination alone, as one of
+feeble-mindedness.</p></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>F.&nbsp;H. Boy, age&nbsp;16-6; mental age&nbsp;11-5; I&nbsp;Q approximately 72
+(disregarding age above 16&nbsp;years).</i> Tested for three successive
+years without change of more than four points in I&nbsp;Q. Father a
+laborer, dull, subject to fits of rage, and beats the boy.
+Mother not far from border-line. F.&nbsp;H. has always had the best
+of school advantages and has been promoted to the seventh grade.
+Is really about equal to fifth-grade work. Fairly rapid and
+accurate in number combinations, but cannot solve arithmetical
+problems which require any reasoning. Reads with reasonable
+fluency, but with little understanding. Appears exceedingly
+good-natured, but was once suspended from school for hurling
+bricks at a fellow pupil. Played a &ldquo;joke&rdquo; on another pupil by
+fastening a dangerous, sharp-pointed, steel paper-file in the
+pupil&#8217;s seat for him to sit down on. He is cruel, stubborn, and
+plays truant, but is fairly industrious when he gets a job as
+errand or delivery boy. Discharged once for taking money.</p>
+
+<p>F.&nbsp;H. is generally called &ldquo;queer,&rdquo; but is not ordinarily thought
+of as feeble-minded. His deficiency is real, however, and it is
+altogether doubtful whether he will be able to make a living and
+to keep out of trouble, though he is now (at age&nbsp;20) employed as
+messenger boy for the Western Union at $30&nbsp;per month. This is
+considerably less than pick-and-shovel men get in the community
+where he lives. Delinquents and criminals often belong to this
+level of intelligence.</p></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>W.&nbsp;C. Boy, age&nbsp;16-8; mental age&nbsp;12; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;75 (disregarding age
+above 16&nbsp;years).</i> Father a college professor. All the other
+children in the family of unusually superior intelligence. When
+tested (four years ago) was trying to do seventh-grade work, but
+with little success. Wanted to leave school and learn farming,
+but father insisted on his getting the usual grammar-school and
+high-school <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;90">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_90" id="Page_90"></a>education. Made $25 one summer by raising vegetables
+on a vacant lot. In the four years since the test was made he
+has managed to get into high school. Teachers say that in spite
+of his best efforts he learns next to nothing, and they regard
+him as hopelessly dull. Is docile, lacks all aggressiveness,
+looks stupid, and has head circumference an inch below normal.</p>
+
+<p>Here is a most pitiful case of the overstimulated backward child
+in a superior family. Instead of nagging at the boy and urging
+him on to attempt things which are impossible to his inferior
+intelligence, his parents should take him out of school and put
+him at some kind of work which he could do. If the boy had been
+the son of a common laborer he would probably have left school
+early and have become a dependable and contented laborer. In a
+very simple environment he would probably not be considered
+defective.</p></blockquote>
+
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>C.&nbsp;P. Boy, age&nbsp;10-2; mental age&nbsp;7-11; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;78.</i> Portuguese boy,
+son of a skilled laborer. One of eleven children, most of whom
+have about this same grade of intelligence. Has attended school
+regularly for four years. Is in the third grade, but cannot do
+the work. Except for extreme stubbornness his social development
+is fairly normal. Capable in plays and games, but is regarded as
+impossible in his school work. Like his brother, M.&nbsp;P., the next
+case to be described, he will doubtless become a fairly reliable
+laborer at unskilled work and will not be regarded, in his
+rather simple environment, as a defective. From the
+psychological point of view, however, his deficiency is real. He
+will probably never develop beyond the 11- or 12-year level or
+be able to do satisfactory school work beyond the fifth or sixth
+grade.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 500px;">
+<a name="fig10" id="fig10"></a>
+<img src="images/fig10.png" width="500" height="83" alt="Handwriting (legible though not straight): see the little dolly." title="" />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.&nbsp;10.</span> WRITING FROM DICTATION. C.&nbsp;P., AGE&nbsp;10-2;
+MENTAL AGE&nbsp;7-11</p>
+</div></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>M.&nbsp;P. Boy, age&nbsp;14; mental age&nbsp;10-8; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;77.</i> Has been tested
+four successive years, I&nbsp;Q being always between 75&nbsp;and&nbsp;80.
+Brother to C.&nbsp;P. above. In school nearly eight years and has
+been promoted to the fifth grade. At 16 was doing poor work in
+the sixth grade. Good school advantages, as the father has tried
+conscientiously to <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;91">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_91" id="Page_91"></a>give his children &ldquo;a good education.&rdquo;
+Perfectly normal in appearance and in play activities and is
+liked by other children. Seems to be thoroughly dependable both
+in school and in his outside work. Will probably become an
+excellent laborer and will pass as perfectly normal,
+notwithstanding a grade of intelligence which will not develop
+above 11&nbsp;or&nbsp;12&nbsp;years.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 200px;">
+<a name="fig11" id="fig11"></a>
+<img src="images/fig11.png" width="200" height="221" alt="Circle has six lines entering at the gate and spreading out." title="" />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.&nbsp;11.</span> BALL AND FIELD TEST. M.&nbsp;P., AGE&nbsp;14;
+MENTAL AGE&nbsp;10-8</p>
+</div></blockquote>
+
+<p>What shall we say of cases like the last two which test at high-grade
+moronity or at border-line, but are well enough endowed in moral and
+personal traits to pass as normal in an uncomplicated social
+environment? According to the classical definition of feeble-mindedness
+such individuals cannot be considered defectives. Hardly any one would
+think of them as institutional cases. Among laboring men and servant
+girls there are thousands like them. They are the world&#8217;s &ldquo;hewers of
+wood and drawers of water.&rdquo; And yet, as far as intelligence is
+concerned, the tests have told the truth. These boys are uneducable
+beyond the merest rudiments of training. No amount of school instruction
+will ever make them intelligent voters or capable citizens in the true
+sense of the word. Judged psychologically they cannot be considered
+normal.</p>
+
+<p>It is interesting to note that M.&nbsp;P. and C.&nbsp;P. represent the level of
+intelligence which is very, very common among Spanish-Indian and Mexican
+families of the Southwest and also among negroes. Their dullness seems
+to be racial, or at least inherent in the family stocks from which they
+come. The fact that one meets this type with such extraordinary
+frequency among Indians, Mexicans, and negroes <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;92">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_92" id="Page_92"></a>suggests quite forcibly
+that the whole question of racial differences in mental traits will have
+to be taken up anew and by experimental methods. The writer predicts
+that when this is done there will be discovered enormously significant
+racial differences in general intelligence, differences which cannot be
+wiped out by any scheme of mental culture.</p>
+
+<p>Children of this group should be segregated in special classes and be
+given instruction which is concrete and practical. They cannot master
+abstractions, but they can often be made efficient workers, able to look
+out for themselves. There is no possibility at present of convincing
+society that they should not be allowed to reproduce, although from a
+eugenic point of view they constitute a grave problem because of their
+unusually prolific breeding.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Dull_normals" id="Dull_normals"></a>Dull normals (I&nbsp;Q usually 80&nbsp;to&nbsp;90).</h3>
+
+<p>In this group are included those
+children who would not, according to any of the commonly accepted social
+standards, be considered feeble-minded, but who are nevertheless far
+enough below the actual average of intelligence among races of western
+European descent that they cannot make ordinary school progress or
+master other intellectual difficulties which average children are equal
+to. A few of this class test as low as 75&nbsp;to&nbsp;80&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q, but the majority
+are not far from 85. The unmistakably normal children who go much below
+this (in California, at least) are usually Mexicans, Indians, or
+negroes.</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>R.&nbsp;G. Negro boy, age&nbsp;13-5; mental age&nbsp;10-6; I&nbsp;Q approximately
+80.</i> Normal in appearance and conduct, but very dull. Is
+attempting fifth-grade work in a special class, but is failing.
+From a fairly good home and has had ordinary school advantages.
+In the examination his intelligence is very even as far as it
+goes, but stops rather abruptly after the 10-year tests. Will
+unquestionably pass as normal among unskilled laborers, but his
+intelligence will never <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;93">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_93" id="Page_93"></a>exceed the 12-year level and he is not
+likely to advance beyond the seventh grade, if as far.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 200px;">
+<a name="fig12" id="fig12"></a>
+<img src="images/fig12.png" width="200" height="208" alt="Circle has one line entering at the gate and going to the centre, from which several more lines to the edge emanate." title="" />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.&nbsp;12.</span> BALL AND FIELD. R.&nbsp;G., AGE&nbsp;13-5, MENTAL
+AGE&nbsp;10-6</p>
+</div></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>F.&nbsp;D. Boy, tested at age&nbsp;10-2; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;83, and again at 14-1;
+I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;79.</i> Mental age in the first test was 8-6 and in the second
+test 11. Son of a barber. Father dead; mother capable; makes a
+good home, and cares for her children well. At 10 was doing
+unsatisfactory work in the fourth grade, and at 12
+unsatisfactory work in low sixth. Good-looking, normal in
+appearance and social development, and though occasionally
+obstinate is usually steady. Any one unacquainted with his poor
+school work and low I&nbsp;Q would consider him perfectly normal. No
+physical or moral handicaps of any kind that could possibly
+account for his retardation. Is simply dull. Needs purely a
+vocational training, but may be able to complete the eighth
+grade with low marks by the age of 16&nbsp;or&nbsp;17.</p></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>G.&nbsp;G. Girl, age&nbsp;12-4; mental age&nbsp;10-10; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;82.</i> From average
+home. Excellent educational advantages and no physical
+handicaps. At 12&nbsp;years was doing very poor work in fifth grade.
+Appearance, play life, and attitude toward other children
+normal. Simply dull. Will probably never go beyond the 12- or
+13-year level and is not likely to get as far as the high
+school.</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>Those testing 80&nbsp;and&nbsp;90 will usually be able to reach the eighth grade,
+but ordinarily only after from one to three or four failures. They are
+so very numerous (about 15&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the school enrollment) that it is
+doubtful whether we can expect soon to have special classes enough to
+accommodate all. The most feasible solution is a differentiated course
+of study with parallel classes in which every child will be allowed to
+make the best progress of which he is capable, without incurring the
+risk of failure and <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;94">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_94" id="Page_94"></a>non-promotion. The so-called Mannheim system, or
+something similar to it, is what we need.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Average_intelligence" id="Average_intelligence"></a>Average intelligence (I&nbsp;Q 90&nbsp;to&nbsp;110).</h3>
+
+<p>It is often said that the schools
+are made for the average child, but that &ldquo;the average child does not
+exist.&rdquo; He does exist, and in very large numbers. About 60&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of
+all school children test between 90&nbsp;and&nbsp;110&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q, and about 40&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent
+between 95&nbsp;and&nbsp;105. That these children are average is attested by their
+school records as well as by their I&nbsp;Q&#8217;s. Our records show that, of more
+than 200&nbsp;children below 14&nbsp;years of age and with I&nbsp;Q between 95&nbsp;and&nbsp;105,
+not one was making much more nor much less than average school progress.
+Four were two years retarded, but in each case this was due to late
+start, illness, or irregular attendance. Children who test close to 90,
+however, often fail to get along satisfactorily, while those testing
+near 110 are occasionally able to win an extra promotion.</p>
+
+<p>The children of this average group are seldom school problems, as far as
+ability to learn is concerned. Nor are they as likely to cause trouble
+in discipline as the dull and border-line cases. It is therefore hardly
+necessary to give illustrative cases here.</p>
+
+<p>The high school, however, does not fit their grade of intelligence as
+well as the elementary and grammar schools. High schools probably enroll
+a disproportionate number of pupils in the I&nbsp;Q range above 100. That is,
+the average intelligence among high-school pupils is above the average
+for the population in general. It is probably not far from 110. College
+students are, of course, a still more selected group, perhaps coming
+chiefly from the range above 115. The child whose school marks are
+barely average in the elementary grades, when measured against children
+in general, will ordinarily earn something less than average marks in
+high school, and perhaps excessively poor marks in college.<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;95">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_95" id="Page_95"></a></p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Superior_intelligence" id="Superior_intelligence"></a>Superior intelligence (I&nbsp;Q 110&nbsp;to&nbsp;120).</h3>
+
+<p>Children of this group
+ordinarily make higher marks and are capable of making somewhat more
+rapid progress than the strictly average child. Perhaps most of them
+could complete the eight grades in seven years as easily as the average
+child does in eight years. They are not usually the best scholars, but
+on a scale of excellent, good, fair, poor, and failure they will usually
+rank as good, though of course the degree of application is a factor. It
+is rare, however, to find a child of this level who is positively
+indolent in his school work or who dislikes school. In high school they
+are likely to win about the average mark.</p>
+
+<p>Intelligence of 110&nbsp;to&nbsp;120&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q is approximately five times as common
+among children of superior social status as among children of inferior
+social status; the proportion among the former being about 24&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent
+of all, and among the latter only 5&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of all. The group is made
+up largely of children of the fairly successful mercantile or
+professional classes.</p>
+
+<p>The total number of children between 110&nbsp;and&nbsp;120 is almost exactly the
+same as the number between 80&nbsp;and&nbsp;90; namely, about 15&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent. The
+distance between these two groups (say between 85&nbsp;and&nbsp;115) is as great
+as the distance between average intelligence and border-line deficiency,
+and it would be absurd to suppose that they could be taught to best
+advantage in the same classes. As a matter of fact, pupils between
+110&nbsp;and&nbsp;120 are usually held back to the rate of progress which the
+average child can make. They are little encouraged to do their best.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Very_superior_intelligence" id="Very_superior_intelligence"></a>Very superior intelligence (I&nbsp;Q 120&nbsp;to&nbsp;140).</h3>
+
+<p>Children of this group are
+better than somewhat above average. They are unusually superior. Not
+more than 3 out of 100 go as high as 125&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q, and only about 1 out of
+100 as high as 130. <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;96">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_96" id="Page_96"></a>In the schools of a city of average population only
+about 1&nbsp;child in 250&nbsp;or&nbsp;300 tests as high as 140&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q.</p>
+
+<p>In a series of 476 unselected children there was not a single one
+reaching 120 whose social class was described as &ldquo;below average.&rdquo;<a name="FNanchor_29_29" id="FNanchor_29_29"></a><a href="#Footnote_29_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a> Of
+the children of superior social status, about 10&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent reached 120 or
+better. The 120&ndash;140 group is made up almost entirely of children whose
+parents belong to the professional or very successful business classes.
+The child of a skilled laborer belongs here occasionally, the child of a
+common laborer very rarely indeed. At least this is true in the smaller
+cities of California among populations made up of native-born Americans.
+In all probability it would not have been true in the earlier history of
+the country when ordinary labor was more often than now performed by men
+of average intelligence, and it would probably not hold true now among
+certain immigrant populations of good stock, but limited social and
+educational advantages.</p>
+
+<p>What can children of this grade of ability do in school? The question
+cannot be answered as satisfactorily as one could wish, for the simple
+reason that such children are rarely permitted to do what they can. What
+they do accomplish is as follows: Of 54&nbsp;children (of the 1000 unselected
+cases) falling in this group, 12&frac12;&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent were advanced in the
+grades two years, approximately 54&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent were advanced one year,
+28&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent were in the grade where they belonged by chronological age,
+and three children, or 5&frac12;&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent, were actually retarded one year.
+But wherever located, such children rarely get anything but the highest
+marks, and the evidence goes to show that most of them could easily be
+prepared for high school by the age of 12&nbsp;<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;97">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_97" id="Page_97"></a>years. Serious injury is done
+them by schools which believe in &ldquo;putting on the brakes.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>The following are illustrations of children testing between 130&nbsp;and&nbsp;145.
+Not all are taken from the 1000 unselected tests. The writer has
+discovered several children of this grade as a result of lectures before
+teachers&#8217; institutes. It is his custom, in such lectures, to ask the
+teachers to bring in for a demonstration test the &ldquo;brightest child in
+the city&rdquo; (or county, etc.). The I&nbsp;Q resulting from such a test is
+usually between 130&nbsp;and&nbsp;140, occasionally a little higher.</p>
+
+
+<h4><a name="Examples_of_very_superior_intelligence" id="Examples_of_very_superior_intelligence"></a>Examples of very superior intelligence</h4>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>Margaret P. Age&nbsp;8-10; mental age&nbsp;11-1; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;130.</i> Father only a
+skilled laborer (house painter), but a man of unusual
+intelligence and character for his social class. Home care above
+average. M.&nbsp;P. has attended school a little less than three
+years and is completing fourth grade. Marks all &ldquo;excellent.&rdquo;
+Health perfect. Social and moral traits of the very best. Is
+obedient, conscientious, and unusually reliable for her age.
+Quiet and confident bearing, but no touch of vanity.</p>
+
+<p>M.&nbsp;P. is known to be related on her father&#8217;s side to John
+Wesley, and her maternal grandfather was a highly skilled
+mechanic and the inventor of an important train-coupling device
+used on all railroads.</p>
+
+<p>Although she is not yet 9&nbsp;years old and is completing the fourth
+grade, she is still about a grade below where she belongs by
+mental age. She could no doubt easily be made ready for high
+school by the age of 12.</p></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>J.&nbsp;R. Girl, age&nbsp;12-9; mental age&nbsp;16 (average adult); I&nbsp;Q
+approximately 130.</i> Daughter of a university professor. In first
+year of high school. From first grade up her marks have been
+nearly all of the A rank. For first semester of high school four
+of six grades were A, the others B. A wonderfully charming,
+delightful girl in every respect. Play life perfectly normal.</p>
+
+<p><i>J.&nbsp;R.&#8217;s</i> parents have moved about a great deal and she has
+attended eight different schools. She is two years above grade
+in school, but of this gain only one-half grade was made in
+school; <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;98">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_98" id="Page_98"></a><em>the other grade and a half she gained in a little over
+a year by staying out of school and working a little each day
+under the instruction of her mother</em>. But for this she would
+doubtless now be in the seventh grade instead of in high school.
+As it is she is at least a grade below where she belongs by
+mental age. Something better than an average college record may
+be safely predicted for J.&nbsp;R.</p></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>E.&nbsp;B. Girl, age&nbsp;7-9; mental age&nbsp;10-2; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;130.</i> E.&nbsp;B. was
+selected by the teachers of a small California city as the
+brightest school child in that city (school population about
+500). Her parents are said to be unusually intelligent. E.&nbsp;B. is
+in the third grade, a year advanced, but her mental level shows
+that she belongs in the fourth. The test was made as a
+demonstration test in the presence of about 150&nbsp;teachers, all
+of whom were charmed by her delightful personality and keen
+responses. No trace of vanity or queerness of any kind. Health
+excellent. E.&nbsp;B. ought to be ready for high school at 12; she
+will really have the intelligence to do high-school work by 11.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 200px;">
+<a name="fig13" id="fig13"></a>
+<img src="images/fig13.png" width="200" height="203" alt="A rough anticlockwise spiral from the gate inwards to the centre." title="" />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.&nbsp;13.</span> BALL AND FIELD TEST. E.&nbsp;B., AGE 7-9;
+I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;130</p>
+</div></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>L.&nbsp;B. Girl, age&nbsp;8-6; mental age&nbsp;11-6; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;135.</i> Tested nearly
+three years earlier, age&nbsp;5-11; mental age&nbsp;7-6; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;127. Daughter
+of a university professor. At age of 8-6 was doing very superior
+work in the fifth grade. Later, at age of 10-6, is in the
+seventh grade with all her marks excellent. Has two sisters who
+test almost as high, both completing the eighth grade at barely
+12&nbsp;years of age. L.&nbsp;B. looks rather delicate, and though a
+little nervous is ordinarily strong. We have known her since her
+early childhood. Like both her sisters, she is a favorite with
+young and old, as nearly perfection as the most charming little
+girl could be.</p></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>R.&nbsp;S. Boy, age&nbsp;6-5; mental age&nbsp;9-6; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;148.</i> When tested at
+age&nbsp;5-2 he had a mental age of 7-6, I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;142. Father a university
+professor. R.&nbsp;S. entered school at exactly 6&nbsp;years of age, and
+at the present writing is 7&frac12;&nbsp;years old and is entering the
+third grade. Leads his class in school and takes delight in the
+work. Is normal <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;99">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_99" id="Page_99"></a>in play life and social traits and is dependable
+and thoughtful beyond his years. Should enter high school not
+later than 12; could probably be made ready a year earlier, but
+as he is somewhat nervous this might not be wise.</p></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>T.&nbsp;F. Boy, age&nbsp;10-6; mental age&nbsp;14; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;133.</i> At 13-6&nbsp;tested at
+&ldquo;superior adult,&rdquo; and had vocabulary of 13,000 (also &ldquo;superior
+adult&rdquo;). Son of a college professor. Did not go to school till
+age of 9&nbsp;years and was not taught to read till 8&frac12;. At this
+writing he is 15&frac12;&nbsp;years old and is a senior in high school.
+He will complete the high-school course in three and one-half
+years with A to B marks, mostly A. Gets his hardest mathematics
+lessons in five to ten minutes. Science is his play. When he
+discovered Hodge&#8217;s <i>Nature Study and Life</i> at age of 11&nbsp;years he
+literally slept with the book till he almost knew it by heart.
+Since age&nbsp;12 he has given much time to magazines on mechanics
+and electricity. At 13 he installed a wireless apparatus
+without other aid than his electrical magazines. He has, for a
+boy of his age, a rather remarkable understanding of the
+principles underlying electrical applications. He is known by
+his playmates as &ldquo;the boy with a hobby.&rdquo; Stamp collections,
+butterfly and moth collections (over 70 different varieties),
+seashore collections, and wireless apparatus all show that the
+appellation is fully merited. He chooses his hobbies and &ldquo;rides&rdquo;
+them entirely on his own initiative.</p></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>J.&nbsp;S. Boy, age&nbsp;8-2; mental age&nbsp;11-4; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;138.</i> Father was a
+lawyer, parents now dead. Is in high fourth grade. Leads his
+class. Attractive, healthy, normal-appearing lad. Full of good
+humor. Is loving and obedient, strongly attached to his foster
+mother (an aunt). Composes verses and fables for pastime. Here
+are a couple of verses composed before his eighth birthday. They
+are reproduced without change of spelling or punctuation:&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="center">
+<table summary="Two poems">
+<tr>
+<td style="padding:0 3em 1em 0;"><h5><i>Christmas</i></h5>
+Hurrah for Christmas<br />
+And all it&#8217;s joy&#8217;s<br />
+That come that day<br />
+For girls and boy&#8217;s.<br />
+</td>
+<td style="padding:0 0 1em 3em;">
+<h5><i>Flowers</i></h5>
+Flowers in the garden.<br />
+That is all you see<br />
+Who likes them best?<br />
+That&#8217;s the honey bee.<br />
+</td></tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<p>J.&nbsp;S. ought to be in the fifth grade, instead of the fourth. He
+will easily be able to enter college by the age of 15 if he is
+allowed to <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;100">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_100" id="Page_100"></a>make the progress which would be normal to a child of
+his intelligence. But it is too much to expect that the school
+will permit this.</p></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>F. McA. Boy, age&nbsp;10-3; mental age&nbsp;14-6; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;142.</i> Father a
+school principal. F. is leading his class of 24&nbsp;pupils in the
+high seventh grade. Has received so many extra promotions only
+because his father insisted that the teachers allow him to try
+the next grade. The dire consequences which they predicted have
+never followed. F. is perfectly healthy and one of the most
+attractive lads the writer has ever seen. He has the normal play
+instincts, but when not at play he has the dignified bearing of
+a young prince, although without vanity. His vocabulary is 9000
+(14&nbsp;years), and his ability is remarkably even in all
+directions. F. should easily enter college by the age of 15.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 200px;">
+<a name="fig14" id="fig14"></a>
+<img src="images/fig14.png" width="200" height="216" alt="A smooth anticlockwise spiral from the gate to the centre." title="" />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.&nbsp;14.</span> BALL AND FIELD F. McA., AGE&nbsp;10-3, MENTAL
+AGE&nbsp;14-6</p>
+</div></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>E.&nbsp;M. Boy, age&nbsp;6-11; mental age&nbsp;10; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;145.</i> Learned to read
+at age of 5 without instruction and shortly afterward had
+learned from geography maps the capitals of all the States of
+the Union. Started to school at 7&frac12;. Entered the first grade
+at 9&nbsp;<span class="smcap">a.m.</span> and had been promoted to the fourth grade by 3&nbsp;<span class="smcap">p.m.</span> of
+the same day! Has now attended school a half-year and is in the
+fifth grade, age&nbsp;7&nbsp;years, 8&nbsp;months. Father is on the faculty of
+a university.</p>
+
+<p>E.&nbsp;M. is as superior in personal and moral traits as in
+intelligence. Responsible, sturdy, playful, full of humor,
+loving, obedient. Health is excellent. Has had no home
+instruction in school work. His progress has been perfectly
+natural.</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>The above list of &ldquo;very superior&rdquo; children includes only a few of those
+we have tested who belong to this grade of intelligence. Every child in
+the list is so interesting that it is hard to omit any. We have found
+all such children (with one or two exceptions not included here) so
+superior to average children in all sorts of mental and moral traits<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;101">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_101" id="Page_101"></a>
+that one is at a loss to understand how the popular superstitions about
+the &ldquo;queerness&rdquo; of bright children could have originated or survived.
+Nearly every child we have found with I&nbsp;Q above 140 is the kind one
+feels, before the test is over, one would like to adopt. If the crime of
+kidnaping could ever be forgiven it would be in the case of a child like
+one of these.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 400px;">
+<a name="fig15" id="fig15"></a>
+<img src="images/fig15.png" width="400" height="124" alt="One line containing some right angles and loops, alongside a rectangle inside a larger one, with the corresponding corners joined." title="" />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.&nbsp;15.</span> DRAWING DESIGNS FROM MEMORY. E.&nbsp;M., AGE&nbsp;6-11;
+MENTAL AGE&nbsp;10, I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;145
+
+(This performance is satisfactory for year&nbsp;10)</p>
+</div>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Genius_and_near_genius" id="Genius_and_near_genius"></a>Genius and &ldquo;near&rdquo; genius.</h3>
+
+<p>Intelligence tests have not been in use long
+enough to enable us to define genius definitely in terms of I&nbsp;Q. The
+following two cases are offered as among the highest test records of
+which the writer has personal knowledge. It is doubtful whether more
+than one child in 10,000 goes as high as either. One case has been
+reported, however, in which the I&nbsp;Q was not far from 200. Such a
+record, if reliable, is certainly phenomenal.</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>E.&nbsp;F. Russian boy, age&nbsp;8-5; mental age&nbsp;13; I&nbsp;Q approximately
+155.</i> Mother is a university student apparently of very superior
+intelligence. E.&nbsp;F. has a sister almost as remarkable as
+himself. E.&nbsp;F. is in the sixth grade and at the head of his
+class. Although about four grades advanced beyond his
+chronological age he is still one grade retarded! He could
+easily carry seventh-grade work. In all probability E.&nbsp;F. could
+be made ready for college by the age of 12&nbsp;years without injury
+to body or mind. His mother has taken the only sensible course;
+she has encouraged him without subjecting him to
+overstimulation.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;102">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_102" id="Page_102"></a>E.&nbsp;F. was selected for the test as probably one of the brightest
+children in a city of a third of a million population. He may
+not be the brightest in that city, but he is one of the three or
+four most intelligent the writer has found after a good deal of
+searching. He is probably equaled by not more than one in
+several thousand unselected children. How impatiently one waits
+to see the fruit of such a budding genius!</p></blockquote>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>B.&nbsp;F. Son of a minister, age&nbsp;7-8; mental age&nbsp;12-4; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;160.</i>
+Vocabulary 7000 (12&nbsp;years). This test was not made by the
+writer, but by one of his graduate students. The record included
+the <i>verbatim</i> responses, so that it was easy to verify the
+scoring. There can be no doubt as to the substantial accuracy
+of the test. This I&nbsp;Q of 160 is the highest one in the Stanford
+University records. B.&nbsp;F. has excellent health, normal play
+interests, and is a favorite among his playfellows. Parents had
+not thought of him as especially remarkable. He is only in the
+third grade, and is therefore about three grades below his
+mental age.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 200px;">
+<a name="fig16" id="fig16"></a>
+<img src="images/fig16.png" width="200" height="201" alt="A very smooth anticlockwise spiral from the gate to the centre.  The lines are closer together than in previous examples." title="" />
+<p class="caption"><span class="smcap">Fig.&nbsp;16.</span> BALL AND FIELD. B.&nbsp;F., AGE&nbsp;7-8; MENTAL
+AGE&nbsp;12-4; I&nbsp;Q&nbsp;160
+
+(This is a 12-year performance)</p>
+</div></blockquote>
+
+<p>It is especially noteworthy that not one of the children we have
+described with I&nbsp;Q above 130 has ever had any unusual amount or kind of
+home instruction. In most cases the parents were not aware of their very
+great superiority. Nor can we give the credit to the school or its
+methods. The school has in most cases been a deterrent to their
+progress, rather than a help. These children have been taught in classes
+with average and inferior children, like those described in the first
+part of this chapter. Their high I&nbsp;Q is only an index of their
+extraordinary cerebral endowment. This endowment is for life. There is
+not the remotest probability that any <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;103">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_103" id="Page_103"></a>of these children will deteriorate
+to the average level of intelligence with the onset of maturity. Such an
+event would be no less a miracle (barring insanity) than the development
+of an imbecile into a successful lawyer or physician.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Is_the_I_Q_often_misleading" id="Is_the_I_Q_often_misleading"></a>Is the I&nbsp;Q often misleading?</h3>
+
+<p>Do the cases described in this chapter give
+a reliable picture as to what one may expect of the various I&nbsp;Q levels?
+Does the I&nbsp;Q furnish anything like a reliable index of an individual&#8217;s
+general educational possibilities and of his social worth? Are there not
+&ldquo;feeble-minded geniuses,&rdquo; and are there not children of exceptionally
+high I&nbsp;Q who are nevertheless fools?</p>
+
+<p>We have no hesitation in saying that there is not one case in fifty in
+which there is any serious contradiction between the I&nbsp;Q and the child&#8217;s
+performances in and out of school. We cannot deny the existence of
+&ldquo;feeble-minded geniuses,&rdquo; but after a good deal of search we have not
+found one. Occasionally, of course, one finds a feeble-minded person
+who is an expert penman, who draws skillfully, who plays a musical
+instrument tolerably well, or who handles number combinations with
+unusual rapidity; but these are not geniuses; they are not authors,
+artists, musicians, or mathematicians.</p>
+
+<p>As for exceptionally intelligent children who appear feeble-minded, we
+have found but one case, a boy of 10&nbsp;years with an I&nbsp;Q of about 125.
+This boy, whom we have tested several times and whose development we
+have followed for five years, was once diagnosed by a physician as
+feeble-minded. His behavior among other persons than his familiar
+associates is such as to give this impression. Nothing less than an
+entire chapter would be adequate for a description of this case, which
+is in reality one of disturbed emotional and social development with
+superior intelligence.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;104">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_104" id="Page_104"></a>It should be emphasized, however, that what we have said about the
+significance of various I&nbsp;Q&#8217;s holds only for the I&nbsp;Q&#8217;s secured by the
+use of the Stanford revision. As we have shown elsewhere (p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_62">62</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>)
+the I&nbsp;Q yielded by other versions of the Binet tests are often so
+inaccurate as to be misleading.</p>
+
+<p>We have not found a single child who tested between 70&nbsp;and&nbsp;80&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q by the
+Stanford revision who was able to do satisfactory school work in the
+grade where he belonged by chronological age. Such children are usually
+from two to three grades retarded by the age of 12&nbsp;years. On the other
+hand, the child with an I&nbsp;Q of 120 or above is almost never found below
+the grade for his chronological age, and occasionally he is one or two
+grades above. Wherever located, his school work is so superior as to
+suggest strongly the desirability of extra promotions. Those who test
+between 96&nbsp;and&nbsp;105 are almost never more than one grade above or below
+where they belong by chronological age, and even the small displacement
+of one year is usually determined by illness, age of beginning school,
+etc.</p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_28_28" id="Footnote_28_28"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_28_28">[28]</a></span> The clinical descriptions to be given are not complete and
+are designed merely to aid the examiner in understanding the
+significance of intelligence quotients found.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_29_29" id="Footnote_29_29"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_29_29">[29]</a></span> In other investigations, however, we have found even
+brighter children from very inferior homes. See p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_117">117</a> for an example.</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;105">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_105" id="Page_105"></a><a name="CHAPTER_VII" id="CHAPTER_VII"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;VII
+<br />
+<small>RELIABILITY OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD</small></h2>
+
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="General_value_of_the_method" id="General_value_of_the_method"></a>General value of the method.</h3>
+
+<p>In a former chapter we have noted certain
+imperfections of the scale devised by Binet and Simon; namely, that many
+of the tests were not correctly located, that the choice of tests was in
+a few cases unsatisfactory, that the directions for giving and scoring
+the tests were sometimes too indefinite, and that the upper and lower
+ranges of the scale especially stood in need of extensions and
+corrections. All of these faults have been quite generally admitted. The
+method itself, however, after being put to the test by psychologists of
+all countries and of all faiths, by the skeptical as well as the
+friendly, has amply demonstrated its value. The agreement on this point
+is as complete as it is regarding the scale&#8217;s imperfections.</p>
+
+<p>The following quotations from prominent psychologists who have studied
+the method will serve to show how it is regarded by those most entitled
+to an opinion:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p>There can be no question about the fact that the Binet-Simon
+tests do not make half as frequent or half as great errors in
+the mental ages (of feeble-minded children) as are included in
+gradings based on careful, prolonged general observation by
+experienced observers.<a name="FNanchor_30_30" id="FNanchor_30_30"></a><a href="#Footnote_30_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a></p>
+
+<p>All of the different authors who have made these researches
+(with Binet&#8217;s method) are in a general way unanimous in
+recognizing <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;106">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_106" id="Page_106"></a>that the principle of the scale is extremely
+fortunate, and all believe that it offers the basis of a most
+useful method for the examination of intelligence.<a name="FNanchor_31_31" id="FNanchor_31_31"></a><a href="#Footnote_31_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a></p>
+
+<p>It serves as a relatively simple and speedy method of securing,
+by means accessible to every one, a true insight into the
+average level of ability of a child between 3&nbsp;and&nbsp;15&nbsp;years of
+age.<a name="FNanchor_32_32" id="FNanchor_32_32"></a><a href="#Footnote_32_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a></p>
+
+<p>That, despite the differences in race and language, despite the
+divergences in school organization and in methods of
+instruction, there should be so decided agreement in the
+reactions of the children&mdash;is, in my opinion, the best
+vindication of the <em>principle</em> of the tests that one could
+imagine, because this agreement demonstrates that <em>the tests do
+actually reach and discover the general developmental conditions
+of intelligence</em> (so far as these are operative in
+public-school children of the present cultural epoch), and not
+mere fragments of knowledge and attainments acquired by
+chance.<a name="FNanchor_33_33" id="FNanchor_33_33"></a><a href="#Footnote_33_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a></p>
+
+<p>It is without doubt the most satisfactory and accurate method of
+determining a child&#8217;s intelligence that we have, and so far
+superior to everything else which has been proposed that as yet
+there is nothing else to be considered.<a name="FNanchor_34_34" id="FNanchor_34_34"></a><a href="#Footnote_34_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a>
+</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>The value of the method lies both in the swiftness and the accuracy with
+which it works. One who knows how to apply the tests correctly and who
+is experienced in the psychological interpretation of responses can in
+forty minutes arrive at a more accurate judgment as to a subject&#8217;s
+intelligence than would be possible without the tests after months or
+even years of close observation. The reasons for this have already been
+set forth.<a name="FNanchor_35_35" id="FNanchor_35_35"></a><a href="#Footnote_35_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a> The difference is something like that between measuring a
+person&#8217;s height with a yardstick and estimating it by guess. That this
+is not an unfair statement of the case is well shown by the following<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;107">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_107" id="Page_107"></a>
+candid confession by a psychologist who tested 200 juvenile delinquents
+brought before Judge Lindsey&#8217;s court:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p>As a matter of interest I estimated the mental ages of 150 of my
+subjects before testing them. In 54 of the estimates the error
+was not more than one year in either direction; 70 of the
+subjects were estimated too high, the average error being
+2&nbsp;years and 7&nbsp;months; 26 of the subjects were estimated too low,
+the average error being 2&nbsp;years and 2&nbsp;months. <em>These figures
+would seem to imply that an estimate with nothing to support it
+is wholly unreliable, more especially as many of the estimates
+were four or five years wide of the mark.</em><a name="FNanchor_36_36" id="FNanchor_36_36"></a><a href="#Footnote_36_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a>
+</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>Criticisms of the Binet method have also been frequently voiced, but
+chiefly by persons who have had little experience with it or by those
+whose scientific training hardly justifies an opinion. It cannot be too
+strongly emphasized that eminence in law, medicine, education, or any
+other profession does not of itself enable any one to pass judgment on
+the validity of a psychological method.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Dependence_of_the_scales_reliability_on_the_training_of_the_examiner" id="Dependence_of_the_scales_reliability_on_the_training_of_the_examiner"></a>Dependence of the scale&#8217;s reliability on the training of the examiner.</h3>
+
+<p>
+On this point two radically different opinions have been urged. On the
+one hand, some have insisted that the results of a test made by other
+than a thoroughly trained psychologist are absolutely worthless. At the
+opposite extreme are a few who seem to think that any teacher or
+physician can secure perfectly valid results after a few hours&#8217;
+acquaintance with the tests.</p>
+
+<p>The dispute is one which cannot be settled by the assertion of opinion,
+and, unfortunately, thoroughgoing investigations have not yet been made
+as to the frequency and extent of errors made by untrained or partially
+trained examiners. The only study of this kind which has so far been
+reported is the following:&mdash;<a name="FNanchor_37_37" id="FNanchor_37_37"></a><a href="#Footnote_37_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;108">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_108" id="Page_108"></a>Dr.&nbsp;Kohs gives the results of tests made by 58 inexperienced teachers
+who were taking a summer course in the Training School at Vineland. The
+class met three times a week for instruction in the use of the Binet
+scale. During the first week the students listened to three lectures by
+Dr.&nbsp;Goddard. The second week was given over to demonstration testing.
+Each student saw four children tested, and attended two discussion
+periods of an hour each. During the third, fourth, and fifth weeks each
+student tested one child per week, and observed the testing of two
+others. The student was allowed to carry the test through in his own
+way, but received criticism after it was finished. Twice a week
+Dr.&nbsp;Goddard spent an hour with the class, discussing experimental
+procedure. The subjects tested were feeble-minded children whose exact
+mental ages were already known, and for this reason it was possible to
+check up the accuracy of each student&#8217;s work.</p>
+
+<p>Kohs&#8217;s table of results for the trial testing of the 174&nbsp;children
+showed:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol>
+<li>That 50&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the work was as exact as any one in
+the laboratory could make it;</li>
+
+<li>That in an additional 38&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent the results were within
+three fifths of a year of being exact;</li>
+
+<li>That nearly 90&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the work of the summer students
+was sufficiently accurate for all practical purposes;</li>
+
+<li>That the records improved during the brief training so
+that during the third week only one test missed the real
+mental age by as much as a year.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>Since hardly any of these students had had any previous experience with
+the Binet tests, Dr.&nbsp;Kohs seems to be entirely justified in his
+conclusion that it is possible, in the <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;109">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_109" id="Page_109"></a>brief period of six weeks, to
+teach people to use the tests with a reasonable degree of accuracy.</p>
+
+<p>What shall we say of the teacher or of the physician who has not even
+had this amount of instruction? The writer&#8217;s experience forces him to
+agree with Binet and with Dr.&nbsp;Goddard, that any one with intelligence
+enough to be a teacher, and who is willing to devote conscientious study
+to the mastery of the technique, can use the scale accurately enough to
+get a better idea of a child&#8217;s mental endowment than he could possibly
+get in any other way. It is necessary, however, for the untrained person
+to recognize his own lack of experience, and in no case would it be
+justifiable to base important action or scientific conclusions upon the
+results of the inexpert examiner. As Binet himself repeatedly insisted,
+the method is not absolutely mechanical, and cannot be made so by
+elaboration of instructions.</p>
+
+<p>It is sometimes held that the examination and classification of backward
+children for special instruction should be carried out by the school
+physicians. The fact is, however, that there is nothing in the
+physician&#8217;s training to give him any advantage over the ordinary teacher
+in the use of the Binet tests. Because of her more intimate knowledge of
+children and because of her superior tact and adaptability, the average
+teacher is perhaps better equipped than the average physician to give
+intelligence tests.</p>
+
+<p>Finally, it should be emphasized that whatever the previous training or
+experience of the examiner may have been, his ability to adjust to the
+child&#8217;s personality and his willingness to follow conscientiously the
+directions for giving the tests are important factors in his equipment.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Influence_of_the_subjects_attitude" id="Influence_of_the_subjects_attitude"></a>Influence of the subject&#8217;s attitude.</h3>
+
+<p>One continually meets such queries
+as, &ldquo;How do you know the subject did his best?&rdquo; &ldquo;Possibly the child was
+nervous or frightened,&rdquo; or, &ldquo;Perhaps incorrect answers were purposely<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;110">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_110" id="Page_110"></a>
+given.&rdquo; All such objections may be disposed of by saying that the
+competent examiner can easily control the experiment in such a way that
+embarrassment is soon replaced by self-confidence, and in such a way
+that effort is kept at its maximum. As for mischievous deception, it
+would be a poor clinicist who could not recognize and deal with the
+little that is likely to arise.</p>
+
+<p>Cautions regarding embarrassment, fatigue, fright, illness, etc. are
+given in <a href="#CHAPTER_IX">Chapter&nbsp;IX</a>. Most of the errors which have been reported along
+this line are such as can nearly always be avoided by ordinary prudence,
+coupled with a little power of observation.<a name="FNanchor_38_38" id="FNanchor_38_38"></a><a href="#Footnote_38_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a> We must not charge the
+mistakes of untrained and indiscreet examiners against the validity of
+the method itself.</p>
+
+<p>It is possibly true that even if the examiner is tactful and prudent an
+unfavorable attitude on the part of the subject may occasionally affect
+the results of a test to some extent, but it ought not seriously to
+invalidate one examination out of five hundred. The greatest danger is
+in the case of a young subject who has been recently arrested and
+brought before a court. Even here a little common sense and scientific
+insight should enable one to guard against a mistaken diagnosis.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="The_influence_of_coaching" id="The_influence_of_coaching"></a>The influence of coaching.</h3>
+
+<p>It might be supposed that after the
+intelligence scale had been used with a few pupils in a given school all
+of their fellows would soon be apprised of the nature of the tests, and
+so learn the correct responses. Experience shows, however, that there is
+little likelihood of such influence except in the case of a small
+minority of the tests. Experiments in the psychology of testimony have
+demonstrated that children&#8217;s ability to report upon a complex set of
+experiences is astonishingly weak. In testing <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;111">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_111" id="Page_111"></a>with the Stanford revision
+a child is ordinarily given from twenty-four to thirty different tests,
+many of which are made up of three or more items. Of the total forty to
+fifty items the child is ordinarily able to report but few, and these
+not always correctly.</p>
+
+<p>Such tests as memory for sentences and digits, drawing the square and
+diamond, reproducing the designs from memory, comparing weights and
+lines, describing and interpreting pictures, &aelig;sthetic comparison,
+vocabulary, dissected sentences, fables, reading for memories, finding
+differences and similarities, arithmetical reasoning, and the form-board
+test, are hardly subject to report at all. While almost any of the other
+tests might, theoretically, be communicated, there is little danger that
+many of them will be. It is assumed, of course, that the examiner will
+take proper precautions to prevent any of his blanks or other materials
+from falling into the hands of those who are to be examined.</p>
+
+<p>The following tests are the ones most subject to the influence of
+coaching: Ball and field, giving date, naming sixty words, finding
+rhymes, changing hands of clock, comprehension of physical relations,
+&ldquo;induction test,&rdquo; and &ldquo;ingenuity test.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>In several instances we have interviewed children an hour or two after
+they had taken the examination, in order to find out how many of the
+tests they could recall. A boy of 4&nbsp;years, after repeated questioning,
+could only say: &ldquo;He showed me some pictures. He had a knife and a penny.
+He told me to shut the door.&rdquo; A girl of 3&nbsp;years could recall nothing
+whatever that was intelligible.</p>
+
+<p>An 8-year-old boy said: &ldquo;He made me tie a knot. He asked me about a ship
+and an auto. He wanted me to count backwards. He made me say over some
+things, numbers and things.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;112">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_112" id="Page_112"></a>A boy of 12&nbsp;years said: &ldquo;He told me to say all the words I could think
+of. He said some foolish things and asked what was foolish [he could not
+repeat a single absurdity]. I had to put some blocks together. I had to
+do some problems in arithmetic [he could not repeat a single problem].
+He read some fables to me. [Asked about the fables he was able to recall
+only part of one, that of the fox and the crow.] He showed me the
+picture of a field and wanted to know how to find a ball.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>It is evident from the above samples of report that the danger of
+coaching increases considerably with the age of the children concerned.
+With young subjects the danger is hardly present at all; with children
+of the upper-grammar grades, in the high school, and most of all in
+prisons and reformatories, it must be taken into account. Alternative
+tests may sometimes be used to advantage when there is evidence of
+coaching on any of the regular tests. It would be desirable to have two
+or three additional scales which could be used interchangeably with the
+Binet-Simon.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Reliability_of_repeated_tests" id="Reliability_of_repeated_tests"></a>Reliability of repeated tests.</h3>
+
+<p>Will the same tests give consistent
+results when used repeatedly with the same subject? In general we may
+say that they do. Something depends, however, on the age and
+intelligence of the subject and on the time interval between the
+examinations.</p>
+
+<p>Goddard proves that feeble-minded individuals whose intelligence has
+reached its full development continue to test at exactly the same mental
+age by the Binet scale, year after year. In their case, familiarity with
+the tests does not in the least improve the responses. At each retesting
+the responses given at previous examinations are repeated with only the
+most trivial variations. Of 352 feeble-minded children tested at
+Vineland, three years in succession, 109 gave absolutely no variation,
+232 showed a variation of not more than two fifths of a year, while 22<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;113">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_113" id="Page_113"></a>
+gained as much as one year in the three tests. The latter, presumably,
+were younger children whose intelligence was still developing.</p>
+
+<p>Goddard has also tested 464 public-school children for three successive
+years. Approximately half of these showed normal progress or more in
+mental age, while most of the remainder showed somewhat less than normal
+progress.</p>
+
+<p>Bobertag&#8217;s retesting of 83 normal children after an interval of a year
+gave results entirely in harmony with those of Goddard. The
+reapplication of the tests showed absolutely no influence of
+familiarity, the correlation of the two tests being almost perfect
+(.95). Those who tested &ldquo;at age&rdquo; in the first test had advanced, on the
+average, exactly one year. Those who tested <em>plus</em> in the first test
+advanced in the twelve months about a year and a quarter, as we should
+expect those to do whose mental development is accelerated.
+Correspondingly, those who tested <em>minus</em> at the first test advanced
+only about three fourths of a year in mental age during the
+interval.<a name="FNanchor_39_39" id="FNanchor_39_39"></a><a href="#Footnote_39_39" class="fnanchor">[39]</a></p>
+
+<p>Our own results with a mixed group of normal, superior, dull and
+feeble-minded children agree fully with the above findings. In this case
+the two tests were separated by an interval of two to four years, and
+the correlation between their results was practically perfect. The
+average difference between the I&nbsp;Q obtained in the second test and that
+obtained in the first was only 4&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent, and the greatest difference
+found was only 8&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent.<a name="FNanchor_40_40" id="FNanchor_40_40"></a><a href="#Footnote_40_40" class="fnanchor">[40]</a></p>
+
+<p>The repetition of the test at shorter intervals will perhaps affect the
+result somewhat more, but the influence is much less than one might
+expect. The writer has tested, at <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;114">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_114" id="Page_114"></a>intervals of only a few days to a few
+weeks, 14 backward children of 12&nbsp;to&nbsp;18&nbsp;years, and 8 normal children of
+5&nbsp;to&nbsp;13&nbsp;years. The backward children showed an average improvement in
+the second test of about two months in mental age, the normal children
+an average improvement of little more than three months. No child varied
+in the second test more than half a year from the mental age first
+secured. On the whole, normal children profit more from the experience
+of a previous test than do the backward and feeble-minded.</p>
+
+<p>Berry tested 45 normal children and 50 defectives with the Binet 1908
+and 1911 scales at brief intervals. The author does not state which
+scale was applied first, but the mental ages secured by the two scales
+were practically the same when allowance was made for the slightly
+greater difficulty of the 1911 series of tests.<a name="FNanchor_41_41" id="FNanchor_41_41"></a><a href="#Footnote_41_41" class="fnanchor">[41]</a></p>
+
+<p>We may conclude, therefore, that while it would probably be desirable
+to have one or more additional scales for alternative use in testing the
+same children at very brief intervals, the same scale may be used for
+repeated tests at intervals of a year or more with little danger of
+serious inaccuracy. Moreover, results like those set forth above are
+important evidence as to the validity of the test method.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Influence_of_social_and_educational_advantages" id="Influence_of_social_and_educational_advantages"></a>Influence of social and educational advantages.</h3>
+
+<p>The criticism has often
+been made that the responses to many of the tests are so much subject to
+the influence of school and home environment as seriously to invalidate
+the scale as a whole. Some of the tests most often named in this
+connection are the following: Giving age and sex; naming common objects,
+colors, and coins; giving the value of stamps; giving date; naming the
+months of the year and the days of the week; distinguishing forenoon and
+afternoon; <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;115">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_115" id="Page_115"></a>counting; making change; reading for memories; naming sixty
+words; giving definitions; finding rhymes; and constructing a sentence
+containing three given words.</p>
+
+<p>It has in fact been found wherever comparisons have been made that
+children of superior social status yield a higher average mental age
+than children of the laboring classes. The results of Decroly and Degand
+and of Meumann, Stern, and Binet himself may be referred to in this
+connection. In the case of the Stanford investigation, also, it was
+found that when the unselected school children were grouped in three
+classes according to social status (superior, average, and inferior),
+the average I&nbsp;Q for the superior social group was 107, and that of the
+inferior social group 93. This is equivalent to a difference of one year
+in mental age with 7-year-olds, and to a difference of two years with
+14-year-olds.</p>
+
+<p>However, the common opinion that the child from a cultured home does
+better in tests solely by reason of his superior home advantages is an
+entirely gratuitous assumption. Practically all of the investigations
+which have been made of the influence of nature and nurture on mental
+performance agree in attributing far more to original endowment than to
+environments. Common observation would itself suggest that the social
+class to which the family belongs depends less on chance than on the
+parents&#8217; native qualities of intellect and character.</p>
+
+<p>The results of five separate and distinct lines of inquiry based on the
+Stanford data agree in supporting the conclusion that the children of
+successful and cultured parents test higher than children from wretched
+and ignorant homes for the simple reason that their heredity is better.
+The results of this investigation are set forth in full elsewhere.<a name="FNanchor_42_42" id="FNanchor_42_42"></a><a href="#Footnote_42_42" class="fnanchor">[42]</a></p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;116">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_116" id="Page_116"></a>It would, of course, be going too far to deny all possibility of
+environmental conditions affecting the result of an intelligence test.
+Certainly no one would expect that a child reared in a cage and denied
+all intercourse with other human beings could by any system of mental
+measurement test up to the level of normal children. There is, however,
+no reason to believe that <em>ordinary</em> differences in social environment
+(apart from heredity), differences such as those obtaining among
+unselected children attending approximately the same general type of
+school in a civilized community, affects to any great extent the
+validity of the scale.</p>
+
+<p>A crucial experiment would be to take a large number of very young
+children of the lower classes and, after placing them in the most
+favorable environment obtainable, to compare their later mental
+development with that of children born into the best homes. No extensive
+study of this kind has been made, but the writer has tested twenty
+orphanage children who, for the most part, had come from very inferior
+homes. They had been in a well-conducted orphanage for from two to
+several years, and had enjoyed during that time the advantages of an
+excellent village school. Nevertheless, all but three tested below
+average, ranging from 75&nbsp;to&nbsp;90&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q.</p>
+
+<p>The impotence of school instruction to neutralize individual differences
+in native endowment will be evident to any one who follows the school
+career of backward children. The children who are seriously retarded in
+school are not normal, and cannot be made normal by any refinement of
+educational method. As a rule, the longer the inferior child attends
+school, the more evident his inferiority becomes. It would hardly be
+reasonable, therefore, to expect that a little incidental instruction in
+the home would weigh very heavily against these same native differences<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;117">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_117" id="Page_117"></a>
+in endowment. Cases like the following show conclusively that it does
+not:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p>X is the son of unusually intelligent and well-educated parents.
+The home is everything one would expect of people of scholarly
+pursuits and cultivated tastes. But X has always been
+irresponsible, troublesome, childish, and queer. He learned to
+walk at 2&nbsp;years, to talk at 3, and has always been delicate and
+nervous. When brought for examination he was 8&nbsp;years old. He had
+twice attempted school work, but could accomplish nothing and
+was withdrawn. His play-life was not normal, and other children,
+younger than himself, abused and tormented him. The Binet tests
+gave an I&nbsp;Q of approximately 75; that is, the retardation
+amounted to about two years. The child was examined again three
+years later. At that time, after attending school two years, he
+had recently completed the first grade. This time the I&nbsp;Q was
+73. Strange to say, the mother is encouraged and hopeful because
+she sees that her boy is learning to read. She does not seem to
+realize that at his age he ought to be within three years of
+entering high school.</p>
+
+<p>The forty-minute test had told more about the mental ability of
+this boy than the intelligent mother had been able to learn in
+eleven years of daily and hourly observation. For X is
+feeble-minded; he will never complete the grammar school; he
+will never be an efficient worker or a responsible citizen.</p>
+
+<p>Let us change the picture. Z is a bright-eyed, dark-skinned girl
+of 9&nbsp;years. She is dark-skinned because her father is a mixture
+of Indian and Spanish. The mother is of Irish descent. With her
+strangely mated parents and two brothers she lives in a dirty,
+cramped, and poorly furnished house in the country. The parents
+are illiterate, and the brothers are retarded and dull, though
+not feeble-minded.</p>
+
+<p>It is Z&#8217;s turn to be tested. I inquire the name. It is familiar,
+for I have already tested the two stupid brothers. I also know
+her ignorant parents and the miserable cabin in which she lives.
+The examination begins with the 8-year tests. The responses are
+quick and accurate. We proceed to the 9-year group. There is no
+failure, and there is but one minor error. Successes and
+failures alternate for a while until the latter prevail. Z has
+tested at 11&nbsp;years. In spite of her wretched home, she is
+mentally advanced nearly 25&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent. By the vocabulary test she
+is credited with a <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;118">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_118" id="Page_118"></a>knowledge of nearly 6000&nbsp;words, or nearly
+four times as many as X, the boy of cultured home and scholarly
+parents, had learned by the age of 8&nbsp;years.</p>
+
+<p>Five years have passed. When given the test, Z was in the fourth
+grade and, as we have already stated, 9&nbsp;years of age. As a
+result of the test she was transferred to the fifth grade. Later
+she skipped again and at the age of 14 is a successful student
+in the second year of high school. To assay her intelligence and
+determine its quality was a task of forty-five minutes.</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>The above cases, each of which could be paralleled by many others which
+we have found, will serve to illustrate the fact that exceptionally
+superior endowment is discoverable by the tests, however unfavorable the
+home from which it comes, and that inferior endowment cannot be
+normalized by all the advantages of the most cultured home. Quoting
+again from Stern, &ldquo;The tests actually reach and discover the general
+developmental conditions of intelligence, and not mere fragments of
+knowledge and attainments acquired by chance.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_30_30" id="Footnote_30_30"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_30_30">[30]</a></span> Dr. F. Kuhlmann: &ldquo;The Binet-Simon Tests of Intelligence in
+Grading Feeble-Minded Children,&rdquo; in <i>Journal of Psycho-Asthenics</i>
+(1912), p.&nbsp;189.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_31_31" id="Footnote_31_31"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_31_31">[31]</a></span> Dr. Otto Bobertag: &ldquo;<span lang="fr">L&#8217;&eacute;chelle m&eacute;trique de l&#8217;intelligence</span>,&rdquo;
+in <i lang="fr">L&#8217;Ann&eacute;e Psychologique</i> (1912), p.&nbsp;272.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_32_32" id="Footnote_32_32"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_32_32">[32]</a></span> Dr. Ernest Meumann: <i lang="de">Experimentelle P&auml;dagogik</i> (1913),
+vol.&nbsp;II, p.&nbsp;277.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_33_33" id="Footnote_33_33"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_33_33">[33]</a></span> Dr. W. Stern: <i>The Psychological Methods of Testing
+Intelligence.</i> Translated by Whipple (1913), p.&nbsp;49.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_34_34" id="Footnote_34_34"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_34_34">[34]</a></span> Dr. H.&nbsp;H. Goddard: &ldquo;The Binet Measuring Scale of
+Intelligence; What it is and How it is to be Used,&rdquo; in <i>The Training
+School Bulletin</i> (1912).</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_35_35" id="Footnote_35_35"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_35_35">[35]</a></span> See this volume, p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_24">24</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_36_36" id="Footnote_36_36"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_36_36">[36]</a></span> C.&nbsp;S. Bluemel: &ldquo;Binet Tests on 200&nbsp;Delinquents,&rdquo; in <i>The
+Training School Bulletin</i> (1915), p.&nbsp;192. (Italics inserted.)</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_37_37" id="Footnote_37_37"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_37_37">[37]</a></span> Samuel C. Kohs: &ldquo;The Binet Test and the Training of
+Teachers,&rdquo; in <i>The Training School Bulletin</i> (1914), pp.&nbsp;113&ndash;17.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_38_38" id="Footnote_38_38"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_38_38">[38]</a></span> See, for example, the rather ludicrous &ldquo;errors&rdquo; of the
+Binet method reported in <i>The Psychological Clinic</i> for 1915,
+pp.&nbsp;140&nbsp;<i>ff.</i> and 167&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_39_39" id="Footnote_39_39"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_39_39">[39]</a></span> Otto Bobertag: &ldquo;<span lang="de">Ueber Intelligenz Pr&uuml;fungen</span>,&rdquo; in <i lang="de">Zeitsch.
+f. Angew. Psychol.</i> (1912), p.&nbsp;521&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_40_40" id="Footnote_40_40"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_40_40">[40]</a></span> See <i>The Stanford Revision and Extension of the
+Binet-Simon Scale for Measuring Intelligence</i>. (Warwick and York,
+1916.)</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_41_41" id="Footnote_41_41"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_41_41">[41]</a></span> Charles Scott Berry: &ldquo;A Comparison of the Binet Tests of
+1908 and 1911,&rdquo; in <i>Journal of Educational Psychology</i> (1912),
+pp.&nbsp;444&ndash;51.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_42_42" id="Footnote_42_42"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_42_42">[42]</a></span> See <i>The Stanford Revision and Extension of the
+Binet-Simon Measuring Scale of Intelligence</i>. (Warwick and York, 1916)</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;119">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_119" id="Page_119"></a><a name="PART_II" id="PART_II"></a>PART&nbsp;II
+<br />
+GUIDE FOR THE USE OF THE STANFORD REVISION
+<br />
+AND EXTENSION<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;120">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_120" id="Page_120"></a></h2>
+
+
+
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;121">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_121" id="Page_121"></a><a name="CHAPTER_VIII" id="CHAPTER_VIII"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;VIII
+<br />
+<small>GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS</small></h2>
+
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Necessity_of_securing_attention_and_effort" id="Necessity_of_securing_attention_and_effort"></a>Necessity of securing attention and effort.</h3>
+
+<p>The child&#8217;s intelligence is
+to be judged by his success in the performance of certain tasks. These
+tasks may appear to the examiner to be very easy, indeed; but we must
+bear in mind that they are often anything but easy for the child. Real
+effort and attention are necessary for his success, and occasionally
+even his best efforts fall short of the desired result. If the tests are
+to display the child&#8217;s real intellectual ability it will be necessary,
+therefore, to avoid as nearly as possible every disturbing factor which
+would divide his attention or in any other way injure the quality of
+his responses. To insure this it will be necessary to consider somewhat
+in detail a number of factors which influence effort, such as degree of
+quiet, the nature of surroundings, presence or absence of others, means
+of gaining the child&#8217;s confidence, the avoidance of embarrassment,
+fatigue, etc.</p>
+
+<p>One should not expect, however, to secure an absolutely equal degree of
+attention from all subjects. The power to give sustained attention to a
+difficult task is characteristically weak in dull and feeble-minded
+children. What we should labor to secure is the maximum attention of
+which the child is capable, and if this is unsatisfactory without
+external cause, we are to regard the fact as symptomatic of inferior
+mental ability, not as an extenuating factor or an excuse for lack of
+success in the tests.</p>
+
+<p>Attention, of course, cannot be normal if any acute <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;122">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_122" id="Page_122"></a>physical or mental
+disturbance is present. Toothache, headache, earache, nausea, fever,
+cold, etc., all render the test inadvisable. The same is true of mental
+anxiety or fear, as in the case of the child who has just been arrested
+and brought before the court.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Quiet_and_seclusion" id="Quiet_and_seclusion"></a>Quiet and seclusion.</h3>
+
+<p>The tests should be conducted in a quiet room,
+located where the noises of the street and other outside distractions
+cannot enter. A reasonably small room is better than a very large one,
+because it is more homelike. The furnishings of the room should be
+simple. A table and two chairs are sufficient. If the room contains a
+number of unfamiliar objects, such as psychological apparatus, pictures
+on the walls, etc., the attention of the child is likely to be drawn
+away from the tasks which he is given to do. The halls and corridors
+which it is sometimes necessary to use in testing school children are
+usually noisy, cold, or otherwise objectionable.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Presence_of_others" id="Presence_of_others"></a>Presence of others.</h3>
+
+<p>A still more disturbing influence is the presence of
+other persons. Generally speaking, if accurate results are to be secured
+it is not permissible to have any auditor, besides possibly an
+assistant to record the responses. Even the assistant, however quiet and
+unobtrusive, is sometimes a disturbing element. Though something of a
+convenience, the assistant is by no means necessary, after the examiner
+has thoroughly mastered the procedure of the tests and has acquired some
+skill in the use of abbreviations in recording the answers. If an
+assistant or any other person is present, he should be seated somewhat
+behind the child, not too close, and should take no notice of the child
+either when he enters the room or at any time during the examination.</p>
+
+<p>At all events, the presence of parent, teacher, school principal, or
+governess is to be avoided. Contrary to what one might expect, these
+distract the child much more than <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;123">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_123" id="Page_123"></a>a strange personality would do. Their
+critical attitude toward the child&#8217;s performance is very likely to cause
+embarrassment. If the child is alone with the examiner, he is more at
+ease from the mere fact that he does not feel that there is a reputation
+to sustain. The praise so lavishly bestowed upon him by the friendly and
+sympathetic examiner lends to the same effect.</p>
+
+<p>As Binet emphasizes, if the presence of others cannot be avoided, it is
+at least necessary to require of them absolute silence. Parents, and
+sometimes teachers, have an almost irrepressible tendency to interrupt
+the examination with excuses for the child&#8217;s failures and with
+disturbing explanations which are likely to aid the child in
+comprehending the required task. Without the least intention of doing
+so, they sometimes practically tell the child how to respond. Parents,
+especially, cannot refrain from scolding the child or showing impatience
+when his answers do not come up to expectation. This, of course,
+endangers the child&#8217;s success still further.</p>
+
+<p>The psychologist is not surprised at such conduct. It would be foolish
+to expect average parents, even apart from their bias in the particular
+case at hand, to adopt the scientific attitude of the trained examiner.
+Since we cannot in a few moments at our disposal make them over into
+psychologists, our only recourse is to deal with them by exclusion.</p>
+
+<p>This is not to say that it is impossible to test a child satisfactorily
+in the presence of others. If the examiner is experienced, and if the
+child is not timid, it is sometimes possible to make a successful test
+in the presence of quite a number of auditors, provided they remain
+silent, refrain from staring, and otherwise conduct themselves with
+discretion. But not even the veteran examiner can always be sure of the
+outcome in demonstration testing.<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;124">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_124" id="Page_124"></a></p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Getting_into_rapport" id="Getting_into_rapport"></a>Getting into &ldquo;rapport.&rdquo;</h3>
+
+<p>The examiner&#8217;s first task is to win the
+confidence of the child and overcome his timidity. Unless <i>rapport</i> has
+first been established, the results of the first tests given are likely
+to be misleading. The time and effort necessary for accomplishing this
+are variable factors, depending upon the personality of both the
+examiner and the subject. In a majority of cases from three to five
+minutes should be sufficient, but in a few cases somewhat more time is
+necessary.</p>
+
+<p>The writer has found that when a strange child is brought to the clinic
+for examination, it is advantageous to go out of doors with him for a
+little walk around the university buildings. It is usually possible to
+return from such a stroll in a few minutes, with the child chattering
+away as though to an old friend. Another approach is to begin by showing
+the child some interesting object, such as a toy, or a form-board, or
+pictures not used in the test. The only danger in this method is that
+the child is likely to find the object so interesting that he may not be
+willing to abandon it for the tests, or that his mind will keep
+reverting to it during the examination.</p>
+
+<p>Still another method is to give the child his seat as soon as he is
+ushered into the room, and, after a word of greeting, which must be
+spoken in a kindly tone but without gushiness, to open up a conversation
+about matters likely to be of interest. The weather, place of residence,
+pets, sports, games, toys, travels, current events, etc., are suitable
+topics if rightly employed. When the child has begun to express himself
+without timidity and it is clear that his confidence has been gained,
+one may proceed, as though in continuance of the conversation, to
+inquire the name, age, and school grade. The examiner notes these down
+in the appropriate blanks, rather unconcernedly, at the same time
+complimenting the child (unless it is clearly a case of serious<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;125">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_125" id="Page_125"></a>
+retardation) on the fine progress he has made with his studies.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Keeping_the_child_encouraged" id="Keeping_the_child_encouraged"></a>Keeping the child encouraged.</h3>
+
+<p>Nothing contributes more to a satisfactory
+<i>rapport</i> than praise of the child&#8217;s efforts. Under no circumstances
+should the examiner permit himself to show displeasure at a response,
+however absurd it may be. In general, the poorer the response, the
+better satisfied one should appear to be with it. An error is always to
+be passed by without comment, unless it is painfully evident to the
+child himself, in which case the examiner will do well to make some
+excuse for it; e.g., &ldquo;You are not quite old enough to answer questions
+like that one; but, never mind, you are doing beautifully,&rdquo; etc.
+Exclamations like &ldquo;fine!&rdquo; &ldquo;splendid!&rdquo; etc., should be used lavishly.
+Almost any innocent deception is permissible which keeps the child
+interested, confident, and at his best level of effort. The examination
+should begin with tests that are fairly easy, in order to give the child
+a little experience with success before the more difficult tests are
+reached.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="The_importance_of_tact" id="The_importance_of_tact"></a>The importance of tact.</h3>
+
+<p>It goes without saying that children&#8217;s
+personalities are not so uniform and simple that we can adhere always to
+a single stereotyped procedure in working our way into their good
+graces. Suggestions like the above have their value, but, like rules of
+etiquette, they must be supported by the tact which comes of intuition
+and cannot be taught. The address which flatters and pleases one child
+may excite disgust in another. The examiner must scent the situation and
+adapt his method to it. One child is timid and embarrassed; another may
+think his mental powers are under suspicion and so react with sullen
+obstinacy; a third may be in an angry mood as a result of a recent
+playground quarrel. Situations like these are, of course, exceptional,
+but in any case it is necessary <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;126">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_126" id="Page_126"></a>to create in the child a certain mood,
+or indefinable attitude of mind, before the test begins.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Personality_of_the_examiner" id="Personality_of_the_examiner"></a>Personality of the examiner.</h3>
+
+<p>Doubtless there are persons so lacking in
+personal adaptability that success in this kind of work would be for
+them impossible. The wooden, mechanical, matter-of-fact and unresponsive
+personality is as much out of place in the psychological clinic as the
+traditional bull in the china shop. It would make an interesting study
+for some one to investigate, by exact methods, the influence on test
+results of the personality of different examiners who have been equally
+trained in the methods to be employed and who are equally conscientious
+in applying them according to rules.</p>
+
+<p>On the whole, differences of this kind are probably not very great among
+experienced and reasonably competent examiners. Adaptability grows with
+experience and with increase of self-confidence. After a few score tests
+there should be no serious failure from inability to get into <i>rapport</i>
+with the child. Even in those rare cases where the child breaks down and
+cries from timidity, or perhaps refuses to answer out of embarrassment,
+the difficulty can be overcome by sufficient tact so that the
+examination may proceed as though nothing had happened.</p>
+
+<p>If the examiner has the proper psychological and personal equipment, the
+testing of twenty or thirty children forms a fairly satisfactory
+apprenticeship. Without psychological training, no amount of experience
+will guarantee absolute accuracy of the results.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="The_avoidance_of_fatigue" id="The_avoidance_of_fatigue"></a>The avoidance of fatigue.</h3>
+
+<p>Against the validity of intelligence tests it
+is often argued that the result of an examination depends a great deal
+on the time of day when it is made, whether in the morning hours when
+the mind is at its best, or in the afternoon when it is supposedly
+fatigued. Although no very extensive investigation has been made of<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;127">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_127" id="Page_127"></a> this
+influence, there is no evidence that the ordinary fatigue incident to
+school work injures the child&#8217;s performance appreciably. Our tests of
+1000&nbsp;children showed no inferiority of results secured from 1&nbsp;to&nbsp;4&nbsp;<span class="smcap">p.m.</span>,
+as compared with tests made from 9&nbsp;to&nbsp;12&nbsp;<span class="smcap">a.m.</span></p>
+
+<p>An explanation for this is not hard to find. Although school work causes
+fatigue, in the sense that a part of the child&#8217;s available supply of
+mental energy is used up, there is always a reserve of energy sufficient
+to carry the child through a thirty-to fifty-minute test. The fact that
+the required tasks are novel and interesting to a high degree insures
+that the reserve energy will really be brought into play. This
+principle, of course, has its natural limits. The examiner would avoid
+testing a child who was exhausted either from work or play, or a child
+who was noticeably sleepy.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Duration_of_the_examination" id="Duration_of_the_examination"></a>Duration of the examination.</h3>
+
+<p>About the only danger of fatigue lies in
+making the examination too long. Young children show symptoms of
+weariness much more quickly than older children, and it is therefore
+fortunate that not so much time is needed for testing them. The
+following allowances of time will usually be found sufficient:&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="center">
+<table class="center smaller" summary="Recommended duration of the I&nbsp;Q test for various ages">
+<tr>
+  <td>Children</td>
+  <td>3&ndash;5</td>
+  <td>years old</td>
+  <td class="tdl0">25&ndash;30&nbsp;minutes</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td>"</td>
+  <td>6&ndash;8</td>
+  <td>" "</td>
+  <td class="tdl0">30&ndash;40 &nbsp; &nbsp; "</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td>"</td>
+  <td>&nbsp;&thinsp;9&ndash;12</td>
+  <td>" "</td>
+  <td class="tdl0">40&ndash;50 &nbsp; &nbsp; "</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td>"</td>
+  <td>13&ndash;15</td>
+  <td>" "</td>
+  <td class="tdl0">50&ndash;60 &nbsp; &nbsp; "</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td colspan="3" class="tdl0">Adults</td>
+  <td class="tdl0">60&ndash;90 &nbsp; &nbsp; "</td>
+</tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<p>This allowance ordinarily includes the time necessary for getting into
+<i>rapport</i> with the child, in addition to that actually consumed in the
+tests. But the examiner need not expect to hold fast to any schedule.
+Some subjects respond in a lively manner, others are exasperatingly
+slow. It is more often the mentally retarded child who answers slowly,
+but exceptions to this rule are not uncommon. One 8-year-old <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;128">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_128" id="Page_128"></a>boy
+examined by the writer answered so hesitatingly that it required two
+sittings of nearly an hour each to complete the test. The result,
+however, showed a mental age of 11&frac12;&nbsp;years, or an I&nbsp;Q of 143.</p>
+
+<p>It is permissible to hurry the child by an occasional &ldquo;that&#8217;s fine; now,
+quickly,&rdquo; etc., but in doing this caution must be exercised, or the
+child&#8217;s mental process may be blocked. The appearance of nagging must be
+carefully avoided. If the test goes so slowly that it cannot be
+completed in the above limits of time, it is usually best to stop and
+complete the examination at another time. When this is not possible, it
+is advisable to take a ten-minute intermission and a little walk out of
+doors.</p>
+
+<p>Time can be saved by having all the necessary materials close at hand
+and conveniently arranged. The coins should be kept in a separate purse,
+and the pictures, colors, stamps, and designs for drawing should be
+mounted on stiff cardboard which may be punched and kept in a notebook
+cover. The series of sentences, digits, comprehension questions, fables,
+etc., should either be mounted in similar fashion, or else printed in
+full on the record sheets used in the tests. The latter is more
+convenient.<a name="FNanchor_43_43" id="FNanchor_43_43"></a><a href="#Footnote_43_43" class="fnanchor">[43]</a> All other materials should be kept where they will not
+have to be hunted for.</p>
+
+<p>Besides saving valuable time, a little methodical foresight of this kind
+adds to the success of the test. If the child is kept waiting, the test
+loses its interest and attention <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;129">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_129" id="Page_129"></a>strays. See to it, if possible, that no
+lull occurs in the performance.</p>
+
+<p>Inexperienced examiners sometimes waste time foolishly by stopping to
+instruct the child on his failures. This is doubly bad, for besides
+losing time it makes the child conscious of the imperfection of his
+responses and creates embarrassment. Adhere to the purpose of the test,
+which is to ascertain the child&#8217;s intellectual level, not to instruct
+him.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Desirable_range_of_testing" id="Desirable_range_of_testing"></a>Desirable range of testing.</h3>
+
+<p>There are two considerations here of equal
+importance. It is necessary to make the examination thorough, but in the
+pursuit of thoroughness we must be careful not to produce fatigue or
+ennui. Unless there is reason to suspect mental retardation, it is
+usually best to begin with the group of tests just below the child&#8217;s
+age. However, if there is a failure in the tests of that group, it is
+necessary to go back and try all the tests of the previous group. In
+like manner the examination should be carried up the scale, until a test
+group has been found in which all the tests are failed.</p>
+
+<p>It must be admitted, however, that because of time limitations and
+fatigue, it is not always practicable to adhere to this ideal of
+thoroughness. In testing normal children, little error will result if we
+go back no farther than the year which yielded only one failure, and if
+we stop with the year in which there was only one success. <em>This is the
+lowest permissible limit of thoroughness.</em> Defectives are more uneven
+mentally than normal children, and therefore scatter their successes and
+failures over a wider range. With such subjects it is absolutely
+imperative that the test be thorough.</p>
+
+<p>In the case of defectives it is sometimes necessary to begin with random
+testing, until a rough idea is gained of the mental level. But the
+skilled observer soon becomes able to utilize symptoms in the child&#8217;s
+conversation and conduct and to dispense with most of this preliminary
+exploration.<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;130">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_130" id="Page_130"></a></p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Order_of_giving_the_tests" id="Order_of_giving_the_tests"></a>Order of giving the tests.</h3>
+
+<p>The child&#8217;s efforts in the tests are
+sometimes markedly influenced by the order in which they are given. If
+language tests or memory tests are given first, the child is likely to
+be embarrassed. More suitable to begin with are those which test
+knowledge or judgment about objective things, such as the pictures,
+weights, stamps, bow-knot, colors, coins, counting pennies, number of
+fingers, right and left, time orientation, ball and field,
+paper-folding, etc. Tests like naming sixty words, finding rhymes,
+giving differences or similarities, making sentences, repeating
+sentences, and drawing are especially unsuitable because they tend to
+provoke self-consciousness.</p>
+
+<p>The tests as arranged in this revision are in the order which it is
+usually best to follow, but one should not hesitate to depart from the
+order given when it seems best in a given case to do so. It is necessary
+to be constantly alert so that when the child shows a tendency to balk
+at a given type of test, such as those of memory, language, numbers,
+drawing, &ldquo;comprehension,&rdquo; etc., the work can be shifted to more
+agreeable tasks. When the child is at his ease again, it is usually
+possible to return to the troublesome tests with better success. In the
+case of 8-year-old D.&nbsp;C., who is a speech defective but otherwise above
+normal, it was quite impossible at the first sitting to give such tests
+as sentence-making, naming sixty words, reading, repeating sentences,
+giving definitions, etc.; at each test of this type the child&#8217;s voice
+broke and he was ready to cry, due, no doubt, to sensitiveness regarding
+his speech defect. Others do everything willingly except the drawing and
+copying. The younger children sometimes refuse to repeat the sentences
+or digits. In all such cases it is best to pass on to something else.
+After a few minutes the rejected task may be done willingly.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Coaxing_to_be_avoided" id="Coaxing_to_be_avoided"></a>Coaxing to be avoided.</h3>
+
+<p>Although we should always <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;131">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_131" id="Page_131"></a>encourage the child to
+believe that he can answer correctly, if he will only try, we must avoid
+the common practice of dragging out responses by too much urging and
+coaxing. The sympathies of the examiner tend to lead him into the habit
+of repeating and explaining the question if the child does not answer
+promptly. This is nearly always a mistake, for the question is one which
+should be understood. Besides, explanations and coaxing are too often
+equivalent to answering the question for the child. It is almost
+impossible to impress this danger sufficiently upon the untrained
+examiner. One who is not familiar with the psychology of suggestion may
+put the answer in the child&#8217;s mouth without suspecting what he is doing.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Adhering_to_formula" id="Adhering_to_formula"></a>Adhering to formula.</h3>
+
+<p>It cannot be too strongly emphasized that unless we
+follow a standardized procedure the tests lose their significance. The
+danger is chiefly that of unintentionally and unconsciously introducing
+variations which will affect the meaning of the test. One who has not
+had a thorough training in the methods of mental testing cannot
+appreciate how numerous are the opportunities for the unconscious
+transformation of a test. Many of these are pointed out in the
+description of the individual tests, but it would be folly to undertake
+to warn the experimenter against every possible error of this kind.
+Sometimes the omission or the addition of a single phrase in giving the
+test will alter materially the significance of the response. Only the
+trained psychologist can vary the formula without risk of invalidating
+the result, and even he must be on his guard. All sorts of
+misunderstandings regarding the correct placing of tests and regarding
+their accuracy or inaccuracy have come about through the failure of
+different investigators to follow the same procedure.</p>
+
+<p>One who would use the tests for any serious purpose, therefore, must
+study the procedure for each and every <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;132">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_132" id="Page_132"></a>test until he knows it
+thoroughly. After that a considerable amount of practice is necessary
+before one learns to avoid slips. During the early stages of practice it
+is necessary to refer to the printed instructions frequently in order to
+check up errors before they have become habitual.</p>
+
+<p>The instructions hitherto available are at fault in not defining the
+procedure with sufficient definiteness, and it is the purpose of this
+volume to make good this deficiency as far as possible.</p>
+
+<p>It is too much, however, to suppose that the instructions can be made
+&ldquo;fool-proof.&rdquo; With whatever definiteness they may be set forth,
+situations are sure to arise which the examiner cannot be formally
+prepared for. There is no limit to the multitude of misunderstandings
+possible. After testing hundreds of children one still finds new
+examples of misapprehension. In a few such cases the instruction may be
+repeated, if there is reason to think the child&#8217;s hearing was at fault
+or if some extraordinary distraction has occurred. But unless otherwise
+stated in the directions, the repetition of a question is ordinarily to
+be avoided. Supplementary explanations are hardly ever permissible.</p>
+
+<p>In short, numberless situations may arise in the use of a test which may
+injure the validity of the response, events which cannot always be dealt
+with by preconceived rule. Accordingly, although we must urge
+unceasingly the importance of following the standard procedure, it is
+not to be supposed that formulas are an adequate substitute either for
+scientific judgment or for common sense.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Scoring" id="Scoring"></a>Scoring.</h3>
+
+<p>The exact method of scoring the individual tests is set forth
+in the following chapters. Reference to the record booklet for use in
+testing will show that the records are to be kept in detail. Each
+subdivision of a test should be scored separately, in order that the
+clinical picture <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;133">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_133" id="Page_133"></a>may be as complete as possible. This helps in the final
+evaluation of the results. It makes much difference, for example,
+whether success in repeating six digits is earned by repeating all three
+correctly or only one; or whether the child&#8217;s lack of success with the
+absurdities is due to failure on two, three, four, or all of them. Time
+should be recorded whenever called for in the record blanks.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Recording_responses" id="Recording_responses"></a>Recording responses.</h3>
+
+<p>Plus and minus signs alone are not usually
+sufficient. Whenever possible the entire response should be recorded. If
+the test results are to be used by any other person than the examiner,
+this is absolutely essential. Any other standard of completeness opens
+the door to carelessness and inaccuracy. In nearly all the tests, except
+that of naming sixty words, the examiner will find it possible by the
+liberal use of abbreviations to record practically the entire response
+<i>verbatim</i>. In doing so, however, one must be careful to avoid keeping
+the child waiting. Occasionally it is necessary to leave off recording
+altogether because of the embarrassment sometimes aroused in the child
+by seeing his answer written down. The writer has met the latter
+difficulty several times. When for any reason it is not feasible to
+record anything more than score marks, success may be indicated by the
+sign +, failure by &minus;, and half credit by &frac12;. An exceptionally good
+response may be indicated by ++ and an exceptionally poor response by
+&minus;&thinsp;&minus;. If there is a slight doubt about a success or failure the sign? may
+be added to the + or &minus;. In general, however, score the response either +
+or &minus;, avoiding half credit as far as it is possible to do so.</p>
+
+<p>If the entire response is not recorded it is necessary to record at
+least the score mark for each test <em>when the test is given</em>. It must be
+borne in mind that the scoring is not a purely mechanical affair.
+Instead, the judgment of the examiner must come into play with every
+record made. <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;134">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_134" id="Page_134"></a>If the scoring is delayed, there is not only the danger of
+forgetting a response, but the judgment is likely to be influenced by
+the subject&#8217;s responses to succeeding questions. Our special record
+booklet contains wide margins, so that extended notes and observations
+regarding the child&#8217;s responses and behavior can be recorded as the test
+proceeds.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Scattering_of_successes" id="Scattering_of_successes"></a>Scattering of successes.</h3>
+
+<p>It is sometimes a source of concern to the
+untrained examiner that the successes and failures should be scattered
+over quite an extensive range of years. Why, it may be asked, should not
+a child who has 10-year intelligence answer correctly all the tests up
+to and including group&nbsp;X, and fail on all the tests beyond? There are
+two reasons why such is almost never the case. In the first place, the
+intelligence of an individual is ordinarily not even. There are many
+different kinds of intelligence, and in some of these the subject is
+better endowed than in others. A second reason lies in the fact that no
+test can be purely and simply a test of native intelligence. Given a
+certain degree of intelligence, accidents of experience and training
+bring it about that this intelligence will work more successfully with
+some kinds of material than with others. For both of these reasons there
+results a scattering of successes and failures over three or four years.
+The subject fails first in one or two tests of a group, then in two or
+three tests of the following group, the number of failures increasing
+until there are no successes at all. Success &ldquo;tapers off&rdquo; from
+100&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent to 0. Once in a great while a child fails on several of the
+tests of a given year and succeeds with a majority of those in the next
+higher year. This is only an extreme instance of uneven intelligence or
+of specialized experience, and does not necessarily reflect upon the
+reliability of the tests for children in general. The method of
+calculation given above strikes <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;135">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_135" id="Page_135"></a>a kind of average and gives the general
+level of intelligence, which is essentially the thing we want to know.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Supplementary_considerations" id="Supplementary_considerations"></a>Supplementary considerations.</h3>
+
+<p>It would be a mistake to suppose that any
+set of mental tests could be devised which would give us complete
+information about a child&#8217;s native intelligence. There are no tests
+which are absolutely pure tests of intelligence. All are influenced to a
+greater or less degree also by training and by social environment. For
+this reason, all the ascertainable facts bearing on such influences
+should be added to the record of the mental examination, and should be
+given due weight in reaching a final conclusion as to the level of
+intelligence.</p>
+
+<p>The following supplementary information should be gathered, when
+possible:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol class="smaller">
+<li>Social status (very superior, superior, average, inferior, or very inferior).</li>
+<li>The teacher&#8217;s estimate of the child&#8217;s intelligence (very superior, superior, average, inferior, or very inferior).</li>
+<li>School opportunities, including years of attendance, regularity, retardation or acceleration, etc.</li>
+<li>Quality of school work (very superior, superior, average, inferior, or very inferior).</li>
+<li>Physical handicaps, if any (adenoids, diseased tonsils, partial deafness, imperfect vision, malnutrition, etc.).</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>In addition, the examiner will need to take account of the general
+attitude of the child during the examination. This is provided for in
+the record blanks under the heading &ldquo;comments.&rdquo; The comments should
+describe as fully as possible the conduct and attitude of the child
+during the examination, with emphasis upon such disturbing factors as
+fear, timidity, unwillingness to answer, overconfidence, carelessness,
+lack of attention, etc. Sometimes, also, it is desirable to verify the
+child&#8217;s age and to make record of the verification.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;136">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_136" id="Page_136"></a>Once more let it be urged that no degree of mechanical perfection of the
+tests can ever take the place of good judgment and psychological
+insight. Intelligence is too complicated to be weighed, like a bag of
+grain, by any one who can read figures.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Alternative_tests" id="Alternative_tests"></a>Alternative tests.</h3>
+
+<p>The tests designated as &ldquo;alternative tests&rdquo; are not
+intended for regular use. Inasmuch as they have been standardized and
+belong in the year group where they are placed, they may be used as
+substitute tests on certain occasions. Sometimes one of the regular
+tests is spoiled in giving it, or the requisite material for it may not
+be at hand. Sometimes there may be reason to suspect that the subject
+has become acquainted with some of the tests. In such cases it is a
+great convenience to have a few substitutes available.</p>
+
+<p>It is necessary, however, to warn against a possible misuse of
+alternative tests. <em>It is not permissible to count success in an
+alternative test as offsetting failure in a regular test.</em> This would
+give the subject too much leeway of failure. There are very exceptional
+cases, however, when it is legitimate to break this rule; namely, when
+one of the regular tests would be obviously unfair to the subject being
+tested. In year&nbsp;X, for example, one of the three <a href="#X_alt1">alternative tests</a>
+should be substituted for the reading test (<a href="#X_4">X,&nbsp;4</a>) in case we are testing
+a subject who has not had the equivalent of at least two years of school
+work. In year&nbsp;VIII, it would be permissible to substitute the
+alternative test of <a href="#VIII_alt1">naming six coins</a>, instead of the <a href="#VIII_6">vocabulary test</a>, in
+the case of a subject who came from a home where English was not spoken.
+In VII, it would perhaps not be unfair to substitute the <a href="#VII_alt1">alternative
+test</a>, in place of the test of <a href="#VII_6">copying a diamond</a>, in the case of a
+subject who, because of timidity or embarrassment, refused to attempt
+the diamond. But it would be going entirely too far to substitute an
+alternative<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;137">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_137" id="Page_137"></a> test in the place of every regular test which the subject
+responded to by silence. In the large majority of cases persistent
+silence deserves to be scored failure.</p>
+
+<p>Certain tests have been made alternatives because of their inferior
+value, some because the presence of other tests of similar nature in the
+same year rendered them less necessary.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Finding_mental_age" id="Finding_mental_age"></a>Finding mental age.</h3>
+
+<p>As there are six tests in each age group from III to
+X, each test in this part of the scale counts 2&nbsp;months toward mental
+age. There are eight tests in group&nbsp;XII, which, because of the omission
+of the 11-year group, have a combined value of 24&nbsp;months, or 3&nbsp;months
+each. Similarly, each of the six tests in XIV has a value of 4&nbsp;months
+(24&nbsp;&divide;&nbsp;6&nbsp;=&nbsp;4). The tests of the &ldquo;average adult&rdquo; group are given a value
+of 5&nbsp;months each, and those of the &ldquo;superior adult&rdquo; group a value of
+6&nbsp;months each. These values are in a sense arbitrary, but they are
+justified in the fact that they are such as to cause ordinary adults to
+test at the &ldquo;average adult&rdquo; level.</p>
+
+<p>The calculation of mental age is therefore simplicity itself. The rule
+is: (1) Credit the subject with all the tests below the point where the
+examination begins (remembering that the examination goes back until a
+year group has been found in which all the tests are passed); and (2)
+add to this basal credit 2&nbsp;months for each test passed successfully up
+to and including year&nbsp;X, 3&nbsp;months for each test passed in XII, 4&nbsp;months
+for each test passed in XIV, 5&nbsp;months for each success in &ldquo;average
+adult,&rdquo; and 6&nbsp;months for each success in &ldquo;superior adult.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>For example, let us suppose that a child passes all the tests in VI,
+five of the six tests in VII, three in VIII, two in IX, and one in X.
+The total credit earned is as follows:&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="center">
+<table class="smaller" summary="First example of calculating mental age">
+<tr>
+  <th><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;138">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_138" id="Page_138"></a></th>
+  <th><i>Years</i></th>
+  <th><i>Months</i></th>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td>Credit presupposed, years I to V</td>
+  <td class="tdr">5</td>
+  <td></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td>Credit earned in VI, 6&nbsp;tests passed, 2&nbsp;months
+  each</td>
+  <td class="tdr">1</td>
+  <td></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td>Credit earned in VII, 5&nbsp;tests passed, 2&nbsp;months
+  each</td>
+  <td></td>
+  <td class="tdr">10</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td>Credit earned in VIII, 3&nbsp;tests passed, 2&nbsp;months
+  each</td>
+  <td></td>
+  <td class="tdr">6</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td>Credit earned in IX, 2&nbsp;tests passed, 2&nbsp;months
+  each</td>
+  <td></td>
+  <td class="tdr">4</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td>Credit earned in X, 1&nbsp;test passed, 2&nbsp;months</td>
+  <td></td>
+  <td class="tdr">2</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td style="padding-left:2em;">Total credit</td>
+  <td class="tdr" style="border-top:thin solid black;">7</td>
+  <td class="tdr" style="border-top:thin solid black;">10</td>
+</tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<p>Taking a subject who tests higher, let us suppose the following tests
+are passed: All in X, six of the eight in XII, two of the six in XIV,
+and one of the six in &ldquo;average adult.&rdquo; The total credit is as follows:&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="center">
+<table class="smaller" summary="Second example of calculating mental age">
+<tr>
+  <th></th>
+  <th><i>Years</i></th>
+  <th><i>Months</i></th>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td>Credit presupposed, years I to IX</td>
+  <td class="tdr">9</td>
+  <td></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td>Credit earned in X, 6&nbsp;tests passed, 2&nbsp;months each</td>
+  <td class="tdr">1</td>
+  <td></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td>Credit earned in XII, 6&nbsp;tests passed, 3&nbsp;months
+  each</td>
+  <td class="tdr">1</td>
+  <td class="tdr">6</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td>Credit earned in XIV, 2&nbsp;tests passed, 4&nbsp;months each</td>
+  <td class="tdr">0</td>
+  <td class="tdr">8</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td>Credit earned in &ldquo;average adult,&rdquo; 1&nbsp;success, 5&nbsp;months&nbsp;</td>
+  <td></td>
+  <td class="tdr">5</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td style="padding-left:2em;">Total credit</td>
+  <td class="tdr" style="border-top:thin solid black;">12</td>
+  <td class="tdr" style="border-top:thin solid black;">7</td>
+</tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<p>One other point: If one or more tests of a year group have been omitted,
+as sometimes happens either from oversight or lack of time, the question
+arises how the tests which were given in such a year group should be
+evaluated. Suppose, for example, a subject has been given only four of
+the six tests in a given year, and that he passes two, or half of those
+given. In such a case the probability would be that had all six tests
+been given, three would have been passed; that is, one half of all. It
+is evident, therefore, that when a test has been omitted, a
+proportionately larger value should be assigned to each of those given.</p>
+
+<p>If all six tests are given in any year group below XII, each has a value
+of 2&nbsp;months. If only four are given, each has a value of 3&nbsp;months
+(12&nbsp;&divide;&nbsp;4&nbsp;=&nbsp;3). If five tests only <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;139">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_139" id="Page_139"></a>are given, each has a value of
+2.4&nbsp;months (12&nbsp;&divide;&nbsp;5&nbsp;=&nbsp;2.4). If in year group&nbsp;XII only six of the eight
+tests are given, each has a value of 4&nbsp;months (24&nbsp;&divide;&nbsp;6&nbsp;=&nbsp;4). If in the
+&ldquo;average adult&rdquo; group only five of the six tests are given, each has a
+value of 6&nbsp;months instead of the usual 5&nbsp;months. In this connection it
+will need to be remembered that the six &ldquo;average adult&rdquo; tests have a
+combined value of 30&nbsp;months (6&nbsp;tests, 5&nbsp;months each); also that the
+combined value of the six &ldquo;superior adult&rdquo; tests is 36&nbsp;months
+(6&nbsp;&times;&nbsp;6&nbsp;=&nbsp;36). Accordingly, if only five of the six &ldquo;superior adult&rdquo;
+tests are given, the value of each is 36&nbsp;&divide;&nbsp;5&nbsp;=&nbsp;7.2&nbsp;months.</p>
+
+<p>For example, let us suppose that a subject has been tested as follows:
+All the six tests in X were given and all were passed; only six of the
+eight in XII were given and five were passed; five of the six in XIV
+were given and three were passed; five of the six in &ldquo;average adult&rdquo;
+were given and one was passed; five were given in &ldquo;superior adult&rdquo; and
+no credit earned. The result would be as follows:&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="center">
+<table class="center smaller" style="width:90%;" summary="Third example of calculating mental age">
+<tr>
+  <th></th>
+  <th><i>Years</i></th>
+  <th><i>Months</i></th>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="tdlh">Credit presupposed, years I to IX</td>
+  <td>9</td>
+  <td></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="tdlh">Credit earned in X, 6&nbsp;given, 6&nbsp;successes</td>
+  <td>1</td>
+  <td></td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="tdlh">Credit earned in XII, 6&nbsp;given, 5&nbsp;passed. Unit value of
+  each test given is 24&nbsp;&divide;&nbsp;6&nbsp;=&nbsp;4. Total
+  value of the 5&nbsp;tests passed is 5&nbsp;&times;&nbsp;4 or</td>
+  <td>1</td>
+  <td>8</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="tdlh">Credit earned in XIV, 5&nbsp;tests given, 3&nbsp;passed. Unit
+  value of each of the 5 given is
+  24&nbsp;&divide;&nbsp;5&nbsp;=&nbsp;4.8. Value of the 3 passed is
+  3&nbsp;&times;&nbsp;4.8, or</td>
+  <td>0</td>
+  <td>14+</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="tdlh">Credit earned in &ldquo;average adult,&rdquo; 5&nbsp;tests given,
+  1&nbsp;passed. Unit value of the 5&nbsp;tests given is
+  30&nbsp;&divide;&nbsp;5&nbsp;=&nbsp;6. Value of the
+  1&nbsp;success</td>
+  <td>0</td>
+  <td>6</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="tdlh">Credit earned in &ldquo;superior adult&rdquo;</td>
+  <td>0</td>
+  <td>0</td>
+</tr>
+<tr>
+  <td class="tdlh" style="text-indent:0;">Total credit</td>
+  <td style="border-top:thin solid black;">13&nbsp;&nbsp;</td>
+  <td style="border-top:thin solid black;">&nbsp;&nbsp;4+</td>
+</tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<p>The calculation of mental age is really simpler than our verbal
+illustrations make it appear. After the operation <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;140">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_140" id="Page_140"></a>has been performed
+twenty or thirty times, it can be done in less than a half-minute
+without danger of error.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="The_use_of_the_intelligence_quotient" id="The_use_of_the_intelligence_quotient"></a>The use of the intelligence quotient.</h3>
+
+<p>As elsewhere explained, the mental
+age alone does not tell us what we want to know about a child&#8217;s
+intelligence status. The significance of a given number of years of
+retardation or acceleration depends upon the age of the child. A
+3-year-old child who is retarded one year is ordinarily feeble-minded; a
+10-year-old retarded one year is only a little below normal. The child
+who at 3&nbsp;years of age is retarded one year will probably be retarded two
+years at the age of 6, three years at the age of 9, and four years at
+the age of 12.</p>
+
+<p>What we want to know, therefore, is the ratio existing between mental
+age and real age. This is the intelligence quotient, or I&nbsp;Q. To find it
+we simply divide mental age (expressed in years and months) by real age
+(also expressed in years and months). The process is easier if we
+express each age in terms of months alone before dividing. The division
+can, of course, be performed almost instantaneously and with much less
+danger of error by the use of a slide rule or a division table. One who
+has to calculate many intelligence quotients should by all means use
+some kind of mechanical help.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="How_to_find_the_I_Q_of_adult_subjects" id="How_to_find_the_I_Q_of_adult_subjects"></a>How to find the I&nbsp;Q of adult subjects.</h3>
+
+<p>Native intelligence, in so far as
+it can be measured by tests now available, appears to improve but little
+after the age of 15&nbsp;or&nbsp;16&nbsp;years. It follows that in calculating the I&nbsp;Q
+of an adult subject, it will be necessary to disregard the years he has
+lived beyond the point where intelligence attains its final development.</p>
+
+<p>Although the location of this point is not exactly known, it will be
+sufficiently accurate for our purpose to assume its location at
+16&nbsp;years. Accordingly, any person over 16&nbsp;years of age, however old, is
+for purposes of calculating <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;141">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_141" id="Page_141"></a>I&nbsp;Q considered to be just 16&nbsp;years old. If a
+youth of 18 and a man of 60&nbsp;years both have a mental age of 12&nbsp;years,
+the I&nbsp;Q in each case is 12&nbsp;&divide;&nbsp;16, or .75.</p>
+
+<p>The significance of various values of the I&nbsp;Q is set forth
+elsewhere.<a name="FNanchor_44_44" id="FNanchor_44_44"></a><a href="#Footnote_44_44" class="fnanchor">[44]</a> Here it need only be repeated that 100&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q means exactly
+average intelligence; that nearly all who are below 70&nbsp;or&nbsp;75&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q are
+feeble-minded; and that the child of 125&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q is about as much above the
+average as the high-grade feeble-minded individual is below the average.
+For ordinary purposes all who fall between 95&nbsp;and&nbsp;105&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q may be
+considered as average in intelligence.</p>
+
+<h3 class="runin"><a name="Material_for_use_in_testing" id="Material_for_use_in_testing"></a>Material for use in testing.</h3>
+
+<p>It is strongly recommended that in testing
+by the Stanford revision the regular Stanford record booklets be used.
+These are so arranged as to make testing accurate, rapid, and
+convenient. They contain square, diamond, round field, vocabulary list,
+fables, sentences, digits, and selections for memory tests, the reading
+selection barred for scoring, the dissected sentences, arithmetical
+problems, etc. One is required for each child tested.<a name="FNanchor_45_45" id="FNanchor_45_45"></a><a href="#Footnote_45_45" class="fnanchor">[45]</a></p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_43_43" id="Footnote_43_43"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_43_43">[43]</a></span> Examiners will find it a great convenience to use the
+record booklet which has been specially devised for testing with the
+Stanford revision. It contains all the necessary printed material,
+including digits, sentences, absurdities, fables, the vocabulary list,
+the reading selection, the square and diamond for copying, etc., and in
+addition gives with each test the standard for scoring. It is so
+arranged as to afford ample room for a <i>verbatim</i> record of all the
+child&#8217;s responses, and contains other features calculated to make
+testing easy and accurate. Regarding purchasing of supplies see p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_141">141</a>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_44_44" id="Footnote_44_44"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_44_44">[44]</a></span> See <a href="#CHAPTER_VI">Chapter&nbsp;VI</a>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_45_45" id="Footnote_45_45"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_45_45">[45]</a></span> Houghton Mifflin Company will supply all the printed
+material needed in the tests, including the lines for the forms for
+<a href="#VI_2">VI,&nbsp;2</a>, the four pictures for &ldquo;enumeration,&rdquo; &ldquo;description,&rdquo; and
+&ldquo;interpretation,&rdquo; the pictures for <a href="#V_3">V,&nbsp;3</a> and <a href="#VI_2">VI,&nbsp;2</a>, the colors, designs
+for <a href="#X_3">X,&nbsp;3</a>, the code for <a href="#Average_adult_6">Average Adult 6</a>, and score cards for square,
+diamond, designs, and ball-and-field.</p>
+
+<p>This is all the material required for the use of the Stanford revision,
+except the five weights for <a href="#IX_2">IX,&nbsp;2</a>, and <a href="#V_1">V,&nbsp;1</a>, and the <a href="#X_alt3">Healy-Fernald
+Construction Puzzle</a> for <a href="#CHAPTER_XVI">X</a>. These may be purchased of C.&nbsp;H. Stoelting &amp;
+Co., 3037 Carroll Avenue, Chicago. It is not necessary, however, to have
+the weights and the Construction Puzzle, as the presence of one or more
+alternative tests in each year makes it possible to substitute other
+tests instead of those requiring these materials. This saves
+considerable expense. Apart from these, which may either be made at home
+(see pages <a href="#Page_278">278</a>, <a href="#Page_279">279</a>) or dispensed with, the only necessary equipment for
+using the Stanford revision is a copy of this book with the accompanying
+set of printed matter, and the record booklets. The record booklets are
+supplied only in packages of 25.</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;142">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_142" id="Page_142"></a><a name="CHAPTER_IX" id="CHAPTER_IX"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;IX
+<br />
+<small>Instructions For Year&nbsp;III</small></h2>
+
+
+<h3><a name="III_1" id="III_1"></a>III,&nbsp;1. Pointing to parts of the body</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> After getting the child&#8217;s attention, say: &ldquo;<i>Show me your
+nose.</i>&rdquo; &ldquo;<i>Put your finger on your nose.</i>&rdquo; Same with eyes, mouth, and
+hair.</p>
+
+<p>Tact is often necessary to overcome timidity. If two or three
+repetitions of the instruction fail to bring a response, point to the
+child&#8217;s chin or ear and say: &ldquo;<i>Is this your nose?</i>&rdquo; &ldquo;<i>No?</i>&rdquo; &ldquo;<i>Then where
+is your nose?</i>&rdquo; Sometimes, after one has tried two or three parts of the
+test without eliciting any response, the child may suddenly release his
+inhibitions and answer all the questions promptly. In case of persistent
+refusal to respond it is best not to harass the child for an answer, but
+to leave the test for a while and return to it later. This is a rule
+which applies generally throughout the scale. In the case of one
+exceptionally timid little girl, it was impossible to get any response
+by the usual procedure, but immediately when a doll was shown the child
+pointed willingly to its nose, eyes, mouth, and hair. The device was
+successful because it withdrew the child&#8217;s attention from herself and
+centered it upon something objective.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> <em>Three responses out of four</em> must be correct. Instead of
+pointing, the child sometimes responds by winking the eyes, opening the
+mouth, etc., which is counted as satisfactory.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Binet&#8217;s purpose in this test is to ascertain whether the
+subject is capable of comprehending simple <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;143">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_143" id="Page_143"></a>language. The ability to
+comprehend and use language is indeed one of the most reliable
+indications of the grade of mental development. The appreciation of
+gestures comes first, then the comprehension of language heard, next the
+ability to repeat words and sentences mechanically, and finally the
+ability to use language as a means of communication. The present test,
+however, is not more strictly a test of language comprehension than the
+others of the 3-year group, and in any case it could not be said to mark
+the <em>beginning</em> of the power to comprehend spoken language. That is
+fairly well advanced by the age of 2&nbsp;years. The test closely resembles
+<a href="#III_2">III,&nbsp;2</a> (naming familiar objects), and <a href="#III_3">III,&nbsp;3</a> (enumeration of objects in
+a picture), except that it brings in a personal element and gives some
+clue to the development of the sense of self. All the data agree in
+locating the test at year&nbsp;III.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="III_2" id="III_2"></a>III,&nbsp;2. Naming familiar objects</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Use a key, a penny, a closed knife, a watch, and an ordinary
+lead pencil. The key should be the usual large-sized doorkey, not one of
+the Yale type. The penny should not be too new, for the freshly made,
+untarnished penny resembles very little the penny usually seen. Any
+ordinary pocket knife may be used, and it is to be shown unopened. The
+formula is, &ldquo;<i>What is this?</i>&rdquo; or, &ldquo;<i>Tell me what this is.</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> There must be at least <em>three correct responses out of five</em>. A
+response is not correct unless the object is named. It is not sufficient
+for the child merely to show that he knows its use. A child, for
+example, may take the pencil and begin to mark with it, or go to the
+door and insert the key in the lock, but this is not sufficient. At the
+same time we must not be too arbitrary about requiring a particular<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;144">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_144" id="Page_144"></a>
+name. &ldquo;Cent&rdquo; or &ldquo;pennies&rdquo; for &ldquo;penny&rdquo; is satisfactory, but &ldquo;money&rdquo; is
+not. The watch is sometimes called &ldquo;a clock&rdquo; or &ldquo;a tick-tock,&rdquo; and we
+shall perhaps not be too liberal if we score these responses <em>plus</em>.
+&ldquo;Pen&rdquo; for &ldquo;pencil,&rdquo; however, is unsatisfactory. Substitute names for
+&ldquo;key&rdquo; and &ldquo;knife&rdquo; are rarely given. Mispronunciations due to baby-talk
+are of course ignored.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The purpose of this test is to find out whether the child has
+made the association between familiar objects and their names. The
+mental processes necessary to enable the child to pass this test are
+very elementary, and yet, as far as they go, they are fundamental.
+Learning the names of objects frequently seen is a form of mental
+activity in which the normally endowed child of 2&nbsp;to&nbsp;4&nbsp;years finds great
+satisfaction. Any marked retardation in making such associations is a
+grave indication of the lack of that spontaneity which is so necessary
+for the development of the higher grades of intelligence. It would be
+entirely beside the point, therefore, to question the validity of the
+test on the ground that a given child may not have been <em>taught</em> the
+names of the objects used. Practically all children 3&nbsp;years old, however
+poor their environment, have made the acquaintance of at least three of
+the five objects, and if intelligence is normal they have learned their
+names as a result of spontaneous inquiry.</p>
+
+<p>Always use the list of objects here given, because it has been
+standardized. Any improvised selection would be sure to contain some
+objects either less or more familiar than those in the standardized
+list. Note also that three correct responses out of five are sufficient.
+If we required five correct answers out of six (like Kuhlmann), or three
+out of three (like Binet, Goddard, and Huey), the test would probably
+belong at the 4-year level. Binet states that this test is materially
+harder than that of naming objects in a <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;145">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_145" id="Page_145"></a>picture, since in the latter the
+child selects from a number of objects in the picture those he knows
+best, while in the former test he must name the objects we have
+arbitrarily chosen. This difference does not hold, however, if we
+require only three correct responses out of five for passing the test of
+naming objects, instead of Binet&#8217;s three out of three. All else being
+equal, it is of course easier to recognize and name a real object shown
+than it is to recognize and name it from a picture.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="III_3" id="III_3"></a>III,&nbsp;3. Enumeration of objects in pictures</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Use the three pictures designated as &ldquo;Dutch Home,&rdquo; &ldquo;River
+Scene,&rdquo; and &ldquo;Post-Office.&rdquo; Say, &ldquo;<i>Now I am going to show you a pretty
+picture.</i>&rdquo; Then, holding the first one before the child, close enough to
+permit distinct vision, say: &ldquo;<i>Tell me what you see in this picture.</i>&rdquo;
+If there is no response, as sometimes happens, due to embarrassment or
+timidity, repeat the request in this form: &ldquo;<i>Look at the picture and
+tell me everything you can see in it.</i>&rdquo; If there is still no response,
+say: &ldquo;<i>Show me the ...</i>&rdquo; (naming some object in the picture). Only one
+question of this type, however, is permissible. If the child answers
+correctly, say: &ldquo;<i>That is fine; now tell me everything you see in the
+picture.</i>&rdquo; From this point the responses nearly always follow without
+further coaxing. Indeed, if <i>rapport</i> has been properly cultivated
+before the test begins, the first question will ordinarily be
+sufficient. If the child names one or two things in a picture and then
+stops, urge him on by saying &ldquo;<i>And what else</i>&rdquo; Proceed with pictures <i>b</i>
+and <i>c</i> in the same manner.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if the child enumerates as many as <em>three</em>
+objects in <em>one</em> picture <em>spontaneously</em>; that is, without intervening
+questions or urging. Anything better <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;146">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_146" id="Page_146"></a>than enumeration (as description or
+interpretation) is also acceptable, but description is rarely
+encountered before 5&nbsp;years and interpretation rarely before 9&nbsp;or&nbsp;10.<a name="FNanchor_46_46" id="FNanchor_46_46"></a><a href="#Footnote_46_46" class="fnanchor">[46]</a></p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The purpose of the test in this year is to find out whether the
+sight of a familiar object in a picture provokes recognition and calls
+up the appropriate name.<a name="FNanchor_47_47" id="FNanchor_47_47"></a><a href="#Footnote_47_47" class="fnanchor">[47]</a> The average child of 3&nbsp;or&nbsp;4&nbsp;years is in
+what Binet calls &ldquo;the identification stage&rdquo;; that is, familiar objects
+in a picture will be identified but not described, their relations to
+one another will not be grasped.</p>
+
+<p>In giving the test, always present the pictures in the same order, first
+Dutch Home, then River Scene, then Post-Office. The order of
+presentation will no doubt seem to the uninitiated too trivial a matter
+to insist upon, but a little experience teaches one that an apparently
+insignificant change in the procedure may exert a considerable influence
+upon the response. Some pictures tend more strongly than others to
+provoke a particular type of response. Some lend themselves especially
+to enumeration, others to description, others to interpretation. The
+pictures used in the Stanford revision have been selected from a number
+which have been tried because they are more uniform in this respect
+than most others in use. However, they are not without their
+differences, picture <i>b</i>, for example, tending more than the others to
+provoke description.</p>
+
+<p>There seems to be no disagreement as to the proper location of this
+test.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="III_4" id="III_4"></a>III,&nbsp;4. Giving sex</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> If the subject is a boy, the formula is: &ldquo;<i>Are you a little
+boy or a little girl?</i>&rdquo; If a girl, &ldquo;<i>Are you <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;147">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_147" id="Page_147"></a>a little girl or a little
+boy?</i>&rdquo; This variation in the formula is necessary because of the
+tendency in young children to repeat mechanically the last word of
+anything that is said to them. If there is no response, say: &ldquo;<i>Are you a
+little girl?</i>&rdquo; (if a boy); or, &ldquo;<i>Are you a little boy?</i>&rdquo; (if a girl). If
+the answer to the last question is &ldquo;no&rdquo; (or a shake of the head), we
+then say: &ldquo;<i>Well, what are you? Are you a little boy or a little girl?</i>&rdquo;
+(or <i>vice versa</i>).</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The response is satisfactory if it indicates that the child has
+really made the discrimination, but we must be cautious about accepting
+any other response than the direct answer, &ldquo;A little girl,&rdquo; or, &ldquo;A
+little boy.&rdquo; &ldquo;Yes&rdquo; and &ldquo;no&rdquo; in response to the second question must be
+carefully checked up.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Binet and Goddard say that 3-year-olds cannot pass this test
+and that 4-year-olds almost never fail. We can accept the last part of
+this statement, but not the first part. Nearly all of our 3-year-old
+subjects succeed with it.</p>
+
+<p>The test probably has nothing to do with sex consciousness, as such.
+Success in it would seem to depend on the ability to discriminate
+between familiar class names which are in a certain degree related.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="III_5" id="III_5"></a>III,&nbsp;5. Giving the family name</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> The child is asked, &ldquo;<i>What is your name?</i>&rdquo; If the answer, as
+often happens, includes only the first name (Walter, for example), say:
+&ldquo;<i>Yes, but what is your other name? Walter what?</i>&rdquo; If the child is
+silent, or if he only repeats the first name, say: &ldquo;<i>Is your name
+Walter&nbsp;...&nbsp;?</i>&rdquo; (giving a fictitious name, as Jones, Smith, etc.). This
+question nearly always brings the correct answer if it is known.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;148">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_148" id="Page_148"></a><b>Scoring.</b> Simply + or &minus;. No attention is paid to faults of pronunciation.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> There is unanimous agreement that this test belongs in the
+3-year group. Although the child has not had as much opportunity to
+learn the family name as his first name, he is almost certain to have
+heard it more or less, and if his intelligence is normal the interest in
+self will ordinarily cause it to be remembered.</p>
+
+<p>The critic of the intelligence scale need not be unduly exercised over
+the fact that there may be an occasional child of 3&nbsp;years who has never
+heard his family name. We have all read of such children, but they are
+so extremely rare that the chances of a given 3-year-old being unjustly
+penalized for this reason are practically negligible. In the second
+place, contingencies of this nature are throughout the scale
+consistently allowed for in the percentage of passes required for
+locating a test. Since (in the year groups below XIV) the individual
+tests are located at the age level where they are passed by
+60&nbsp;to&nbsp;70&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of unselected children of that age, it follows that
+the child of average ability <em>is expected</em> to fail on about one third of
+the tests of his age group. The plan of the scale is such as to warrant
+this amount of leeway. But even granting the possibility that one
+subject out of a hundred or so may be unjustly penalized for lack of
+opportunity to acquire the knowledge which the test calls for, the
+injustice done does not greatly alter the result. A single test affects
+mental age only to the extent of two months, and the chances of two such
+injustices occurring with the same child are very slight. Herein lies
+the advantage of a multiplicity of tests. No test considered by itself
+is very dependable, but two dozen tests, properly arranged, are almost
+infinitely reliable.</p>
+
+
+<h3><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;149">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_149" id="Page_149"></a><a name="III_6" id="III_6"></a>III,&nbsp;6. Repeating six to seven syllables</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Begin by saying: &ldquo;<i>Can you say &lsquo;mamma&rsquo;? Now, say &lsquo;nice
+kitty.&rsquo;</i>&rdquo; Then ask the child to say, &ldquo;<i>I have a little dog.</i>&rdquo; Speak the
+sentence distinctly and with expression, but in a natural voice and not
+too slowly. If there is no response, the first sentence may be repeated
+two or three times. Then give the other two sentences: &ldquo;<i>The dog runs
+after the cat</i>,&rdquo; and, &ldquo;<i>In summer the sun is hot.</i>&rdquo; A great deal of tact
+is sometimes necessary to enlist the child&#8217;s co&ouml;peration in this test.
+If he cannot be persuaded to try, the alternative test of three digits
+may be substituted.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if at least <em>one sentence is repeated
+without error after a single reading</em>. &ldquo;Without error&rdquo; is to be taken
+literally; there must be no omission, insertion, or transposition of
+words. Ignore indistinctness of articulation and defects of
+pronunciation as long as they do not mutilate the sentence beyond easy
+recognition.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The test does not presuppose that the child should have the
+ability to make and use sentences like these for purposes of
+communication, or even that he should know the meaning of all the words
+they contain. Its purpose is to bring out the ability of the child to
+repeat a six-syllable series of more or less familiar language sounds.
+As every one knows, the normal child of 2&nbsp;or&nbsp;3&nbsp;years is constantly
+imitating the speech of those around him and finds this a great source
+of delight. Long practice in the semi-mechanical repetition of language
+sounds is necessary for the learning of speech co&ouml;rdinations and is
+therefore an indispensable preliminary to the purposeful use of
+language. High-grade idiots and the lowest grade of imbeciles never
+acquire much facility in the repetition of language heard. The test gets
+at one of the simplest forms of mental integration.</p>
+
+<p>Binet says that children of 3&nbsp;years <em>never</em> repeat sentences<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;150">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_150" id="Page_150"></a> of ten
+syllables. This is not strictly true, for six out of nineteen
+3-year-olds succeeded in doing so. All the data agree, however, that the
+<em>average</em> child of 3&nbsp;years repeats only six to seven syllables
+correctly.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="III_alt" id="III_alt"></a>III. Alternative test: repeating three digits</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Use the following digits: 6&ndash;4&ndash;1, 3&ndash;5&ndash;2, 8&ndash;3&ndash;7. Begin with two
+digits, as follows: &ldquo;<i>Listen; say 4&ndash;2</i>.&rdquo; &ldquo;<i>Now, say 6&ndash;4&ndash;1</i>.&rdquo; &ldquo;<i>Now, say
+3&ndash;5&ndash;2</i>,&rdquo; etc. Pronounce the digits in a distinct voice and with
+perfectly uniform emphasis at a rate just a little faster than one per
+second. Two per second, as recommended by Binet, is too rapid.</p>
+
+<p>Young subjects, because of their natural timidity in the presence of
+strangers, sometimes refuse to respond to this test. With subjects under
+5&nbsp;or&nbsp;6&nbsp;years of age it is sometimes necessary in such cases to re-read
+the first series of digits several times in order to secure a response.
+The response thus secured, however, is not counted in scoring, the
+purpose of the re-reading being merely to break the child&#8217;s silence. The
+second and third series may be read but once. With the digits tests
+above year&nbsp;IV the re-reading of a series is never permissible.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> Passed if the child repeats correctly, <em>after a single reading,
+one series out of the three</em> series given. Not only must the correct
+digits be given, but the order also must be correct.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Others, on the basis of rather scanty data, have usually
+located this test at the 4-year level. Our results show that with the
+procedure described above it is fully as easy as the test of repeating
+sentences of 6&nbsp;to&nbsp;7 syllables.<a name="FNanchor_48_48" id="FNanchor_48_48"></a><a href="#Footnote_48_48" class="fnanchor">[48]</a></p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_46_46" id="Footnote_46_46"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_46_46">[46]</a></span> See instructions for <a href="#VII_2">VII,&nbsp;2</a>, and <a href="#XII_7">XII,&nbsp;7</a>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_47_47" id="Footnote_47_47"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_47_47">[47]</a></span> For a discussion of the significance of the different
+types of response, enumeration, description, and interpretation, see
+<a href="#VII_2">VII,&nbsp;2</a>, and <a href="#XII_7">XII,&nbsp;7</a>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_48_48" id="Footnote_48_48"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_48_48">[48]</a></span> See p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_194">194</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i> for further discussion of the digits
+test.</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;151">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_151" id="Page_151"></a><a name="CHAPTER_X" id="CHAPTER_X"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;X
+<br />
+<small>INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR&nbsp;IV</small></h2>
+
+
+<h3><a name="IV_1" id="IV_1"></a>IV,&nbsp;1. Comparison of lines</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Present the appropriate accompanying card with the lines in
+horizontal position. Point to the lines and say: &ldquo;<i>See these lines. Look
+closely and tell me which one is longer. Put your finger on the longest
+one.</i>&rdquo; We use the superlative as well as the comparative form of <em>long</em>
+because it is often more familiar to young subjects. If the child does
+not respond, say: &ldquo;<i>Show me which line is the biggest.</i>&rdquo; Then withdraw
+the card, turn it about a few times, and present it again with the
+position of the two lines reversed, saying: &ldquo;<i>Now show me the longest.</i>&rdquo;
+Turn the card again and make a third presentation.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> All three comparisons must be made correctly; or if only two
+responses out of three are correct, all three pairs are again shown,
+just as before, and if there is no error this time, the test is passed.
+The standard, therefore, is <em>three correct responses out of three, or
+five out of six</em>.</p>
+
+<p>Sometimes the child points, but at no particular part of the card. In
+such cases it may be difficult to decide whether he has failed to
+comprehend and to make the discrimination or has only been careless in
+pointing. It is then necessary to repeat the experiment until the
+evidence is clear.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> As noted by Binet, success in this test depends on the
+comprehension of the verbal directions rather than on actual
+discrimination of length. The child who would unerringly choose the
+larger of two pieces of candy might <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;152">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_152" id="Page_152"></a>fail on the comparison of lines.
+However, since the child must correctly compare the lines three times in
+succession, or at least in five out of six trials, <em>willingness to
+attend</em> also plays a part. The attention of the low-grade imbecile, or
+even of the normal child of 3&nbsp;years, is not very obedient to the
+suggestions of the experimenter. It may be gained momentarily, but it is
+not easily held to the same task for more than a few seconds. Hence some
+children who perfectly comprehend this task fail to make a succession of
+correct comparisons because they are unable or unwilling to bring to
+bear even the small amount of attention which is necessary. This does
+not in the least condone the failure, for it is exactly in such
+voluntary control of mental processes that we find one of the most
+characteristic differences between bright and dull, or mature and
+immature subjects.</p>
+
+<p>There has been little disagreement as to the proper location of this
+test.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="IV_2" id="IV_2"></a>IV,&nbsp;2. Discrimination of forms</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Use the forms supplied with this book. First, place the
+circle of the duplicate set at &ldquo;<span class="sf">X</span>&rdquo;, and say: &ldquo;<i>Show me one like
+this</i>,&rdquo; at the same time passing the finger around the circumference of
+the circle. If the child does not respond, say: &ldquo;<i>Do you see all of
+these things?</i>&rdquo; (running the finger over the various forms); &ldquo;<i>And do
+you see this one?</i>&rdquo; (pointing again to the circle); &ldquo;<i>Now, find me
+another one just like this.</i>&rdquo; Use the square next, then the triangle,
+and the others in any order.</p>
+
+<p>Correct the child&#8217;s first error by saying: &ldquo;<i>No, find one just like
+this</i>&rdquo; (again passing the finger around the outline of the form at &ldquo;<span class="sf">X</span>&rdquo;).
+Make no comment on errors after the first one, proceeding at once with
+the next card, but <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;153">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_153" id="Page_153"></a>each time the choice is correct encourage the child
+with a hearty &ldquo;That&#8217;s good,&rdquo; or something similar.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if <em>seven out of ten</em> choices, are correct,
+the first corrected error being counted.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> In the test of discriminating forms, unlike the test of
+comparing lines, lack of success is less often due to inability to
+understand the task than to failure to discriminate. The test may be
+regarded as a variation of the form-board test. It displays the
+subject&#8217;s ability to compare and contrast successive visual perceptions
+of form. The accurate perception of even a fairly simple form requires
+the integration of a number of sensory elements into one whole. The
+forms used in this test have meaning. They are far from nonsense figures
+even for the (normal) child of 4&nbsp;years, who has, of course, never heard
+about &ldquo;triangles,&rdquo; &ldquo;squares,&rdquo; &ldquo;rectangles,&rdquo; etc. The meaning present at
+this level of intelligence is probably a compound of such factors as
+appreciation of symmetry and direction, and discrimination of quantity
+and number.</p>
+
+<p>Another element in success, especially in the latter part of the
+experiment, is the ability to make an <em>attentive</em> comparison between the
+form shown and the others. The child may be satisfied to point to the
+first form his eye happens to fall upon. Far from being a legitimate
+excuse for failure, such an exhibition of inattention and of weakness of
+the critical faculty is symptomatic of a mental level below 4&nbsp;years.</p>
+
+<p>In addition to counting the number of errors made, it is interesting to
+note with what forms they occur. To match the circle with the ellipse or
+the octagon, for example, is a less serious error than to match it with
+the square or triangle.</p>
+
+<p>This test was devised and standardized by Dr.&nbsp;Fred Kuhlmann. It is
+inserted here without essential alteration, <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;154">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_154" id="Page_154"></a>except that the size
+recommended for the forms is slightly reduced and minor changes have
+been made in the wording of the directions. Our own results are
+favorable to the test and to the location assigned it by its author.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="IV_3" id="IV_3"></a>IV,&nbsp;3. Counting four pennies</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Place four pennies in a horizontal row before the child. Say:
+&ldquo;<i>See these pennies. Count them and tell me how many there are. Count
+them with your finger, this way</i>&rdquo; (pointing to the first one on the
+child&#8217;s left)&mdash;&ldquo;<i>One</i>&rdquo;&mdash;&ldquo;<i>Now, go ahead.</i>&rdquo; If the child simply gives the
+number (whether right or wrong) without pointing, say: &ldquo;<i>No; count them
+with your finger, this way</i>,&rdquo; starting him off as before. Have him count
+them aloud.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed only if the counting tallies with the
+pointing. It is not sufficient merely to state the correct number
+without pointing.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Contrary to what one might think, this is not to any great
+extent a test of &ldquo;schooling.&rdquo; Practically all children of this age have
+had opportunity to learn to count as far as four, and with normal
+children the spontaneous interest in number is such that very few
+4-year-olds, even from inferior social environment, fail to pass the
+test.</p>
+
+<p>While success requires more than the ability to repeat the number names
+by rote, it does not presuppose any power of calculation or a mastery of
+the number concepts from one to four. Many children who will readily
+say, mechanically, &ldquo;one, two, three, four,&rdquo; when started off, are not
+able to pass the test. On the other hand, it is not expected that the
+child who passes will also necessarily understand that four is made up
+of two two&#8217;s, or four one&#8217;s, or three plus one, etc.</p>
+
+<p>Binet, Goddard, and Kuhlmann place this test in the<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;155">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_155" id="Page_155"></a> 5-year group, but
+three separate series of tests made for the Stanford revision, as well
+as nearly all the statistics available from other sources, show that it
+belongs at 4&nbsp;years.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="IV_4" id="IV_4"></a>IV,&nbsp;4. Copying a square</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Place before the child a cardboard on which is drawn in heavy
+black lines a square about 1&frac14;&nbsp;inches on a side.<a name="FNanchor_49_49" id="FNanchor_49_49"></a><a href="#Footnote_49_49" class="fnanchor">[49]</a> Give the child a
+pencil and say: &ldquo;<i>You see that</i> (pointing to the square). <i>I want you to
+make one just like it. Make it right here</i> (showing where it is to be
+drawn). <i>Go ahead. I know you can do it nicely.</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Avoid such an expression as, &ldquo;<i>I want you to draw a figure like that.</i>&rdquo;
+The child may not know the meaning of either <em>draw</em> or <em>figure</em>. Also,
+in pointing to the model, take care not to run the finger around the
+four sides.</p>
+
+<p>Children sometimes have a deep-seated aversion to drawing on request and
+a bit of tactful urging may be necessary. Experience and tact will
+enable the experimenter in all but the rarest cases to come out
+victorious in these little battles with balky wills. Give three trials,
+saying each time: &ldquo;<i>Make it exactly like this</i>,&rdquo; pointing to model.
+Make sure that the child is in an easy position and that the paper used
+is held so it cannot slip.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if at least <em>one drawing out of the three</em>
+is as good as those marked + on the score card. Young subjects usually
+reduce figures in drawing from copy, but size is wholly disregarded in
+scoring. It is of more importance that the right angles be fairly well
+preserved than that the lines should be straight or the corners entirely
+closed. The scoring of this test should be rather liberal.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> After the three copies have been made say:<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;156">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_156" id="Page_156"></a> &ldquo;<i>Which one do you
+like best?</i>&rdquo; In this way we get an idea of the subject&#8217;s power of
+auto-criticism, a trait in which the mentally retarded are nearly always
+behind normal children of their own age. Normal children, when young,
+reveal the same weakness to a certain extent. It is especially
+significant when the subject shows complete satisfaction with a very
+poor performance.</p>
+
+<p>Observe whether the child makes each part with careful effort, looking
+at the model from time to time, or whether the strokes are made in a
+haphazard way with only an initial glance at the original. The latter
+procedure is quite common with young or retarded subjects. Curiously
+enough, the first trial is more successful than either of the others,
+due perhaps to a waning of effort and attention.</p>
+
+<p>Note that pencil is used instead of pen and that only one success is
+necessary. Binet gives only one trial and requires pen. Goddard allows
+pencil, but permits only one trial. Kuhlmann requires pen and passes the
+child only when two trials out of three are successful. But these
+authors locate the test at 5&nbsp;years. Our results show that nearly three
+fourths of 4-year-olds succeed with pencil in one out of three trials if
+the scoring is liberal. It makes a great deal of difference whether pen
+or pencil is used, and whether two successes are required or only one.
+No better illustration could be given of the fact that without
+thoroughgoing standardization of procedure and scoring the best mental
+test may be misleading as to the degree of intelligence it indicates.</p>
+
+<p>Copying a square is one of three drawing tests used in the Binet scale,
+the others being the <a href="#VII_6">diamond</a> (year&nbsp;VII), and the <a href="#X_3">designs to be copied
+from memory</a> (year&nbsp;X). These tests do not to any great extent test what
+is usually known as &ldquo;drawing ability.&rdquo; Only the square and the diamond
+tests are strictly comparable with one another, the <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;157">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_157" id="Page_157"></a>other having a
+psychologically different purpose. In none of them does success seem to
+depend very much on the amount of previous instruction in drawing. To
+copy a figure like a square or a diamond requires first of all an
+appreciation of spacial relationships. The figure must be perceived as a
+whole, not simply as a group of meaningless lines. In the second place,
+success depends upon the ability to use the visual impression in guiding
+a rather complex set of motor co&ouml;rdinations. The latter is perhaps the
+main difficulty, and is one which is not fully overcome, at least for
+complicated movements, until well toward adult life.</p>
+
+<p>It is interesting to compare the square and the diamond as to relative
+difficulty. They have the same number of lines and in each case the
+opposite sides are parallel; but whereas 4-year intelligence is equal to
+the task of copying a square, the diamond ordinarily requires 7-year
+intelligence. Probably no one could have foreseen that a change in the
+angles would add so much to the difficulty of the figure. It would be
+worth while to devise and standardize still more complicated figures.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="IV_5" id="IV_5"></a>IV,&nbsp;5. Comprehension, first degree</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> After getting the child&#8217;s attention, say: &ldquo;<i>What must you do
+when you are sleepy?</i>&rdquo; If necessary the question may be repeated a
+number of times, using a persuasive and encouraging tone of voice. No
+other form of question may be substituted. About twenty seconds may be
+allowed for an answer, though as a rule subjects of 4&nbsp;or&nbsp;5&nbsp;years usually
+answer quite promptly or not at all.</p>
+
+<p>Proceed in the same way with the other two questions: &ldquo;<i>What ought you
+to do when you are cold?</i>&rdquo; &ldquo;<i>What ought you to do when you are hungry?</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> There must be <em>two correct responses out of<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;158">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_158" id="Page_158"></a> three</em>. No one form
+of answer is required. It is sufficient if the question is comprehended
+and given a reasonably sensible answer. The following are samples of
+correct responses:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol class="alph smaller">
+<li><span class="u">&ldquo;Go to bed.&rdquo; &ldquo;Go to sleep.&rdquo; &ldquo;Have my mother get me ready
+for bed.&rdquo; &ldquo;Lie still, not talk, and I&#8217;ll soon be asleep.&rdquo;</span></li>
+
+<li><span class="u">&ldquo;Put on a coat&rdquo; (or &ldquo;cloak,&rdquo; &ldquo;furs,&rdquo; &ldquo;wrap up,&rdquo; etc.).
+&ldquo;Build a fire.&rdquo; &ldquo;Run and I&#8217;ll soon get warm.&rdquo; &ldquo;Get close to the
+stove.&rdquo; &ldquo;Go into the house,&rdquo; or, &ldquo;Go to bed,&rdquo; may possibly
+deserve the score <em>plus</em>, though they are somewhat doubtful and
+are certainly inferior to the responses just given.</span></li>
+
+<li><span class="u">&ldquo;Eat something.&rdquo; &ldquo;Drink some milk.&rdquo; &ldquo;Buy a lunch.&rdquo; &ldquo;Have
+my mamma spread some bread and butter,&rdquo; etc.</span></li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>With the comprehension questions in this year it is nearly always easy
+to decide whether the response is acceptable, failure being indicated
+usually either by silence or by an absurd or irrelevant answer. One
+8-year-old boy who had less than 4-year intelligence answered all three
+questions by putting his finger on his eye and saying: &ldquo;I&#8217;d do that.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Have to cry&rdquo; is a rather common incorrect response.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The purpose of these questions is to ascertain whether the
+child can comprehend the situations suggested and give a reasonably
+pertinent reply. The first requirement, of course, is to understand the
+language; the second is to tell how the situation suggested should be
+met.</p>
+
+<p>The question may be raised whether a given child might not fail to
+answer the questions correctly and yet have the intelligence to do the
+appropriate thing if the real situation were present. This is at least
+conceivable, but since it would not be practicable to make the subject
+actually cold, sleepy, or hungry in order to observe his behavior, <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;159">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_159" id="Page_159"></a>we
+must content ourselves with suggesting a situation to be imagined. It
+probably requires more intelligence to tell what one ought to do in a
+situation which has to be imagined than to do the right thing when the
+real situation is encountered.</p>
+
+<p>The comprehension questions of this year had not been standardized until
+the Stanford investigation of 1913&ndash;14. Questions <i>a</i> and <i>b</i> were
+suggested by Binet in 1905, while <i>c</i> is new. They make an excellent
+test of 4-year intelligence.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="IV_6" id="IV_6"></a>IV,&nbsp;6. Repeating four digits</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Say: &ldquo;<i>Now, listen. I am going to say over some numbers and
+after I am through, I want you to say them exactly like I do. Listen
+closely and get them just right&mdash;4&ndash;7&ndash;3&ndash;9.</i>&rdquo; Same with 2&ndash;8&ndash;5&ndash;4 and
+7&ndash;2&ndash;6&ndash;1. The examiner should consume nearly four seconds in pronouncing
+each series, and should practice in advance until this speed can be
+closely approximated. If the child refuses to respond, the first series
+may be repeated as often as may be necessary to prove an attempt, but
+<em>success with a series which has been re-read may not be counted</em>. The
+second and third series may be pronounced but once.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> Passed if the child repeats correctly, <em>after a single reading,
+one series out of the three</em> series given. The order must be correct.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The test of repeating four digits was not included by Binet in
+the scale and seems not to have been used by any of the Binet workers.
+It is passed by about three fourths of our 4-year-olds.</p>
+
+
+<h3><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;160">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_160" id="Page_160"></a><a name="IV_alt" id="IV_alt"></a>IV. Alternative test: repeating twelve to thirteen syllables</h3>
+
+<p>The three sentences are:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol class="alph smaller">
+<li>&ldquo;The boy&#8217;s name is John. He is a very good boy.&rdquo;</li>
+<li>&ldquo;When the train passes you will hear the whistle blow.&rdquo;</li>
+<li>&ldquo;We are going to have a good time in the country.&rdquo;</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Get the child&#8217;s attention and say: &ldquo;<i>Listen, say this: &lsquo;Where
+is kitty?&rsquo;</i>&rdquo; After the child responds, add: &ldquo;<i>Now say this ...</i>,&rdquo;
+reading the first sentence in a natural voice, distinctly and with
+expression. If the child is too timid to respond, the first sentence may
+be re-read, but in this case the response is not counted. <em>Re-reading is
+permissible only with the first sentence.</em></p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if at least <em>one sentence is repeated
+without error after a single reading</em>. As in the <a href="#III_alt">alternative test</a> of
+<a href="#CHAPTER_IX">year&nbsp;III</a>, we ignore ordinary indistinctness and defects of pronunciation
+due to imperfect language development, but the sentence must be repeated
+without addition, omission, or transposition of words.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Sentences of twelve syllables had not been standardized
+previous to the Stanford revision, but Binet locates memory for ten
+syllables at year&nbsp;V, and others have followed his example. Our own data
+show that even 4-year-olds are usually able to repeat twelve syllables
+with the procedure here set forth.</p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_49_49" id="Footnote_49_49"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_49_49">[49]</a></span> No material is needed if the regular Stanford record
+blanks are used, as these all contain the square and diamond.</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;161">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_161" id="Page_161"></a><a name="CHAPTER_XI" id="CHAPTER_XI"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;XI
+<br />
+<small>INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR&nbsp;V</small></h2>
+
+
+<h3><a name="V_1" id="V_1"></a>V,&nbsp;1. Comparison of weights</h3>
+
+<p><b>Materials.</b> It is necessary to have two weights, identical in shape,
+size, and appearance, weighing respectively 3&nbsp;and&nbsp;15&nbsp;grams.<a name="FNanchor_50_50" id="FNanchor_50_50"></a><a href="#Footnote_50_50" class="fnanchor">[50]</a> If
+manufactured weights are not at hand, it is easy to make satisfactory
+substitutes by taking stiff cardboard pill-boxes, about 1&frac14;&nbsp;inches in
+diameter, and filling them with cotton and shot to the desired weight.
+The shot must be embedded in the center of the cotton so as to prevent
+rattling. After the box has been loaded to the exact weight, the lid
+should be glued on firmly. If one does not have access to laboratory
+scales, it is always possible to secure the help of a druggist in the
+rather delicate task of weighing the boxes accurately. A set of pill-box
+weights will last through hundreds of tests, if handled carefully, but
+they will not stand rough usage. The manufactured blocks are more
+durable, and so more satisfactory in the long run. If the weights are
+not at hand, the alternative test may be substituted.</p>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Place the 3- and 15-gram weights on the table before the
+child some two or three inches apart. Say: &ldquo;<i>You see these blocks. They
+look just alike, but one of them is heavy and one is light. Try them and
+tell me which one is heavier.</i>&rdquo; If the child does not respond, repeat
+the <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;162">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_162" id="Page_162"></a>instructions, saying this time, &ldquo;<i>Tell me which one is the
+heaviest.</i>&rdquo; (Many American children have heard only the superlative form
+of the adjective used in the comparison of two objects.)</p>
+
+<p>Sometimes the child merely points to one of the boxes or picks up one at
+random and hands it to the examiner, thinking he is asked to <em>guess</em>
+which is heaviest. We then say: &ldquo;<i>No, that is not the way. You must take
+the boxes in your hands and try them, like this</i>&rdquo; (illustrating by
+lifting with one hand, first one box and then the other, a few inches
+from the table). Most children of 5&nbsp;years are then able to make the
+comparison correctly. Very young subjects, however, or older ones who
+are retarded, sometimes adopt the rather questionable method of lifting
+both weights in the same hand at once. This is always an unfavorable
+sign, especially if one of the blocks is placed in the hand on top of
+the other block.</p>
+
+<p>After the first trial, the weights are shuffled and again presented for
+comparison as before, <em>this time with the positions reversed</em>. The third
+trial follows with the blocks in the same position as in the first
+trial. Some children have a tendency to stereotyped behavior, which in
+this test shows itself by choosing always the block on a certain side.
+Hence the necessity of alternating the positions.<a name="FNanchor_51_51" id="FNanchor_51_51"></a><a href="#Footnote_51_51" class="fnanchor">[51]</a> Reserve
+commendation until all three trials have been given.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if <em>two of the three</em> comparisons are
+correct. If there is reason to suspect that the successful responses
+were due to lucky guesses, the test should be entirely repeated.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> This test is decidedly more difficult than that of comparing
+lines (<a href="#IV_1">IV,&nbsp;1</a>). It is doubtful, however, if we can regard the difference
+as one due primarily to the relative difficulty of visual discrimination
+and muscular <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;163">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_163" id="Page_163"></a>discrimination. In fact, the test with weights hardly taxes
+sensory discrimination at all when used with children of 5-year
+intelligence. Success depends, in the first place, on the ability to
+understand the instructions; and in the second place, on the power to
+hold the instructions in mind long enough to guide the process of making
+the comparison. The test presupposes, in elementary form, a power which
+is operative in all the higher independent processes of thought, the
+power to neglect the manifold distractions of irrelevant sensations and
+ideas and to drive direct toward a goal. Here the goal is furnished by
+the instruction, &ldquo;Try them and see which is heavier.&rdquo; This must be held
+firmly enough in mind to control the steps necessary for making the
+comparison. Ideas of piling the blocks on top of one another, throwing
+them, etc., must be inhibited. Sometimes the low-grade imbecile starts
+off in a very promising way, then apparently forgets the instructions
+(loses sight of the goal), and begins to play with the boxes in a random
+way. His mental processes are not consecutive, stable, or controlled. He
+is blown about at the mercy of every gust of momentary interest.</p>
+
+<p>There is very general agreement in the assignment of this test to
+year&nbsp;V.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="V_2" id="V_2"></a>V,&nbsp;2. Naming colors</h3>
+
+<p><b>Materials.</b> Use saturated red, yellow, blue, and green papers, about
+2&nbsp;&times;&nbsp;1&nbsp;inch in size, pasted one half inch apart on white or gray
+cardboard. For sake of uniformity it is best to match the colors
+manufactured especially for this test.<a name="FNanchor_52_52" id="FNanchor_52_52"></a><a href="#Footnote_52_52" class="fnanchor">[52]</a></p>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Point to the colors in the order, red, yellow, blue, green.
+Bring the finger close to the color designated,<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;164">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_164" id="Page_164"></a> in order that there may
+be no mistake as to which one is meant, and say: &ldquo;<i>What is the name of
+that color?</i>&rdquo; Do not say: &ldquo;<i>What color is that?</i>&rdquo; or, &ldquo;<i>What kind of a
+color is that?</i>&rdquo; Such a formula might bring the answer, &ldquo;The first
+color&rdquo;; or, &ldquo;A pretty color.&rdquo; Still less would it do to say: &ldquo;<i>Show me
+the red</i>,&rdquo; &ldquo;<i>Show me the yellow</i>,&rdquo; etc. This would make it an entirely
+different test, one that would probably be passed a year earlier than
+the Binet form of the experiment. Nor is it permissible, after a color
+has been miscalled, to return to it and again ask its name.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed only if <em>all</em> the colors are named correctly
+and without marked uncertainty. However, prefixing the adjective &ldquo;dark,&rdquo;
+or &ldquo;light,&rdquo; before the name of a color is overlooked.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Naming colors is not a test of color discrimination, for that
+capacity is well developed years below the level at which this test is
+used. All 5-year-olds who are not color blind discriminate among the
+four primary colors here used as readily as adults do. As stated by
+Binet, it is a test of the &ldquo;verbalization of color perception.&rdquo; It tells
+us whether the child has associated the names of the four primary colors
+with his perceptual imagery of those colors.</p>
+
+<p>The <em>ability</em> to make simple associations between a sense impression and
+a name is certainly present in normal children some time before the
+above color associations are actually made. Many objects of experience
+are correctly named two or three years earlier, and it may seem at
+first a little strange that color names are learned so late. But it must
+be remembered that the child does not have numerous opportunities to
+observe and hear the names of several colors at once, nor does the
+designation of colors by their names ordinarily have much practical
+value for the young child. When he finally learns their names, it is<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;165">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_165" id="Page_165"></a>
+more because of his spontaneous interest in the world of sense. Lack of
+such spontaneous interest is always an unfavorable sign, and it is not
+surprising, therefore, that imbecile intelligence has ordinarily never
+taken the trouble to associate colors with their names. Girls are
+somewhat superior to boys in this test, due probably to a greater
+natural interest in colors.</p>
+
+<p>Binet originally placed this test in year&nbsp;VIII, changing it to year&nbsp;VII
+in the 1911 scale. Goddard places it in year&nbsp;VII, while Kuhlmann omits
+it altogether. With a single exception, all the actual statistics with
+normal children justify the location of the test in year&nbsp;V. Bobertag&#8217;s
+figures are the exception, opposed to which are Rowe, Winch, Dumville,
+Dougherty, Brigham, and all three of the Stanford investigations.</p>
+
+<p>The test is probably more subject to the influence of home environment
+than most of the other tests of the scale, and if the social status of
+the child is low, failure would not be especially significant until
+after the age of 6&nbsp;years. On the whole it is an excellent test.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="V_3" id="V_3"></a>V,&nbsp;3. &AElig;sthetic comparison</h3>
+
+<p>Use the three pairs of faces supplied with the printed forms. It goes
+without saying that improvised drawings may not be substituted for
+Binet&#8217;s until they have first been standardized.</p>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Show the pairs in order from top to bottom. Say: &ldquo;<i>Which of
+these two pictures is the prettiest?</i>&rdquo; Use both the comparative and the
+superlative forms of the adjective. Do not use the question, &ldquo;Which face
+is the uglier (ugliest)?&rdquo; unless there is some difficulty in getting the
+child to respond. It is not permitted, in case of an incorrect response,
+to give that part of the test again and to allow<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;166">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_166" id="Page_166"></a> the child a chance to
+correct his answer; or, in case this is done, we must consider only the
+original response in scoring.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed only if all <em>three</em> comparisons are made
+correctly. Any marked uncertainty is failure. Sometimes the child
+laughingly designates the ugly picture as the prettier, yet shows by his
+amused expression that he is probably conscious of its peculiarity or
+absurdity. In such cases &ldquo;pretty&rdquo; seems to be given the meaning of
+&ldquo;funny&rdquo; or &ldquo;amusing.&rdquo; Nevertheless, we score this response as failure,
+since it betokens a rather infantile tolerance of ugliness.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> From the psychological point of view this is a most interesting
+test. One might suppose that &aelig;sthetic judgment would be relatively
+independent of intelligence. Certainly no one could have known in
+advance of experience that intellectual retardation would reveal itself
+in weakness of the &aelig;sthetic sense about as unmistakably as in memory,
+practical judgment, or the comprehension of language. But such is the
+case. The development of the &aelig;sthetic sense parallels general mental
+growth rather closely. The imbecile of 4-year intelligence, even though
+he may have lived forty years, has no more chance of passing this test
+than any other test in year&nbsp;V. It would be profitable to devise and
+standardize a set of pictures of the same general type which would
+measure a less primitive stage of &aelig;sthetic development.</p>
+
+<p>The present test was located by Binet in year&nbsp;VI and has been retained
+in that year in other revisions; but three separate Stanford
+investigations, as well as the statistics of Winch, Dumville, Brigham,
+Rowe, and Dougherty, warrant its location in year&nbsp;V.</p>
+
+
+<h3><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;167">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_167" id="Page_167"></a><a name="V_4" id="V_4"></a>V,&nbsp;4. Giving definitions in terms of use</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Use the words: <i>Chair</i>, <i>horse</i>, <i>fork</i>, <i>doll</i>, <i>pencil</i>,
+and <i>table</i>. Say: &ldquo;<i>You have seen a chair. You know what a chair is.
+Tell me, what is a chair?</i>&rdquo; And so on with the other words, always in
+the order in which they are named above.</p>
+
+<p>Occasionally there is difficulty in getting a response, which is
+sometimes due merely to the child&#8217;s unwillingness to express his
+thoughts in sentences. The earlier tests require only words and phrases.
+In other cases silence is due to the rather indefinite form of the
+question. The child could answer, but is not quite sure what is expected
+of him. Whatever the cause, a little tactful urging is nearly always
+sufficient to bring a response. In this test we have not found the
+difficulty of overcoming silence nearly as great as others have stated
+it to be. In consecutive tests of 150 5- and 6-year-old children we
+encountered unbreakable silence with 8&nbsp;words out of the total 900
+(150&nbsp;&times;&nbsp;6). This is less than 1&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent. But tactful encouragement is
+sometimes necessary, and it is best to take the precaution of not giving
+the test until <i>rapport</i> has been well established.</p>
+
+<p>The urging should take the following form: &ldquo;<i>I&#8217;m sure you know what a
+... is. You have seen a .... Now, tell me, what is a ...&nbsp;?</i>&rdquo; That is, we
+merely repeat the question with a word of encouragement and in a
+coaxing tone of voice. It would not at all do to introduce other
+questions, like, &ldquo;<i>What does a ... look like?</i>&rdquo; or, &ldquo;<i>What is a ...
+for?</i>&rdquo; &ldquo;<i>What do people do with a ...&nbsp;?</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Sometimes, instead of attempting a definition (of <em>doll</em>, for example),
+the child begins to talk in a more or less irrelevant way, as &ldquo;I have a
+great big doll. Auntie gave it to me for Christmas,&rdquo; etc. In such cases
+we repeat the question and say, &ldquo;<i>Yes, but tell me; what is a doll?</i>&rdquo;
+This is<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;168">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_168" id="Page_168"></a> usually sufficient to bring the little chatter-box back to the
+task.</p>
+
+<p>Unless it is absolutely necessary to give the child lavish
+encouragement, it is best to withhold approval or disapproval until the
+test has been finished. If the first response is a poor one and we
+pronounce it &ldquo;fine&rdquo; or &ldquo;very good,&rdquo; we tempt the child to persist in his
+low-grade type of definition. By withholding comment until the last word
+has been defined, we give greater play to spontaneity and initiative.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> As a rule, children of 5&nbsp;and&nbsp;6&nbsp;years define an object in terms
+of use, stating what it does, what it is for, what people do with it,
+etc. Definitions by description, by telling what substance it is made
+of, and by giving the class to which it belongs are grouped together as
+&ldquo;definitions superior to use.&rdquo; It is not before 8&nbsp;years that two thirds
+of the children spontaneously give a large proportion of definitions in
+terms superior to use.</p>
+
+<p>The test is passed in year&nbsp;V if <em>four words out of the six</em> are defined
+in terms of use (or better than use). The following are examples of
+satisfactory responses:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ul class="indent smaller">
+<li><i>Chair</i>: &ldquo;To sit on.&rdquo; &ldquo;You sit on it.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is made of wood and
+has legs and back,&rdquo; etc.</li>
+
+<li><i>Horse</i>: &ldquo;To drive.&rdquo; &ldquo;To ride.&rdquo; &ldquo;What people drive.&rdquo; &ldquo;To pull
+the wagon.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is big and has four legs,&rdquo; etc.</li>
+
+<li><i>Fork</i>: &ldquo;To eat with.&rdquo; &ldquo;To stick meat with.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is hard and has
+three sharp things,&rdquo; etc.</li>
+
+<li><i>Doll</i>: &ldquo;To play with.&rdquo; &ldquo;What you dress and put to bed.&rdquo; &ldquo;To
+rock,&rdquo; etc.</li>
+
+<li><i>Pencil</i>: &ldquo;To write with.&rdquo; &ldquo;To draw.&rdquo; &ldquo;They write with it.&rdquo; &ldquo;It
+is sharp and makes a black mark.&rdquo;</li>
+
+<li><i>Table</i>: &ldquo;To eat on.&rdquo; &ldquo;What you put the dinner on.&rdquo; &ldquo;Where you
+write.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is made of wood and has legs.&rdquo;</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p>Examples of failure are such responses as the following: &ldquo;A chair is a
+chair&rdquo;; &ldquo;There is a chair&rdquo;; or simply,<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;169">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_169" id="Page_169"></a> &ldquo;There&rdquo; (pointing to a chair). We
+record such responses without pressing for a further definition. About
+the only other type of failure is silence.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> It is not the purpose of this test to find out whether the
+child knows the meaning of the words he is asked to define. Words have
+purposely been chosen which are perfectly familiar to all normal
+children of 5&nbsp;years. But with young children there is a difference
+between knowing a word and giving a definition of it. Besides, we desire
+to find out how the child apperceives the word, or rather the object for
+which it stands; whether the thing is thought of in terms of use,
+appearance (shape, size, color, etc.), material composing it, or class
+relationships.</p>
+
+<p>This test, because it throws such interesting light on the maturity of
+the child&#8217;s apperceptive processes, is one of the most valuable of all.
+It is possible to differentiate at least a half-dozen degrees of
+excellence in definitions, according to the intellectual maturity of the
+subject. A volume, indeed, could be written on the development of word
+definitions and the growth of meanings; but we will postpone further
+discussion until <a href="#VIII_5">VIII,&nbsp;5</a>. Our concern at present is to know that
+children of 5&nbsp;years should at least be able to define four of these six
+words in terms of use.</p>
+
+<p>Binet placed the test in year&nbsp;VI, but our own figures and those of
+nearly all the other investigations indicate that it is better located
+in year&nbsp;V.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="V_5" id="V_5"></a>V,&nbsp;5. The game of patience</h3>
+
+<p><b>Material.</b> Prepare two rectangular cards, each 2&nbsp;&times;&nbsp;3&nbsp;inches, and divide
+one of them into two triangles by cutting it along one of its diagonals.</p>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Place the uncut card on the table with one<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;170">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_170" id="Page_170"></a> of its longer
+sides to the child. By the side of this card, a little nearer the child
+and a few inches apart, lay the two halves of the divided rectangle with
+their hypothenuses turned from each other as follows:</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 200px;">
+<img src="images/triangles.png" width="200" height="124" alt="A pair of congruent non-isosceles right-angled triangles, placed with their vertical sides nearest one another." title="" />
+</div>
+
+<p>Then say to the child: &ldquo;<i>I want you to take these two pieces</i> (touching
+the two triangles) <i>and put them together so they will look exactly like
+this</i>&rdquo; (pointing to the uncut card). If the child hesitates, we repeat
+the instructions with a little urging. Say nothing about hurrying, as
+this is likely to cause confusion. Give three trials, of one minute
+each. If only one trial is given, success is too often a result of
+chance moves; but luck is not likely to bring two successes in three
+trials. If the first trial is a failure, move the cut halves back to
+their original position and say: &ldquo;<i>No; put them together so they will
+look like this</i>&rdquo; (pointing to the uncut card). Make no other comment of
+approval or disapproval. Disregard in silence the inquiring looks of the
+child who tries to read his success or failure in your face.</p>
+
+<p>If one of the pieces is turned over, the task becomes impossible, and it
+is then necessary to turn the piece back to its original position and
+begin over, not counting this trial. Have the under side of the pieces
+marked so as to avoid the risk of presenting one of them to the child
+wrong side up.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> There must be <em>two successes in three trials</em>. About the only
+difficulty in scoring is that of deciding what constitutes a trial. We
+count it a trial when the child brings the pieces together and (after
+few or many changes) leaves them in some position. Whether he succeeds
+after many moves, or leaves the pieces with approval in some absurd
+position, or gives up and says he cannot do it, his effort counts as one
+trial. A single trial may involve a number of unsuccessful changes of
+position in the two <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;171">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_171" id="Page_171"></a>cards, but these changes may not consume altogether
+more than one minute.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> As aptly described by Binet, the operation has the following
+elements: &ldquo;(1) To keep in mind the end to be attained, that is to say,
+the figure to be formed. It is necessary to comprehend this end and not
+to lose sight of it. (2) To try different combinations under the
+influence of this directing idea, which guides the efforts of the child
+even though he be unconscious of the fact. (3) To judge the formed
+combination, compare it with the model, and decide whether it is the
+correct one.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>It may be classed, therefore, as one of the many forms of the
+&ldquo;combination method.&rdquo; Elements must be combined into some kind of whole
+under the guidance of a directing idea. In this respect it has something
+in common with the form-board test, the Ebbinghaus test, and the test
+with dissected sentences (<a href="#XII_4">XII,&nbsp;4</a>). Binet designates it a &ldquo;test of
+patience,&rdquo; because success in it depends upon a certain willingness to
+persist in a line of action under the control of an idea.</p>
+
+<p>Not all failures in this test are equally significant. A bright child of
+5&nbsp;years sometimes fails, but usually not without many trial combinations
+which he rejects one after another as unsatisfactory. A dull child of
+the same age often stops after he has brought the pieces into any sort
+of juxtaposition, however absurd, and may be quite satisfied with his
+foolish effort. His mind is not fruitful and he lacks the power of
+auto-criticism.</p>
+
+<p>It would be well worth while to work out a new and somewhat more
+difficult &ldquo;test of patience,&rdquo; but with special care to avoid the
+puzzling features of the usual games of anagrams. The one given us by
+Binet is rather easy for year&nbsp;V, though plainly somewhat too difficult
+for year&nbsp;IV.</p>
+
+
+<h3><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;172">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_172" id="Page_172"></a><a name="V_6" id="V_6"></a>V,&nbsp;6. Three commissions</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> After getting up from the chair and moving with the child to
+the center of the room, say: &ldquo;<i>Now, I want you to do something for me.
+Here&#8217;s a key. I want you to put it on that chair over there; then I want
+you to shut (or open) that door, and then bring me the box which you see
+over there</i> (pointing in turn to the objects designated). <i>Do you
+understand? Be sure to get it right. First, put the key on the chair,
+then shut</i> (open) <i>the door, then bring me the box</i> (again pointing).
+<i>Go ahead.</i>&rdquo; Stress the words <em>first</em> and <em>then</em> so as to emphasize the
+order in which the commissions are to be executed.</p>
+
+<p>Give the commissions always in the above order. Do not repeat the
+instructions again or give any further aid whatever, even by the
+direction of the gaze. If the child stops or hesitates it is never
+permissible to say: &ldquo;<i>What next?</i>&rdquo; Have the self-control to leave the
+child alone with his task.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> <em>All three commissions must be executed and in the proper
+order.</em> Failure may result, therefore, either from leaving out one or
+more of the commands or from changing the order. The former is more
+often the case.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Success depends first on the ability to comprehend the
+commands, and secondly, on the ability to hold them in mind. It is
+therefore a test of memory, though of a somewhat different kind from
+that involved in repeating digits or sentences. It is an excellent test,
+for it throws light on a kind of intelligence which is demanded in all
+occupations and in everyday life. A more difficult test of the same type
+ought to be worked out for a higher age level.</p>
+
+<p>Binet originally located this test in year&nbsp;VI, but in 1911 changed it to
+year&nbsp;VII. This is unfortunate, for the three <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;173">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_173" id="Page_173"></a>Stanford investigations, as
+well as the statistics of all other investigators, show conclusively
+that it is easy enough for year&nbsp;V.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="V_alt" id="V_alt"></a>V. Alternative test: giving age</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> The formula is simply, &ldquo;<i>How old are you?</i>&rdquo; The child of this
+age is, of course, not expected to know the date of his birthday, but
+merely how many years old he is.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> About the only danger in scoring is in the failure to verify
+the child&#8217;s response. Some children give an incorrect answer with
+perfect assurance, and it is therefore always necessary to verify.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Inability to give the age may or may not be significant. If the
+child has arrived at the age of 7&nbsp;or&nbsp;8&nbsp;years and has had anything like a
+normal social environment, failure in the test is an extremely
+unfavorable sign. But if the child is an orphan or has grown up in
+neglect, ignorance of age has little significance for intelligence.
+About all we can say is that if a child gives his age correctly, it is
+because he has had sufficient interest and intelligence to remember
+verbal statements which have been made concerning him in his presence.
+He may even pass the test without attaching any definite meaning to the
+word &ldquo;year.&rdquo; On the other hand, if he has lived seven or eight years in
+a normal environment, it is safe to assume that he has heard his age
+given many times, and failure to remember it would then indicate either
+a weak memory or a grave inferiority of spontaneous interests, or both.
+Normal children have a natural interest in the things they hear said
+about themselves, while the middle-grade imbecile of even 40&nbsp;years may
+fail to remember his age, however often he may have heard it stated.</p>
+
+<p>Binet placed the test in year&nbsp;VI of the 1908 series, but omitted it
+altogether in 1911. Kuhlmann and Goddard<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;174">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_174" id="Page_174"></a> also omit it, perhaps wisely.
+Nevertheless, it is always interesting to give as a supplementary test.
+Children from good homes acquire the knowledge about a year earlier than
+those from less favorable surroundings. Unselected children of
+California ordinarily pass the test at 5&nbsp;years.</p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_50_50" id="Footnote_50_50"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_50_50">[50]</a></span> The weights required for this test, and also for <a href="#IX_2">IX,&nbsp;2</a>,
+may be purchased of C.&nbsp;H. Stoelting &amp; Co., 3037&nbsp;Carroll Avenue, Chicago,
+Illinois.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_51_51" id="Footnote_51_51"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_51_51">[51]</a></span> For discussion of &ldquo;stereotypy&rdquo; see p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_203">203</a>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_52_52" id="Footnote_52_52"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_52_52">[52]</a></span> Printed cards showing these colors are included in the set
+of material furnished by the publishers of this book.</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;175">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_175" id="Page_175"></a><a name="CHAPTER_XII" id="CHAPTER_XII"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;XII
+<br />
+<small>INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR&nbsp;VI</small></h2>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VI_1" id="VI_1"></a>VI,&nbsp;1. Distinguishing right and left</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Say to the child: &ldquo;<i>Show me your right hand.</i>&rdquo; After this is
+responded to, say: &ldquo;<i>Show me your left ear.</i>&rdquo; Then: &ldquo;<i>Show me your right
+eye.</i>&rdquo; Stress the words <em>left</em> and <em>ear</em> rather strongly and equally;
+also <em>right</em> and <em>eye</em>. If there is one error, repeat the test, this
+time with left hand, right ear, and left eye. Carefully avoid giving any
+help by look of approval or disapproval, by glancing at the part of the
+body indicated, or by supplementary questions.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if all three questions are answered
+correctly, or if, in case of one error, the three additional questions
+are all answered correctly. The standard, therefore, <em>is three out of
+three, or five out of six</em>.</p>
+
+<p>The chief danger of variation among different examiners in scoring
+comes from double responses. For example, the child may point first to
+one ear and then to the other. In all cases of double response, the rule
+is to count the second response and disregard the first. This holds
+whether the first response was wrong and the second right, or <i>vice
+versa</i>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> It is interesting to follow the child&#8217;s acquisitions of
+language distinctions relating to spacial orientation. Other
+distinctions of this type are those between up and down, above and
+below, near and far, before and behind, <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;176">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_176" id="Page_176"></a>etc. As Bobertag has pointed
+out, the child first masters such distinctions as up and down, above and
+below, before and behind, etc., and arrives at a knowledge of right and
+left rather tardily.</p>
+
+<p>How may we explain the late distinction of right and left as compared
+with up and down? At least four theories may be advanced: (1) Something
+depends on the frequency with which children have occasion to make the
+respective distinctions. (2) It may be explained on the supposition that
+kin&aelig;sthetic sensations are more prominently involved in distinctions of
+up and down than in distinctions of right and left. It is certainly true
+that, in distinguishing the two sides of a thing, less bodily movement
+is ordinarily required than in distinctions of its upper and lower
+aspects. The former demands only a shift of the eyes, the latter often
+requires an upward or downward movement of the head. (3) It may be due
+to the fact that the appearance of an object is more affected by
+differences in vertical orientation than by those of horizontal
+orientation. We see an object now from one side, now from the other, and
+the two aspects easily blend, while the two aspects corresponding to
+above and below are not viewed in such rapid succession and so remain
+much more distinct from one another in the child&#8217;s mind. Or, (4), the
+difference may be mainly a matter of language. The child undoubtedly
+hears the words <em>up</em> and <em>down</em> much oftener than <em>right</em> and <em>left</em>,
+and thus learns their meaning earlier. Horizontal distinctions are
+commonly made in such terms as <em>this side</em> and <em>that side</em>, or merely by
+pointing, while in the case of vertical distinctions the words <em>up</em> and
+<em>down</em> are used constantly. This last explanation is a very plausible
+one, but it is very probable that other factors are also involved.</p>
+
+<p>The distinction between right and left has a certain inherent and more
+or less mysterious difficulty. To convince <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;177">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_177" id="Page_177"></a>one&#8217;s self of this it is only
+necessary to try a little experiment on the first fifty persons one
+chances to meet. The experiment is as follows. Say: &ldquo;I am going to ask
+you a question and I want you to answer it as quickly as you can.&rdquo; Then
+ask: &ldquo;Which is your right hand?&rdquo; About forty persons out of fifty will
+answer correctly without a second&#8217;s hesitation, several will require two
+or three seconds to respond, while a few, possibly four or five
+per&nbsp;cent, will grow confused and perhaps be unable to respond for five
+or ten seconds. Some very intelligent adults cannot possibly tell which
+is the right or left hand without first searching for a scar or some
+other distinguishing mark which is known to be on a particular hand.
+Others resort to incipient movements of writing, and since, of course,
+every one knows which hand he writes with, the writing movements
+automatically initiated give the desired clue. One bright little girl of
+8&nbsp;years responded by trying to wink first one eye and then the other.
+Asked why she did this, she said she knew she could wink her left eye,
+but not her right! One who is resourceful enough to adopt such an
+ingenious method is surely not less intelligent than the one who is able
+to respond by a direct instead of an intermediate association.</p>
+
+<p>It seems that normal people never encounter a corresponding difficulty
+in distinguishing up and down. The writer has questioned several hundred
+without finding a single instance, whereas a great many have to employ
+some intermediate association in order to distinguish right and left. It
+is the &ldquo;p&#8217;s and q&#8217;s&rdquo; that children must be told to mind; not the &ldquo;p&#8217;s
+and b&#8217;s.&rdquo; The former is a horizontal, the latter a vertical distinction.</p>
+
+<p>Considering the difficulty which normal adults sometimes have in
+distinguishing right and left, is it fair to use this test as a measure
+of intelligence? We may answer in the affirmative. It is fair because
+normal adults, notwithstanding <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;178">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_178" id="Page_178"></a>momentary uncertainty, are invariably
+able to make the distinction, if not by direct association, then by an
+intermediate one. We overlook the momentary confusion and regard only
+the correctness of the response. Subjects who are below middle-grade
+imbecile, however long they have lived, seldom pass the test.</p>
+
+<p>This test found a place in year&nbsp;VI of Binet&#8217;s 1908 scale, but was
+shifted to year&nbsp;VII in the 1911 revision. The Stanford statistics, and
+all other available data, with the exception of Bobertag&#8217;s, justify its
+retention in year&nbsp;VI. It is possible that the children of different
+nations do not have equal opportunity and stimulus for learning the
+distinction between right and left, but the data show that as far as
+American and English children are concerned we have a right to expect
+this knowledge in children of 6&nbsp;years.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VI_2" id="VI_2"></a>VI,&nbsp;2. Finding omissions in pictures</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Show the pictures to the child one at a time in the order in
+which they are lettered, <i>a</i>, <i>b</i>, <i>c</i>, <i>d</i>. When the first picture is
+shown (that with the eye lacking), say: &ldquo;<i>There is something wrong with
+this face. It is not all there. Part of it is left out. Look carefully
+and tell me what part of the face is not there.</i>&rdquo; Often the child gives
+an irrelevant answer; as, &ldquo;The feet are gone,&rdquo; &ldquo;The stomach is not
+there,&rdquo; etc. These statements are true, but they do not satisfy the
+requirements of the test, so we say: &ldquo;<i>No; I am talking about the face.
+Look again and tell me what is left out of the face.</i>&rdquo; If the correct
+response does not follow, we point to the place where the eye should be
+and say: &ldquo;<i>See, the eye is gone.</i>&rdquo; When picture <i>b</i> is shown we say
+merely: &ldquo;<i>What is left out of this face?</i>&rdquo; Likewise with picture <i>c</i>.
+For picture <i>d</i> we say: &ldquo;<i>What is left out of this picture?</i>&rdquo; No help of
+any kind is given <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;179">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_179" id="Page_179"></a>unless (if necessary) with the first picture. With the
+others we confine ourselves to the single question, and the answer
+should be given promptly, say within twenty to twenty-five seconds.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> Passed if the omission is correctly pointed out in <em>three out
+of four</em> of the pictures. Certain minor errors we may overlook, such as
+&ldquo;eyes&rdquo; instead of &ldquo;eye&rdquo; for the first picture; &ldquo;nose and one ear&rdquo;
+instead of merely &ldquo;nose&rdquo; for the third; &ldquo;hands&rdquo; instead of &ldquo;arms&rdquo; for
+the fourth, etc. Errors like the following, however, count as failure:
+&ldquo;The other eye,&rdquo; or &ldquo;The other ear&rdquo; for the first or third; &ldquo;The ears&rdquo;
+for the fourth, etc.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The test is one of the two or three dozen forms of the
+so-called &ldquo;completion test,&rdquo; all of which have it in common that from
+the given parts of a whole the missing parts are to be found. The whole
+to be completed may be a word, a sentence, a story, a picture, a group
+of pictures, an object, or in fact almost anything. Sometimes all the
+parts of the whole are given and only the arrangement or order is to be
+found, as in the test with dissected sentences.</p>
+
+<p>Further discussion of the completion test will be found in connection
+with <a href="#XII_4">test&nbsp;4, year&nbsp;XII</a>. For the present we will only observe that
+notwithstanding a certain similarity among the tests of this type, they
+do not all call into play the same mental processes. The factor most
+involved may be verbal language coherence, visual perception of form,
+the association of abstract ideas, etc. To pass Binet&#8217;s test with
+mutilated pictures requires, (1) that the parts of the picture be
+perceived as constituting a whole; and (2) that the idea of a human face
+or form be so easily and so clearly reproducible that it may act, even
+before it comes fully into consciousness, as a model or pattern, for the
+criticism of the picture shown. The younger the child, the less
+adequate, in this sense, is his perceptual familiarity with <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;180">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_180" id="Page_180"></a>common
+objects. In standardizing a series of &ldquo;absurd pictures,&rdquo; the writer has
+found that normal children of 3&nbsp;years often see nothing wrong in a
+picture which shows a cat with two legs or a hen with four legs. Such
+children would, of course, never mistake a cat for a hen. Their trouble
+lies in the inability to call up in clear form a &ldquo;free idea&rdquo; of a cat or
+a hen for comparison with the perceptual presentation offered by the
+picture. Middle-grade imbeciles of adult age have much the same
+difficulty as normal children of 4&nbsp;years in recognizing mutilations or
+absurdities in pictures of familiar objects.</p>
+
+<p>Binet first placed this test in year&nbsp;VII, changing it to year&nbsp;VIII in
+the 1911 revision. In other revisions it has been retained in year&nbsp;VII,
+although all the available statistics except Bobertag&#8217;s warrant its
+location in year&nbsp;VI.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VI_3" id="VI_3"></a>VI,&nbsp;3. Counting thirteen pennies</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> The procedure is the same as in the test of counting four
+pennies (<a href="#IV_3">year&nbsp;IV, test&nbsp;3</a>). If the first response contains only a minor
+error, such as the omission of a number in counting, failure to tally
+with the finger, etc., a second trial is given.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if there is <em>one success in two trials</em>.
+Success requires that the counting should tally with the pointing. It is
+not sufficient merely to state the number of pennies without pointing,
+for unless the child points and counts aloud we cannot be sure that his
+correct answer may not be the joint result of two errors in opposite
+directions and equal; for example, if one penny were skipped and
+another were counted twice the total result would still be correct, but
+the performance would not satisfy the requirements.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Does success in this test depend upon <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;181">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_181" id="Page_181"></a>intelligence or upon
+schooling? The answer is, intelligence mainly. There are possibly a few
+normal 6-year-old children who could not pass the test for lack of
+instruction, but children of this age usually have enough spontaneous
+interest in numbers to acquire facility in counting as far as 13 without
+formal teaching. Certainly, inability to do so by the age of 7&nbsp;years is
+a suspicious sign unless the child&#8217;s environment has been
+extraordinarily unfavorable. On the other hand, feeble-minded adults of
+the 5-year level usually have to have a great deal of instruction before
+they acquire the ability to count 13, and many of them are hardly able
+to learn it at all. So much does our learning depend on original
+endowment.</p>
+
+<p>Binet originally placed this test in year&nbsp;VII, but moved it to year&nbsp;VI
+in 1911. All the statistics, without exception, show that this change
+was justified. Bobertag says that nearly all 7-year-olds who are not
+feeble-minded can pass it, a statement with which we can fully agree.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VI_4" id="VI_4"></a>VI,&nbsp;4. Comprehension, second degree</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> The questions used in this year are:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol class="alph smaller">
+<li>&ldquo;What&#8217;s the thing to do if it is raining when you start to school?&rdquo;</li>
+<li>&ldquo;What&#8217;s the thing to do if you find that your house is on fire?&rdquo;</li>
+<li>&ldquo;What&#8217;s the thing to do if you are going some place and miss your train (car)?&rdquo;</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>Note that the wording of the first part of the questions is slightly
+different from that in <a href="#IV_5">year&nbsp;IV, test&nbsp;5</a>.</p>
+
+<p>If there is no response, or if the child looks puzzled, the question may
+be repeated once or twice. The form of the question must not under any
+circumstances be altered. Question <i>b</i>, for example, would be materially
+changed if we should say: &ldquo;<i>Suppose you were to come home from <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;182">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_182" id="Page_182"></a>school
+and find that your house was burning up. What would you do?</i>&rdquo; The
+expression &ldquo;burning up&rdquo; would probably be much less likely to suggest
+calling a fireman than would the words &ldquo;on fire.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> <em>Two out of three</em> must be answered correctly. The harder the
+comprehension questions are, the greater the variety of answers and the
+greater the difficulty of scoring. Because of the difficulty many
+examiners find in scoring this test, we will list the most common
+satisfactory, unsatisfactory, and doubtful responses to each question.</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller">
+<h4>(a) If it is raining when you start to school</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Take umbrella,&rdquo; &ldquo;Bring a parasol,&rdquo; &ldquo;Put on
+rubbers,&rdquo; &ldquo;Wear an overcoat,&rdquo; etc. This type of response
+occurred 61&nbsp;times out of 72&nbsp;successes. &ldquo;Have my father bring me&rdquo;
+also counts <em>plus</em>.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Go home,&rdquo; &ldquo;Stay at home,&rdquo; &ldquo;Stay in the
+house,&rdquo; &ldquo;Have the rainbow,&rdquo; &ldquo;Stay in school,&rdquo; etc. &ldquo;Stay at
+home&rdquo; is the most common failure and might at first seem to the
+examiner to be a satisfactory response. As a matter of fact,
+this answer rests on a slight misunderstanding of the question,
+the import of which is that one is to go to school and it is
+raining.</p>
+
+<p><i>Doubtful.</i> &ldquo;Run&rdquo; as an answer is a little more troublesome. It
+may reasonably be scored <em>plus</em> if it can be ascertained that
+the child is accustomed to meet the situation in this way. It is
+a common response with children in those regions of the
+Southwest where rains are so infrequent that umbrellas are
+rarely used. &ldquo;Bring my lunch&rdquo; may be considered a satisfactory
+response in case the child is in the habit of so doing on rainy
+days.</p>
+
+<h4>(b) If you find that your house is on fire</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Ring the fire alarm,&rdquo; &ldquo;Call the firemen,&rdquo; &ldquo;Call
+for help,&rdquo; &ldquo;Put water on it,&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> The most common failure, accounting for nearly
+half of all, is to suggest finding other shelter; <i>e.g.</i>, &ldquo;Go to
+the hotel,&rdquo; &ldquo;Get another house,&rdquo; &ldquo;Stay with your friends,&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Build a new house,&rdquo; etc. Others are: &ldquo;Tell them you are sorry
+it burned down,&rdquo; &ldquo;Be careful and not let it burn again,&rdquo; &ldquo;Have
+it insured,&rdquo; &ldquo;Cry,&rdquo; &ldquo;Call the policeman,&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;183">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_183" id="Page_183"></a><i>Doubtful.</i> Instead of suggesting measures to put out the fire,
+a good many children suggest mere escape or the saving of
+household articles. Responses of this type are: &ldquo;Jump out of the
+windows,&rdquo; &ldquo;Save yourself,&rdquo; &ldquo;Get out as fast as you can,&rdquo; &ldquo;Save
+the baby,&rdquo; &ldquo;Get my dolls and jewelry and hurry and get out.&rdquo;
+These answers are about one seventh as frequent as the perfectly
+satisfactory ones, and the rule for scoring them is a matter of
+some importance. Under certain circumstances the logical thing
+to do would be to save one&#8217;s self or valuables without wasting
+time trying to call help. There may be no help in reach, or a
+fire which the child imagines may be too far along for help to
+be effective. In order to avoid the possibility of doing a
+subject an injustice, it may be desirable to score such answers
+<em>plus</em>. We must not be too arbitrary.</p>
+
+<h4>(c) If you miss your train</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> The answer we expect is, &ldquo;Wait for another,&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Take the next car,&rdquo; or something to that effect. This type of
+answer includes about 85&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the responses which do not
+belong obviously in the unsatisfactory group. &ldquo;Take a jitney&rdquo; is
+a modern variation of this response which must be counted as
+satisfactory.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> These are endless. One continues to meet new
+examples of absurdity, however many children one has tested. The
+possibilities are literally inexhaustible, but the following are
+among the most common: &ldquo;Wait for it to come back,&rdquo; &ldquo;Have to
+walk,&rdquo; &ldquo;Be mad,&rdquo; &ldquo;Don&#8217;t swear,&rdquo; &ldquo;Run and try to catch it,&rdquo; &ldquo;Try
+to jump on,&rdquo; &ldquo;Don&#8217;t go to that place,&rdquo; &ldquo;Go to the next station,&rdquo;
+etc.</p>
+
+<p><i>Doubtful.</i> The main doubtful response is, &ldquo;Go home again,&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Come back next day and catch another,&rdquo; etc. In small or
+isolated towns having only one or two trains per day, this is
+the logical thing to do, and in such cases the score is <em>plus</em>.
+Fortunately, only about one answer in ten gives rise to any
+difference of opinion among even partly trained examiners.</p></blockquote>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The three comprehension questions of this group were all
+suggested by Binet in 1905. Only one of them, however, &ldquo;What would you
+do if you were going some place and missed your train?&rdquo; was incorporated
+in the 1908 or 1911 series, and this was used in year&nbsp;X with<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;184">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_184" id="Page_184"></a> seven
+others much harder. The other two remained unstandardized previous to
+the Stanford investigation.<a name="FNanchor_53_53" id="FNanchor_53_53"></a><a href="#Footnote_53_53" class="fnanchor">[53]</a></p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VI_5" id="VI_5"></a>VI,&nbsp;5. Naming four coins</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Show a nickel, a penny, a quarter, and a dime, asking each
+time: &ldquo;<i>What is that?</i>&rdquo; If the child misunderstands and answers,
+&ldquo;Money,&rdquo; or &ldquo;A piece of money,&rdquo; we say: &ldquo;<i>Yes, but what do you call that
+piece of money?</i>&rdquo; Show the coins always in the order given above.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if <em>three of the four</em> questions are
+correctly answered. Any correct designation of a coin is satisfactory,
+including provincialisms like &ldquo;two bits&rdquo; for the 25-cent piece, etc. If
+the child changes his response for a coin, we count the second answer
+and ignore the first. No supplementary questions are permissible.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Some of the critics of the Binet scale regard this test as of
+little value, because, they say, the ability to identify pieces of money
+depends entirely on instruction or other accidents of environment. The
+figures show, however, that it is not greatly influenced by differences
+of social environment, although children from poor homes do slightly
+better with it than those from homes of wealth and culture. The fact
+seems to be that practically all children by the age of 6&nbsp;years have had
+opportunity to learn the names of the smaller coins, and if they have
+failed to learn them it betokens a lack of that spontaneity of interest
+in things which we have mentioned so often as a fundamental
+presupposition of intelligence. It is by no means a test of mere
+mechanical memory.</p>
+
+<p>This test was given a place in year&nbsp;VII of Binet&#8217;s 1908 scale, the coins
+used being the 1-sou, 2-sous, 10-sous, and<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;185">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_185" id="Page_185"></a> 5-franc pieces. It was
+omitted from the Binet 1911 revision and also from that of Goddard.
+Kuhlmann retains it in year&nbsp;VII. Others, however, have required all four
+coins to be correctly named, and when this standard is used the test is
+difficult enough for year&nbsp;VII. Germany has six coins up to and including
+the 1-mark piece, all of which could be named by 76&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of
+Bobertag&#8217;s 7-year-olds. With the coins and the standard of scoring used
+in the Stanford revision the test belongs well in year&nbsp;VI.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VI_6" id="VI_6"></a>VI,&nbsp;6. Repeating sixteen to eighteen syllables</h3>
+
+<p>The sentences are:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol class="alph smaller">
+<li>&ldquo;We are having a fine time. We found a little mouse in the trap.&rdquo;</li>
+<li>&ldquo;Walter had a fine time on his vacation. He went fishing every day.&rdquo;</li>
+<li>&ldquo;We will go out for a long walk. Please give me my pretty straw hat.&rdquo;</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> The instructions should be given as follows: &ldquo;<i>Now, listen. I
+am going to say something and after I am through I want you to say it
+over just like I do. Understand? Listen carefully and be sure to say
+exactly what I say.</i>&rdquo; Then read the first sentence rather slowly, in a
+distinct voice, and with expression. If the response is not too bad,
+praise the child&#8217;s efforts. Then proceed with the second and third
+sentences, prefacing each with an exhortation to &ldquo;say exactly what I
+say.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>In this year and in the memory-for-sentences test of later years it is
+not permissible to re-read even the first sentence. The only reason for
+allowing a repetition of one of the sentences in the earlier test of
+this kind was to overcome the child&#8217;s timidity. With children of 6&nbsp;years
+or upward we seldom encounter the timidity which sometimes<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;186">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_186" id="Page_186"></a> makes it so
+hard to secure responses in some of the tests of the earlier years.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed <em>if at least one sentence out of three is
+repeated without error, or if two are repeated with not more than one
+error each</em>. A single omission, insertion, or transposition counts as an
+error. Faults of pronunciation are of course overlooked. It is not
+sufficient that the thought be reproduced intact; the exact language
+must be repeated. The responses should be recorded <i>verbatim</i>. This is
+easily done if record blanks used for scoring have the sentences printed
+in full.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> In this test and in later tests of memory for sentences, it is
+interesting to ask after each response: &ldquo;<i>Did you get it right?</i>&rdquo; As in
+the tests with digits, it is an unfavorable sign when the child is
+perfectly satisfied with a very poor response.</p>
+
+<p>It is evident that tests of this type give opportunity for different
+degrees of failure. To repeat only a half or a third of each sentence is
+much more serious than to make but one error in each sentence (one word
+omitted, inserted, or misplaced). It would be possible to use the same
+sentences at three or four different age levels, by setting the
+appropriate standard for success at each age. If the standard is one
+sentence out of three repeated with no more than two errors, the test
+belongs in year&nbsp;V. If we require two absolutely correct responses out of
+three, the test belongs at about year&nbsp;VII. The shifting standard is
+rendered unnecessary, however, by the use of other tests of the same
+kind, easier ones in the lower years and more difficult ones in the
+upper.</p>
+
+<p>Sentences of sixteen syllables found a place in Binet&#8217;s 1908 scale and
+were correctly located in year&nbsp;VI, but later revisions, including that
+of Binet, have omitted the test.</p>
+
+
+<h3><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;187">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_187" id="Page_187"></a><a name="VI_alt" id="VI_alt"></a>VI. Alternative test: forenoon and afternoon</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> If it is morning, ask: &ldquo;<i>Is it morning or afternoon?</i>&rdquo; If it
+is afternoon, put the question in the reverse form, &ldquo;<i>Is it afternoon or
+morning?</i>&rdquo; This precaution is necessary because of the tendency of some
+children to choose always the latter of two alternatives. Do not
+cross-question the child or give any suggestion that might afford a clue
+as to the correct answer.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if the correct response is given with
+apparent assurance. If the child says he is not sure but <em>thinks</em> it
+forenoon (or afternoon, as the case may be), we score the response a
+failure even if the answer happens to be correct. However, this type of
+response is not often encountered.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> It is interesting to follow the child&#8217;s development with regard
+to orientation in time. This development proceeds much more slowly than
+we are wont to assume. Certain distinctions with regard to space, as up
+and down, come much earlier. As Binet remarks, schools sometimes try to
+teach the events of national history to children whose time orientation
+is so rudimentary that they do not even know morning from afternoon!</p>
+
+<p>The test has two rather serious faults: (1) It gives too much play to
+chance, for since only two alternatives are offered, guesses alone would
+give about fifty per&nbsp;cent of correct responses. (2) We cannot be sure
+that the verbal distinction between forenoon and afternoon always
+corresponds the two divisions of the day. It is possible that the
+temporal discrimination precedes the formation of the correct verbal
+association.</p>
+
+<p>This test was included in the year&nbsp;VI group of the 1908 scale, but was
+omitted from the 1911 revision. Nearly all <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;188">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_188" id="Page_188"></a>the data except Bobertag&#8217;s
+show that it is rather easy for year&nbsp;VI, though too difficult for
+year&nbsp;V. Bobertag&#8217;s figures would place the test in year&nbsp;VII. Possibly
+the corresponding German words are not as easy to learn as our <em>morning</em>
+and <em>afternoon</em>.</p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_53_53" id="Footnote_53_53"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_53_53">[53]</a></span> For general discussion of the comprehension questions as a
+test, see p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_158">158</a>.</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;189">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_189" id="Page_189"></a><a name="CHAPTER_XIII" id="CHAPTER_XIII"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;XIII
+<br />
+<small>INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR&nbsp;VII</small></h2>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VII_1" id="VII_1"></a>VII,&nbsp;1. Giving the number of fingers</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> &ldquo;<i>How many fingers have you on one hand?</i>&rdquo; &ldquo;<i>How many on the
+other hand?</i>&rdquo; &ldquo;<i>How many on both hands together?</i>&rdquo; If the child begins
+to count in response to any of the questions, say: &ldquo;<i>No, don&#8217;t count.
+Tell me without counting.</i>&rdquo; Then repeat the question.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> Passed <em>if all three questions are answered correctly and
+promptly</em> without the necessity of counting. Some subjects do not
+understand the question to include the thumbs. We disregard this if the
+number of fingers exclusive of thumbs is given correctly.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Like the two tests of counting pennies, this one, also, throws
+light on the child&#8217;s spontaneous interest in numbers. However, the
+mental processes it calls into play are a little less simple than those
+required for mere counting. If the child is able to give the number of
+fingers, it is ordinarily because he has previously counted them and has
+remembered the result. The memory would hardly be retained but for a
+certain interest in numbers as such. Middle-grade imbeciles of even
+adult age seldom remember how many fingers they have, however often
+they may have been told. They are not able to form accurate concepts of
+other than the simplest number relationships, and numbers have little
+interest or meaning for them.</p>
+
+<p>Binet gave this test a place in year&nbsp;VII of the 1908 series, <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;190">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_190" id="Page_190"></a>but omitted
+it in the 1911 revision. Goddard omits it, while Kuhlmann retains it in
+year&nbsp;VII, where, according to our own figures, it unmistakably belongs.
+Bobertag finds it rather easy for year&nbsp;VII, though too difficult for
+year&nbsp;VI.</p>
+
+<p>Our data prove that this test fulfills the requirements of a good test.
+It shows a rapid but even rise from year&nbsp;V to year&nbsp;VIII in the per&nbsp;cent
+passing, the agreement among the different testers is extraordinarily
+close, and it is relatively little influenced by training and social
+environment. For these reasons, and because it is so easy to give and
+score with uniformity, it well deserves a place in the scale.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VII_2" id="VII_2"></a>VII,&nbsp;2. Description of pictures</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Use the same pictures as in <a href="#III_3">III,&nbsp;3</a>, presenting them always in
+the following order: Dutch Home, River Scene, Post-Office. The formula
+for the test in this year is somewhat different from <a href="#III_3">that of year&nbsp;III</a>.
+Say: &ldquo;<i>What is this picture about? What is this a picture of?</i>&rdquo; Use the
+double question, and follow the formula exactly. It would ruin the test
+to say: &ldquo;<i>Tell me everything you see in this picture</i>,&rdquo; for this form of
+question tends to provoke the enumeration response even with intelligent
+children of this age.</p>
+
+<p>When there is no response, the question may be repeated as often as is
+necessary to break the silence.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if <em>two of the three</em> pictures are described
+or interpreted. Interpretation, however, is seldom encountered at this
+age. Often the response consists of a mixture of enumeration and
+description. The rule is that the reaction to a picture should not be
+scored <em>plus</em> unless it is made up chiefly of description (or
+interpretation).</p>
+
+<p>Study of the following samples of satisfactory responses <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;191">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_191" id="Page_191"></a>will give a
+fairly definite idea of the requirements for satisfactory description:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><h4>Picture (a): satisfactory responses</h4>
+
+<p>&ldquo;The little girl is crying. The mother is looking at her and
+there is a little kitten on the floor.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;The mother is watching the baby, and the cat is looking at a
+hole in the floor, and there is a lamp and a table so I guess
+it&#8217;s a dining room.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;The little girl has wooden shoes. Her mother is sitting in a
+chair and has a funny cap on her head. The cat is sitting on the
+floor and there is a basket by the mother and a table with
+something on it.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;It&#8217;s about Holland. The little Dutch girl is crying and the
+mother is sitting down.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;A little Dutch girl and her mother and that&#8217;s a kitten, and the
+little girl has her hand up as if she was doing something to her
+forehead. She has shoes that curve up in front.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;Dutch lady, and the little baby doesn&#8217;t want to come to her
+mother and the cat is looking for some mice.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;The mother is sitting down and the little one has her hands up
+over her eyes. There&#8217;s a pail by the mother and a chair with
+some clothes on it and a table with dishes. And here&#8217;s a lamp
+and here&#8217;s some curtains.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<h4>Picture (b): satisfactory responses</h4>
+
+<p>&ldquo;Some people in a boat. The water is high and if they don&#8217;t look
+out the boat will tip over.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;Some Indians and a lady and man. They are in a boat on the
+river and the boat is about to upset, and there are some dead
+trees going to fall.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;There&#8217;s a lot of water coming up to drown the people. There are
+two people in the boat and the boat is sinking.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;There&#8217;s some people sailing in a canoe and the woman is leaning
+over on the man because she is afraid.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;There&#8217;s an Indian and some white people in the boat. I suppose
+they are out for a ride in a canoe.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;Picture about some man and lady in a canoe and going down to
+the sea.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;They are taking a boat ride on the ocean and the water is up<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;192">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_192" id="Page_192"></a> so
+high that one of them is scared. Here are some trees and two of
+them are going to fall down. Here&#8217;s a little place or bridge you
+can stand on. The man is touching this one&#8217;s head and this one
+has his hand on the cover.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;The water is splashing all over. There&#8217;s trees on this bank and
+there&#8217;s a rock and some trees falling down. The people have a
+blanket over them.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<h4>Picture (c): satisfactory responses</h4>
+
+<p>&ldquo;A man selling eggs and two men reading the paper together and
+two men watching.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;A few men reading a newspaper and one has a basket of eggs and
+this one has been fishing.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;There&#8217;s a man with a basket of eggs and another is reading the
+paper and a woman is hanging out clothes. There&#8217;s a house near.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;There&#8217;s a man trying to read the paper and the others want to
+read it too. Here&#8217;s a lady walking up to the barn. There are
+houses over there and one man has a basket.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;There&#8217;s a big brick house and five men by it and a man with a
+basket of eggs and a post-office sign and a lady going home.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;They are all looking at the paper. He is looking over the other
+man&#8217;s shoulder and this one is looking at the back of the paper.
+There&#8217;s a woman cleaning up her back yard and some coops for
+hens.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;A man reading a paper, a man with eggs, a woman and a tree and
+another house. That man has an apron on. This is the
+post-office.&rdquo;</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>Unsatisfactory responses are those made up entirely or mainly of
+enumeration. A phrase or two of description intermingled with a larger
+amount of enumeration counts <em>minus</em>. Sometimes the description is
+satisfactory as far as it goes, but is exceedingly brief. In such cases
+a little tactful urging (&ldquo;<i>Go ahead</i>,&rdquo; etc.) will extend the response
+sufficiently to reveal its true character.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Description is better than enumeration because it involves
+putting the elements of a picture together in a simple way or noting
+their qualities. This requires a higher type of mental association
+(combinative <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;193">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_193" id="Page_193"></a>power) than mere enumeration. An unusually complete
+description indicates relative wealth of mental content and facility of
+association.</p>
+
+<p>Binet placed this test in year&nbsp;VII, and it seems to have been retained
+in this location in all revisions except Bobertag&#8217;s. However, the
+statistics of various workers show much disagreement. Lack of agreement
+is easily accounted for by the fact that different investigators have
+used different series of pictures and doubtless also different standards
+for success. The pictures used by Binet have little action or detail and
+are therefore rather difficult for description. On the other hand, the
+Jingleman-Jack pictures used by Kuhlmann represent such familiar
+situations and have so much action that even 5- or 6-year intelligence
+seldom fails with them. The pictures we employ belong without question
+in year&nbsp;VII.</p>
+
+<p>No better proof than the above could be found to show how ability of a
+given kind does not make its appearance suddenly. There is no one time
+in the life of even a single child when the power to describe pictures
+suddenly develops. On the contrary, pictures of a certain type will
+ordinarily provoke description, rather than enumeration, as early as
+5&nbsp;or&nbsp;6&nbsp;years; others not before 7&nbsp;or&nbsp;8&nbsp;years, or even later.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VII_3" id="VII_3"></a>VII,&nbsp;3. Repeating five digits</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Use: 3&ndash;1&ndash;7&ndash;5&ndash;9; 4&ndash;2&ndash;3&ndash;8&ndash;5; 9&ndash;8&ndash;1&ndash;7&ndash;6. Tell the child to
+listen and to say after you just what you say. Then read the first
+series of digits at a slightly faster rate than one per second, in a
+distinct voice, and with perfectly uniform emphasis. <em>Avoid rhythm.</em></p>
+
+<p>In previous tests with digits, it was permissible to re-read the first
+series if the child refused to respond. In this year, and in the digits
+tests of later years, this is not<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;194">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_194" id="Page_194"></a> permissible. Warning is not given as
+to the number of digits to be repeated. Before reading each series, get
+the child&#8217;s attention. Do not stare at the child during the response, as
+this is disconcerting. Look aside or at the record sheet.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> Passed if the child repeats correctly, after a single reading,
+<em>one series out of the three</em> series given. The order must be correct.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Psychologically the repetition of digits differs from the
+repetition of sentences mainly in the fact that digits have less meaning
+(fewer associations) than the words of a sentence. It is because they
+are not as well knit together in meaning that three digits tax the
+memory as much as six syllables making up a sentence.</p>
+
+<p>Testing auditory memory for digits is one of the oldest of intelligence
+tests. It is easy to give and lends itself well to exact quantitative
+standardization. Its value has been questioned, however, on two grounds:
+(1) That it is not a test of pure memory, but depends largely on
+attention; and (2) that the results are too much influenced by the
+child&#8217;s type of imagery. As to the first objection, it is true that more
+than one mental function is brought into play by the test. The same may
+be said of every other test in the Binet scale and for that matter of
+any test that could be devised. It is impossible to isolate any function
+for separate testing. In fact, the functions called memory, attention,
+perception, judgment, etc., never operate in isolation. There are no
+separate and special &ldquo;faculties&rdquo; corresponding to such terms, which are
+merely convenient names for characterizing mental processes of various
+types. In any test it is &ldquo;general ability&rdquo; which is operative, perhaps
+now <em>chiefly</em> in remembering, at another time <em>chiefly</em> in sensory
+discrimination, again in reasoning, etc.</p>
+
+<p>The second objection, that the test is largely invalidated <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;195">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_195" id="Page_195"></a>by the
+existence of imagery types, is not borne out by the facts. Experiments
+have shown that pure imagery types are exceedingly rare, and that
+children, especially, are characterized by &ldquo;mixed&rdquo; imagery. There are
+probably few subjects so lacking in auditory imagery as to be placed at
+a serious disadvantage in this test.</p>
+
+<p>Lengthening a series by the addition of a single digit adds greatly to
+the difficulty. While four digits can usually be repeated by children of
+4&nbsp;years, five digits belong in year&nbsp;VII and six in year&nbsp;X.</p>
+
+<p>It is always interesting to note the type of errors made. The most
+common error is to omit one or more of the digits, usually in the first
+part of the series. If the child&#8217;s ability is decidedly below the test
+he may give only the last two or three out of the five or six heard.
+Substitutions are also quite frequent, and if so many substitutions are
+made as to give a series quite unlike that which the child has heard, it
+is an unfavorable sign, indicating weakness of the critical sense which
+is so often found with low-level intelligence. In case of extreme
+weakness of the power of auto-criticism, the child in response to the
+series 9&ndash;8&ndash;1&ndash;7&ndash;6&ndash;, may say 1&ndash;2&ndash;3&ndash;4&ndash;5&ndash;6, or perhaps merely a couple of
+digits like 8&ndash;6, and still express complete satisfaction with his absurd
+response. After each series, therefore, the examiner should say, &ldquo;<i>Was
+it right?</i>&rdquo;<a name="FNanchor_54_54" id="FNanchor_54_54"></a><a href="#Footnote_54_54" class="fnanchor">[54]</a> Very young subjects, however, have a tendency to answer
+&ldquo;yes&rdquo; to any question of this type, and it is therefore best not to call
+for criticism of a performance below the age of 6&nbsp;or&nbsp;7&nbsp;years.</p>
+
+<p>Digit series of a given length are not always of equal difficulty, and
+for this reason it is never wise to use series improvised at the moment
+of the experiment. We must avoid especially series of regularly
+ascending or descending <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;196">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_196" id="Page_196"></a>value, the repetition at regular intervals of a
+particular digit, and all other peculiarities of arrangement which would
+favor the grouping of the digits for easier retention.</p>
+
+<p>It remains to mention two or three further cautions in regard to
+procedure. It is best to begin with a series about one digit below the
+child&#8217;s expected ability. If the child has a probable intelligence of
+about 6&nbsp;or&nbsp;7&nbsp;years, we should begin with four digits; in case of
+probable 10-year intelligence we begin with five digits, etc. On the
+other hand, we should avoid beginning too far down, because then the
+result is too much complicated by the effects of practice and fatigue.</p>
+
+<p>It is not necessary, and often it is not expedient, to give the digits
+tests of all the different years in succession; that is, without other
+tests intervening. While this may be permissible with older children, in
+young children the power of sustained attention is so weak that no
+single kind of test should occupy more than two or three minutes.
+Children below 6&nbsp;or&nbsp;7&nbsp;years should ordinarily be given the tests in the
+order in which they are listed in the record booklet.</p>
+
+<p>In his 1911 revision of the scale Binet unfortunately shifted this test
+from year&nbsp;VII to year&nbsp;VIII. Goddard follows his example, but Kuhlmann
+retains it in year&nbsp;VII. The data from more than a dozen leading
+investigations in America, England, and Germany agree in showing that
+the test should remain in year&nbsp;VII.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VII_4" id="VII_4"></a>VII,&nbsp;4. Tying a bow-knot</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Prepare a shoestring tied in a bow-knot around a stick. The
+knot should be an ordinary &ldquo;double bow,&rdquo; with wings not over three or
+four inches long. Make this ready in advance of the experiment and show
+the child only the completed knot.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;197">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_197" id="Page_197"></a>Place the model before the subject with the wings pointing to the right
+and left, and say: &ldquo;<i>You know what kind of knot this is, don&#8217;t you? It
+is a bow-knot. I want you to take this other piece of string and tie the
+same kind of knot around my finger.</i>&rdquo; At the same time give the child a
+piece of shoestring, of the same length as that which is tied around the
+stick, and hold out a finger pointed toward the child and in convenient
+position for the operation. It is better to have the subject tie the
+string around the examiner&#8217;s finger than around a pencil or other object
+because the latter often falls out of the string and is otherwise
+awkward to handle.</p>
+
+<p>Some children who assert that they do not know how to tie a bow-knot are
+sometimes nevertheless successful when urged to try. It is always
+necessary, therefore, to secure an actual trial.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if a double bow-knot (both ends folded in)
+is made <em>in not more than a minute</em>. A single bow-knot (only one end
+folded in) counts half credit, because children are often accustomed to
+use the single bow altogether. The usual plain common knot, which
+precedes the bow-knot proper, must not be omitted if the response is to
+count as satisfactory, for without this preliminary plain knot a
+bow-knot will not hold and is of no value. To be satisfactory the knot
+should also be drawn up reasonably close, not left gaping.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> This test, which had not before been standardized, was
+suggested to the writer by the late Dr.&nbsp;Huey, who in a conversation
+once remarked upon the frequent inability of feeble-minded adults to
+perform the little motor tasks which are universally learned by normal
+persons in childhood. The test was therefore incorporated in the
+Stanford trial series of 1913&ndash;14 and tried with 370 non-selected
+children within two months of the 6th, 7th, 8th, <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;198">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_198" id="Page_198"></a>or 9th birthday. It was
+expected that the test would probably be found to belong at about the
+8-year level, but it proved to be easy enough for year&nbsp;VII, where
+69&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the children passed it. Only 35&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the
+6-year-olds succeeded, but after that age the per&nbsp;cent passing increased
+rapidly to 94&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent at 9&nbsp;years.</p>
+
+<p>This little experiment, simple as it is, seems to fulfill reasonably
+well the requirements of a good test. The main objection which might be
+brought against it is that it is much subject to the influence of
+training. If this were true in any marked degree, the mentally retarded
+children of 7-year intelligence should be expected to succeed better
+with it than mentally advanced children of the same mental level, since
+the former would have had at least two or three years more in which to
+learn the task. A comparison of the two groups, however, shows no great
+difference. The factor of age, apart from mental age, affects the
+results so little that it is evident we have here a real test of
+intelligence.</p>
+
+<p>It would, of course, be easy to imagine a child of 7&nbsp;years who had not
+had reasonable opportunity to make the acquaintance of bow-knots or to
+learn to tie them. But such children are seldom encountered in the ages
+above 6&nbsp;or&nbsp;7. Of 68 7-year-olds who were asked whether they had ever
+seen a bow-knot (&ldquo;a knot like that&rdquo;) only two replied in the negative.
+It cannot be denied, however, that specific instruction and special
+stimulus to practice do play a certain part. This is suggested by the
+fact that girls excel the boys somewhat at each age, doubtless because
+bow-knots play a larger r&ocirc;le in feminine apparel. Social status affects
+the results in only a moderate degree, though it might be supposed that
+poor ragamuffins, on the one hand, and children of the very rich, on the
+other, would both make a poor showing in this test; the former because
+of<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;199">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_199" id="Page_199"></a> their scanty apparel, the latter because they sometimes have servants
+to dress them.</p>
+
+<p>The following are probably the chief factors determining success with
+this test: (1) Interest in common objective things; (2) ability to form
+permanent associative connections between successive motor co&ouml;rdinations
+(memory for a series of acts); and (3) skill in the acquisition of
+voluntary motor control. The last factor is probably much less important
+than the other two. Motor awkwardness often prolongs the time from the
+usual ten or fifteen seconds to thirty or forty seconds, but it is
+rarely a cause of a failure. The important thing is to be able to
+reproduce the appropriate succession of acts, acts which nearly all
+children of 7&nbsp;years, under the joint stimulus of example and spontaneous
+interest, have before performed or tried to perform.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VII_5" id="VII_5"></a>VII,&nbsp;5. Giving differences from memory</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Say: &ldquo;<i>What is the difference between a fly and a
+butterfly?</i>&rdquo; If the child does not seem to understand, say: &ldquo;<i>You know
+flies, do you not? You have seen flies? And you know the butterflies!
+Now, tell me the difference between a fly and a butterfly.</i>&rdquo; Proceed in
+the same way with <i>stone and egg</i>, and <i>wood and glass</i>. A little
+coaxing is sometimes necessary to secure a response, but supplementary
+questions and suggestions of every kind are to be avoided. For example,
+it would not be permissible for the examiner to say: &ldquo;<i>Which is larger,
+a fly or a butterfly?</i>&rdquo; This would give the child his cue and he would
+immediately answer, &ldquo;A butterfly.&rdquo; The child must be left to find a
+difference by himself. Sometimes a difference is given, but without any
+indication as to its direction, as, for example, &ldquo;One is bigger than the
+other&rdquo; (for fly and butterfly). It is then permissible to ask: &ldquo;<i>Which
+is bigger?</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;200">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_200" id="Page_200"></a><b>Scoring.</b> Passed if a real difference is given in <em>two out of three
+comparisons</em>. It is not necessary, however, that an <em>essential</em>
+difference be given; the difference may be trivial, only it must be a
+real one. The following are samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory
+responses:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><h4>Fly and butterfly</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Butterfly is larger.&rdquo; &ldquo;Butterfly has bigger
+wings.&rdquo; &ldquo;Fly is black and a butterfly is not.&rdquo; &ldquo;Butterfly is
+yellow (or white, etc.) and fly is black.&rdquo; &ldquo;Fly bites you and
+butterfly don&#8217;t.&rdquo; &ldquo;Butterfly has powder on its wings, fly does
+not.&rdquo; &ldquo;Fly flies straighter.&rdquo; &ldquo;Butterfly is outdoors and a fly
+is in the house.&rdquo; &ldquo;Flies are more dangerous to our health.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Flies haven&#8217;t anything to sip honey with.&rdquo; &ldquo;Butterfly doesn&#8217;t
+live as long as a fly.&rdquo; &ldquo;Butterfly comes from a caterpillar.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Sometimes a double contrast is meant, but not fully expressed;
+as, &ldquo;A fly is small and a butterfly is pretty.&rdquo; Here the thought
+is probably correct, only the language is awkward.</p>
+
+<p>Of 102&nbsp;correct responses, 70 were in terms of size, or size plus
+color or form; 12 were in terms of both form and color; 6 in
+terms of color alone; and the rest scattered among such
+responses as those mentioned above.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> These are mostly misstatements of facts; as:
+&ldquo;Fly is bigger.&rdquo; &ldquo;Fly has legs and butterfly hasn&#8217;t.&rdquo; &ldquo;Butterfly
+has no feet and fly has.&rdquo; &ldquo;Butterfly makes butter.&rdquo; &ldquo;Fly is a
+fly and a butterfly is not.&rdquo; Failures due to misstatement of
+fact are of endless variety. If an indefinite response is given,
+like &ldquo;The fly is different,&rdquo; or &ldquo;They don&#8217;t look alike,&rdquo; we ask,
+&ldquo;<i>How is it different?</i>&rdquo; or, &ldquo;<i>Why don&#8217;t they look alike?</i>&rdquo; It
+is satisfactory if the child then gives a correct answer.</p>
+
+<h4>Stone and egg</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Stone is harder.&rdquo; &ldquo;Egg is softer.&rdquo; &ldquo;Egg breaks
+easier.&rdquo; &ldquo;Egg breaks and stone doesn&#8217;t.&rdquo; &ldquo;Stone is heavier.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Egg is white and stone is not.&rdquo; &ldquo;Egg has a shell and stone does
+not.&rdquo; &ldquo;Eggs have a white and a yellow in them.&rdquo; &ldquo;You put eggs in
+a pudding.&rdquo; &ldquo;An egg is rounder than a stone.&rdquo; We may also accept
+statements which are only qualifiedly true; as, &ldquo;You can break
+an egg, but not a stone.&rdquo; Likewise double but incomplete<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;201">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_201" id="Page_201"></a>
+comparisons are satisfactory; as, &ldquo;An egg you fry and a stone
+you throw,&rdquo; &ldquo;A stone is tough and an egg you eat,&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+<p>A little over three fourths of the comparisons made by children
+of 6, 7, and 8&nbsp;years are in terms of hardness. The other
+responses are widely scattered.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;A stone is bigger (or smaller) than an egg.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;A stone is square and an egg is round.&rdquo; &ldquo;An egg is yellow and a
+stone is white.&rdquo; &ldquo;Stones are red (or black, etc.) and eggs are
+white.&rdquo; &ldquo;An egg is to eat and a stone is to plant.&rdquo; &ldquo;An egg is
+round and a stone is sometimes round.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>It will be noted that the above responses are partly true and
+partly false. The error they contain renders them unacceptable.
+Most of the failures are due to misstatements as to size, shape,
+or color, but occasionally one meets a bizarre answer.</p>
+
+<h4>Wood and glass</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Glass breaks easier than wood.&rdquo; &ldquo;Glass breaks
+and wood does not.&rdquo; &ldquo;Wood is stronger than glass.&rdquo; &ldquo;Glass you
+can see through and wood you can&#8217;t.&rdquo; &ldquo;Glass cuts you and wood
+doesn&#8217;t.&rdquo; &ldquo;You get splinters from wood and you don&#8217;t from
+glass.&rdquo; &ldquo;Glass melts and wood doesn&#8217;t.&rdquo; &ldquo;Wood burns and glass
+doesn&#8217;t.&rdquo; &ldquo;Wood has bark and glass hasn&#8217;t.&rdquo; &ldquo;Wood grows and
+glass doesn&#8217;t.&rdquo; &ldquo;Glass is heavier than wood.&rdquo; &ldquo;Glass glistens in
+the sun and wood does not.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>An incomplete double comparison is also counted satisfactory;
+as, &ldquo;Wood you can burn and glass you can see through.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Wood is black and glass is white.&rdquo; (Color
+differences are always unsatisfactory in this comparison unless
+transparency is also mentioned.) &ldquo;Glass is square and wood is
+round.&rdquo; &ldquo;Glass is bigger than wood&rdquo; (or <i>vice versa</i>). &ldquo;Wood is
+oblong and glass is square.&rdquo; &ldquo;Glass is thin and wood is thick.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Wood is made out of trees and glass out of windows.&rdquo; &ldquo;There is
+no glass in wood.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>The two most frequent types of failures are misstatements
+regarding color and thickness. The other failures are widely
+scattered.</p></blockquote>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The test is one which all the critics agree in commending,
+largely because it is so little influenced by ordinary school
+experience. Its excellence lies mainly, however, in the fact that it
+throws light upon the character <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;202">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_202" id="Page_202"></a>of the child&#8217;s higher thought processes,
+for thinking means essentially the association of ideas on the basis of
+differences or similarities. Nearly all thought processes, from the most
+complex to the very simplest, involve to a greater or less degree one or
+the other of these two types of association. They are involved in the
+simple judgments made by children, in the appreciation of puns, in
+mechanical inventions, in the creation of poetry, in the scientific
+classification of natural phenomena, and in the origination of the
+hypotheses of science or philosophy.</p>
+
+<p>The ability to note differences precedes somewhat the ability to note
+resemblances, though the contrary has sometimes been asserted by
+logician-psychologists. The difficulty of the test is greatly increased
+by the fact that the objects to be compared are not present to the
+senses, which means that the free ideas must be called up for comparison
+and contrast. Failure may result either from weakness in the power of
+ideational representation of objects, or from the inadequacy of the
+associations themselves, or from both. Probably both factors are usually
+involved.</p>
+
+<p>Intellectual development is especially evident in increased ability to
+note <em>essential</em> differences and likenesses, as contrasted with those
+which are trivial, superficial, and accidental. To distinguish an egg
+from a stone on the basis of one being organic, the other inorganic
+matter requires far higher intelligence than to distinguish them on the
+basis of shape, color, fragibility, etc. It is not till well toward the
+adult stage that the ability to give very essential likenesses and
+differences becomes prominent, and when we get a comparison of this type
+from a child of 7&nbsp;or&nbsp;8&nbsp;years it is a very favorable sign.</p>
+
+<p>It would be well worth while to standardize a new test of this kind for
+use in the upper years and especially adapted to display the ability to
+give essential likenesses and differences. <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;203">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_203" id="Page_203"></a>At year&nbsp;VII we must accept as
+satisfactory any real difference.</p>
+
+<p>One point remains. In the tests of giving differences and similarities,
+it is well to make note of any tendency to <em>stereotypy</em>, by which is
+meant the mechanical reappearance of the same idea, or element, in
+successive responses. For example, the child begins by comparing fly and
+butterfly on the basis of size; as, &ldquo;A butterfly is bigger than a fly.&rdquo;
+So far, this is quite satisfactory; but the child with a tendency to
+stereotypy finds himself unable to get away from the dominating idea of
+size and continues to make it the basis of the other comparisons: &ldquo;A
+stone is larger than an egg,&rdquo; &ldquo;Wood is larger than glass,&rdquo; etc. In case
+of stereotypy in all three responses, we should have to score the total
+response failure even though the idea employed happened to fit all three
+parts of the question. As a rule it is encountered only with very young
+children or with older children who are mentally retarded. It is
+therefore an unfavorable sign.</p>
+
+<p>Although this test has been universally used in year&nbsp;VIII, all the
+available statistics, with the exception of Bobertag&#8217;s and Bloch&#8217;s,
+indicate that it is decidedly too easy for that year. Binet himself says
+that nearly all 7-year-olds pass it. Goddard finds 97&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent passing
+at year&nbsp;VIII, and Dougherty 90&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent at year&nbsp;VI. With the standard of
+scoring given in the present revision, and with the substitution of
+<i>stone and egg</i> instead of the more difficult <i>paper and cloth</i>, the
+test is unquestionably easy enough for year&nbsp;VII.</p>
+
+
+<h3><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;204">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_204" id="Page_204"></a><a name="VII_6" id="VII_6"></a>VII,&nbsp;6. Copying a diamond</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> On a white cardboard draw in heavy black lines a diamond with
+the longer diagonal three inches and the shorter diagonal an inch and a
+half. The specially prepared record booklet contains the diamond as well
+as many other conveniences.</p>
+
+<p>Place the model before the child with the longer diagonal pointing
+directly toward him, and giving him <i>pen and ink</i> and paper, say: &ldquo;<i>I
+want you to draw one exactly like this.</i>&rdquo; Give three trials, saying each
+time: &ldquo;<i>Make it exactly like this one.</i>&rdquo; In repeating the above formula,
+merely point to the model; do not pass the fingers around its edge.</p>
+
+<p>Unlike the test of <a href="#IV_4">copying a square</a> in year&nbsp;IV, there is seldom any
+difficulty in getting the child to try this one. By the age of 7 the
+child has grown much less timid and has become more accustomed to the
+use of writing materials.</p>
+
+<p>Note whether the child draws each part carefully, looking at the model
+from time to time, or whether the strokes are made in a more or less
+haphazard manner with only an initial glance at the original.</p>
+
+<p>After each trial, say to the child: &ldquo;<i>Is it good?</i>&rdquo; And after the three
+copies have been made say: &ldquo;<i>Which one is the best?</i>&rdquo; Retarded children
+are sometimes entirely satisfied with the most nondescript drawings
+imaginable, but they are more likely correctly to pick out the best of
+three than to render a correct judgment about the worth of each drawing
+separately.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if <em>two of the three</em> drawings are at least
+as good as those marked satisfactory on the score card. The diamond
+should be drawn approximately in the correct position, and the diagonals
+must not be reversed. Disregard departures from the model with respect
+to size.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;205">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_205" id="Page_205"></a><b>Remarks.</b> The test is a good one. Age and training, apart from
+intelligence, affect it only moderately. There are few adult imbeciles
+of 6-year intelligence who are able to pass it, while but few subjects
+who have reached the 8-year level fail on it.<a name="FNanchor_55_55" id="FNanchor_55_55"></a><a href="#Footnote_55_55" class="fnanchor">[55]</a></p>
+
+<p>This test was located in year&nbsp;VII of the 1908 scale, but was shifted to
+year&nbsp;VI in Binet&#8217;s 1911 revision. The change was without justification,
+for Binet expressly states, both in 1908 and 1911, that only half of the
+6-year-olds succeed with it. The large majority of investigations have
+given too low a proportion of successes at 6&nbsp;years to warrant its
+location at that age, particularly if pen is required instead of pencil.
+Location at year&nbsp;VI would be warranted only on the condition that the
+use of pencil be permitted and only one success required in three
+trials.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VII_alt1" id="VII_alt1"></a>VII, Alternative test&nbsp;1: naming the days of the week</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Say: &ldquo;<i>You know the days of the week, do you not? Name the
+days of the week for me.</i>&rdquo; Sometimes the child begins by naming various
+annual holidays, as Christmas, Fourth of July, etc. Perhaps he has not
+comprehended the task; at any rate, we give him one more trial by
+stopping him and saying: &ldquo;<i>No; that is not what I mean. I want you to
+name the days of the week.</i>&rdquo; No supplementary questions are permissible,
+and we must be careful not to show approval or disapproval in our looks
+as the child is giving his response.</p>
+
+<p>If the days have been named in correct order, we check up the response
+to see whether the real order of days is known or whether the names have
+only been repeated mechanically. This is done by asking the following
+questions: <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;206">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_206" id="Page_206"></a>&ldquo;<i>What day comes before Tuesday?</i>&rdquo; &ldquo;<i>What day comes before
+Thursday?</i>&rdquo; &ldquo;<i>What day comes before Friday?</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if, within <em>fifteen seconds</em>, the days of
+the week are <em>all named in correct order</em>, and if the child succeeds in
+at least <em>two of the three check questions</em>. We disregard the point of
+beginning.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The test has been criticized as too dependent on rote memory.
+Bobertag says a child may pass it without having any adequate conception
+of &ldquo;week,&rdquo; &ldquo;yesterday,&rdquo; &ldquo;day before yesterday,&rdquo; etc. This criticism
+holds if the test is given according to the older procedure, but does
+not apply with the procedure above recommended. The &ldquo;checking-up&rdquo;
+questions enable us at once to distinguish responses that are given by
+rote from those which rest upon actual knowledge.</p>
+
+<p>The test has been shown to be much more influenced by age, apart from
+intelligence, than most other tests of the scale. Notwithstanding this
+fault, it seems desirable to keep the test, at least as an alternative,
+because it forms one of a group which may be designated as tests of time
+orientation. The others of this group are: &ldquo;<i><a href="#VI_alt">Distinguishing forenoon and
+afternoon</a></i>&rdquo; (VI), &ldquo;<i><a href="#IX_1">Giving the date</a></i>&rdquo; and &ldquo;<i><a href="#IX_alt1">Naming the months</a></i>&rdquo; (IX). It
+would be well if we had even more of this type, for interest in the
+passing of time and in the names of time divisions is closely correlated
+with intelligence. One reason for the inferiority of the dull and
+feeble-minded in tests of this type is that their mental associations
+are weaker and less numerous. The greater poverty of their associations
+brings it about that their remembered experiences are less definitely
+located in time with reference to other events.</p>
+
+<p>The test was located in year&nbsp;IX of the 1908 scale, but was omitted from
+the 1911 revision. Kuhlmann also omits it, while Goddard places it in
+year&nbsp;VIII. The statistics <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;207">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_207" id="Page_207"></a>from every American investigation, however,
+warrant its location in year&nbsp;VII. It may be located in year&nbsp;VIII only on
+the condition that the child be required to name the days backwards, and
+that within a rather low time limit.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VII_alt2" id="VII_alt2"></a>VII, Alternative test&nbsp;2: repeating three digits reversed</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> The digits used are: 2&ndash;8&ndash;3; 4&ndash;2&ndash;7; 5&ndash;9&ndash;6. The test should be
+given after, but not immediately after, the tests of repeating digits
+forwards.</p>
+
+<p>Say to the child: &ldquo;<i>Listen carefully. I am going to read some numbers
+again, but this time I want you to say them backwards. For example, if I
+should say 1&ndash;2&ndash;3, you would say 3&ndash;2&ndash;1. Do you understand?</i>&rdquo; When it is
+evident that the child has grasped the instructions, say: &ldquo;<i>Ready now;
+listen carefully, and be sure to say the numbers backwards.</i>&rdquo; Then read
+the series at the same rate and in the same manner as in the other
+digits tests. It is not permissible to re-read any of the series.</p>
+
+<p>If the first series is repeated forwards instead of backwards series
+exhort the child to listen carefully and to be sure to repeat the
+numbers backwards.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if <em>one series out of three</em> is repeated
+backwards without error.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The test of repeating digits backwards was suggested by
+Bobertag in 1911, but appears not to have been used or standardized
+previous to the Stanford investigation.</p>
+
+<p>It is very much harder to repeat a series of digits backwards in the
+direct order at year&nbsp;VII, and six at year&nbsp;X. Reversing the order places
+three digits in year&nbsp;VII, four in year&nbsp;X, five in year&nbsp;XII, and six in
+&ldquo;average adult.&rdquo; Even <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;208">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_208" id="Page_208"></a>intelligent adults sometimes have difficulty in
+repeating six digits backwards, once in three trials.</p>
+
+<p>As a test of intelligence this test is better than that of repeating
+digits in the direct order. It is less mechanical and makes a much
+heavier demand on attention. The digits must be so firmly fixated in
+memory that they can be held there long enough to be told off, one by
+one, backwards.</p>
+
+<p>Feeble-minded children find this test especially difficult, perhaps
+mainly because of its element of novelty. School children are often
+asked to write numbers dictated by the teacher, and even the very dull
+acquire a certain proficiency in doing so; but the test of repeating
+digits backwards requires a certain facility in adjusting to a new task,
+exactly the sort of thing in which the feeble-minded are so markedly
+deficient.</p>
+
+<p>As a rule the response consumes much more time than in the other digits
+test. This is particularly true when the series to be repeated backwards
+contains four or more digits. The chance of success is greatly increased
+if the subject first thinks the series through two or three times in the
+direct order before attempting the reverse order. The subject who
+responds immediately is likely to begin correctly, but to give the first
+part of the original series in the direct order. For example, 6&ndash;5&ndash;2&ndash;8 is
+given 8&ndash;2&ndash;6&ndash;5.</p>
+
+<p>Sometimes the child gives one or two numbers and then stops, having
+completely lost the rest of the series in the stress of adjusting to the
+novel and relatively difficult task of beginning with the final digit.
+In such cases the feeble-minded are prone to fill in with any numbers
+they may happen to think of. A good method for the subject is to break
+the series up into groups and to give each group separately. Thus,
+6&ndash;5&ndash;2&ndash;8 is given 8&ndash;2 (pause) 5&ndash;6. As a rule only the more intelligent
+subjects adopt this method. One 12-year-old girl attending high school
+was <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;209">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_209" id="Page_209"></a>able to repeat eight digits backwards by the aid of this device.</p>
+
+<p>It would be well worth while to investigate the relation of this test to
+imagery type. Such a study would have to make use of adult subjects
+trained in introspection. It would seem that success might be favored by
+the ability to translate the auditory impression into visual imagery, so
+that the remembered numbers could be read off as from a book; but this
+may or may not be the case. At any rate, success seems to depend largely
+upon the ability to manipulate mental imagery.</p>
+
+<p>The degree of certainty as to the correctness of the response is usually
+much less than in repeating digits forwards.</p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_54_54" id="Footnote_54_54"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_54_54">[54]</a></span> &ldquo;<i>Was it wrong?</i>&rdquo; is not an equivalent question and should
+not be used.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_55_55" id="Footnote_55_55"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_55_55">[55]</a></span> For further discussion of drawing tests, see <a href="#V_1">V,&nbsp;1</a>, and
+<a href="#X_3">X,&nbsp;3</a>.</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;210">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_210" id="Page_210"></a><a name="CHAPTER_XIV" id="CHAPTER_XIV"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;XIV
+<br />
+<small>INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR&nbsp;VIII</small></h2>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VIII_1" id="VIII_1"></a>VIII,&nbsp;1. The ball-and-field test (Score&nbsp;2, inferior plan)</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Draw a circle about two and one half inches in diameter,
+leaving a small gap in the side next the child. Say: &ldquo;<i>Let us suppose
+that your baseball has been lost in this round field. You have no idea
+what part of the field it is in. You don&#8217;t know what direction it came
+from, how it got there, or with what force it came. All you know is
+that the ball is lost somewhere in the field. Now, take this pencil and
+mark out a path to show me how you would hunt for the ball so as to be
+sure not to miss it. Begin at the gate and show me what path you would
+take.</i>&rdquo;<a name="FNanchor_56_56" id="FNanchor_56_56"></a><a href="#Footnote_56_56" class="fnanchor">[56]</a></p>
+
+<p>Give the instructions always as worded above. Avoid using an expression
+like, &ldquo;<i>Show me how you would walk around in the field</i>&rdquo;; the word
+<em>around</em> might suggest a circular path.</p>
+
+<p>Sometimes the child merely points or tells how he would go. It is then
+necessary to say: &ldquo;<i>No; you must mark out your path with the pencil so I
+can see it plainly.</i>&rdquo; Other children trace a path only a little way and
+stop, saying: &ldquo;Here it is.&rdquo; We then say: &ldquo;<i>But suppose you have not
+found it yet. Which direction would you go next?</i>&rdquo; In this way the child
+must be kept tracing a path until it is evident whether any plan governs
+his procedure.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The performances secured with this test are <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;211">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_211" id="Page_211"></a>conveniently
+classified into four groups, representing progressively higher types.
+The first two types represent failures; the third is satisfactory at
+year&nbsp;VIII, the fourth at year&nbsp;XII. They may be described as follows:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>Type a</i> (failure). The child fails to comprehend the
+instructions and either does nothing at all or else, perhaps,
+takes the pencil and makes a few random strokes which could not
+be said to constitute a search.</p>
+
+<p><i>Type b</i> (also failure). The child comprehends the instructions
+and carries out a search, but without any definite plan. Absence
+of plan is evidenced by the crossing and re-crossing of paths,
+or by &ldquo;breaks.&rdquo; A break means that the pencil is lifted up and
+set down in another part of the field. Sometimes only two or
+three fragments of paths are drawn, but more usually the field
+is pretty well filled up with random meanderings which cross
+each other again and again. Other illustrations of type <i>b</i> are:
+A single straight or curved line going direct to the ball, short
+haphazard dashes or curves, bare suggestion of a fan or spiral.</p>
+
+<p><i>Type c</i> (satisfactory at year&nbsp;VIII). A successful performance
+at year&nbsp;VIII is characterized by the presence of a plan, but one
+ill-adapted to the purpose. That some forethought is exercised
+is evidenced, (1) by fewer crossings, (2) by a tendency either
+to make the lines more or less parallel or else to give them
+some kind of symmetry, and (3) by fewer breaks. The
+possibilities of type <i>c</i> are almost unlimited, and one is
+continually meeting new forms. We have distinguished more than
+twenty of these, the most common of which may be described as  follows:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol>
+<li>Very rough or zigzag circles or similarly imperfect spirals.</li>
+<li>Segments of curves joined in a more or less symmetrical fashion.</li>
+<li>Lines going back and forth across the field, joined at the ends and not intended to be parallel.</li>
+<li>The &ldquo;wheel plan,&rdquo; showing lines radiating from near the center of the field toward the circumference.</li>
+<li>The &ldquo;fan plan,&rdquo; showing a number of lines radiating (usually) from the gate and spreading out over the field.</li>
+<li>&ldquo;Fan ellipses&rdquo; or &ldquo;fan spirals&rdquo; radiating from the gate like the lines just described.</li>
+<li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;212">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_212" id="Page_212"></a>The &ldquo;leaf plan,&rdquo; &ldquo;rib plan,&rdquo; or &ldquo;tree plan,&rdquo; with lines branching off from a trunk line like ribs, veins of a leaf, or branches of a tree.</li>
+<li>Parallel lines which cross at right angles and mark off the field like a checkerboard.</li>
+<li>Paths making one or more fairly symmetrical geometrical figures, like a square, a diamond, a star, a hexagon, etc.</li>
+<li>A combination of two or more of the above plans.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p><i>Type d</i> (satisfactory at year&nbsp;XII). Performances of this type
+meet perfectly, or almost perfectly, the logical requirements of
+the problem. The paths are almost or quite parallel, and there
+are no intersections or breaks. The possibilities of type <i>d</i>
+are fewer and embrace chiefly the  following:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol>
+<li>A spiral, perfect or almost perfect, and beginning either at the gate or at the center of the field.</li>
+<li>Concentric circles.</li>
+<li>Transverse lines, parallel or almost so, and joined at the ends.</li>
+</ol>
+</blockquote>
+
+<p>Up to about 4&nbsp;years most children failed entirely to comprehend the
+task. By the age of 6&nbsp;years the task is usually understood, but the
+search is conducted without plan. Type <i>c</i> is not attained by two
+thirds before the mental level of 8&nbsp;years, and score&nbsp;3 ordinarily not
+until 11&nbsp;or&nbsp;12&nbsp;years.</p>
+
+<p>Grading presents some difficulties because of occasional border-line
+performances which have a value almost midway between the types <i>b</i> and
+<i>c</i> or between <i>c</i> and <i>d</i>. Frequent reference to the scoring card will
+enable the examiner, after a little experience, to score nearly all the
+doubtful performances satisfactorily.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The ball-and-field problem may be called a test of practical
+judgment. Unlike a majority of the other tests, it gives the subject a
+chance to show how well he can meet the demands of a real, rather than
+an imagined, situation. Tests like this, involving practical
+adjustments, are valuable in rounding out the scale, which, as left by
+Binet, placed rather excessive emphasis on abstract reasoning <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;213">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_213" id="Page_213"></a>and the
+comprehension of language. The test requires little time and always
+arouses the child&#8217;s interest.</p>
+
+<p>Our analysis of the responses of nearly 1500&nbsp;subjects shows that
+improvement with increasing mental age is steady and fairly rapid.
+Occasionally, however, one meets a high-grade performance with children
+of 6&nbsp;or&nbsp;7&nbsp;years, and a low-grade performance with adults of average
+intelligence. Like all the other tests of the scale, it is unreliable
+when used alone.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VIII_2" id="VIII_2"></a>VIII,&nbsp;2. Counting backwards from 20&nbsp;to&nbsp;1</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Say to the child: &ldquo;<i>You can count backwards, can you not? I
+want you to count backwards for me from 20&nbsp;to&nbsp;1. Go ahead.</i>&rdquo; In the
+great majority of cases this is sufficient; the child comprehends the
+task and begins. If he does not comprehend, and is silent, or starts in,
+perhaps, to count forwards from 1 or 20, say: &ldquo;<i>No; I want you to count
+backwards from 20&nbsp;to&nbsp;1, like this: 20&ndash;19&ndash;18, and clear on down to 1.
+Now, go ahead.</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Insist upon the child trying it even though he asserts he cannot do it.
+In many such cases an effort is crowned with success. Say nothing about
+hurrying, as this confuses some subjects. Prompting is not permissible.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if the child counts from 20&nbsp;to&nbsp;1 <em>in not
+over forty seconds and with not more than a single error</em> (one omission
+or one transposition). Errors which the child spontaneously corrects are
+not counted as errors.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The statistics on this test agree remarkably well. It is
+plainly too easy for year&nbsp;IX, and no one has found it easy enough for
+year&nbsp;VII. The main lack of uniformity has been in the adherence to a
+time limit. Binet required that the task be completed in twenty seconds,
+and Goddard and most others adhere rather strictly to this rule.
+<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;214">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_214" id="Page_214"></a>Kuhlmann, however, allows thirty seconds if there is no error and twenty
+seconds if one error is committed. We agree with Bobertag that owing to
+the nature of this test we should not be pedantic about the time. While
+a majority of children who are able to count backwards do the task in
+twenty seconds, there are some intelligent but deliberate subjects who
+require as much as thirty-five or forty seconds. If the counting is done
+with assurance and without stumbling, there is no reason why we should
+not allow even forty seconds. Beyond this, however, our generosity
+should not go, because of the chance it would give for the use of
+special devices such as counting forwards each time to the next number
+wanted.</p>
+
+<p>It may be said that counting backwards is a test of schooling, and to a
+certain extent this is true. It is reasonable to suppose that special
+training would enable the child to pass the test a little earlier than
+he would otherwise be able to do, though it is doubtful whether many
+children below 7&nbsp;years of age have had enough of such training to
+influence the performance very materially. On the other hand, when the
+child has reached an intelligence level of 8 or at most 9&nbsp;years, he is
+ordinarily able to count from 20&nbsp;to&nbsp;1 whether he has ever tried it
+before or not.</p>
+
+<p>What psychological factors are involved in this test? It presupposes, in
+the first place, the ability to count from 1&nbsp;to&nbsp;20. But this alone does
+not guarantee success in counting backwards. Something more is required
+than a mere rote memory for the number names in their order from 1 up to
+20. The quantitative relationships of the numbers must also be
+apprehended if the task is to be performed smoothly without a great deal
+of special training. In addition to being reasonably secure in his
+knowledge of the number relationships involved, the child must be able
+to give sustained attention until the task is completed.<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;215">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_215" id="Page_215"></a> His mental
+processes must be dominated by the guiding idea, &ldquo;count backwards.&rdquo;
+Associations which do not harmonize with this aim, or which fail to
+further it, must be inhibited. Even momentary relaxation of attention
+means a loss of directive force in the guiding idea and the dominance of
+better known associations which may be suggested by the task, but are
+out of harmony with it. Thus, if a child momentarily loses sight of the
+end after counting backwards successfully from 20&nbsp;to&nbsp;14, he is likely to
+be overpowered by the law of habit and begin counting forwards,
+14&ndash;15&ndash;16&ndash;17, etc. We may regard the test, therefore, as a test of
+attention, or prolonged thought control. The ability to exercise
+unbroken vigilance for a period of twenty or thirty seconds is rarely
+found below the level of 7- or 8-year intelligence.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VIII_3" id="VIII_3"></a>VIII,&nbsp;3. Comprehension, third degree</h3>
+
+<p>The questions for this year are:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol class="alph smaller">
+<li>&ldquo;What&#8217;s the thing for you to do when you have broken something which belongs to some one else?&rdquo;</li>
+<li>&ldquo;What&#8217;s the thing for you to do when you notice on your way to school that you are in danger of being tardy?&rdquo;</li>
+<li>&ldquo;What&#8217;s the thing for you to do if a playmate hits you without meaning to do it?&rdquo;</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>The procedure is the same as in previous <a href="#XII_4">comprehension</a> <a href="#X_5">questions</a>.<a name="FNanchor_57_57" id="FNanchor_57_57"></a><a href="#Footnote_57_57" class="fnanchor">[57]</a>
+Each question may be repeated once or twice, but its form must not be
+changed. No explanations are permissible.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring</b>:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><h4>Question a (If you have broken something)</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory responses</i> are those suggesting either restitution
+or apology, or both. Confession is not satisfactory unless
+accompanied<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;216">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_216" id="Page_216"></a> by apology. The following are satisfactory: &ldquo;Buy a
+new one.&rdquo; &ldquo;Pay for it.&rdquo; &ldquo;Give them something instead of it.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Have my father mend it.&rdquo; &ldquo;Apologize.&rdquo; &ldquo;Tell them I&#8217;m sorry,
+that I did not mean to break it,&rdquo; etc. Of 92&nbsp;correct answers, 76
+suggested restitution, while 16 suggested apology, or apology
+and restitution.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Tell them I did it.&rdquo; &ldquo;Go tell my mother.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Feel sorry.&rdquo; &ldquo;Be ashamed.&rdquo; &ldquo;Pick it up,&rdquo; etc. Mere confession
+accounts for over 20&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of all failures.</p>
+
+
+<h4>Question b (In danger of being tardy)</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> The expected response is, &ldquo;Hurry,&rdquo; &ldquo;Walk
+faster,&rdquo; or something to that effect. One bright city boy said
+he would take a car. Of the answers not obviously incorrect,
+nearly 95&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent suggest hurrying. The rule ordinarily
+recommended is to grade all other responses <em>minus</em>. But this
+rule is too sweeping to be followed blindly. One who would use
+intelligence tests must learn to discriminate. &ldquo;I would go back
+home and not go to school that day&rdquo; is a good answer in those
+cases (fortunately rare) in which children are forbidden by the
+teacher to enter the schoolroom if tardy. &ldquo;Go back home and get
+mother to write an excuse&rdquo; would be good policy if by so doing
+the child might escape the danger of incurring an extreme
+penalty. When teachers inflict absurd penalties for unexcused
+tardiness, it is the part of wisdom for children to incur no
+risks! When such a response is given, it is well to inquire into
+the school&#8217;s method of dealing with tardiness and to score the
+response accordingly.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Go to the principal.&rdquo; &ldquo;Tell the teacher I
+couldn&#8217;t help it.&rdquo; &ldquo;Have to get an excuse.&rdquo; &ldquo;Go to school
+anyway.&rdquo; &ldquo;Get punished.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not do it again.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not play hooky.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Start earlier next time,&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+<p>Lack of success results oftenest from failure to get the exact
+shade of meaning conveyed by the question. It is implied, of
+course, that something is to be done at once to avoid tardiness;
+but the subject of dull comprehension may suggest a suitable
+thing to do in case tardiness has been incurred. Hence the
+response, &ldquo;I would go to the principal and explain.&rdquo; Answers of
+this type are always unsatisfactory.</p>
+
+
+<h4>Question c (Playmate hits you)</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory responses</i> are only those which suggest either
+excusing or overlooking the act. These ideas are variously
+expressed as<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;217">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_217" id="Page_217"></a> follows: &ldquo;I would excuse him&rdquo; (about half of all
+the correct answers). &ldquo;I would say &lsquo;yes&rsquo; if he asked my pardon.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;I would say it was all right.&rdquo; &ldquo;I would take it for a joke.&rdquo; &ldquo;I
+would just be nice to him.&rdquo; &ldquo;I would go right on playing.&rdquo; &ldquo;I
+would take it kind-hearted.&rdquo; &ldquo;I would not fight or run and tell
+on him.&rdquo; &ldquo;I would not blame him for it.&rdquo; &ldquo;Ask him to be more
+careful,&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory responses</i> are all those not of the above two
+types; as: &ldquo;I would hit them back.&rdquo; &ldquo;I would not hit them back,
+but I would get even some other way.&rdquo; &ldquo;Tell them not to do it
+again.&rdquo; &ldquo;Tell them to &lsquo;cut it out.&rsquo;&rdquo; &ldquo;Tell him it&#8217;s a wrong
+thing to do.&rdquo; &ldquo;Make him excuse himself.&rdquo; &ldquo;Make him say he&#8217;s
+sorry.&rdquo; &ldquo;Would not play with him.&rdquo; &ldquo;Tell my mamma.&rdquo; &ldquo;I would ask
+him why he did it.&rdquo; &ldquo;He&#8217;d say &lsquo;excuse me&rsquo; and I&#8217;d say &lsquo;thank
+you.&rsquo;&rdquo; &ldquo;He should excuse me.&rdquo; &ldquo;He is supposed to say &lsquo;excuse
+me.&rsquo;&rdquo;</p></blockquote>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> All three comprehension questions of this year were used by
+Binet, Goddard, Huey, and others in year&nbsp;X; two of them in the &ldquo;easy
+series&rdquo; and one in the &ldquo;hard series.&rdquo; The Stanford data show that they
+belong at the 8-year level on the standard of scoring above set forth.
+The three differ little among themselves in difficulty, but all of them
+are decidedly easier than the other five used by Binet. It would be
+absurd to go on using the comprehension questions as Binet bunched them,
+eight together, ranging in difficulty from one which is easy enough for
+6-year intelligence (&ldquo;What&#8217;s the thing to do if you miss your train?&rdquo;)
+to one which is hard for the 12-year level (&ldquo;Why is a bad act done when
+one is angry more excusable than the same act done when one is not
+angry?&rdquo;).</p>
+
+
+
+<h3><a name="VIII_4" id="VIII_4"></a>VIII,&nbsp;4. Giving similarities; two things</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Say to the child: &ldquo;<i>I am going to name two things which are
+alike in some way, and I want you to tell me how they are alike. Wood
+and coal: in what way are they alike?</i>&rdquo; Proceed in the same manner
+with:&mdash;</p>
+
+
+<ul class="indent smaller">
+<li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;218">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_218" id="Page_218"></a><i>An apple and a peach.</i></li>
+<li><i>Iron and silver.</i></li>
+<li><i>A ship and an automobile.</i></li>
+</ul>
+
+<p>After the first pair the formula may be abbreviated to &ldquo;<i>In what way are
+... and ... alike?</i>&rdquo; It is often necessary to insist a little if the
+child is silent or says he does not know, but in doing this we must
+avoid supplementary questions and suggestions. In giving the first pair,
+for example, it would not be permissible to ask such additional
+questions as, &ldquo;<i>What do you use wood for? What do you use coal for? And
+now, how are wood and coal alike?</i>&rdquo; This is really putting the answer in
+the child&#8217;s mouth. It is only permissible to repeat the original
+question in a persuasive tone of voice, and perhaps to add: &ldquo;<i>I&#8217;m sure
+you can tell me how ... and ... are alike</i>,&rdquo; or something to that
+effect.</p>
+
+<p>A very common mistake which the child makes is to give differences
+instead of similarities. This tendency is particularly strong if <a href="#VII_5">test&nbsp;5,
+year&nbsp;VII</a> (giving differences), has been given earlier in the sitting,
+but it happens often enough in other cases also to suggest that finding
+differences is, to a much greater extent than finding similarities, the
+child&#8217;s preferred method of making a comparison. When a difference is
+given, instead of a similarity, we say: &ldquo;<i>No, I want you to tell me how
+they are alike. In what way are ... and ... alike?</i>&rdquo; Unless the child is
+of rather low intelligence level this is sufficient, but the mentally
+retarded sometimes continue to give differences persistently in spite
+of repeated admonitions, or if they cease to do so for one or two
+comparisons, they are likely to repeat the mistake in the latter part of
+the test.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if a likeness is given in <em>two out of four</em>
+comparisons. We accept as satisfactory any real likeness, whether
+fundamental or superficial, though, of <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;219">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_219" id="Page_219"></a>course, the more essential the
+resemblance, the better indication it is of intelligence. The following
+are samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory answers:&mdash;<a name="FNanchor_58_58" id="FNanchor_58_58"></a><a href="#Footnote_58_58" class="fnanchor">[58]</a></p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><h4>(a) Wood and coal</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Both burn.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both keep you warm.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both are
+used for fuel.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both are vegetable matter.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both come from the
+ground.&rdquo; &ldquo;Can use them both for running engines.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both hard.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Both heavy.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both cost money.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Of 80 correct answers, 64, or 80&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent, referred in one way
+or another to combustibility.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> Most frequent is the persistent giving of a
+difference instead of a similarity. This accounts for a little
+over half of all the failures. About half of the remainder are
+cases of inability to give any response. Incorrect statements
+with regard to color are rather common. Sample failures of this
+type are: &ldquo;Both are black,&rdquo; or &ldquo;Both the same color.&rdquo; Other
+failures are: &ldquo;Both are dirty on the outside;&rdquo; &ldquo;You can&#8217;t break
+them;&rdquo; &ldquo;Coal burns better;&rdquo; &ldquo;Wood is lighter than coal,&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+<h4>(b) An apple and a peach</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Both are round.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both the same shape.&rdquo; &ldquo;They
+are about the same color.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both nearly always have some red on
+them.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both good to eat.&rdquo; &ldquo;Can make pies of both of them.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Both can be cooked.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both mellow when they are ripe.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both
+have a stem&rdquo; (or seeds, skin, etc.). &ldquo;Both come from trees.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Can be dried in the same way.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both are fruits.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both green
+(in color) when they are not ripe.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Of 82 correct answers, 25&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent mention color; 25&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent,
+form; 22&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent, edibility; 20&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent, having stem, seed, or
+skin; and 5&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent, that both grow on trees.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Both taste the same.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both have a lot of
+seeds.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both have a fuzzy skin.&rdquo; &ldquo;An apple is bigger than a
+peach.&rdquo; &ldquo;One is red and one is white,&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+<p>Again, over 50&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the failures are due to giving
+differences and about 18&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent to silence.</p>
+
+
+<h4><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;220">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_220" id="Page_220"></a>(c) Iron and silver</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Both are metals&rdquo; (or mineral). &ldquo;Both come out
+of the ground.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both cost money.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both are heavy.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both are
+hard.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both can be melted.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both can be bent.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both used for
+utensils.&rdquo; &ldquo;You manufacture things out of both of them.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both
+can be polished.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>These are named most frequently in the following order: (1)
+hardness, (2) origin from the ground, (3) heaviness, (4) use in
+making things.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Both thin&rdquo; (or thick). &ldquo;Sometimes they are
+the same shape.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both the same color.&rdquo; &ldquo;A little silver and
+lots of iron weigh the same.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both made by the same company.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;They rust the same.&rdquo; &ldquo;You can&#8217;t eat them&rdquo; (!)<a name="FNanchor_59_59" id="FNanchor_59_59"></a><a href="#Footnote_59_59" class="fnanchor">[59]</a></p>
+
+<p>Of 60&nbsp;failures, 32 were due to giving differences and 14 to
+silence or unwillingness to hazard a reply.</p>
+
+<h4>(d) A ship and an automobile</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Both means of travel.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both go.&rdquo; &ldquo;You ride in
+them.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both take you fast.&rdquo; &ldquo;They both use fuel.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both run by
+machinery.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both have a steering gear.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both have engines in
+them.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both have wood in them.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both can be wrecked.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both
+break if they hit a rock.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>About 45&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the answers are in terms of running or
+travel, 37&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent in terms of machinery or structure, the rest
+scattered.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Both black&rdquo; (or some other color). &ldquo;Both very
+big.&rdquo; &ldquo;They are made alike.&rdquo; &ldquo;Both run on wheels.&rdquo; &ldquo;Ship is for
+the water and automobile for the land.&rdquo; &ldquo;Ship goes on water and
+an automobile sometimes goes in water.&rdquo; &ldquo;An auto can go faster.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Ship is run by coal and automobile by gasoline.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Of 51&nbsp;failures, 32 were due to giving differences and 14 to
+failure to reply.</p></blockquote>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The test of finding similarities was first used by Binet in
+1905. Our results show that it is fully as satisfactory as the test of
+giving differences. The test reveals in <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;221">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_221" id="Page_221"></a>a most interesting way one of
+the fundamental weaknesses of the feeble mind. Young normal children,
+say of 7&nbsp;or&nbsp;8&nbsp;years, often fail to pass, but it is the feeble-minded who
+give the greatest number of absurd answers and who also find greatest
+difficulty in resisting the tendency to give differences.<a name="FNanchor_60_60" id="FNanchor_60_60"></a><a href="#Footnote_60_60" class="fnanchor">[60]</a></p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VIII_5" id="VIII_5"></a>VIII,&nbsp;5. Giving definitions superior to use</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> The words for this year are <i>balloon</i>, <i>tiger</i>, <i>football</i>,
+and <i>soldier</i>. Ask simply: &ldquo;<i>What is a balloon?</i>&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+<p>If it appears that any of the words are not familiar to the child,
+substitution may be made from the following: <i>automobile</i>,
+<i>battle-ship</i>, <i>potato</i>, <i>store</i>.</p>
+
+<p>Make no comments on the responses until all the words have been given.
+In case of silence or hesitation in answering, the question may be
+repeated with a little encouragement; but supplementary questions are
+never in order. Ordinarily there is no difficulty in securing a response
+to the definition test of this year. The trouble comes in scoring the
+response.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if two of the four words are defined in
+terms superior to use. &ldquo;Superior to use&rdquo; includes chiefly: (<i>a</i>)
+Definitions which describe the object or tell something of its nature
+(form, size, color, appearance, etc.); (<i>b</i>) definitions which give the
+substance or the materials or parts composing it; and (<i>c</i>) those which
+tell what class the object belongs to or what relation it bears to
+other classes of objects.</p>
+
+<p>It is possible to distinguish different grades of definitions in each of
+the above classes. A definition by description (type <i>a</i>) may be brief
+and partial, mentioning only one or <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;222">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_222" id="Page_222"></a>two qualities or characteristics, or
+it may be relatively rich and complete. Likewise with definitions of
+type <i>b</i>. Classificatory definitions (type <i>c</i>) are of particularly
+uneven value, the lowest order being those which subsume the object to
+be defined under a remote class and give few if any characteristics to
+distinguish it from other members of the same class; as, for example, &ldquo;A
+football is a thing you can have fun with,&rdquo; or, &ldquo;A soldier is a person.&rdquo;
+The best classificatory definitions are those which subsume the object
+under the next higher class and give the more essential traits (perhaps
+a number of them) which distinguish the object from others of the class
+named; as, for example, &ldquo;A tiger is a large animal like a cat; it lives
+in the jungle and eats men and other animals,&rdquo; or, &ldquo;A soldier is a man
+who goes to war.&rdquo; These shades of distinction give interesting and
+valuable clues to the maturity and richness of the apperceptive
+processes, but for purposes of scoring it is necessary merely to decide
+whether the definition is given in terms superior to use.</p>
+
+<p>The following are samples of satisfactory definitions, those for each
+word being arranged roughly in the order of their value from excellent
+to barely passing:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller">
+<h4>(a) Balloon</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;A balloon is a means of traveling through the
+air.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is a kind of airship, made of cloth and filled with
+air so it can go up.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is big and made of cloth. It has gas
+in it and carries people up in a basket that&#8217;s fastened on to
+the bottom.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is a thing you hold by a string and it goes
+up.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is like a big bag with air in it.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is a big thing
+that goes up.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;To go up in the air.&rdquo; &ldquo;What you go up in.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;When you go up.&rdquo; &ldquo;They go up in it.&rdquo; &ldquo;It&#8217;s full of gas.&rdquo; &ldquo;To
+carry you up.&rdquo; &ldquo;A balloon is a balloon,&rdquo; etc. &ldquo;It is big.&rdquo; &ldquo;They
+go up,&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+
+<h4><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;223">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_223" id="Page_223"></a>(b) Tiger</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;It is a wild animal of the cat family.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is
+an animal that&#8217;s a cousin to the lion.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is an animal that
+lives in the jungle.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is a wild animal.&rdquo; &ldquo;It looks like a
+big cat.&rdquo; &ldquo;It lives in the woods and eats flesh.&rdquo; &ldquo;Something
+that eats people.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;To eat you up.&rdquo; &ldquo;To kill people.&rdquo; &ldquo;To travel
+in the circus.&rdquo; &ldquo;What eats people.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is a tiger,&rdquo; etc. &ldquo;You
+run from it,&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+
+<h4>(c) Football</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;It is a leather bag filled with air and made
+for kicking.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is a ball you kick.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is a thing you play
+with.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is made of leather and is stuffed with air.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is a
+thing you kick.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is brown and filled with air.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is a
+thing shaped like a watermelon.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;To kick.&rdquo; &ldquo;To play with.&rdquo; &ldquo;What they play
+with.&rdquo; &ldquo;Boys play with it.&rdquo; &ldquo;It&#8217;s filled with air.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is a
+football.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is a basket ball.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is round.&rdquo; &ldquo;You kick it.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<h4>(d) Soldier</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;A man who goes to war.&rdquo; &ldquo;A brave man.&rdquo; &ldquo;A man
+that walks up and down and carries a gun.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is a man who
+minds his captain and stands still and walks straight.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is a
+man who goes to war and shoots.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is a man who stands
+straight and marches.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;To shoot.&rdquo; &ldquo;To go to war.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is a soldier.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;A soldier that marches.&rdquo; &ldquo;He fights.&rdquo; &ldquo;He shoots.&rdquo; &ldquo;What
+fights,&rdquo; etc. &ldquo;When you march and shoot.&rdquo;</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>Silence accounts for only a small proportion of the failures with
+children of 8, 9, and 10&nbsp;years.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The &ldquo;use definitions&rdquo; sometimes given at this age are usually
+of slightly better quality than those given in year&nbsp;V. Younger children
+more often use the infinitive form, &ldquo;to play with&rdquo; (doll), &ldquo;to drive&rdquo;
+(horse), &ldquo;to eat on&rdquo; (table), etc. Use definitions of this year more
+often begin with &ldquo;they,&rdquo; or &ldquo;what&rdquo;; as, &ldquo;they go up in it&rdquo; (balloon),
+&ldquo;they kick it&rdquo; (football), etc.</p>
+
+<p>Why, it may be asked, is the use definition regarded as<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;224">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_224" id="Page_224"></a> inferior to the
+descriptive or the classificatory definition? Is not the use to which an
+object may be put the most essential thing about it, for the child at
+least? Is it not more important to know that a fork is to eat with than
+to be able to name the material it is made of? Is not the use primary
+and does it not determine most of the physical characteristics of the
+object?</p>
+
+<p>The above questions may sound reasonable, but they are based on poor
+psychology. We must rest our case upon the facts. The first lesson which
+the student of child psychology must learn is that it is unsafe to set
+up criteria of intelligence, of maturity, or of any other mental trait
+on the basis of theoretical considerations. Experiment teaches that
+normal children of 5&nbsp;or&nbsp;6&nbsp;years, also older feeble-minded persons of the
+5-year intelligence level, define objects in terms of use; also that
+normal children of 8&nbsp;or&nbsp;9&nbsp;years and older feeble-minded persons of this
+mental level have for the most part developed beyond the stage of use
+definitions into the descriptive or classificatory stage. An ounce of
+fact is worth a ton of theory.</p>
+
+<p>The test has usually been located in year&nbsp;IX, with the requirement of
+three successes out of five trials and with somewhat more rigid scoring
+of the individual definitions. When only two successes are required in
+four trials, and when scored leniently, the test belongs at the 8-year
+level.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VIII_6" id="VIII_6"></a>VIII,&nbsp;6. Vocabulary; twenty definitions, 3600&nbsp;words</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Use the list of words given in the record booklet. Say to the
+child: &ldquo;<i>I want to find out how many words you know. Listen; and when I
+say a word you tell me what it means.</i>&rdquo; If the child can read, give him
+a printed copy of the word list and let him look at each word as you
+pronounce it.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;225">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_225" id="Page_225"></a>The words are arranged approximately (though not exactly) in the order
+of their difficulty, and it is best to begin with the easier words and
+proceed to the harder. With children under 9&nbsp;or&nbsp;10&nbsp;years, begin with the
+first. Apparently normal children of 10&nbsp;years may safely be credited
+with the first ten words without being asked to define them. Apparently
+normal children of 12 may begin with word&nbsp;16, and 15-year-olds with
+word&nbsp;21. Except with subjects of almost adult intelligence there is no
+need to give the last ten or fifteen words, as these are almost never
+correctly defined by school children. A safe rule to follow is to
+continue until eight or ten successive words have been missed and to
+score the remainder <em>minus</em> without giving them.</p>
+
+<p>The formula is as follows: &ldquo;What is an <em>orange</em>?&rdquo; &ldquo;What is a <em>bonfire</em>?&rdquo;
+&ldquo;<em>Roar</em>; what does <em>roar</em> mean?&rdquo; &ldquo;<em>Gown</em>; what is a <em>gown</em>?&rdquo; &ldquo;What does
+<em>tap</em> mean?&rdquo; &ldquo;What does <em>scorch</em> mean?&rdquo; &ldquo;What is a <em>puddle</em>?&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+<p>Some children at first show a little hesitation about answering,
+thinking that a strictly formal definition is expected. In such cases a
+little encouragement is necessary; as: &ldquo;<i>You know what a bonfire is. You
+have seen a bonfire. Now, what is a bonfire?</i>&rdquo; If the child still
+hesitates, say: &ldquo;<i>Just tell me in your own words; say it any way you
+please. All I want is to find out whether you know what a bonfire is.</i>&rdquo;
+Do not torture the child, however, by undue insistence. If he persists
+in his refusal to define a word which he would ordinarily be expected to
+know, it is better to pass on to the next one and to return to the
+troublesome word later. Above all, avoid helping the child by
+illustrating the use of a word in a sentence. Adhere strictly to the
+formula given above. If the definition as given does not make it clear
+whether the child has the correct idea, say: &ldquo;<i>Explain</i>,&rdquo; or, &ldquo;<i>I don&#8217;t
+understand; explain what you mean.</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;226">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_226" id="Page_226"></a>Encourage the child frequently by saying: &ldquo;That&#8217;s fine. You are doing
+beautifully. You know lots of words,&rdquo; etc. Never tell the child his
+definition is not correct, and never ask for a different definition.</p>
+
+<p>Avoid saying anything which would suggest a model form of definition, as
+the type of definition which the child spontaneously chooses throws
+interesting light on the degree of maturity of the apperceptive
+processes. Record all definitions <i>verbatim</i> if possible, or at least
+those which are exceptionally good, poor, or doubtful.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> Credit a response in full if it gives one correct meaning for
+the word, regardless of whether that meaning is the most common one, and
+regardless of whether it is the original or a derived meaning.
+Occasionally half credit may be given, but this should be avoided as far
+as possible.</p>
+
+<p>To find the entire vocabulary, multiply the number of words known by
+180. (This list is made up of 100&nbsp;words selected by rule from a
+dictionary containing 18,000&nbsp;words.) Thus, the child who defines
+20&nbsp;words correctly has a vocabulary of 20&nbsp;&times;&nbsp;180&nbsp;=&nbsp;3600&nbsp;words; 50&nbsp;correct
+definitions would mean a vocabulary of 9000&nbsp;words, etc. The following
+are the standards for different years, as determined by the vocabulary
+reached by 60&nbsp;to&nbsp;65&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the subjects of the various mental
+levels:&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="center">
+<table class="space smaller" summary="The vocabulary expected at various ages">
+<tr><td>8&nbsp;years  </td><td>20&nbsp;words</td><td>vocabulary &nbsp;&nbsp;3,600</td></tr>
+<tr><td>10&nbsp;years </td><td>30&nbsp;words</td><td>vocabulary  &nbsp;&nbsp;5,400</td></tr>
+<tr><td>12&nbsp;years </td><td>40&nbsp;words</td><td>vocabulary  &nbsp;&nbsp;7,200</td></tr>
+<tr><td>14&nbsp;years </td><td>50&nbsp;words</td><td>vocabulary  &nbsp;&nbsp;9,000</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Average adult </td><td>65&nbsp;words</td><td>vocabulary 11,700</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Superior adult</td><td>75&nbsp;words</td><td>vocabulary 13,500</td></tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<p>Although the form of the definition is significant, it is not taken into
+consideration in scoring. The test is intended to explore the range of
+ideas rather than the evolution of thought forms. When it is evident
+that the child has one fairly correct meaning for a word, he is given
+full <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;227">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_227" id="Page_227"></a>credit for it, however poorly the definition may have been stated.</p>
+
+<p>While there is naturally some difficulty now and then in deciding
+whether a given definition is correct, this happens much less frequently
+than one would expect. In order to get a definite idea of the extent of
+error due to the individual differences among examiners, we have had the
+definitions of 25&nbsp;subjects graded independently by 10 different persons.
+The result showed an average difference below 3 in the number of
+definitions scored <em>plus</em>. Since these subjects attempted on an average
+about 60&nbsp;words, the average number of doubtful definitions per subject
+was below 5&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the number attempted.</p>
+
+<p>An idea of the degree of leniency to be exercised may be had from the
+following examples of definitions, which are mostly of low grade, but
+acceptable unless otherwise indicated:&mdash;</p>
+
+
+<ol class="indent smaller">
+<li><i>Orange.</i> &ldquo;An orange is to eat.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is yellow and grows on a tree.&rdquo; (Both full credit.)</li>
+<li><i>Bonfire.</i> &ldquo;You burn it outdoors.&rdquo; &ldquo;You burn some leaves or things.&rdquo; &ldquo;It&#8217;s a big fire.&rdquo; (All full credit.)</li>
+<li><i>Roar.</i> &ldquo;A lion roars.&rdquo; &ldquo;You holler loud.&rdquo; (Full credit.)</li>
+<li><i>Gown.</i> &ldquo;To sleep in.&rdquo; &ldquo;It&#8217;s a nightie.&rdquo; &ldquo;It&#8217;s a nice gown that ladies wear.&rdquo; (All full credit.)</li>
+<li value="7"><i>Puddle.</i> &ldquo;You splash in it.&rdquo; &ldquo;It&#8217;s just a puddle of water.&rdquo; (Both full credit.)</li>
+<li value="9"><i>Straw.</i> &ldquo;It grows in the field.&rdquo; &ldquo;It means wheat-straw.&rdquo; &ldquo;The horses eat it.&rdquo; (All full credit.)</li>
+<li><i>Rule.</i> &ldquo;The teacher makes rules.&rdquo; &ldquo;It means you can&#8217;t do something.&rdquo; &ldquo;You make marks with it,&rdquo; i.e., a ruler, often called a <i>rule</i> by school children. (All full credit.)</li>
+<li><i>Afloat.</i> &ldquo;To float on the water.&rdquo; &ldquo;A ship floats.&rdquo; (Both full credit.)</li>
+<li><i>Eyelash.</i> If the child says, &ldquo;It&#8217;s over the eye,&rdquo; tell him to point to it, as often the word is confused with <i>eyebrow</i>.</li>
+<li value="14"><i>Copper.</i> &ldquo;It&#8217;s a penny.&rdquo; &ldquo;It means some copper wire.&rdquo; (Both full credit.)</li>
+<li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;228">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_228" id="Page_228"></a><i>Health.</i> &ldquo;It means good health or bad health.&rdquo; &ldquo;It means strong.&rdquo; (Both full credit.)</li>
+<li value="17"><i>Guitar.</i> &ldquo;You play on it.&rdquo; (Full credit.)</li>
+<li><i>Mellow.</i> If the child says, &ldquo;It means a mellow apple,&rdquo; ask what kind of apple that would be. For full credit the answer must be &ldquo;soft,&rdquo; &ldquo;mushy,&rdquo; etc.</li>
+<li><i>Pork.</i> If the answer is &ldquo;meat,&rdquo; ask what animal it comes from. Half credit if wrong animal is named.</li>
+<li value="21"><i>Plumbing.</i> &ldquo;You fix pipes.&rdquo; (Full credit.)</li>
+<li value="25"><ins class="correction" title="Transcriber&#8217;s note: Original numbered this item 21 also."><i>Southern.</i></ins> If the answer is &ldquo;Southern States,&rdquo; or &ldquo;Southern California,&rdquo; say: &ldquo;<i>Yes; but what does &lsquo;southern&rsquo; mean?</i>&rdquo; Do not credit unless explanation is forthcoming.</li>
+<li><i>Noticeable.</i> &ldquo;You notice a thing.&rdquo; (Full credit.)</li>
+<li value="29"><i>Civil.</i> &ldquo;Civil War.&rdquo; (Failure unless explained.) &ldquo;It means to be nice.&rdquo; (Full credit.)</li>
+<li><i>Treasury.</i> Give half credit for definitions like &ldquo;Valuables,&rdquo; &ldquo;Lots of money,&rdquo; etc.; i.e., if the word is confused with <i>treasure.</i></li>
+<li value="32"><i>Ramble.</i> &ldquo;To go about fast.&rdquo; (Half credit.)</li>
+<li value="38"><i>Nerve.</i> Half credit if the slang use is defined, &ldquo;You&#8217;ve got nerve,&rdquo; etc.</li>
+<li value="41"><i>Majesty.</i> &ldquo;What you say to a king.&rdquo; (Full credit.)</li>
+<li value="45"><i>Sportive.</i> &ldquo;To like sports.&rdquo; (Half credit.) &ldquo;Playful&rdquo; or &ldquo;happy.&rdquo; (Full credit.)</li>
+<li><i>Hysterics.</i> &ldquo;You laugh and cry at the same time.&rdquo; &ldquo;A kind of sickness.&rdquo; &ldquo;A kind of fit.&rdquo; (All full credit.)</li>
+<li value="48"><i>Repose.</i> &ldquo;You pose again.&rdquo; (Failure.)</li>
+<li value="52"><i>Coinage.</i> &ldquo;A place where they make money.&rdquo; (Half credit.)</li>
+<li value="56"><i>Dilapidated.</i> &ldquo;Something that&#8217;s very old.&rdquo; (Half credit.)</li>
+<li value="58"><i>Conscientious.</i> &ldquo;You&#8217;re careful how you do your work.&rdquo; (Full credit.)</li>
+<li value="60"><i>Artless.</i> &ldquo;No art.&rdquo; (Failure unless correctly explained.)</li>
+<li><i>Priceless.</i> &ldquo;It has no price.&rdquo; (Failure.)</li>
+<li value="66"><i>Promontory.</i> &ldquo;Something prominent.&rdquo; (Failure unless child can explain what it refers to.)</li>
+<li value="68"><i>Milksop.</i> &ldquo;You sop up milk.&rdquo; (Failure.)</li>
+<li value="73"><i>Harpy.</i> &ldquo;A kind of bird.&rdquo; (Full credit.)</li>
+<li value="80"><i>Exaltation.</i> &ldquo;You feel good.&rdquo; (Full credit.)</li>
+<li value="85"><i>Retroactive.</i> &ldquo;Acting backward.&rdquo; (Full credit.)</li>
+<li value="92"><i>Theosophy.</i> &ldquo;A religion.&rdquo; (Full credit.)</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;229">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_229" id="Page_229"></a>It is seen from the above examples that a very liberal standard has been
+used. Leniency in judging definitions is necessary because the child&#8217;s
+power of expression lags farther behind his understanding than is true
+of adults, and also because for the young subject the word has a
+relatively less unitary existence.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Our vocabulary test was derived by selecting the last word of
+every sixth column in a dictionary containing approximately
+18,000&nbsp;words, presumably the 18,000 most common words in the language.
+The test is based on the assumption that 100&nbsp;words selected according to
+some arbitrary rule will be a large enough sampling to afford a fairly
+reliable index of a subject&#8217;s entire vocabulary. Rather extensive
+experimentation with this list and others chosen in a similar manner has
+proved that the assumption is justified. Tests of the same
+75&nbsp;individuals with five different vocabulary tests of this type showed
+that the average difference between two tests of the same person was
+less than 5&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent. This means that any one of the five tests used is
+reliable enough for all practical purposes. It is of no special
+importance that a given child&#8217;s vocabulary is 8000 rather than 7600; the
+significance lies in the fact that it is approximately 8000 and not
+4000, 12,000, or some other widely different number.</p>
+
+<p>It may seem to the reader almost incredible that so small a sampling of
+words would give a reliable index of an individual&#8217;s vocabulary. That it
+does so is due to the operation of the ordinary laws of chance. It is
+analogous to predicting the results of an election when only a small
+proportion of the ballots have been counted. It is known that a ballot
+box contains 600&nbsp;votes, and if when only 30 have been counted it is
+found that they are divided between two candidates in the proportion of
+20&nbsp;and&nbsp;10, it is safe to predict that a complete count will give the two
+candidates<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;230">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_230" id="Page_230"></a> approximately 400 and 200 respectively.<a name="FNanchor_61_61" id="FNanchor_61_61"></a><a href="#Footnote_61_61" class="fnanchor">[61]</a> In 1914 about
+1,000,000 votes were cast for governor in California, and when only
+10,000&nbsp;votes had been counted, or a hundredth of all, it was announced
+and conceded that Governor Johnson had been re&euml;lected by the 150,000
+plurality. The completed count gave him 188,505 plurality. The error was
+less than 4&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the total vote.</p>
+
+<p>The vocabulary test has a far higher value than any other single test of
+the scale. Used with children of English-speaking parents (with children
+whose home language is not English it is of course unreliable), it
+probably has a higher value than any three other tests in the scale. Our
+statistics show that in a large majority of cases the vocabulary test
+alone will give us an intelligence quotient within 10&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of that
+secured by the entire scale. Out of hundreds of English-speaking
+children we have not found one testing significantly above age who had a
+significantly low vocabulary; and correspondingly, those who test much
+below age never have a high vocabulary.</p>
+
+<p>Occasionally, however, a subject tests somewhat higher or lower in
+vocabulary than the mental age would lead us to expect. This is often
+the case with dull children in cultured homes and with very intelligent
+children whose home environment has not stimulated language development.
+But even in these cases we are not seriously misled, for the dull child
+of fortunate home surroundings shows his dullness in the quality of his
+definitions if not in their quantity; while the bright child of
+illiterate parents shows his intelligence in the aptness and accuracy of
+his definitions.</p>
+
+<p>We have not worked out a satisfactory method of scoring the quality of
+definitions in our vocabulary test, but these differences will be
+readily observed by the trained examiner. Definitions in terms of use
+and definitions which <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;231">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_231" id="Page_231"></a>are slightly inaccurate or hazy are quite
+characteristic of the lower mental ages. Children of the lower mental
+age have also a tendency to venture wild guesses at words they do not
+know. This is especially characteristic of retarded subjects and is
+another example of their weakness of auto-criticism. One feeble-minded
+boy of 12&nbsp;years, with a mental age of 8&nbsp;years, glibly and confidently
+gave definitions for every one of the hundred words. About 70 of the
+definitions were pure nonsense.</p>
+
+<p>This vocabulary test was arranged and partially standardized by Mr.
+H.&nbsp;G. Childs and the writer in 1911. Many experiments since then have
+proved its value as a test of intelligence.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VIII_alt1" id="VIII_alt1"></a>VIII, Alternative test&nbsp;1: naming six coins</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure</b> is exactly as in <a href="#VI_5">VI,&nbsp;5</a> (naming four coins). The dollar should
+be shown before the half-dollar.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> <em>All six coins must be correctly named.</em> If a response is
+changed the rule is to count the second answer and ignore the first.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Binet used nine pieces and required knowledge of all at year&nbsp;X
+(1908), but at year&nbsp;IX in the 1911 revision. Most other workers have
+used the same method, with the test located in either year&nbsp;IX or year&nbsp;X.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="VIII_alt2" id="VIII_alt2"></a>VIII, Alternative test&nbsp;2: writing from dictation</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Give the child pen, ink, and paper, place him in a
+comfortable position for writing, and say: &ldquo;<i>I want you to write
+something for me as nicely as you can. Write these words: &lsquo;See the
+little boy.&rsquo; Be sure to write it all: &lsquo;See the little boy.&rsquo;</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Do not dictate the words separately, but give the <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;232">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_232" id="Page_232"></a>sentence as a whole.
+Further repetition of the sentence is not permissible, as ability to
+remember what has been dictated is a part of the test. Copy, of course,
+must not be shown.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> Passed if the sentence is written legibly enough to be easily
+recognized, and if no word has been omitted. Ordinary mistakes of
+spelling are disregarded. The rule is that the mistake in spelling must
+not mutilate the word beyond easy recognition. The performance may be
+graded by the use of Thorndike&#8217;s handwriting scale. The handwriting of
+8-year-old children who have been in school not less than one year or
+more than two usually falls between quality&nbsp;7 and quality&nbsp;9 on this
+scale, but we shall, perhaps, not be too liberal if we consider a
+performance satisfactory which does not grade below quality&nbsp;6, provided
+it is not seriously mutilated by errors, omissions, etc.<a name="FNanchor_62_62" id="FNanchor_62_62"></a><a href="#Footnote_62_62" class="fnanchor">[62]</a></p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> This test found a place in year&nbsp;VIII of Binet&#8217;s 1908 scale, but
+has been omitted from all the other revisions, including Binet&#8217;s own.
+Bobertag did not even regard the test as worthy of a trial. The
+universal criticism has been that it is a test of schooling rather than
+of intelligence. That the performance depends, in a certain sense, upon
+special instruction is self-evident. Without such instruction no child
+of 8&nbsp;years, however intelligent, would be able to pass the test. Nature
+does not give us a conventionalized language, either written or spoken.
+It must be acquired. It is also true that a high-grade feeble-minded
+child, say 8&nbsp;years of age and of 6-year intelligence, is sometimes
+(though not always) able to pass the test after two years of school
+instruction. It is exceedingly improbable, however, that a
+feeble-minded subject with less than 6-year intelligence will ever be
+able to pass this test, however long he remains in school.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;233">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_233" id="Page_233"></a>The conclusions to be drawn from these facts are as follows: (1)
+Inability to pass the test should not be counted against the child
+unless it is known that he has had at least a full year of the usual
+school instruction. (2) Ability to pass the test after only two years of
+school instruction is almost certain proof that the child has reached a
+mental level of at least 6&nbsp;years. (3) Failure to pass the test must be
+regarded as a grave symptom in the case of the child 9 or more years of
+age who is known to have attended school as much as two years. (4) For
+mental levels higher than 8&nbsp;years the test has hardly any diagnostic
+value, since feeble-minded persons of 8- or 9-year intelligence can
+usually be taught to write quite legibly.</p>
+
+<p>If the limitations above set forth are kept in mind, the test is by no
+means without value, and is always worth giving as a supplementary test.
+Learning to write simple sentences from dictation is no mean
+accomplishment. It demands, in the first place, a fairly complete
+mastery of rather difficult muscular co&ouml;rdinations. Moreover, these
+co&ouml;rdinations must be firmly associated with the corresponding letters
+and words, for if the writing co&ouml;rdinations are not fairly automatic, so
+much attention will be required to carry them out that the child will
+not be able to remember what he has been told to write. The necessity of
+remembering the passage acts as a distraction, and writing from
+dictation is therefore a more difficult task than writing from copy.</p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_56_56" id="Footnote_56_56"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_56_56">[56]</a></span> The Stanford record booklet contains the circle ready for
+use.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_57_57" id="Footnote_57_57"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_57_57">[57]</a></span> See <a href="#IV_5">IV,&nbsp;5</a>, and <a href="#VI_4">VI,&nbsp;4</a>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_58_58" id="Footnote_58_58"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_58_58">[58]</a></span> For aid in classifying the responses in this and certain
+other tests the writer is indebted to Miss Grace Lyman.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_59_59" id="Footnote_59_59"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_59_59">[59]</a></span> One is here reminded of the puzzling conundrum, &ldquo;Why is a
+brick like an elephant?&rdquo; The answer being, &ldquo;Because neither can climb a
+tree!&rdquo; A response of this type states a fact, but because of its bizarre
+nature should hardly be counted satisfactory.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_60_60" id="Footnote_60_60"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_60_60">[60]</a></span> For further discussion of the processes involved, see
+<a href="#VII_5">VII,&nbsp;5</a>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_61_61" id="Footnote_61_61"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_61_61">[61]</a></span> Supposing the ballots to have been shuffled.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_62_62" id="Footnote_62_62"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_62_62">[62]</a></span> See scoring card for samples of satisfactory and
+unsatisfactory performances.</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;234">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_234" id="Page_234"></a><a name="CHAPTER_XV" id="CHAPTER_XV"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;XV
+<br />
+<small>INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR&nbsp;IX</small></h2>
+
+
+<h3><a name="IX_1" id="IX_1"></a>IX,&nbsp;1. Giving the date</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Ask the following questions in order:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol class="alph smaller">
+<li>&ldquo;What day of the week is it to-day?&rdquo;</li>
+<li>&ldquo;What month is it?&rdquo;</li>
+<li>&ldquo;What day of the month is it?&rdquo;</li>
+<li>&ldquo;What year is it?&rdquo;</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>If the child misunderstands and gives the day of the month for the day
+of the week, or <i>vice versa</i>, we merely repeat the question with
+suitable emphasis, but give no other help.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> An error of three days in either direction is allowed for <i>c</i>,
+but <i>a</i>, <i>b</i>, and <i>d</i> must all be given correctly. If the child makes an
+error and spontaneously corrects it, the change is allowed, but
+corrections must not be called for or suggested.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Binet originally located this test in year&nbsp;IX, but
+unfortunately moved it to year&nbsp;VIII in the 1911 revision. Kuhlmann,
+Goddard, and Huey all retain it in year&nbsp;IX, where, according to our own
+data, it unquestionably belongs. With the exception of Binet&#8217;s 1911
+results, the statistics for the test are in remarkably close agreement
+for children in France, Germany, England, and Eastern and Western United
+States. It seems that practically all children in civilized countries
+have ample opportunity to learn the divisions of the year, month, and
+week, <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;235">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_235" id="Page_235"></a>and to become oriented with respect to these divisions. Special
+instruction is doubtless capable of hastening time orientation to a
+certain degree, but not greatly. Binet tells of a French <i>&eacute;cole
+maternelle</i> attended by children 4&nbsp;to&nbsp;6&nbsp;years of age, where instruction
+was given daily in regard to the date, and yet not a single one of the
+children was able to pass this test. This is a beautiful illustration of
+the futility of precocious teaching. In spite of well-meant instruction,
+it is not until the age of 8&nbsp;or&nbsp;9&nbsp;years that children have enough
+comprehension of time periods, and sufficient interest in them, to keep
+very close track of the date. Failure to pass the test at the age of
+10&nbsp;or&nbsp;11&nbsp;years is a decidedly unfavorable sign, unless the error is very
+slight.</p>
+
+<p>The fact that normal adults are occasionally unable to give the day of
+the month is no argument against the validity of the test, since the
+system of tests is so constructed as to allow for accidental failures on
+any particular test. As a matter of fact, very nearly 100&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of
+normal 12-year-old children pass this test.</p>
+
+<p>The unavoidable fault of the test is its lack of uniformity in
+difficulty at different dates. It is easier for school children to give
+the day of the week on Monday or Friday than on Tuesday, Wednesday, or
+Thursday. Mistakes in giving the day of the month are less likely to
+occur at the beginning or end of the month than at any other time, while
+mistakes in naming the month are most likely to occur then.</p>
+
+<p>It is interesting to compare the four parts of this test in regard to
+difficulty. Binet and Bobertag both state that ability to name the year
+comes last, but they give no figures. Our own data show that the four
+parts of the test are of almost exactly the same difficulty and that
+this is true at all ages.</p>
+
+
+<h3><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;236">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_236" id="Page_236"></a><a name="IX_2" id="IX_2"></a>IX,&nbsp;2. Arranging five weights</h3>
+
+<p>Use the five weights, 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15&nbsp;grams. Be sure that the
+weights are identical in appearance. The weights may be made as
+described under <a href="#V_1">V,&nbsp;1</a>, or they may be purchased of C.&nbsp;H. Stoelting &amp; Co.,
+Chicago, Illinois. If no weights are at hand one of the alternative
+tests may be substituted.</p>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Place the five boxes on the table in an irregular group
+before the child and say: &ldquo;<i>See the boxes. They all look alike, don&#8217;t
+they? But they are not alike. Some of them are heavy, some are not quite
+so heavy, and some are still lighter. No two weigh the same. Now, I want
+you to find the heaviest one and place it here. Then find the one that
+is just a little lighter and put it here. Then put the next lighter one
+here, and the next lighter one here, and the lightest of all at this
+end</i> (pointing each time at the appropriate spot). <i>Do you understand?</i>&rdquo;
+Whatever the child answers, in order to make sure that he does
+understand, we repeat the instructions thus: &ldquo;<i>Remember now, that no two
+weights are the same. Find the heaviest one and put it here, the next
+heaviest here, and lighter, lighter, until you have the very lightest
+here. Ready; go ahead.</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>It is best to follow very closely the formula here given, otherwise
+there is danger of stating the directions so abstractly that the subject
+could not comprehend them. A formula like &ldquo;<i>I want you to arrange the
+blocks in a gradually decreasing series according to weight</i>&rdquo; would be
+Greek to most children of 10&nbsp;years.</p>
+
+<p>If the subject still seems at a loss to know what to do, the
+instructions may be again repeated. But no further help of any kind may
+be given. Do not tell the subject to take the blocks one at a time in
+the hand and try them, and do not illustrate by hefting the blocks
+yourself. <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;237">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_237" id="Page_237"></a>It is a part of the test to let the subject find his own
+method.</p>
+
+<p>Give three trials, shuffling the boxes after each. Do not repeat the
+instructions before the second and third trials unless the subject has
+used an absurd procedure in the previous trial.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if the blocks are arranged in the correct
+order <em>twice out of three trials</em>. Always record the order of
+arrangement and note the number and extent of displacement. Obviously an
+arrangement like 12&ndash;6&ndash;15&ndash;3&ndash;9 is very much more serious than one like
+15&ndash;12&ndash;6&ndash;9&ndash;3, but we require that two trials be absolutely without error.</p>
+
+<p>Scoring is facilitated if the blocks are marked on the bottom so that
+they may be easily identified. It is then necessary to exercise some
+care to see that the subject does not examine the bottom of the blocks
+for a clue as to the correct order.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Binet originally located this test in year&nbsp;IX, but in his 1911
+revision changed it to year&nbsp;VIII. Other revisions have retained it in
+year&nbsp;IX. The correct location depends upon the weights used and upon the
+procedure and scoring. Kuhlmann uses weights of 3, 9, 18, 27, 36, and
+45&nbsp;grams, and this probably makes the test easier. Bobertag tried two
+sets of boxes, one set being of larger dimensions than the other. The
+larger gave decidedly the more errors. If we require only one success in
+three trials the test could be located a year or two lower in the scale,
+while three successes as a standard would require that it be moved
+upward possibly as much as two years.</p>
+
+<p>Much depends also on whether the child is left to find his own method,
+and on this there has been much difference of procedure. Kuhlmann,
+Bobertag, and Wallin illustrate the correct method of making the
+comparison by first hefting<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;238">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_238" id="Page_238"></a> and arranging the weights while the subject
+looks on. We prefer to keep the test in its original form, and with the
+procedure and scoring we have used it is well located in year&nbsp;IX.</p>
+
+<p>Wallin carries his assistance still further by saying, after the first
+block has been placed, &ldquo;Now, find the heaviest of the four,&rdquo; and after
+the second has been placed, &ldquo;Now, find the heaviest of the three,&rdquo; etc.
+Finally, when the arrangement has been made, he tells the subject to try
+them again to make sure the order is correct, allowing the subject to
+make whatever changes he thinks necessary. This procedure robs the test
+of its most valuable features. The experiment was not devised primarily
+as a test of sensory discrimination, for it has long been recognized
+that individuals who have developed as far as the 9- or 10-year level of
+intelligence are ordinarily but little below normal in sensory capacity.</p>
+
+<p>Psychologically, the test resembles that of comparing weights in <a href="#V_1">V,&nbsp;1</a>.
+Success depends, in the first place, upon the correct comprehension of
+the task and the setting of a goal to be attained; secondly, upon the
+choice of a suitable method for realizing the goal; and finally, upon
+the ability to keep the end clearly in consciousness until all the steps
+necessary for its attainment have been gone through. Elementary as are
+the processes involved, they represent the prototype of all purposeful
+behavior. The statesman, the lawyer, the teacher, the physician, the
+carpenter, all in their own way and with their own materials, are
+continually engaged in setting goals, choosing means, and inhibiting the
+multitudinous appeals of irrelevant and distracting ideas.</p>
+
+<p>In this experiment the subject may fail in any one of the three
+requirements of the test or in all of them. (1) He may not comprehend
+the instructions and so be unable to <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;239">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_239" id="Page_239"></a>set the goal. (2) Though
+understanding what is expected of him, he may adopt an absurd method of
+carrying out the task. Or (3) he may lose sight of the end and begin to
+play with the blocks, stacking them on top of one another, building
+trains, tossing them about, etc. Sometimes the guiding idea is not
+completely lost, but is weakened or rendered only partially operative.
+In such a case the subject may compare some of the blocks carefully,
+place others without trying them at all, but continue in his
+half-rational, half-irrational procedure until all the blocks have been
+arranged.</p>
+
+<p>It is essential, therefore, to supplement the mere record of success or
+failure by jotting down a brief but accurate description of the
+performance. Note any hesitation or inability to grasp the instructions.
+Note especially any absurd procedure, such as placing all the blocks
+without hefting any of them, comparing only some of them, holding them
+up and shaking them, hefting two at once in the same hand, etc. The
+ideal method, of course, is to try all the blocks carefully before
+placing any of them, then to make a tentative arrangement, and finally,
+to correct this tentative arrangement by means of individual
+comparisons. A slight departure from this method does not always bring
+failure, but it renders success less probable. As a rule it is only the
+very intelligent children of 10&nbsp;years who think to test out their first
+arrangement by making a final and additional trial of each block in
+turn. Contrary to what might be supposed, success is slightly favored by
+hefting the blocks successively with one hand rather than by taking one
+in each hand for simultaneous comparison, but as the child cannot be
+expected to know this, we must regard the two methods as equally
+logical.</p>
+
+<p>The test of arranging weights has met universal praise. Its special
+advantage is that it tests the subject&#8217;s intelligence<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;240">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_240" id="Page_240"></a> in the
+manipulation of <em>things</em> rather than his capacity for dealing with
+<em>abstractions</em>. It tests his ability to do something rather than his
+ability to express himself in language. It throws light upon certain
+factors of motor adaptation and practical judgment which play a great
+part in the everyday life of the average human being. It depends as
+little upon school, perhaps, as any other test of the scale, and it is
+readily usable with children of all nations without danger of being
+materially altered in translation Moreover, it is always an interesting
+test for the child. Bobertag goes so far as to say that any 8- or 9-year
+child who passes this test cannot possibly be feeble-minded. This may be
+true; but the converse is hardly the case; that is, the failure of older
+children is by no means certain proof of mental retardation. The same
+observation, however, applies equally well to many other of the Binet
+tests, some of which correlate more closely with true mental age than
+this one. A rather considerable fraction of normal 12-year-olds fail on
+it, and it is in fact somewhat less dependable than certain other tests
+if we wish to differentiate between 9-year and 11-year intelligence. But
+it is a test we could ill afford to eliminate.<a name="FNanchor_63_63" id="FNanchor_63_63"></a><a href="#Footnote_63_63" class="fnanchor">[63]</a></p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="IX_3" id="IX_3"></a>IX,&nbsp;3. Making change</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Ask the following questions in the order here given:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol class="alph smaller">
+<li>&ldquo;If I were to buy 4&nbsp;cents worth of candy and should give the storekeeper 10&nbsp;cents, how much money would I get back?&rdquo;</li>
+<li>&ldquo;If I bought 13&nbsp;cents worth and gave the storekeeper 15&nbsp;cents, how much would I get back?&rdquo;</li>
+<li>&ldquo;If I bought 4&nbsp;cents worth and gave the storekeeper 25&nbsp;cents, how much would I get back?&rdquo;</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;241">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_241" id="Page_241"></a>Coins are not used, and the subject is not allowed the help of pencil
+and paper. If the subject forgets the statement of the problem, it is
+permissible to repeat it once, but only once. The response should be
+made in ten or fifteen seconds for each problem.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring,</b> The test is passed if <em>two out of three</em> problems are answered
+correctly in the allotted time. In case two answers are given to a
+problem, we follow the usual rule of counting the second and ignoring
+the first.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Problems of this nature, when thoroughly standardized, are
+extremely valuable as tests of intelligence. The difficulty of the test,
+as we have used it, does not lie in the subtraction of 4 from 10, 12
+from 15, etc. Such subtractions, when given as problems in subtraction,
+are readily solved by practically all normal 8-year-olds who have
+attended school as much as two years. The problems of the test have a
+twofold difficulty: (1) The statement of the problem must be
+comprehended and held in mind until the solution has been arrived at;
+(2) the problem is so stated that the subject must himself select the
+fundamental operation which applies. The latter difficulty is somewhat
+the greater of the two, addition sometimes being employed instead of
+subtraction.</p>
+
+<p>It is just such difficulties as this that prove so perplexing to the
+feeble-minded. High-grade defectives, although they require more than
+the usual amount of drill and are likely to make occasional errors, are
+nevertheless capable of learning to add, subtract, multiply, and divide
+fairly well. Their main trouble comes in deciding which of these
+operations a given problem calls for. They can master routine, but as
+regards initiative, judgment, and power to reason they are little
+educable. The psychology and pedagogy of mental deficiency is epitomized
+in this statement.</p>
+
+<p>There has been little disagreement as to the proper location <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;242">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_242" id="Page_242"></a>of the test
+of making change, but various procedures have been employed. Coins have
+generally been employed, in which case the subject is actually allowed
+to make the change. Most other revisions have also given only a single
+problem, usually 4&nbsp;cents out of 20&nbsp;cents, or 4 out of 25, or 9 out of
+25. It is evident that these are not all of equal difficulty. There is
+general agreement, however, that normal children of 9&nbsp;years should be
+able to make simple change.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="IX_4" id="IX_4"></a>IX,&nbsp;4. Repeating four digits reversed</h3>
+
+<p>The series are 6&ndash;5&ndash;2&ndash;8; 4&ndash;9&ndash;3&ndash;7; 3&ndash;6&ndash;2&ndash;9.</p>
+
+<p><b>Procedure and scoring.</b> Exactly as in <a href="#VII_alt2">VII, alternate test&nbsp;2</a>.<a name="FNanchor_64_64" id="FNanchor_64_64"></a><a href="#Footnote_64_64" class="fnanchor">[64]</a></p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="IX_5" id="IX_5"></a>IX,&nbsp;5. Using three words in a sentence</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure</b> The words used are:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol class="alph smaller">
+<li>Boy, ball, river.</li>
+<li>Work, money, men.</li>
+<li>Desert, rivers, lakes.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>Say: &ldquo;<i>You know what a sentence is, of course. A sentence is made up of
+some words which say something. Now, I am going to give you three words,
+and you must make up a sentence that has all three words in it. The
+three words are &lsquo;boy,&rsquo; &lsquo;ball,&rsquo; &lsquo;river.&rsquo; Go ahead and make up a sentence
+that has all three words in it.</i>&rdquo; The others are given in the same way.</p>
+
+<p>Note that the subject is not shown the three words written down, and
+that the reply is to be given orally.</p>
+
+<p>If the subject does not understand what is wanted, the instruction may
+be repeated, but it is not permissible to illustrate what a sentence is
+by giving one. There must be no preliminary practice.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;243">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_243" id="Page_243"></a>A curious misunderstanding which is sometimes encountered comes from
+assuming that the sentence must be constructed entirely of the three
+words given. If it appears that the subject is stumbling over this
+difficulty, we explain: &ldquo;<i>The three words must be put with some other
+words so that all of them together will make a sentence.</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Nothing is said about hurrying, but if a sentence is not given within
+one minute the rule is to count that part of the test a failure and to
+proceed to the next trio of words.</p>
+
+<p>Give only one trial for each part of the test.</p>
+
+<p>Do not specially caution the child to avoid giving more than one
+sentence, as this is implied in the formula used and should be
+understood.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if <em>two of the three</em> sentences are
+satisfactory. In order to be satisfactory a sentence must fulfill the
+following requirements: (1) It must either be a simple sentence, or, if
+compound, must not contain more than two distinct ideas; and (2) it must
+not express an absurdity.</p>
+
+<p>Slight changes in one or more of the key words are disregarded, as
+<em>river</em> for <em>rivers</em>, etc.</p>
+
+<p>The scoring is difficult enough to justify rather extensive
+illustration.</p>
+
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><h4>(a) Boy, ball, river</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> An analysis of 128 satisfactory responses gave
+the following classification:&mdash;</p>
+<ol>
+<li>Simple sentence containing a simple subject and a simple
+predicate; as: &ldquo;The boy threw his ball into the river.&rdquo; &ldquo;The boy
+lost his ball in the river.&rdquo; &ldquo;The boy&#8217;s ball fell into the
+river.&rdquo; &ldquo;The boy swam into the river after his ball,&rdquo; etc. This
+group contains 76&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the correct responses.</li>
+
+<li>A sentence with a simple subject and a compound predicate;
+as: &ldquo;A boy went to the river and took his ball with him.&rdquo; About
+8&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of all were of this type.</li>
+
+<li>A complex sentence containing a relative clause (2&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent
+<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;244">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_244" id="Page_244"></a>only); as: &ldquo;The boy ran after his ball which was rolling toward
+the river.&rdquo;</li>
+
+<li>A compound sentence containing two independent clauses
+(about 14&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent); as: &ldquo;The boy had a ball and he lost it in
+the river.&rdquo;</li>
+</ol>
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> The failures fall into four chief groups:&mdash;</p>
+<ol>
+<li>Sentences with three clauses (or else three separate
+sentences).</li>
+
+<li>Sentences containing an absurdity.</li>
+
+<li>Sentences which omit one of the key words.</li>
+
+<li>Silence, due ordinarily to inability to comprehend the task.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>Group&nbsp;1 includes 78&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the failures; group&nbsp;2, about
+12&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent; and group 3 and 4 about 5&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent each. Samples of
+group&nbsp;1 are: &ldquo;There was a boy, and he bought a ball, and it fell
+into the river.&rdquo; &ldquo;I saw a boy, and he had a ball, and he was
+playing by the river.&rdquo; Illustration of an absurd sentence, &ldquo;The
+boy was swimming in the river and he was playing ball.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<h4>(b) Work, money, men</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory</i>:&mdash;</p>
+<ol>
+<li>Sentence with a simple subject and simple predicate
+(including 75&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of 116 satisfactory responses); as: &ldquo;Men
+work for their money.&rdquo; &ldquo;Men get money for their work,&rdquo; etc.</li>
+
+<li>A complex sentence with a relative clause (12&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of
+correct answers); as: &ldquo;Men who work earn much money.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is
+easy for men to earn money if they are willing to work,&rdquo; etc.</li>
+
+<li>A compound sentence with two independent, co&ouml;rdinate clauses
+(13&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent); as: &ldquo;Men work and they earn money.&rdquo; &ldquo;Some men
+have money and they do not work.&rdquo;</li>
+</ol>
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory</i>:&mdash;</p>
+<ol>
+<li>Three clauses; as: &ldquo;I know a man and he has money, and he
+works at the store.&rdquo;</li>
+
+<li>Sentences which are absurd or meaningless; as: &ldquo;Men work
+with their money.&rdquo;</li>
+
+<li>Omission of one of the words.</li>
+
+<li>Inability to respond.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<h4><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;245">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_245" id="Page_245"></a>(c) Desert, rivers, lakes</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory</i>:&mdash;</p>
+<ol>
+<li>Sentences with a simple subject and a simple predicate
+(including 84&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of 126 correct answers); as: &ldquo;There are
+no rivers or lakes in the desert.&rdquo; &ldquo;The desert has one river and
+one lake,&rdquo; etc.</li>
+
+<li>A complex sentence with a relative clause (only 2&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent);
+as: &ldquo;In the desert there was a river which flowed into a lake.&rdquo;</li>
+
+<li>A compound sentence with two independent, co&ouml;rdinate clauses
+(11&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent); as: &ldquo;We went to the desert, and it had no rivers
+or lakes.&rdquo;</li>
+
+<li>A compound, complex sentence (3&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of all); as: &ldquo;There
+was a desert, and near by there was a river that emptied into a
+lake.&rdquo;</li>
+</ol>
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory</i>:&mdash;</p>
+<ol>
+<li>Sentences with three clauses (40&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of all failures);
+as: &ldquo;A desert is dry, rivers are long, lakes are rough.&rdquo;</li>
+
+<li>Sentences containing an absurdity (12&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the
+failures): as: &ldquo;a desert is dry, rivers are long, lakes are
+filled with swimming boys.&rdquo; &ldquo;The lake went through the desert
+and the river.&rdquo; &ldquo;There was a desert and rivers and lakes in the
+forest.&rdquo; &ldquo;The desert is full of rivers and lakes.&rdquo;</li>
+
+<li>Omission of one of the words (40&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the failures).</li>
+
+<li>Inability to respond (8&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent).</li>
+</ol></blockquote>
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The test of constructing a sentence containing given words was
+first used by Masselon and is known as &ldquo;the Masselon experiment.&rdquo;
+Meumann, who used it in a rather extended experiment,<a name="FNanchor_65_65" id="FNanchor_65_65"></a><a href="#Footnote_65_65" class="fnanchor">[65]</a> finds it a
+good test of intelligence and a reliable index as to the richness,
+definiteness, and maturity of the associative processes. As Meumann
+shows, it is instructive to study the qualitative differences between
+the responses of bright and dull children, apart from questions of
+sentence structure. These differences are <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;246">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_246" id="Page_246"></a>especially discernible in
+(<i>a</i>) the logical qualities of the associations, and (<i>b</i>) the
+definiteness of statement. As regards (<i>a</i>), bright children are much
+more likely to use the given words as keystones in the construction of a
+sentence which would be logically suggested by them. For example,
+<em>donkey</em>, <em>blows</em>, suggest some such sentence as, &ldquo;The donkey receives
+blows because he is lazy.&rdquo; In like manner we have found that the words
+<em>work</em>, <em>money</em>, <em>men</em> usually suggest to the more intelligent children
+a sentence like &ldquo;Men work for their money&rdquo; (or &ldquo;because they need
+money,&rdquo; etc.), while the dull child is more likely to give some such
+sentence as &ldquo;The men have work and they don&#8217;t have much money.&rdquo; That is,
+the sentence of the dull child, even though correct in structure and
+free enough from outright absurdity to satisfy the standard of scoring
+which we have set forth, is likely to express ideas which are more or
+less nondescript, ideas not logically suggested by the set of words
+given.</p>
+
+<p>The experiment is one of the many forms of the &ldquo;completion test,&rdquo; or
+&ldquo;the combination method.&rdquo; As we have already noted, the power to combine
+more or less separate and isolated elements into a logical whole is one
+of the most essential features of intelligence. The ability to do so in
+a given case depends, in the first place, upon the number and logical
+quality of the associations which have previously been made with each of
+the given elements separately, and in the second place, upon the
+readiness with which these ideational stores yield up the particular
+associations necessary for weaving the given words into some kind of
+unity. The child must pass from what is given to what is not given but
+merely suggested. This requires a certain amount of invention. Scattered
+fragments must be conceived as the skeleton of a thought, and this
+skeleton, or partial skeleton, must be assembled and made whole. The
+task is analogous <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;247">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_247" id="Page_247"></a>to that which confronts the pal&aelig;ontologist, who is
+able to reconstruct, with a high degree of certainty, the entire
+skeleton of an extinct animal from the evidence furnished by three or
+four fragments of bones. It is no wonder, therefore, that subjects whose
+ideational stores are scanty, and whose associations are based upon
+accidental rather than logical connections, find the test one of
+peculiar difficulty. Invention thrives in a different soil.</p>
+
+<p>Binet located this test in year&nbsp;X. Goddard and Kuhlmann assign it the
+same location, though their actual statistics agree closely with our
+own. Our procedure makes the test somewhat easier than that of Binet,
+who gave only one trial and used the somewhat more difficult words
+<em>Paris</em>, <em>river</em>, <em>fortune</em>. Others have generally followed the Binet
+procedure, merely substituting for Paris the name of a city better known
+to the subject. Binet&#8217;s requirement of a written response also makes the
+test harder.</p>
+
+<p>Perhaps the greatest obstacle to uniformity in the use of the test comes
+from the difficulty of scoring, particularly in deciding whether the
+sentence contains enough absurdity to disqualify it, and whether it
+expresses three separate ideas or only two. It is hoped that the rather
+large variety of sample responses which we have given will reduce these
+difficulties to a minimum.</p>
+
+<p>An additional word is necessary in regard to what constitutes an
+absurdity in (<i>b</i>). A sentence like &ldquo;There are some rivers and lakes in
+the desert&rdquo; is not an absurdity in certain parts of Western United
+States. In Professor Ordahl&#8217;s tests at Reno, Nevada, many children whose
+intelligence was altogether above suspicion gave this reply. The
+statement is, indeed, perfectly true for the semi-arid region in the
+vicinity of Reno known as &ldquo;the desert.&rdquo; On the other hand, such
+sentences as &ldquo;The desert is full of rivers and lakes,&rdquo; or &ldquo;There are
+forty rivers and lakes<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;248">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_248" id="Page_248"></a> in the desert,&rdquo; can hardly be considered
+satisfactory. Similar difficulties are presented by (<i>c</i>), though not so
+frequently. &ldquo;Men who work do not have money&rdquo; expresses, unfortunately,
+more truth than nonsense.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="IX_6" id="IX_6"></a>IX,&nbsp;6. Finding rhymes</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Say to the child: &ldquo;<i>You know what a rhyme is, of course. A
+rhyme is a word that sounds like another word. Two words rhyme if they
+end in the same sound. Understand?</i>&rdquo; Whether the child says he
+understands or not, we proceed to illustrate what a rhyme is, as
+follows: &ldquo;<i>Take the two words &lsquo;hat&rsquo; and &lsquo;cat.&rsquo; They sound alike and so
+they make a rhyme. &lsquo;Hat,&rsquo; &lsquo;rat,&rsquo; &lsquo;cat,&rsquo; &lsquo;bat&rsquo; all rhyme with one
+another.</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>That is, we first explain what a rhyme is and then we give an
+illustration. A large majority of American children who have reached the
+age of 9&nbsp;years understand perfectly what a rhyme is, without any
+illustration. A few, however, think they understand, but do not; and in
+order to insure that all are given equal advantage it is necessary never
+to omit the illustration.</p>
+
+<p>After the illustration say: &ldquo;<i>Now, I am going to give you a word and you
+will have one minute to find as many words as you can that rhyme with
+it. The word is &lsquo;day.&rsquo; Name all the words you can think of that rhyme
+with &lsquo;day.&rsquo;</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>If the child fails with the first word, before giving the second we
+repeat the explanation and give sample rhymes for <em>day</em>; otherwise we
+proceed without further explanation to <em>mill</em> and <em>spring</em>, saying,
+&ldquo;<i>Now, you have another minute to name all the words you can think of
+that rhyme with &lsquo;mill,&rsquo;</i>&rdquo; etc. Apart from the mention of &ldquo;one minute&rdquo;
+say nothing to suggest hurrying, as this tends to throw some children
+into mental confusion.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;249">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_249" id="Page_249"></a><b>Scoring.</b> Passed if in <em>two out of the three</em> parts of the experiment the
+child finds <em>three words</em> which rhyme with the word given, the time
+limit for each series being <em>one minute</em>. Note that in each case there
+must be three words in addition to the word given. These must be real
+words, not meaningless syllables or made-up words. However, we should be
+liberal enough to accept such words as <em>ding</em> (from &ldquo;ding-dong &rdquo;) for
+<em>spring</em>, <em>Jill</em> (see &ldquo;Jack and Jill&rdquo;) for <em>mill</em>, <em>Fay</em> (girl&#8217;s name)
+for <em>day</em>, etc.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> At first thought it would seem that the demands made by this
+test upon intelligence could not be very great. Sound associations
+between words may be contrasted unfavorably with associations like those
+of cause and effect, part to whole, whole to part, opposites, etc. But
+when we pass from <i>a-priori</i> considerations to an examination of the
+actual data, we find that the giving of rhymes is closely correlated
+with general intelligence.</p>
+
+<p>The 9-year-olds who test at or above 10&nbsp;years nearly always do well in
+finding rhymes, while 9-year-olds who test as low as 8&nbsp;years seldom
+pass. When a test thus shows high correlation with the scale as a whole,
+we must either accept the test as valid or reject the scale altogether.
+While the feeble-minded do not do as well in this test as normal
+children of corresponding mental age, the percentage successes for them
+rises rapidly between mental age&nbsp;8 and mental age&nbsp;10&nbsp;or&nbsp;11.</p>
+
+<p>Closer psychological analysis of the processes involved will show why
+this is true. To find rhymes for a given word means that one must hunt
+out verbal associations under the direction of a guiding idea. Every
+word has innumerable associations and many of these tend, in greater or
+less degree, to be aroused when the stimulus word is given. In order to
+succeed with the test, however, it is necessary to inhibit all
+associations which are not relevant <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;250">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_250" id="Page_250"></a>to the desired end. The directing
+idea must be held so firmly in mind that it will really direct the
+thought associations. Besides acting to inhibit the irrelevant, it must
+create a sort of magnetic stress (to borrow a figure from physics) which
+will give dominance to those associative tendencies pointing in the
+right direction. Even the feeble-minded child of imbecile grade has in
+his vocabulary a great many words which rhyme with <em>day</em>, <em>mill</em>, and
+<em>spring</em>. He fails on the test because his verbal associations cannot be
+subjugated to the influence of a directing idea. The end to be attained
+does not dominate consciousness sufficiently to create more than a faint
+stress. Instead of a single magnetic pole there is a conflict of forces.
+The result is either chaos or partial success. <em>Mill</em> may suggest
+<em>hill</em>, and then perhaps the directing idea becomes suddenly inoperative
+and the child gives <em>mountain</em>, <em>valley</em>, or some other irrelevant
+association. The lack of associations, however, is a more frequent cause
+of failure than inability to inhibit the irrelevant.</p>
+
+<p>If any one supposes that finding rhymes does not draw upon the higher
+mental powers, let him try the experiment upon himself in various stages
+of mental efficiency, say at 9&nbsp;<span class="smcap">a.m.</span>, when mentally refreshed by a good
+night of sleep and again when fatigued and sleepy. Poets questioned by
+Galton on this point all testified to the greater difficulty of finding
+rhymes when mentally fatigued. In this and in many other respects the
+mental activities of the fatigued or sleepy individual approach the type
+of mentation which is normal to the feeble-minded.</p>
+
+<p>It is important to note that adults make a less favorable showing in
+this test than normal children of corresponding mental age,
+Mr.&nbsp;Knollin&#8217;s &ldquo;hoboes&rdquo; of 12-year intelligence doing hardly as well as
+school children of 10-year intelligence. Those who are habitually
+employed in school <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;251">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_251" id="Page_251"></a>exercises probably acquire an adeptness in verbal
+associations which is later gradually lost in the preoccupations of real
+life.</p>
+
+<p>There has been more disagreement as to the proper location of this test
+than of any other test of the Binet scale. Binet placed it in year&nbsp;XII
+of the 1908 scale, but shifted it to year&nbsp;XV in 1911. Kuhlmann retains
+it in year&nbsp;XII, while Goddard drops it down to year&nbsp;XI. However, when we
+examine the actual statistics for normal children we do not find very
+marked disagreement, and such disagreement as is present can be largely
+accounted for by variations in procedure and by differing conclusions
+drawn from identical data. In the first place, Binet gave but one trial.
+This, of course, makes the test much harder than when three trials are
+given and only two successes are required. To make one trial equal in
+difficulty to three trials we should perhaps need to demand only two
+rhymes, instead of three, in the one trial. In the second place, the
+word used by Binet (<i>obeissance</i>) is much harder than one-syllable words
+like <em>day</em>, <em>mill</em>, and <em>spring</em>. Finally, the wide shift of the test
+from year&nbsp;XII to year&nbsp;XV was not justified by the statistics of Binet
+himself, and the figures of Kuhlmann and Goddard are really in
+exceptionally close agreement with our own, notwithstanding the fact
+that Goddard required three successes instead of two. In four series of
+tests, considered together, we have found 62&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent passing at
+year&nbsp;IX, 81&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent at year&nbsp;X, 83&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent at year&nbsp;XI, and 94&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent
+at year&nbsp;XII.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="IX_alt1" id="IX_alt1"></a>IX, Alternative test&nbsp;1: naming the months</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Simply ask the subject to &ldquo;<i>name all the months of the
+year</i>.&rdquo; Do not start him off by naming one month; give no look of
+approval or disapproval as the <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;252">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_252" id="Page_252"></a>months are being named, and make no
+suggestions or comments of any kind.</p>
+
+<p>When the months have been named, we &ldquo;check up&rdquo; the performance by
+asking: &ldquo;<i>What month comes before April?</i>&rdquo; &ldquo;<i>What month comes before
+July?</i>&rdquo; &ldquo;<i>What month comes before November?</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> Passed if the months are named in about <em>fifteen or twenty
+seconds with no more than one error</em> of omission, repetition, or
+displacement, and if <em>two out of the three check questions</em> are answered
+correctly. Disregard place of beginning.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Some are inclined to consider this test of little value,
+because of its supposed dependence on accidental training. With this
+opinion we cannot fully agree. The arguments already given in favor of
+the retention of <a href="#VII_alt1">naming the days of the week</a> (year&nbsp;VII), apply equally
+well in the present case. It has been shown, however, that age, apart
+from intelligence, does have some effect on the ability to name the
+months. Defective adults of 9-year intelligence do about as well with it
+as normal children of 10-year intelligence.</p>
+
+<p>The test appears in year&nbsp;X of Binet&#8217;s 1908 scale and in year&nbsp;IX of the
+1911 revision. Goddard places it correctly in year&nbsp;IX, while Kuhlmann
+and Bobertag have omitted it.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="IX_alt2" id="IX_alt2"></a>IX, Alternative test&nbsp;2: counting the value of stamps</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Place before the subject a cardboard on which are pasted
+three 1-cent and three 2-cent stamps arranged as follows: 111222. Be
+sure to lay the card so that the stamps will be right side up for the
+child. Say: &ldquo;<i>You know, of course, how much a stamp like this costs</i>
+(pointing to a 1-cent stamp). <i>And you know how much one like this<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;253">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_253" id="Page_253"></a>
+costs</i> (pointing to a 2-cent stamp). <i>Now, how much money would it take
+to buy all these stamps?</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Do not tell the individual values of the stamps if these are not known,
+for it is a part of the test to ascertain whether the child&#8217;s
+spontaneous curiosity has led him to find out and remember their values.
+If the individual values are known, but the first answer is wrong, a
+second trial may be given. In such cases, however, it is necessary to be
+on guard against guessing.</p>
+
+<p>If the child merely names an incorrect sum without saying anything to
+indicate how he arrived at his answer, it is well to tell him to figure
+it up aloud. &ldquo;<i>Tell me how you got it.</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> Passed if the correct value is given in not over fifteen
+seconds.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The value of this test may be questioned on two grounds: (1)
+That it has an ambiguous significance, since failure to pass it may
+result either from incorrect addition or from lack of knowledge of the
+individual values of the stamps; (2) that familiarity with stamps and
+their values is so much a matter of accident and special instruction
+that the test is not fair.</p>
+
+<p>Both criticisms are in a measure valid. The first, however, applies
+equally well to a great many useful intelligence tests. In fact, it is
+only a minority in which success depends on but one factor. The other
+criticism has less weight than would at first appear. While it is, of
+course, not impossible for an intelligent child to arrive at the age of
+9&nbsp;years without having had reasonable opportunity to learn the cost of
+the common postage stamps, the fact is that a large majority have had
+the opportunity and that most of those of normal intelligence have taken
+advantage of it. It is necessary once more to emphasize the fact that in
+its method of locating a test the Binet system makes ample allowance for
+&ldquo;accidental&rdquo; failures.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;254">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_254" id="Page_254"></a>Like the tests of naming coins, repeating the names of the days of the
+week or the months of the year, giving the date, tying a bow-knot,
+distinguishing right and left, naming the colors, etc., this one also
+throws light on the child&#8217;s spontaneous interest in common objects. It
+is mainly the children of deficient intellectual curiosity who do not
+take the trouble to learn these things at somewhere near the expected
+age.</p>
+
+<p>The test was located in year&nbsp;VIII of the Binet scale. However, Binet
+used coins, three single and three double sous. Since we do not have
+either a half-cent or a 2-cent coin, it has been necessary to substitute
+postage stamps. This changes the nature of the test and makes it much
+harder. It becomes less a test of ability to do a simple sum, and more a
+test of knowledge as to the value of the stamps used. That the test is
+easy enough for year&nbsp;VIII when it can be given in the original form is
+indicated by all the French, German, and English statistics available,
+but four separate series of Stanford tests agree in finding it too hard
+for year&nbsp;VIII when stamps are substituted and the test is carried out
+according to the procedure described above.</p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_63_63" id="Footnote_63_63"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_63_63">[63]</a></span> Compare with <a href="#V_1">V,&nbsp;1</a>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_64_64" id="Footnote_64_64"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_64_64">[64]</a></span> See discussion, p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_207">207</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_65_65" id="Footnote_65_65"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_65_65">[65]</a></span> &ldquo;<span lang="de">Ueber eine neue Methode der Intelligenzpr&uuml;fung und &uuml;ber
+den Wert der Kombinationsmethoden</span>,&rdquo; in <i lang="de">Zeitschrift f&uuml;r P&auml;dagogische
+Psychologie und Experimentelle P&auml;dagogik</i> (1912), pp.&nbsp;145&ndash;63.</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;255">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_255" id="Page_255"></a><a name="CHAPTER_XVI" id="CHAPTER_XVI"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;XVI
+<br />
+<small>INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR&nbsp;X</small></h2>
+
+
+<h3><a name="X_1" id="X_1"></a>X,&nbsp;1. Vocabulary (thirty definitions, 5400&nbsp;words)</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure and scoring as in <a href="#VIII_6">VIII,&nbsp;6</a>.</b> At year&nbsp;X, thirty words should be
+correctly defined.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="X_2" id="X_2"></a>X,&nbsp;2. Detecting absurdities</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Say to the child: &ldquo;<i>I am going to read a sentence which has
+something foolish in it, some nonsense. I want you to listen carefully
+and tell me what is foolish about it.</i>&rdquo; Then read the sentences, rather
+slowly and in a matter-of-fact voice, saying after each: &ldquo;<i>What is
+foolish about that?</i>&rdquo; The sentences used are the following:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol class="alph smaller">
+<li>&ldquo;A man said: &lsquo;I know a road from my house to the city
+which is downhill all the way to the city and downhill all the
+way back home.&rsquo;&rdquo;</li>
+
+<li>&ldquo;An engineer said that the more cars he had on his train
+the faster he could go.&rdquo;</li>
+
+<li>&ldquo;Yesterday the police found the body of a girl cut into
+eighteen pieces. They believe that she killed herself.&rdquo;</li>
+
+<li>&ldquo;There was a railroad accident yesterday, but it was not
+very serious. Only forty-eight people were killed.&rdquo;</li>
+
+<li>&ldquo;A bicycle rider, being thrown from his bicycle in an
+accident, struck his head against a stone and was instantly
+killed. They picked him up and carried him to the hospital, and
+they do not think he will get well again.&rdquo;</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>Each should ordinarily be answered within thirty seconds. If the child
+is silent, the sentence should be <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;256">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_256" id="Page_256"></a>repeated; but no other questions or
+suggestions of any kind are permissible. Such questions as &ldquo;<i>Could the
+road be downhill both ways?</i>&rdquo; or, &ldquo;<i>Do you think the girl could have
+killed herself?</i>&rdquo; would, of course, put the answer in the child&#8217;s mouth.
+It is even best to avoid laughing as the sentence is read.</p>
+
+<p>Owing to the child&#8217;s limited power of expression it is not always easy
+to judge from the answer given whether the absurdity has really been
+detected or not. In such cases ask him to explain himself, using some
+such formula as: &ldquo;<i>I am not sure I know what you mean. Explain what you
+mean. Tell me what is foolish in the sentence I read.</i>&rdquo; This usually
+brings a reply the correctness or incorrectness of which is more
+apparent, while at the same time the formula is so general that it
+affords no hint as to the correct answer. Additional questions must be
+used with extreme caution.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> Passed if the absurdity is detected in <em>four out of the five</em>
+statements. The following are samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory
+answers:&mdash;</p>
+
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><h4>(a) The road downhill</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;If it was downhill to the city it would be
+uphill coming back.&rdquo; &ldquo;It can&#8217;t be downhill both directions.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;That could not be.&rdquo; &ldquo;That is foolish. (Explain.) Because it
+must be uphill one way or the other.&rdquo; &ldquo;That would be a funny
+road. (Explain.) No road can be like that. It can&#8217;t be downhill
+both ways.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Perhaps he took a little different road
+coming back.&rdquo; &ldquo;I guess it is a very crooked road.&rdquo; &ldquo;Coming back
+he goes around the hill.&rdquo; &ldquo;The man lives down in a valley.&rdquo; &ldquo;The
+road was made that way so it would be easy.&rdquo; &ldquo;Just a road. I
+don&#8217;t see anything foolish.&rdquo; &ldquo;He should say, &lsquo;a road which
+goes.&rsquo;&rdquo;</p>
+
+
+<h4>(b) What the engineer said</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;If he has more cars he will go slower.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is
+the other way. If he wants to go faster he mustn&#8217;t have so many<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;257">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_257" id="Page_257"></a>
+cars.&rdquo; &ldquo;The man didn&#8217;t mean what he said, or else it was a slip
+of the tongue.&rdquo; &ldquo;That&#8217;s the way it would be if he was going
+downhill.&rdquo; &ldquo;Foolish, because the cars don&#8217;t help pull the
+train.&rdquo; &ldquo;He ought to say <em>slower</em>, not <em>faster</em>.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;A long train is nicer.&rdquo; &ldquo;The engine pulls
+harder if the train has lots of cars.&rdquo; &ldquo;That&#8217;s all right. I
+suppose he likes a big train.&rdquo; &ldquo;Nothing foolish; when I went to
+the city I saw a train that had lots of cars and it was going
+awfully fast.&rdquo; &ldquo;He should have said, &lsquo;the faster I can <em>run</em>.&rsquo;&rdquo;</p>
+
+
+<h4>(c) The girl who was thought to have killed herself</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;She could not have cut herself into eighteen
+pieces.&rdquo; &ldquo;She would have been dead before that.&rdquo; &ldquo;She might have
+cut two or three pieces off, but she couldn&#8217;t do the rest.&rdquo;
+(Laughing) &ldquo;Well, she may have killed herself; but if she did
+it&#8217;s a sure thing that some one else came along after and
+chopped her up.&rdquo; &ldquo;That policeman must have been a fool.
+(Explain.) To think that she could chop herself into eighteen
+pieces.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;<em>Think</em> that she killed herself; they <em>know</em>
+she did.&rdquo; &ldquo;They can&#8217;t be sure. Some one may have killed her.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;It was a foolish girl to kill herself.&rdquo; &ldquo;How can they tell who
+killed her?&rdquo; &ldquo;No girl would kill herself unless she was crazy.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;It ought to read: &lsquo;They think that she committed suicide.&rsquo;&rdquo;</p>
+
+
+<h4>(d) The railroad accident</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;That was very serious.&rdquo; &ldquo;I should like to know
+what you would call a serious accident!&rdquo; &ldquo;You could say it was
+not serious if two or three people were killed, but
+forty-eight,&mdash;that is serious.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;It was a foolish mistake that made the
+accident.&rdquo; &ldquo;They couldn&#8217;t help it. It was an accident.&rdquo; &ldquo;It
+might have been worse.&rdquo; &ldquo;Nothing foolish; it&#8217;s just sad.&rdquo;</p>
+
+
+<h4>(e) The bicycle rider</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;How could he get well after he was already
+killed?&rdquo; &ldquo;Why, he&#8217;s already dead.&rdquo; &ldquo;No use to take a dead man to
+the hospital.&rdquo; &ldquo;They ought to have taken him to a grave-yard!&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Foolish to fall off of a bicycle. He should
+have known how to ride.&rdquo; &ldquo;They ought to have carried him home.<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;258">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_258" id="Page_258"></a>
+(Why?) So his folks could get a doctor.&rdquo; &ldquo;He should have been
+more careful.&rdquo; &ldquo;Maybe they can cure him if he isn&#8217;t hurt very
+bad.&rdquo; &ldquo;There&#8217;s nothing foolish in that.&rdquo;</p></blockquote>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The detection of absurdities is one of the most ingenious and
+serviceable tests of the entire scale. It is little influenced by
+schooling, and it comes nearer than any other to being a test of that
+species of mother-wit which we call common sense. Like the
+&ldquo;comprehension questions,&rdquo; it may be called a test of judgment, using
+this term in the colloquial and not in the logical sense. The stupid
+person, whether depicted in literature, proverb, or the ephemeral joke
+column, is always (and justly, it would seem) characterized by a huge
+tolerance for absurd contradictions and by a blunt sensitivity for the
+fine points of a joke. Intellectual discrimination and judgment are
+inferior. The ideas do not cross-light each other, but remain relatively
+isolated. Hence, the most absurd contradictions are swallowed, so to
+speak, without arousing the protest of the critical faculty. The latter,
+indeed, is only a name for the tendency of intellectually irreconcilable
+elements to clash. If there is no clash, if the elements remain apart,
+it goes without saying that there will be no power of criticism.</p>
+
+<p>The critical faculty begins its development in the early years and
+strengthens <i>pari passu</i> with the growing wealth of inter-associations
+among ideas; but in the average child it is not until the age of about
+10&nbsp;years that it becomes equal to tasks like those presented in this
+test. Eight-year intelligence hardly ever scores more than two or three
+correct answers out of five. By 12, the critical ability has so far
+developed that the test is nearly always passed. It is an invaluable
+test for the higher grades of mental deficiency.</p>
+
+<p>As a test of the critical powers Binet first used &ldquo;trap questions&rdquo;; as,
+for example, &ldquo;Is snow red or black?&rdquo; <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;259">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_259" id="Page_259"></a>The results were disappointing, for
+it was found that owing to timidity, deference, and suggestibility
+normal children often failed on such questions. Deference is more marked
+in normal than in feeble-minded children, and it is because of the
+influence of this trait that it is necessary always to forewarn the
+subject that the sentence to be given contains nonsense.</p>
+
+<p>Binet located the test in year&nbsp;XI of the 1908 scale, but changed it to
+year&nbsp;X in 1911. Goddard and Kuhlmann retain it in year&nbsp;XI. The large
+majority of the statistics, including those of Goddard and Kuhlmann,
+warrant the location of the test in year&nbsp;X. Not all have used the same
+absurdities, and these have not been worded uniformly. Most have
+required three successes out of five, but Bobertag and Kuhlmann require
+three out of four; Bobertag&#8217;s procedure is also different in that he
+does not forewarn the child that an absurdity is to follow.</p>
+
+<p>The present form of the test is the result of three successive
+refinements. It will be noted that we have made two substitutions in
+Binet&#8217;s list of absurdities. Those omitted from the original scale are:
+&ldquo;<i>I have three brothers&mdash;Paul, Ernest, and myself</i>,&rdquo; and, &ldquo;<i>If I were
+going to commit suicide I would not choose Friday, because Friday is an
+unlucky day and would bring me misfortune.</i>&rdquo; The last has a puzzling
+feature which makes it much too hard for year&nbsp;X, and the other is
+objectionable with children who are accustomed to hear a foreign
+language in which the form of expression used in the absurdity is
+idiomatically correct.</p>
+
+<p>The two we have substituted for these objectionable absurdities are,
+&ldquo;The road downhill&rdquo; and &ldquo;What the engineer said.&rdquo; The five we have
+used, though of nearly equal difficulty, are here listed in the order
+from easiest to hardest. Our series as a whole is slightly easier than
+Binet&#8217;s.</p>
+
+
+<h3><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;260">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_260" id="Page_260"></a><a name="X_3" id="X_3"></a>X,&nbsp;3. Drawing designs from memory</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Use the designs shown on the accompanying printed form. If
+copies are used they must be exact in size and shape. Before showing the
+card say: &ldquo;<i>This card has two drawings on it. I am going to show them to
+you for ten seconds, then I will take the card away and let you draw
+from memory what you have seen. Examine both drawings carefully and
+remember that you have only ten seconds.</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Provide pencil and paper and then show the card for ten seconds, holding
+it at right angles to the child&#8217;s line of vision and with the designs in
+the position given in the plate. Have the child draw the designs
+immediately after they are removed from sight.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if <em>one of the designs is reproduced
+correctly and the other about half correctly</em>. &ldquo;Correctly&rdquo; means that
+the <em>essential plan</em> of the design has been grasped and reproduced.
+Ordinary irregularities due to lack of motor skill or to hasty execution
+are disregarded. &ldquo;Half correctly&rdquo; means that some essential part of the
+design has been omitted or misplaced, or that parts have been added.</p>
+
+<p>The sample reproductions shown on the scoring card will serve as a
+guide. It will be noted that an inverted design, or one whose right and
+left sides have been transposed, is counted only half correct, however
+perfect it many be in other respects; also that design <i>b</i> is counted
+only half correct if the inner rectangle is not located off center.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Binet states that the main factors involved in success are
+&ldquo;attention, visual memory, and a little analysis.&rdquo; The power of rapid
+analysis would seem to be the most important, for if the designs are
+analyzed they may be reproduced from a verbal memory of the analysis.
+Without some analysis it would hardly be possible to remember<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;261">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_261" id="Page_261"></a> the
+designs at all, as one of them contains thirteen lines and the other
+twelve. The memory span for unrelated objects is far too limited to
+permit us to grasp and retain that number of unrelated impressions.
+Success is possible only by grouping the lines according to their
+relationships, so that several of them are given a unitary value and
+remembered as one. In this manner, the design to the right, which is
+composed of twelve lines, may be reduced to four elements: (1) The outer
+rectangle; (2) the inner rectangle; (3) the off-center position of the
+inner rectangle; and (4) the joining of the angles. Of course the child
+does not ordinarily make an analysis as explicit as this; but analysis
+of some kind, even though it be unconscious, is necessary to success.</p>
+
+<p>Ability to pass the test indicates the presence, in a certain definite
+amount, of the tendency for the contents of consciousness to fuse into a
+meaningful whole. Failure indicates that the elements have maintained
+their unitary character or have fused inadequately. It is seen,
+therefore, that the test has a close kinship with the test of memory for
+sentences. The latter, also, permits the fusion or grouping of
+impressions according to meaning, with the result that five or six times
+as many meaningful syllables as nonsense syllables or digits can be
+retained.</p>
+
+<p>Binet had many more failures on design <i>a</i> than on design <i>b</i>. This was
+probably due to the fact that he showed the designs with our <i>b</i> to the
+left. A majority of subjects, probably because of the influence of
+reading habits, examine first the figure to the left, and because of the
+short time allowed for the inspection are unable to devote much time to
+the design at the right. We have placed the design of greater intrinsic
+difficulty at the left, with the result that the failures are almost
+equally divided between the two.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;262">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_262" id="Page_262"></a>Binet used this test in his unstandardized series of 1905, omitted it in
+1908, but included it in the 1911 revision, locating it in year&nbsp;X.
+Except for Goddard, who recommends year&nbsp;XI, there is rather general
+agreement that the test belongs at year&nbsp;X. Our own data show that it may
+be placed either at year&nbsp;X or year&nbsp;XI, according as the grading is rigid
+or lenient.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="X_4" id="X_4"></a>X,&nbsp;4. Reading for eight memories</h3>
+
+<p><b>Material.</b> We use Binet&#8217;s selection, slightly adapted, as follows:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>New York, September 5th. A fire last night burned three houses
+near the center of the city. It took some time to put it out.
+The loss was fifty thousand dollars, and seventeen families lost
+their homes. In saving a girl, who was asleep in a bed, a
+fireman was burned on the hands.</i></p></blockquote>
+
+<p>The copy of the selection used by the subject should be printed in heavy
+type and should not contain the bars dividing it into memories. The
+Stanford record booklet contains the selection in two forms, one
+suitable for use in scoring, the other in heavy type to be read by the
+subject.</p>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Hand the selection to the subject, who should be seated
+comfortably in a good light, and say: &ldquo;<i>I want you to read this for me
+as nicely as you can.</i>&rdquo; The subject must read aloud.</p>
+
+<p>Pronounce all the words which the subject is unable to make out, not
+allowing more than five seconds&#8217; hesitation in such a case.</p>
+
+<p>Record all errors made in reading the selection, and the exact time. By
+&ldquo;error&rdquo; is meant the omission, substitution, transposition, or
+mispronunciation of one word.</p>
+
+<p>The subject is not warned in advance that he will be asked to report
+what he has read, but as soon as he has<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;263">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_263" id="Page_263"></a> finished reading, put the
+selection out of sight and say: &ldquo;<i>Very well done. Now, I want you to
+tell me what you read. Begin at the first and tell everything you can
+remember.</i>&rdquo; After the subject has repeated everything he can recall and
+has stopped, say: &ldquo;<i>And what else? Can you remember any more of it?</i>&rdquo;
+Give no other aid of any kind. It is of course not permissible, when the
+child stops, to prompt him with such questions as, &ldquo;<i>And what next?
+Where were the houses burned? What happened to the fireman?</i>&rdquo; etc. The
+report must be spontaneous.</p>
+
+<p>Now and then, though not often, a subject hesitates or even refuses to
+try, saying he is unable to do it. Perhaps he has misunderstood the
+request and thinks he is expected to repeat the selection word for word,
+as in the <a href="#III_6">tests of memory</a> <a href="#VI_6">for sentences</a>. We urge a little and repeat:
+&ldquo;<i>Tell me in your own words all you can remember of it.</i>&rdquo; Others
+misunderstand in a different way, and thinking they are expected to tell
+merely what the story is about, they say: &ldquo;It was about some houses that
+burned.&rdquo; In such cases we repeat the instructions with special emphasis
+on the words <em>all you can remember</em>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed <em>if the selection is read in thirty-five
+seconds with not more than two errors, and if the report contains at
+least eight &ldquo;memories.&rdquo;</em> By underscoring the memories correctly
+reproduced, and by interlineations to show serious departures from the
+text, the record can be made complete with a minimum of trouble.</p>
+
+<p>The main difficulty in scoring is to decide whether a memory has been
+reproduced correctly enough to be counted. Absolutely literal
+reproduction is not expected. The rule is to count all memories whose
+thought is reproduced with only minor changes in the wording. &ldquo;It took
+quite a while&rdquo; instead of &ldquo;it took some time&rdquo; is satisfactory; likewise,
+&ldquo;got burnt&rdquo; for &ldquo;was burned&rdquo;; <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;264">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_264" id="Page_264"></a>&ldquo;who was sleeping&rdquo; for &ldquo;who was asleep&rdquo;;
+&ldquo;are homeless&rdquo; for &ldquo;lost their homes&rdquo;; &ldquo;in the middle&rdquo; for &ldquo;near the
+center&rdquo;; &ldquo;a big fire&rdquo; for &ldquo;a fire,&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+<p>Memories as badly mutilated as the following, however, are not counted:
+&ldquo;A lot of buildings&rdquo; for &ldquo;three houses;&rdquo; &ldquo;a man&rdquo; for &ldquo;a fireman&rdquo;; &ldquo;who
+was sick&rdquo; for &ldquo;who was asleep&rdquo;; etc. Occasionally we may give half
+credit, as in the case of &ldquo;was seventeen thousand dollars&rdquo; for &ldquo;was
+fifty thousand dollars&rdquo;; &ldquo;and fifteen families&rdquo; for &ldquo;and seventeen
+families,&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Are we warranted in using at all as a measure of intelligence a
+test which depends as much on instruction as this one does? Many are
+inclined to answer this question in the negative. The test has been
+omitted from the revisions of Goddard, Kuhlmann, and Binet himself. As
+regards Binet&#8217;s earlier test of reading for two memories, in year&nbsp;VIII,
+there could hardly be any difference of opinion. The ability to read at
+that age depends so much on the accident of environment that the test is
+meaningless unless we know all about the conditions which have
+surrounded the child.</p>
+
+<p>The use of the test in year&nbsp;X, however, is a very different matter.
+There are comparatively few children of that age who will fail to pass
+it for lack of the requisite school instruction. Children of 10&nbsp;years
+who have attended school with reasonable regularity for three years are
+practically always able to read the selection in thirty-five seconds and
+without over two mistakes unless they are retarded almost to the
+border-line of mental deficiency. Of our 10-year-olds who failed to meet
+the test, only a fourth did so because of inability to meet the reading
+requirements as regards time or mistakes. The remaining failures were
+caused by inadequate report, and most of these subjects were of the
+distinctly retarded group.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;265">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_265" id="Page_265"></a>We may conclude, therefore, that given anything approaching normal
+educational advantages, the test is really a measure of intelligence.
+Used with due caution, it is perhaps as valuable as any other test in
+the scale. It is only necessary, in case of failure, to ascertain the
+facts regarding the child&#8217;s educational opportunities. Even this
+precaution is superfluous in case the subject tests as low as 8&nbsp;years by
+the remainder of the scale. A safe rule is to omit the test from the
+calculation of mental age if the subject has not attended school the
+equivalent of two or three years.</p>
+
+<p>It has been contended by some that tests in which success depends upon
+language mastery cannot be real tests of intelligence. By such critics
+language tests have been set over against intelligence tests as
+contrasting opposites. It is easy to show, however, that this view is
+superficial and psychologically unsound. Every one who has an
+acquaintance with the facts of mental growth knows that language mastery
+of some degree is the <i>sine qua non</i> of conceptual thinking. Language
+growth, in fact, mirrors the entire mental development. There are few
+more reliable indications of a subject&#8217;s stage of intellectual maturity
+than his mastery of language.</p>
+
+<p>The rate of reading, for example, is a measure of the rate of
+association. Letters become associated together in certain combinations
+making words, words into word groups and sentences. Recognition is for
+the most part an associative process. Rapid and accurate association
+will mean ready recognition of the printed form. Since language units
+(whether letters, words, or word groups) have more or less preferred
+associations according to their habitual arrangement into larger units,
+it comes about that in the normal mind under normal conditions these
+preferred sequences arouse the apperceptive complex necessary to make a
+running <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;266">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_266" id="Page_266"></a>recognition rapid and easy. It is reasonable to suppose that in
+the subnormal mind the habitual common associations are less firmly
+fixed, thus diminishing the effectiveness of the ever-changing
+apperceptive expectancy. Reading is, therefore, largely dependent on
+what James calls the &ldquo;fringe of consciousness&rdquo; and the &ldquo;consciousness of
+meaning.&rdquo; In reading connected matter, every unit is big with a mass of
+tendencies. The smaller and more isolated the unit, the greater is the
+number of possibilities. Every added unit acts as a modifier limiting
+the number of tendencies, until we have finally, in case of a large
+mental unit, a fairly manageable whole. When the most logical and
+suitable of these associations arise easily from subconsciousness to
+consciousness, recognition is made easy, and their doing so will depend
+on whether the habitual relations of the elements have left permanent
+traces in the mind.</p>
+
+<p>The reading of the subnormal subject bears a close analogy to the
+reading of nonsense matter by the normal person. It has been ascertained
+by experiment that such reading requires about twice as much time as the
+reading of connected matter. This is true for the reason that out of
+thousands of associations possible with each word, no particular
+association is favored. The apperceptive expectancy, practically <i>nil</i>
+in the reading of nonsense material, must be decidedly deficient in all
+poor reading.</p>
+
+<p>Furthermore, in the case of the ordinary reader there is a feeling of
+rightness or wrongness about the thought sequences. That less
+intelligent subjects have this sense of fitness to a much less degree is
+evidenced by their passing over words so mutilated in pronunciation as
+to deprive them of all meaning. The transposition of letters and words,
+and the failure to observe marks of punctuation, point to the same
+thing. In other words, all the reading of the<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;267">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_267" id="Page_267"></a> stupid subject is with
+material which to him is more or less nonsensical.<a name="FNanchor_66_66" id="FNanchor_66_66"></a><a href="#Footnote_66_66" class="fnanchor">[66]</a></p>
+
+<p>A little observation will convince one that mentally retarded subjects,
+even when they possess a reasonable degree of fluency in recognizing
+printed words, do not sense shades of meaning. Their reading is by small
+units. Words and phrases do not fuse into one mental content, but remain
+relatively unconnected. The expression is monotonous and the voice has
+more of the unnatural &ldquo;schoolroom&rdquo; pitch. They read more slowly, more
+often misplace the emphasis, and miscall more words. In short, one who
+has psychological insight and is acquainted with reading standards can
+easily detect the symptoms of intellectual inferiority by hearing a dull
+subject read a brief selection.</p>
+
+<p>The giving of memories is also significant. Feeble-minded adults who
+have been well schooled are sometimes able to read the words of the text
+fairly fluently, but are usually unable to give more than a scanty
+report of what has been read. The scope of attention has been exhausted
+in the mere recognition and pronouncing of words. In general, the
+greater the mechanical difficulties which a subject encounters, the less
+adequate is his report of memories.</p>
+
+<p>The test has, however, one real fault. School children have a certain
+advantage in it over older persons <em>of the same mental age</em> whose school
+experience is less recent. Adult subjects tend to give their report in
+less literal form. It is necessary, therefore, to give credit for the
+reproduction of the ideas of the passage rather than for strictly
+literal &ldquo;memories.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>The selection we have used is, with minor changes, the same as Binet&#8217;s.
+His selection was divided into nineteen memories. The one here given has
+twenty-one memories. <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;268">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_268" id="Page_268"></a>Binet used the test both in year&nbsp;VIII and year&nbsp;IX,
+requiring two memories at year&nbsp;VIII and six memories at year&nbsp;IX. When we
+require eight memories, as we have done, the test becomes difficult
+enough for non-selected school children of 10&nbsp;years. Location in year&nbsp;X
+seems preferable, because it insures that the child will almost
+certainly have had the schooling requisite for learning to read a
+selection of this difficulty, even if he has started to school at a
+later age than is customary. Naturally, placing the test higher in the
+scale makes it more a test of report and less a test of ability to
+recognize and pronounce printed words.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="X_5" id="X_5"></a>X,&nbsp;5. Comprehension, fourth degree</h3>
+
+<p>The questions for this year are:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol class="alph smaller">
+<li>&ldquo;What ought you to say when some one asks your opinion about a person you don&#8217;t know very well?&rdquo;</li>
+<li>&ldquo;What ought you to do before undertaking (beginning) something very important?&rdquo;</li>
+<li>&ldquo;Why should we judge a person more by his actions than by his words?&rdquo;</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>The <b>procedure</b> is the same as for the previous comprehension tests. Each
+question may be repeated, but its form must not be changed. It is not
+permissible to make any explanation whatever as to the meaning of the
+question, except to substitute <em>beginning</em> for <em>undertaking</em> when (<i>b</i>)
+seems not to be comprehended.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> <em>Two out of the three</em> questions must be answered
+satisfactorily. Study of the following classified responses should make
+scoring fairly easy in most cases:&mdash;</p>
+
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><h4>(a) When some one asks your opinion</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;I would say I don&#8217;t know him very well&rdquo;
+(42&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the correct answers). &ldquo;Tell him what I know and
+no more&rdquo; (34&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of correct answers). &ldquo;I would say that I&#8217;d<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;269">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_269" id="Page_269"></a>
+rather not express any opinion about him&rdquo; (20&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the
+correct answers). &ldquo;Tell him to ask some one else.&rdquo; &ldquo;I would not
+express any opinion.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> Unsatisfactory responses are due either to
+failure to grasp the import of the question, or to inability to
+suggest the appropriate action demanded by the situation.</p>
+
+<p>The latter form of failure is the more common; e.g.: &ldquo;I&#8217;d say
+they are nice.&rdquo; &ldquo;Say you like them.&rdquo; &ldquo;Say what I think.&rdquo; &ldquo;Say
+it&#8217;s none of their business.&rdquo; &ldquo;Tell them I mind my own
+business.&rdquo; &ldquo;Say I would get acquainted with them.&rdquo; &ldquo;Say that I
+don&#8217;t talk about people.&rdquo; &ldquo;Say I didn&#8217;t know how he looked.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Tell them you ought not to say such things; you might get into
+trouble.&rdquo; &ldquo;I wouldn&#8217;t say anything.&rdquo; &ldquo;I would try to answer.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Say I did not know his name,&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+<p>The following are samples of failure due to mistaking the import
+of the question: &ldquo;I&#8217;d say, &lsquo;How do you do?&rsquo;&rdquo; &ldquo;Say,&lsquo;I&#8217;m glad to
+meet you.&rsquo;&rdquo;</p>
+
+
+<h4>(b) Before undertaking something important</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory responses</i> fall into the following classes:&mdash;</p>
+<ol>
+<li>Brief statement of preliminary consideration; as: &ldquo;Think
+about it.&rdquo; &ldquo;Look it over.&rdquo; &ldquo;Plan it all out.&rdquo; &ldquo;Make your plans.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Stop and think,&rdquo; etc.</li>
+
+<li>Special emphasis on preliminary preparation and correct
+procedure; as: &ldquo;Find out the best way to do it.&rdquo; &ldquo;Find out what
+it is.&rdquo; &ldquo;Get everything ready.&rdquo; &ldquo;Do every little thing that
+would help you.&rdquo; &ldquo;Get all the details you can.&rdquo; &ldquo;Take your time
+and figure it out,&rdquo; etc.</li>
+
+<li>Asking help; as: &ldquo;Ask some one to help you who knows all
+about it.&rdquo; &ldquo;Pray, if you are a Christian.&rdquo; &ldquo;Ask advice,&rdquo; etc.</li>
+
+<li>Preliminary testing of ability, self-analysis, etc.; as:
+&ldquo;Try something easier first.&rdquo; &ldquo;Practice and make sure I could do
+it.&rdquo; &ldquo;Learn how to do it,&rdquo; etc.</li>
+
+<li>Consider the wisdom or propriety of doing it: &ldquo;Think whether
+it would be best to do it.&rdquo; &ldquo;See whether it would be possible.&rdquo;</li>
+</ol>
+<p>About 65&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the correct responses belong either to
+group (1) or (2), about 20&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent to group (3), and most of
+the remainder to group (4).</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;270">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_270" id="Page_270"></a><i>Unsatisfactory responses</i> are of the following types:&mdash;</p>
+<ol>
+<li>Due to mistaking the import of the question; e.g.: &ldquo;Ask for
+it.&rdquo; &ldquo;Ought to say please.&rdquo; &ldquo;Ask whose it is.&rdquo; Replies of this
+kind can be nearly all eliminated by repeating the question,
+using <em>beginning</em> instead of <em>undertaking</em>.</li>
+
+<li>Replies more or less absurd or irrelevant; as: &ldquo;Promise to
+do your best.&rdquo; &ldquo;Wash your face and hands.&rdquo; &ldquo;Get a lot of
+insurance.&rdquo; &ldquo;Dress up and take a walk.&rdquo; &ldquo;Tell your name.&rdquo; &ldquo;Know
+whether it&#8217;s correct.&rdquo; &ldquo;Begin at the beginning.&rdquo; &ldquo;Say you will
+do it.&rdquo; &ldquo;See if it&#8217;s a fake.&rdquo; &ldquo;Go to school a long time.&rdquo; &ldquo;Pass
+an examination.&rdquo; &ldquo;Do what is right.&rdquo; &ldquo;Add up and see how much it
+will cost.&rdquo; &ldquo;Say I would do it.&rdquo; &ldquo;Just start doing it.&rdquo; &ldquo;Go
+away.&rdquo; &ldquo;Consult a doctor.&rdquo; &ldquo;See if you have time,&rdquo; etc.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<h4>(c) Why we should judge a person more by his actions than by
+his words</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory responses</i> fall into the following classes:&mdash;</p>
+<ol>
+<li>Words and deeds both mentioned and contrasted in
+reliability; as: &ldquo;Actions speak louder than words&rdquo; (this in
+8&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of successes). &ldquo;You can tell more by his actions than
+by his words.&rdquo; &ldquo;He might talk nice and do bad things.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Sometimes people say things and don&#8217;t do them.&rdquo; &ldquo;It&#8217;s not what
+you say but what you do that counts.&rdquo; &ldquo;Talk is cheap; when he
+does a thing you can believe it.&rdquo; &ldquo;People don&#8217;t do everything
+they say.&rdquo; &ldquo;A man might steal but talk like a nice man.&rdquo; Over
+45&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of all correct responses belong to group (1).</li>
+
+<li>Acts stressed without mention of words; as: &ldquo;You can tell by
+his actions whether he is good or not.&rdquo; &ldquo;If he <em>acts</em> nice he
+<em>is</em> nice.&rdquo; &ldquo;Actions show for themselves.&rdquo; Group (2) contains
+about 25&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the correct responses.</li>
+
+<li>Emphasis on unreliability of words; as: &ldquo;You can&#8217;t tell by
+his words, he might lie or boast.&rdquo; &ldquo;Because you can&#8217;t always
+believe what people say.&rdquo; (Group (3) contains 15&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the
+correct responses.)</li>
+
+<li>Responses which state that a man&#8217;s deeds are sometimes
+better than his words; as: &ldquo;He might talk ugly and still not do
+bad things.&rdquo; &ldquo;Some really kind-hearted people scold and swear.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;A man&#8217;s words may be worse than his deeds,&rdquo; <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;271">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_271" id="Page_271"></a>etc.
+Group (4) contains over 10&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the correct responses.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory responses</i> are usually due to inability to
+comprehend the meaning of the question. If there is a complete
+lack of comprehension the result is either silence or a totally
+irrelevant response. If there is partial comprehension of the
+question the response may be partially relevant, but fail to
+make the expected distinction.</p>
+
+<p>The following are sample failures: &ldquo;You could tell by his words
+that he was educated.&rdquo; &ldquo;It shows he is polite if he acts nice.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Sometimes people aren&#8217;t polite.&rdquo; &ldquo;Actions show who he might
+be.&rdquo; &ldquo;Acts may be foolish.&rdquo; &ldquo;Words ain&#8217;t right.&rdquo; &ldquo;A man might be
+dumb.&rdquo; &ldquo;A fellow don&#8217;t know what he says.&rdquo; &ldquo;Some people can
+talk, but don&#8217;t have control of themselves.&rdquo; &ldquo;You can tell by
+his acts whether he goes with bad people.&rdquo; &ldquo;If he doesn&#8217;t act
+right you know he won&#8217;t talk right.&rdquo; &ldquo;Actions show if he has
+manners.&rdquo; &ldquo;Might get embarrassed and not talk good.&rdquo; &ldquo;He may not
+know how to express his thoughts.&rdquo; &ldquo;He might be a rich man but a
+poor talker.&rdquo; &ldquo;He might say the wrong thing and afterwards be
+sorry for it,&rdquo; etc. (The last four are nearer correct than the
+others, but they fall just short of expressing the essential
+contrast.)</p></blockquote>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> For discussion of the comprehension questions as a test of
+intelligence, see page&nbsp;<a href="#Page_158">158</a>.</p>
+
+<p>Binet used eight questions, three &ldquo;easy&rdquo; and five &ldquo;difficult,&rdquo; and
+required that five out of eight be answered correctly in year&nbsp;X. The
+eight were as follows:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol class="smaller">
+<li>What to do when you have missed your train.</li>
+<li>When you have been struck by a playmate, etc.</li>
+<li>When you have broken something, etc.</li>
+<li>When about to be late for school.</li>
+<li>When about to undertake something important.</li>
+<li>Why excuse a bad act committed in anger more readily than a bad act committed without anger.</li>
+<li>What to do if some one asks your opinion, etc.</li>
+<li>Why can you judge a person better by his actions, etc.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>As we have shown, questions 1, 2, 3, and 4 are much too easy for year&nbsp;X.
+Question&nbsp;6 is hard enough for year&nbsp;XII. <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;272">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_272" id="Page_272"></a>We have omitted it because it was not needed and is not entirely satisfactory.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="X_6" id="X_6"></a>X,&nbsp;6. Naming sixty words</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Say: &ldquo;<i>Now, I want to see how many different words you can
+name in three minutes. When I say ready, you must begin and name the
+words as fast as you can, and I will count them. Do you understand? Be
+sure to do your very best, and remember that just any words will do,
+like &lsquo;clouds,&rsquo; &lsquo;dog,&rsquo; &lsquo;chair,&rsquo; &lsquo;happy&rsquo;&mdash;Ready; go ahead!</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>The instructions may be repeated if the subject does not understand what
+is wanted. As a rule the task is comprehended instantly and entered into
+with great zest.</p>
+
+<p>Do not stare at the child, and do not say anything as the test proceeds
+unless there is a pause of fifteen seconds. In this event say: &ldquo;<i>Go
+ahead, as fast as you can. Any words will do.</i>&rdquo; Repeat this urging after
+every pause of fifteen seconds.</p>
+
+<p>Some subjects, usually rather intelligent ones, hit upon the device of
+counting or putting words together in sentences. We then break in with:
+&ldquo;<i>Counting</i> (or <i>sentences</i>, as the case may be) <i>not allowed. You must
+name separate words. Go ahead.</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Record the individual words if possible, and mark the end of each
+half-minute. If the words are named so rapidly that they cannot be taken
+down, it is easy to keep the count by making a pencil stroke for each
+word. If the latter method is employed, repeated words may be indicated
+by making a cross instead of a single stroke. Always make record of
+repetitions.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if <em>sixty</em> words, exclusive of repetitions,
+are named in three minutes. It is not allowable to accept twenty words
+in one minute or forty words<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;273">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_273" id="Page_273"></a> in two minutes as an equivalent of the
+expected score. Only real words are counted.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Scoring, as we have seen, takes account only of the number of
+words. It is instructive, however, to note the kind of words given. Some
+subjects, more often those of the 8- or 9-year intelligence level, give
+mainly isolated, detached words. As well stated by Binet, &ldquo;Little
+children exhaust an idea in naming it. They say, for example, <i>hat</i>, and
+then pass on to another word without noticing that hats differ in color,
+in form, have various parts, different uses and accessories, and that in
+enumerating all these they could find a large number of words.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Others quickly take advantage of such relationships and name many parts
+of an object before leaving it, or name a number of other objects
+belonging to the same class. <i>Hat</i>, for example, suggests <i>cap</i>, <i>hood</i>,
+<i>coat</i>, <i>shirt</i>, <i>shoes</i>, <i>stockings</i>, etc. <i>Pencil</i> suggests <i>book</i>,
+<i>slate</i>, <i>paper</i>, <i>desk</i>, <i>ink</i>, <i>map</i>, <i>school-yard</i>, <i>teacher</i>, etc.
+Responses of this type may be made up of ten or a dozen plainly distinct
+word groups.</p>
+
+<p>Another type of response consists in naming only objects present, or
+words which present objects immediately suggest. It is unfortunate that
+this occurs, since rooms in which testing is done vary so much with
+respect to furnishings. The subject who chooses this method is obviously
+handicapped if the room is relatively bare. One way to avoid this
+influence is to have all subjects name the words with eyes closed, but
+the distraction thus caused is sometimes rather disturbing. It is
+perhaps best for the present to adhere to the original procedure, and to
+follow the rule of making tests in a room containing few furnishings in
+addition to the necessary table and chairs.</p>
+
+<p>A fourth type of response is that including a large proportion of
+unusual or abstract words. This is the best of<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;274">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_274" id="Page_274"></a> all, and is hardly ever
+found except with subjects who are above the 11-year intelligence level.</p>
+
+<p>It goes without saying that a response need not belong entirely to any
+one of the above types. Most responses, in fact, are characterized by a
+mixture of two or three of the types, one of them perhaps being
+dominant.</p>
+
+<p>Though not without its shortcomings, the test is interesting and
+valuable. Success in it does not, as one might suppose, depend solely
+upon the size of the vocabulary. Even 8-year-olds ordinarily know the
+meaning of more than 3000&nbsp;words, and by 10&nbsp;years the vocabulary usually
+exceeds 5000 words, or eighty times as many as the child is expected to
+name in three minutes. The main factors in success are two, (1) richness
+and variety of previously made associations with common words; and (2)
+the readiness of these associations to reinstate themselves. The young
+or the retarded subject fishes in the ocean of his vocabulary with a
+single hook, so to speak. He brings up each time only one word. The
+subject endowed with superior intelligence employs a net (the idea of a
+class, for example) and brings up a half-dozen words or more. The latter
+accomplishes a greater amount and with less effort; but it requires
+intelligence and will power to avoid wasting time with detached words.</p>
+
+<p>One is again and again astonished at the poverty of associations which
+this test discloses with retarded subjects. For twenty or thirty seconds
+such children may be unable to think of a single word. It would be
+interesting if at such periods we could get a glimpse into the subject&#8217;s
+consciousness. There must be some kind of mental content, but it seems
+too vague to be crystallized in words. The ready association of thoughts
+with definite words connotes a relatively high degree of intellectual
+advancement. Language forms are the short-hand of thought; without
+facile command of <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;275">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_275" id="Page_275"></a>language, thinking is vague, clumsy, and ineffective.
+Conversely, vague mental content entails language shortage.</p>
+
+<p>Occasionally a child of 11- or 12-year intelligence will make a poor
+showing in this test. When this happens it is usually due either to
+excessive embarrassment or to a strange persistence in running down all
+the words of a given class before launching out upon a new series.
+Occasionally, too, an intelligent subject wastes time in thinking up a
+beautiful list of big or unusual words. As stated by Bobertag, success
+is favored by a certain amount of &ldquo;intellectual nonchalance,&rdquo; a
+willingness to ignore sense and a readiness to break away from a train
+of associations as soon as the &ldquo;point of diminishing returns&rdquo; has been
+reached. This doubtless explains why adults sometimes make such a
+surprisingly poor showing in the test. They have less &ldquo;intellectual
+nonchalance&rdquo; than children, are less willing to subordinate such
+considerations as completeness and logical connection to the demands of
+speed. Knollin&#8217;s unemployed men of 12- to 13-year intelligence succeeded
+no better than school children of the 10-year level.</p>
+
+<p>We do not believe, however, that this fault is serious enough to warrant
+the elimination of the test. The fact is that in a large majority of
+cases the score which it yields agrees fairly closely with the result of
+the scale as a whole. Subjects more than a year or two below the mental
+age of 10&nbsp;years seldom succeed. Those more than a year or two above the
+10-year level seldom fail.</p>
+
+<p>There is another reason why the test should be retained, it often has
+significance beyond that which appears in the mere number of words
+given. The naming of unusual and abstract words is an instance of this.
+An unusually large number of repetitions has symptomatic significance
+in the other direction. It indicates a tendency to mental <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;276">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_276" id="Page_276"></a>stereotypy, so
+frequently encountered in testing the feeble-minded. The proportion of
+repetitions made by normal children of the 10- or 11-year intelligence
+level rarely exceeds 2&nbsp;or&nbsp;3&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the total number of words named;
+those of older retarded children of the same level occasionally reach
+6&nbsp;or&nbsp;8&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent.</p>
+
+<p>It is conceivable, of course, that a more satisfactory test of this
+general nature could be devised; such, for example, as having the
+subject name all the words he can of a given class (four-footed animals,
+things to eat, articles of household furniture, trees, birds, etc.). The
+main objection to this form of the test is that the performance would in
+all probability be more influenced by environment and formal instruction
+than is the case with the test of naming sixty words.</p>
+
+<p>One other matter remains to be mentioned; namely, the relative number of
+words named in the half-minute periods. As would be expected, the rate
+of naming words decreases as the test proceeds. In the case of the
+10-year-olds, we find the average number of words for the six successive
+half-minutes to be as follows:&mdash;</p>
+
+<p class="center" style="word-spacing:0.5em;">
+18, 12&frac12;, 10&frac12;, 9, 8&frac12;, 7.
+</p>
+
+<p>Some subjects maintain an almost constant rate throughout the test,
+others rapidly exhaust themselves, while a very few make a bad beginning
+and improve as they go. As a rule it is only the very intelligent who
+improve after the first half-minute. On the other hand, mentally
+retarded subjects and very young normals exhaust themselves so quickly
+that only a few words are named in the last minute.</p>
+
+<p>Binet first located this test in year&nbsp;XI, but shifted it to year&nbsp;XII in
+1911. Goddard and Kuhlmann retain it in year&nbsp;XI, though Goddard&#8217;s
+statistics suggest year&nbsp;X as the <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;277">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_277" id="Page_277"></a>proper location, and Kuhlmann&#8217;s even
+suggest year&nbsp;IX. Kuhlmann, however, accepts fifty words as satisfactory
+in case the response contains a considerable proportion of abstract or
+unusual words. All the American statistics except Rowe&#8217;s agree in
+showing that the test is easy enough for year&nbsp;X.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="X_alt1" id="X_alt1"></a>X, Alternative test&nbsp;1: repeating six digits</h3>
+
+<p>The digit series used are 3&ndash;7&ndash;4&ndash;8&ndash;5&ndash;9; and 5&ndash;2&ndash;1&ndash;7&ndash;4&ndash;6.</p>
+
+<p>The <b>procedure</b> and <b>scoring</b> are the same as in <a href="#VII_3">VII,&nbsp;3</a>, except that only
+two trials are given, one of which must be correct. The test is somewhat
+too easy for year&nbsp;10 when three trials are given.</p>
+
+<p>The test of repeating six digits did not appear in the Binet scale and
+seems not to have been standardized until inserted in the Stanford
+series.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="X_alt2" id="X_alt2"></a>X, Alternative test&nbsp;2: repeating twenty to twenty-two syllables</h3>
+
+<p>The sentences for this year are:&mdash;</p>
+
+
+<ol class="alph smaller">
+<li>&ldquo;The apple tree makes a cool, pleasant shade on the ground where the children are playing.&rdquo;</li>
+<li>&ldquo;It is nearly half-past one o&#8217;clock; the house is very quiet and the cat has gone to sleep.&rdquo;</li>
+<li>&ldquo;In summer the days are very warm and fine; in winter it snows and I am cold.&rdquo;</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p><b>Procedure</b> and <b>scoring</b> exactly as in <a href="#VI_6">VI,&nbsp;6</a>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> It is interesting to note that five years of mental growth are
+required to pass from the ability to <a href="#VI_6">repeat sixteen or eighteen
+syllables</a> (year&nbsp;VI) to the ability to repeat twenty or twenty-two
+syllables. Similarly in memory for digits. <a href="#VII_3">Five</a> digits are almost as
+easy at year&nbsp;<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;278">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_278" id="Page_278"></a>VII as <a href="#X_alt1">six</a> at year&nbsp;X. Two explanations are available: (1)
+The increased difficulty may be accounted for by a relatively slow
+growth of memory power after the age of 6&nbsp;or&nbsp;7&nbsp;years; or (2) the
+increase in difficulty may be real, expressing an inner law as to the
+behavior of the memory span in dealing with material of increasing
+length. Both factors are probably involved.</p>
+
+<p>This is another of the Stanford additions to the scale. Average children
+of 10&nbsp;years ordinarily pass it, but older, retarded children of 10-year
+mental age make a poorer showing. In the case of mentally retarded
+adults, especially, the verbal memory is less exact than that of school
+children of the same mental age.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="X_alt3" id="X_alt3"></a>X, Alternative test&nbsp;3: construction puzzle A (Healy and Fernald)</h3>
+
+<p><b>Material.</b> Use the form-board pictured on page&nbsp;<a href="#Page_279">279</a>. This may be
+purchased of C.&nbsp;H. Stoelting &amp; Co., Chicago, Illinois. A home-made one
+will do as well if care is taken to get the dimensions exact.
+Quarter-inch wood should be used. The inside of the frame should be
+3&nbsp;&times;&nbsp;4&nbsp;inches, and the dimensions of the blocks should be as follows:
+1<sup>3</sup>&frasl;<sub>16</sub>&nbsp;&times;&nbsp;3; 1&nbsp;&times;&nbsp;1&frac12;; 1&nbsp;&times;&nbsp;2&frac34;; 1&nbsp;&times;&nbsp;1&frac12;; 1&frac14;&nbsp;&times;&nbsp;2.</p>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Place the frame on the table before the subject, the short
+side nearest him. The blocks are placed in an irregular position on the
+side of the frame away from the subject. Take care that the board with
+the blocks in place is not exposed to view in advance of the experiment.</p>
+
+<p>Say: &ldquo;<i>I want you to put these blocks in this frame so that all the
+space will be filled up. If you do it rightly they will all fit in and
+there will be no space left over. Go ahead.</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Do not tell the subject to see how quickly he can do it. Say nothing
+that would even suggest hurrying, for this <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;279">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_279" id="Page_279"></a>tends to call forth the
+trial-and-error procedure even with intelligent subjects.</p>
+
+<div class="figcenter" style="width: 203px;"><a name="rectangle" id="rectangle"></a>
+<img src="images/rectangle.png" width="203" height="266" alt="A double rectangular frame with six (different-sized) rectangles fitted inside." title="" />
+</div>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if the child succeeds in fitting the blocks
+into place <em>three times in a total time of five minutes for the three
+trials</em>.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;280">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_280" id="Page_280"></a>The method of procedure is fully as important as the time, but is not so
+easily scored in quantitative terms. Nevertheless, the examiner should
+always take observations on the method employed, noting especially any
+tendency to make and to repeat moves which lead to obvious
+impossibilities; i.e., moves which leave a space obviously unfitted to
+any of the remaining pieces. Some subjects repeat an absurd move many
+times over; others make an absurd move, but promptly correct it; others,
+and these are usually the bright ones, look far enough ahead to avoid
+error altogether.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> This test was devised by Professor Freeman, was adapted
+slightly by Healy and Fernald, and was first standardized by
+Dr.&nbsp;Kuhlmann. Miss Gertrude Hall has also standardized it, but on a
+different procedure from that described above.<a name="FNanchor_67_67" id="FNanchor_67_67"></a><a href="#Footnote_67_67" class="fnanchor">[67]</a></p>
+
+<p>The test has a lower correlation with intelligence than most of the
+other tests of the scale. Many bright children of 10-year intelligence
+adopt the trial-and-error method and have little success, while retarded
+older children of only 8-year intelligence sometimes succeed. Age, apart
+from intelligence, seems to play an important part in determining the
+nature of the performance. A favorable feature of the test, however, is
+the fact that it makes no demand on language ability and that it brings
+into play an aspect of intelligence which is relatively neglected by the
+remainder of the scale. For this reason it is at least worth keeping as
+an alternative test.</p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_66_66" id="Footnote_66_66"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_66_66">[66]</a></span> See &ldquo;Genius and Stupidity,&rdquo; by Lewis M. Terman, in
+<i>Pedagogical Seminary</i>, September, 1906, p.&nbsp;340&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_67_67" id="Footnote_67_67"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_67_67">[67]</a></span> <i>Eugenics and Social Welfare Bulletin</i>, No.&nbsp;5, The State
+Board of Charities, Albany, New York.</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;281">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_281" id="Page_281"></a><a name="CHAPTER_XVII" id="CHAPTER_XVII"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;XVII
+<br />
+<small>INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR&nbsp;XII</small></h2>
+
+
+<h3><a name="XII_1" id="XII_1"></a>XII,&nbsp;1. Vocabulary (forty definitions, 7200&nbsp;words)</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure</b> and <b>scoring</b> as in previous vocabulary tests.<a name="FNanchor_68_68" id="FNanchor_68_68"></a><a href="#Footnote_68_68" class="fnanchor">[68]</a> In this case
+forty words must be defined.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="XII_2" id="XII_2"></a>XII,&nbsp;2. Defining abstract words</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> The words to be defined are <i>pity</i>, <i>revenge</i>, <i>charity</i>,
+<i>envy</i>, and <i>justice</i>. The formula is, &ldquo;<i>What is pity? What do we mean
+by pity?</i>&rdquo; and so on with the other words. If the meaning of the
+response is not clear, ask the subject to explain what he means. If the
+definition is in terms of the word itself, as &ldquo;Pity means to pity
+someone,&rdquo; &ldquo;Revenge is to take revenge,&rdquo; etc., it is then necessary to
+say: &ldquo;<i>Yes, but what does it mean to pity some one?</i>&rdquo; or, &ldquo;<i>What does it
+mean to take revenge?</i>&rdquo; etc. Only supplementary questions of this kind
+are permissible.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if <em>three of the five</em> words are
+satisfactorily defined. The definition need not be strictly logical nor
+the language elegant. It is sufficient if the definition shows that the
+meaning of the word is known. Definitions which define by means of an
+illustration are acceptable. The following are samples of satisfactory
+and unsatisfactory responses:&mdash;</p>
+
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><h4><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;282">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_282" id="Page_282"></a>(a) Pity</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;To be sorry for some one.&rdquo; &ldquo;To feel
+compassion.&rdquo; &ldquo;To have sympathy for a person.&rdquo; &ldquo;To feel bad for
+some one.&rdquo; &ldquo;It means you help a person out and don&#8217;t like to
+have him suffer.&rdquo; &ldquo;To have a feeling for people when they are
+treated wrong.&rdquo; &ldquo;If anybody gets hurt real bad you pity them.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;It&#8217;s when you feel sorry for a tramp and give him something to
+eat.&rdquo; &ldquo;If some one is in trouble and you know how it feels to be
+in that condition, you pity him.&rdquo; &ldquo;You see something that&#8217;s
+wrong and have your feeling aroused.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Of 130 correct responses, 85, or 65&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent, defined <em>pity</em> as
+&ldquo;to feel sorry for some one,&rdquo; or words to that effect. Less than
+10&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent defined by means of illustration.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;To think of the poor.&rdquo; &ldquo;To be good to
+others.&rdquo; &ldquo;To help.&rdquo; &ldquo;It means sorrow.&rdquo; &ldquo;Mercy.&rdquo; &ldquo;To cheer people
+up.&rdquo; &ldquo;It means &lsquo;What a pity!&rsquo;&rdquo; &ldquo;To be ashamed.&rdquo; &ldquo;To be sick or
+poor.&rdquo; &ldquo;It&#8217;s when you break something.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Apart from inability to reply, which accounts for nearly one
+fourth of the failures, there is no predominant type of
+unsatisfactory response.</p>
+
+
+<h4>(b) Revenge</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;To get even with some one.&rdquo; &ldquo;To get back on
+him.&rdquo; &ldquo;To do something to the one who has done something to
+you.&rdquo; &ldquo;To hurt them back.&rdquo; &ldquo;To pay it back,&rdquo; or &ldquo;Do something
+back.&rdquo; &ldquo;To do something mean in return.&rdquo; &ldquo;To square up with a
+person.&rdquo; &ldquo;When somebody slaps you, you slap back.&rdquo; &ldquo;You kill a
+person if he does something to you.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>The expression &ldquo;to get even&rdquo; was found in 42&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of 120
+correct answers; &ldquo;to pay it back,&rdquo; or &ldquo;To do something back,&rdquo; in
+20&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent; &ldquo;To get back on him,&rdquo; in 17&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent. About
+8&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent were illustrations.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;To be mad.&rdquo; &ldquo;You try to hurt them.&rdquo; &ldquo;To
+fight.&rdquo; &ldquo;You hate a person.&rdquo; &ldquo;To kill them.&rdquo; &ldquo;It means hateful.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;To try again.&rdquo; &ldquo;To think evil of some one.&rdquo; &ldquo;To hate some one
+who has done you wrong.&rdquo; &ldquo;To let a person off.&rdquo; &ldquo;To go away from
+something.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Inability to reply accounts for a little over 40&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the
+failures.</p>
+
+
+<h4><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;283">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_283" id="Page_283"></a>(c) Charity</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;To give to the poor.&rdquo; &ldquo;To help those who are
+needy.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is charity if you are poor and somebody helps you.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;To give to somebody without pay.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Of 110 correct replies, 72&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent were worded substantially
+like the first or second given above.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;A person who helps the poor.&rdquo; &ldquo;A place where
+poor people get food and things.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is a good life.&rdquo; &ldquo;To be
+happy.&rdquo; &ldquo;To be poor.&rdquo; &ldquo;Charity is being treated good.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is to
+be charitable.&rdquo; &ldquo;Charity is selling something that is not worth
+much.&rdquo; &ldquo;It means to be good&rdquo; or &ldquo;to be kind.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>When the last named response is given, we should say: &ldquo;<i>Explain
+what you mean.</i>&rdquo; If this brings an amplification of the response
+to &ldquo;It means to do things for the poor,&rdquo; or the equivalent, the
+score is <em>plus</em>. &ldquo;Charity means love&rdquo; is also <em>minus</em> if the
+statement cannot be further explained and is merely rote memory
+of the passage in the 13th chapter of 1st Corinthians. Simply
+&ldquo;To help&rdquo; or &ldquo;To give&rdquo; is unsatisfactory. Half of the failures
+are due to inability to reply.</p>
+
+
+<h4>(d) Envy</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;You envy some one who has something you want.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;It&#8217;s the way you feel when you see some one with something
+nicer than you have.&rdquo; &ldquo;It&#8217;s when a poor girl sees a rich girl
+with nice dresses and things.&rdquo; &ldquo;You hate some one because
+they&#8217;ve got something you want.&rdquo; &ldquo;Jealousy&rdquo; (satisfactory if
+subject can explain what <i>jealousy</i> means; otherwise it is
+<em>minus</em>). &ldquo;It&#8217;s when you see a person better off than you are.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Nearly three fourths of the correct responses say in substance,
+&ldquo;You envy a person who has something you want.&rdquo; Most of the
+others are concrete illustrations.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;To hate some one,&rdquo; or simply &ldquo;To hate.&rdquo; &ldquo;You
+don&#8217;t like &#8217;em.&rdquo; &ldquo;Bad feeling toward any one.&rdquo; &ldquo;To be a great
+man or woman.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to be nice to people.&rdquo; &ldquo;What we do to our
+enemies.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Inability to respond accounts for 55&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of the failures.</p>
+
+
+<h4>(e) Justice</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;To give people what they deserve.&rdquo; &ldquo;It means
+that everybody is treated the same way, whether he is rich or
+poor.&rdquo; &ldquo;It&#8217;s what you get when you go to court.&rdquo; &ldquo;If one does<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;284">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_284" id="Page_284"></a>
+something and gets punished, that&#8217;s justice.&rdquo; &ldquo;To do the square
+thing.&rdquo; &ldquo;To give everybody his dues.&rdquo; &ldquo;Let every one have what&#8217;s
+coming to him.&rdquo; &ldquo;To do the right thing by any one.&rdquo; &ldquo;If two
+people do the same thing and they let one go without punishing,
+that is not justice.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Approximately 38&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of 102 correct responses referred to
+treating everybody the same way; 25&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent to &ldquo;doing the
+square thing&rdquo;, 12&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent were concrete illustrations; and
+4&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent were definitions of what justice is not.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;It means to have peace.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is where they
+have court.&rdquo; &ldquo;It&#8217;s the Courthouse.&rdquo; &ldquo;To be honest.&rdquo; &ldquo;Where one
+is just&rdquo; (<em>minus</em>, unless further explained). &ldquo;To do right&rdquo;
+(<em>minus</em>, unless in explaining <em>right</em> the subject gives a
+definition of <em>justice</em>).</p>
+
+<p>It is very necessary, in case of such answers as &ldquo;Justice is to
+do right,&rdquo; &ldquo;To be just,&rdquo; etc., that the subject be urged to
+explain further what he means. &ldquo;To do right&rdquo; includes nearly
+12&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of all answers, and is given by the very brightest
+children. Most of these are able, when urged, to complete the
+definition in a satisfactory manner.</p></blockquote>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The reader may be surprised that the ability to define common
+abstract words should develop so late. Most children who have had
+anything like ordinary home or school environment have doubtless heard
+all of these words countless times before the age of 12&nbsp;years.
+Nevertheless, the statistics from the test show unmistakably that before
+this age such words have but limited and vague meaning. Other vocabulary
+studies confirm this fact so completely that we may say there is hardly
+any trait in which 12- to 14-year intelligence more uniformly excels
+that of the 9- or 10-year level.</p>
+
+<p>This is readily understandable when we consider the nature of abstract
+meanings and the intellectual processes by which we arrive at them.
+Unlike such words as <i>tree</i>, <i>house</i>, etc., the ideas they contain are
+not the immediate result of perceptual processes, in which even childish
+intelligence is adept, but are a refined and secondary <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;285">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_285" id="Page_285"></a>product of
+relationships between other ideas. They require the logical processes of
+comparison, abstraction, and generalization. One cannot see justice, for
+example, but one is often confronted with situations in which justice or
+injustice is an element; and given a certain degree of abstraction and
+generalization, out of such situations the idea of justice will
+gradually be evolved.</p>
+
+<p>The formation and use of abstract ideas, of one kind or another,
+represent, <i>par excellence</i>, the &ldquo;higher thought processes.&rdquo; It is not
+without significance that delinquents who test near the border-line of
+mental deficiency show such inferior ability in arriving at correct
+generalizations regarding matters of social and moral relationships. We
+cannot expect a mind of defective generalizing ability to form very
+definite or correct notions about justice, law, fairness, ownership
+rights, etc.; and if the ideas themselves are not fairly clear, the
+rules of conduct based upon them cannot make a very powerful appeal.<a name="FNanchor_69_69" id="FNanchor_69_69"></a><a href="#Footnote_69_69" class="fnanchor">[69]</a></p>
+
+<p>Binet used the words <i>charity</i>, <i>justice</i>, and <i>kindness</i>, and required
+two successes. In the 1911 revision he shifted the test from year&nbsp;XI to
+year&nbsp;XII, where it more nearly belongs. Goddard also places it in
+year&nbsp;XII and uses Binet&#8217;s words, translating <i>bont&eacute;</i>, however, as
+<i>goodness</i> instead of <i>kindness</i>. Kuhlmann retains the test in year&nbsp;XI
+and adds <i>bravery</i> and <i>revenge</i>, requiring three correct definitions
+out of five. Bobertag uses <i>pity</i>, <i>envy</i>, and <i>justice</i>, requires two
+correct definitions, and finds the test just hard enough for year&nbsp;XII.</p>
+
+<p>After using the words <i>goodness</i> and <i>kindness</i> in two series of tests,
+we have discarded them as objectionable in that they give rise to so
+many doubtful definitions. Even intelligent children often say:
+&ldquo;Goodness means to do something good,&rdquo; &ldquo;Kindness means to be kind to
+some one,&rdquo; <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;286">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_286" id="Page_286"></a>etc. These definitions in a circle occur less than half as
+often with <i>pity</i>, <i>revenge</i>, and <i>envy</i>, which are also superior to
+<i>charity</i> and <i>justice</i> in this respect.</p>
+
+<p>The relative difficulty of our five words is indicated by the order in
+which we have listed them in the test (i.e., beginning with the easiest
+and ending with the hardest). On the standard of three correct
+definitions, these words fit very accurately in year&nbsp;XII.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="XII_3" id="XII_3"></a>XII,&nbsp;3. The ball-and-field test (superior plan)</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure</b>, as in <a href="#VII_1">year&nbsp;VIII, test&nbsp;1</a>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> Score&nbsp;3 (or superior plan) is required for passing in
+year&nbsp;XII.<a name="FNanchor_70_70" id="FNanchor_70_70"></a><a href="#Footnote_70_70" class="fnanchor">[70]</a></p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="XII_4" id="XII_4"></a>XII,&nbsp;4. Dissected sentences</h3>
+
+<p>The following disarranged sentences are used:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ul class="indent">
+<li>FOR THE STARTED AN WE COUNTRY EARLY AT HOUR</li>
+<li>TO ASKED PAPER MY TEACHER CORRECT I MY</li>
+<li>A DEFENDS DOG GOOD HIS BRAVELY MASTER</li>
+</ul>
+
+<p>These should be printed in <ins class="correction" title="Transcriber&#8217;s not: The type used appeared to be the same (Roman, serif) font as in the rest of the text.">type like that used above</ins>. The Stanford
+record booklet contains the sentences in convenient form.</p>
+
+<p>It is not permissible to substitute written words or printed script, as
+that would make the test harder. All the words should be printed in caps
+in order that no clue shall be given as to the first word in a sentence.
+For a similar reason the period is omitted.</p>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Say: &ldquo;<i>Here is a sentence that has the words all mixed up so
+that they don&#8217;t make any sense. If the words <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;287">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_287" id="Page_287"></a>were changed around in the
+right order they would make a good sentence. Look carefully and see if
+you can tell me how the sentence ought to read.</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Give the sentences in the order in which they are listed in the record
+booklet. Do not tell the subject to see how quickly he can do it,
+because with this test any suggestion of hurrying is likely to produce a
+kind of mental paralysis. If the subject has no success with the first
+sentence in one minute, read it off correctly for him, somewhat slowly,
+and pointing to each word as it is spoken. Then proceed to the second
+and third, allowing one minute for each.</p>
+
+<p>Give no further help. It is not permissible, in case an incorrect
+response is given, to ask the subject to try again, or to say: &ldquo;<i>Are you
+sure that is right?</i>&rdquo; &ldquo;<i>Are you sure you have not left out any words?</i>&rdquo;
+etc. Instead, maintain absolute silence. However, the subject is
+permitted to make as many changes in his response as he sees fit,
+provided he makes them spontaneously and within the allotted time.
+Record the entire response.</p>
+
+<p>Once in a great while the subject misunderstands the task and thinks the
+only requirement is to use all the words given, and that it is permitted
+to add as many other words as he likes. It is then necessary to repeat
+the instructions and to allow a new trial.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> <i>Two sentences out of three must be correctly given within the
+minute allotted to each.</i> It is understood, of course, that if the first
+sentence has to be read for the subject, both the other responses must
+be given correctly.</p>
+
+<p>A sentence is not counted correct if a single word is omitted, altered,
+or inserted, or if the order given fails to make perfect sense.</p>
+
+<p>Certain responses are not absolutely incorrect, but are objectionable as
+regards sentence structure, or else fail to give the exact meaning
+intended. These are given half <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;288">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_288" id="Page_288"></a>credit. Full credit on one, and half
+credit on each of the other two, is satisfactory. The following are
+samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory responses:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller">
+<h4>(a)</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i></p>
+<ul class="indent">
+  <li>&ldquo;We started for the country at an early hour.&rdquo;</li>
+  <li>&ldquo;At an early hour we started for the country.&rdquo;</li>
+  <li>&ldquo;We started at an early hour for the country.&rdquo;</li>
+</ul>
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i></p>
+<ul class="indent">
+  <li>&ldquo;We started early at an hour for the country.&rdquo;</li>
+  <li>&ldquo;Early at an hour we started for the country.&rdquo;</li>
+  <li>&ldquo;We started early for the country.&rdquo;</li>
+</ul>
+<p><i>Half credit.</i></p>
+<ul class="indent">
+  <li>&ldquo;For the country at an early hour we started.&rdquo;</li>
+  <li>&ldquo;For the country we started at an early hour.&rdquo;</li>
+</ul>
+
+<h4>(b)</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i></p>
+<ul class="indent">
+  <li>&ldquo;I asked my teacher to correct my paper.&rdquo;</li>
+</ul>
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i></p>
+<ul class="indent">
+  <li>&ldquo;My teacher asked to correct my paper.&rdquo;</li>
+  <li>&ldquo;To correct my paper I asked my teacher.&rdquo;</li>
+</ul>
+<p><i>Half credit.</i></p>
+<ul class="indent">
+  <li>&ldquo;My teacher I asked to correct my paper.&rdquo;</li>
+</ul>
+
+<h4>(c)</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i></p>
+<ul class="indent">
+  <li>&ldquo;A good dog defends his master bravely.&rdquo;</li>
+  <li>&ldquo;A good dog bravely defends his master.&rdquo;</li>
+</ul>
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i></p>
+<ul class="indent">
+  <li>&ldquo;A dog defends his master bravely.&rdquo;</li>
+  <li>&ldquo;A bravely dog defends his master.&rdquo;</li>
+  <li>&ldquo;A good dog defends his bravely master.&rdquo;</li>
+  <li>&ldquo;A good brave dog defends his master.&rdquo;</li>
+</ul>
+<p><i>Half credit.</i></p>
+<ul class="indent">
+  <li>&ldquo;A dog defends his good master bravely.&rdquo;</li>
+  <li>&ldquo;A dog bravely defends his good master.&rdquo;</li>
+  <li>&ldquo;A good master bravely defends his dog.&rdquo;</li>
+</ul>
+</blockquote>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;289">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_289" id="Page_289"></a><b>Remarks.</b> This is an excellent test. It involves no knowledge which may
+not be presupposed at the age in which it is given, and success
+therefore depends very little on experience. The worst that can be urged
+against it is that it may possibly be influenced to a certain extent by
+the amount of reading the subject has done. But this has not been
+demonstrated. At any rate, the test satisfies the most important
+requirement of a test of intelligence; namely, the percentage of
+successes increases rapidly and steadily from the lower to the higher
+levels of mental age.</p>
+
+<p>This experiment can be regarded as a variation of the completion test.
+Binet tells us, in fact, that it was directly suggested by the
+experiment of Ebbinghaus. As will readily be observed, however, it
+differs to a certain extent from the Ebbinghaus completion test.
+Ebbinghaus omits parts of a sentence and requires the subject to supply
+the omissions. In this test we give all the parts and require the
+formation of a sentence by rearrangement. The two experiments are
+psychologically similar in that they require the subject to relate given
+fragments into a meaningful whole. Success depends upon the ability of
+intelligence to utilize hints, or clues, and this in turn depends on the
+logical integrity of the associative processes. All but the highest
+grade of the feeble-minded fail with this test.</p>
+
+<p>This test is found in year&nbsp;XI of Binet&#8217;s 1908 series and in year&nbsp;XII of
+his 1911 revision. Goddard and Kuhlmann retain it in the original
+location. That it is better placed in year&nbsp;XII is indicated by all the
+available statistics with normal children, except those of Goddard. With
+this exception, the results of various investigators for year&nbsp;XII are in
+remarkably close agreement, as the following figures will show:&mdash;</p>
+
+<div class="center">
+<table class="space smaller" summary="Percentage passing this test, according to various researchers">
+<caption><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;290">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_290" id="Page_290"></a><i>Per cent passing at year&nbsp;XII</i></caption>
+<tr><td>Binet                            </td><td>66</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Kuhlmann                         </td><td>68</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Bobertag                         </td><td>78</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Dougherty                        </td><td>64</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Strong                           </td><td>72</td></tr>
+<tr><td>L&eacute;viste and Morl&eacute;  </td><td>70</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Stanford series (1911)           </td><td>62</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Stanford series (1913)           </td><td>57</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Stanford series (1914)           </td><td>62</td></tr>
+<tr><td>Princeton data                   </td><td>61</td></tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<p>This agreement is noteworthy considering that no two experiments seem to
+have used exactly the same arrangement of words, and that some have
+presented the words of a sentence in a single line, others in two or
+three lines. A single line would appear to be somewhat easier.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="XII_5" id="XII_5"></a>XII,&nbsp;5. Interpretation of fables (score&nbsp;4)</h3>
+
+<p>The following fables are used:&mdash;</p>
+
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><h4>(a) Hercules and the Wagoner</h4>
+
+<p><i>A man was driving along a country road, when the wheels
+suddenly sank in a deep rut. The man did nothing but look at the
+wagon and call loudly to Hercules to come and help him. Hercules
+came up, looked at the man, and said: &ldquo;Put your shoulder to the
+wheel, my man, and whip up your oxen.&rdquo; Then he went away and
+left the driver.</i></p>
+
+
+<h4>(b) The Milkmaid and her Plans</h4>
+
+<p><i>A milkmaid was carrying her pail of milk on her head, and was
+thinking to herself thus: &ldquo;The money for this milk will buy
+4&nbsp;hens; the hens will lay at least 100&nbsp;eggs; the eggs will
+produce at least 75&nbsp;chicks; and with the money which the chicks
+will bring I can buy a new dress to wear instead of the ragged
+one I have on.&rdquo; At this moment she looked down at herself,
+trying to think how she would look in her new dress; but as she
+did so the pail of milk slipped from her head and dashed upon
+the ground. Thus all her imaginary schemes perished in a moment.</i></p>
+
+
+<h4><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;291">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_291" id="Page_291"></a>(c) The Fox and the Crow</h4>
+
+<p><i>A crow, having stolen a bit of meat, perched in a tree and held
+it in her beak. A fox, seeing her, wished to secure the meat,
+and spoke to the crow thus: &ldquo;How handsome you are! and I have
+heard that the beauty of your voice is equal to that of your
+form and feathers. Will you not sing for me, so that I may judge
+whether this is true?&rdquo; The crow was so pleased that she opened
+her mouth to sing and dropped the meat, which the fox
+immediately ate.</i></p>
+
+
+<h4>(d) The Farmer and the Stork</h4>
+
+<p><i>A farmer set some traps to catch cranes which had been eating
+his seed. With them he caught a stork. The stork, which had not
+really been stealing, begged the farmer to spare his life,
+saying that he was a bird of excellent character, that he was
+not at all like the cranes, and that the farmer should have pity
+on him. But the farmer said: &ldquo;I have caught you with these
+robbers, and you will have to die with them.&rdquo;</i></p>
+
+
+<h4>(e) The Miller, His Son, and the Donkey</h4>
+
+<p><i>A miller and his son were driving their donkey to a neighboring
+town to sell him. They had not gone far when a child saw them
+and cried out: &ldquo;What fools those fellows are to be trudging
+along on foot when one of them might be riding.&rdquo; The old man,
+hearing this, made his son get on the donkey, while he himself
+walked. Soon, they came upon some men. &ldquo;Look,&rdquo; said one of them,
+&ldquo;see that lazy boy riding while his old father has to walk.&rdquo; On
+hearing this, the miller made his son get off, and he climbed on
+the donkey himself. Farther on they met a company of women, who
+shouted out: &ldquo;Why, you lazy old fellow, to ride along so
+comfortably while your poor boy there can hardly keep pace by
+the side of you!&rdquo; And so the good-natured miller took his boy up
+behind him and both of them rode. As they came to the town a
+citizen said to them, &ldquo;Why, you cruel fellows! You two are
+better able to carry the poor little donkey than he is to carry
+you.&rdquo; &ldquo;Very well,&rdquo; said the miller, &ldquo;we will try.&rdquo; So both of
+them jumped to the ground, got some ropes, tied the donkey&#8217;s
+legs to a pole and tried to carry him. But as they crossed the
+bridge the donkey became frightened, kicked loose and fell into
+the stream.</i></p></blockquote>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Present the fables in the order in which they are given
+above. The method is to say to the subject:</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;292">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_292" id="Page_292"></a>&ldquo;<i>You know what a fable is? You have heard fables?</i>&rdquo; Whatever the
+answer, proceed to explain a fable as follows: &ldquo;<i>A fable, you know, is a
+little story, and is meant to teach us a lesson. Now, I am going to read
+a fable to you. Listen carefully, and when I am through I will ask you
+to tell me what lesson the fable teaches us. Ready; listen.</i>&rdquo; After
+reading the fable, say: &ldquo;<i>What lesson does that teach us?</i>&rdquo; Record the
+response <i>verbatim</i> and proceed with the next as follows: &ldquo;<i>Here is
+another. Listen again and tell me what lesson this fable teaches us</i>,&rdquo;
+etc.</p>
+
+<p>As far as possible, avoid comment or commendation until all the fables
+have been given. If the first answer is of an inferior type and we
+express too much satisfaction with it, we thereby encourage the subject
+to continue in his error. On the other hand, never express
+dissatisfaction with a response, however absurd or <i>malapropos</i> it may
+be. Many subjects are anxious to know how well they are doing and
+continually ask, &ldquo;Did I get that one right?&rdquo; It is sufficient to say,
+&ldquo;You are getting along nicely,&rdquo; or something to that effect. Offer no
+comments, suggestions, or questions which might put the subject on the
+right track. This much self-control is necessary if we would make the
+conditions of the test uniform for all subjects.</p>
+
+<p>The only occasion when a supplementary question is permissible is in
+case of a response whose meaning is not clear. Even then we must be
+cautious and restrict ourselves to some such question as, &ldquo;<i>What do you
+mean?</i>&rdquo; or, &ldquo;<i>Explain; I don&#8217;t quite understand what you mean</i>.&rdquo; The
+scoring of fables is somewhat difficult at best, and this additional
+question is often sufficient to place the response very definitely in
+the right or wrong column.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> Give score&nbsp;2, i.e., 2&nbsp;points, for a correct answer, and 1 for
+an answer which deserves half credit. The test is passed in year&nbsp;XII
+<em>if 4&nbsp;points are earned</em>; that is, if two<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;293">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_293" id="Page_293"></a> responses are correct or if
+one is correct and two deserve half credit.</p>
+
+<p>Score&nbsp;2 means that the fable has been correctly interpreted and that the
+lesson it teaches has been stated in general terms.</p>
+
+<p>There are two types of response which may be given half credit. They
+include (1) the interpretations which are stated in general terms and
+are fairly plausible, but are not exactly correct; and (2) those which
+are perfectly correct as to substance, but are not generalized.</p>
+
+<p>We overlook ordinary faults of expression and regard merely the
+essential meaning of the response.</p>
+
+<p>The only way to explain the method is by giving copious illustrations.
+If the following sample responses are carefully studied, a reasonable
+degree of expertness in scoring fables may be acquired with only a
+limited amount of actual practice. The sampling may appear to the reader
+needlessly prolix, but experience has taught us that in giving
+directions for the scoring of tests error always lies on the side of
+taking too much for granted.</p>
+
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><h4>(a) Hercules and the Wagoner</h4>
+
+<p><i>Full credit; score&nbsp;2.</i> &ldquo;God helps those who help themselves.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Do not depend on others.&rdquo; &ldquo;Help yourself before calling for
+help.&rdquo; &ldquo;It teaches that we should rely upon ourselves.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>The following are not quite so good, but are nevertheless
+considered satisfactory. &ldquo;We should always try, even if it looks
+hard and we think we can&#8217;t do it.&rdquo; &ldquo;When in trouble try to get
+out of it yourself.&rdquo; &ldquo;We&#8217;ve got to do things without help.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not
+to be lazy.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Half credit; score&nbsp;1.</i> This is most often given for the
+response which contains the correct idea, but states it in terms
+of the concrete situation, e.g.: &ldquo;The man ought to have tried
+himself first.&rdquo; &ldquo;Hercules wanted to teach the man to help
+himself.&rdquo; &ldquo;The driver was too much inclined to depend on
+others.&rdquo; &ldquo;The man was too lazy. He should not have called for
+help until he had <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;294">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_294" id="Page_294"></a>tried to get out by himself.&rdquo; &ldquo;To get out and
+try instead of watching.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory; score&nbsp;0.</i> Failures are mainly of five
+varieties: (1) generalized interpretations which entirely miss
+the point; (2) crude interpretations which not only miss the
+point, but are also stated in terms of the concrete situation;
+(3) irrelevant or incoherent remarks; (4) efforts to repeat the
+story; and (5) inability to respond.</p>
+
+<p>Sample failures of type (1), entirely incorrect generalizations:
+&ldquo;Teaches us to look where we are going.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to ask for
+anything when there is no one to help.&rdquo; &ldquo;To help those who are
+in trouble.&rdquo; &ldquo;Teaches us to be polite.&rdquo; &ldquo;How to help others.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Not to be cruel to horses.&rdquo; &ldquo;Always to do what people tell you&rdquo;
+(or &ldquo;obey orders,&rdquo; etc.). &ldquo;Not to be foolish&rdquo; (or stupid, etc.).
+&ldquo;If you would have a thing well done, do it yourself.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Failures of type (2), crude interpretations stated in concrete
+terms: &ldquo;How to get out of the mud.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to get stuck in the
+mud.&rdquo; &ldquo;To carry a stick along to pry yourself out if you get
+into a mud-hole.&rdquo; &ldquo;To help any one who is stuck in the mud.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Taught Hercules to help the horses along and not whip them too
+hard.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to be mean like Hercules.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Failures of type (3), irrelevant responses: &ldquo;It was foolish not
+to thank him.&rdquo; &ldquo;He should have helped the driver.&rdquo; &ldquo;Hercules was
+mean.&rdquo; &ldquo;If any one helps himself the horses will try.&rdquo; &ldquo;The
+driver should have done what Hercules told him.&rdquo; &ldquo;He wanted the
+man to help the oxen.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Type (4): Efforts to repeat the story.</p>
+
+<p>Type (5): Inability to respond.</p>
+
+
+<h4>(b) The Maid and the Eggs</h4>
+
+<p><i>Full credit; score&nbsp;2.</i> &ldquo;Teaches us not to build air-castles.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Don&#8217;t count your chickens before they are hatched.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to
+plan too far ahead.&rdquo; Slightly inferior, but still acceptable:
+&ldquo;Never make too many plans.&rdquo; &ldquo;Don&#8217;t count on the second thing
+till you have done the first.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Half credit; score&nbsp;1.</i> &ldquo;It teaches us not to have our minds on
+the future when we carry milk on the head.&rdquo; &ldquo;She was building
+air-castles and so lost her milk.&rdquo; &ldquo;She was planning too far
+ahead.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>The responses just given are examples of fairly correct
+interpretations in non-generalized terms. The following are
+examples of generalized interpretations which fall below the
+accuracy required<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;295">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_295" id="Page_295"></a> for full credit: &ldquo;Never make plans.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to
+be too proud.&rdquo; &ldquo;To keep our mind on what we are doing.&rdquo; &ldquo;Don&#8217;t
+cross a bridge till you come to it.&rdquo; &ldquo;Don&#8217;t count your <em>eggs</em>
+before they are hatched.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to be wanting things; learn to
+wait.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to imagine; go ahead and do it.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory; score&nbsp;0.</i> Type (1), entirely incorrect
+generalization: &ldquo;That money does not buy everything.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to be
+greedy.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to be selfish.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to waste things.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to
+take risks like that.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to think about clothes.&rdquo; &ldquo;Count your
+chickens before they are hatched.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Type (2), very crude interpretations stated in concrete terms:
+&ldquo;Not to carry milk on the head.&rdquo; &ldquo;Teaches her to watch and not
+throw down her head.&rdquo; &ldquo;To carry her head straight.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to
+spill milk.&rdquo; &ldquo;To keep your chickens and you will make more
+money.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Type (3), irrelevant responses: &ldquo;She wanted the money.&rdquo; &ldquo;Teaches
+us to read and write&rdquo; (18-year-old of 8-year intelligence).
+&ldquo;About a girl who was selling some milk.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Type (4), effort to repeat the story.</p>
+
+<p>Type (5), inability to respond.</p>
+
+
+<h4>(c) The Fox and the Crow</h4>
+
+<p><i>Full credit; score&nbsp;2.</i> &ldquo;Teaches us not to listen to flattery.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Don&#8217;t let yourself be flattered.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is not safe to believe
+people who flatter us.&rdquo; &ldquo;We had better look out for people who
+brag on us.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Half credit; score&nbsp;1.</i> Correct idea in concrete terms: &ldquo;The
+crow was so proud of herself that she lost all she had.&rdquo; &ldquo;The
+crow listened to flattery and got left.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to be proud and
+let people think you can sing when you can&#8217;t.&rdquo; &ldquo;If anybody
+brags on you don&#8217;t sing or do what he tells you.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Pertinent but somewhat inferior generalizations: &ldquo;Not to be too
+proud.&rdquo; &ldquo;Pride goes before a fall.&rdquo; &ldquo;To be on our guard against
+people who are our enemies.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to do everything people tell
+you.&rdquo; &ldquo;Don&#8217;t trust every slick fellow you meet.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory; score&nbsp;0.</i> Type (1), incorrect generalization:
+&ldquo;Not to go with people you don&#8217;t know.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to be selfish.&rdquo; &ldquo;To
+share your food.&rdquo; &ldquo;Look before you leap.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to listen to
+evil.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to steal.&rdquo; &ldquo;Teaches honesty.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to covet.&rdquo; &ldquo;Think
+for yourself.&rdquo; &ldquo;Teaches wisdom.&rdquo; &ldquo;Never listen to advice.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Never let any one get ahead of you.&rdquo; &ldquo;To figure out what they
+are going <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;296">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_296" id="Page_296"></a>to do.&rdquo; &ldquo;Never try to do two things at once.&rdquo; &ldquo;How to
+get what you want.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Type (2), very crude interpretation stated in terms of the
+concrete situation: &ldquo;Not to sing before you eat.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to hold a
+thing in your mouth; eat it.&rdquo; &ldquo;To eat a thing before you think
+of your beauty.&rdquo; &ldquo;To swallow it before you sing.&rdquo; &ldquo;To be on your
+watch when you have food in your mouth.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Type (3), irrelevant responses: &ldquo;The fox was greedy.&rdquo; &ldquo;The fox
+was slicker than what the crow was.&rdquo; &ldquo;The crow ought not to have
+opened her mouth.&rdquo; &ldquo;The crow should just have shaken her head.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;It served the crow right for stealing the meat.&rdquo; &ldquo;The fox
+wanted the meat and just told the crow that to get it.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Foolishness.&rdquo; &ldquo;Guess that&#8217;s where the old fox got his
+name&mdash;&lsquo;Old Foxy&rsquo;&mdash;Don&#8217;t teach us anything.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Type (4), efforts to repeat the story.</p>
+
+<p>Type (5), inability to respond.</p>
+
+
+<h4>(d) The Farmer and the Stork</h4>
+
+<p><i>Full credit; score&nbsp;2.</i> &ldquo;You are judged by the company you
+keep.&rdquo; &ldquo;Teaches us to keep out of bad company.&rdquo; &ldquo;Birds of a
+feather flock together.&rdquo; &ldquo;If you go with bad people you are
+counted like them.&rdquo; &ldquo;We should choose our friends carefully.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Don&#8217;t go with bad people.&rdquo; &ldquo;Teaches us to avoid the appearance
+of evil.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Half credit; score&nbsp;1.</i> &ldquo;The stork should not have been with the
+cranes.&rdquo; &ldquo;Teaches him not to go with robbers.&rdquo; &ldquo;Don&#8217;t go with
+people who are not of your nation.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to follow others.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory; score&nbsp;0.</i> Type (1), incorrect generalization:
+&ldquo;Not to steal.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to tell lies.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to give excuses.&rdquo; &ldquo;A
+poor excuse is better than none.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to trust what people
+say.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to listen to excuses.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to harm animals that do
+no harm.&rdquo; &ldquo;To have pity on others.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to be cruel.&rdquo; &ldquo;To be
+kind to birds.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to blame people for what they don&#8217;t do.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Teaches that those who do good often suffer for those who do
+evil.&rdquo; &ldquo;To tend to your own business.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to meddle with other
+people&#8217;s things.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to trespass on people&#8217;s property.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not
+to think you are so nice.&rdquo; &ldquo;To keep out of mischief.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Type (2), very crude interpretations in concrete terms: &ldquo;Taught
+the stork to look where it stepped and not walk into a trap.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Taught the stork to keep out of the man&#8217;s field.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to take
+the seeds.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Type (3), irrelevant responses: &ldquo;The farmer was right; storks<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;297">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_297" id="Page_297"></a> do
+eat grain.&rdquo; &ldquo;Served the stork right, he was stealing too.&rdquo; &ldquo;He
+should try to help the stork out of the field.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Type (4), efforts to repeat the story.</p>
+
+<p>Type (5), inability to reply.</p>
+
+
+<h4>(e) The Miller, His Son, and the Donkey</h4>
+
+<p><i>Full credit; score&nbsp;2.</i> &ldquo;When you try to please everybody you
+please nobody.&rdquo; &ldquo;Don&#8217;t listen to everybody; you can&#8217;t please
+them all.&rdquo; &ldquo;Don&#8217;t take every one&#8217;s advice.&rdquo; &ldquo;Don&#8217;t try to do
+what everybody tells you.&rdquo; &ldquo;Use your own judgment.&rdquo; &ldquo;Have a mind
+of your own.&rdquo; &ldquo;Make up your mind and stick to it.&rdquo; &ldquo;Don&#8217;t be
+wishy-washy.&rdquo; &ldquo;Have confidence in your own opinions.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Half credit; score&nbsp;1.</i> Interpretations which are generalized
+but somewhat inferior: &ldquo;Never take any one&#8217;s advice&rdquo; (too
+sweeping a conclusion). &ldquo;Don&#8217;t take foolish advice.&rdquo; &ldquo;Take your
+own advice.&rdquo; &ldquo;It teaches us that people don&#8217;t always agree.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Correct idea but not generalized: &ldquo;They were fools to listen to
+everybody.&rdquo; &ldquo;They should have walked or rode just as they
+thought best, without listening to other people.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory; score&nbsp;0.</i> Type (1), incorrect generalization:
+&ldquo;To do right.&rdquo; &ldquo;To do what people tell you.&rdquo; &ldquo;To be kind to old
+people.&rdquo; &ldquo;To be polite.&rdquo; &ldquo;To serve others.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to be cruel to
+animals.&rdquo; &ldquo;To have sympathy for beasts of burden.&rdquo; &ldquo;To be
+good-natured.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to load things on animals that are small.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;That it is always better to leave things as they are.&rdquo; &ldquo;That
+men were not made for beasts of burden.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Type (2), very crude interpretations stated in concrete terms:
+&ldquo;Not to try to carry the donkey.&rdquo; &ldquo;That walking is better than
+riding.&rdquo; &ldquo;The people should have been more polite to the old
+man.&rdquo; &ldquo;That the father should be allowed to ride.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Type (3), irrelevant responses: &ldquo;The men were too heavy for the
+donkey.&rdquo; &ldquo;They ought to have stayed on and they would not have
+fallen into the stream.&rdquo; &ldquo;It teaches about a man and he lost his
+donkey.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Type (4), efforts to repeat the story.</p>
+
+<p>Type (5), inability to respond.</p></blockquote>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The fable test, or the &ldquo;test of generalization,&rdquo; as it may
+aptly be named, was used by the writer in a study <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;298">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_298" id="Page_298"></a>of the intellectual
+processes of bright and dull boys in 1905,<a name="FNanchor_71_71" id="FNanchor_71_71"></a><a href="#Footnote_71_71" class="fnanchor">[71]</a> and was further
+standardized by the writer and Mr.&nbsp;Childs in 1911.<a name="FNanchor_72_72" id="FNanchor_72_72"></a><a href="#Footnote_72_72" class="fnanchor">[72]</a> It has proved its
+worth in a number of investigations. It has been necessary, however, to
+simplify the rather elaborate method of scoring which was proposed in
+1911, not because of any logical fault of the method, but because of the
+difficulty in teaching examiners to use the system correctly. The method
+explained above is somewhat coarser, but it has the advantage of being
+much easier to learn.</p>
+
+<p>The generalization test presents for interpretation situations which are
+closely paralleled in the everyday social experience of human beings. It
+tests the subject&#8217;s ability to understand motives underlying acts or
+attitudes. It gives a clue to the status of the social consciousness.
+This is highly important in the diagnosis of the upper range of mental
+defectiveness. The criterion of the subnormal&#8217;s fitness for life outside
+an institution is his ability to understand social relations and to
+adjust himself to them. Failure of a subnormal to meet this criterion
+may lead him to break common conventions, and to appear disrespectful,
+sulky, stubborn, or in some other way queer and exceptional. He is
+likely to be misunderstood, because he so easily misunderstands others.
+The skein of human motives is too complex for his limited intelligence
+to untangle.</p>
+
+<p>Ethnological studies have shown in an interesting way the social origin
+of the moral judgment. The rectitude of the moral life, therefore,
+depends on the accuracy of the social judgment. It would be interesting
+to know what proportion of offenders have transgressed moral codes
+because of continued failure to grasp the essential lessons presented
+by human situations.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;299">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_299" id="Page_299"></a>For the intelligent child even the common incidents of life carry an
+endless succession of lessons in right conduct. On the average school
+playground not an hour passes without some happening which is fraught
+with a moral hint to those who have intelligence enough to generalize
+the situation. A boy plays unfairly and is barred from the game. One
+bullies his weaker companion and arouses the anger and scorn of all his
+fellows. Another vents his braggadocio and feels at once the withering
+scorn of those who listen. Laziness, selfishness, meanness, dishonesty,
+ingratitude, inconstancy, inordinate pride, and the countless other
+faults all have their social penalties. The child of normal intelligence
+sees the point, draws the appropriate lesson and (provided emotions and
+will are also normal) applies it more or less effectively as a guide to
+his own conduct. To the feeble-minded child, all but lacking in the
+power of abstraction and generalization, the situation conveys no such
+lesson. It is but a muddle of concrete events without general
+significance; or even if its meaning is vaguely apprehended, the powers
+of inhibition are insufficient to guarantee that right action will
+follow.</p>
+
+<p>It is for this reason that the generalization test is so valuable in the
+mental examinations of delinquents. It presents a moral situation,
+imagined, to be sure, but none the less real to the individual of normal
+comprehension. It tells us quickly whether the subject tested is able to
+see beyond the incidents of the given situation and to grasp their wider
+relations&mdash;whether he is able to generalize the concrete.</p>
+
+<p>The following responses made by feeble-minded delinquents from
+16&nbsp;to&nbsp;21&nbsp;years of age demonstrate sufficiently their inability to
+comprehend the moral situation:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>Hercules and the Wagoner.</i> &ldquo;Teaches you to look where you are
+going.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to help any one who is stuck in the mud.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;300">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_300" id="Page_300"></a> to
+whip oxen.&rdquo; &ldquo;Teaches that Hercules was mean.&rdquo; &ldquo;Teaches us to
+carry a stick along to pry the wheels out.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>The Fox and the Crow.</i> &ldquo;Not to sing when eating.&rdquo; &ldquo;To keep away
+from strangers.&rdquo; &ldquo;To swallow it before you sing.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to be
+stingy.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to listen to evil.&rdquo; &ldquo;The fox was wiser than the
+crow.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to be selfish with food.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to do two things at
+once.&rdquo; &ldquo;To hang on to what you&#8217;ve got.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>The Farmer and the Stork.</i> &ldquo;Teaches the stork to look where he
+steps.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to be cruel like the farmer.&rdquo; &ldquo;Not to tell lies.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Not to butt into other people&#8217;s things.&rdquo; &ldquo;To be kind to birds.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Teaches us how to get rid of troublesome people.&rdquo; &ldquo;Never go
+with anything else.&rdquo;</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>The following are the responses of an 18-year-old delinquent
+(intelligence level 10&nbsp;years) to the five fables:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>Maid and Eggs.</i> &ldquo;She was thinking about getting the dress and
+spilled the milk. Teaches selfishness.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Hercules and the Wagoner.</i> &ldquo;He wanted to help the oxen out.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Fox and Crow.</i> &ldquo;Guess that&#8217;s where the fox got his name&mdash;&lsquo;Old
+Foxy.&rsquo; Don&#8217;t teach us anything.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Farmer and Stork.</i> &ldquo;Try and help the stork out of the field.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Miller, Son, and Donkey.</i> &ldquo;They was all big fools and mean to
+the donkey.&rdquo;</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>One does not require very profound psychological insight to see that a
+person of this degree of comprehension is not promising material for
+moral education. His weakness in the ability to generalize a moral
+situation is not due to lack of instruction, but is inherent in the
+nature of his mental processes, all of which have the infantile quality
+of average 9- or 10-year intelligence. Well-instructed normal children
+of 10&nbsp;years ordinarily succeed no better. The ability to draw the
+correct lesson from a social situation is little developed below the
+mental level of 12&nbsp;or&nbsp;13&nbsp;years.</p>
+
+<p>The test is also valuable because it throws light on the subject&#8217;s
+ability to appreciate the finer shades of meaning. The mentally retarded
+often show marked inferiority in this <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;301">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_301" id="Page_301"></a>respect. They sense, perhaps, in a
+general way the trend of the story, but they fail to comprehend much
+that to us seems clearly expressed. They do not get what is left for the
+reader to infer, because they are insensible to the thought fringes. It
+is these which give meaning to the fable. The dull subject may be able
+to image the objects and activities described, but taken in the rough
+such imagery gets him nowhere.</p>
+
+<p>Finally, the test is almost free from the danger of coaching. The
+subject who has been given a number of fables along with twenty-five or
+thirty other tests can as a rule give only hazy and inaccurate testimony
+as to what he has been put through. Moreover, we have found that, even
+if a subject has previously heard a fable, that fact does not materially
+increase his chances of giving a correct interpretation. If the
+situation depicted in the fable is beyond the subject&#8217;s power of
+comprehension even explicit instruction has little effect upon the
+quality of the response.</p>
+
+<p>Incidentally, this observation raises the question whether the use of
+proverbs, mottoes, fables, poetry, etc., in the moral instruction of
+children may not often be futile because the material is not fitted to
+the child&#8217;s power of comprehension. Much of the school&#8217;s instruction in
+history and literature has a moral purpose, but there is reason to
+suspect that in this field schools often make precocious attempts in
+&ldquo;generalizing&rdquo; exercises.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="XII_6" id="XII_6"></a>XII,&nbsp;6. Repeating five digits reversed</h3>
+
+<p>The series are 3&ndash;1&ndash;8&ndash;7&ndash;9; 6&ndash;9&ndash;4&ndash;8&ndash;2; 5&ndash;2&ndash;9&ndash;6&ndash;1.</p>
+
+<p><b>Procedure</b> and <b>Scoring</b>. Exactly as in years <a href="#VII_3">VII</a> and <a href="#IX_4">IX</a>.<a name="FNanchor_73_73" id="FNanchor_73_73"></a><a href="#Footnote_73_73" class="fnanchor">[73]</a></p>
+
+
+<h3><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;302">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_302" id="Page_302"></a><a name="XII_7" id="XII_7"></a>XII,&nbsp;7. Interpretation of pictures</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Use the same pictures as in <a href="#III_1">III,&nbsp;1</a>, and <a href="#VII_2">VII,&nbsp;2</a>, and the
+additional picture <i>d</i>. Present in the same order. The formula to begin
+with is identical with that in <a href="#VII_2">VII,&nbsp;2</a>: &ldquo;<i>Tell me what this picture is
+about. What is this a picture of?</i>&rdquo; This formula is chosen because it
+does not suggest specifically either description or interpretation, and
+is therefore adapted to show the child&#8217;s spontaneous or natural mode of
+apperception. However, in case, this formula fails to bring spontaneous
+interpretation for three of the four pictures, we then return to those
+pictures on which the subject has failed and give a second trial with
+the formula: &ldquo;<i>Explain this picture</i>.&rdquo; A good many subjects who failed
+to interpret the pictures spontaneously do so without difficulty when
+the more specific formula is used.</p>
+
+<p>If the response is so brief as to be difficult to classify, the subject
+should be urged to amplify by some such injunction as &ldquo;<i>Go ahead</i>,&rdquo; or
+&ldquo;<i>Explain what you mean</i>.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>One more caution. It is necessary to refrain from voicing a single word
+of commendation or approval until all the pictures have been responded
+to. A moment&#8217;s thought will reveal the absolute necessity of adhering to
+this rule. Often a subject will begin by giving an inferior type of
+response (description, say) to the first picture, but with the second
+picture adjusts better to the task and responds satisfactorily. If in
+such a case the first (unsatisfactory) response were greeted with an
+approving &ldquo;That&#8217;s fine, you are doing splendidly,&rdquo; the likelihood of any
+improvement taking place as the test proceeds would be greatly lessened.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> <em>Three pictures out of four</em> must be satisfactorily
+interpreted. &ldquo;Satisfactorily&rdquo; means that the interpretation given should
+be reasonably plausible; not necessarily the exact one the artist had in
+mind, yet not absurd. The<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;303">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_303" id="Page_303"></a> following classified responses will serve as
+a fairly secure guide for scoring:&mdash;</p>
+
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><h4>(a) Dutch Home</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Child has spilled something and is getting a
+scolding.&rdquo; &ldquo;The baby has hurt herself and the mother is
+comforting her.&rdquo; &ldquo;The baby is crying because she is hungry and
+the mother has nothing to give her.&rdquo; &ldquo;The little girl has been
+naughty and is about to be punished.&rdquo; &ldquo;The baby is crying
+because she does not like her dinner.&rdquo; &ldquo;There&#8217;s bread on the
+table and the mother won&#8217;t let the little girl have it and so
+she is crying.&rdquo; &ldquo;The baby is begging for something and is crying
+because her mamma won&#8217;t give it to her.&rdquo; &ldquo;It&#8217;s a poor family.
+The father is dead and they don&#8217;t have enough to eat.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;The baby is crying and the mother is looking
+at her&rdquo; (description). &ldquo;It&#8217;s in Holland, and there&#8217;s a little
+girl crying, and a mamma, and there&#8217;s a dish on the table&rdquo;
+(mainly description). &ldquo;The mother is teaching the child to walk&rdquo;
+(absurd interpretation).</p>
+
+
+<h4>(b) River Scene</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Man and lady eloping to get married and an
+Indian to row for them.&rdquo; &ldquo;I think it represents a honeymoon
+trip.&rdquo; &ldquo;In frontier days and a man and his wife have been
+captured by the Indians.&rdquo; &ldquo;It&#8217;s a perilous journey and they have
+engaged the Indian to row for them.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;They are shooting the rapids.&rdquo; &ldquo;An Indian
+rowing a man and his wife down the river&rdquo; (mainly description).
+&ldquo;A storm at sea&rdquo; (absurd interpretation). &ldquo;Indians have rescued
+a couple from a shipwreck.&rdquo; &ldquo;They have been up the river and
+are riding down the rapids.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>The following responses are somewhat doubtful, but should
+probably be scored <em>minus</em>: &ldquo;People going out hunting and have
+Indian for a guide.&rdquo; &ldquo;The man has rescued the woman from the
+Indians.&rdquo; &ldquo;It&#8217;s a camping trip.&rdquo;</p>
+
+
+<h4>(c) Post-Office</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;It&#8217;s a lot of old farmers. They have come to
+the post-office to get the paper, which only comes once a week,
+and they are all happy.&rdquo; &ldquo;There&#8217;s something funny in the paper
+about one of the men and they are all laughing about it.&rdquo; &ldquo;They
+are <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;304">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_304" id="Page_304"></a>reading about the price of eggs, and they look very happy so
+I guess the price has gone up.&rdquo; &ldquo;It&#8217;s a bunch of country
+politicians reading the election news.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;A man has just come out of the post-office
+and is reading to his friends.&rdquo; &ldquo;It&#8217;s a little country town and
+they are looking at the paper.&rdquo; &ldquo;A man is reading the paper and
+the others are looking on and laughing.&rdquo; &ldquo;Some men are reading a
+paper and laughing, and the other man has brought some eggs to
+market, and it&#8217;s in a little country town.&rdquo; (All the above are
+mainly description.)</p>
+
+<p>Responses like the following are somewhat better, but hardly
+satisfactory: &ldquo;They are reading something funny in the paper.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;They are reading the ads.&rdquo; &ldquo;They are laughing about something
+in the newspaper,&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+
+<h4>(d) Colonial Home</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;They are lovers and have quarreled.&rdquo; &ldquo;The man
+has to go away for a long time, maybe to war, and she is afraid
+he won&#8217;t return.&rdquo; &ldquo;He has proposed and she has rejected him, and
+she is crying because she hated to disappoint him.&rdquo; &ldquo;The woman
+is crying because her husband is angry and leaving her.&rdquo; &ldquo;The
+man is a messenger and has brought the woman bad news.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;The husband is leaving and the dog is looking
+at the lady.&rdquo; &ldquo;It&#8217;s a picture to show how people dressed in
+colonial times.&rdquo; &ldquo;The lady is crying and the man is trying to
+comfort her.&rdquo; &ldquo;The man is going away. The woman is angry because
+he is going. The dog has a ball in its mouth and looks happy,
+and the man looks sad.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Such responses as the following are doubtful, but rather <em>minus</em>
+than <em>plus</em>: &ldquo;A picture of George Washington&#8217;s home.&rdquo; &ldquo;They
+have lost their money and they are sad&rdquo; (gratuitous
+interpretation). &ldquo;The man has struck the woman.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Doubt sometimes arises as to the proper scoring of imaginative
+or gratuitous interpretations. The following are samples of
+such: (<i>a</i>) &ldquo;The little girl is crying because she wants a new
+dress and the mother is telling her she can have one when
+Christmas comes if she will be good.&rdquo; (<i>b</i>) &ldquo;The man and woman
+have gone up the river to visit some friends and an Indian guide
+is bringing them home.&rdquo; (<i>c</i>) &ldquo;Some old Rubes are reading about
+a circus that&#8217;s going to come.&rdquo; (<i>d</i>) &ldquo;Napoleon leaving his
+wife.&rdquo;</p></blockquote>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;305">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_305" id="Page_305"></a>Sometimes these imaginative responses are given by very bright subjects,
+under the impression that they are asked to &ldquo;make up&rdquo; a story based on
+the picture. We may score them <em>plus</em>, provided they are not too much
+out of harmony with the situation and actions represented in the
+picture. Interpretations so gratuitous as to have little or no bearing
+upon the scene depicted should be scored <em>minus</em>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The test of picture interpretation has been variously located
+from 12&nbsp;to&nbsp;15&nbsp;years. It cannot be too strongly emphasized that
+everything depends on the nature of the pictures used, the form in which
+the question is put, and the standard for scoring. The Jingleman-Jack
+pictures used by Kuhlmann are as easy to interpret at 10&nbsp;years as the
+Stanford pictures at 12. Spontaneous interpretation (&ldquo;What is this a
+picture of?&rdquo; or &ldquo;What do you see in this picture?&rdquo;) comes no more
+readily at 14&nbsp;years than provoked interpretation (&ldquo;Explain this
+picture&rdquo;) at 12. The standard of scoring is no less important. If with
+the Stanford pictures we require three satisfactory responses out of
+four, the test belongs at the 12-year level, but the standard of two
+correct out of four can be met a year or two earlier.</p>
+
+<p>Even after we have agreed upon a given series of pictures, the formula
+for giving the test, and upon the requisite number of passes, there
+remains still the question as to the proper degree of liberality in
+deciding what constitutes interpretation. There is no single point in
+mental development where the &ldquo;ability to interpret pictures&rdquo; sweeps in
+with a rush. Like the development of most other abilities, it comes by
+slow degrees, beginning even as early as 6&nbsp;years.</p>
+
+<p>The question is, therefore, to decide whether a given response contains
+as much and as good interpretation as <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;306">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_306" id="Page_306"></a>we have a right to expect at the
+age level where the test has been placed. It is imperative for any one
+who would use the scale correctly to acquaint himself thoroughly with
+the procedure and standards described above.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="XII_8" id="XII_8"></a>XII,&nbsp;8. Giving similarities, three things</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> The procedure is the same as in <a href="#VIII_4">VIII,&nbsp;4</a>, but with the
+following words:&mdash;</p>
+
+
+<ol class="alph smaller">
+<li>Snake, cow, sparrow.</li>
+<li>Book, teacher, newspaper.</li>
+<li>Wool, cotton, leather.</li>
+<li>Knife-blade, penny, piece of wire.</li>
+<li>Rose, potato, tree.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>As before, a little tactful urging is occasionally necessary in order to
+secure a response.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> <em>Three satisfactory responses out of five</em> are necessary for
+success. Any real similarity is acceptable, whether fundamental or
+superficial, although the giving of fundamental likenesses is especially
+symptomatic of good intelligence.</p>
+
+<p>Failures may be classified under four heads: (1) Leaving one of the
+words out of consideration; (2) giving a difference instead of a
+similarity; (3) giving a similarity that is not real or that is too
+bizarre or far-fetched; and (4) inability to respond. Types (1), (3),
+and (4) are almost equally numerous, while type (2) is not often
+encountered at this level of intelligence.</p>
+
+<p>This test provokes doubtful responses somewhat oftener than the earlier
+test of giving similarities. Those giving greatest difficulty are the
+indefinite statements like &ldquo;All are useful,&rdquo; &ldquo;All are made of the same
+material,&rdquo; etc. Fortunately, in most of these cases an additional
+question is sufficient to determine whether the subject has in mind<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;307">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_307" id="Page_307"></a> a
+real similarity. Questions suitable for this purpose are: &ldquo;Explain what
+you mean,&rdquo; &ldquo;In what respect are they all useful?&rdquo; &ldquo;What material do you
+mean?&rdquo; etc. Of course it is only permissible to make use of
+supplementary questions of this kind when they are necessary in order to
+clarify a response which has already been made.</p>
+
+<p>While the amateur examiner is likely to have more or less trouble in
+deciding upon scores, this difficulty rapidly disappears with
+experience. The following samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory
+responses will serve as a fairly adequate guide in dealing with doubtful
+cases:&mdash;</p>
+
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><h4>(a) Snake, cow, sparrow</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;All are animals&rdquo; (or creatures, etc.). &ldquo;All
+live on the land.&rdquo; &ldquo;All have blood&rdquo; (or flesh, bones, eyes,
+skin, etc.). &ldquo;All move about.&rdquo; &ldquo;All breathe air.&rdquo; &ldquo;All are
+useful&rdquo; (<em>plus</em> only if subject can give a use which they have
+in common). &ldquo;All have a little intelligence&rdquo; (or sense,
+instinct, etc.).</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;All have legs.&rdquo; &ldquo;All are dangerous.&rdquo; &ldquo;All
+feed on grain&rdquo; (or grass, etc.). &ldquo;All are much afraid of man.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;All frighten you.&rdquo; &ldquo;All are warm-blooded.&rdquo; &ldquo;All get about the
+same way.&rdquo; &ldquo;All walk on the ground.&rdquo; &ldquo;All can bite.&rdquo; &ldquo;All
+holler.&rdquo; &ldquo;All drink water.&rdquo; &ldquo;A snake crawls, a cow walks, and a
+sparrow flies&rdquo; (or some other difference). &ldquo;They are not alike.&rdquo;</p>
+
+
+<h4>(b) Book, teacher, newspaper</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;All teach.&rdquo; &ldquo;You learn from all.&rdquo; &ldquo;All give you
+information.&rdquo; &ldquo;All help you get an education.&rdquo; &ldquo;All are your
+good friends&rdquo; (<em>plus</em> if subject can explain how). &ldquo;All are
+useful&rdquo; (<em>plus</em> if subject can explain how).</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;All tell you the news.&rdquo; &ldquo;A teacher writes,
+and a book and newspaper have writing.&rdquo; &ldquo;They are not alike.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;All read.&rdquo; &ldquo;All use the alphabet.&rdquo;</p>
+
+
+<h4>(c) Wool, cotton, leather</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;All used for clothing.&rdquo; &ldquo;We wear them all.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;All grow&rdquo; (<em>plus</em> if subject can explain). &ldquo;All have to be sent
+to the factory to be made into things.&rdquo; &ldquo;All are useful&rdquo; (<em>plus</em>
+if <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;308">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_308" id="Page_308"></a>subject can give a use which all have in common). &ldquo;All are
+valuable&rdquo; (<em>plus</em> if explained).</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;All come from plants.&rdquo; &ldquo;All grow on animals.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;All came off the top of something.&rdquo; &ldquo;All are things.&rdquo; &ldquo;They are
+pretty.&rdquo; &ldquo;All spell alike.&rdquo; &ldquo;All are furry&rdquo; (or soft, hard,
+etc.).</p>
+
+
+<h4>(d) Knife-blade, penny, piece of wire</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory</i>. &ldquo;All are made from minerals&rdquo; (or metals). &ldquo;All
+come from mines.&rdquo; &ldquo;All are hard material.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;All are made of steel&rdquo; (or copper, iron,
+etc.). &ldquo;All are made of the same metal.&rdquo; &ldquo;All cut.&rdquo; &ldquo;All bend
+easily.&rdquo; &ldquo;All are used in building a house.&rdquo; &ldquo;All are
+worthless.&rdquo; &ldquo;All are useful in fixing things.&rdquo; &ldquo;All have an
+end.&rdquo; &ldquo;They are small.&rdquo; &ldquo;All weigh the same.&rdquo; &ldquo;Can get them all
+at a hardware store.&rdquo; &ldquo;You can buy things with all of them.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;You buy them with money.&rdquo; &ldquo;One is sharp, one is round, and one
+is long&rdquo; (or some other difference).</p>
+
+<p>Such answers as &ldquo;All are found in a boy&#8217;s pocket,&rdquo; or &ldquo;Boys like
+them,&rdquo; are not altogether bad, but hardly deserve to be called
+satisfactory. &ldquo;All are useful&rdquo; is <em>minus</em> unless the subject can
+give a use which they have in common, which in this case he is
+not likely to do. Bizarre uses are also <em>minus</em>; as, &ldquo;All are
+good for a watch fob,&rdquo; &ldquo;Can use all for paper weights,&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+
+<h4>(e) Rose, potato, tree</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;All are plants.&rdquo; &ldquo;All grow from the ground.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;All have leaves&rdquo; (or roots, etc.). &ldquo;All have to be planted.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;All are parts of nature.&rdquo; &ldquo;All have colors.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;All are pretty.&rdquo; &ldquo;All bear fruit.&rdquo; &ldquo;All have
+pretty flowers.&rdquo; &ldquo;All grow on bushes.&rdquo; &ldquo;All are valuable&rdquo; (or
+useful). &ldquo;They grow close to a house.&rdquo; &ldquo;All are ornamental.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;All are shrubbery.&rdquo;</p></blockquote>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The words of each series lend themselves readily to
+classification into a next higher class. This is the best type of
+response, but with most of the series it accounts for less than two
+thirds of the successes among subjects of 12-year intelligence. The
+proportion is less than one third for subjects of 10-year intelligence
+and nearly three fourths at the 14-year level. It would be possible and
+very desirable <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;309">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_309" id="Page_309"></a>to devise and standardize an additional test of this
+kind, but requiring the giving of an essential resemblance or
+classificatory similarity.</p>
+
+<p>For discussion of the psychological factors involved in the similarities
+test, see <a href="#VII_5">VII,&nbsp;5</a>.</p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_68_68" id="Footnote_68_68"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_68_68">[68]</a></span> See <a href="#VIII_6">VIII,&nbsp;6</a>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_69_69" id="Footnote_69_69"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_69_69">[69]</a></span> See also p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_298">298</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_70_70" id="Footnote_70_70"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_70_70">[70]</a></span> See scoring card.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_71_71" id="Footnote_71_71"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_71_71">[71]</a></span> &ldquo;Genius and Stupidity,&rdquo; in <i>Pedagogical Seminary</i>, vol.
+xiii, pp.&nbsp;307&ndash;73.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_72_72" id="Footnote_72_72"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_72_72">[72]</a></span> &ldquo;A Tentative Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon
+Measuring Scale of Intelligence,&rdquo; <i>Journal of Educational Psychology</i>
+(1912).</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_73_73" id="Footnote_73_73"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_73_73">[73]</a></span> See discussion, p.&nbsp;<a href="#Page_207">207</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;310">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_310" id="Page_310"></a><a name="CHAPTER_XVIII" id="CHAPTER_XVIII"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;XVIII
+<br />
+<small>INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR&nbsp;XIV.</small></h2>
+
+
+<h3><a name="XIV_1" id="XIV_1"></a>XIV,&nbsp;1. Vocabulary (fifty definitions, 9000&nbsp;words)</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure</b> and <b>Scoring</b>, as in <a href="#VIII_6" title="Vocabulary in Year VIII">VIII</a>, <a href="#X_1" title="Vocabulary in Year X">X</a>, and <a href="#XII_1" title="Vocabulary in Year XII">XII</a>. At year&nbsp;XIV fifty words
+must be correctly defined.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="XIV_2" id="XIV_2"></a>XIV,&nbsp;2. Induction test: finding a rule</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Provide six sheets of thin blank paper, say
+8&frac12;&nbsp;&times;&nbsp;11&nbsp;inches. Take the first sheet, and telling the subject to
+watch what you do, fold it once, and in the middle of the folded edge
+tear out or cut out a small notch; then ask the subject to tell you <i>how
+many holes there will be in the paper when it is unfolded</i>. The correct
+answer, <em>one</em>, is nearly always given without hesitation. But whatever
+the answer, unfold the paper and hold it up broadside for the subject&#8217;s
+inspection. Next, take another sheet, fold it once as before and say:
+&ldquo;<i>Now, when we folded it this way and tore out a piece, you remember it
+made one hole in the paper. This time we will give the paper another
+fold and see how many holes we shall have.</i>&rdquo; Then proceed to fold the
+paper again, this time in the other direction, and tear out a piece
+from the folded side and ask how many holes there will be when the paper
+is unfolded. After recording the answer, unfold the paper, hold it up
+before the subject so as to let him see the result. The answer is often
+incorrect and the unfolded sheet is greeted with an exclamation of<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;311">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_311" id="Page_311"></a>
+surprise. The governing principle is seldom made out at this stage of
+the experiment. But regardless of the correctness or incorrectness of
+the first and second answers, proceed with the third sheet. Fold it once
+and say: &ldquo;<i>When we folded it this way there was one hole.</i>&rdquo; Then fold it
+again and say: &ldquo;<i>And when we folded it this way there were two holes.</i>&rdquo;
+At this point fold the paper a third time and say: &ldquo;<i>Now, I am folding
+it again. How many holes will it have this time when I unfold it?</i>&rdquo;
+Record the answer and again unfold the paper while the subject looks on.</p>
+
+<p>Continue in the same manner with sheets four, five, and six, adding one
+fold each time. In folding each sheet recapitulate the results with the
+previous sheets, saying (with the sixth, for example): &ldquo;<i>When we folded
+it this way there was one hole, when we folded it again there were two,
+when we folded it again there were four, when we folded it again there
+were eight, when we folded it again there were sixteen; now, tell me how
+many holes there will be if we fold it once more.</i>&rdquo; In the
+recapitulation avoid the expression &ldquo;<i>When we folded it once, twice,
+three times</i>,&rdquo; etc., as this often leads the subject to double the
+numeral heard instead of doubling the number of holes in the previously
+folded sheet. After the answer is given, do not fail to unfold the paper
+and let the subject view the result.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed <em>if the rule is grasped by the time the
+sixth sheet is reached</em>; that is, the subject may pass after five
+incorrect responses, provided the sixth is correct and the governing
+rule can then be given. It is not permissible to ask for the rule until
+all six parts of the experiment have been given. Nothing must be said
+which could even suggest the operation of a rule. Often, however, the
+subject grasps the principle after two or three steps and gives it
+spontaneously. In this case it is unnecessary to proceed with the
+remaining steps.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;312">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_312" id="Page_312"></a><b>Remarks.</b> This test was first used by the writer in a comparative study
+of the intellectual processes of bright and dull boys in 1905, but it
+was not standardized until 1914. Rather extensive data indicate that it
+is a genuine test of intelligence. Of 14-year-old school children
+testing between 96&nbsp;and&nbsp;105&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q, 59&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent passed this test; of
+14-year-olds testing below 96&nbsp;I&nbsp;Q, 41&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent passed; of those testing
+above 105, 71&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent passed. That is, the test agrees well with the
+results obtained by the scale as a whole. Of &ldquo;average adults&rdquo; only
+10&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent fail; and of &ldquo;superior adults,&rdquo; fewer than 5&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent. As a
+rule, the higher the grade of intelligence, the fewer the steps
+necessary for grasping the rule. Of the superior adults, only
+35&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent fail to get the rule as early as the end of the fourth step.</p>
+
+<p>The test is little affected by schooling, and apart from differences in
+intelligence it is little influenced by age. Other advantages of the
+test are the keen interest it always arouses and its independence of
+language ability. It has been used successfully with immigrant subjects
+who had been in this country but a few months.</p>
+
+<p>We have named the experiment an &ldquo;induction test.&rdquo; It might be supposed
+that the solution would ordinarily be arrived at by deduction, or by an
+<i>a-priori</i> logical analysis of the principle involved. This, however, is
+rarely the case. Not one average adult out of ten reasons out the
+situation in this purely logical manner. It is ordinarily only after one
+or more mistakes have been made and have been exposed by the examiner
+holding up the unfolded paper to view that the correct principle is
+grasped. In the absence of deductive reasoning the subject must note
+that each unfolded sheet contains twice as many holes as the previous
+one, and must infer that folding the paper again will again double the
+number. The ability tested is the ability <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;313">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_313" id="Page_313"></a>to generalize from
+particulars where the common element of the particulars can be discerned
+only by the selective action of attention, in this case attention to the
+fact that each number is the double of its predecessor.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="XIV_3" id="XIV_3"></a>XIV,&nbsp;3. Giving differences between a president and a king</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Say: &ldquo;<i>There are three main differences between a president
+and a king; what are they?</i>&rdquo; If the subject stops after one difference
+is given, we urge him on, if possible, until three are given.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The three differences relate to power, tenure, and manner of
+accession. Only these differences are considered correct, and the
+successful response must include at least two of the three. We disregard
+crudities of expression and note merely whether the subject has the
+essential idea. As regards power, for example, any of the following
+responses are satisfactory: &ldquo;The king is absolute and the president is
+not.&rdquo; &ldquo;The king rules by himself, but the president rules with the help
+of the people.&rdquo; &ldquo;Kings can have things their own way more than
+presidents can,&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+<p>It may be objected that the reverse of this is sometimes true, that the
+king of to-day often has less power than the average president.
+Sometimes subjects mention this fact, and when they do we credit them
+with this part of the test. As a matter of fact, however, this answer is
+seldom given.</p>
+
+<p>Sometimes the subject does not stop until he has given a half-dozen or
+more differences, and in such cases the first three differences may be
+trivial and some of the later ones essential. The question then arises
+whether we should disregard the errors and pass the subject on his later
+correct responses. The rule in such cases is to ask the subject to pick
+out the &ldquo;three main differences.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;314">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_314" id="Page_314"></a>Sometimes accession and tenure are given in the form of a single
+contrast, as: &ldquo;The president is elected, but the king inherits his
+throne and rules for life.&rdquo; This answer entitles the subject to credit
+for both accession and tenure, the contrast as regards tenure being
+plainly implied.</p>
+
+<p>Unsatisfactory contrasts are of many kinds and are often amusing. Some
+of the most common are the following:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p>&ldquo;A king wears a crown.&rdquo; &ldquo;A king has jewels.&rdquo; &ldquo;A king sits on a
+throne.&rdquo; (&ldquo;A king sets on a thorn&rdquo; as one feeble-minded boy put
+it!) &ldquo;A king lives in a palace.&rdquo; &ldquo;A king has courtiers.&rdquo; &ldquo;A king
+is very dignified.&rdquo; &ldquo;A king dresses up more.&rdquo; &ldquo;A president has
+less pomp and ceremony.&rdquo; &ldquo;A president is more ready to receive
+the people.&rdquo; &ldquo;A king sits on a chair all the time and a
+president does not.&rdquo; &ldquo;No differences; it&#8217;s just names.&rdquo; &ldquo;A
+president does not give titles.&rdquo; &ldquo;A king has a larger salary.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;A king has royal blood.&rdquo; &ldquo;A king is in more danger.&rdquo; &ldquo;They have
+a different title.&rdquo; &ldquo;A king is more cruel.&rdquo; &ldquo;Kings have people
+beheaded.&rdquo; &ldquo;A king rules in a monarchy and a president in a
+republic.&rdquo; &ldquo;A king rules in a foreign country.&rdquo; &ldquo;A president is
+elected and a king fights for his office.&rdquo; &ldquo;A president appoints
+governors and a king does not.&rdquo; &ldquo;A president lets the lawyers
+make the laws.&rdquo; &ldquo;Everybody works for a king.&rdquo;</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>It is surprising to see how often trivial differences like the above are
+given. About thirty &ldquo;average adults&rdquo; out of a hundred, including
+high-school students, give at least one unsatisfactory contrast.</p>
+
+<p>The test has been criticized as depending too much on schooling. The
+criticism is to a certain extent valid when the test is used with young
+subjects, say of 10&nbsp;or&nbsp;12&nbsp;years. It is not valid, however, if the use of
+the test is confined to older subjects. With the latter, it is not a
+test of knowledge, but of the discriminative capacity to deal with
+knowledge already in the possession of the subject. It would be
+difficult to find an adult, not actually feeble-minded, who is ignorant
+of the facts called for: That the king inherits his <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;315">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_315" id="Page_315"></a>throne, while the
+president is elected; that the tenure of the king is for life, and that
+of the president for a term of years; that kings ordinarily have, or are
+supposed to have, more power. Even the relatively stupid adult knows
+this; but he also knows that kings are different from presidents in
+having crowns, thrones, palaces, robes, courtiers, larger pay, etc., and
+he makes no discrimination as regards the relative importance of these
+differences.</p>
+
+<p>The test is psychologically related to that of <a href="#VII_5">giving differences</a> in
+<ins class="correction" title="Transcriber&#8217;s note: Original reads &lsquo;VIII&rsquo;.">year&nbsp;VII</ins> and to the <a href="#VII_4">two</a> <a href="#XII_8">tests</a> of finding similarities; but it differs
+from these in requiring a comparison based on fundamental rather than
+accidental distinctions. The idea is good and should be worked out in
+additional tests of the same type.</p>
+
+<p>The test first appeared in the Binet revised scale of 1911. Kuhlmann
+omits it, and besides our own there are few statistics bearing on it.
+Our results show that if two essential differences are required, the
+test belongs where we have placed it, but that if only one essential
+difference is required, the test is easy enough for year&nbsp;XII.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="XIV_4" id="XIV_4"></a>XIV,&nbsp;4. Problem questions</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Say to the subject: &ldquo;<i>Listen, and see if you can understand
+what I read.</i>&rdquo; Then read the following three problems, rather slowly and
+with expression, pausing after each long enough for the subject to find
+an answer:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol class="alph smaller">
+<li>&ldquo;A man who was walking in the woods near a city stopped
+suddenly, very much frightened, and then ran to the
+nearest policeman, saying that he had just seen hanging
+from the limb of a tree a ... a what?&rdquo;</li>
+
+<li>&ldquo;My neighbor has been having queer visitors. First a
+doctor came to his house, then a lawyer, then a minister
+(preacher or priest). What do you think happened there?&rdquo;</li>
+
+<li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;316">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_316" id="Page_316"></a>&ldquo;An Indian who had come to town for the first time in
+his life saw a white man riding along the street. As the
+white man rode by, the Indian said&mdash;&lsquo;The white man is
+lazy; he walks sitting down.&rsquo; What was the white man
+riding on that caused the Indian to say, &lsquo;He walks sitting
+down&rsquo;?&rdquo;</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>Do not ask questions calculated to draw out the correct response, but
+wait in silence for the subject&#8217;s spontaneous answer. It is permissible,
+however, to re-read the passage if the subject requests it.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> <em>Two responses out of three must be satisfactory.</em> The
+following explanations and examples will make clear the requirements of
+the test:&mdash;</p>
+
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><h4>(a) What the man saw hanging</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> The only correct answer for the first is &ldquo;A man
+who had hung himself&rdquo; (or who had committed suicide, been
+hanged, etc.). We may also pass the following answer: &ldquo;Dead
+branches that looked like a man hanging.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>A good many subjects answer simply, &ldquo;A man.&rdquo; This answer cannot
+be scored because of the impossibility of knowing what is in the
+subject&#8217;s mind, and in such cases it is always necessary to say:
+&ldquo;<i>Explain what you mean.</i>&rdquo; The answer to this interrogation
+always enables us to score the response.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> There is an endless variety of failures: &ldquo;A
+snake,&rdquo; &ldquo;A monkey,&rdquo; &ldquo;A robber,&rdquo; or &ldquo;A tramp&rdquo; being the most
+common. Others include such answers as &ldquo;A bear,&rdquo; &ldquo;A tiger,&rdquo; &ldquo;A
+wild cat,&rdquo; &ldquo;A cat,&rdquo; &ldquo;A bird,&rdquo; &ldquo;An eagle,&rdquo; &ldquo;A bird&#8217;s nest,&rdquo; &ldquo;A
+hornet&#8217;s nest,&rdquo; &ldquo;A leaf,&rdquo; &ldquo;A swing,&rdquo; &ldquo;A boy in a swing,&rdquo; &ldquo;A
+basket of flowers,&rdquo; &ldquo;An egg,&rdquo; &ldquo;A ghost,&rdquo; &ldquo;A white sheet,&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Clothes,&rdquo; &ldquo;A purse,&rdquo; etc.</p>
+
+
+<h4>(b) My neighbor</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> The expected answer is &ldquo;A death,&rdquo; &ldquo;Some one has
+died,&rdquo; etc. We must always check up this response, however, by
+asking what the lawyer came for, and this must also be answered
+correctly.</p>
+
+<p>While it is expected that the subject will understand that the
+doctor came to attend a sick person, the lawyer to make his
+will, <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;317">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_317" id="Page_317"></a>and the minister to preach the funeral, there are a few
+other ingenious interpretations which pass as satisfactory. For
+example, &ldquo;A man got hurt in an accident; the doctor came to make
+him well, the lawyer to see about damages, and then he died and
+the preacher came for the funeral.&rdquo; Or, &ldquo;A man died, the lawyer
+came to help the widow settle the estate and the preacher came
+for the funeral.&rdquo; We can hardly expect the 14-year-old child to
+know that it is not the custom to settle an estate until after
+the funeral.</p>
+
+<p>The following excellent response was given by an enlightened
+young eugenist: &ldquo;A marriage; the doctor came to examine them and
+see if they were fit to marry, the lawyer to arrange the
+marriage settlement, and the minister to marry them.&rdquo; The
+following logical responses occurred once each: &ldquo;A murder. The
+doctor came to examine the body, the lawyer to get evidence, and
+the preacher to preach the funeral.&rdquo; &ldquo;An unmarried girl has
+given birth to a child. The lawyer was employed to get the man
+to marry her and then the preacher came to perform the wedding
+ceremony.&rdquo; Perhaps some will consider this interpretation too
+far-fetched to pass. But it is perfectly logical and,
+unfortunately, represents an occurrence which is not so very
+rare.</p>
+
+<p>If an incorrect answer is first given and then corrected, the
+correction is accepted.</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> The failures again are quite varied, but are
+most frequently due to failure to understand the lawyer&#8217;s
+mission. Of 66 tabulated failures, 26 are accounted for in this
+way, while only 6 are due to inability to state the part played
+by the minister. The most common incorrect responses are: &ldquo;A
+baby born&rdquo; (accounting for 5 out of 66 failures); &ldquo;A divorce&rdquo;
+(very common with the children tested by Dr.&nbsp;Ordahl, at Reno,
+Nevada!); &ldquo;A marriage&rdquo;; &ldquo;A divorce and a remarriage&rdquo;; &ldquo;A
+dinner&rdquo;; &ldquo;An entertainment&rdquo;; &ldquo;Some friends came to chat,&rdquo; etc.
+In 20&nbsp;failures out of 66, marriage was incorrectly connected
+with a will, a divorce, the death of a child, etc.</p>
+
+<p>The following are not bad, but hardly deserve to pass: &ldquo;Sickness
+and trouble; the lawyer and minister came to help him out of
+trouble.&rdquo; Or, &ldquo;Somebody was sick; the lawyer wanted his money
+and the minister came to see how he was.&rdquo; A few present a still
+more logical interpretation, but so far-fetched that it is
+doubtful whether they should count as passes; for example: &ldquo;A
+man and his wife had a fight. One got hurt and had to have the
+doctor, then they had a lawyer to get them divorced, then the
+minister came to <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;318">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_318" id="Page_318"></a>marry one of them.&rdquo; Again, &ldquo;Some one is dying
+and is getting married and making his will before he dies.&rdquo;</p>
+
+
+<h4>(c) What the man was riding on</h4>
+
+<p>The only correct response is &ldquo;Bicycle.&rdquo; The most common error is
+<i>horse</i> (or <i>donkey</i>), accounting for 48 out of 71 tabulated
+failures. Vehicles, like <i>wagon</i>, <i>buggy</i>, <i>automobile</i>, or
+<i>street car</i>, were mentioned in 14 out of 71 failures. Bizarre
+replies are: &ldquo;A cripple in a wheel chair&rdquo;; &ldquo;A person riding on
+some one&#8217;s back,&rdquo; etc.</p></blockquote>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The experiment is a form of the completion test. Elements of a
+situation are given, out of which the entire situation is to be
+constructed. This phase of intelligence has already been discussed.<a name="FNanchor_74_74" id="FNanchor_74_74"></a><a href="#Footnote_74_74" class="fnanchor">[74]</a></p>
+
+<p>While it is generally admitted that the underlying idea of this test is
+good, some have criticized Binet&#8217;s selection of problems. Meumann thinks
+the lawyer element of the second is so unfamiliar to children as to
+render that part of the test unfair. Several &ldquo;armchair&rdquo; critics have
+mentioned the danger of nervous shock from the first problem. Bobertag
+throws out the test entirely and substitutes a completion test modeled
+after that of Ebbinghaus. Our own results are altogether favorable to
+the test. If it is used in year&nbsp;XIV, Meumann&#8217;s objection hardly holds,
+for American children of that age do ordinarily know something about
+making wills. As for the danger of shock from the first problem, we have
+never once found the slightest evidence of this much-feared result. The
+subject always understands that the situation depicted is hypothetical,
+and so answers either in a matter-of-fact manner or with a laugh.</p>
+
+<p>The bicycle problem is our own invention. Binet used the other two and
+required both to be answered correctly. The test was located in year&nbsp;XII
+of the 1908 scale, and in <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;319">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_319" id="Page_319"></a>year&nbsp;XV of the 1911 revision. Goddard and
+Kuhlmann retain it in the original location. The Stanford results of
+1911, 1912, 1914, and 1915 agree in showing the test too difficult for
+year&nbsp;XII, even when only two out of three correct responses are
+required. If the original form of the experiment is used, it is
+exceedingly difficult for year&nbsp;XV. As here given it fits well at
+year&nbsp;XIV.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="XIV_5" id="XIV_5"></a>XIV,&nbsp;5. Arithmetical reasoning</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> The following problems, printed in clear type, are shown one
+at a time to the subject, who reads each problem aloud and (with the
+printed problem still before him) finds the answer without the use of
+pencil or paper.</p>
+
+
+<ol class="alph smaller">
+<li>If a man&#8217;s salary is $20 a week and he spends $14 a week, how long will it take him to save $300?</li>
+<li>If 2&nbsp;pencils cost 5&nbsp;cents, how many pencils can you buy for 50&nbsp;cents?</li>
+<li>At 15&nbsp;cents a yard, how much will 7&nbsp;feet of cloth cost?</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p>Only one minute is allowed for each problem, but nothing is said about
+hurrying. While one problem is being solved, the others should be hidden
+from view. It is not permissible, if the subject gives an incorrect
+answer, to ask him to solve the problem again. The following exception,
+however, is made to this rule: If the answer given to the third problem
+indicates that the word <em>yard</em> has been read as <em>feet</em>, the subject is
+asked to read the problem through again carefully (aloud) and to tell
+how he solved it. No further help of any kind may be given.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> <em>Two of the three</em> problems must be solved correctly within the
+minute allotted to each. No credit is allowed for correct method if the
+answer is wrong.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;320">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_320" id="Page_320"></a><b>Remarks.</b> We have selected these problems from the list used by Bonser in
+his <i>Study of the Reasoning Ability of Children in the Fourth, Fifth,
+and Sixth School Grades</i>.<a name="FNanchor_75_75" id="FNanchor_75_75"></a><a href="#Footnote_75_75" class="fnanchor">[75]</a></p>
+
+<p>Our tests of 279 &ldquo;at age&rdquo; children between 12&nbsp;and&nbsp;15&nbsp;years reveal the
+surprising fact that the test as here used and scored is not passed by
+much over half of the children of any age in the grades below the
+high-school age. Of the high-school pupils 19&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent failed to pass,
+21&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of ordinarily successful business men (!), and 27&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent
+of Knollin&#8217;s unemployed men testing up to the &ldquo;average adult&rdquo; level. To
+find average intelligence cutting such a sorry figure raises the
+question whether the ancient definition of man as &ldquo;the rational animal&rdquo;
+is justified by the facts. The truth is, <em>average</em> intelligence does not
+do a great deal of abstract, logical reasoning, and the little it does
+is done usually under the whip of necessity.</p>
+
+<p>At first thought these problems will doubtless appear to the reader to
+be mere tests of schooling. It is true, of course, that in solving them
+the subject makes use of knowledge which is ordinarily obtained in
+school; but this knowledge (that is, knowledge of reading and of
+addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division) is possessed by
+practically all adults who are not feeble-minded, and by many who are.
+Success, therefore, depends upon the ability to apply this knowledge
+readily and accurately to the problems given&mdash;precisely the kind of
+ability in which a deficiency cannot be made good by school training. We
+can teach even morons how to read problems and how to add, subtract,
+multiply, and divide with a fair degree of accuracy; the trouble comes
+when they try to decide which of these processes the problem calls for.
+This may require intelligence of high or low order, according to the
+difficulty of the problem. As for the present test, we have shown that
+almost totally <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;321">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_321" id="Page_321"></a>unschooled men of &ldquo;average adult&rdquo; intelligence pass this
+test as frequently as high-school seniors of the same mental level.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="XIV_6" id="XIV_6"></a>XIV,&nbsp;6. Reversing hands of clock</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Say to the subject: &ldquo;<i>Suppose it is six twenty-two o&#8217;clock,
+that is, twenty-two minutes after six; can you see in your mind where
+the large hand would be, and where the small hand would be?</i>&rdquo; Subjects
+of 12- to 14-year intelligence practically always answer this in the
+affirmative. Then continue: &ldquo;<i>Now, suppose the two hands of the clock
+were to trade places, so that the large hand takes the place where the
+small hand was, and the small hand takes the place where the large hand
+was. What time would it then be?</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Repeat the test with the hands at 8.10 (10&nbsp;minutes after 8), and again
+with the hands at 2.46 (14&nbsp;minutes before 3).</p>
+
+<p>The subject is not allowed to look at a clock or watch, or to aid
+himself by drawing, but must work out the problem mentally. As a rule
+the answer is given within a few seconds or not at all. If an answer is
+not forthcoming within two minutes the score is failure.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if <em>two of the three</em> problems are solved
+within the following range of accuracy: the first solution is considered
+correct if the answer falls between 4.30 and 4.35, inclusive; the second
+if the answer falls between 1.40 and 1.45, and the third if the answer
+falls between 9.10 and 9.15.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> It appears that success in the test chiefly depends upon
+voluntary control over constructive visual imagery. Weakness of visual
+imagery may account for the failure of a considerable percentage of
+adults to pass the test. Visual imagery, however, is not absolutely
+necessary to success. One 8-year-old prodigy, who had 12-year<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;322">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_322" id="Page_322"></a>
+intelligence, arrived in forty seconds at a strictly mathematical
+solution for the second problem, as follows: &ldquo;If it is 2.46, and the
+hands trade places, then the little hand has gone about one fourth of
+the distance from 9&nbsp;o&#8217;clock to 10&nbsp;o&#8217;clock. One fourth of 60&nbsp;minutes is
+15&nbsp;minutes, and so the time would be 15&nbsp;minutes after 9&nbsp;o&#8217;clock.&rdquo; Such a
+solution is certainly possible by the use of verbal imagery of any type.</p>
+
+<p>The test shows a high correlation with mental age, but more than most
+others it is subject to the influence of cribbing. For this reason,
+other positions of the clock hands should be tried out for the purpose
+of finding substitute experiments of equal difficulty. Until such
+experiments have been made, it will be necessary to confine the
+experiment to the three positions here presented.</p>
+
+<p>Schooling seems to have no influence whatever on the percentage of
+passes.</p>
+
+<p>This test was first used by Binet in 1905, but was not included in
+either the 1908 or 1911 series. Goddard and Kuhlmann both include the
+test in their revisions, placing it in year&nbsp;XV. They give only two
+problems (our <i>a</i> and <i>c</i>) and require that both be answered correctly.
+Neither Goddard nor Kuhlmann, however, indicates the degree of error
+permitted.</p>
+
+<p>Something depends upon original position of the hands. Binet used 6.20
+and 2.46. For some reason the 2.46 arrangement is much more difficult
+than either 8.10 or 6.22, yielding almost twice as many failures as
+either of the other positions.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="XIV_alt" id="XIV_alt"></a>XIV, Alternative tests: repeating seven digits</h3>
+
+<p>This time, as in <a href="#X_alt1" title="Repeating digits in Year X">year&nbsp;X</a>, only two series are given, one of which must be
+repeated without error. The two series are: 2&ndash;1&ndash;8&ndash;3&ndash;4&ndash;3&ndash;9 and
+9&ndash;7&ndash;2&ndash;8&ndash;4&ndash;7&ndash;5. Note that in none<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;323">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_323" id="Page_323"></a> of the tests of repeating digits is it
+permissible to warn the subject of the number to be given.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Binet originally placed this test in year&nbsp;XII, giving three
+trials, but later moved it to year&nbsp;XV. Goddard and Kuhlmann retain it in
+year&nbsp;XII. Our data show that when three trials are given the test is too
+easy for year&nbsp;XIV, but that it fits this age when only two trials are
+allowed; that after the age of 12&nbsp;or&nbsp;14&nbsp;years memory for relatively
+meaningless material, like digits or nonsense syllables, improves but
+little; and that above this level it does not correlate very closely
+with intelligence.</p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_74_74" id="Footnote_74_74"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_74_74">[74]</a></span> See <a href="#IX_5">IX,&nbsp;5</a>, and <a href="#XII_4">XII,&nbsp;4</a>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_75_75" id="Footnote_75_75"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_75_75">[75]</a></span> Columbia University Contributions to Education, no.&nbsp;37,
+1910.</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;324">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_324" id="Page_324"></a><a name="CHAPTER_XIX" id="CHAPTER_XIX"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;XIX
+<br />
+<small>INSTRUCTIONS FOR &ldquo;AVERAGE ADULT&rdquo;</small></h2>
+
+
+<h3><a name="Average_adult_1" id="Average_adult_1"></a>Average adult, 1: vocabulary (sixty-five definitions, 11,700&nbsp;words)</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure</b> and <b>Scoring</b>, as in previous vocabulary tests.<a name="FNanchor_76_76" id="FNanchor_76_76"></a><a href="#Footnote_76_76" class="fnanchor">[76]</a> At the
+average adult level sixty-five words should be correctly defined.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="Average_adult_2" id="Average_adult_2"></a>Average adult, 2: interpretation of fables (score&nbsp;8)</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> As in <a href="#XII_6">year&nbsp;XII, test&nbsp;6</a>. Use the same fables.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The method of scoring is the same as for <a href="#XII_5">XII</a>, but the total
+score must be 8&nbsp;points to satisfy the requirements at this level.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> For discussion of test, see <a href="#XII_5">XII,&nbsp;5</a>.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="Average_adult_3" id="Average_adult_3"></a>Average adult, 3: differences between abstract terms</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Say: <i>What is the difference between</i>:&mdash;</p>
+
+
+<ol class="alph smaller">
+<li>Laziness and idleness?</li>
+<li>Evolution and revolution?</li>
+<li>Poverty and misery?</li>
+<li>Character and reputation?</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> <em>Three correct contrasting definitions out of four</em> are
+necessary for a pass. It is not sufficient merely to give a correct
+meaning for each word of a pair; the subject <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;325">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_325" id="Page_325"></a>must point out a difference
+between the two words so as to make a real contrast. For example, if the
+subject defines <em>evolution</em> as a &ldquo;growth&rdquo; or &ldquo;gradual change,&rdquo; and
+<em>revolution</em> as the turning of a wheel on its axis, the experimenter
+should say: &ldquo;<i>Yes, but I want you to tell me the difference between
+evolution and revolution.</i>&rdquo; If the contrast is not then forthcoming the
+response is marked <em>minus</em>.</p>
+
+<p>The following are sample definitions which may be considered
+acceptable:&mdash;</p>
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><p><i>(a) Laziness and idleness.</i> &ldquo;It is laziness if you won&#8217;t
+work, and idleness if you are willing to work but haven&#8217;t any
+job.&rdquo; &ldquo;Lots of men are idle who are not lazy and would like to
+work if they had something to do.&rdquo; &ldquo;Laziness means you don&#8217;t
+want to work; idleness means you are not doing anything just
+now.&rdquo; &ldquo;Idle people may be lazy, or they may just happen to be
+out of a job.&rdquo; &ldquo;It is laziness when you don&#8217;t like to work, and
+idleness when you are not working.&rdquo; &ldquo;An idle person might be
+willing to work; a lazy man won&#8217;t work.&rdquo; &ldquo;Laziness comes from
+within; idleness may be forced upon one.&rdquo; &ldquo;Laziness is aversion
+to activity; idleness is simply the state of inactivity.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Laziness is idleness from choice or preference; idleness means
+doing nothing.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>The essential contrast, accordingly, is that <em>laziness refers to
+unwillingness to work; idleness to the mere fact of inactivity</em>.
+This contrast must be expressed, however clumsily.</p>
+
+<p><i>(b) Evolution and revolution.</i> &ldquo;Evolution is a gradual
+change; revolution is a sudden change.&rdquo; &ldquo;Evolution is natural
+development; revolution is sudden upheaval.&rdquo; &ldquo;Evolution means an
+unfolding or development; revolution means a complete upsetting
+of everything.&rdquo; &ldquo;Evolution is the gradual development of a
+country or government; revolution is a quick change of
+government.&rdquo; &ldquo;Evolution takes place by natural force; a
+revolution is caused by an outside force.&rdquo; &ldquo;Evolution is growth;
+revolution is a quick change from existing conditions.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Evolution is a natural change; revolution is a violent
+change.&rdquo; &ldquo;Evolution is growth step by step; revolution is more
+sudden and radical in its action.&rdquo; &ldquo;Evolution is a change
+brought about by peaceful development, while revolution is
+brought about by an uprising.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>The essential distinction, accordingly, is that <em>evolution means
+a <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;326">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_326" id="Page_326"></a>gradual, natural, or slow change, while revolution means a
+sudden, forced, or violent change</em>. Non-contrasting definitions,
+even when the individual terms are defined correctly, are not
+satisfactory.</p>
+
+<p><i>(c) Poverty and misery.</i> &ldquo;Poverty is when you are poor;
+misery means suffering.&rdquo; &ldquo;Only the poor are in poverty, but
+everybody can be miserable.&rdquo; &ldquo;Poverty is the lowest stage of
+poorness; misery means pain.&rdquo; &ldquo;The poor are not always
+miserable, and the rich are miserable sometimes.&rdquo; &ldquo;Poverty means
+to be in want; misery comes from any kind of suffering or
+anguish.&rdquo; &ldquo;The poor are in poverty; the sick are in misery.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Poverty is the condition of being very poor financially; misery
+is a feeling which any class of people can have.&rdquo; &ldquo;One who is
+poor is in poverty; one who is wretched or doesn&#8217;t enjoy life is
+in misery.&rdquo; &ldquo;Poverty comes from lack of money; misery, from lack
+of happiness or comfort.&rdquo; &ldquo;Misery means distress. It can come
+from poverty or many other things.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>(d) Character and reputation.</i> &ldquo;Character is what you are;
+reputation is what people say about you.&rdquo; &ldquo;You have character if
+you are honest; but you might be honest and still have a bad
+reputation among people who misjudge you.&rdquo; &ldquo;Character is your
+real self; reputation is the opinion people have about you.&rdquo;
+&ldquo;Your character depends upon yourself; reputation depends on
+what others think of you.&rdquo; &ldquo;Character means your real morals;
+reputation is the way you are known in the world.&rdquo; &ldquo;A man has a
+good character if he would not do evil; but a man may have a
+good reputation and still have a bad character.&rdquo;</p></blockquote>
+
+<p>A little practice and a good deal of discrimination are necessary for
+the correct grading of responses to this test. Subjects are often so
+clumsy in expression that their responses are anything but clear. It is
+then necessary to ask them to explain what they mean. Further
+questioning, however, is not permissible. For uniformity in scoring it
+is necessary to bear in mind that the definitions given must, in order
+to be satisfactory, express the essential distinction between the two
+words.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> What we have said regarding the psychological significance of
+<a href="#XII_2">test&nbsp;2, year&nbsp;XII</a>, applies equally well here. The test on the whole is a
+valuable one. Our statistics<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;327">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_327" id="Page_327"></a> show that it is not, as some critics have
+thought, mainly a test of schooling.</p>
+
+<p>The main criticism to be made is that it imposes a somewhat difficult
+task upon the power of language expression. For this reason it is
+necessary in scoring to disregard clumsiness of expression and to look
+only to the essential correctness or incorrectness of the thought.</p>
+
+<p>This test first appeared in year&nbsp;XIII of Binet&#8217;s 1908 scale. The terms
+used were &ldquo;happiness and honor&rdquo;; &ldquo;evolution and revolution&rdquo;; &ldquo;event and
+advent&rdquo;; &ldquo;poverty and misery&rdquo;; &ldquo;pride and pretension.&rdquo; In the 1911
+revision, &ldquo;happiness and honor&rdquo; and &ldquo;pride and pretension&rdquo; were dropped,
+and the other three pairs were moved up to the adult group, two out of
+three successes being required for a pass. Kuhlmann places it in
+year&nbsp;XV, using &ldquo;happiness and honor&rdquo; instead of our &ldquo;character and
+reputation,&rdquo; and requires three successes out of five.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="Average_adult_4" id="Average_adult_4"></a>Average adult, 4: problem of the enclosed boxes</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Show the subject a cardboard box about one inch on a side.
+Say: &ldquo;<i>You see this box; it has two smaller boxes inside of it, and each
+one of the smaller boxes contains a little tiny box. How many boxes are
+there altogether, counting the big one?</i>&rdquo; To be sure that the subject
+understands repeat the statement of the problem: &ldquo;<i>First the large box,
+then two smaller ones, and each of the smaller ones contains a little
+tiny box.</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Record the response, and, showing another box, say: &ldquo;<i>This box has two
+smaller boxes inside, and each of the smaller boxes contains two tiny
+boxes. How many altogether? Remember, first the large box, then two
+smaller ones, and each smaller one contains two tiny boxes.</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>The third problem, which is given in the same way,<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;328">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_328" id="Page_328"></a> states that there are
+<i>three</i> smaller boxes, each of which contains <i>three</i> tiny boxes.</p>
+
+<p>In the fourth problem there are <i>four</i> smaller boxes, each containing
+<i>four</i> tiny boxes.</p>
+
+<p>The problem must be given orally, and the solution must be found without
+the aid of pencil or paper. Only one half-minute is allowed for each
+problem. Note that each problem is stated twice.</p>
+
+<p>A correction is permitted, provided it is offered spontaneously and does
+not seem to be the result of guessing. Guessing can be checked up by
+asking the subject to explain the solution.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> <em>Three of the four</em> problems must be solved correctly within
+the half-minute allotted to each.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Success depends, in the first place, upon ability to comprehend
+the statement of the problem and to hold its conditions in mind.
+Subjects much below the 12-year level of intelligence are often unable
+to do this.</p>
+
+<p>Granting that the problem has been comprehended, success seems to depend
+chiefly upon the facility with which the constructive imagination
+manipulates concrete visual imagery. In this respect it resembles the
+problem of reversing the hands of a clock. With some subjects, however,
+verbal imagery alone is operative. Tactual imagery would, of course,
+serve the purpose as well.</p>
+
+<p>This is as good a place as any to emphasize the fact that the
+introspective study of mental imagery has little to contribute to the
+measurement of intelligence. Intelligence tests are concerned with the
+total result of a thought process, rather than with the imagery supports
+of that process. Thought may be carried on almost equally well by
+various kinds of imagery. As Galton showed, a person can be taught to
+carry on arithmetical processes by the use of smell imagery. The kind of
+imagery employed is the product of <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;329">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_329" id="Page_329"></a>slight, innate preferences
+complicated by the more or less accidental effects of habit.</p>
+
+<p>We may say that imagery is to thinking what scaffolding is to
+architecture. The important thing is the completed building rather than
+the nature of the scaffolding employed in erecting it. No one thinks of
+blaming the ill construction of a building upon the kind of scaffolding
+used, for if the architect and builder are competent satisfactory
+scaffolding will be found. Just as little are deficiencies or
+peculiarities of imagery the real cause of low-order intelligence. We
+cannot increase intelligence by formal drill in the use of supposedly
+important kinds of mental imagery, any more than we can transform a
+plain carpenter into a Michael Angelo by instructing him in the use of
+scaffolding materials such as were employed in the construction of St.
+Peter&#8217;s Cathedral.</p>
+
+<p>This test is of our own invention and has been brought to its present
+form only after a good deal of preliminary experimentation. It
+correlates fairly well with mental age as determined by the scale as a
+whole. It was passed by 55&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of high-school pupils and by
+65&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of unschooled business men. Success in it is thus seen not
+to depend upon schooling.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="Average_adult_5" id="Average_adult_5"></a>Average adult, 5: repeating six digits reversed</h3>
+
+<p>The series used are: 4&ndash;7&ndash;1&ndash;9&ndash;5&ndash;2; 5&ndash;8&ndash;3&ndash;2&ndash;9&ndash;4; and 7&ndash;5&ndash;2&ndash;6&ndash;3&ndash;8.</p>
+
+<p><b>Procedure</b> and <b>Scoring</b>, as in <a href="#VII_alt2">year&nbsp;VII, alternative&nbsp;2</a>.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The test is passed by approximately half of &ldquo;average adults&rdquo;
+and by three fourths of &ldquo;superior adults.&rdquo; It shows no effect of
+schooling, the uneducated business men even surpassing our high-school
+students.</p>
+
+<p>For the higher levels of intelligence, especially, the test <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;330">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_330" id="Page_330"></a>is superior
+to that of repeating digits in the direct order. It is less mechanical
+and makes heavier demands upon higher intelligence.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="Average_adult_6" id="Average_adult_6"></a>Average adult, 6: using a code</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Show the subject the code given on the accompanying form.
+Say: &ldquo;<i>See these diagrams here. Look and you will see that they contain
+all the letters of the alphabet. Now, examine the arrangement of the
+letters. They go</i> (pointing) <i>a b c, d e f, g h i, j k l, m n o, p q r,
+s t u v, w x y z. You see the letters in the first two diagrams are
+arranged in the up-and-down order</i> (pointing again), <i>and the letters in
+the other two diagrams run in just the opposite way from the hands of a
+clock</i> (pointing). <i>Look again and you will see that the second diagram
+is drawn just like the first, except that each letter has a dot with it,
+and that the last diagram is like the third except that here, also, each
+letter has a dot. Now, all of this represents a code; that is, a secret
+language. It is a real code, one that was used in the Civil War for
+sending secret messages. This is the way it works: we draw the lines
+which hold a letter, but leave out the letter. Here, for example, is the
+way we would write &lsquo;spy?&rsquo;</i>&rdquo; Then write the word <em>spy</em>, pointing out
+carefully where each letter comes from, and emphasizing the fact that
+the dot must be used in addition to the lines in writing any letter in
+the second or the fourth diagram. Illustrate also with <em>war</em>.</p>
+
+<p>Then add: &ldquo;<i>I am going to have you write something for me; remember now,
+how the letters go, first</i> (pointing, as before) <i>a b c, d e f, g h i,
+then j k l, m n o, p q r, then s t u v, then w x y z. And don&#8217;t forget
+the dots for the letters in this diagram and this one</i>&rdquo; (pointing). At
+this point, take away the diagrams and tell the subject to write the
+words <em>come quickly</em>. Say nothing about hurrying.</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;331">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_331" id="Page_331"></a>The subject is given a pencil, but is allowed to draw only the symbols
+for the words <em>come quickly</em>. He is not permitted to reproduce the
+entire code and then to copy the code letters from his reproduction.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if the words are written in <em>six minutes and
+without more than two errors</em>. Omission of a dot counts as only a half
+error.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> It is not easy to analyze the mental functions which contribute
+to success in the code test. Contrary to what might be supposed, success
+does not necessarily depend upon getting and retaining a visual picture
+of the diagrams. Kin&aelig;sthetic imagery will answer the purpose just as
+well, or the original visual impression may even be translated at once
+into auditory-verbal imagery and remembered as such. The significance of
+the test must be expressed in other terms than the kind of imagery it
+may happen to bring into play.</p>
+
+<p>Healy and Fernald describe the task of writing a code sentence without
+copy as one which requires &ldquo;close attention and steadiness of purpose.&rdquo;
+They also emphasize the fact that the attention must be directed inward,
+since there is no object of interest before the senses and since no
+special stimulus to attention is offered by the experimenter.
+Observations we have made on subjects during the test confirm this view
+as to the factors involved.</p>
+
+<p>That inability to remember the code as a whole is not a common cause of
+failure is shown by the fact that subjects above 12-year intelligence
+who have failed on the test are nearly always able to reproduce the
+diagrams and insert the letters in their proper places. To give the code
+form of a given letter without copy, however, makes a much heavier
+demand on attention. Nearly all subjects find it necessary to trace the
+code form, in imagination, from the beginning up to each letter whose
+code form is sought. Subjects of <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;332">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_332" id="Page_332"></a>superior intelligence, however,
+sometimes hit upon the device of remembering the position of the
+individual key letters e.g. (the first letter of each figure) from
+which, as a base, any desired letter form may be quickly sought out.</p>
+
+<p>The test correlates well with mental age, but for some reason not
+apparent it is passed by a larger percentage of high-school pupils than
+unschooled adults of the same mental level.</p>
+
+<p>The code test was first described by Healy and Fernald in their &ldquo;Tests
+for Practical Mental Classification.&rdquo;<a name="FNanchor_77_77" id="FNanchor_77_77"></a><a href="#Footnote_77_77" class="fnanchor">[77]</a> The authors gave no data,
+however, which would indicate the mental level to which the test
+belongs. Dr.&nbsp;Goddard incorporated it in year&nbsp;XV of his revision of the
+Binet scale, but also fails to give statistics. The location given the
+test in the Stanford revision is based on tests of nearly
+500&nbsp;individuals ranging from a mental level of 12&nbsp;years to that of
+&ldquo;superior adult.&rdquo; It appears that the test is considerably more
+difficult than most had thought it to be.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="Average_adult_alt1" id="Average_adult_alt1"></a>Average adult, alternative test&nbsp;1: repeating twenty-eight syllables</h3>
+
+<p>The sentences for this test are:&mdash;</p>
+
+
+<ol class="alph smaller">
+<li>Walter likes very much to go on visits to his grandmother, because she always tells him many funny stories.</li>
+<li>Yesterday I saw a pretty little dog in the street. It had curly brown hair, short legs, and a long tail.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Exactly as in <a href="#VI_6">VI,&nbsp;6</a>. Emphasize that the sentence must be
+repeated without a single change of any sort. Get attention before
+giving each sentence.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> Passed <em>if one sentence is repeated without a single error</em>. In
+<a href="#VI_6" title="Repeating syllables at Year VI">VI</a> and <a href="#X_alt2" title="Repeating syllables at Year X">X</a> we scored the response as satisfactory<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;333">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_333" id="Page_333"></a> if one sentence was
+repeated without error, or if two were repeated with not more than one
+error each.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> The test of repeating sentences is not as satisfactory in the
+higher intelligence levels as in the lower. It is too mechanical to tax
+very heavily the higher thought processes. It does, however, have a
+certain correlation with intelligence. Contrary to what one would have
+expected, uneducated adults of &ldquo;average adult&rdquo; intelligence surpassed
+our high-school students of the same mental level.</p>
+
+<p>Binet located this test in year&nbsp;XII of the 1908 series, but shifted it
+to year&nbsp;XV in 1911. The American versions of the Binet scale have
+usually retained it in year&nbsp;XII, though Goddard admits that the
+sentences are somewhat too difficult for that year. Kuhlmann puts the
+test in year&nbsp;XII, but reduces the sentences to twenty-four syllables and
+permits one re-reading. We give only two trials and our sentences are
+considerably more difficult. With the procedure and scoring we have
+used, the test is rather easy for the &ldquo;average adult&rdquo; group, but a
+little too hard for year&nbsp;XIV.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="Average_adult_alt2" id="Average_adult_alt2"></a>Average adult, alternative test&nbsp;2: comprehension of physical relations</h3>
+
+
+<h4>(a) Problem regarding the path of a cannon ball</h4>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Draw on a piece of paper a horizontal line six or eight
+inches long. Above it, an inch or two, draw a short horizontal line
+about an inch long and parallel to the first. Tell the subject that the
+long line represents the perfectly level ground of a field, and that the
+short line represents a cannon. Explain that the cannon is &ldquo;<i>pointed
+horizontally (on a level) and is fired across this perfectly level
+field</i>.&rdquo; After it is clear that these conditions of the problem <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;334">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_334" id="Page_334"></a>are
+comprehended, we add: &ldquo;<i>Now, suppose that this cannon is fired off and
+that the ball comes to the ground at this point here</i> (pointing to the
+farther end of the line which represents the field). <i>Take this pencil
+and draw a line which will show what path the cannon ball will take from
+the time it leaves the mouth of the cannon till it strikes the ground.</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> There are four types of response: (1) A straight diagonal line
+is drawn from the cannon&#8217;s mouth to the point where the ball strikes.
+(2) A straight line is drawn from the cannon&#8217;s mouth running
+horizontally until almost directly over the goal, at which point the
+line drops almost or quite vertically. (3) The path from the cannon&#8217;s
+mouth first rises considerably from the horizontal, at an angle perhaps
+of between ten to forty-five degrees, and finally describes a gradual
+curve downward to the goal. (4) The line begins almost on a level and
+drops more rapidly toward the end of its course.</p>
+
+<p>Only the last is satisfactory. Of course, nothing like a mathematically
+accurate solution of the problem is expected. It is sufficient if the
+response belongs to the fourth type above instead of being absurd, as
+the other types described are. Any one who has ever thrown stones should
+have the data for such an approximate solution. Not a day of schooling
+is necessary.</p>
+
+
+<h4>(b) Problem as to the weight of a fish in water</h4>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Say to the subject: &ldquo;<i>You know, of course, that water holds
+up a fish that is placed in it. Well, here is a problem. Suppose we have
+a bucket which is partly full of water. We place the bucket on the
+scales and find that with the water in it it weighs exactly 45&nbsp;pounds.
+Then we put a 5-pound fish into the bucket of water. Now, what will the
+whole thing weigh?</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> Many subjects even as low as 9- or 10-year<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;335">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_335" id="Page_335"></a> intelligence will
+answer promptly, &ldquo;Why, 45&nbsp;pounds and 5&nbsp;pounds makes 50&nbsp;pounds, of
+course.&rdquo; But this is not sufficient. We proceed to ask, with serious
+demeanor: &ldquo;<i>How <ins class="correction" title="Transcriber&#8217;s note: Original read &lsquo;this can&rsquo;.">can this</ins> be correct, since the water itself
+holds up the fish?</i>&rdquo; The young subject who has answered so glibly now
+laughs sheepishly and apologizes for his error, saying that he answered
+without thinking, etc. This response is scored failure without further
+questioning.</p>
+
+<p><ins class="correction" title="Transcriber&#8217;s note: Original read &lsquo;Others&rsquo;.">Other</ins> subjects, mostly above the 14-year level, adhere to the
+answer &ldquo;50&nbsp;pounds,&rdquo; however strongly we urge the argument about the
+water holding up the fish. In response to our question, &ldquo;<i>How can that
+be the case?</i>&rdquo; it is sufficient if the subject replies that &ldquo;The weight
+is there just the same; the scales have to hold up the bucket and the
+bucket has to hold up the water,&rdquo; or words to that effect. Only some
+such response as this is satisfactory. If the subject keeps changing his
+answer or says that he <em>thinks</em> the weight would be 50&nbsp;pounds, but is
+not certain, the score is failure.</p>
+
+
+<h4>(c) Difficulty of hitting a distant mark</h4>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Say to the subject: &ldquo;<i>You know, do you not, what it means
+when they say a gun &lsquo;carries 100&nbsp;yards&rsquo;? It means that the bullet goes
+that far before it drops to amount to anything.</i>&rdquo; All boys and most
+girls more than a dozen years old understand this readily. If the
+subject does not understand, we explain again what it means for a gun
+&ldquo;to carry&rdquo; a given distance. When this part is clear, we proceed as
+follows: &ldquo;<i>Now, suppose a man is shooting at a mark about the size of a
+quart can. His rifle carries perfectly more than 100&nbsp;yards. With such a
+gun is it any harder to hit the mark at 100&nbsp;yards than it is at
+50&nbsp;yards?</i>&rdquo; After the response is given, we ask the subject to explain.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> Simply to say that it would be easier at 50&nbsp;yards is not
+sufficient, nor can we pass the response which<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;336">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_336" id="Page_336"></a> merely states that it is
+&ldquo;easier to aim&rdquo; at 50&nbsp;yards. The correct principle must be given, one
+which shows the subject has appreciated the fact that a small deviation
+from the &ldquo;bull&#8217;s-eye&rdquo; at 50&nbsp;yards, due to incorrect aim, becomes a
+larger deviation at 100&nbsp;yards. However, the subject is not required to
+know that the deviation at 100&nbsp;yards is exactly twice as great as at
+50&nbsp;yards. A certain amount of questioning is often necessary before we
+can decide whether the subject has the correct principle in mind.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring the entire test.</b> <em>Two of the three problems</em> must be solved in
+such a way as to satisfy the requirements above set forth.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> These problems were devised by the writer. They yield
+interesting results, when properly given, but are not without their
+faults. Sometimes a very superior subject fails, while occasionally an
+inferior subject unexpectedly succeeds. On the whole, however the test
+correlates fairly well with mental age. At the 14-year level less than
+50&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent pass; of &ldquo;average adults,&rdquo; from 60&nbsp;to&nbsp;75&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent are
+successful. Few &ldquo;superior adults&rdquo; fail.</p>
+
+<p>The test as here given is little influenced by the formal instruction
+given in the grades or the high school. In fact, 80&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of our
+uneducated business men, as contrasted with 65&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of high-school
+juniors and seniors, passed the test. Success probably depends in the
+main upon previous interest in physical relationships and upon the
+ability to understand phenomena of this kind which the subject has had
+opportunity to observe.</p>
+
+<p>It would be interesting to standardize a longer series of problems
+designed to test a subject&#8217;s comprehension of common physical
+relationships. In the first few months of life a normal child learns
+that objects unsupported fall to the ground. Later he learns that fire
+burns; that birds fly in the air; that fish do not sink in the water;
+that water <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;337">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_337" id="Page_337"></a>does not run uphill; that it is easy to lift a leg or arm as
+one lies prone in the water; that mud is thrown from a rotating wheel
+(and always in the same direction); that a stone which is flying
+through the air swiftly is more dangerous than one which is moving
+slowly; that it is more dangerous to be run over by a train than by a
+buggy; that it is hard to run against a strong wind; that cyclones blow
+down trees and houses; that a rapidly moving train creates a stronger
+wind than a slower train; that a feather falls through the air with less
+speed than a stone; that a falling object gains momentum; that a heavy
+moving object is harder to stop than a light object moving at the same
+rate; that freezing water bursts pipes; that sounds sometimes give
+echoes; that rainbows cannot be approached; that a lamp seems dim by
+daylight; that by day the stars are not visible and the moon only barely
+visible; that the headlights of an approaching automobile or train are
+blinding; that if the room in which we are reading is badly lighted we
+must hold the book nearer to the eyes; that running makes the heart beat
+faster and increases the rate of breathing; that if we are cold we can
+get warm by running; that whirling rapidly makes us dizzy; that heat or
+exercise will cause perspiration, etc.</p>
+
+<p>Although the causes of some of these phenomena are not understood even
+by intelligent adults without some instruction, the facts themselves are
+learned by the normal individual from his own experience. The higher the
+mental level and the greater the curiosity, the more observant one is
+about such matters and the more one learns. Many items of knowledge such
+as we have mentioned could and should be standardized for various mental
+levels. In devising tests of this kind we should, of course, have to
+look out for the influences of formal instruction.</p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_76_76" id="Footnote_76_76"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_76_76">[76]</a></span> See <a href="#VIII_6">VIII,&nbsp;6</a>.</p></div>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_77_77" id="Footnote_77_77"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_77_77">[77]</a></span> <i>Psychological Review Monographs</i> (1911), vol. <span class="allsc">XIII</span>,
+no.&nbsp;2, p.&nbsp;51.</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;338">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_338" id="Page_338"></a><a name="CHAPTER_XX" id="CHAPTER_XX"></a>CHAPTER&nbsp;XX
+<br />
+<small>INSTRUCTIONS FOR &ldquo;SUPERIOR ADULT&rdquo;</small></h2>
+
+
+<h3><a name="Superior_adult_1" id="Superior_adult_1"></a>Superior adult, 1: vocabulary (seventy-five definitions, 13,500&nbsp;words)</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure</b> and <b>Scoring</b>, as in previous vocabulary tests. At the &ldquo;superior
+adult&rdquo; level seventy-five words should be known.</p>
+
+<p>The test is passed by only one third of those at the &ldquo;average adult&rdquo;
+level, but by about 90&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent of &ldquo;superior adults.&rdquo; Ability to pass
+the test is relatively independent of the number of years the subject
+has attended school, our business men showing even a higher percentage
+of passes than high-school pupils.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="Superior_adult_2" id="Superior_adult_2"></a>Superior adult, 2: Binet&#8217;s paper-cutting test</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Take a piece of paper about six inches square and say:
+&ldquo;<i>Watch carefully what I do. See, I fold the paper this way</i> (folding it
+once over in the middle), <i>then I fold it this way</i> (folding it again in
+the middle, but at right angles to the first fold). <i>Now, I will cut out
+a notch right here</i>&rdquo; (indicating). At this point take scissors and cut
+out a small notch from the middle of the side which presents but one
+edge. Throw the fragment which has been cut out into the waste-basket or
+under the table. Leave the folded paper exposed to view, but pressed
+flat against the table. Then give the subject a pencil and a second
+sheet of paper like <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;339">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_339" id="Page_339"></a>the one already used and say: &ldquo;<i>Take this piece of
+paper and make a drawing to show how the other sheet of paper would look
+if it were unfolded. Draw lines to show the creases in the paper and
+show what results from the cutting.</i>&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>The subject is not permitted to fold the second sheet, but must solve
+the problem by the imagination unaided.</p>
+
+<p>Note that we do not say, &ldquo;<i>Draw the holes</i>,&rdquo; as this would inform the
+subject that more than one hole is expected.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed <em>if the creases in the paper are properly
+represented, if the holes are drawn in the correct number, and if they
+are located correctly</em>, that is, both on the same crease and each about
+halfway between the center of the paper and the side. The shape of the
+holes is disregarded.</p>
+
+<p>Failure may be due to error as regards the creases or the number and
+location of the holes, or it may involve any combination of the above
+errors.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Success seems to depend upon constructive visual imagination.
+The subject must first be able to construct in imagination the creases
+which result from the folding, and secondly, to picture the effects of
+the cutting as regards number of holes and their location. It appears
+that a solution is seldom arrived at, even in the case of college
+students, by logical mathematical thinking. Our unschooled subjects even
+succeeded somewhat better than high-school and college students of the
+same mental level.</p>
+
+<p>Binet placed this test in year&nbsp;XIII of the 1908 scale, but shifted it to
+the adult group in the 1911 revision. Goddard retains it in the adult
+group, while Kuhlmann places it in year&nbsp;XV. There have also been certain
+variations in the procedure employed. As given in the Stanford revision
+the test is passed by hardly any subjects below the 14-year level, but
+by about one third of &ldquo;average adults&rdquo; and by the large majority of
+&ldquo;superior adults.&rdquo;</p>
+
+
+<h3><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;340">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_340" id="Page_340"></a><a name="Superior_adult_3" id="Superior_adult_3"></a>Superior adult, 3: repeating eight digits</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure</b> and <b>Scoring</b>, the same as in previous tests with digits
+reversed. The series used are: 7&ndash;2&ndash;5&ndash;3&ndash;4&ndash;8&ndash;9&ndash;6; 4&ndash;9&ndash;8&ndash;5&ndash;3&ndash;7&ndash;6&ndash;2; and
+8&ndash;3&ndash;7&ndash;9&ndash;5&ndash;4&ndash;8&ndash;2.</p>
+
+<p>Guard against rhythm and grouping in reading the digits and do not give
+warning as to the number to be given.</p>
+
+<p>The test is passed by about one third of &ldquo;average adults&rdquo; and by over
+two thirds of &ldquo;superior adults.&rdquo; The test shows no marked difference
+between educated and uneducated subjects of the same mental level.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="Superior_adult_4" id="Superior_adult_4"></a>Superior adult, 4: repeating thought of passage</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Say: &ldquo;<i>I am going to read a little selection of about six or
+eight lines. When I am through I will ask you to repeat as much of it as
+you can. It doesn&#8217;t make any difference whether you remember the exact
+words or not, but you must listen carefully so that you can tell me
+everything it says.</i>&rdquo; Then read the following selections, pausing after
+each for the subject&#8217;s report, which should be recorded <i>verbatim</i>:&mdash;</p>
+
+<ol class="alph smaller">
+<li>&ldquo;Tests such as we are now making are of value both for
+the advancement of science and for the information of the
+person who is tested. It is important for science to learn
+how people differ and on what factors these differences
+depend. If we can separate the influence of heredity from
+the influence of environment, we may be able to apply our
+knowledge so as to guide human development. We may thus in
+some cases correct defects and develop abilities which we
+might otherwise neglect.&rdquo;</li>
+
+<li>&ldquo;Many opinions have been given on the value of life.
+Some call it good, others call it bad. It would be nearer
+correct to say that it is mediocre; for on the one hand,
+our happiness is never as great as we should like, and on
+the other hand, our misfortunes are never as great as our
+enemies would wish for us. It is this mediocrity of life
+which prevents it from being radically unjust.&rdquo;</li>
+</ol>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;341">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_341" id="Page_341"></a>Sometimes the subject hesitates to begin, thinking, in spite of our
+wording of the instructions, that a perfect reproduction is expected.
+Others fall into the opposite misunderstanding and think that they are
+prohibited from using the words of the text and must give the thought
+entirely in their own language. In cases of hesitation we should urge
+the subject a little and remind him that he is to express the thought of
+the selection in whatever way he prefers; that the main thing is to tell
+what the selection says.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> The test is passed if the subject is able to repeat in
+reasonably consecutive order the main thoughts of at least one of the
+selections. Neither elegance of expression nor <i>verbatim</i> repetition is
+expected. We merely want to know whether the leading thoughts in the
+selection have been grasped and remembered.</p>
+
+<p>All grades of accuracy are found, both in the comprehension of the
+selection and in the recall, and it is not always easy to draw the line
+between satisfactory and unsatisfactory responses. The following sample
+performances will serve as a guide:&mdash;</p>
+
+
+<blockquote class="smaller"><h4>Selection (a)</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;The tests which we are making are given for the
+advancement of science and for the information of the person
+tested. By scientific means we will be able to separate
+characteristics derived from heredity and environment and to
+treat each class separately. By doing so we can more accurately
+correct defects.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;Tests like these are for two purposes. First to develop a
+science, and second to apply it to the person to help him. The
+tests are to find out how you differ from another and to measure
+the difference between your heredity and environment.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;These tests are given to see if we can separate heredity and
+environment and to see if we can find out how one person differs
+from another. We can then correct these differences and teach
+people more effectively.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;342">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_342" id="Page_342"></a>&ldquo;The tests that we are now making are valuable along both
+scientific and personal lines. By using them it can be found out
+where a person is weak and where he is strong. We can then
+strengthen his weak points and remedy some things that would
+otherwise be neglected. They are of great benefit to science and
+to the person concerned.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;Tests such as we are now making are of great importance because
+they aim to show in what respects we differ from others and why,
+and if they do this they will be able to guide us into the right
+channel and bring success instead of failure.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Tests such as we are now making are of value
+both for the advancement of science and for the information of
+the person interested. It is necessary to know this.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;Such tests as we are now making show about the human mind and
+show in what channels we are fitted. It is the testing of each
+individual between his effects of inheritancy and environment.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;It is very interesting for us to study science for two reasons;
+first, to test our mental ability, and second for the further
+development of science.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;Tests such as we are now making help in two ways; it helps the
+scientists and it gives information to the people.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;Tests are being given to pupils to-day to better them and to
+aid science for generations to come. If each person knows
+exactly his own beliefs and ideas and faults he can find out
+exactly what kind of work he is fitted for by heredity. The
+tests show that environment doesn&#8217;t count, for if you are all
+right you will get along anyway.&rdquo; (Note invention.)</p>
+
+
+<h4>Selection (b)</h4>
+
+<p><i>Satisfactory.</i> &ldquo;There are different opinions about life. Some
+call it good and some bad. It would be more correct to say that
+it is middling, because we are never as happy as we would like
+to be and we are never as sad as our enemies want us to be.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;One hears many judgments about life. Some say it is good, while
+others say it is bad. But it is really neither of the extremes.
+Life is mediocre. We do not have as much good as we desire, nor
+do we have as much misfortune as others want us to have.
+Nevertheless, we have enough good to keep life from being
+unjust.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;Some people have different views of life from others. Some say
+it is bad, others say it is good. It is better to class life as<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;343">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_343" id="Page_343"></a>
+mediocre, as it is never as good as we wish it, and on the other
+hand, it might be worse.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;Some people think differently of life. Some think it good, some
+bad, others mediocre, which is nearest correct. It brings
+unhappiness to us, but not as much as our enemies want us to
+have.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p><i>Unsatisfactory.</i> &ldquo;Some say life is good, some say it is
+mediocre. Even though some say it is mediocre they say it is
+right.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;There are two sides of life. Some say it is good while others
+say it is bad. To some, life is happy and they get all they can
+out of life. For others life is not happy and therefore they
+fail to get all there is in life.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;One hears many different judgments of life. Some call it good,
+some call it bad. It brings unhappiness and it does not have
+enough pleasure. It should be better distributed.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;There are different opinions of the value of life. Some say it
+is good and some say it is bad. Some say it is mediocrity. Some
+think it brings happiness while others do not.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>&ldquo;Nowadays there is much said about the value of life. Some say
+it is good, while others say it is bad. A person should not have
+an ill feeling toward the value of life, and he should not be
+unjust to any one. Honesty is the best policy. People who are
+unjust are more likely to be injured by their enemies.&rdquo; (Note
+invention.)</p></blockquote>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> Contrary to what the subject is led to expect, the test is less
+a test of memory than of ability to comprehend the drift of an abstract
+passage. A subject who fully grasps the meaning of the selection as it
+is read is not likely to fail because of poor memory. Mere verbal memory
+improves but little after the age of 14&nbsp;or&nbsp;15&nbsp;years, as is shown by the
+fact that our adults do little better than eighth-grade children in
+repeating sentences of twenty-eight syllables. On the other hand, adult
+intelligence is vastly superior in the comprehension and retention of a
+logically presented group of abstract ideas.</p>
+
+<p>There is nothing in which stupid persons cut a poorer figure than in
+grappling with the abstract. Their thinking clings tenaciously to the
+concrete; their concepts are vague or inaccurate; the interrelations
+among their concepts<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;344">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_344" id="Page_344"></a> are scanty in the extreme; and such poor mental
+stores as they have are little available for ready use.</p>
+
+<p>A few critics have objected to the use of tests demanding abstract
+thinking, on the ground that abstract thought is a very special aspect
+of intelligence and that facility in it depends almost entirely on
+occupational habits and the accidents of education. Some have even gone
+so far as to say that we are not justified, on the basis of any number
+of such tests, in pronouncing a subject backward or defective. It is
+supposed that a subject who has no capacity in the use of abstract ideas
+may nevertheless have excellent intelligence &ldquo;along other lines.&rdquo; In
+such cases, it is said, we should not penalize the subject for his
+failures in handling abstractions, but substitute, instead, tests
+requiring motor co&ouml;rdination and the manipulation of things, tests in
+which the supposedly dull child often succeeds fairly well.</p>
+
+<p>From the psychological point of view, such a proposal is na&iuml;vely
+unpsychological. It is in the very essence of the higher thought
+processes to be conceptual and abstract. What the above proposal amounts
+to is, that if the subject is not capable of the more complex and
+strictly human type of thinking, we should ignore this fact and estimate
+his intelligence entirely on the ability he displays to carry on mental
+operations of a more simple and primitive kind. This would be like
+asking the physician to ignore the diseased parts of his patient&#8217;s body
+and to base his diagnosis on an examination of the organs which are
+sound!</p>
+
+<p>The present test throws light in an interesting way on the integrity of
+the critical faculty. Some subjects are unwilling to extend the report
+in the least beyond what they know to be approximately correct, while
+others with defective powers of auto-criticism manufacture a report
+which draws heavily on the imagination, perhaps continuing in garrulous
+fashion as long as they can think of anything <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;345">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_345" id="Page_345"></a>having the remotest
+connection with any thought in the selection. We have included, for each
+selection, one illustration of this type in the sample failures given
+above.</p>
+
+<p>The worst fault of the test is its susceptibility to the influence of
+schooling. Our uneducated adults of even &ldquo;superior adult&rdquo; intelligence
+often fail, while about two thirds of high-school pupils succeed. The
+unschooled adults have a marked tendency either to give a summary which
+is inadequate because of its extreme brevity, or else to give a
+criticism of the thought which the passage contains.</p>
+
+<p>This test first appeared in Binet&#8217;s 1911 revision, in the adult group.
+Binet used only selection (<i>b</i>), and in a slightly more difficult form
+than we have given above. Goddard gives the test like Binet and retains
+it in the adult group. Kuhlmann locates it in year&nbsp;XV, using only
+selection (<i>a</i>). On the basis of over 300&nbsp;tests of adults we find the
+test too difficult for the &ldquo;average adult&rdquo; level, even on the basis of
+only one success in two trials and when scored on the rather liberal
+standard above set forth.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="Superior_adult_5" id="Superior_adult_5"></a>Superior adult, 5: repeating seven digits reversed</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure</b> and <b>Scoring</b>, the same as in previous tests of this kind. The
+series are: 4&ndash;1&ndash;6&ndash;2&ndash;5&ndash;9&ndash;3; 3&ndash;8&ndash;2&ndash;6&ndash;4&ndash;7&ndash;5; and 9&ndash;4&ndash;5&ndash;2&ndash;8&ndash;3&ndash;7.</p>
+
+<p>We have collected fewer data on this test than on any of the others, as
+it was added later to the test series. As far as we have used it we have
+found few &ldquo;average adults&rdquo; who pass, while about half the &ldquo;superior
+adults&rdquo; do so.</p>
+
+
+<h3><a name="Superior_adult_6" id="Superior_adult_6"></a>Superior adult, 6: ingenuity test</h3>
+
+<p><b>Procedure.</b> Problem <i>a</i> is stated as follows:&mdash;</p>
+
+<p><i>A mother sent her boy to the river and told him to bring back exactly
+7&nbsp;pints of water. She gave him a 3-pint vessel and a 5-pint vessel.<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;346">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_346" id="Page_346"></a>
+Show me how the boy can measure out exactly 7&nbsp;pints of water, using
+nothing but these two vessels and not guessing at the amount. You should
+begin by filling the 5-pint vessel first. Remember, you have a 3-pint
+vessel and a 5-pint vessel and you must bring back exactly 7&nbsp;pints.</i></p>
+
+<p>The problem is given orally, but may be repeated if necessary.</p>
+
+<p>The subject is not allowed pencil or paper and is requested to give his
+solution orally as he works it out. It is then possible to make a
+complete record of the method employed.</p>
+
+<p>The subject is likely to resort to some such method as to &ldquo;fill the
+3-pint vessel two thirds full,&rdquo; or, &ldquo;I would mark the inside of the
+5-pint vessel so as to show where 4&nbsp;pints come to,&rdquo; etc. We inform the
+subject that such a method is not allowable; that this would be
+guessing, since he could not be sure when the 3-pint vessel was two
+thirds full (or whether he had marked off his 5-pint vessel accurately).
+Tell him he must <em>measure</em> out the water without any guesswork. Explain
+also, that it is a fair problem, not a &ldquo;catch.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Say nothing about pouring from one vessel to another, but if the subject
+asks whether this is permissible the answer is &ldquo;yes.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>The time limit for each problem is 5&nbsp;minutes. If the subject fails on
+the first problem, we explain the solution in full and then proceed to
+the next.</p>
+
+<p>The second problem is like the first, except that a 5-pint vessel and a
+7-pint vessel are given, to get 8&nbsp;pints, the subject being told to begin
+by filling the 5-pint vessel.</p>
+
+<p>In the third problem 4 and 9 are given, to get 7, the instruction being
+to &ldquo;begin by filling the 4-pint vessel.&rdquo;</p>
+
+<p>Note that in each problem we instruct the subject how to begin. This is
+necessary in order to secure uniformity of conditions. It is possible to
+solve all of the problems by beginning with either of the two vessels,
+but the solution <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;347">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_347" id="Page_347"></a>is made very much more difficult if we begin in the
+direction opposite from that recommended.</p>
+
+<p>Give no further aid. It is necessary to refrain from comment of every
+kind.</p>
+
+<p><b>Scoring.</b> <em>Two of the three</em> problems must be solved correctly within the
+5&nbsp;minutes <ins class="correction" title="Transcriber&#8217;s note: Original read &lsquo;alloted&rsquo;.">allotted</ins> to each.</p>
+
+<p><b>Remarks.</b> We have called this a test of ingenuity. The subject who is
+given the problem finds himself involved in a difficulty from which he
+must extricate himself. Means must be found to overcome an obstacle.
+This requires practical judgement and a certain amount of inventive
+ingenuity. Various possibilities must be explored and either accepted
+for trial or rejected. If the amount of invention called for seems to
+the reader inconsiderable, let it be remembered that the important
+inventions of history have not as a rule had a Minerva birth, but
+instead have developed by successive stages, each involving but a small
+step in advance.</p>
+
+<p>It is unnecessary to emphasize at length the function of invention in
+the higher thought processes. In one form or another it is present in
+all intellectual activity; in the creation and use of language, in art,
+in social adjustments, in religion, and in philosophy, as truly as in
+the domains of science and practical affairs. Certainly this is true if
+we accept Mason&#8217;s broad definition of invention as including &ldquo;every
+change in human activity made designedly and systematically.&rdquo;<a name="FNanchor_78_78" id="FNanchor_78_78"></a><a href="#Footnote_78_78" class="fnanchor">[78]</a> From
+the psychological point of view, perhaps, Mason is justified in looking
+upon the great inventor as &ldquo;an epitome of the genius of the world.&rdquo; To
+develop a Krag-Joergensen from a bow and arrow, a &ldquo;velvet-tipped&rdquo;
+lucifer match from the primitive fire-stick, or a modern piano from the
+first crude, stringed, musical instrument has involved much the same
+intellectual processes as have been operative in transforming fetishism
+and magic <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;348">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_348" id="Page_348"></a>into religion and philosophy, or scattered fragments of
+knowledge into science.</p>
+
+<p>Psychologically, invention depends upon the constructive imagination;
+that is, upon the ability to abstract from what is immediately present
+to the senses and to picture new situations with their possibilities and
+consequences. Images are united in order to form new combinations.</p>
+
+<p>As we have several times emphasized, the decisive intellectual
+differences among human beings are not greatly dependent upon mere sense
+discrimination or native retentiveness. Far more important than the raw
+mass of sense data is the correct shooting together of the sense
+elements in memory and imagination. This is but another name for
+invention. It is the synthetic, or apperceptive, activity of the mind
+that gives the &ldquo;seven-league boots&rdquo; to genius. It is, however, a kind of
+ability which is possessed by all minds to a greater or less degree. Any
+test has its value which gives a clue, as this test does, to the
+subject&#8217;s ability in this direction.</p>
+
+<p>The test was devised by the writer and used in 1905 in a study of the
+intellectual processes of bright and dull boys, but it was not at that
+time standardized. It has been found to belong at a much higher mental
+level than was at first supposed. Only an insignificant number pass the
+test below the mental age of 14&nbsp;years, and about two thirds of &ldquo;average
+adults&rdquo; fail. Of our &ldquo;superior adults&rdquo; somewhat more than 75&nbsp;per&nbsp;cent
+succeed. Formal education influences the test little or not at all, the
+unschooled business men making a somewhat better showing than the
+high-school students.</p>
+
+<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
+
+<div class="footnote"><p><a name="Footnote_78_78" id="Footnote_78_78"></a><span class="label"><a href="#FNanchor_78_78">[78]</a></span> Otis T. Mason: <i>The Origins of Inventions</i>. (London,
+1902.)</p></div>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;349">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_349" id="Page_349"></a><a name="SELECTED_REFERENCES" id="SELECTED_REFERENCES"></a>SELECTED REFERENCES</h2>
+
+
+
+<p>The following classified lists include only the most important
+references under each topic. So many investigations have been made with
+the Binet-Simon tests in the last few years, and so many articles have
+been written in evaluation of the method, that a complete bibliography
+of the subject would require thirty or forty pages. Those who desire to
+make a more thorough study of the literature are referred to the
+admirable annotated bibliography compiled by Samuel C. Kohs, and
+published by Warwick &amp; York, Baltimore. Kohs&#8217;s Bibliography contains
+254&nbsp;references, and is complete to January&nbsp;1, 1914.</p>
+
+<div class="refs">
+<h3>BINET-SIMON TESTS OF NORMAL CHILDREN</h3>
+
+<ol>
+<li>Binet, A., <i lang="fr">et</i> Simon, Th. &ldquo;<span lang="fr">Le d&eacute;veloppement de
+l&#8217;intelligence chez les enfants</span>&rdquo;; in <i lang="fr">Ann&eacute;e psychologique</i>
+(1908), vol.&nbsp;14, pp.&nbsp;1&ndash;94.
+
+<p>Exposition of the original 1908 scale with results.</p></li>
+
+<li><a name="ref2" id="ref2"></a>Binet, A. &ldquo;<span lang="fr">Nouvelles recherches sur la mesure du niveau
+intellectuel chez les enfants d&#8217;&eacute;cole</span>&rdquo;; in <i lang="fr">Ann&eacute;e
+psychologique</i> (1911), vol.&nbsp;17, pp.&nbsp;145&ndash;201.
+
+<p>Presents the 1911 revision.</p></li>
+
+<li>Bobertag, O. &ldquo;<span lang="de">Ueber Intelligenzpr&uuml;fungen (nach der Methode
+von Binet und Simon)</span>&rdquo;; in <i lang="de">Zeitschrift f&uuml;r angewande
+Psychologie</i> (1911), vol.&nbsp;5, pp.&nbsp;105&ndash;203; and (1912),
+vol.&nbsp;6, pp.&nbsp;495&ndash;537.
+
+<p>Analysis of 400&nbsp;cases and criticism of method and results.</p></li>
+
+<li>Dougherty, M.&nbsp;L. &ldquo;Report on the Binet-Simon Tests given to
+Four Hundred and Eighty-three Children in the Public
+Schools of Kansas City, Kansas&rdquo;; in <i>Journal of
+Educational Psychology</i> (1913), vol.&nbsp;4, pp.&nbsp;338&ndash;52.</li>
+
+<li>Goddard, H.&nbsp;H. &ldquo;The Binet-Simon Measuring Scale for
+Intelligence, Revised&rdquo;; in <i>Training School Bulletin</i>
+(1911), vol.&nbsp;8, pp.&nbsp;56&ndash;62.</li>
+
+<li>Hoffman, A. &ldquo;<span lang="de">Vergleichende Intelligenzpr&uuml;fungen an
+Vorsch&uuml;lern und Volkssch&uuml;lern</span>&rdquo;; in <i lang="de">Zeitschrift f&uuml;r
+angewande Psychologie</i> (1913), vol.&nbsp;8, pp.&nbsp;102&ndash;20.
+
+<p>One hundred and fifty-six subjects. Ages seven, nine, and ten.</p></li>
+
+<li>Johnston, Katherine L. &ldquo;Binet&#8217;s Method for the Measurement
+of Intelligence; Some Results&rdquo;; in <i>Journal of
+Experimental Pedagogy</i> (1911), vol.&nbsp;1, pp.&nbsp;24&ndash;31.
+
+<p>Results of 200&nbsp;tests of school children.</p></li>
+
+<li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;350">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_350" id="Page_350"></a>Kuhlmann, F. &ldquo;Some Results of Examining 1000 Public-School
+Children with a Revision of the Binet-Simon Tests of
+Intelligence by Untrained Teachers&rdquo;; in <i>Journal of
+Psycho-Asthenics</i> (1914), vol.&nbsp;18, pp.&nbsp;150&ndash;79, and 233&ndash;69.</li>
+
+<li>Phillips, Byron A. &ldquo;The Binet Tests applied to Colored
+Children&rdquo;; in <i>Psychological Clinic</i> (1914), pp.&nbsp;190&ndash;96.
+
+<p>A comparison of 86 colored and 137 white children.</p></li>
+
+<li>Rogers, Agnes L., <i>and</i> McIntyre, J.&nbsp;L. &ldquo;The Measurement
+of Intelligence in Children by the Binet-Simon Scale&rdquo;; in
+<i>British Journal of Psychology</i> (1914), vol.&nbsp;7,
+pp.&nbsp;265&ndash;300.</li>
+
+<li>Rowe, E.&nbsp;C. &ldquo;Five Hundred Forty-Seven White and Two
+Hundred Sixty-Eight Indian Children tested by the
+Binet-Simon Tests&rdquo;; in <i>Pedagogical Seminary</i> (1914),
+vol.&nbsp;21, pp.&nbsp;454&ndash;69.</li>
+
+<li>Strong, Alice C. &ldquo;Three Hundred Fifty White and Colored
+Children measured by the Binet-Simon Measuring Scale of
+Intelligence&rdquo;; in <i>Pedagogical Seminary</i> (1913), vol.&nbsp;20,
+pp.&nbsp;485&ndash;515.</li>
+
+<li>Terman, L.&nbsp;M., <i>and</i> Childs, H.&nbsp;G. &ldquo;A Tentative Revision
+and <ins class="correction" title="Transcriber&#8217;s note: Original read &lsquo;Extention&rsquo;.">Extension</ins> of the Binet-Simon Measuring
+Scale of Intelligence&rdquo;; in <i>Journal of Educational
+Psychology</i> (1912), vol.&nbsp;3, pp.&nbsp;61&ndash;74, 133&ndash;43, 198&ndash;208,
+and 277&ndash;89.
+
+<p>Results of 396&nbsp;tests of California school-children.</p></li>
+
+<li>Terman, Lyman, Ordahl, Galbreath, <i>and</i> Talbert. <i>The
+Stanford Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon
+Measuring Scale of Intelligence.</i> (1916.)
+
+<p>Detailed analysis of the results secured by testing 1000
+unselected school-children within two months of a
+birthday.</p></li>
+
+<li>Weintrob, J. <i>and</i> R. &ldquo;The Influence of Environment on
+Mental Ability as shown by the Binet Tests&rdquo;; in <i>Journal
+of Educational Psychology</i> (1912), pp.&nbsp;577&ndash;86.</li>
+
+<li>Winch, W.&nbsp;H. &ldquo;Binet&#8217;s Mental Tests: What They Are, and
+What We Can Do with Them&rdquo;; in <i>Child Study</i> (London),
+1913, 1914, 1915, and 1916.
+
+<p>An extended series of articles setting forth results of tests
+with normal children, and giving valuable criticisms and
+suggestions.</p></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>BINET-SIMON TESTS OF THE FEEBLE-MINDED</h3>
+
+<ol start="17">
+<li>Chotzen, F. &ldquo;<span lang="de">Die Intelligenzpr&uuml;fungsmethode von
+Binet-Simon bei schwachsinnigen Kindern</span>&rdquo;; in <i lang="de">Zeitschrift
+f&uuml;r angewande Psychologie</i> (1912), vol.&nbsp;6, pp.&nbsp;411&ndash;94.
+
+<p>A critical study of the results of 280&nbsp;tests.</p></li>
+
+<li>Goddard, H.&nbsp;H. &ldquo;Four Hundred Feeble-Minded Children
+classified by the Binet Method&rdquo;; in <i>Pedagogical Seminary</i>
+(1910), vol.&nbsp;17, pp.&nbsp;387&ndash;97; also in <i>Journal of
+Psycho-Asthenics</i> (1910), vol.&nbsp;15, pp.&nbsp;17&ndash;30.
+
+<p>Offers important evidence of the value of the Binet-Simon
+method.</p></li>
+
+<li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;351">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_351" id="Page_351"></a>19. Kuhlmann, F. &ldquo;The Binet and Simon Tests of Intelligence in
+Grading Feeble-Minded Children&rdquo;; in <i>Journal of
+Psycho-Asthenics</i> (1912), vol.&nbsp;16, pp.&nbsp;173&ndash;93.
+
+<p>Analysis of results from 1300&nbsp;cases.</p></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>BINET-SIMON TESTS OF DELINQUENTS</h3>
+
+<ol start="20">
+<li>Bluemel, C.&nbsp;S. &ldquo;Binet Tests on Two Hundred Juvenile
+Delinquents&rdquo;; in <i>Training School Bulletin</i> (1915),
+pp.&nbsp;187&ndash;93.</li>
+
+<li>Goddard, H.&nbsp;H. <i>The Criminal Imbecile.</i> The Macmillan
+Company. (1915.) 157&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>An analysis of the mentality of three murderers of moron or
+borderline intelligence.</p></li>
+
+<li>Goddard, H.&nbsp;H. &ldquo;The Responsibility of Children in the
+Juvenile Court&rdquo;; in <i>Journal of Criminal Law and
+Criminology</i> (September, 1912).
+
+<p>Analysis of 100&nbsp;tests of juvenile delinquents.</p></li>
+
+<li>Healy, William. <i>The Individual Delinquent.</i> Little, Brown
+&amp; Co. (1915.) 830&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>A textbook on delinquents. Gives results of many Binet-Simon
+tests.</p></li>
+
+<li>Spaulding, Edith R. &ldquo;The Results of Mental and Physical
+Examination of Four Hundred Women Offenders&rdquo;; in <i>Journal
+of Criminal Law and Criminology</i> (1915), pp.&nbsp;704&ndash;17.</li>
+
+<li>Sullivan, W.&nbsp;C. &ldquo;<span lang="fr">La mesure du d&eacute;veloppement intellectuel
+chez les jeunes d&eacute;linquantes</span>&rdquo;; in <i lang="fr">Ann&eacute;e psychologique</i>
+(1912), vol.&nbsp;18, pp.&nbsp;341&ndash;61.</li>
+
+<li>Williams, J. Harold. <i>A Study of 150 Delinquent Boys.</i>
+Bulletin no.&nbsp;1, Research Laboratory of the Buckel
+Foundation. (1915.) 15&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>The Stanford revision used. Report of over 400&nbsp;cases to
+follow.</p></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>BINET-SIMON TESTS OF SUPERIOR CHILDREN</h3>
+
+<ol start="27">
+<li>Jeronutti, A. &ldquo;<span lang="it">Ricerche psicologiche sperimentali sugli
+alunni molto intelligenti</span>&rdquo;; in <i lang="it">Lab. di Psicol. Sperim.
+della Reg. Univ. Roma</i>. (1912)
+
+<p>Out of fifteen hundred school and kindergarten children, ages
+five to twelve, fourteen were selected by the teachers as
+the brightest. The Binet test showed them to be from one
+to three years in advance of their chronological ages.</p></li>
+
+<li>Terman, L.&nbsp;M. &ldquo;The Mental Hygiene of Exceptional
+Children&rdquo;; in <i>Pedagogical Seminary</i> (1915), vol.&nbsp;22,
+pp.&nbsp;529&ndash;37.
+
+<p>Data on 31&nbsp;children testing above 120&nbsp;I.&nbsp;Q.</p></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>INSTRUCTIONS FOR GIVING THE BINET-SIMON TESTS</h3>
+
+<ol start="29">
+<li>Binet, A., <i>and</i> Simon, Th. <i>A Method of Measuring the
+Development of Intelligence in Young Children.</i> Chicago
+Medical Book Company. (1915.) 82&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Authorized translation of Binet&#8217;s final instructions for
+giving the tests.</p></li>
+
+<li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;352">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_352" id="Page_352"></a>Goddard, H.&nbsp;H. &ldquo;A Measuring Scale of Intelligence&rdquo;; in
+<i>Training School Bulletin</i> (1910), vol.&nbsp;6, pp.&nbsp;146&ndash;55.
+
+<p>Condensed translation of Binet&#8217;s 1908 <i>Measuring Scale of
+Intelligence</i>.</p></li>
+
+<li>Goddard, H.&nbsp;H. &ldquo;The Binet-Simon Measuring Scale for
+Intelligence, Revised&rdquo;; in <i>Training School Bulletin</i>
+(1911), vol.&nbsp;8, pp.&nbsp;56&ndash;62.</li>
+
+<li>Goddard, H.&nbsp;H. &ldquo;Standard Method for Giving the Binet
+Test&rdquo;; in <i>Training School Bulletin</i> (1913), vol.&nbsp;10,
+pp.&nbsp;23&ndash;30.</li>
+
+<li>Kuhlmann, F. &ldquo;A Revision of the Binet-Simon System for
+Measuring the Intelligence of Children&rdquo;; Monograph
+Supplement of <i>Journal of Psycho-Asthenics</i> (September,
+1912), 41&nbsp;pages.</li>
+
+<li>Wallin, J.&nbsp;E.&nbsp;W. &ldquo;A Practical Guide for the Administration
+of the Binet-Simon Scale for Measuring Intelligence&rdquo;; in
+<i>The Psychological Clinic</i> (1911), vol.&nbsp;5, pp.&nbsp;217&ndash;38.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>CRITICISMS AND EVALUATIONS OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD</h3>
+
+<ol start="35">
+<li>Berry, C.&nbsp;S. &ldquo;A Comparison of the Binet Tests of 1908 and
+1911&rdquo;; in <i>Journal of Educational Psychology</i> (1912),
+vol.&nbsp;3, pp.&nbsp;444&ndash;51.</li>
+
+<li>Bobertag, O. &ldquo;<span lang="de">Ueber Intelligenzpr&uuml;fungen (nach der Methode
+von Binet und Simon)</span>&rdquo;; in <i lang="de">Zeitschrift f&uuml;r angewande
+Psychologie</i>. (A, 1911), vol.&nbsp;5, pp.&nbsp;105&ndash;203; (B, 1912),
+vol.&nbsp;6, pp.&nbsp;495&ndash;537.
+
+<p>Accepts the method and gives valuable suggestions for
+improvement.</p></li>
+
+<li>Brigham, Carl C. &ldquo;An Experimental Critique of the
+Binet-Simon Scale&rdquo;; in <i>Journal of Educational Psychology</i>
+(1914), pp.&nbsp;439&ndash;48.
+
+<p>Finds the scale 96% efficient.</p></li>
+
+<li>Goddard, H.&nbsp;H. &ldquo;The Reliability of the Binet-Simon
+Measuring Scale of Intelligence&rdquo;; in <i>Proceedings of the
+Fourth International Congress of School Hygiene</i> (1913),
+vol.&nbsp;5, pp.&nbsp;693&ndash;99.
+
+<p>Application of the theory of probability to the results proves
+the extremely small liability of error.</p></li>
+
+<li>Kohs, Samuel C. &ldquo;The Practicability of the Binet Scale and
+the Question of the Borderline Case&rdquo;; in <i>Training School
+Bulletin</i> (1916), pp.&nbsp;211&ndash;23.
+
+<p>Analysis of cases showing the reliability of the scale.</p></li>
+
+<li>Kuhlmann, F. &ldquo;Binet and Simon&#8217;s System for Measuring the
+Intelligence of Children&rdquo;; in <i>Journal of
+Psycho-Asthenics</i> (1911), vol.&nbsp;15, pp.&nbsp;79&ndash;92.
+
+<p>Finds the method of the greatest value.</p></li>
+
+<li>Kuhlmann, F. &ldquo;A Reply to Dr. L.&nbsp;P. Ayres&#8217;s Criticism of
+the Binet and Simon System for Measuring the Intelligence
+of Children&rdquo;; in <i>Journal of Psycho-Asthenics</i> (1911),
+vol.&nbsp;16, pp.&nbsp;58&ndash;67.
+
+<p>Many of the Ayres criticisms are shown to be unfounded.</p></li>
+
+<li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;353">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_353" id="Page_353"></a>Meumann, E. <i lang="de">Vorlesungen zur Einf&uuml;hrung in die
+Experimentelle P&auml;dagogik</i> (1913), vol.&nbsp;2, pp.&nbsp;130&ndash;300.
+
+<p>Summary of the literature on Binet tests up to 1913. Accepts
+the method but gives suggestions for improvement. This
+summary and other writings of Meumann on the psychology of
+endowment are reviewed by Lewis M. Terman in a series of
+four articles in the <i>Journal of Psycho-Asthenics</i> for
+1915.</p></li>
+
+<li>Otis, A.&nbsp;S. &ldquo;Some Logical and Mathematical Aspects of the
+Measurement of Intelligence by the Binet-Simon Method&rdquo;; in
+<i>The Psychological Review</i> (April and June, 1916).
+
+<p>Considers the Binet-Simon method imperfect from the
+mathematical point of view.</p></li>
+
+<li>Schmitt, Clara. <i>Standardization of Tests for Defective
+Children.</i> Psychological Monographs (1915), no.&nbsp;83,
+181&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Contains (pp.&nbsp;52&ndash;67) a discussion of the &ldquo;Fallacies and
+Inadequacies of the Binet-Simon Series.&rdquo; Most of the
+criticisms here given are either superficial or unfair,
+some of them apparently being due to a lack of
+acquaintance with Binet&#8217;s writings.</p></li>
+
+<li>Stern, W. <i>The Psychological Methods of Measuring
+Intelligence.</i> Translated by G.&nbsp;M. Whipple. (1913.)
+160&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>A splendid critical discussion of the Binet-Simon method.
+Should be read by every one who would use the scale.</p></li>
+
+<li>Terman, L.&nbsp;M. &ldquo;Suggestions for Revising, Extending, and
+Supplementing the Binet Intelligence Tests&rdquo;; in <i>Journal
+of Psycho-Asthenics</i> (1913), vol.&nbsp;18, pp.&nbsp;20&ndash;33.</li>
+
+<li>Terman, L.&nbsp;M. &ldquo;Psychological Principles Underlying the
+Binet-Simon Scale and Some Practical Considerations for
+its Correct Use&rdquo;; in <i>Journal of Psycho-Asthenics</i> (1913),
+vol.&nbsp;18, pp.&nbsp;93&ndash;104.</li>
+
+<li>Terman, L.&nbsp;M. &ldquo;A Report of the Buffalo Conference on the
+Binet-Simon Tests of Intelligence&rdquo;; in <i>Pedagogical
+Seminary</i> (1913), vol.&nbsp;20, pp.&nbsp;549&ndash;54.
+
+<p>Abstracts of papers presented at the above conference.</p></li>
+
+<li>Terman, Lyman, Ordahl, Galbreath, <i>and</i> Talbert. <i>The
+Stanford Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Scale
+for Measuring Intelligence.</i> (1916.)
+
+<p>Contains a chapter on the validity of the individual tests and
+on considerations relating to the formation of an
+intelligence scale.</p></li>
+
+<li>Terman <i>and</i> Knollin. &ldquo;The Detection of Borderline
+Deficiency by the Binet-Simon Method&rdquo;; in <i>Journal of
+Psycho-Asthenics</i> (June, 1916).
+
+<p>A comparison of the accuracy of the Stanford and other
+revisions with borderline cases.</p></li>
+
+<li>Tr&egrave;ves <i>and</i> Saffiotti. &ldquo;<span lang="fr">L&#8217;&eacute;chelle m&eacute;trique de
+l&#8217;intelligence modifi&eacute;e selon la m&eacute;thode
+Tr&egrave;ves-Saffiotti</span>&rdquo;; in <i lang="fr">Ann&eacute;e Psychologique</i> (1912),
+pp.&nbsp;327&ndash;40.
+
+<p>Criticize the age-grade method of measuring intelligence and
+propose a substitute.</p></li>
+
+<li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;354">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_354" id="Page_354"></a>Wallin, J.&nbsp;E.&nbsp;W. <i>Experimental Studies of Mental
+Defectives. A Critique of the Binet-Simon Tests.</i> Warwick
+&amp; York. (1912.)
+
+<p>Criticism based on the use of the scale with epileptics.</p></li>
+
+<li>Yerkes <i>and</i> Bridges. <i>A Point Scale for Measuring Mental
+Ability.</i> Warwick &amp; York.
+
+<p>Authors think the point scale preferable to the Binet-Simon
+method.</p></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>BOOKS ON MENTAL DEFICIENCY</h3>
+
+<ol start="54">
+<li>Binet, A., <i>and</i> Simon, Th. <i>Mentally Defective Children.</i>
+Translated from the French by W.&nbsp;B. Drummond. Longmans,
+Green &amp; Co. (1914.) 171&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Discusses the psychology, pedagogy, and medical examination of
+defectives.</p></li>
+
+<li>Goddard, H.&nbsp;H. <i>Feeble-Mindedness; Its Causes and
+Consequences.</i> The Macmillan Company. (1913.) 599&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>The most important single volume on the subject. Extensive
+data on the causes of feeble-mindedness and excellent
+clinical pictures of all grades of mental defects.</p></li>
+
+<li>Goddard, H.&nbsp;H. <i>The Kallikak Family.</i> The Macmillan
+Company. (1914.) 121&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>An epoch-making study of the hereditary transmission of mental
+deficiency in a degenerate family.</p></li>
+
+<li>Holmes, Arthur. <i>The Conservation of the Child.</i> J.&nbsp;B.
+Lippincott Company. (1912.) 345&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Methods of examination and treatment of defective children.</p></li>
+
+<li>Holmes, Arthur. <i>The Backward Child.</i> Bobbs-Merrill
+Company. (1915.)
+
+<p>A popular treatment of the handling of backward children.</p></li>
+
+<li>Huey, E.&nbsp;B. <i>Backward and Feeble-Minded Children.</i> Warwick
+&amp; York. (1912.) 221&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Devoted mainly to clinical accounts of borderline cases.</p></li>
+
+<li>Lapage, C.&nbsp;P. <i>Feeble-Mindedness in Children of School
+Age.</i> The University Press, Manchester, England. (1911.)
+359&nbsp;pages.</li>
+
+<li>Sherlock, E.&nbsp;B. <i>The Feeble-Minded; A Guide to Study and
+Practice.</i> The Macmillan Company. (1911.) 327&nbsp;pages.</li>
+
+<li>Tredgold, A.&nbsp;F. <i>Mental Deficiency (Amentia).</i> Bailli&egrave;re,
+Tindall, and Cox. London, England. (2d ed. 1914.)
+491&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>The best medical treatment of the subject.</p></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>STUDIES OF THE PROGRESS OF CHILDREN THROUGH THE GRADES</h3>
+
+<ol start="63">
+<li>Ayres, Leonard P. <i>Laggards in our Schools.</i> The Russell
+Sage Foundation. (1909.) 236&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Interesting and instructive discussion of school retardation
+and its causes.</p></li>
+
+<li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;355">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_355" id="Page_355"></a>Blan, Louis B. <i>A Special Study of the Incidence of
+Retardation.</i> Teachers College, Columbia University,
+Contributions to Education, no.&nbsp;40. (1911.) 111&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Review of the literature and a statistical study of the
+progress of 4579&nbsp;children.</p></li>
+
+<li>Keyes, C.&nbsp;H. <i>Progress Through the Grades of City
+Schools.</i> Teachers College, Columbia University,
+Contributions to Education, no.&nbsp;42. (1911.) 79&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Important study of the progress of several thousand children.</p></li>
+
+<li>Strayer, George D. <i>Age and Grade Census of Schools and
+Colleges.</i> Bulletin no.&nbsp;451, U.S. Bureau of Education.
+(1911.) 144&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Statistics of the age-grade status of the children in
+318&nbsp;cities.</p></li>
+
+<li>See also the <i>Reports</i> of leading school surveys, such as
+those of New York, Salt Lake City, Butte, Springfield
+(Mass.), Denver, Cleveland, etc.</li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>REFERENCES ON THE SPECIAL CLASS FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN</h3>
+
+<ol start="68">
+<li>Huey, E.&nbsp;B. &ldquo;The Education of Defectives and the Training
+of Teachers for Special Classes&rdquo;; in <i>Journal of
+Educational Psychology</i> (1913), pp.&nbsp;545&ndash;50.</li>
+
+<li>Goddard, H.&nbsp;H. <i>School Training of Defective Children.</i>
+World Book Company. (1914.) 97&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Based on his survey of the treatment of backward children in
+the schools of New York City.</p></li>
+
+<li>Holmes, W.&nbsp;H. <i>School Organization and the Individual
+Child.</i> The Davis Press, Worcester, Massachusetts. (1912.)
+211&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>A comprehensive account of the efforts which have been made to
+adjust the school to the capacities of individual
+children.</p></li>
+
+<li>Maennel, B. <i>Auxiliary Education.</i> Translated from the
+German by Emma Sylvester. Doubleday, Page &amp; Co. (1909.)
+267&nbsp;pages.</li>
+
+<li>Van Sickle, J.&nbsp;H., Witmer, L., <i>and</i> Ayres, L.&nbsp;P.
+<i>Provision for Exceptional Children in Public Schools.</i>
+Bulletin no.&nbsp;461, U.S. Bureau of Education. (1911.)
+92&nbsp;pages.</li>
+
+<li>Shaer, I. &ldquo;Special Classes for Bright Children in an
+English Elementary School&rdquo;; in <i>Journal of Educational
+Psychology</i> (1913), pp.&nbsp;209&ndash;22.</li>
+
+<li>Stern, W. &ldquo;The Supernormal Child&rdquo;; in <i>Journal of
+Educational Psychology</i> (1911), pp.&nbsp;143&ndash;48 and 181&ndash;90.
+
+<p>A strong plea for special classes for superior children.</p></li>
+
+<li>Vaney, V. <i lang="fr">Les classes pour enfants arri&egrave;res.</i> <span lang="fr">Bulletin de
+la Soci&eacute;t&eacute; libre pour l&#8217;&eacute;tude psychologique de l&#8217;enfant</span>
+(1911), pp.&nbsp;53&ndash;152.
+
+<p>Report of the French National Commission appointed to
+investigate methods of treatment and training.</p></li>
+
+<li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;356">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_356" id="Page_356"></a>Witmer, L. <i>The Special Class for Backward Children.</i> The
+Psychological Clinic Press, Philadelphia. (1911.)
+275&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>An account of the special class conducted in connection with
+the University of Pennsylvania Summer School.</p></li>
+</ol>
+
+<h3>LIST OF BINET&#8217;S MOST IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE MEASUREMENT OF
+INTELLIGENCE</h3>
+
+<ol start="77">
+<li>Binet, A. <i lang="fr">L&#8217;&Eacute;tude experimentale de l&#8217;intelligence.</i>
+Paris: Schleicher fr&egrave;res. (1903.)</li>
+
+<li>Binet, A. &ldquo;<span lang="fr">A Propos de la mesure de l&#8217;intelligence</span>&rdquo;; in
+<i lang="fr">Ann&eacute;e psychologique</i> (1905), vol.&nbsp;11, pp.&nbsp;69&ndash;82.</li>
+
+<li>Binet, A. <i lang="fr">Les enfants anormaux; guide pour l&#8217;admission
+des enfants anormaux dans les classes de
+perfectionnement.</i> Paris: Colin (1907.)</li>
+
+<li>Binet, A. <i lang="fr">Comment les instituteurs jugent-ils
+l&#8217;intelligence d&#8217;un ecolier?</i> <span lang="fr">Bulletin de la Soci&eacute;t&eacute; libre
+pour l&#8217;&eacute;tude psychologique de l&#8217;enfant</span> (1910), no.&nbsp;10,
+pp.&nbsp;172&ndash;82.</li>
+
+<li>Binet, A. &ldquo;<span lang="fr">Nouvelles recherches sur la mesure du niveau
+intellectuel chez les enfants d&#8217;&eacute;cole&rdquo;</span>; in <i lang="fr">Ann&eacute;e
+psychologique</i> (1911), vol.&nbsp;17, pp.&nbsp;145&ndash;201.</li>
+
+<li>Binet, A., <i lang="fr">et</i> Simon, Th. &ldquo;<span lang="fr">Sur la n&eacute;cessit&eacute; d&#8217;&eacute;tablir un
+diagnostique scientifique des &eacute;tats inf&eacute;rieurs de
+l&#8217;intelligence</span>&rdquo;; in <i lang="fr">Ann&eacute;e psychologique</i> (1905), vol.&nbsp;11,
+pp.&nbsp;163&ndash;90.</li>
+
+<li>Binet, A., <i lang="fr">et</i> Simon, Th. &ldquo;<span lang="fr">M&eacute;thodes nouvelles pour le
+diagnostique du niveau intellectuel des anormaux</span>&rdquo;; in
+<i lang="fr">Ann&eacute;e psychologique</i> (1905), vol.&nbsp;11, pp.&nbsp;191&ndash;244.</li>
+
+<li>Binet, A., <i lang="fr">et</i> Simon, Th. &ldquo;<span lang="fr">Application des M&eacute;thodes
+nouvelles au diagnostique du niveau intellectuel chez des
+enfants normaux et anormaux d&#8217;hospice et d&#8217;&eacute;cole
+primaire</span>&rdquo;; in <i lang="fr">Ann&eacute;e psychologique</i> (1905), vol.&nbsp;11,
+pp.&nbsp;245&ndash;336.</li>
+
+<li>Binet, A., <i lang="fr">et</i> Simon, Th. &ldquo;<span lang="fr">Le d&eacute;veloppement de
+l&#8217;intelligence chez les enfants</span>&rdquo;; in <i lang="fr">Ann&eacute;e psychologique</i>
+(1908), vol.&nbsp;14, pp.&nbsp;1&ndash;94.</li>
+
+<li>Binet, A., <i lang="fr">et</i> Simon, Th. &ldquo;<span lang="fr">Langage et pens&eacute;e</span>&rdquo;; in <i lang="fr">Ann&eacute;e
+psychologique</i> (1908), vol.&nbsp;14, pp.&nbsp;284&ndash;339.</li>
+
+<li>Binet, A., <i lang="fr">et</i> Simon, Th. &ldquo;<span lang="fr">L&#8217;intelligence des imbeciles</span>&rdquo;;
+in <i lang="fr">Ann&eacute;e psychologique</i> (1909), vol.&nbsp;15, pp.&nbsp;1&ndash;147.</li>
+
+<li>Binet, A., <i lang="fr">et</i> Simon, Th. &ldquo;<span lang="fr">Nouvelle th&eacute;orie psychologique
+et clinique de la d&eacute;mence</span>&rdquo;; in <i lang="fr">Ann&eacute;e psychologique</i>
+(1909), vol.&nbsp;15, pp.&nbsp;168&ndash;272.</li>
+
+<li>Binet, A., <i lang="fr">et</i> Simon, Th. <i lang="fr">La mesure du d&eacute;veloppement de
+l&#8217;intelligence chez les jeunes enfants.</i> <span lang="fr">Bulletin de la
+Soci&eacute;t&eacute; libre pour l&#8217;&eacute;tude psychologique de l&#8217;enfant</span>
+(1911), no.&nbsp;11, pp.&nbsp;187&ndash;256.</li>
+</ol>
+</div>
+
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;357">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_357" id="Page_357"></a><a name="SUGGESTIONS_FOR_A_TEACHERS_PRIVATE_LIBRARY" id="SUGGESTIONS_FOR_A_TEACHERS_PRIVATE_LIBRARY"></a>SUGGESTIONS FOR A TEACHER&#8217;S PRIVATE LIBRARY</h2>
+
+<div class="refs">
+<h3>ON EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN</h3>
+
+<ul>
+<li>Ayres, L.&nbsp;P. <i>Laggards in our Schools.</i> The Russell Sage
+Foundation. (1909.) 236&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Treats the amount and causes of school retardation.</p></li>
+
+<li>Binet, A., <i>and</i> Simon, Th. <i>Mentally Defective Children.</i>
+Translated from the French by W.&nbsp;B. Drummond. Longmans,
+Green &amp; Co. (1914.) 171&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Discusses the psychology, pedagogy and medical examination of
+defectives.</p></li>
+
+<li>Binet, A., <i>and</i> Simon, Th. <i>A Method of Measuring the
+Development of Intelligence in Young Children.</i> Chicago
+Medical Book Company. (1915.) 82&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Authorized translation of Binet&#8217;s final instructions for
+giving the tests.</p></li>
+
+<li>Goddard, H.&nbsp;H. <i>Feeble-Mindedness; Its Causes and
+Consequences.</i> The Macmillan Company. (1913.) 599&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>The most important single volume on the subject.</p></li>
+
+<li>Goddard, H.&nbsp;H. <i>The Kallikak Family.</i> The Macmillan Company.
+(1914.) 121&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>A study of the hereditary transmission of mental deficiency in
+one family.</p></li>
+
+<li>Goddard, H.&nbsp;H. <i>School Training of Defective Children.</i> World
+Book Company. (1914.) 97&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Admirable treatment of the entire subject.</p></li>
+
+<li>Goddard, H.&nbsp;H. <i>The Criminal Imbecile.</i> The Macmillan Company.
+(1915.) 157&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>An analysis of three murderers of borderline intelligence.</p></li>
+
+<li>Holmes, Arthur. <i>The Conservation of the Child.</i> J.&nbsp;B.
+Lippincott Company. (1912.) 345&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Methods of examination and treatment of defective children.</p></li>
+
+<li>Holmes, Arthur. <i>The Backward Child.</i> The Bobbs-Merrill Co.
+(1915.)
+
+<p>A popular treatment of the subject.</p></li>
+
+<li>Holmes, W.&nbsp;H. <i>School Organization and the Individual Child.</i>
+The Davis Press, Worcester, Massachusetts. (1912) 211&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>A comprehensive account of methods of adjusting school work to
+the capacity of the individual child.</p></li>
+
+<li>Huey, E.&nbsp;B. <i>Backward and Feeble-Minded Children.</i> Warwick &amp;
+York. (1912.) 221&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Clinical studies of borderline cases.</p></li>
+
+<li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;358">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_358" id="Page_358"></a>Kelynack, T.&nbsp;N. (<i>Editor</i>). <i>Defective Children.</i> John Bale,
+Sons, and Daniellson, London. (1915.) 447&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Written by many authors and devoted to all kinds of physical
+and mental defects.</p></li>
+
+<li>Kuhlmann, F. &ldquo;A Revision of the Binet-Simon System for
+Measuring the Intelligence of Children.&rdquo; Monograph
+Supplement of <i>Journal of Psycho-Asthenics</i>. (1912.)
+41&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Contains instructions for use of the Kuhlmann revision.</p></li>
+
+<li>Stern, W. <i>The Psychological Method of Measuring
+Intelligence.</i> Translated from the German by G.&nbsp;M. Whipple.
+Warwick &amp; York. (1913.) 160&nbsp;pages.</li>
+
+<li>Terman, Lyman, Ordahl, Galbreath, <i>and</i> Talbert. <i>The Stanford
+Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Scale for
+Measuring Intelligence.</i> (1916.)
+
+<p>Extended analysis of 1000&nbsp;tests. Data on the relation of
+intelligence to school success, social status, etc.</p></li>
+
+<li>Terman, Lewis M. <i>The Hygiene of the School Child.</i> Houghton
+Mifflin Company. (1914.) 417&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Devoted to the physical defects of school children.</p></li>
+
+<li>Tredgold, A.&nbsp;F. <i>Mental Deficiency (Amentia).</i> Bailli&egrave;re,
+Tindall &amp; Cox, London. (1914.) 491&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>The best medical treatment of the subject.</p></li>
+
+<li>Whipple, G.&nbsp;M. <i>Manual of Mental and Physical Tests.</i> Warwick
+&amp; York. Vol.&nbsp;I (1914), 365&nbsp;pages; vol.&nbsp;II (1915), 336&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>The best treatment of mental tests other than those of the
+Binet system.</p></li>
+
+<li>Witmer, L. <i>The Special Class for Backward Children.</i> The
+Psychological Clinic Press, Philadelphia. (1911.) 275&nbsp;pages.
+
+<p>Problems encountered in connection with the special class.</p></li>
+</ul>
+
+<h3>MAGAZINES</h3>
+
+<ul>
+<li><i>The Training School Bulletin.</i> Published monthly by the
+Training School, Vineland, New Jersey. Edited by H.&nbsp;H.
+Goddard and E.&nbsp;R. Johnstone.</li>
+
+<li><i>The Psychological Clinic.</i> Published monthly by the
+Psychological Clinic Press, Philadelphia. Edited by Lightner
+Witmer.</li>
+
+<li><i>The Journal of Delinquency.</i> Published bi-monthly by the
+Whittier State School, Whittier, California. Edited by
+Williams, Goddard, Terman, and others.</li>
+
+<li><i>The Journal of Psycho-Asthenics.</i> Published quarterly at
+Faribault, Minnesota. Organ of the American Association for
+the Study of the Feeble-Minded. Edited by A.&nbsp;C. Rogers and
+F. Kuhlmann.</li>
+
+<li><i>The Journal of Educational Psychology.</i> Published by Warwick
+&amp; York, Baltimore. Edited by J. Carleton Bell.</li>
+</ul>
+</div>
+
+<hr class="major" />
+<h2><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;359">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_359" id="Page_359"></a><a name="INDEX" id="INDEX"></a>INDEX</h2>
+
+<div class="center">
+<table class="az" border="1" summary="Alphabetic jump-table for the index">
+        <tr>
+            <td><a href="#IX_A">A</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_B">B</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_C">C</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_D">D</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_E">E</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_F">F</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_G">G</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_H">H</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_I">I</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_J">J</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_K">K</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_L">L</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_M">M</a></td>
+        </tr>
+        <tr>
+            <td><a href="#IX_N">N</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_O">O</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_P">P</a></td>
+            <td>Q</td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_R">R</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_S">S</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_T">T</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_U">U</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_V">V</a></td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_W">W</a></td>
+            <td>X</td>
+            <td><a href="#IX_Y">Y</a></td>
+            <td>Z</td>
+        </tr>
+</table>
+</div>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_A" name="IX_A"></a>Abstract thought, tests of, <a href="#Page_344">344</a>.</li>
+<li>Absurdities, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Adolescence, and variability in intelligence, <a href="#Page_67">67</a>.</li>
+<li>Adult intelligence, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>.</li>
+<li>Adults, how to find I&nbsp;Q of adults, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>.</li>
+<li>&AElig;sthetic comparison, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Age, test of giving age, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Age standards, <a href="#Page_40">40</a>.</li>
+<li>Alternative tests, <a href="#Page_136">136</a>.</li>
+<li>Amateur testing, <a href="#Page_107">107</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Apperception, <a href="#Page_169">169</a>.</li>
+<li>Arithmetical reasoning, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Association processes, <a href="#Page_274">274</a>.</li>
+<li>Attention, during the test, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>.</li>
+<li>Attitude of the subject, <a href="#Page_109">109</a>.</li>
+<li>Auto-criticism, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>.</li>
+<li>Average intelligence, <a href="#Page_94">94</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_B" name="IX_B"></a>Ball and field test, <a href="#Page_210">210</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, <a href="#Page_286">286</a>.</li>
+<li>Berry, C.&nbsp;S., <a href="#Page_114">114</a>.</li>
+<li>Binet,
+  <ul class="IX">
+  <li>on how teachers judge intelligence, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>;</li>
+  <li>Binet&#8217;s conception of intelligence, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, <a href="#Page_123">123</a>, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_183">183</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_186">186</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_232">232</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>, <a href="#Page_254">254</a>, <a href="#Page_258">258</a>, <a href="#Page_260">260</a>, <a href="#Page_261">261</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>, <a href="#Page_339">339</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>.</li>
+  </ul></li>
+<li>Binet-Simon method,
+  <ul class="IX">
+  <li>nature and derivation of the scale, <a href="#Page_36">36</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, <a href="#Page_47">47</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>;</li>
+  <li>limitations of, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+  </ul></li>
+<li>Bloch, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>.</li>
+<li>Bluemel, C.&nbsp;S., <a href="#Page_107">107</a>.</li>
+<li>Bobertag, Otto, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_113">113</a>, <a href="#Page_176">176</a>, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_188">188</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_232">232</a>, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>, <a href="#Page_275">275</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>.</li>
+<li>Borderline intelligence, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>, <a href="#Page_87">87</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Bow-knot, test of tying, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Brigham, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_C" name="IX_C"></a>Change, test of making change, <a href="#Page_240">240</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Childs, H.&nbsp;G., <a href="#Page_231">231</a>, <a href="#Page_298">298</a>.</li>
+<li>Coaching, <a href="#Page_110">110</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Code test, <a href="#Page_330">330</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Color naming, <a href="#Page_163">163</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Combination method, <a href="#Page_171">171</a>. <i>See also</i> <a href="#completion">Completion test</a>.</li>
+<li>Commissions, <a href="#Page_172">172</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Comparison of lines, <a href="#Page_151">151</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li><a name="completion" id="completion"></a>Completion test, <a href="#Page_179">179</a>, <a href="#Page_246">246</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>.</li>
+<li>Comprehension questions, <a href="#Page_157">157</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, <a href="#Page_181">181</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, <a href="#Page_215">215</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, <a href="#Page_268">268</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Conditions favorable to testing, <a href="#Page_121">121</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Counting,
+  <ul class="IX">
+  <li>four pennies, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>;</li>
+  <li>thirteen pennies, <a href="#Page_180">180</a>;</li>
+  <li>counting backwards, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>.</li>
+  </ul></li>
+<li>Crime,
+  <ul class="IX">
+  <li>relation to feeble-mindedness, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>;</li>
+  <li>cost of, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>.</li>
+  </ul></li>
+<li>Cuneo, Irene, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_D" name="IX_D"></a>Davenport, C.&nbsp;B., <a href="#Page_10">10</a>.</li>
+<li>Definitions,
+  <ul class="IX">
+  <li>in terms of use, <a href="#Page_167">167</a>;</li>
+  <li>superior to use, <a href="#Page_221">221</a>;</li>
+  <li>of abstract words, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, and 324&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+  <li><i>See also</i> <a href="#vocabulary">Vocabulary tests</a>.</li>
+  </ul></li>
+<li>&ldquo;Degenerate&rdquo; families, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Delinquency, relation to feeble-mindedness, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Diamond, test of copying diamond, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>.</li>
+<li>Differences, test of finding, <a href="#Page_199">199</a>, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Digits. <i>See</i> Memory for digits.</li>
+<li><span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;360">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_360" id="Page_360"></a>Discrimination of forms, <a href="#Page_152">152</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Dissected sentences, <a href="#Page_286">286</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Distribution of intelligence, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, <a href="#Page_78">78</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Dougherty, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>.</li>
+<li>Drawing, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_204">204</a>, <a href="#Page_260">260</a>.</li>
+<li>Dull normals, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Dumville, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_E" name="IX_E"></a>Ebbinghaus, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>.</li>
+<li>Emotion, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>.</li>
+<li>Enclosed boxes, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Endowment, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Environment, influence on test, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Eugenics, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Examination, duration of, <a href="#Page_127">127</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Examiner, qualifications of, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_F" name="IX_F"></a>Fables, interpretation of, <a href="#Page_290">290</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Fatigue, influence of, on test, <a href="#Page_126">126</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Feeble-minded, proportion of school-children feeble-minded, <a href="#Page_6">6</a>.</li>
+<li>Feeble-mindedness,
+  <ul class="IX">
+  <li>value of tests for, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>;</li>
+  <li>psychological analysis, <a href="#Page_23">23</a>;</li>
+  <li>definition, <a href="#Page_80">80</a>;</li>
+  <li>examples, <a href="#Page_82">82</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+  </ul></li>
+<li>Fernald, G.&nbsp;G., <a href="#Page_8">8</a>.</li>
+<li>Fernald, Grace, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>.</li>
+<li>Fingers, test of giving number of, <a href="#Page_189">189</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Freeman, Frank N., <a href="#Page_280">280</a>.</li>
+<li>Functions, tested by Binet scale, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_G" name="IX_G"></a>Galbreath, Neva, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>.</li>
+<li>Galton, <a href="#Page_328">328</a>.</li>
+<li>General intelligence, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Generalization, tests of, <a href="#Page_298">298</a>.</li>
+<li>Genius. <i>See</i> Superior intelligence.</li>
+<li>Goddard, H.&nbsp;H., <a href="#Page_8">8</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_213">213</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>, <a href="#Page_339">339</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>.</li>
+<li>Grading, value of intelligence tests in, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_H" name="IX_H"></a>Hall, Gertrude, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>.</li>
+<li>Healy-Fernald, <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_278">278</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>.</li>
+<li>Heredity, use of tests in the study of, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>.</li>
+<li>Hill folk, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>.</li>
+<li>Hollingworth, Leta S., <a href="#Page_71">71</a>.</li>
+<li>Huey, E.&nbsp;B., <a href="#Page_197">197</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_I" name="IX_I"></a>Imagery, <a href="#Page_195">195</a>, <a href="#Page_209">209</a>, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>, <a href="#Page_339">339</a>.</li>
+<li>Induction test, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Ingenuity test, <a href="#Page_346">346</a>.</li>
+<li>Intelligence,
+  <ul class="IX">
+  <li>analysis of, <i>see</i> remarks under instructions for each test;</li>
+  <li>superior, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>,</li>
+  <li>teachers&#8217; estimates of, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>;</li>
+  <li>general, <a href="#Page_42">42</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>;</li>
+  <li>definitions of, <a href="#Page_44">44</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+  </ul></li>
+<li>Intelligence quotient, <a href="#Page_53">53</a>, <a href="#Page_55">55</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_65">65</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>;
+  <ul class="IX">
+  <li>validity of, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>;</li>
+  <li>classification and significance, <a href="#Page_79">79</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, <a href="#Page_140">140</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+  </ul></li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_J" name="IX_J"></a>Jukes family, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_K" name="IX_K"></a>Kallikak family, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>.</li>
+<li>Knollin, H.&nbsp;E., <a href="#Page_18">18</a>, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>, <a href="#Page_63">63</a>.</li>
+<li>Kohs, S.&nbsp;C., <a href="#Page_107">107</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Kuhlmann, F., <a href="#Page_56">56</a>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>, <a href="#Page_153">153</a>, <a href="#Page_154">154</a>, <a href="#Page_156">156</a>, <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_173">173</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>, <a href="#Page_196">196</a>, <a href="#Page_206">206</a>, <a href="#Page_214">214</a>, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>, <a href="#Page_247">247</a>, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>, <a href="#Page_259">259</a>, <a href="#Page_264">264</a>, <a href="#Page_276">276</a>, <a href="#Page_280">280</a>, <a href="#Page_285">285</a>, <a href="#Page_289">289</a>, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>, <a href="#Page_319">319</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_323">323</a>, <a href="#Page_327">327</a>, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>, <a href="#Page_339">339</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_L" name="IX_L"></a>Language comprehension, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>, <a href="#Page_144">144</a>.</li>
+<li>Limitations of the Binet scale, <a href="#Page_48">48</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Lombroso, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>.</li>
+<li>Lyman, Grace, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_M" name="IX_M"></a>Mason, Otis, <a href="#Page_347">347</a>.</li>
+<li>Masselon, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>.</li>
+<li>Material used in the tests, <a href="#Page_141">141</a>.</li>
+<li>Memory,
+  <ul class="IX">
+  <li>for sentences, <a href="#Page_149">149</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, <a href="#Page_160">160</a>, <a href="#Page_185">185</a>, <a href="#Page_332">332</a>;</li>
+  <li>for passages, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>;</li>
+  <li>for designs, <a href="#Page_260">260</a>;</li>
+  <li>for digits, <a href="#Page_150">150</a>, <a href="#Page_159">159</a>, <a href="#Page_193">193</a>, <a href="#Page_207">207</a>, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>, <a href="#Page_301">301</a>, <a href="#Page_322">322</a>, <a href="#Page_329">329</a>, <a href="#Page_340">340</a>, <a href="#Page_345">345</a>.</li>
+  </ul></li>
+<li>Mental age, <a href="#Page_39">39</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>;
+  <ul class="IX">
+  <li>effect of Stanford <span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;361">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_361" id="Page_361"></a>revision on, <a href="#Page_62">62</a>;</li>
+  <li>how to calculate, <a href="#Page_137">137</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+  </ul></li>
+<li>Mental deficiency. <i>See</i> Feeble-mindedness.</li>
+<li>Meumann, Ernst, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_245">245</a>, <a href="#Page_318">318</a>.</li>
+<li>Moral development, dependence of, on intelligence, <a href="#Page_11">11</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_N" name="IX_N"></a>Nam family, <a href="#Page_10">10</a>.</li>
+<li>Name, test of giving name, <a href="#Page_147">147</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Naming coins, <a href="#Page_184">184</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>.</li>
+<li>Naming familiar objects, <a href="#Page_143">143</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Normals, dull, <a href="#Page_92">92</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_O" name="IX_O"></a>Ordahl, Dr. George, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>.</li>
+<li>Ordahl, Louise Ellison, <a href="#Page_8">8</a>.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_P" name="IX_P"></a>Paper-cutting test, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>.</li>
+<li>Physical defects, effects of, on intelligence, <a href="#Page_19">19</a>.</li>
+<li>Physical relations, comprehension of, <a href="#Page_333">333</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Physicians, as Binet testers, <a href="#Page_34">34</a>.</li>
+<li>Pictures,
+  <ul class="IX">
+  <li>enumeration of objects in, <a href="#Page_145">145</a>;</li>
+  <li>description of, <a href="#Page_190">190</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>;</li>
+  <li>interpretation of, <a href="#Page_302">302</a>;</li>
+  <li>finding omissions in, <a href="#Page_178">178</a>.</li>
+  </ul></li>
+<li>Pointing to parts of body, <a href="#Page_142">142</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Practical judgment, <a href="#Page_212">212</a>.</li>
+<li>President and king, giving differences between, <a href="#Page_313">313</a>.</li>
+<li>Problem questions, <a href="#Page_315">315</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Procedure, necessity of uniformity in, <a href="#Page_32">32</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, <a href="#Page_131">131</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Promotions, on basis of intelligence tests, <a href="#Page_16">16</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_R" name="IX_R"></a>Race differences, <a href="#Page_91">91</a>.</li>
+<li>Range of testing, <a href="#Page_129">129</a>.</li>
+<li>Rapport, <a href="#Page_124">124</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Reading, test of reading for memories, <a href="#Page_262">262</a>.</li>
+<li>Record booklet, <a href="#Page_128">128</a>.</li>
+<li>Recording responses, <a href="#Page_133">133</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Reliability of the scale, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, <a href="#Page_105">105</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Repeated tests, <a href="#Page_112">112</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Retardation,
+  <ul class="IX">
+  <li>cost of, <a href="#Page_1">1</a>, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>;</li>
+  <li>training of retarded children, <a href="#Page_4">4</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+  </ul></li>
+<li>Reversing hands of clock, <a href="#Page_321">321</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Rhymes, test of finding, <a href="#Page_248">248</a>.</li>
+<li>Right and left, <a href="#Page_175">175</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Rowe, E.&nbsp;P., <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>, <a href="#Page_277">277</a>.</li>
+<li>Rowland, Eleanor, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_S" name="IX_S"></a>Scattering of successes, <a href="#Page_134">134</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>School success and intelligence, <a href="#Page_73">73</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Scoring, <a href="#Page_132">132</a>. <i>See also</i> instructions for scoring each test.</li>
+<li>Seclusion during test, <a href="#Page_122">122</a>.</li>
+<li>Sex, test of giving, <a href="#Page_146">146</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Sex differences in intelligence, <a href="#Page_68">68</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Similarities, test of finding, <a href="#Page_217">217</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, <a href="#Page_306">306</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Sixty words, <a href="#Page_272">272</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Social class and intelligence, <a href="#Page_72">72</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, <a href="#Page_114">114</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Spearman, C., definition of intelligence, <a href="#Page_46">46</a>.</li>
+<li>Special classes, <a href="#Page_5">5</a>.</li>
+<li>Square, test of copying, <a href="#Page_155">155</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Stamps, test of counting value of, <a href="#Page_252">252</a>.</li>
+<li>Standardization, value of, <a href="#Page_30">30</a>.</li>
+<li>Stanford revision of the Binet scale, <a href="#Page_51">51</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Stereotypy, <a href="#Page_203">203</a>.</li>
+<li>Stern, W., <a href="#Page_46">46</a>, <a href="#Page_106">106</a>, <a href="#Page_118">118</a>.</li>
+<li>Stigmata, <a href="#Page_7">7</a>.</li>
+<li>Structural psychology, <a href="#Page_43">43</a>.</li>
+<li>Superior intelligence, tests of superior children, <a href="#Page_12">12</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>, <a href="#Page_95">95</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Supplementary information, <a href="#Page_135">135</a>.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_T" name="IX_T"></a>Teachers&#8217; estimates of intelligence, <a href="#Page_13">13</a>, <a href="#Page_24">24</a>, <a href="#Page_26">26</a>, <a href="#Page_28">28</a>, <a href="#Page_75">75</a>.</li>
+<li>Terman, Lewis M., <a href="#Page_63">63</a>, <a href="#Page_267">267</a>, <a href="#Page_298">298</a>.</li>
+<li>Three words, test of using, in a sentence, <a href="#Page_242">242</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Time orientation,
+  <ul class="IX">
+  <li>forenoon and afternoon, <a href="#Page_187">187</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>;</li>
+  <li>days of the week, <a href="#Page_205">205</a>&nbsp;<span class="pagenum" title="Page&nbsp;362">&nbsp;</span><a name="Page_362" id="Page_362"></a><i>ff.</i>;</li>
+  <li>giving date, <a href="#Page_234">234</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i>;</li>
+  <li>naming months, <a href="#Page_251">251</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+  </ul></li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_U" name="IX_U"></a>Unemployment, relation of, to intelligence, <a href="#Page_18">18</a>.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_V" name="IX_V"></a>Validity of the tests, <a href="#Page_76">76</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li><a name="vocabulary" id="vocabulary"></a>Vocabulary tests, <a href="#Page_224">224</a>, <a href="#Page_255">255</a>, <a href="#Page_281">281</a>, <a href="#Page_310">310</a>, <a href="#Page_324">324</a>, <a href="#Page_338">338</a>.</li>
+<li>Vocational guidance, use of intelligence tests in, <a href="#Page_17">17</a>, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>.</li>
+<li>Volition, <a href="#Page_49">49</a>.</li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_W" name="IX_W"></a>Waddle, Charles, <a href="#Page_52">52</a>.</li>
+<li>Wallin, <a href="#Page_237">237</a>.</li>
+<li>Weights, comparison of, <a href="#Page_161">161</a>, <a href="#Page_236">236</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+<li>Williams, Dr. J. Harold, <a href="#Page_9">9</a>, <a href="#Page_54">54</a>.</li>
+<li>Winch, W.&nbsp;H., <a href="#Page_165">165</a>, <a href="#Page_166">166</a>.</li>
+<li>Writing from dictation, <a href="#Page_231">231</a>&nbsp;<i>ff.</i></li>
+</ul>
+
+<ul class="IX">
+<li><a id="IX_Y" name="IX_Y"></a>Yerkes, R.&nbsp;M., <a href="#Page_70">70</a>.</li>
+</ul>
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+<pre>
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Measurement of Intelligence, by 
+Lewis Madison Terman
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE MEASUREMENT OF INTELLIGENCE ***
+
+***** This file should be named 20662-h.htm or 20662-h.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        https://www.gutenberg.org/2/0/6/6/20662/
+
+Produced by Audrey Longhurst, Laura Wisewell and the Online
+Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+https://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+https://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at https://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit https://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
+donations.  To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     https://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
+
+
+</pre>
+
+</body>
+</html>
diff --git a/20662-h/images/fig03.png b/20662-h/images/fig03.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..b0fe1a4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/images/fig03.png
diff --git a/20662-h/images/fig04.png b/20662-h/images/fig04.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c043d87
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/images/fig04.png
diff --git a/20662-h/images/fig05.png b/20662-h/images/fig05.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2fc7337
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/images/fig05.png
diff --git a/20662-h/images/fig06.png b/20662-h/images/fig06.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..166c0f0
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/images/fig06.png
diff --git a/20662-h/images/fig07.png b/20662-h/images/fig07.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8384a5e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/images/fig07.png
diff --git a/20662-h/images/fig08.png b/20662-h/images/fig08.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1ecd6da
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/images/fig08.png
diff --git a/20662-h/images/fig09.png b/20662-h/images/fig09.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..8154518
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/images/fig09.png
diff --git a/20662-h/images/fig10.png b/20662-h/images/fig10.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..cc531ff
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/images/fig10.png
diff --git a/20662-h/images/fig11.png b/20662-h/images/fig11.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..1352011
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/images/fig11.png
diff --git a/20662-h/images/fig12.png b/20662-h/images/fig12.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..3fdaa0d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/images/fig12.png
diff --git a/20662-h/images/fig13.png b/20662-h/images/fig13.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d6419c7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/images/fig13.png
diff --git a/20662-h/images/fig14.png b/20662-h/images/fig14.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..746f5ce
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/images/fig14.png
diff --git a/20662-h/images/fig15.png b/20662-h/images/fig15.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..31e587d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/images/fig15.png
diff --git a/20662-h/images/fig16.png b/20662-h/images/fig16.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..bca7498
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/images/fig16.png
diff --git a/20662-h/images/logo.png b/20662-h/images/logo.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..7faeaa7
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/images/logo.png
diff --git a/20662-h/images/rectangle.png b/20662-h/images/rectangle.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..76c9a45
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/images/rectangle.png
diff --git a/20662-h/images/trans.jpg b/20662-h/images/trans.jpg
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4a849b1
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/images/trans.jpg
diff --git a/20662-h/images/triangles.png b/20662-h/images/triangles.png
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..470645e
--- /dev/null
+++ b/20662-h/images/triangles.png
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..79a26f4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #20662 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/20662)
diff --git a/old/20662-8.txt b/old/20662-8.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..2b4d944
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/20662-8.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,13921 @@
+Project Gutenberg's The Measurement of Intelligence, by Lewis Madison Terman
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: The Measurement of Intelligence
+       An Explanation of and a Complete Guide for the Use of the
+       Stanford Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon
+       Intelligence Scale
+
+Author: Lewis Madison Terman
+
+Editor: Ellwood P. Cubberley
+
+Release Date: February 25, 2007 [EBook #20662]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ISO-8859-1
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE MEASUREMENT OF INTELLIGENCE ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Audrey Longhurst, Laura Wisewell and the Online
+Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+                          RIVERSIDE TEXTBOOKS
+                              IN EDUCATION
+
+
+                     EDITED BY ELLWOOD P. CUBBERLEY
+
+                         PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION
+                   LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY
+
+
+                    DIVISION OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
+                     UNDER THE EDITORIAL DIRECTION
+                          OF ALEXANDER INGLIS
+
+                         PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION
+                           HARVARD UNIVERSITY
+
+
+
+
+                            THE MEASUREMENT
+                            OF INTELLIGENCE
+
+
+                        AN EXPLANATION OF AND A
+                   COMPLETE GUIDE FOR THE USE OF THE
+                   STANFORD REVISION AND EXTENSION OF
+                  _The Binet-Simon Intelligence Scale_
+
+                                   BY
+
+                            LEWIS M. TERMAN
+                         PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION
+                   LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY
+
+                             [Illustration]
+
+                        HOUGHTON MIFFLIN COMPANY
+                 BOSTON NEW YORK CHICAGO SAN FRANCISCO
+                     The Riverside Press Cambridge
+
+
+
+
+                  COPYRIGHT, 1916, BY LEWIS M. TERMAN
+
+                          ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
+
+
+
+                          The Riverside Press
+                       CAMBRIDGE · MASSACHUSETTS
+                         PRINTED IN THE U.S.A.
+
+
+
+
+                             To the Memory
+                                   OF
+                              ALFRED BINET
+
+      PATIENT RESEARCHER, CREATIVE THINKER, UNPRETENTIOUS SCHOLAR;
+                     INSPIRING AND FRUITFUL DEVOTEE
+                                   OF
+                         INDUCTIVE AND DYNAMIC
+                               PSYCHOLOGY
+
+
+
+
+EDITOR'S INTRODUCTION
+
+
+The present volume appeals to the editor of this series as one of the
+most significant books, viewed from the standpoint of the future of our
+educational theory and practice, that has been issued in years. Not only
+does the volume set forth, in language so simple that the layman can
+easily understand, the large importance for public education of a
+careful measurement of the intelligence of children, but it also
+describes the tests which are to be given and the entire procedure of
+giving them. In a clear and easy style the author sets forth scientific
+facts of far-reaching educational importance, facts which it has cost
+him, his students, and many other scientific workers, years of
+painstaking labor to accumulate.
+
+Only very recently, practically only within the past half-dozen years,
+have scientific workers begun to appreciate fully the importance of
+intelligence tests as a guide to educational procedure, and up to the
+present we have been able to make but little use of such tests in our
+schools. The conception in itself has been new, and the testing
+procedure has been more or less unrefined and technical. The following
+somewhat popular presentation of the idea and of the methods involved,
+itself based on a scientific monograph which the author is publishing
+elsewhere, serves for the first time to set forth in simple language the
+technical details of giving such intelligence tests.
+
+The educational significance of the results to be obtained from
+careful measurements of the intelligence of children can hardly be
+overestimated. Questions relating to the choice of studies, vocational
+guidance, schoolroom procedure, the grading of pupils, promotional
+schemes, the study of the retardation of children in the schools,
+juvenile delinquency, and the proper handling of subnormals on the
+one hand and gifted children on the other,--all alike acquire new
+meaning and significance when viewed in the light of the measurement
+of intelligence as outlined in this volume. As a guide to the
+interpretation of the results of other forms of investigation relating
+to the work, progress, and needs of children, intelligence tests form a
+very valuable aid. More than all other forms of data combined, such
+tests give the necessary information from which a pupil's possibilities
+of future mental growth can be foretold, and upon which his further
+education can be most profitably directed.
+
+The publication of this revision and extension of the original
+Binet-Simon scale for measuring intelligence, with the closer adaptation
+of it to American conditions and needs, should mark a distinct step in
+advance in our educational procedure. It means the perfection of another
+and a very important measuring stick for evaluating educational
+practices, and in particular for diagnosing individual possibilities and
+needs. Just now the method is new, and its use somewhat limited, but it
+is the confident prediction of many students of the subject that, before
+long, intelligence tests will become as much a matter of necessary
+routine in schoolroom procedure as a blood-count now is in physical
+diagnosis. That our schoolroom methods will in turn become much more
+intelligent, and that all classes of children, but especially the gifted
+and the slow, will profit by such intellectual diagnosis, there can be
+but little question.
+
+That any parent or teacher, without training, can give these tests, the
+author in no way contends. However, the observations of Dr. Kohs, cited
+in Chapter VII, as well as the experience of the author and others who
+have given courses in intelligence testing to teachers, alike indicate
+that sufficient skill to enable teachers and school principals to give
+such tests intelligently is not especially difficult to acquire. This
+being the case it may be hoped that the requisite training to enable
+them to handle these tests may be included, very soon, as a part of the
+necessary pedagogical equipment of those who aspire to administrative
+positions in our public and private schools.
+
+Besides being of special importance to school officers and to students
+of education in colleges and normal schools, this volume can confidently
+be recommended to physicians and social workers, and to teachers and
+parents interested in intelligence measurements, as at once the simplest
+and the best explanation of the newly-evolved intelligence tests, which
+has so far appeared in print.
+
+    ELLWOOD P. CUBBERLEY.
+
+
+
+
+PREFACE
+
+
+The constant and growing use of the Binet-Simon intelligence scale in
+public schools, institutions for defectives, reform schools, juvenile
+courts, and police courts is sufficient evidence of the intrinsic
+worth of the method. It is generally recognized, however, that the
+serviceableness of the scale has hitherto been seriously limited, both
+by the lack of a sufficiently detailed guide and by a number of
+recognized imperfections in the scale itself. The Stanford revision and
+extension has been worked out for the purpose of correcting as many as
+possible of these imperfections, and it is here presented with a rather
+minute description of the method as a whole and of the individual tests.
+
+The aim has been to present the explanations and instructions so clearly
+and in such an untechnical form as to make the book of use, not only to
+the psychologist, but also to the rank and file of teachers, physicians,
+and social workers. More particularly, it is designed as a text for use
+in normal schools, colleges, and teachers' reading-circles.
+
+While the use of the intelligence scale for research purposes and for
+accurate diagnosis will of necessity always be restricted to those who
+have had extensive training in experimental psychology, the author
+believes that the time has come when its wider use for more general
+purposes should be encouraged.
+
+However, it cannot be too strongly emphasized that no one, whatever his
+previous training may have been, can make proper use of the scale unless
+he is willing to learn the method of procedure and scoring down to the
+minutest detail. A general acquaintance with the nature of the
+individual tests is by no means sufficient.
+
+Perhaps the best way to learn the method will be to begin by studying
+the book through, in order to gain a general acquaintance with the
+tests; then, if possible, to observe a few examinations; and finally to
+take up the procedure for detailed study in connection with practice
+testing. Twenty or thirty tests, made with constant reference to the
+procedure as described in Part II, should be sufficient to prepare the
+teacher or physician to make profitable use of the scale.
+
+The Stanford revision of the scale is the result of a number of
+investigations, made possible by the coöperation of the author's
+graduate students. Grateful acknowledgment is especially due to
+Professor H. G. Childs, Miss Grace Lyman, Dr. George Ordahl, Dr. Louise
+Ellison Ordahl, Miss Neva Galbreath, Mr. Wilford Talbert, Mr. J. Harold
+Williams, and Mr. Herbert E. Knollin. Without their assistance this book
+could not have been written.
+
+    STANFORD UNIVERSITY,
+        _April, 1916_.
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS
+
+
+PART I. PROBLEMS AND RESULTS
+
+CHAPTER I
+
+THE USES OF INTELLIGENCE TESTS                                         3
+
+  Intelligence tests of retarded school children. Intelligence
+  tests of the feeble-minded. Intelligence tests of delinquents.
+  Intelligence tests of superior children. Intelligence tests as a
+  basis for grading. Intelligence tests for vocational fitness.
+  Other uses of intelligence tests.
+
+CHAPTER II
+
+SOURCES OF ERROR IN JUDGING INTELLIGENCE                              22
+
+  Are intelligence tests superfluous? The necessity of standards.
+  The intelligence of retarded children usually overestimated. The
+  intelligence of superior children usually underestimated. Other
+  fallacies in the estimation of intelligence. Binet's
+  questionnaire on teachers' methods of judging intelligence.
+  Binet's experiment on how teachers test intelligence.
+
+CHAPTER III
+
+DESCRIPTION OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD                                 36
+
+  Essential nature of the scale. How the scale was derived. List of
+  tests. How the scale is used. Special characteristics of the
+  Binet-Simon method. The use of age standards. The kind of mental
+  functions brought into play. Binet would test "general
+  intelligence." Binet's conception of general intelligence. Other
+  conceptions of intelligence. Guiding principles in choice and
+  arrangement of tests. Some avowed limitations of the Binet tests.
+
+CHAPTER IV
+
+NATURE OF THE STANFORD REVISION AND EXTENSION                         51
+
+  Sources of data. Method of arriving at a revision. List of tests
+  in the Stanford revision and extension. Summary of changes.
+  Effects of the revision on the mental ages secured.
+
+CHAPTER V
+
+ANALYSIS OF ONE THOUSAND INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS                       65
+
+  The distribution of intelligence. The validity of the
+  intelligence quotient. Sex differences. Intelligence of the
+  different social classes. The relation of the I Q to the quality
+  of the child's school work. The relation between I Q and grade
+  progress. Correlation between I Q and the teachers' estimates of
+  the children's intelligence. The validity of the individual
+  tests.
+
+CHAPTER VI
+
+THE SIGNIFICANCE OF VARIOUS INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS                    78
+
+  Frequency of different degrees of intelligence. Classification of
+  intelligence quotients. Feeble-mindedness. Border-line cases.
+  Examples of border-line deficiency. Dull normals. Average
+  intelligence. Superior intelligence. Very superior intelligence.
+  Examples of very superior intelligence. Genius and "near" genius.
+  Is the I Q often misleading?
+
+CHAPTER VII
+
+RELIABILITY OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD                                105
+
+  General value of the method. Dependence of the scale's
+  reliability on the training of the examiner. Influence of the
+  subject's attitude. The influence of coaching. Reliability of
+  repeated tests. Influence of social and educational advantages.
+
+
+PART II
+
+GUIDE FOR THE USE OF THE STANFORD REVISION AND EXTENSION
+
+CHAPTER VIII
+
+GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS                                                 121
+
+  Necessity of securing attention and effort. Quiet and seclusion.
+  Presence of others. Getting into _rapport_. Keeping the child
+  encouraged. The importance of tact. Personality of the examiner.
+  The avoidance of fatigue. Duration of the examination. Desirable
+  range of testing. Order of giving the tests. Coaxing to be
+  avoided. Adhering to formula. Scoring. Recording responses.
+  Scattering of successes. Supplementary considerations.
+  Alternative tests. Finding mental age. The use of the
+  intelligence quotient. How to find the I Q of adult subjects.
+  Material for use in testing.
+
+CHAPTER IX
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR III
+
+  1. Pointing to parts of the body                                   142
+  2. Naming familiar objects                                         143
+  3. Enumeration of objects in pictures                              145
+  4. Giving sex                                                      146
+  5. Giving the family name                                          147
+  6. Repeating six to seven syllables                                149
+     Alternative test: Repeating three digits                        150
+
+CHAPTER X
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR IV
+
+  1. Comparison of lines                                             151
+  2. Discrimination of forms                                         152
+  3. Counting four pennies                                           154
+  4. Copying a square                                                155
+  5. Comprehension, first degree                                     157
+  6. Repeating four digits                                           159
+     Alternative test: Repeating twelve to thirteen syllables        160
+
+CHAPTER XI
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR V
+
+  1. Comparison of weights                                           161
+  2. Naming colors                                                   163
+  3. Æsthetic comparison                                             165
+  4. Giving definitions in terms of use                              167
+  5. The game of patience                                            169
+  6. Three commissions                                               172
+     Alternative test: Giving age                                    173
+
+CHAPTER XII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VI
+
+  1. Distinguishing right and left                                   175
+  2. Finding omissions in pictures                                   178
+  3. Counting thirteen pennies                                       180
+  4. Comprehension, second degree                                    181
+  5. Naming four coins                                               184
+  6. Repeating sixteen to eighteen syllables                         185
+     Alternative test: Forenoon and afternoon                        187
+
+CHAPTER XIII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VII
+
+  1. Giving the number of fingers                                    189
+  2. Description of pictures                                         190
+  3. Repeating five digits                                           193
+  4. Tying a bow-knot                                                196
+  5. Giving differences from memory                                  199
+  6. Copying a diamond                                               204
+     Alternative test 1: Naming the days of the week                 205
+     Alternative test 2: Repeating three digits reversed             207
+
+CHAPTER XIV
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VIII
+
+  1. The ball-and-field test                                         210
+  2. Counting backwards from 20 to 1                                 213
+  3. Comprehension, third degree                                     215
+  4. Giving similarities, two things                                 217
+  5. Giving definitions superior to use                              221
+  6. Vocabulary (20 definitions, 3600 words)                         224
+     Alternative test 1: Naming six coins                            231
+     Alternative test 2: Writing from dictation                      231
+
+CHAPTER XV
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR IX
+
+  1. Giving the date                                                 234
+  2. Arranging five weights                                          236
+  3. Making change                                                   240
+  4. Repeating four digits reversed                                  242
+  5. Using three words in a sentence                                 242
+  6. Finding rhymes                                                  248
+     Alternative test 1: Naming the months                           251
+     Alternative test 2: Counting the value of stamps                252
+
+CHAPTER XVI
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR X
+
+  1. Vocabulary (30 definitions, 5400 words)                         255
+  2. Detecting absurdities                                           255
+  3. Drawing designs from memory                                     260
+  4. Reading for eight memories                                      262
+  5. Comprehension, fourth degree                                    268
+  6. Naming sixty words                                              272
+     Alternative test 1: Repeating six digits                        277
+     Alternative test 2: Repeating twenty to twenty-two syllables    277
+     Alternative test 3: Healy's Construction Puzzle A               278
+
+CHAPTER XVII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR XII
+
+  1. Vocabulary (40 definitions, 7200 words)                         281
+  2. Defining abstract words                                         281
+  3. The ball-and-field test (superior plan)                         286
+  4. Dissected sentences                                             286
+  5. Interpretation of fables (score 4)                              290
+  6. Repeating five digits reversed                                  301
+  7. Interpretation of pictures                                      302
+  8. Giving similarities, three things                               306
+
+CHAPTER XVIII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR XIV
+
+  1. Vocabulary (50 definitions, 9000 words)                         310
+  2. Induction test: finding a rule                                  310
+  3. Giving differences between a president and a king               313
+  4. Problem questions                                               315
+  5. Arithmetical reasoning                                          319
+  6. Reversing hands of a clock                                      321
+     Alternative test: Repeating seven digits                        322
+
+CHAPTER XIX
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR "AVERAGE ADULT"
+
+  1. Vocabulary (65 definitions, 11,700 words)                       324
+  2. Interpretation of fables (score 8)                              324
+  3. Differences between abstract terms                              324
+  4. Problem of the enclosed boxes                                   327
+  5. Repeating six digits reversed                                   329
+  6. Using a code                                                    330
+     Alternative test 1: Repeating twenty-eight syllables            332
+     Alternative test 2: Comprehension of physical relations         333
+
+CHAPTER XX
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR "SUPERIOR ADULT"
+
+  1. Vocabulary (75 definitions, 13,500 words)                       338
+  2. Binet's paper-cutting test                                      338
+  3. Repeating eight digits                                          340
+  4. Repeating thought of passage                                    340
+  5. Repeating seven digits reversed                                 345
+  6. Ingenuity test                                                  345
+
+SELECTED REFERENCES                                                  349
+
+INDEX                                                                359
+
+
+
+
+FIGURES AND DIAGRAMS
+
+
+  1. Distribution of Mental Ages of 62 Normal Adults                  55
+  2. Distribution of I Q's of 905 Unselected Children, 5-14 Years
+     of Age                                                           66
+  3. Median I Q of 457 Boys and 448 Girls, for the Ages 5-14 Years    69
+  4. Diamond drawn by R. W.; Age 13-10; Mental Age 7-6                82
+  5. Writing from Dictation. R. M., Age 15; Mental Age 9              83
+  6. Ball and Field Test. I. M., Age 14-2; Mental Age 9               84
+  7. Diamond drawn by A. W.                                           85
+  8. Drawing Designs from Memory. H. S., Age 11; Mental Age 8-3       86
+  9. Ball and Field Test. S. F., Age 17; Mental Age 11-6              88
+ 10. Writing from Dictation. C. P., Age 10-2; Mental Age 7-11         90
+ 11. Ball and Field Test. M. P., Age 14; Mental Age 10-8              91
+ 12. Ball and Field Test. R. G., Age 13-5; Mental Age 10-6            93
+ 13. Ball and Field Test. E. B., Age 7-9; I Q 130                     98
+ 14. Ball and Field Test. F. McA., Age 10-3; Mental Age 14-6         100
+ 15. Drawing Designs from Memory. E. M., Age 6-11; Mental Age 10,
+     I Q 145                                                         101
+ 16. Ball and Field Test. B. F., Age 7-8; Mental Age 12-4; I Q 160   102
+ 17. Healy and Fernald Construction Puzzle                           279
+
+
+
+
+THE MEASUREMENT OF INTELLIGENCE
+
+PART I
+
+PROBLEMS AND RESULTS
+
+
+
+
+THE MEASUREMENT OF INTELLIGENCE
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER I
+
+THE USES OF INTELLIGENCE TESTS
+
+
+INTELLIGENCE TESTS OF RETARDED SCHOOL CHILDREN. Numerous studies of the
+age-grade progress of school children have afforded convincing evidence
+of the magnitude and seriousness of the retardation problem. Statistics
+collected in hundreds of cities in the United States show that between a
+third and a half of the school children fail to progress through the
+grades at the expected rate; that from 10 to 15 per cent are retarded
+two years or more; and that from 5 to 8 per cent are retarded at least
+three years. More than 10 per cent of the $400,000,000 annually expended
+in the United States for school instruction is devoted to re-teaching
+children what they have already been taught but have failed to learn.
+
+The first efforts at reform which resulted from these findings were
+based on the supposition that the evils which had been discovered could
+be remedied by the individualizing of instruction, by improved methods
+of promotion, by increased attention to children's health, and by other
+reforms in school administration. Although reforms along these lines
+have been productive of much good, they have nevertheless been in a
+measure disappointing. The trouble was, they were too often based upon
+the assumption that under the right conditions all children would be
+equally, or almost equally, capable of making satisfactory school
+progress. Psychological studies of school children by means of
+standardized intelligence tests have shown that this supposition is not
+in accord with the facts. It has been found that children do not fall
+into two well-defined groups, the "feeble-minded" and the "normal."
+Instead, there are many grades of intelligence, ranging from idiocy on
+the one hand to genius on the other. Among those classed as normal, vast
+individual differences have been found to exist in original mental
+endowment, differences which affect profoundly the capacity to profit
+from school instruction.
+
+We are beginning to realize that the school must take into account, more
+seriously than it has yet done, the existence and significance of these
+differences in endowment. Instead of wasting energy in the vain attempt
+to hold mentally slow and defective children up to a level of progress
+which is normal to the average child, it will be wiser to take account of
+the inequalities of children in original endowment and to differentiate
+the course of study in such a way that each child will be allowed to
+progress at the rate which is normal to him, whether that rate be rapid
+or slow.
+
+While we cannot hold all children to the same standard of school
+progress, we can at least prevent the kind of retardation which involves
+failure and the repetition of a school grade. It is well enough
+recognized that children do not enter with very much zest upon school
+work in which they have once failed. Failure crushes self-confidence and
+destroys the spirit of work. It is a sad fact that a large proportion of
+children in the schools are acquiring the habit of failure. The remedy,
+of course, is to measure out the work for each child in proportion to
+his mental ability.
+
+Before an engineer constructs a railroad bridge or trestle, he studies
+the materials to be used, and learns by means of tests exactly the
+amount of strain per unit of size his materials will be able to
+withstand. He does not work empirically, and count upon patching up the
+mistakes which may later appear under the stress of actual use. The
+educational engineer should emulate this example. Tests and forethought
+must take the place of failure and patchwork. Our efforts have been too
+long directed by "trial and error." It is time to leave off guessing and
+to acquire a scientific knowledge of the material with which we have to
+deal. When instruction must be repeated, it means that the school, as
+well as the pupil, has failed.
+
+Every child who fails in his school work or is in danger of failing
+should be given a mental examination. The examination takes less than
+one hour, and the result will contribute more to a real understanding of
+the case than anything else that could be done. It is necessary to
+determine whether a given child is unsuccessful in school because of
+poor native ability, or because of poor instruction, lack of interest,
+or some other removable cause.
+
+It is not sufficient to establish any number of special classes, if they
+are to be made the dumping-ground for all kinds of troublesome
+cases--the feeble-minded, the physically defective, the merely backward,
+the truants, the incorrigibles, etc. Without scientific diagnosis and
+classification of these children the educational work of the special
+class must blunder along in the dark. In such diagnosis and
+classification our main reliance must always be in mental tests,
+properly used and properly interpreted.
+
+INTELLIGENCE TESTS OF THE FEEBLE-MINDED. Thus far intelligence tests
+have found their chief application in the identification and grading of
+the feeble-minded. Their value for this purpose is twofold. In the first
+place, it is necessary to ascertain the degree of defect before it is
+possible to decide intelligently upon either the content or the method
+of instruction suited to the training of the backward child. In the
+second place, intelligence tests are rapidly extending our conception of
+"feeble-mindedness" to include milder degrees of defect than have
+generally been associated with this term. The earlier methods of
+diagnosis caused a majority of the higher grade defectives to be
+overlooked. Previous to the development of psychological methods the
+low-grade moron was about as high a type of defective as most physicians
+or even psychologists were able to identify as feeble-minded.
+
+Wherever intelligence tests have been made in any considerable number in
+the schools, they have shown that not far from 2 per cent of the
+children enrolled have a grade of intelligence which, however long they
+live, will never develop beyond the level which is normal to the average
+child of 11 or 12 years. The large majority of these belong to the moron
+grade; that is, their mental development will stop somewhere between the
+7-year and 12-year level of intelligence, more often between 9 and 12.
+
+The more we learn about such children, the clearer it becomes that they
+must be looked upon as real defectives. They may be able to drag
+along to the fourth, fifth, or sixth grades, but even by the age of
+16 or 18 years they are never able to cope successfully with the more
+abstract and difficult parts of the common-school course of study. They
+may master a certain amount of rote learning, such as that involved in
+reading and in the manipulation of number combinations but they cannot
+be taught to meet new conditions effectively or to think, reason, and
+judge as normal persons do.
+
+It is safe to predict that in the near future intelligence tests will
+bring tens of thousands of these high-grade defectives under the
+surveillance and protection of society. This will ultimately result in
+curtailing the reproduction of feeble-mindedness and in the elimination
+of an enormous amount of crime, pauperism, and industrial inefficiency.
+It is hardly necessary to emphasize that the high-grade cases, of the
+type now so frequently overlooked, are precisely the ones whose
+guardianship it is most important for the State to assume.
+
+INTELLIGENCE TESTS OF DELINQUENTS. One of the most important facts
+brought to light by the use of intelligence tests is the frequent
+association of delinquency and mental deficiency. Although it has long
+been recognized that the proportion of feeble-mindedness among
+offenders is rather large, the real amount has, until recently, been
+underestimated even by the most competent students of criminology.
+
+The criminologists have been accustomed to give more attention to the
+physical than to the mental correlates of crime. Thus, Lombroso and
+his followers subjected thousands of criminals to observation and
+measurement with regard to such physical traits as size and shape of the
+skull, bilateral asymmetries, anomalies of the ear, eye, nose, palate,
+teeth, hands, fingers, hair, dermal sensitivity, etc. The search was for
+physical "stigmata" characteristic of the "criminal type."
+
+Although such studies performed an important service in creating a
+scientific interest in criminology, the theories of Lombroso have been
+wholly discredited by the results of intelligence tests. Such tests have
+demonstrated, beyond any possibility of doubt, that the most important
+trait of at least 25 per cent of our criminals is mental weakness. The
+physical abnormalities which have been found so common among prisoners
+are not the stigmata of criminality, but the physical accompaniments of
+feeble-mindedness. They have no diagnostic significance except in so far
+as they are indications of mental deficiency. Without exception, every
+study which has been made of the intelligence level of delinquents has
+furnished convincing testimony as to the close relation existing between
+mental weakness and moral abnormality. Some of these findings are as
+follows:--
+
+    Miss Renz tested 100 girls of the Ohio State Reformatory and
+    reported 36 per cent as certainly feeble-minded. In every one of
+    these cases the commitment papers had given the pronouncement
+    "intellect sound."
+
+    Under the direction of Dr. Goddard the Binet tests were given to
+    100 juvenile court cases, chosen at random, in Newark, New
+    Jersey. Nearly half were classified as feeble-minded. One boy
+    17 years old had 9-year intelligence; another of 15½ had
+    8-year intelligence.
+
+    Of 56 delinquent girls 14 to 20 years of age tested by Hill and
+    Goddard, almost half belonged either to the 9- or the 10-year
+    level of intelligence.
+
+    Dr. G. G. Fernald's tests of 100 prisoners at the Massachusetts
+    State Reformatory showed that at least 25 per cent were
+    feeble-minded.
+
+    Of 1186 girls tested by Miss Dewson at the State Industrial
+    School for Girls at Lancaster, Pennsylvania, 28 per cent were
+    found to have subnormal intelligence.
+
+    Dr. Katherine Bement Davis's report on 1000 cases entered in the
+    Bedford Home for Women, New York, stated that there was no doubt
+    but that at least 157 were feeble-minded. Recently there has
+    been established at this institution one of the most important
+    research laboratories of the kind in the United States, with a
+    trained psychologist, Dr. Mabel Fernald, in charge.
+
+    Of 564 prostitutes investigated by Dr. Anna Dwyer in connection
+    with the Municipal Court of Chicago, only 3 per cent had gone
+    beyond the fifth grade in school. Mental tests were not made,
+    but from the data given it is reasonably certain that half or
+    more were feeble-minded.
+
+    Tests, by Dr. George Ordahl and Dr. Louise Ellison Ordahl, of
+    cases in the Geneva School for Girls, Geneva, Illinois, showed
+    that, on a conservative basis of classification, at least
+    18 per cent were feeble-minded. At the Joliet Prison, Illinois,
+    the same authors found 50 per cent of the female prisoners
+    feeble-minded, and 26 per cent of the male prisoners. At the St.
+    Charles School for Boys 26 per cent were feeble-minded.
+
+    Tests, by Dr. J. Harold Williams, of 150 delinquents in the
+    Whittier State School for Boys, Whittier, California, gave
+    28 per cent feeble-minded and 25 per cent at or near the
+    border-line. About 300 other juvenile delinquents tested by
+    Mr. Williams gave approximately the same figures. As a result of
+    these findings a research laboratory has been established at the
+    Whittier School, with Dr. Williams in charge. In the girls'
+    division of the Whittier School, Dr. Grace Fernald collected a
+    large amount of psychological data on more than 100 delinquent
+    girls. The findings of this investigation agree closely with
+    those of Dr. Williams for the boys.
+
+    At the State Reformatory, Jeffersonville, Indiana, Dr. von
+    Klein-Schmid, in an unusually thorough psychological study of
+    1000 young adult prisoners, finds the proportion of
+    feeble-mindedness not far from 50 per cent.
+
+But it is needless to multiply statistics. Those given are but samples.
+Tests are at present being made in most of the progressive prisons,
+reform schools, and juvenile courts throughout the country, and while
+there are minor discrepancies in regard to the actual percentage who are
+feeble-minded, there is no investigator who denies the fearful rôle
+played by mental deficiency in the production of vice, crime, and
+delinquency.[1]
+
+[1] See References at end of volume.
+
+Heredity studies of "degenerate" families have confirmed, in a striking
+way, the testimony secured by intelligence tests. Among the best known
+of such families are the "Kallikaks," the "Jukes," the "Hill Folk," the
+"Nams," the "Zeros," and the "Ishmaelites."
+
+    _The Kallikak family._ Martin Kallikak was a youthful soldier in
+    the Revolutionary War. At a tavern frequented by the militia he
+    met a feeble-minded girl, by whom he became the father of a
+    feeble-minded son. In 1912 there were 480 known direct
+    descendants of this temporary union. It is known that 36 of
+    these were illegitimates, that 33 were sexually immoral, that 24
+    were confirmed alcoholics, and that 8 kept houses of ill-fame.
+    The explanation of so much immorality will be obvious when it is
+    stated that of the 480 descendants, 143 were known to be
+    feeble-minded, and that many of the others were of questionable
+    mentality.
+
+    A few years after returning from the war this same Martin
+    Kallikak married a respectable girl of good family. From this
+    union 496 individuals have been traced in direct descent, and in
+    this branch of the family there were no illegitimate children,
+    no immoral women, and only one man who was sexually loose. There
+    were no criminals, no keepers of houses of ill-fame, and only
+    two confirmed alcoholics. Again the explanation is clear when it
+    is stated that this branch of the family did not contain a
+    single feeble-minded individual. It was made up of doctors,
+    lawyers, judges, educators, traders, and landholders.[2]
+
+    [2] H. H. Goddard: _The Kallikak Family_. (1914.) 141 pp.
+
+    _The Hill Folk._ The Hill Folk are a New England family of which
+    709 persons have been traced. Of the married women, 24 per cent
+    had given birth to illegitimate offspring, and 10 per cent were
+    prostitutes. Criminal tendencies were clearly shown in
+    24 members of the family, while alcoholism was still more
+    common. The proportion of feeble-minded was 48 per cent. It was
+    estimated that the Hill Folk have in the last sixty years cost
+    the State of Massachusetts, in charitable relief, care of
+    feeble-minded, epileptic, and insane, conviction and punishment
+    for crime, prostitution pauperism, etc., at least $500,000.[3]
+
+    [3] Danielson and Davenport: _The Hill Folk_. Eugenics Record Office,
+    Memoir No. 1. 1912. 56 pp.
+
+    The Nam family and the Jukes give equally dark pictures as
+    regards criminality, licentiousness, and alcoholism, and
+    although feeble-mindedness was not as fully investigated in
+    these families as in the Kallikaks and the Hill Folk, the
+    evidence is strong that it was a leading trait. The 784 Nams who
+    were traced included 187 alcoholics, 232 women and 199 men known
+    to be licentious, and 40 who became prisoners. It is estimated
+    that the Nams have already cost the State nearly $1,500,000.[4]
+
+    [4] Estabrook and Davenport: _The Nam Family_. Eugenics Record Office
+    Memoir No. 2. (1912). 85 pp.
+
+    Of 540 Jukes, practically one fifth were born out of wedlock, 37
+    were known to be syphilitic, 53 had been in the poorhouse, 76
+    had been sentenced to prison, and of 229 women of marriageable
+    age 128 were prostitutes. The economic damage inflicted upon the
+    State of New York by the Jukes in seventy-five years was
+    estimated at more than $1,300,000, to say nothing of diseases
+    and other evil influences which they helped to spread.[5]
+
+    [5] R. L. Dugdale: _The Jukes_. (Fourth edition, 1910.) 120 pp. G. P.
+    Putnam's Sons.
+
+But why do the feeble-minded tend so strongly to become delinquent? The
+answer may be stated in simple terms. Morality depends upon two things:
+(a) the ability to foresee and to weigh the possible consequences for
+self and others of different kinds of behavior; and (b) upon the
+willingness and capacity to exercise self-restraint. That there are many
+intelligent criminals is due to the fact that (a) may exist without
+(b). On the other hand, (b) presupposes (a). In other words, not
+all criminals are feeble-minded, but all feeble-minded are at least
+potential criminals. That every feeble-minded woman is a potential
+prostitute would hardly be disputed by any one. Moral judgment, like
+business judgment, social judgment, or any other kind of higher thought
+process, is a function of intelligence. Morality cannot flower and fruit
+if intelligence remains infantile.
+
+All of us in early childhood lacked moral responsibility. We were as
+rank egoists as any criminal. Respect for the feelings, the property
+rights, or any other kind of rights, of others had to be laboriously
+acquired under the whip of discipline. But by degrees we learned that
+only when instincts are curbed, and conduct is made to conform to
+principles established formally or accepted tacitly by our neighbors,
+does this become a livable world for any of us. Without the intelligence
+to generalize the particular, to foresee distant consequences of present
+acts, to weigh these foreseen consequences in the nice balance of
+imagination, morality cannot be learned. When the adult body, with its
+adult instincts, is coupled with the undeveloped intelligence and weak
+inhibitory powers of a 10-year-old child, the only possible outcome,
+except in those cases where constant guardianship is exercised by
+relatives or friends, is some form of delinquency.
+
+Considering the tremendous cost of vice and crime, which in all
+probability amounts to not less than $500,000,000 per year in the United
+States alone, it is evident that psychological testing has found here
+one of its richest applications. Before offenders can be subjected
+to rational treatment a mental diagnosis is necessary, and while
+intelligence tests do not constitute a complete psychological diagnosis,
+they are, nevertheless, its most indispensable part.
+
+INTELLIGENCE TESTS OF SUPERIOR CHILDREN. The number of children with
+very superior ability is approximately as great as the number of
+feeble-minded. The future welfare of the country hinges, in no small
+degree, upon the right education of these superior children. Whether
+civilization moves on and up depends most on the advances made by
+creative thinkers and leaders in science, politics, art, morality, and
+religion. Moderate ability can follow, or imitate, but genius must show
+the way.
+
+Through the leveling influences of the educational lockstep such
+children at present are often lost in the masses. It is a rare child who
+is able to break this lockstep by extra promotions. Taking the country
+over, the ratio of "accelerates" to "retardates" in the school is
+approximately 1 to 10. Through the handicapping influences of poverty,
+social neglect, physical defects, or educational maladjustments, many
+potential leaders in science, art, government, and industry are denied
+the opportunity of a normal development. The use we have made of
+exceptional ability reminds one of the primitive methods of surface
+mining. It is necessary to explore the nation's hidden resources of
+intelligence. The common saying that "genius will out" is one of those
+dangerous half-truths with which too many people rest content.
+
+Psychological tests show that children of superior ability are very
+likely to be misunderstood in school. The writer has tested more than a
+hundred children who were as much above average intelligence as moron
+defectives are below. The large majority of these were found located
+below the school grade warranted by their intellectual level. One third
+had failed to reap any advantage whatever, in terms of promotion, from
+their very superior intelligence. Even genius languishes when kept
+over-long at tasks that are too easy.
+
+Our data show that teachers sometimes fail entirely to recognize
+exceptional superiority in a pupil, and that the degree of such
+superiority is rarely estimated with anything like the accuracy which is
+possible to the psychologist after a one-hour examination. _B. F._, for
+example, was a little over 7½ years old when tested. He was in the
+third grade, and was therefore thought by his teacher to be accelerated
+in school. This boy's intelligence, however, was found to be above the
+12-year level. There is no doubt that his mental ability would have
+enabled him, with a few months of individual instruction, to carry fifth
+or even sixth-grade work as easily as third, and without injury to body
+or mind. Nevertheless, the teacher and both the parents of this child
+had found nothing remarkable about him. In reality he belongs to a grade
+of genius not found oftener than once in several thousand cases.
+
+Another illustration is that of a boy of 10½ years who tested at the
+"average adult" level. He was doing superior work in the sixth grade,
+but according to the testimony of the teacher had "no unusual ability."
+It was ascertained from the parents that this boy, at an age when most
+children are reading fairy stories, had a passion for standard medical
+literature and textbooks in physical science. Yet, after more than a
+year of daily contact with this young genius (who is a relative of
+Meyerbeer, the composer), the teacher had discovered no symptoms of
+unusual ability.[6]
+
+[6] See p. 26 _ff._ for further illustrations of this kind.
+
+Teachers should be better trained in detecting the signs of superior
+ability. Every child who consistently gets high marks in his school work
+with apparent ease should be given a mental examination, and if his
+intelligence level warrants it he should either be given extra
+promotions, or placed in a special class for superior children where
+faster progress can be made. The latter is the better plan, because it
+obviates the necessity of skipping grades; it permits rapid but
+continuous progress.
+
+The usual reluctance of teachers to give extra promotions probably rests
+upon three factors: (1) mere inertia; (2) a natural unwillingness to
+part with exceptionally satisfactory pupils; and (3) the traditional
+belief that precocious children should be held back for fear of dire
+physical or mental consequences.
+
+In order to throw light on the question whether exceptionally bright
+children are specially likely to be one-sided, nervous, delicate,
+morally abnormal, socially unadaptable, or otherwise peculiar, the
+writer has secured rather extensive information regarding 31 children
+whose mental age was found by intelligence tests to be 25 per cent above
+the actual age. This degree of intelligence is possessed by about
+2 children out of 100, and is nearly as far above average intelligence
+as high-grade feeble-mindedness is below. The supplementary information,
+which was furnished in most cases by the teachers, may be summarized as
+follows:--
+
+  1. _Ability special or general._ In the case of 20 out of 31 the
+      ability is decidedly general, and with 2 it is mainly general.
+      The talents of 5 are described as more or less special, but
+      only in one case is it remarkably so. Doubtful 4.
+
+  2. _Health._ 15 are said to be perfectly healthy; 13 have one or
+      more physical defects; 4 of the 13 are described as delicate;
+      4 have adenoids; 4 have eye-defects; 1 lisps; and 1 stutters.
+      These figures are about the same as one finds in any group of
+      ordinary children.
+
+  3. _Studiousness._ "Extremely studious," 15; "usually studious" or
+      "fairly studious," 11; "not particularly studious," 5; "lazy,"
+      0.
+
+  4. _Moral traits._ Favorable traits only, 19; one or more
+      unfavorable traits, 8; no answer, 4. The eight with
+      unfavorable moral traits are described as follows: 2 are "very
+      self-willed"; 1 "needs close watching"; 1 is "cruel to
+      animals"; 1 is "untruthful"; 1 is "unreliable"; 1 is "a
+      bluffer"; 1 is "sexually abnormal," "perverted," and
+      "vicious."
+
+      It will be noted that with the exception of the last child,
+      the moral irregularities mentioned can hardly be regarded,
+      from the psychological point of view, as essentially abnormal.
+      It is perhaps a good rather than a bad sign for a child to be
+      self-willed; most children "need close watching"; and a
+      certain amount of untruthfulness in children is the rule and
+      not the exception.
+
+  5. _Social adaptability._ Socially adaptable, 25; not adaptable,
+      2; doubtful, 4.
+
+  6. _Attitude of other children._ "Favorable," "friendly," "liked
+      by everybody," "much admired," "popular," etc., 26; "not
+      liked," 1; "inspires repugnance," 1; no answer, 1.
+
+  7. _Is child a leader?_ "Yes," 14; "no," or "not particularly,"
+      12; doubtful, 5.
+
+  8. _Is play life normal?_ "Yes," 26; "no," 1; "hardly," 1;
+      doubtful, 3.
+
+  9. _Is child spoiled or vain?_ "No," 22; "yes," 5; "somewhat," 2;
+      no answer, 2.
+
+According to the above data, exceptionally intelligent children are
+fully as likely to be healthy as ordinary children; their ability is far
+more often general than special, they are studious above the average,
+really serious faults are not common among them, they are nearly always
+socially adaptable, are sought after as playmates and companions, their
+play life is usually normal, they are leaders far oftener than other
+children, and notwithstanding their many really superior qualities they
+are seldom vain or spoiled.
+
+It would be greatly to the advantage of such children if their superior
+ability were more promptly and fully recognized, and if (under proper
+medical supervision, of course) they were promoted as rapidly as their
+mental development would warrant. Unless they are given the grade of
+work which calls forth their best efforts, they run the risk of falling
+into lifelong habits of submaximum efficiency. The danger in the case of
+such children is not over-pressure, but under-pressure.
+
+INTELLIGENCE TESTS AS A BASIS FOR GRADING. Not only in the case of
+retarded or exceptionally bright children, but with many others also,
+intelligence tests can aid in correctly placing the child in school.
+
+The pupil who enters one school system from another is a case in point.
+Such a pupil nearly always suffers a loss of time. The indefensible
+custom is to grade the newcomer down a little, because, forsooth, the
+textbooks he has studied may have differed somewhat from those he is
+about to take up, or because the school system from which he comes may
+be looked upon as inferior. Teachers are too often suspicious of all
+other educational methods besides their own. The present treatment
+accorded such children, which so often does them injustice and injury,
+should be replaced by an intelligence test. The hour of time required
+for the test is a small matter in comparison with the loss of a school
+term by the pupils.
+
+Indeed, it would be desirable to make all promotions on the basis
+chiefly of intellectual ability. Hitherto the school has had to rely on
+tests of information because reliable tests of intelligence have not
+until recently been available. As trained Binet examiners become more
+plentiful, the information standard will have to give way to the
+criterion which asks merely that the child shall be able to do the work
+of the next higher grade. The brief intelligence test is not only more
+enlightening than the examination; it is also more hygienic. The school
+examination is often for the child a source of worry and anxiety; the
+mental test is an interesting and pleasant experience.
+
+INTELLIGENCE TESTS FOR VOCATIONAL FITNESS. The time is probably not far
+distant when intelligence tests will become a recognized and widely used
+instrument for determining vocational fitness. Of course, it is not
+claimed that tests are available which will tell us unerringly exactly
+what one of a thousand or more occupations a given individual is best
+fitted to pursue. But when thousands of children who have been tested by
+the Binet scale have been followed out into the industrial world, and
+their success in various occupations noted, we shall know fairly
+definitely the vocational significance of any given degree of mental
+inferiority or superiority. Researches of this kind will ultimately
+determine the minimum "intelligence quotient" necessary for success in
+each leading occupation.
+
+Industrial concerns doubtless suffer enormous losses from the employment
+of persons whose mental ability is not equal to the tasks they are
+expected to perform. The present methods of trying out new employees,
+transferring them to simpler and simpler jobs as their inefficiency
+becomes apparent, is wasteful and to a great extent unnecessary. A
+cheaper and more satisfactory method would be to employ a psychologist
+to examine applicants for positions and to weed out the unfit. Any
+business employing as many as five hundred or a thousand workers, as,
+for example, a large department store, could save in this way several
+times the salary of a well-trained psychologist.
+
+That the industrially inefficient are often of subnormal intelligence
+has already been demonstrated in a number of psychological
+investigations. Of 150 "hoboes" tested under the direction of the writer
+by Mr. Knollin, at least 15 per cent belonged to the moron grade of
+mental deficiency, and almost as many more were border-line cases. To be
+sure, a large proportion were found perfectly normal, and a few even
+decidedly superior in mental ability, but the ratio of mental deficiency
+was ten or fifteen times as high as that holding for the general
+population. Several had as low as 9- or 10-year intelligence, and one
+had a mental level of 7 years. The industrial history of such subjects,
+as given by themselves, was always about what the mental level would
+lead us to expect--unskilled work, lack of interest in accomplishment,
+frequent discharge from jobs, discouragement, and finally the "road."
+
+The above findings have been fully paralleled by Mr. Glenn Johnson and
+Professor Eleanor Rowland, of Reed College, who tested 108 unemployed
+charity cases in Portland, Oregon. Both of these investigators made use
+of the Stanford revision of the Binet scale, which is especially
+serviceable in distinguishing the upper-grade defectives from normals.
+
+It hardly needs to be emphasized that when charity organizations help
+the feeble-minded to float along in the social and industrial world, and
+to produce and rear children after their kind, a doubtful service is
+rendered. A little psychological research would aid the united charities
+of any city to direct their expenditures into more profitable channels
+than would otherwise be possible.
+
+OTHER USES OF INTELLIGENCE TESTS. Another important use of intelligence
+tests is in the study of the factors which influence mental development.
+It is desirable that we should be able to guard the child against
+influences which affect mental development unfavorably; but as long as
+these influences have not been sifted, weighed, and measured, we have
+nothing but conjecture on which to base our efforts in this direction.
+
+When we search the literature of child hygiene for reliable evidence as
+to the injurious effects upon mental ability of malnutrition, decayed
+teeth, obstructed breathing, reduced sleep, bad ventilation,
+insufficient exercise, etc., we are met by endless assertion painfully
+unsupported by demonstrated fact. We have, indeed, very little exact
+knowledge regarding the mental effects of any of the factors just
+mentioned. When standardized mental tests have come into more general
+use, such influences will be easy to detect wherever they are really
+present.
+
+Again, the most important question of heredity is that regarding the
+inheritance of intelligence; but this is a problem which cannot be
+attacked at all without some accurate means of identifying the thing
+which is the object of study. Without the use of scales for measuring
+intelligence we can give no better answer as to the essential difference
+between a genius and a fool than is to be found in legend and fiction.
+
+Applying this to school children, it means that without such tests we
+cannot know to what extent a child's mental performances are determined
+by environment and to what extent by heredity. Is the place of the
+so-called lower classes in the social and industrial scale the result of
+their inferior native endowment, or is their apparent inferiority merely
+a result of their inferior home and school training? Is genius more
+common among children of the educated classes than among the children of
+the ignorant and poor? Are the inferior races really inferior, or are
+they merely unfortunate in their lack of opportunity to learn?
+
+Only intelligence tests can answer these questions and grade the raw
+material with which education works. Without them we can never
+distinguish the results of our educational efforts with a given child
+from the influence of the child's original endowment. Such tests would
+have told us, for example, whether the much-discussed "wonder children,"
+such as the Sidis and Wiener boys and the Stoner girl, owe their
+precocious intellectual prowess to superior training (as their parents
+believe) or to superior native ability. The supposed effects upon mental
+development of new methods of mind training, which are exploited so
+confidently from time to time (e.g., the Montessori method and the
+various systems of sensory and motor training for the feeble-minded),
+will have to be checked up by the same kind of scientific measurement.
+
+In all these fields intelligence tests are certain to play an
+ever-increasing rôle. With the exception of moral character there
+is nothing as significant for a child's future as his grade of
+intelligence. Even health itself is likely to have less influence in
+determining success in life. Although strength and swiftness have always
+had great survival value among the lower animals, these characteristics
+have long since lost their supremacy in man's struggle for existence.
+For us the rule of brawn has been broken, and intelligence has become
+the decisive factor in success. Schools, railroads, factories, and the
+largest commercial concerns may be successfully managed by persons who
+are physically weak or even sickly. One who has intelligence constantly
+measures opportunities against his own strength or weakness and adjusts
+himself to conditions by following those leads which promise most toward
+the realization of his individual possibilities.
+
+All classes of intellects, the weakest as well as the strongest, will
+profit by the application of their talents to tasks which are consonant
+with their ability. When we have learned the lessons which intelligence
+tests have to teach, we shall no longer blame mentally defective workmen
+for their industrial inefficiency, punish weak-minded children because
+of their inability to learn, or imprison and hang mentally defective
+criminals because they lacked the intelligence to appreciate the
+ordinary codes of social conduct.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER II
+
+SOURCES OF ERROR IN JUDGING INTELLIGENCE
+
+
+ARE INTELLIGENCE TESTS SUPERFLUOUS? Binet tells us that he often
+encountered the criticism that intelligence tests are superfluous, and
+that in going to so much trouble to devise his measuring scale he was
+forcing an open door. Those who made this criticism believed that the
+observant teacher or parent is able to make an offhand estimate of a
+child's intelligence which is accurate enough. "It is a stupid teacher,"
+said one, "who needs a psychologist to tell her which pupils are not
+intelligent." Every one who uses intelligence tests meets this attitude
+from time to time.
+
+This should not be surprising or discouraging. It is only natural that
+those who are unfamiliar with the methods of psychology should
+occasionally question their validity or worth, just as there are many
+excellent people who do not "believe in" vaccination against typhoid and
+small pox, operations for appendicitis, etc.
+
+There is an additional reason why the applications of psychology have to
+overcome a good deal of conservatism and skepticism; namely, the fact
+that every one, whether psychologically trained or not, acquires in the
+ordinary experiences of life a certain degree of expertness in the
+observation and interpretation of mental traits. The possession of this
+little fund of practical working knowledge makes most people slow to
+admit any one's claim to greater expertness. When the astronomer tells
+us the distance to Jupiter, we accept his statement, because we
+recognize that our ordinary experience affords no basis for judgment
+about such matters. But every one acquires more or less facility in
+distinguishing the coarser differences among people in intelligence,
+and this half-knowledge naturally generates a certain amount of
+resistance to the more refined method of tests.
+
+It should be evident, however, that we need more than the ability merely
+to distinguish a genius from a simpleton, just as a physician needs
+something more than the ability to distinguish an athlete from a man
+dying of consumption. It is necessary to have a definite and accurate
+diagnosis, one which will differentiate more finely the many degrees and
+qualities of intelligence. Just as in the case of physical illness, we
+need to know not merely that the patient is sick, but also why he is
+sick, what organs are involved, what course the illness will run, and
+what physical work the patient can safely undertake, so in the case of a
+retarded child, we need to know the exact degree of intellectual
+deficiency, what mental functions are chiefly concerned in the defect,
+whether the deficiency is due to innate endowment, to physical illness,
+or to faults of education, and what lines of mental activity the child
+will be able to pursue with reasonable hope of success. In the diagnosis
+of a case of malnutrition, the up-to-date physician does not depend upon
+general symptoms, but instead makes a blood test to determine the exact
+number of red corpuscles per cubic millimeter of blood and the exact
+percentage of hæmoglobin. He has learned that external appearances are
+often misleading. Similarly, every psychologist who is experienced in
+the mental examination of school children knows that his own or the
+teacher's estimate of a child's intelligence is subject to grave and
+frequent error.
+
+THE NECESSITY OF STANDARDS. In the first place, in order to judge an
+individual's intelligence it is necessary to have in mind some standard
+as to what constitutes normal intelligence. This the ordinary parent or
+teacher does not have. In the case of school children, for example, each
+pupil is judged with reference to the average intelligence of the
+class. But the teacher has no means of knowing whether the average for
+her class is above, equal to, or below that for children in general. Her
+standard may be too high, too low, vague, mechanical, or fragmentary.
+The same, of course, holds in the case of parents or any one else
+attempting to estimate intelligence on the basis of common observation.
+
+THE INTELLIGENCE OF RETARDED CHILDREN USUALLY OVERESTIMATED. One of the
+most common errors made by the teacher is to overestimate the
+intelligence of the over-age pupil. This is because she fails to take
+account of age differences and estimates intelligence on the basis of
+the child's school performance in the grade where he happens to be
+located. She tends to overlook the fact that quality of school work is
+no index of intelligence unless age is taken into account. The question
+should be, not, "Is this child doing his school work well?" but rather,
+"In what school grade should a child of this age be able to do
+satisfactory work?" A high-grade imbecile may do average work in the
+first grade, and a high-grade moron average work in the third or fourth
+grade, provided only they are sufficiently over-age for the grade in
+question.
+
+Our experience in testing children for segregation in special classes
+has time and again brought this fallacy of teachers to our attention. We
+have often found one or more feeble-minded children in a class after
+the teacher had confidently asserted that there was not a single
+exceptionally dull child present. In every case where there has been
+opportunity to follow the later school progress of such a child the
+validity of the intelligence test has been fully confirmed.
+
+The following are typical examples of the neglect of teachers to take
+the age factor into account when estimating the intelligence of the
+over-age child:--
+
+    _A. R. Girl, age 11; in low second grade._ She was able to do
+    the work of this grade, not well, but passably. The teacher's
+    judgment as to this child's intelligence was "dull but not
+    defective." What the teacher overlooked was the fact that she
+    had judged the child by a 7-year standard, and that, instead of
+    only being able to do the work of the second grade
+    indifferently, a child of this age should have been equal to the
+    work of the fifth grade. In reality, A. R. is definitely
+    feeble-minded. Although she is from a home of average culture,
+    is 11 years old, and has attended school five years, she has
+    barely the intelligence of the average child of six years.
+
+    _D. C. Boy, age 17; in fifth grade._ His teacher knew that he
+    was dull, but had not thought of him as belonging to the class
+    of feeble-minded. She had judged this boy by the 11-year
+    standard and had perhaps been further misled by his normal
+    appearance and exceptionally satisfactory behavior. The Binet
+    test quickly showed that he had a mental level of approximately
+    9 years. There is little probability that his comprehension will
+    ever surpass that of the average 10-year-old.
+
+    _R. A. Boy, age 17; mental age 11; sixth grade; school work
+    "nearly average"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average."_
+    Test plainly shows this child to be a high-grade moron, or
+    border-liner at best. Had attended school regularly 11 years and
+    had made 6 grades. Teacher had compared child with his
+    12-year-old classmates.
+
+    _H. A. Boy, age 14; mental age 9-6; low fourth grade; school
+    work "inferior"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average."_
+    The teacher blamed the inferior quality of school work to "bad
+    home environment." As a matter of fact, the boy's father is
+    feeble-minded and the normality of the mother is questionable.
+    An older brother is in a reform school. We are perfectly safe in
+    predicting that this boy will not complete the eighth grade even
+    if he attends school till he is 21 years of age.
+
+    _F. I. Boy, age 12-11; mental age 9-4; third grade; school work
+    "average"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average"; social
+    environment "average"; health good and attendance regular._
+    Intelligence and school success are what we should expect of an
+    average 9-year-old.
+
+    _D. A. Boy, age 12; mental age 9-2; third grade; school work
+    "inferior"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average."_
+    Teacher imputes inferior school work to "absence from school and
+    lack of interest in books"; we have yet to find a child with a
+    mental age 25 per cent below chronological age who _was_
+    particularly interested in books or enthusiastic about school.
+
+    _C. U. Girl, age 10; mental age 7-8; second grade; school work
+    "average"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average."_
+    Teacher blames adenoids and bad teeth for retardation. No doubt
+    of child's mental deficiency.
+
+    _P. I. Girl, age 8-10; mental age 6-7; has been in first grade
+    2½ years; school work "average"; teacher's estimate of
+    intelligence "average."_ The mother and one brother of this girl
+    are both feeble-minded.
+
+    _H. O. Girl, age 7-10; mental age 5-2; first grade for 2 years;
+    school work "inferior"; teacher's estimate of intelligence
+    "average."_ The teacher nevertheless adds, "This child is not
+    normal, but her ability to respond to drill shows that she has
+    intelligence." It is of course true that even feeble-minded
+    children of 5-year intelligence are able to profit a little from
+    drill. Their weakness comes to light in their inability to
+    perform higher types of mental activity.
+
+THE INTELLIGENCE OF SUPERIOR CHILDREN USUALLY UNDERESTIMATED. We have
+already mentioned the frequent failure of teachers and parents to
+recognize superior ability.[7] The fallacy here is again largely due to
+the neglect of the age factor, but the resulting error is in the
+opposite direction from that set forth above. The superior child is
+likely to be a year or two younger than the average child of his grade,
+and is accordingly judged by a standard which is too high. The following
+are illustrations:--
+
+[7] See p. 13 _ff._
+
+    _M. L. Girl, age 11-2; mental age "average adult" (16); sixth
+    grade; school work "superior"; teacher's estimate of
+    intelligence "average."_ Teacher credits superior school work to
+    "unusual home advantages." Father a college professor. The
+    teacher considers the child accelerated in school. In reality
+    she ought to be in the second year of high school instead of in
+    the sixth grade.
+
+    _H. A. Boy, age 11; mental age 14; sixth grade; school work
+    "average"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average."_
+    According to the supplementary information the boy is
+    "wonderfully attentive," "studious," and possessed of
+    "all-round ability." The estimate of "average intelligence" was
+    probably the result of comparing him with classmates who
+    averaged about a year older.
+
+    _K. R. Girl, age 6-1; mental age 8-5; second grade; school work
+    "average"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "superior"; social
+    environment "average."_ Is it not evident that a child from
+    ordinary social environment, who does work of average quality in
+    the second grade when barely 6 years of age, should be judged
+    "very superior" rather than merely "superior" in intelligence?
+    The intelligence quotient of this girl is 140, which is not
+    reached by more than one child in two hundred.
+
+    _S. A. Boy, age 8-10; mental age 10-9; fourth grade; school work
+    "average"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average."_
+    Teacher attributed school acceleration to "studiousness" and
+    "delight in school work." It would be more reasonable to infer
+    that these traits are indications of unusually superior
+    intelligence.
+
+OTHER FALLACIES IN THE ESTIMATION OF INTELLIGENCE. Another source
+of error in the teacher's judgment comes from the difficulty in
+distinguishing genuine dullness from the mental condition which results
+sometimes from unfavorable social environment or lack of training.
+
+    _V. P. Boy, age 7._ Had attended school one year and had
+    profited very little from the instruction. He had learned to
+    read very little, spoke chiefly in monosyllables, and seemed
+    "queer." The teacher suspected his intelligence and asked for a
+    mental examination. The Binet test showed that except for
+    vocabulary, which was unusually low, there was practically no
+    mental retardation. Inquiry disclosed the fact that the boy's
+    parents were uneducated deaf-mutes, and that the boy had
+    associated little with other children. Four years later this boy
+    was doing fairly well in school, though a year retarded because
+    of his unfavorable home environment.
+
+    _X. Y. Boy, age 10._ Son of a successful business man, he was
+    barely able to read in the second reader. The Binet test
+    revealed an intelligence level which was absolutely normal. The
+    boy was removed to a special class where he could receive
+    individual attention, and two years later was found doing good
+    work in a regular class of the fifth grade. His bad beginning
+    seemed to have been due to an unfavorable attitude toward school
+    work, due in turn to lack of discipline in the home, and to the
+    fact that because of the father's frequent change of business
+    headquarters the boy had never attended one school longer than
+    three months.
+
+Another source of error in judging intelligence from common observation
+is the tendency to overestimate the intelligence of the sprightly,
+talkative, sanguine child, and to underestimate the intelligence of the
+child who is less emotional, reacts slowly, and talks little. One
+occasionally finds a feeble-minded adult, perhaps of only 9- or 10-year
+intelligence, whose verbal fluency, mental liveliness, and
+self-confidence would mislead the offhand judgment of even the
+psychologist. One individual of this type, a border-line case at best,
+was accustomed to harangue street audiences and had served as "major" in
+"Kelly's Army," a horde of several hundred unemployed men who a few
+years ago organized and started to march from San Francisco to
+Washington.
+
+BINET'S QUESTIONNAIRE ON TEACHERS' METHODS OF JUDGING INTELLIGENCE.[8]
+Aroused by the skepticism so often shown toward his test method, Binet
+decided to make a little study of the methods by which teachers are
+accustomed to arrive at a judgment as to a child's intelligence.
+Accordingly, through the coöperation of the director of elementary
+education in Paris, he secured answers from a number of teachers to the
+following questions:--
+
+[8] See p. 169 _ff._ of reference 2, at end of this book
+
+  1. _By what means do you judge the intelligence of your pupils?_
+  2. _How often have you been deceived in your judgments?_
+
+About 40 replies were received. Most of the answers to the first
+question were vague, one-sided, "verbal," or bookish. Only a few showed
+much psychological discrimination as to what intelligence is and
+what its symptoms are. There was a very general tendency to judge
+intelligence by success in one or more of the school studies. Some
+thought that ability to master arithmetic was a sure criterion. Others
+were influenced almost entirely by the pupil's ability to read. One
+teacher said that the child who can "read so expressively as to make you
+feel the punctuation" is certainly intelligent, an observation which is
+rather good, as far as it goes. A few judged intelligence by the pupil's
+knowledge of such subjects as history and geography, which, as Binet
+points out, is to confound intelligence with the ability to memorize.
+"Memory," says Binet, is a "great simulator of intelligence." It is a
+wise teacher who is not deceived by it. Only a small minority mentioned
+resourcefulness in play, capacity to adjust to practical situations, or
+any other out-of-school criteria.
+
+Some suggested asking the pupil such questions as the following:--
+
+    "Why do you love your parents?" "If it takes three persons seven
+    hours to do a piece of work, would it take seven persons any
+    longer?" "Which would you rather have, a fourth of a pie, or a
+    half of a half?" "Which is heavier, a pound of feathers or a
+    pound of lead?" "If you had twenty cents what would you do with
+    it?"
+
+A great many based their judgment mainly on the general appearance of
+the face and eyes. An "active" or "passive" expression of the eyes was
+looked upon as especially significant. One teacher thought that a mere
+"glance of the eye" was sufficient to display the grade of intelligence.
+If the eyes are penetrating, reflective, or show curiosity, the child
+must be intelligent; if they are heavy and expressionless, he must be
+dull. The mobility of countenance came in for frequent mention, also the
+shape of the head.
+
+No one will deny that intelligence displays itself to a greater or
+less extent in the features; but how, asks Binet, are we going to
+_standardize_ a "glance of the eye" or an "expression of curiosity" so
+that it will serve as an exact measure of intelligence?
+
+The fact is, the more one sees of feeble-minded children, the less
+reliance one comes to place upon facial expression as a sign of
+intelligence. Some children who are only slightly backward have the
+general appearance of low-grade imbeciles. On the other hand, not a few
+who are distinctly feeble-minded are pretty and attractive. With many
+such children a ready smile takes the place of comprehension. If the
+smile is rather sweet and sympathetic, as is often the case, the
+observer is almost sure to be deceived.
+
+As regards the shape of the head, peculiar conformation of the ears, and
+other "stigmata," science long ago demonstrated that these are
+ordinarily of little or no significance.
+
+In reply to the second question, some teachers stated that they never
+made a mistake, while others admitted failure in one case out of three.
+Still others said, "Once in ten years," "once in twenty years," "once in
+a thousand times," etc.
+
+As Binet remarks, the answers to this question are not very enlightening.
+In the first place, the teacher as a rule loses sight of the pupil when
+he has passed from her care, and seldom has opportunity of finding out
+whether his later success belies her judgment or confirms it. Errors go
+undiscovered for the simple reason that there is no opportunity to check
+them up. In the second place, her estimate is so rough that an error
+must be very great in order to have any meaning. If I say that a man is
+six feet and two inches tall, it is easy enough to apply a measuring
+stick and prove the correctness or incorrectness of my assertion. But if
+I say simply that the man is "rather tall," or "very tall," the error
+must be very extreme before we can expose it, particularly since the
+estimate can itself be checked up only by observation and not by
+controlled experiment.
+
+The teachers' answers seem to justify three conclusions:--
+
+1. Teachers do not have a very definite idea of what constitutes
+intelligence. They tend to confuse it variously with capacity for
+memorizing, facility in reading, ability to master arithmetic, etc. On
+the whole, their standard is too academic. They fail to appreciate the
+one-sidedness of the school's demands upon intelligence.
+
+In a quaintly humorous passage discussing this tendency, Binet
+characterizes the child in a class as _dénaturé_, a French word which we
+may translate (though rather too literally) as "denatured." Too often
+this "denatured" child of the classroom is the only child the teacher
+knows.
+
+2. In judging intelligence teachers are too easily deceived by a
+sprightly attitude, a sympathetic expression, a glance of the eye, or a
+chance "bump" on the head.
+
+3. Although a few teachers seem to realize the many possibilities of
+error, the majority show rather undue confidence in the accuracy of
+their judgment.
+
+BINET'S EXPERIMENT ON HOW TEACHERS TEST INTELLIGENCE.[9] Finally, Binet
+had three teachers come to his laboratory to judge the intelligence of
+children whom they had never seen before. Each spent an afternoon in the
+laboratory and examined five pupils. In each case the teacher was left
+free to arrive at a conclusion in her own way. Binet, who remained in
+the room and took notes, recounts with playful humor how the teachers
+were unavoidably compelled to resort to the much-abused test method,
+although their attempts at using it were sometimes, from the
+psychologist's point of view, amusingly clumsy.
+
+[9] See p. 182 _ff._ of reference 2 at end of this book.
+
+One teacher, for example, questioned the children about some canals and
+sluices which were in the vicinity, asking what their purpose was and
+how they worked. Another showed the children some pretty pictures,
+which she had brought with her for the purpose, and asked questions
+about them. Showing the picture of a garret, she asked how a garret
+differs from an ordinary room. One teacher asked whether in building a
+factory it was best to have the walls thick or thin. As King Edward had
+just died, another teacher questioned the children about the details of
+this event, in order to find out whether they were in the habit of
+reading the newspapers, or understood the things they heard others read.
+Other questions related to the names of the streets in the neighborhood,
+the road one should take to reach a certain point in the vicinity, etc.
+Binet notes that many of the questions were special, and were only
+applicable with the children of this particular school.
+
+The method of proposing the questions and judging the responses was also
+at fault. The teachers did not adhere consistently to any definite
+formula in giving a particular test to the different children. Instead,
+the questions were materially altered from time to time. One teacher
+scored the identical response differently for two children, giving one
+child more credit than the other because she had already judged his
+intelligence to be superior. In several cases the examination was
+needlessly delayed in order to instruct the child in what he did not
+know.
+
+The examination ended, quite properly for a teacher's examination, with
+questions about history, literature, the metric system, etc., and with
+the recitation of a fable.
+
+A comparison of the results showed hardly any agreement among the
+estimates of the three teachers. When questioned about the standard that
+had been taken in arriving at their conclusions, one teacher said she
+had taken the answers of the first pupil as a point of departure, and
+that she had judged the other pupils by this one. Another judged all the
+children by a child of her acquaintance whom she knew to be intelligent.
+This was, of course, an unsafe method, because no one could say how the
+child taken as an ideal would have responded to the tests used with the
+five children.
+
+In summarizing the result of his little experiment, Binet points out
+that the teachers employed, as if by instinct, the very method which he
+himself recommends. In using it, however, they made numerous errors.
+Their questions were often needlessly long. Several were "dilemma
+questions," that is, answerable by _yes_ or _no_. In such cases chance
+alone will cause fifty per cent of the answers to be correct. Some of
+the questions were merely tests of school knowledge. Others were
+entirely special, usable only with the children of this particular
+school on this particular day. Not all of the questions were put in the
+same terms, and a given response did not always receive the same score.
+When the children responded incorrectly or incompletely, they were often
+given help, but not always to the same extent. In other words, says
+Binet, it was evident that "the teachers employed very awkwardly a very
+excellent method."
+
+The above remark is as pertinent as it is expressive. As the statement
+implies, the test method is but a refinement and standardization of the
+common-sense approach. Binet remarks that most people who inquire into
+his method of measuring intelligence do so expecting to find something
+very surprising and mysterious; and on seeing how much it resembles the
+methods which common sense employs in ordinary life, they heave a sigh
+of disappointment and say, "Is that all?" Binet reminds us that the
+difference between the scientific and unscientific way of doing a thing
+is not necessarily a difference in the _nature_ of the method; it is
+often merely a difference in _exactness_. Science does the thing better,
+because it does it more accurately.
+
+It was of course not the purpose of Binet to cast a slur upon the good
+sense and judgment of teachers. The teachers who took part in the little
+experiment described above were Binet's personal friends. The errors he
+points out in his entertaining and good-humored account of the
+experiment are inherent in the situation. They are the kind of errors
+which any person, however discriminating and observant, is likely to
+make in estimating the intelligence of a subject without the use of
+standardized tests.
+
+It is the writer's experience that the teacher's estimate of a child's
+intelligence is much more reliable than that of the average parent; more
+accurate even than that of the physician who has not had psychological
+training.
+
+Indeed, it is an exceptional school physician who is able to give any
+very valuable assistance to teachers in the classification of mentally
+exceptional children for special pedagogical treatment.
+
+This is only to be expected, for the physician has ordinarily had much
+less instruction in psychology than the teacher, and of course
+infinitely less experience in judging the mental performances of
+children. Even if graduated from a first-rank medical school, the
+instruction he has received in the important subject of mental
+deficiency has probably been less adequate than that given to the
+students of a standard normal school. As a rule, the doctor has no
+equipment or special fitness which gives him any advantage over the
+teacher in acquiring facility in the use of intelligence tests.
+
+As for parents, it would of course be unreasonable to expect from them a
+very accurate judgment regarding the mental peculiarities of their
+children. The difficulty is not simply that which comes from lack of
+special training. The presence of parental affection renders impartial
+judgment impossible. Still more serious are the effects of habituation
+to the child's mental traits. As a result of such habituation the most
+intelligent parent tends to develop an unfortunate blindness to all
+sorts of abnormalities which exist in his own children.
+
+The only way of escape from the fallacies we have mentioned lies in the
+use of some kind of refined psychological procedure. Binet testing is
+destined to become universally known and practiced in schools, prisons,
+reformatories, charity stations, orphan asylums, and even ordinary
+homes, for the same reason that Babcock testing has become universal in
+dairying. Each is indispensable to its purpose.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER III
+
+DESCRIPTION OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD
+
+
+ESSENTIAL NATURE OF THE SCALE. The Binet scale is made up of an extended
+series of tests in the nature of "stunts," or problems, success in which
+demands the exercise of intelligence. As left by Binet, the scale
+consists of 54 tests, so graded in difficulty that the easiest lie well
+within the range of normal 3-year-old children, while the hardest tax
+the intelligence of the average adult. The problems are designed
+primarily to test native intelligence, not school knowledge or home
+training. They try to answer the question "How intelligent is this
+child?" How much the child has learned is of significance only in so far
+as it throws light on his ability to learn more.
+
+Binet fully appreciated the fact that intelligence is not homogeneous,
+that it has many aspects, and that no one kind of test will display it
+adequately. He therefore assembled for his intelligence scale tests of
+many different types, some of them designed to display differences of
+memory, others differences in power to reason, ability to compare, power
+of comprehension, time orientation, facility in the use of number
+concepts, power to combine ideas into a meaningful whole, the maturity
+of apperception, wealth of ideas, knowledge of common objects, etc.
+
+HOW THE SCALE WAS DERIVED. The tests were arranged in order of
+difficulty, as found by trying them upon some 200 normal children of
+different ages from 3 to 15 years. It was found, for illustration, that
+a certain test was passed by only a very small proportion of the younger
+children, say the 5-year-olds, and that the number passing this test
+increased rapidly in the succeeding years until by the age of 7 or
+8 years, let us say, practically all the children were successful.
+If, in our supposed case, the test was passed by about two thirds to
+three fourths of the normal children aged 7 years, it was considered by
+Binet a test of 7-year intelligence. In like manner, a test passed by
+65 to 75 per cent of the normal 9-year-olds was considered a test of
+9-year intelligence, and so on. By trying out many different tests in
+this way it was possible to secure five tests to represent each age from
+3 to 10 years (excepting age 4, which has only four tests), five for
+age 12, five for 15, and five for adults, making 54 tests in all.
+
+LIST OF TESTS. The following is the list of tests as arranged by Binet
+in 1911, shortly before his untimely death:--
+
+_Age 3:_
+    1. Points to nose, eyes, and mouth.
+    2. Repeats two digits.
+    3. Enumerates objects in a picture.
+    4. Gives family name.
+    5. Repeats a sentence of six syllables.
+
+_Age 4:_
+    1. Gives his sex.
+    2. Names key, knife, and penny.
+    3. Repeats three digits.
+    4. Compares two lines.
+
+_Age 5:_
+    1. Compares two weights.
+    2. Copies a square.
+    3. Repeats a sentence of ten syllables.
+    4. Counts four pennies.
+    5. Unites the halves of a divided rectangle.
+
+_Age 6:_
+    1. Distinguishes between morning and afternoon.
+    2. Defines familiar words in terms of use.
+    3. Copies a diamond.
+    4. Counts thirteen pennies.
+    5. Distinguishes pictures of ugly and pretty faces.
+
+_Age 7:_
+    1. Shows right hand and left ear.
+    2. Describes a picture.
+    3. Executes three commissions, given simultaneously.
+    4. Counts the value of six sous, three of which are double.
+    5. Names four cardinal colors.
+
+_Age 8:_
+    1. Compares two objects from memory.
+    2. Counts from 20 to 0.
+    3. Notes omissions from pictures.
+    4. Gives day and date.
+    5. Repeats five digits.
+
+_Age 9:_
+    1. Gives change from twenty sous.
+    2. Defines familiar words in terms superior to use.
+    3. Recognizes all the pieces of money.
+    4. Names the months of the year, in order.
+    5. Answers easy "comprehension questions."
+
+_Age 10:_
+    1. Arranges five blocks in order of weight.
+    2. Copies drawings from memory.
+    3. Criticizes absurd statements.
+    4. Answers difficult "comprehension questions."
+    5. Uses three given words in not more than two sentences.
+
+_Age 12:_
+    1. Resists suggestion.
+    2. Composes one sentence containing three given words.
+    3. Names sixty words in three minutes.
+    4. Defines certain abstract words.
+    5. Discovers the sense of a disarranged sentence.
+
+_Age 15:_
+    1. Repeats seven digits.
+    2. Finds three rhymes for a given word.
+    3. Repeats a sentence of twenty-six syllables.
+    4. Interprets pictures.
+    5. Interprets given facts.
+
+_Adult:_
+    1. Solves the paper-cutting test.
+    2. Rearranges a triangle in imagination.
+    3. Gives differences between pairs of abstract terms.
+    4. Gives three differences between a president and a king.
+    5. Gives the main thought of a selection which he has heard read.
+
+It should be emphasized that merely to name the tests in this way gives
+little idea of their nature and meaning, and tells nothing about Binet's
+method of conducting the 54 experiments. In order to use the tests
+intelligently it is necessary to acquaint one's self thoroughly with the
+purpose of each test, its correct procedure, and the psychological
+interpretation of different types of response.[10]
+
+[10] See Part II of this volume, and References 1 and 29, for discussion
+and interpretation of the individual tests.
+
+In fairness to Binet, it should also be borne in mind that the scale of
+tests was only a rough approximation to the ideal which the author had
+set himself to realize. Had his life been spared a few years longer, he
+would doubtless have carried the method much nearer perfection.
+
+HOW THE SCALE IS USED. By means of the Binet tests we can judge the
+intelligence of a given individual by comparison with standards of
+intellectual performance for normal children of different ages. In order
+to make the comparison it is only necessary to begin the examination of
+the subject at a point in the scale where all the tests are passed
+successfully, and to continue up the scale until no more successes are
+possible. Then we compare our subject's performances with the standard
+for normal children of the same age, and note the amount of acceleration
+or retardation.
+
+Let us suppose the subject being tested is 9 years of age. If he goes as
+far in the tests as normal 9-year-old children ordinarily go, we can say
+that the child has a "mental age" of 9 years, which in this case is
+normal (our child being 9 years of age). If he goes only as far as
+normal 8-year-old children ordinarily go, we say that his "mental age"
+is 8 years. In like manner, a mentally defective child of 9 years may
+have a "mental age" of only 4 years, or a young genius of 9 years may
+have a mental age of 12 or 13 years.
+
+SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD. Psychologists had
+experimented with intelligence tests for at least twenty years before
+the Binet scale made its appearance. The question naturally suggests
+itself why Binet should have been successful in a field where previous
+efforts had been for the most part futile. The answer to this question
+is found in three essential differences between Binet's method and those
+formerly employed.
+
+1. _The use of age standards._ Binet was the first to utilize the idea
+of age standards, or norms, in the measurement of intelligence. It will
+be understood, of course, that Binet did not set out to invent tests of
+10-year intelligence, 6-year intelligence, etc. Instead, as already
+explained, he began with a series of tests ranging from very easy to
+very difficult, and by trying these tests on children of different ages
+and noting the percentages of successes in the various years, he was
+able to locate them (approximately) in the years where they belonged.
+
+This plan has the great advantage of giving us standards which are
+easily grasped. To say, for illustration, that a given subject has a
+grade of intelligence equal to that of the average child of 8 years is a
+statement whose general import does not need to be explained. Previous
+investigators had worked with subjects the degree of whose intelligence
+was unknown, and with tests the difficulty of which was equally unknown.
+An immense amount of ingenuity was spent in devising tests which were
+used in such a way as to preclude any very meaningful interpretation of
+the responses.
+
+The Binet method enables us to characterize the intelligence of a child
+in a far more definite way than had hitherto been possible. Current
+descriptive terms like "bright," "moderately bright," "dull," "very
+dull," "feeble-minded," etc., have had no universally accepted meaning.
+A child who is designated by one person as "moderately bright" may be
+called "very bright" by another person. The degree of intelligence which
+one calls "moderate dullness," another may call "extreme dullness," etc.
+But every one knows what is meant by the term 8-year mentality, 4-year
+mentality, etc., even if he is not able to define these grades of
+intelligence in psychological terms; and by ascertaining experimentally
+what intellectual tasks children of different ages can perform, we are,
+of course, able to make our age standards as definite as we please.
+
+Why should a device so simple have waited so long for a discoverer? We
+do not know. It is of a class with many other unaccountable mysteries in
+the development of scientific method. Apparently the idea of an
+age-grade method, as this is called, did not come to Binet himself until
+he had experimented with intelligence tests for some fifteen years. At
+least his first provisional scale, published in 1905, was not made up
+according to the age-grade plan. It consisted merely of 30 tests,
+arranged roughly in order of difficulty. Although Binet nowhere gives
+any account of the steps by which this crude and ungraded scale was
+transformed into the relatively complete age-grade scale of 1908, we can
+infer that the original and ingenious idea of utilizing age norms was
+suggested by the data collected with the 1905 scale. However the
+discovery was made, it ranks, perhaps, from the practical point of view,
+as the most important in all the history of psychology.
+
+2. _The kind of mental functions brought into play._ In the second
+place, the Binet tests differ from most of the earlier attempts in that
+they are designed to test the higher and more complex mental processes,
+instead of the simpler and more elementary ones. Hence they set
+problems for the reasoning powers and ingenuity, provoke judgments about
+abstract matters, etc., instead of attempting to measure sensory
+discrimination, mere retentiveness, rapidity of reaction, and the like.
+Psychologists had generally considered the higher processes too complex
+to be measured directly, and accordingly sought to get at them
+indirectly by correlating supposed intelligence with simpler processes
+which could readily be measured, such as reaction time, rapidity of
+tapping, discrimination of tones and colors, etc. While they were
+disputing over their contradictory findings in this line of exploration,
+Binet went directly to the point and succeeded where they had failed.
+
+It is now generally admitted by psychologists that higher intelligence
+is little concerned in such elementary processes as those mentioned
+above. Many of the animals have keen sensory discrimination.
+Feeble-minded children, unless of very low grade, do not differ very
+markedly from normal children in sensitivity of the skin, visual
+acuity, simple reaction time, type of imagery, etc. But in power of
+comprehension, abstraction, and ability to direct thought, in the nature
+of the associative processes, in amount of information possessed, and in
+spontaneity of attention, they differ enormously.
+
+3. _Binet would test "general intelligence."_ Finally, Binet's success
+was largely due to his abandonment of the older "faculty psychology"
+which, far from being defunct, had really given direction to most of the
+earlier work with mental tests. Where others had attempted to measure
+memory attention, sense discrimination, etc., as separate faculties or
+functions, Binet undertook to ascertain the _general level_ of
+intelligence. Others had thought the task easier of accomplishment by
+measuring each division or aspect of intelligence separately, and
+summating the results. Binet, too, began in this way, and it was only
+after years of experimentation by the usual methods that he finally
+broke away from them and undertook, so to speak, to triangulate the
+height of his tower without first getting the dimensions of the
+individual stones which made it up.
+
+The assumption that it is easier to measure a part, or one aspect, of
+intelligence than all of it, is fallacious in that the parts are not
+separate parts and cannot be separated by any refinement of experiment.
+They are interwoven and intertwined. Each ramifies everywhere and
+appears in all other functions. The analogy of the stones of the tower
+does not really apply. Memory, for example, cannot be tested separately
+from attention, or sense-discrimination separately from the associative
+processes. After many vain attempts to disentangle the various
+intellective functions, Binet decided to test their combined functional
+capacity without any pretense of measuring the exact contribution
+of each to the total product. It is hardly too much to say that
+intelligence tests have been successful just to the extent to which they
+have been guided by this aim.
+
+Memory, attention, imagination, etc., are terms of "structural
+psychology." Binet's psychology is dynamic. He conceives intelligence as
+the sum total of those thought processes which consist in mental
+adaptation. This adaptation is not explicable in terms of the old mental
+"faculties." No one of these can explain a single thought process, for
+such process always involves the participation of many functions whose
+separate rôles are impossible to distinguish accurately. Instead of
+measuring the intensity of various mental states (psycho-physics), it is
+more enlightening to measure their combined effect on adaptation. Using
+a biological comparison, Binet says the old "faculties" correspond to
+the separate tissues of an animal or plant, while his own "scheme of
+thought" corresponds to the functioning organ itself. For Binet,
+psychology is the science of behavior.
+
+BINET'S CONCEPTION OF GENERAL INTELLIGENCE. In devising tests of
+intelligence it is, of course, necessary to be guided by some
+assumption, or assumptions, regarding the nature of intelligence. To
+adopt any other course is to depend for success upon happy chance.
+
+However, it is impossible to arrive at a final definition of
+intelligence on the basis of _a-priori_ considerations alone. To demand,
+as critics of the Binet method have sometimes done, that one who would
+measure intelligence should first present a complete definition of it,
+is quite unreasonable. As Stern points out, electrical currents were
+measured long before their nature was well understood. Similar
+illustrations could be drawn from the processes involved in chemistry
+physiology, and other sciences. In the case of intelligence it may be
+truthfully said that no adequate definition can possibly be framed which
+is not based primarily on the symptoms empirically brought to light by
+the test method. The best that can be done in advance of such data is to
+make tentative assumptions as to the probable nature of intelligence,
+and then to subject these assumptions to tests which will show their
+correctness or incorrectness. New hypotheses can then be framed for
+further trial, and thus gradually we shall be led to a conception of
+intelligence which will be meaningful and in harmony with all the
+ascertainable facts.
+
+Such was the method of Binet. Only those unacquainted with Binet's
+more than fifteen years of labor preceding the publication of his
+intelligence scale would think of accusing him of making no effort to
+analyze the mental processes which his tests bring into play. It is true
+that many of Binet's earlier assumptions proved untenable, and in this
+event he was always ready, with exceptional candor and intellectual
+plasticity, to acknowledge his error and to plan a new line of attack.
+
+Binet's conception of intelligence emphasizes three characteristics of
+the thought process: (1) Its tendency to take and maintain a definite
+direction; (2) the capacity to make adaptations for the purpose of
+attaining a desired end; and (3) the power of auto-criticism.[11]
+
+[11] See Binet and Simon: "L'intelligence des imbeciles," in _L'Année
+Psychologique_ (1909), pp. 1-147. The last division of this article is
+devoted to a discussion of the essential nature of the higher thought
+processes, and is a wonderful example of that keen psychological
+analysis in which Binet was so gifted.
+
+How these three aspects of intelligence enter into the performances with
+various tests of the scale is set forth from time to time in our
+directions for giving and interpreting the individual tests.[12] An
+illustration which may be given here is that of the "patience test," or
+uniting the disarranged parts of a divided rectangle. As described by
+Binet, this operation has the following elements: "(1) to keep in mind
+the end to be attained, that is to say, the figure to be formed; (2) to
+try different combinations under the influence of this directing idea,
+which guides the efforts of the subject even though he may not be
+conscious of the fact; and (3) to judge the combination which has been
+made, to compare it with the model, and to decide whether it is the
+correct one."
+
+[12] See especially pages 162 and 238.
+
+Much the same processes are called for in many other of the Binet tests,
+particularly those of arranging weights, rearranging dissected
+sentences, drawing a diamond or square from copy, finding a sentence
+containing three given words, counting backwards, etc.
+
+However, an examination of the scale will show that the choice of tests
+was not guided entirely by any single formula as to the nature of
+intelligence. Binet's approach was a many-sided one. The scale includes
+tests of time orientation, of three or four kinds of memory, of
+apperception, of language comprehension, of knowledge about common
+objects, of free association, of number mastery, of constructive
+imagination, and of ability to compare concepts, to see contradictions,
+to combine fragments into a unitary whole, to comprehend abstract terms,
+and to meet novel situations.
+
+OTHER CONCEPTIONS OF INTELLIGENCE. It is interesting to compare Binet's
+conception of intelligence with the definitions which have been offered
+by other psychologists. According to Ebbinghaus, for example, the
+essence of intelligence lies in comprehending together in a unitary,
+meaningful whole, impressions and associations which are more or less
+independent, heterogeneous, or even partly contradictory. "Intellectual
+ability consists in the elaboration of a whole into its worth and
+meaning by means of many-sided combination, correction, and completion
+of numerous kindred associations.... It is a _combination activity_."
+
+Meumann offers a twofold definition. From the psychological point of
+view, intelligence is the power of independent and creative elaboration
+of new products out of the material given by memory and the senses. From
+the practical point of view, it involves the ability to avoid errors, to
+surmount difficulties, and to adjust to environment.
+
+Stern defines intelligence as "the general capacity of an individual
+consciously to adjust his thinking to new requirements: it is general
+adaptability to new problems and conditions of life."
+
+Spearman, Hart, and others of the English school define intelligence as
+a "common central factor" which participates in all sorts of
+special mental activities. This factor is explained in terms of a
+psycho-physiological hypothesis of "cortex energy," "cerebral
+plasticity," etc.
+
+The above definitions are only to a slight extent contradictory or
+inharmonious. They differ mainly in point of view or in the location of
+the emphasis. Each expresses a part of the truth, and none all of it. It
+will be evident that the conception of Binet is broad enough to include
+the most important elements in each of the other definitions quoted.
+
+GUIDING PRINCIPLES IN CHOICE AND ARRANGEMENT OF TESTS. In choosing his
+tests Binet was guided by the conception of intelligence which we have
+set forth above. Tests were devised which would presumably bring
+into play the various mental processes thought to be concerned in
+intelligence, and then these tests were tried out on normal children of
+different ages. If the percentage of passes for a given test increased
+but little or not at all in going from younger to older children this
+test was discarded. On the other hand, if the proportion of passes
+increased rapidly with age, and if children of a given age, who on other
+grounds were known to be bright, passed more frequently than children of
+the same age who were known to be dull, then the test was judged a
+satisfactory test of intelligence. As we have shown elsewhere,[13]
+practically all of Binet's tests fulfill these requirements reasonably
+well, a fact which bears eloquent testimony to the keen psychological
+insight of their author.
+
+[13] See p. 55.
+
+In arranging the tests into a system Binet's guiding principle was to
+find an arrangement of the tests which would cause an average child of
+any given age to test "at age"; that is, the average 5-year-old must
+show a mental age of 5 years, the average 8-year-old a mental age of
+8 years, etc. In order to secure this result Binet found that his data
+seemed to require the location of an individual test in that year where
+it was passed by about two thirds to three fourths of unselected
+children.
+
+It was in the assembling of the tests that the most serious faults of
+the scale had their origin. Further investigation has shown that a great
+many of the tests were misplaced as much as one year, and several of
+them two years. On the whole, the scale as Binet left it was decidedly
+too easy in the lower ranges, and too difficult in the upper. As a
+result, the average child of 5 years was caused to test at not far from
+6 years, the average child of 12 years not far from 11. In the Stanford
+revision an effort has been made to correct this fault, along with
+certain other generally recognized imperfections.
+
+SOME AVOWED LIMITATIONS OF THE BINET TESTS. The Binet tests have often
+been criticized for their unfitness to perform certain services which in
+reality they were never meant to render. This is unfair. We cannot make
+a just evaluation of the scale without bearing in mind its avowed
+limitations.
+
+For example, the scale does not pretend to measure the entire mentality
+of the subject, but only _general intelligence_. There is no pretense of
+testing the emotions or the will beyond the extent to which these
+naturally display themselves in the tests of intelligence. The scale was
+not designed as a tool for the analysis of those emotional or volitional
+aberrations which are concerned in such mental disorders as hysteria,
+insanity, etc. These conditions do not present a progressive reduction
+of intelligence to the infantile level, and in most of them other
+factors besides intelligence play an important rôle. Moreover, even in
+the normal individual the fruitfulness of intelligence, the direction in
+which it shall be applied, and its methods of work are to a certain
+extent determined by the extraneous factors of emotion and volition.
+
+It should, nevertheless, be pointed out that defects of intelligence, in
+a large majority of cases, also involve disturbances of the emotional
+and volitional functions. We do not expect to find perfectly normal
+emotions or will power of average strength coupled with marked
+intellectual deficiency, and as a matter of fact such a combination is
+rare indeed. In the course of an examination with the Binet tests, the
+experienced clinical psychologist is able to gain considerable insight
+into the subject's emotional and volitional equipment, even though the
+method was designed primarily for another purpose.
+
+A second misunderstanding can be avoided by remembering that the Binet
+scale does not pretend to bring to light the idiosyncrasies of special
+talent, but only to measure the general level of intelligence. It cannot
+be used for the discovery of exceptional ability in drawing, painting,
+music, mathematics, oratory, salesmanship, etc., because no effort is
+made to explore the processes underlying these abilities. It can,
+therefore, never serve as a _detailed chart_ for the vocational guidance
+of children, telling us which will succeed in business, which in art,
+which in medicine, etc. It is not a new kind of phrenology. At the same
+time, as we have already pointed out, _it is capable of bounding roughly
+the vocational territory in which an individual's intelligence will
+probably permit success, nothing else preventing_.[14]
+
+[14] See p. 17.
+
+In the third place, it must not be supposed that the scale can be used
+as a complete pedagogical guide. Although intelligence tests furnish
+data of the greatest significance for pedagogical procedure, they do not
+suggest the appropriate educational methods in detail. These will
+have to be worked out in a practical way for the various grades of
+intelligence, and at great cost of labor and patience.
+
+Finally, in arriving at an estimate of a subject's grade of intelligence
+and his susceptibility to training, it would be a mistake to ignore the
+data obtainable from other sources. No competent psychologist, however
+ardent a supporter of the Binet method he might be, would recommend such
+a policy. Those who accept the method as all-sufficient are as much in
+error as those who consider it as no more important than any one of a
+dozen other approaches. Standardized tests have already become and will
+remain by far the most reliable single method for grading intelligence,
+but the results they furnish will always need to be interpreted in the
+light of supplementary information regarding the subject's personal
+history, including medical record, accidents, play habits, industrial
+efficiency, social and moral traits, school success, home environment,
+etc. Without question, however, the improved Binet tests will contribute
+more than all other data combined to the end of enabling us to forecast
+a child's possibilities of future improvement, and this is the
+information which will aid most in the proper direction of his
+education.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IV
+
+NATURE OF THE STANFORD REVISION AND EXTENSION
+
+
+Although the Binet scale quickly demonstrated its value as an instrument
+for the classification of mentally-retarded and otherwise exceptional
+children, it had, nevertheless, several imperfections which greatly
+limited its usefulness. There was a dearth of tests at the higher mental
+levels, the procedure was so inadequately defined that needless
+disagreement came about in the interpretation of data, and so many of
+the tests were misplaced as to make the results of an examination more
+or less misleading, particularly in the case of very young subjects and
+those near the adult level. It was for the purpose of correcting
+these and certain other faults that the Stanford investigation was
+planned.[15]
+
+[15] The writer wishes to acknowledge his very great indebtedness to
+Miss Grace Lyman, Dr. George Ordahl, Dr. Louise Ellison Ordahl, Miss
+Neva Galbreath, Mr. Wilford Talbert, Dr. J. Harold Williams, Mr. Herbert
+E. Knollin, and Miss Irene Cuneo for their coöperation in making the
+tests on which the Stanford revision is chiefly based. Without their
+loyal assistance the investigation could not have been carried through.
+
+Grateful acknowledgment is also made to the many public school teachers
+and principals for their generous and invaluable coöperation in
+furnishing subjects for the tests, and in supplying, sometimes at
+considerable cost of labor, the supplementary information which was
+called for regarding the pupils tested. Their contribution was made in
+the interest of educational science, and without expectation of personal
+benefits of any kind. Their professional spirit cannot be too highly
+commended.
+
+SOURCES OF DATA. Our revision is the result of several years of work,
+and involved the examination of approximately 2300 subjects, including
+1700 normal children, 200 defective and superior children, and more than
+400 adults.
+
+Tests of 400 of the 1700 normal children had been made by Childs and
+Terman in 1910-11, and of 300 children by Trost, Waddle, and Terman in
+1911-12. For various reasons, however, the results of these tests did
+not furnish satisfactory data for a thoroughgoing revision of the scale.
+Accordingly a new investigation was undertaken, somewhat more extensive
+than the others, and more carefully planned. Its main features may be
+described as follows:--
+
+1. The first step was to assemble as nearly as possible all the results
+which had been secured for each test of the scale by all the workers of
+all countries. The result was a large sheet of tabulated data for each
+individual test, including percentages passing the test at various ages,
+conditions under which the results were secured, method of procedure,
+etc. After a comparative study of these data, and in the light of
+results we had ourselves secured, a provisional arrangement of the tests
+was prepared for try-out.
+
+2. In addition to the tests of the original Binet scale, 40 additional
+tests were included for try-out. This, it was expected, would make
+possible the elimination of some of the least satisfactory tests, and at
+the same time permit the addition of enough new ones to give at least
+six tests, instead of five, for each age group.
+
+3. A plan was then devised for securing subjects who should be as nearly
+as possible representative of the several ages. The method was to select
+a school in a community of average social status, a school attended by
+all or practically all the children in the district where it was
+located. In order to get clear pictures of age differences the tests
+were confined to children who were within two months of a birthday. To
+avoid accidental selection, _all_ the children within two months of a
+birthday were tested, in whatever grade enrolled. Tests of foreign-born
+children, however, were eliminated in the treatment of results. There
+remained tests of approximately 1000 children, of whom 905 were between
+5 and 14 years of age.
+
+4. The children's responses were, for the most part, recorded
+_verbatim_. This made it possible to re-score the records according
+to any desired standard, and thus to fit a test more perfectly to the
+age level assigned it.
+
+5. Much attention was given to securing uniformity of procedure. A
+half-year was devoted to training the examiners and another half-year to
+the supervision of the testing. In the further interests of uniformity
+all the records were scored by one person (the writer).
+
+METHOD OF ARRIVING AT A REVISION. The revision of the scale below
+the 14-year level was based almost entirely on the tests of the
+above-mentioned 1,000 unselected children. The guiding principle was to
+secure an arrangement of the tests and a standard of scoring which would
+cause the median mental age of the unselected children of each age group
+to coincide with the median chronological age. That is, a correct scale
+must cause the _average_ child of 5 years to test exactly at 5, the
+_average_ child at 6 to test exactly at 6, etc. Or, to express the same
+fact in terms of intelligence quotient,[16] a correct scale must give a
+median intelligence quotient of unity, or 100 per cent, for unselected
+children of each age.
+
+[16] The intelligence quotient (often designated as I Q) is the ratio of
+mental age to chronological age. (See pp. 65 _ff._ and 78 _ff._)
+
+If the median mental age resulting at any point from the provisional
+arrangement of tests was too high or too low, it was only necessary to
+change the location of certain of the tests, or to change the standard
+of scoring, until an order of arrangement and a standard of passing were
+found which would throw the median mental age where it belonged. We had
+already become convinced, for reasons too involved for presentation
+here, that no satisfactory revision of the Binet scale was possible on
+any theoretical considerations as to the percentage of passes which an
+individual test ought to show in a given year in order to be considered
+standard for that year.
+
+As was to be expected, the first draft of the revision did not prove
+satisfactory. The scale was still too hard at some points, and too easy
+at others. In fact, three successive revisions were necessary, involving
+three separate scorings of the data and as many tabulations of the
+mental ages, before the desired degree of accuracy was secured. As
+finally revised, the scale gives a median intelligence quotient closely
+approximating 100 for the unselected children of each age from 4 to 14.
+
+Since our school children who were above 14 years and still in the
+grades were retarded left-overs, it was necessary to base the revision
+above this level on the tests of adults. These included 30 business men
+and 150 "migrating" unemployed men tested by Mr. H. E. Knollin, 150
+adolescent delinquents tested by Mr. J. Harold Williams, and 50
+high-school students tested by the writer.
+
+The extension of the scale in the upper range is such that ordinarily
+intelligent adults, little educated, test up to what is called the
+"average adult" level. Adults whose intelligence is known from other
+sources to be superior are found to test well up toward the "superior
+adult" level, and this holds whether the subjects in question are well
+educated or practically unschooled. The almost entirely unschooled
+business men, in fact, tested fully as well as high-school juniors and
+seniors.
+
+Figure 1 shows the distribution of mental ages for 62 adults, including
+the 30 business men and the 32 high-school pupils who were over 16 years
+of age. It will be noted that the middle section of the graph represents
+the "mental ages" falling between 15 and 17. This is the range which we
+have designated as the "average adult" level. Those above 17 are called
+"superior adults," those between 13 and 15, "inferior adults." Subjects
+much over 15 years of age who test in the neighborhood of 12 years may
+ordinarily be considered border-line cases.
+
+[Illustration: FIG. 1. DISTRIBUTION OF MENTAL AGES OF 62 NORMAL ADULTS]
+
+The following method was employed for determining the validity of a
+test. The children of each age level were divided into three groups
+according to intelligence quotient, those testing below 90, those
+between 90 and 109, and those with an intelligence quotient of 110 or
+above. The percentages of passes on each individual test at or near that
+age level were then ascertained separately for these three groups. If a
+test fails to show a decidedly higher proportion of passes in the
+superior I Q group than in the inferior I Q group, it cannot be regarded
+as a satisfactory test of intelligence. On the other hand, a test which
+satisfies this criterion must be accepted as valid or the entire scale
+must be rejected. Henceforth it stands or falls with the scale as a
+whole.
+
+When tried out by this method, some of the tests which have been most
+criticized showed a high degree of reliability; certain others which
+have been considered excellent proved to be so little correlated with
+intelligence that they had to be discarded.
+
+After making a few necessary eliminations, 90 tests remained, or 36 more
+than the number included in the Binet 1911 scale. There are 6 at each
+age level from 3 to 10, 8 at 12, 6 at 14, 6 at "average adult," 6 at
+"superior adult," and 16 alternative tests. The alternative tests, which
+are distributed among the different groups, are intended to be used only
+as substitutes when one or more of the regular tests have been rendered,
+by coaching or otherwise, undesirable.[17]
+
+[17] See p. 137 _ff._ for explanations regarding the calculation of
+mental age and the use of alternative tests.
+
+Of the 36 new tests, 27 were added and standardized in the various
+Stanford investigations. Two tests were borrowed from the Healy-Fernald
+series, one from Kuhlmann, one was adapted from Bonser, and the
+remaining five were amplifications or adaptations of some of the earlier
+Binet tests.
+
+Following is a complete list of the tests of the Stanford revision.
+Those designated _al._ are alternative tests. The guide for giving and
+scoring the tests is presented at length in Part II of this volume.
+
+
+_The Stanford revision and extension_
+
+_Year III._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Points to parts of body. (3 to 4.)
+         Nose; eyes; mouth; hair.
+    2. Names familiar objects. (3 to 5.)
+         Key, penny, closed knife, watch, pencil.
+    3. Pictures, enumeration or better. (At least 3 objects enumerated
+       in one picture.)
+         (a) Dutch Home; (b) River Scene; (c) Post-Office.
+    4. Gives sex.
+    5. Gives last name.
+    6. Repeats 6 to 7 syllables. (1 to 3.)
+   Al. Repeats 3 digits. (1 success in 3 trials. Order correct.)
+
+_Year IV._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Compares lines. (3 trials, no error.)
+    2. Discrimination of forms. (Kuhlmann.) (Not over 3 errors.)
+    3. Counts 4 pennies. (No error.)
+    4. Copies square. (Pencil. 1 to 3.)
+    5. Comprehension, 1st degree. (2 to 3.) (Stanford addition.)
+         "What must you do": "When you are sleepy?" "Cold?" "Hungry?"
+    6. Repeats 4 digits. (1 to 3. Order correct.) (Stanford addition.)
+   Al. Repeats 12 to 13 syllables. (1 to 3 absolutely correct, or 2 with
+       1 error each.)
+
+_Year V._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Comparison of weights. (2 to 3.)
+         3-15; 15-3; 3-15.
+    2. Colors. (No error.)
+         Red; yellow; blue; green.
+    3. Æsthetic comparison. (No error.)
+    4. Definitions, use or better. (4 to 6.)
+         Chair; horse; fork; doll; pencil; table.
+    5. Patience, or divided rectangle. (2 to 3 trials. 1 minute each.)
+    6. Three commissions. (No error. Order correct.)
+   Al. Age.
+
+_Year VI._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Right and left. (No error.)
+         Right hand; left ear; right eye.
+    2. Mutilated pictures. (3 to 4 correct.)
+    3. Counts 13 pennies. (1 to 2 trials, without error.)
+    4. Comprehension, 2d degree. (2 to 3.) "What's the thing for
+       you to do":
+         (a) "If it is raining when you start to school?"
+         (b) "If you find that your house is on fire?"
+         (c) "If you are going some place and miss your car?"
+    5. Coins. (3 to 4.)
+         Nickel; penny; quarter; dime.
+    6. Repeats 16 to 18 syllables. (1 to 3 absolutely correct, or 2
+       with 1 error each.)
+   Al. Morning or afternoon.
+
+_Year VII._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Fingers. (No error.) Right; left; both.
+    2. Pictures, description or better. (Over half of performance
+       description:) Dutch Home; River Scene; Post-Office.
+    3. Repeats 5 digits. (1 to 3. Order correct.)
+    4. Ties bow-knot. (Model shown. 1 minute.) (Stanford addition.)
+    5. Gives differences. (2 to 3.)
+         Fly and butterfly; stone and egg; wood and glass.
+    6. Copies diamond. (Pen. 2 to 3.)
+Al. 1. Names days of week. (Order correct. 2 to 3 checks correct.)
+Al. 2. Repeats 3 digits backwards. (1 to 3.)
+
+_Year VIII._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Ball and field. (Inferior plan or better.) (Stanford addition.)
+    2. Counts 20 to 1. (40 seconds. 1 error allowed.)
+    3. Comprehension, 3d degree. (2 to 3.) "What's the thing for you to
+       do":
+         (a) "When you have broken something which belongs to some one
+             else?"
+         (b) "When you are on your way to school and notice that you are
+             in danger of being tardy?"
+         (c) "If a playmate hits you without meaning to do it?"
+    4. Gives similarities, two things. (2 to 4.) (Stanford addition.)
+         Wood and coal; apple and peach; iron and silver; ship and
+         automobile.
+    5. Definitions superior to use. (2 to 4.)
+         Balloon; tiger; football; soldier.
+    6. Vocabulary, 20 words. (Stanford addition. For list of words used,
+       see record booklet.)
+Al. 1. First six coins. (No error.)
+Al. 2. Dictation. ("See the little boy." Easily legible. Pen. 1 minute.)
+
+_Year IX._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Date. (Allow error of 3 days in _c_, no error in _a_, _b_, or _d_.)
+         (a) day of week; (b) month; (c) day of month; (d) year.
+    2. Weights. (3, 6, 9, 12, 15. Procedure not illustrated. 2 to 3.)
+    3. Makes change. (2 to 3. No coins, paper, or pencil.)
+         10--4; 15--12; 25--4.
+    4. Repeats 4 digits backwards. (1 to 3.) (Stanford addition.)
+    5. Three words. (2 to 3. Oral. 1 sentence or not over 2 coördinate
+       clauses.)
+         Boy, river, ball; work, money, men; desert, rivers, lakes.
+    6. Rhymes. (3 rhymes for two of three words. 1 minute for each part.)
+         Day; mill; spring.
+Al. 1. Months. (15 seconds and 1 error in naming. 2 checks of 3 correct.)
+Al. 2. Stamps, gives total value. (Second trial if individual values are
+       known.)
+
+_Year X._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Vocabulary, 30 words. (Stanford addition.)
+    2. Absurdities. (4 to 5. Warn. Spontaneous correction allowed.) (Four
+       of Binet's, one Stanford.)
+    3. Designs. (1 correct, 1 half correct. Expose 10 seconds.)
+    4. Reading and report. (8 memories. 35 seconds and 2 mistakes in
+       reading.) (Binet's selection.)
+    5. Comprehension, 4th degree. (2 to 3. Question may be repeated.)
+         (a) "What ought you to say when some one asks your opinion
+             about a person you don't know very well?"
+         (b) "What ought you to do before undertaking (beginning)
+             something very important?"
+         (c) "Why should we judge a person more by his actions than by
+             his words?"
+    6. Names 60 words. (Illustrate with clouds, dog, chair, happy.)
+Al. 1. Repeats 6 digits. (1 to 2. Order correct.) (Stanford addition.)
+Al. 2. Repeats 20 to 22 syllables. (1 to 3 correct, or 2 with 1 error
+       each.)
+Al. 3. Form board. (Healy-Fernald Puzzle A. 3 times in 5 minutes.)
+
+_Year XII._ (_8 tests, 3 months each._)
+    1. Vocabulary, 40 words. (Stanford addition.)
+    2. Abstract words. (3 to 5.)
+         Pity; revenge; charity; envy; justice.
+    3. Ball and field. (Superior plan.) (Stanford addition.)
+    4. Dissected sentences. (2 to 3. 1 minute each.)
+    5. Fables. (Score 4; i.e., two correct or the equivalent in half
+       credits.) (Stanford addition.)
+         Hercules and Wagoner; Maid and Eggs; Fox and Crow;
+         Farmer and Stork; Miller, Son, and Donkey.
+    6. Repeats 5 digits backwards. (1 to 3.) (Stanford addition.)
+    7. Pictures, interpretation. (3 to 4. "Explain this picture.")
+         Dutch Home; River Scene; Post-Office; Colonial Home.
+    8. Gives similarities, three things. (3 to 5.) (Stanford addition.)
+         Snake, cow, sparrow; book, teacher, newspaper; wool, cotton,
+         leather; knife-blade, penny, piece of wire; rose, potato,
+         tree.
+
+_Year XIV._ (_6 tests, 4 months each._)
+    1. Vocabulary, 50 words. (Stanford addition.)
+    2. Induction test. (Gets rule by 6th folding.) (Stanford addition.)
+    3. President and king. (Power; accession; tenure. 2 to 3.)
+    4. Problems of fact. (2 to 3.) (Binet's two and one Stanford
+       addition.)
+    5. Arithmetical reasoning. (1 minute each. 2 to 3.) (Adapted from
+       Bonser.)
+    6. Clock. (2 to 3. Error must not exceed 3 or 4 minutes.)
+         6.22. 8.10. 2.46.
+   Al. Repeats 7 digits. (1 to 2. Order correct.)
+
+"AVERAGE ADULT." (_6 tests, 5 months each._)
+    1. Vocabulary, 65 words. (Stanford addition.)
+    2. Interpretation of fables. (Score 8.) (Stanford addition.)
+    3. Difference between abstract words. (3 real contrasts out of 4.)
+         Laziness and idleness; evolution and revolution; poverty and
+         misery; character and reputation.
+    4. Problem of the enclosed boxes. (3 to 4.) (Stanford addition.)
+    5. Repeats 6 digits backwards. (1 to 3.) (Stanford addition.)
+    6. Code, writes "Come quickly." (2 errors. Omission of dot counts
+       half error. Illustrate with "war" and "spy.") (From Healy and
+       Fernald.)
+Al. 1. Repeats 28 syllables. (1 to 2 absolutely correct.)
+Al. 2. Comprehension of physical relations. (2 to 3.) (Stanford addition.)
+         Path of cannon ball; weight of fish in water; hitting distant
+         mark.
+
+"SUPERIOR ADULT." (_6 tests, 6 months each._)
+    1. Vocabulary, 75 words. (Stanford addition.)
+    2. Binet's paper-cutting test. (Draws, folds, and locates holes.)
+    3. Repeats 8 digits. (1 to 3. Order correct.) (Stanford addition.)
+    4. Repeats thought of passage heard. (1 to 2.) (Binet's and Wissler's
+       selections adapted.)
+    5. Repeats 7 digits backwards. (1 to 3.) (Stanford addition.)
+    6. Ingenuity test. (2 to 3. 5 minutes each.) (Stanford addition.)
+
+
+SUMMARY OF CHANGES. A comparison of the above list with either the Binet
+1908 or 1911 series will reveal many changes. On the whole, it differs
+somewhat more from the Binet 1911 scale than from that of 1908. Thus, of
+the 49 tests below the "adult" group in the 1911 scale, 2 are eliminated
+and 29 are relocated. Of these, 25 are moved downward and 4 upward. The
+shifts are as follows:--
+
+    Down 1 year, 18
+    Down 2 years, 4
+    Down 3 years, 2
+    Down 6 years, 1
+      Up 1 year,  3
+      Up 2 years, 1
+
+Of the adult group in Binet's 1911 series 1 is eliminated, 2 are moved
+up to "superior adult," and 1 is moved up to 14. Accordingly, of Binet's
+entire 54 tests, we have eliminated 3 and relocated 32, leaving only 19
+in the positions assigned them by Binet. The 3 eliminated are: repeating
+2 digits, resisting suggestion, and "reversed triangle."
+
+The revision is really more extensive than the above figures would
+suggest, since minor changes have been made in the scoring of a great
+many tests in order to make them fit better the locations assigned them.
+Throughout the scale the procedure and scoring have been worked over and
+made more definite with the idea of promoting uniformity. This phase of
+the revision is perhaps more important than the mere relocation of
+tests. Also, the addition of numerous tests in the upper ranges of the
+scale affects very considerably the mental ages above the level of
+10 or 11 years.
+
+EFFECTS OF THE REVISION ON THE MENTAL AGES SECURED. The most important
+effect of the revision is to reduce the mental ages secured in the lower
+ranges of the scale, and to raise considerably the mental ages above
+10 or 11 years. This difference also obtains, though to a somewhat
+smaller extent, between the Stanford revision and those of Goddard and
+Kuhlmann.
+
+For example, of 104 adult individuals testing by the Stanford revision
+between 12 and 14 years, and who were therefore somewhat above the level
+of feeble-mindedness as that term is usually defined, 50 per cent tested
+below 12 years by the Goddard revision. That the dull and border-line
+adults are so much more readily distinguished from the feeble-minded by
+the Stanford revision than by other Binet series is due as much to the
+addition of tests in the upper groups as to the relocation of existing
+tests.
+
+On the other hand, the Stanford revision causes young subjects to test
+lower than any other version of the Binet scale. At 5 or 6 years the
+mental ages secured by the Stanford revision average from 6 to 10 months
+lower than other revisions yield.
+
+The above differences are more significant than would at first appear.
+An error of 10 months in the mental age of a 5-year-old is as serious as
+an error of 20 months in the case of a 10-year-old. Stating the error in
+terms of the intelligence quotient makes it more evident. Thus, an error
+of 10 months in the mental age of a 5-year-old means an error of almost
+15 per cent in the intelligence quotient. A scale which tests this much
+too low would cause the child with a true intelligence quotient of 75
+(which ordinarily means feeble-mindedness or border-line intelligence)
+to test at 90, or only slightly below normal.
+
+Three serious consequences came from the too great ease of the original
+Binet scale at the lower end, and its too great difficulty at the upper
+end:--
+
+1. In young subjects the higher grades of mental deficiency were
+overlooked, because the scale caused such subjects to test only a little
+below normal.
+
+2. The proportion of feeble-mindedness among adult subjects was greatly
+overestimated, because subjects who were really of the 12- or 13-year
+mental level could only earn a mental age of about 11 years.
+
+3. Confusion resulted in efforts to trace the mental growth of either
+feeble-minded or normal children. For example, by other versions of the
+Binet scale an average 5-year-old will show an intelligence quotient
+probably not far from 110 or 115; at 9, an intelligence quotient of
+about 100; and at 14, an intelligence quotient of about 85 or 90.
+
+By such a scale the true border-line case would test approximately as
+follows:--
+
+    At age 5, 90 I Q (apparently not far below normal).
+    At age 9, 75 I Q (border-line).
+    At age 14, 65 I Q (moron deficiency).
+
+On the other hand, re-tests of children by the Stanford revision have
+been found to yield intelligence quotients almost identical with those
+secured from two to four years earlier by the same tests. Those who
+graded feeble-minded in the first test graded feeble-minded in the
+second test: the dull remained dull, the average remained average, the
+superior remained superior, and always in approximately the same
+degree.[18]
+
+[18] See "Some Problems relating to the Detection of Border-line Cases
+of Mental Deficiency," by Lewis M. Terman and H. E. Knollin, in _Journal
+of Psycho-Asthemes_, June, 1916.
+
+It is unnecessary to emphasize further the importance of having an
+intelligence scale which is equally accurate at all points. Absolute
+perfection in this respect is not claimed for the Stanford revision, but
+it is believed to be at least free from the more serious errors of other
+Binet arrangements.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER V
+
+ANALYSIS OF 1000 INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS
+
+
+An extended account of the 1000 tests on which the Stanford revision is
+chiefly based has been presented in a separate monograph. This chapter
+will include only the briefest summary of some of those results of the
+investigation which contribute to the intelligent use of the revision.
+
+THE DISTRIBUTION OF INTELLIGENCE. The question as to the manner in which
+intelligence is distributed is one of great practical as well as
+theoretical importance. One of the most vital questions which can be
+asked by any nation of any age is the following: "How high is the
+average level of intelligence among our people, and how frequent are the
+various grades of ability above and below the average?" With the
+development of standardized tests we are approaching, for the first time
+in history, a possible answer to this question.
+
+Most of the earlier Binet studies, however, have thrown little light on
+the distribution of intelligence because of their failure to avoid the
+influence of accidental selection in choosing subjects for testing. The
+method of securing subjects for the Stanford revision makes our results
+on this point especially interesting.[19] It is believed that the
+subjects used for this investigation were as nearly representative of
+average American-born children as it is possible to secure.
+
+[19] See p. 52 _ff._ for method used to avoid accidental selection of
+subjects for the Stanford investigation.
+
+The intelligence quotients for these 1000 unselected children were
+calculated, and their distribution was plotted for the ages separately.
+The distribution was found fairly symmetrical at each age from 5 to 14.
+At 15 the range is on either side of 90 as a median, and at 16 on either
+side of 80 as a median. That the 15- and 16-year-olds test low is due to
+the fact that these children are left-over retardates and are below
+average in intelligence.
+
+[Illustration: FIG. 2. DISTRIBUTION OF I Q'S OF 905 UNSELECTED
+CHILDREN. 5-14 YEARS OF AGE]
+
+The I Q's were then grouped in ranges of ten. In the middle group were
+thrown those from 96 to 105; the ascending groups including in order the
+I Q's from 106 to 115, 116 to 125, etc.; correspondingly with the
+descending groups. Figure 2 shows the distribution found by this
+grouping for the 905 children of ages 5 to 14 combined. The subjects
+above 14 are not included in this curve because they are left-overs and
+not representative of their ages.
+
+The distribution for the ages combined is seen to be remarkably
+symmetrical. The symmetry for the separate ages was hardly less marked,
+considering that only 80 to 120 children were tested at each age. In
+fact, the range, including the middle 50 per cent of I Q's, was found
+practically constant from 5 to 14 years. The tendency is for the middle
+50 per cent to fall (approximately) between 93 and 108.
+
+Three important conclusions are justified by the above facts:--
+
+1. Since the frequency of the various grades of intelligence decreases
+_gradually_ and at no point abruptly on each side of the median, it is
+evident that there is no definite dividing line between normality and
+feeble-mindedness, or between normality and genius. Psychologically, the
+mentally defective child does not belong to a distinct type, nor does
+the genius. There is no line of demarcation between either of these
+extremes and the so-called "normal" child. The number of mentally
+defective individuals in a population will depend upon the standard
+arbitrarily set up as to what constitutes mental deficiency. Similarly
+for genius. It is exactly as we should undertake to classify all people
+into the three groups: abnormally tall, normally tall, and abnormally
+short.[20]
+
+[20] See Chapter VI for discussion of the significance of various I Q's.
+
+2. The common opinion that extreme deviations below the median are more
+frequent than extreme deviations above the median seems to have no
+foundation in fact. Among unselected school children, at least, for
+every child of any given degree of deficiency there is another child as
+far above the average I Q as the former is below. We have shown
+elsewhere the serious consequences of neglect of this fact.[21]
+
+[21] See p. 12 _ff._
+
+3. The traditional view that variability in mental traits becomes more
+marked during adolescence is here contradicted, as far as intelligence
+is concerned, for the distribution of I Q's is practically the same at
+each age from 5 to 14. For example, 6-year-olds differ from one another
+fully as much as do 14-year-olds.
+
+THE VALIDITY OF THE INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENT. The facts presented above
+argue strongly for the validity of the I Q as an expression of a child's
+intelligence status. This follows necessarily from the similar nature of
+the distributions at the various ages. The inference is that a child's
+I Q, as measured by this scale, remains relatively constant. Re-tests of
+the same children at intervals of two to five years support the
+inference. Children of superior intelligence do not seem to deteriorate
+as they get older, nor dull children to develop average intelligence.
+Knowing a child's I Q, we can predict with a fair degree of accuracy the
+course of his later development.
+
+The mental age of a subject is meaningless if considered apart from
+chronological age. It is only the ratio of retardation or acceleration
+to chronological age (that is, the I Q) which has significance.
+
+It follows also that if the I Q is a valid expression of intelligence,
+as it seems to be, then the Binet-Simon "age-grade method" becomes
+transformed automatically into a "point-scale method," if one wants to
+use it that way. As such it is superior to any other point scale that
+has been proposed, because it includes a larger number of tests and its
+points have definite meaning.[22]
+
+[22] For discussion of the supposed advantages of the "point-scale
+method," see Yerkes and Bridges: _A New Point Scale for Measuring Mental
+Ability_. (Warwick and York, 1915.)
+
+SEX DIFFERENCES. The question as to the relative intelligence of the
+sexes is one of perennial interest and great social importance. The
+ancient hypothesis, the one which dates from the time when only men
+concerned themselves with scientific hypotheses, took for granted the
+superiority of the male. With the development of individual psychology,
+however, it was soon found that as far as the evidence of mental tests
+can be trusted the _average_ intelligence of women and girls is as high
+as that of men and boys.
+
+If we accept this result we are then confronted with the difficult
+problem of finding an explanation for the fact that so few of those who
+have acquired eminence in the various intellectual fields have been
+women. Two explanations have been proposed: (1) That women become
+eminent less often than men simply for lack of opportunity and stimulus;
+and (2) that while the average intelligence of the sexes is the same,
+extreme variations may be more common in males. It is pointed out that
+not only are there more eminent men than eminent women, but that
+statistics also show a preponderance of males in institutions for the
+mentally defective. Accordingly it is often said that women are grouped
+closely about the average, while men show a wider range of distribution.
+
+[Illustration: FIG. 3. MEDIAN I Q OF 457 BOYS (UNBROKEN LINE) AND
+448 GIRLS (DOTTED LINE) FOR THE AGES 5-14 YEARS]
+
+Many hundreds of articles and books of popular or quasi-scientific
+nature have been written on one aspect or another of this question of
+sex difference in intelligence; but all such theoretical discussions
+taken together are worth less than the results of one good experiment.
+Let us see what our 1000 I Q's have to offer toward a solution of the
+problem.
+
+1. When the I Q's of the boys and girls were treated separately there
+was found a small but fairly constant superiority of the girls up to the
+age of 13 years. At 14, however, the curve for the girls dropped below
+that for boys. This is shown in Figure 3.
+
+The supplementary data, including the teachers' estimates of
+intelligence on a scale of five, the teachers' judgments in regard to
+the quality of the school work, and records showing the age-grade
+distribution of the sexes, were all sifted for evidence as to the
+genuineness of the apparent superiority of the girls age for age. The
+results of all these lines of inquiry support the tests in suggesting
+that the superiority of the girls is probably real even up to and
+including age 14, the apparent superiority of the boys at this age being
+fully accounted for by the more frequent elimination of 14-year-old
+girls from the grades by promotion to the high school.[23]
+
+[23] It will be remembered that this series of tests did not follow up
+and test those who had been promoted to high school.
+
+2. However, the superiority of girls over boys is so slight (amounting
+at most ages to only 2 to 3 points in terms of I Q) that for practical
+purposes it would seem negligible. This offers no support to the opinion
+expressed by Yerkes and Bridges that "at certain ages serious injustice
+will be done individuals by evaluating their scores in the light of
+norms which do not take account of sex differences."
+
+3. Apart from the small superiority of girls, the distribution of
+intelligence in the two sexes is not different. The supposed wider
+variation of boys is not found. Girls do not group themselves about the
+median more closely than do boys. The range of I Q including the middle
+fifty per cent is approximately the same for the two sexes.[24]
+
+[24] For an extensive summary of other data on the variability of the
+sexes see the article by Leta S. Hollingworth, in _The American Journal
+of Sociology_ (January, 1914), pp. 510-30. It is shown that the findings
+of others support the conclusions set forth above.
+
+4. When the results for the individual tests were examined, it was found
+that not many showed very extreme differences as to the per cent of boys
+and girls passing. In a few cases, however, the difference was rather
+marked.
+
+The boys were decidedly better in arithmetical reasoning, giving
+differences between a president and a king, solving the form board,
+making change, reversing hands of clock, finding similarities, and
+solving the "induction test." The girls were superior in drawing designs
+from memory, æsthetic comparison, comparing objects from memory,
+answering the "comprehension questions," repeating digits and sentences,
+tying a bow-knot, and finding rhymes.
+
+Accordingly, our data, which for the most part agree with the results of
+others, justify the conclusion that the intelligence of girls, at least
+up to 14 years, does not differ materially from that of boys either as
+regards the average level or the range of distribution. It may still be
+argued that the mental development of boys beyond the age of 14 years
+lasts longer and extends farther than in the case of girls, but as a
+matter of fact this opinion receives little support from such tests as
+have been made on men and women college students.
+
+The fact that so few women have attained eminence may be due to wholly
+extraneous factors, the most important of which are the following: (1)
+The occupations in which it is possible to achieve eminence are for the
+most part only now beginning to open their doors to women. Women's
+career has been largely that of home-making, an occupation in which
+eminence, in the strict sense of the word, is impossible. (2) Even of
+the small number of women who embark upon a professional career, a
+majority marry and thereafter devote a fairly large proportion of their
+energy to bearing and rearing children. (3) Both the training given to
+girls and the general atmosphere in which they grow up are unfavorable
+to the inculcation of the professional point of view, and as a result
+women are not spurred on by deep-seated motives to constant and
+strenuous intellectual endeavor as men are. (4) It is also possible that
+the emotional traits of women are such as to favor the development of
+the sentiments at the expense of innate intellectual endowment.
+
+INTELLIGENCE OF THE DIFFERENT SOCIAL CLASSES. Of the 1000 children, 492
+were classified by their teachers according to social class into the
+following five groups: _very inferior_, _inferior_, _average_,
+_superior_, and _very superior_. A comparative study was then made of
+the distribution of I Q's for these different groups.[25]
+
+[25] The results of this comparison have been set forth in detail in the
+monograph of source material and some of the conclusions have been set
+forth on p. 115 _ff._ of the present volume.
+
+The data may be summarized as follows:--
+
+    1. The median I Q for children of the superior social class is
+    about 7 points above, and that of the inferior social class
+    about 7 points below, the median I Q of the average social
+    group. This means that by the age of 14 inferior class children
+    are about one year below, and superior class children one year
+    above, the median mental age for all classes taken together.
+
+    2. That the children of the superior social classes make a
+    better showing in the tests is probably due, for the most part,
+    to a superiority in original endowment. This conclusion is
+    supported by five supplementary lines of evidence: (a) the
+    teachers' rankings of the children according to intelligence;
+    (b) the age-grade progress of the children; (c) the quality
+    of the school work; (d) the comparison of older and younger
+    children as regards the influence of social environment; and
+    (e) the study of individual cases of bright and dull children
+    in the same family.
+
+    3. In order to facilitate comparison, it is advisable to express
+    the intelligence of children of all social classes in terms of
+    the same objective scale of intelligence. This scale should be
+    based on the median for all classes taken together.
+
+    4. As regards their responses to individual tests, our children
+    of a given social class were not distinguishable from children
+    of the same intelligence in any other social class.
+
+THE RELATION OF THE I Q TO THE QUALITY OF THE CHILD'S SCHOOL WORK. The
+school work of 504 children was graded by the teachers on a scale of
+five grades: _very inferior_, _inferior_, _average_, _superior_, and
+_very superior_. When this grouping was compared with that made on the
+basis of I Q, fairly close agreement was found. However, in about one
+case out of ten there was rather serious disagreement; a child, for
+example, would be rated as doing _average_ school work when his I Q
+would place him in the _very inferior_ intelligence group.
+
+When the data were searched for explanations of such disagreements it
+was found that most of them were plainly due to the failure of teachers
+to take into account the age of the child when grading the quality of
+his school work.[26] When allowance was made for this tendency there
+were no disagreements which justified any serious suspicion as to the
+accuracy of the intelligence scale. Minor disagreements may, of course,
+be disregarded, since the quality of school work depends in part on
+other factors than intelligence, such as industry, health, regularity of
+attendance, quality of instruction, etc.
+
+[26] See p. 24 _ff._
+
+THE RELATION BETWEEN I Q AND GRADE PROGRESS. This comparison, which was
+made for the entire 1000 children, showed a fairly high correlation, but
+also some astonishing disagreements. Nine-year intelligence was found
+all the way from grade 1 to grade 7, inclusive; 10-year intelligence all
+the way from grade 2 to grade 7; and 12-year intelligence all the way
+from grade 3 to grade 8. Plainly the school's efforts at grading fail to
+give homogeneous groups of children as regards mental ability. On the
+whole, the grade location of the children did not fit their mental ages
+much better than it did their chronological ages.
+
+When the data were examined, it was found that practically every child
+whose grade failed to correspond fairly closely with his mental age was
+either exceptionally bright or exceptionally dull. Those who tested
+between 96 and 105 I Q were never seriously misplaced in school. The
+very dull children, however, were usually located from one to three
+grades above where they belonged by mental age, and the duller the
+child the more serious, as a rule, was the misplacement. On the other
+hand, the very bright children were nearly always located from one to
+three grades below where they belonged by mental age, and the brighter
+the child the more serious the school's mistake. The child of 10-year
+mental age in the second grade, for example, is almost certain to be
+about 7 or 8 years old; the child of 10-year intelligence in the sixth
+grade is almost certain to be 13 to 15 years of age.
+
+All this is due to one fact, and one alone: _the school tends to promote
+children by age rather than ability_. The bright children are held back,
+while the dull children are promoted beyond their mental ability. The
+retardation problem is exactly the reverse of what we have thought it to
+be. It is the bright children who are retarded, and the dull children
+who are accelerated.
+
+The remedy is to be sought in differentiated courses (special classes)
+for both kinds of mentally exceptional children. Just as many special
+classes are needed for superior children as for the inferior. The social
+consequences of suitable educational advantages for children of superior
+ability would no doubt greatly exceed anything that could possibly
+result from the special instruction of dullards and border-line
+cases.[27]
+
+[27] See Chapter VI for further discussion of the school progress
+possible to children of various I Q's.
+
+Special study of the I Q's between 70 and 79 revealed the fact that a
+child of this grade of intelligence _never_ does satisfactory work in
+the grade where he belongs by chronological age. By the time he has
+attended school four or five years, such a child is usually found doing
+"very inferior" to "average" work in a grade from two to four years
+below his age.
+
+On the other hand, the child with an I Q of 120 or above is almost never
+found below the grade for his chronological age, and occasionally he is
+one or two grades above. Wherever located, his work is always "superior"
+or "very superior," and the evidence suggests strongly that it would
+probably remain so even if extra promotions were granted.
+
+CORRELATION BETWEEN I Q AND THE TEACHERS' ESTIMATES OF THE CHILDREN'S
+INTELLIGENCE. By the Pearson formula the correlation found between the
+I Q's and the teachers' rankings on a scale of five was .48. This is
+about what others have found, and is both high enough and low enough to
+be significant. That it is moderately high in so far corroborates the
+tests. That it is not higher means that either the teachers or the tests
+have made a good many mistakes.
+
+When the data were searched for evidence on this point, it was found, as
+we have shown in Chapter II, that the fault was plainly on the part of
+the teachers. The serious mistakes were nearly all made with children
+who were either over age or under age for their grade, mostly the
+former. In estimating children's intelligence, just as in grading their
+school success, the teachers often failed to take account of the age
+factor. For example, the child whose mental age was, say, two years
+below normal, and who was enrolled in a class with children about two
+years younger than himself, was often graded "average" in intelligence.
+
+The tendency of teachers is to estimate a child's intelligence according
+to the quality of his school work _in the grade where he happens to be
+located_. This results in overestimating the intelligence of older,
+retarded children, and underestimating the intelligence of the younger,
+advanced children. The disagreements between the tests and the teachers'
+estimates are thus found, when analyzed, to confirm the validity of the
+test method rather than to bring it under suspicion.
+
+THE VALIDITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL TESTS. The validity of each test was
+checked up by measuring it against the scale as a whole in the manner
+described on p. 55. For example, if 10-year-old children having 11-year
+intelligence succeed with a given test decidedly better than 10-year-old
+children who have 9-year intelligence, then either this test must be
+accepted as valid or the scale as a whole must be rejected. Since we
+know, however, that the scale as a whole has at least a reasonably high
+degree of reliability, this method becomes a sure and ready means of
+judging the worth of a test.
+
+When the tests were tried out in this way it was found that some of
+those which have been most criticized have in reality a high correlation
+with intelligence. Among these are naming the days of the week, giving
+the value of stamps, counting thirteen pennies, giving differences
+between president and king, finding rhymes, giving age, distinguishing
+right and left, and interpretation of pictures. Others having a high
+reliability are the vocabulary tests, arithmetical reasoning, giving
+differences, copying a diamond, giving date, repeating digits in reverse
+order, interpretation of fables, the dissected sentence test, naming
+sixty words, finding omissions in pictures, and recognizing absurdities.
+
+Among the somewhat less satisfactory tests are the following: repeating
+digits (direct order), naming coins, distinguishing forenoon and
+afternoon, defining in terms of use, drawing designs from memory, and
+æsthetic comparison. Binet's "line suggestion" test correlated so little
+with intelligence that it had to be thrown out. The same was also true
+of two of the new tests which we had added to the series for try-out.
+
+Tests showing a medium correlation with the scale as a whole include
+arranging weights, executing three commissions, naming colors, giving
+number of fingers, describing pictures, naming the months, making
+change, giving superior definitions, finding similarities, reading for
+memories, reversing hands of clock, defining abstract words, problems of
+fact, bow-knot, induction test, and comprehension questions.
+
+A test which makes a good showing on this criterion of agreement with
+the scale as a whole becomes immune to theoretical criticisms. Whatever
+it appears to be from mere inspection, it is a real measure of
+intelligence. Henceforth it stands or falls with the scale as a whole.
+
+The reader will understand, of course, that no single test used alone
+will determine accurately the general level of intelligence. A great
+many tests are required; and for two reasons: (1) because intelligence
+has many aspects; and (2) in order to overcome the accidental influences
+of training or environment. If many tests are used no one of them need
+show more than a moderately high correlation with the scale as a whole.
+As stated by Binet, "Let the tests be rough, if there are only enough of
+them."
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VI
+
+THE SIGNIFICANCE OF VARIOUS INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS
+
+
+FREQUENCY OF DIFFERENT DEGREES OF INTELLIGENCE. Before we can interpret
+the results of an examination it is necessary to know how frequently an
+I Q of the size found occurs among unselected children. Our tests of
+1000 unselected children enable us to answer this question with some
+degree of definiteness. A study of these 1000 I Q's shows the following
+significant facts:--
+
+  The lowest   1 % go to 70 or below, the highest   1 % reach 130 or above
+   "    "      2 %  "  " 73  "   "      "    "      2 %   "   128  "   "
+   "    "      3 %  "  " 76  "   "      "    "      3 %   "   125  "   "
+   "    "      5 %  "  " 78  "   "      "    "      5 %   "   122  "   "
+   "    "     10 %  "  " 85  "   "      "    "     10 %   "   116  "   "
+   "    "     15 %  "  " 88  "   "      "    "     15 %   "   113  "   "
+   "    "     20 %  "  " 91  "   "      "    "     20 %   "   110  "   "
+   "    "     25 %  "  " 92  "   "      "    "     25 %   "   108  "   "
+   "    "  33+1/3%  "  " 95  "   "      "    "  33+1/3%   "   106  "   "
+
+Or, to put some of the above facts in another form:--
+
+  The child reaching          110 is equaled or excelled by 20 out of 100
+   "    "       "    (about)  115 "     "    "     "     "  10  "  "   "
+   "    "       "       "     125 "     "    "     "     "   3  "  "   "
+   "    "       "       "     130 "     "    "     "     "   1  "  "   "
+
+Conversely, we may say regarding the subnormals that:--
+
+  The child testing at (about) 90 is equaled or excelled by 80 out of 100
+   "    "      "    "     "    85 "     "    "     "     "  90  "  "   "
+   "    "      "    "     "    75 "     "    "     "     "  97  "  "   "
+   "    "      "    "     "    70 "     "    "     "     "  99  "  "   "
+
+CLASSIFICATION OF INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS. What do the above I Q's imply
+in such terms as feeble-mindedness, border-line intelligence, dullness,
+normality, superior intelligence genius, etc.? When we use these terms
+two facts must be borne in mind: (1) That the boundary lines between
+such groups are absolutely arbitrary, a matter of definition only; and
+(2) that the individuals comprising one of the groups do not make up a
+homogeneous type.
+
+Nevertheless, since terms like the above are convenient and will
+probably continue to be used, it is desirable to give them as much
+definiteness as possible. On the basis of the tests we have made,
+including many cases of all grades of intelligence, the following
+suggestions are offered for the classification of intelligence
+quotients:--
+
+    _I Q_         _Classification_
+
+    Above 140     "Near" genius or genius.
+      120-140     Very superior intelligence.
+      110-120     Superior intelligence.
+       90-110     Normal, or average, intelligence.
+       80- 90     Dullness, rarely classifiable as feeble-mindedness.
+       70- 80     Border-line deficiency, sometimes classifiable as
+                    dullness, often as feeble-mindedness.
+     Below 70     Definite feeble-mindedness.
+
+Of the feeble-minded, those between 50 and 70 I Q include most of the
+morons (high, middle, and low), those between 20 or 25 and 50 are
+ordinarily to be classed as imbeciles, and those below 20 or 25 as
+idiots. According to this classification the adult idiot would range up
+to about 3-year intelligence as the limit, the adult imbecile would have
+a mental level between 3 and 7 years, and the adult moron would range
+from about 7-year to 11-year intelligence.
+
+It should be added, however, that the classification of I Q's for the
+various sub-grades of feeble-mindedness is not very secure, for the
+reason that the exact curves of mental growth have not been worked out
+for such grades. As far as the public schools are concerned this does
+not greatly matter, as they never enroll idiots and very rarely even the
+high-grade imbecile. School defectives are practically all of the moron
+and border-line grades, and these it is important teachers should be
+able to recognize. The following discussions and illustrative cases will
+perhaps give a fairly definite idea of the significance of various
+grades of intelligence.[28]
+
+[28] The clinical descriptions to be given are not complete and are
+designed merely to aid the examiner in understanding the significance of
+intelligence quotients found.
+
+FEEBLE-MINDEDNESS (RARELY ABOVE 75 I Q.) There are innumerable grades of
+mental deficiency ranging from somewhat below average intelligence to
+profound idiocy. In the literal sense every individual below the average
+is more or less mentally weak or feeble. Only a relatively small
+proportion of these, however, are technically known as feeble-minded. It
+is therefore necessary to set forth the criterion as to what constitutes
+feeble-mindedness in the commonly accepted sense of that word.
+
+The definition in most general use is the one framed by the Royal
+College of Physicians and Surgeons of London, and adopted by the English
+Royal Commission on Mental Deficiency. It is substantially as follows:--
+
+_A feeble-minded person is one who is incapable, because of mental
+defect existing from birth or from an early age, (a) of competing on
+equal terms with his normal fellows; or (b) of managing himself or his
+affairs with ordinary prudence._
+
+Two things are to be noted in regard to this definition: In the first
+place, it is stated in terms of social and industrial efficiency. Such
+efficiency, however, depends not merely on the degree of intelligence,
+but also on emotional, moral, physical, and social traits as well. This
+explains why some individuals with I Q somewhat below 75 can hardly be
+classed as feeble-minded in the ordinary sense of the term, while others
+with I Q a little above 75 could hardly be classified in any other
+group.
+
+In the second place, the criterion set up by the definition is not very
+definite because of the vague meaning of the expression "ordinary
+prudence." Even the expression "competing on equal terms" cannot be
+taken literally, else it would include also those who are merely dull.
+It is the second part of the definition that more nearly expresses the
+popular criterion, for as long as an individual manages his affairs in
+such a way as to be self-supporting, and in such a way as to avoid
+becoming a nuisance or burden to his fellowmen, he escapes the
+institutions for defectives and may pass for normal.
+
+The most serious defect of the definition comes from the lax
+interpretation of the term "ordinary prudence," etc. The popular
+standard is so low that hundreds of thousands of high grade defectives
+escape identification as such. Moreover, there are many grades of
+severity in social and industrial competition. For example, most of the
+members of such families as the Jukes, the Nams, the Hill Folk, and the
+Kallikaks are able to pass as normal in their own crude environment, but
+when compelled to compete with average American stock their deficiency
+becomes evident. It is therefore necessary to supplement the social
+criterion with a more strictly psychological one.
+
+For this purpose there is nothing else as significant as the I Q. All
+who test below 70 I Q by the Stanford revision of the Binet-Simon scale
+should be considered feeble-minded, and it is an open question whether
+it would not be justifiable to consider 75 I Q as the lower limit of
+"normal" intelligence. Certainly a large proportion falling between
+70 and 75 can hardly be classed as other than feeble-minded, even
+according to the social criterion.
+
+
+_Examples of feeble-minded school children_
+
+    _F. C. Boy, age 8-6; mental age 4-2; I Q approximately 50._ From
+    a very superior home. Has had the best medical care and other
+    attention. Attended a private kindergarten until rejected
+    because he required so much of the teacher's time and appeared
+    uneducable. Will probably develop to about the 6- or 7-year
+    mental level. High grade imbecile. Has since been committed to a
+    state institution. Cases as low as F. C. very rarely get into
+    the public schools.
+
+
+    _R. W. Boy, age 13-10; mental age 7-6; I Q approximately 55._
+    Home excellent. Is pubescent. Because of age and maturity has
+    been promoted to the third grade, though he can hardly do the
+    work of the second. Has attended school more than six years.
+    Will probably never develop much if any beyond 8 years, and will
+    never be self-supporting. Low-grade moron.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 4. DIAMOND DRAWN BY R. W., AGE 13-10; MENTAL
+    AGE 7-6]
+
+
+    _M. S. Girl, age 7-6; mental age 4-6; I Q 60._ Father a
+    gardener, home conditions and medical attention fair. Has twice
+    attempted first grade, but without learning to read more than a
+    few words. In each case teacher requested parents to withdraw
+    her. "Takes" things. Is considered "foolish" by the other
+    children. Will probably never develop beyond a mental level of
+    8 years.
+
+
+    _R. M. Boy, age 15; mental age 9; I Q 60._ Decidedly superior
+    home environment and care. After attending school eight years is
+    in fifth grade, though he cannot do the work of the fourth
+    grade. Parents unable to teach him to respect property. Boys
+    torment him and make his life miserable. At middle-moron level
+    and has probably about reached the limit of his development. Has
+    since been committed to a state institution.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 5. WRITING FROM DICTATION. R. M., AGE 15;
+    MENTAL AGE 9]
+
+
+    _S. M. Girl, age 19-2; mental age 10; I Q approximately 65 (not
+    counting age beyond 16)._ From very superior family. Has
+    attended public and private schools twelve years and has been
+    promoted to seventh grade, where she cannot do the work. Appears
+    docile and childlike, but is subject to spells of disobedience
+    and stubbornness. Did not walk until 4 years old. Plays with
+    young children. Susceptible to attention from men and has to be
+    constantly guarded. Writing excellent, knows the number
+    combinations, but missed all the absurdities and has the
+    vocabulary of an average 10-year-old. The type from which
+    prostitutes often come.
+
+
+    _R. H. Boy, age 14; mental age 8-4; I Q 65._ Father Irish,
+    mother Spanish. Family comfortable and home care average. Has
+    attended school eight years and is unable to do fourth-grade
+    work satisfactorily. Health excellent and attendance regular.
+    Reads in fourth reader without expression and with little
+    comprehension of what is read. Fair skill in number
+    combinations. Writing and drawing very poor. Cannot use a ruler.
+    Has no conception of an inch.
+
+    R. H. is described as high-tempered, irritable, lacking in
+    physical activity, clumsy, and unsteady. Plays little. Just
+    "stands around." Indifferent to praise or blame, has little
+    sense of duty, plays underhand tricks. Is slow, absent-minded,
+    easily confused, in thought, never shows appreciation or
+    interest. So apathetic that he does not hear commands. Voice
+    droning. Speech poor in colloquial expressions.
+
+    Three years later, at age of 17, was in a special class
+    attempting sixth-grade work. Reported as doing "absolutely
+    nothing" in that grade. Still sullen, indifferent, and slow in
+    grasping directions, and lacking in play interests. "No
+    apperception of anything, but has mastered such mechanical
+    things as reading (calling the words) and the fundamentals in
+    arithmetic."
+
+    In school work, moral traits, and out-of-school behavior R. H.
+    shows himself to be a typical case of moron deficiency.
+
+
+    _I. M. Girl, age 14-2; mental age 9; I Q approximately 65._
+    Father a laborer. Does unsatisfactory work in fourth grade.
+    Plays with little girls. A menace to the morals of the school
+    because of her sex interests and lack of self-restraint. Rather
+    good-looking if one does not hunt for appearances of
+    intelligence. Mental reactions intolerably slow. Will develop
+    but little further and will always pass as feeble-minded in any
+    but the very lowest social environment.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 6. BALL AND FIELD TEST. I. M., AGE 14-2;
+    MENTAL AGE 9]
+
+
+    _G. V. Boy, age 10; mental age 6-4; I Q 65._ Father Spanish,
+    mother English. Family poor but fairly respectable. Brothers and
+    sisters all retarded. In high first grade. Work all very poor
+    except writing, drawing, and hand work, in all of which he
+    excels. Is quiet and inactive, lacks self-confidence, and plays
+    little. Mentally slow, inert, "thick," and inattentive. Health
+    fair.
+
+    Three years later G. V. was in the low third grade and still
+    doing extremely poor work in everything except manual training,
+    drawing, and writing. Is not likely ever to go beyond the fourth
+    or fifth grade however long he remains in school.
+
+
+    _V. J. Girl, age 11-6; mental age 8; I Q 70._ Has been tested
+    three times in the last five years, always with approximately
+    the same result in terms of I Q. Home fair to inferior. Has been
+    in a special class two years and in school altogether nearly six
+    years. Is barely able to do third-grade work. Her
+    feeble-mindedness is recognized by teachers and by other pupils.
+    Belongs at about middle-moron to high-moron level.
+
+
+    _A. W. Boy, age 9-4; mental age 7; I Q 75._ A year and a half
+    ago he tested at 6-2. From superior family, brothers of very
+    superior intelligence. In school three years and has made about
+    a grade and a half. Has higher I Q than V. J. described above,
+    but his deficiency is fully as evident. Is generally recognized
+    as mentally defective. Slyly abstracted one of the pennies used
+    in the test and slipped it into his pocket. Has caused much
+    trouble at school by puncturing bicycle tires. High-grade moron.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 7. DIAMOND DRAWN BY A. W.]
+
+
+    _A. C. Boy, age 12; mental age 8-5; I Q 70._ From Portuguese
+    family of ten children. Has a feeble-minded brother. Parents in
+    comfortable circumstances and respectable. A. C. has attended
+    school regularly since he was 6 years old. Trying unsuccessfully
+    to do the work of the fourth grade. Reads poorly in the third
+    reader. Hesitates, repeats, miscalls words, and never gets the
+    thought. Writes about like a first-grade pupil. Cannot solve
+    such simple problems as "How many marbles can you buy for ten
+    cents if one marble costs five cents?" even when he has marbles
+    and money in his hands. Described by teacher as "mentally slow
+    and inert, inattentive, easily distracted, memory poor, ideas
+    vague and often absurd, does not appreciate stories, slow at
+    comprehending commands." Is also described as "unruly,
+    boisterous, disobedient, stubborn, and lacking sense of
+    propriety. Tattles."
+
+    Three years later, at age of 15, was in a special class and was
+    little if any improved. He had, however, learned the mechanics
+    of reading and had mastered the number combinations.
+    Deficiencies described as "of wide range." Conduct, however, had
+    improved. Was "working hard to get on."
+
+    A. C. must be considered definitely feeble-minded.
+
+
+    _H. S. Boy, age 11; mental age 8-3; I Q approximately 75._ At
+    8 years tested at 6. Parents highly educated, father a scholar.
+    Brother and sister of very superior intelligence. Started to
+    school at 7, but was withdrawn because of lack of progress.
+    Started again at 8 and is now doing poor work in the second
+    grade. Weakly and nervous. Painfully aware of his inability to
+    learn. During the test keeps saying, "I tried anyway," "It's all
+    I can do if I try my best, ain't it?" etc. Regarded defective by
+    other children. Will probably never be able to do work beyond
+    the fourth or fifth grade and is not likely to develop above the
+    11-year level, if as high.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 8. DRAWING DESIGNS FROM MEMORY. H. S.,
+    AGE 11; MENTAL AGE 8-3]
+
+
+    _I. S. Boy, age 9-6; mental age 7; I Q 75._ German parentage.
+    Started to school at 6. Now in low second grade and unable to do
+    the work. Health good. Inattentive, mentally slow and inert,
+    easily distracted, speech is monotone. Equally poor in reading,
+    writing, and numbers. I. S. is described as quiet, sullen,
+    indifferent, lazy, and stubborn. Plays little.
+
+    Three years later had advanced from low second to low fourth
+    grade, but was as poor as ever in his school work. "Miscalls the
+    simplest words." Moral traits unsatisfactory. May reach sixth or
+    seventh grade if he remains in school long enough.
+
+    I. S. learned to walk at 2 years and to talk at 3.
+
+The above are cases of such marked deficiency that there could be no
+disagreement among competent judges in classifying them in the group of
+"feeble-minded." All are definitely institutional cases. It is a matter
+of record, however, that one of the cases, H. S., was diagnosed by a
+physician (without test) as "backward but not a defective." and with the
+added encouragement that "the backwardness will be outgrown." Of course
+the reverse is the case; the deficiency is becoming more and more
+apparent as the boy approaches the age where more is expected of him.
+
+In at least three of the above cases (S. M., I. S., and I. M.) the
+teachers had not identified the backwardness as feeble-mindedness. Not
+far from 2 children out of 100, or 2 out of 1000, in the average public
+school are as defective as some of those just described. Teachers get so
+accustomed to seeing a few of them in every group of 200 or 300 pupils
+that they are likely to regard them as merely dull,--"dreadfully dull,"
+of course,--but not defective.
+
+Children like these, for their own good and that of other pupils, should
+be kept out of the regular classes. They will rarely be equal to the
+work of the fifth grade, however long they attend school. They will
+make a little progress in a well-managed special class, but with the
+approach of adolescence, at latest, the State should take them into
+custodial care for its own protection.
+
+BORDER-LINE CASES (USUALLY BETWEEN 70 AND 80 I Q). The border-line cases
+are those which fall near the boundary generally recognized as such and
+the higher group usually classed as normal but dull. They are the
+doubtful cases, the ones we are always trying (rarely with success) to
+restore to normality.
+
+It must be emphasized, however, that this doubtful group is not marked
+off by definite I Q limits. Some children with I Q as high as 75 or even
+80 will have to be classified as feeble-minded; some as low as 70 I Q
+may be so well endowed in other mental traits that they may manage as
+adults to get along fairly well in a simple environment. The ability to
+compete with one's fellows in the social and industrial world does not
+depend upon intelligence alone. Such factors as moral traits, industry,
+environment to be encountered, personal appearance, and influential
+relatives are also involved. Two children classified above as
+feeble-minded had an I Q as high as 75. In these cases the emotional,
+moral, or physical qualities were so defective as to render a normal
+social life out of the question. This is occasionally true even with an
+I Q as high as 80. Some of the border-line cases, with even less
+intelligence, may be so well endowed in other mental traits that they
+are capable of becoming dependable unskilled laborers, and of supporting
+a family after a fashion.
+
+
+_Examples of border-line deficiency_
+
+    _S. F. Girl, age 17; mental age 11-6; I Q approximately 72
+    (disregarding age above 16 years)._ Father intelligent; mother
+    probably high-grade defective. Lives in a good home with aunt,
+    who is a woman of good sense and skillful in her management of
+    the girl. S. F. has attended excellent schools for eleven years
+    and has recently been promoted to the seventh grade. The teacher
+    admits, however, that she cannot do the work of that grade, but
+    says, "I haven't the heart to let her fail in the sixth grade
+    for the third time." She studies very hard and says she wants to
+    become a teacher! At the time the test was made she was actually
+    studying her books from two to three hours daily at home. The
+    aunt, who is very intelligent, had never thought of this girl as
+    feeble-minded, and had suffered much concern and humiliation
+    because of her inability to teach her to conduct herself
+    properly toward men and not to appropriate other people's
+    property.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 9. BALL AND FIELD TEST S. F., AGE 17; MENTAL
+    AGE 11-6]
+
+    S. F. is ordinarily docile, but is subject to fits of anger and
+    obstinacy. She finally determined to leave her home, threatening
+    to take up with a man unless allowed to work elsewhere. Since
+    then she has been tried out in several families, but after a
+    little while in a place she flies into a rage and leaves. She is
+    a fairly capable houseworker when she tries.
+
+    This young woman is feeble-minded and should be classed as such.
+    She is listed here with the border-line cases simply for the
+    reason that she belongs to a group whose mental deficiency is
+    almost never recognized without the aid of a psychological test.
+    Probably no physician could be found who would diagnose the
+    case, on the basis of a medical examination alone, as one of
+    feeble-mindedness.
+
+
+    _F. H. Boy, age 16-6; mental age 11-5; I Q approximately 72
+    (disregarding age above 16 years)._ Tested for three successive
+    years without change of more than four points in I Q. Father a
+    laborer, dull, subject to fits of rage, and beats the boy.
+    Mother not far from border-line. F. H. has always had the best
+    of school advantages and has been promoted to the seventh grade.
+    Is really about equal to fifth-grade work. Fairly rapid and
+    accurate in number combinations, but cannot solve arithmetical
+    problems which require any reasoning. Reads with reasonable
+    fluency, but with little understanding. Appears exceedingly
+    good-natured, but was once suspended from school for hurling
+    bricks at a fellow pupil. Played a "joke" on another pupil by
+    fastening a dangerous, sharp-pointed, steel paper-file in the
+    pupil's seat for him to sit down on. He is cruel, stubborn, and
+    plays truant, but is fairly industrious when he gets a job as
+    errand or delivery boy. Discharged once for taking money.
+
+    F. H. is generally called "queer," but is not ordinarily thought
+    of as feeble-minded. His deficiency is real, however, and it is
+    altogether doubtful whether he will be able to make a living and
+    to keep out of trouble, though he is now (at age 20) employed as
+    messenger boy for the Western Union at $30 per month. This is
+    considerably less than pick-and-shovel men get in the community
+    where he lives. Delinquents and criminals often belong to this
+    level of intelligence.
+
+
+    _W. C. Boy, age 16-8; mental age 12; I Q 75 (disregarding age
+    above 16 years)._ Father a college professor. All the other
+    children in the family of unusually superior intelligence. When
+    tested (four years ago) was trying to do seventh-grade work, but
+    with little success. Wanted to leave school and learn farming,
+    but father insisted on his getting the usual grammar-school and
+    high-school education. Made $25 one summer by raising vegetables
+    on a vacant lot. In the four years since the test was made he
+    has managed to get into high school. Teachers say that in spite
+    of his best efforts he learns next to nothing, and they regard
+    him as hopelessly dull. Is docile, lacks all aggressiveness,
+    looks stupid, and has head circumference an inch below normal.
+
+    Here is a most pitiful case of the overstimulated backward child
+    in a superior family. Instead of nagging at the boy and urging
+    him on to attempt things which are impossible to his inferior
+    intelligence, his parents should take him out of school and put
+    him at some kind of work which he could do. If the boy had been
+    the son of a common laborer he would probably have left school
+    early and have become a dependable and contented laborer. In a
+    very simple environment he would probably not be considered
+    defective.
+
+
+    _C. P. Boy, age 10-2; mental age 7-11; I Q 78._ Portuguese boy,
+    son of a skilled laborer. One of eleven children, most of whom
+    have about this same grade of intelligence. Has attended school
+    regularly for four years. Is in the third grade, but cannot do
+    the work. Except for extreme stubbornness his social development
+    is fairly normal. Capable in plays and games, but is regarded as
+    impossible in his school work. Like his brother, M. P., the next
+    case to be described, he will doubtless become a fairly reliable
+    laborer at unskilled work and will not be regarded, in his
+    rather simple environment, as a defective. From the
+    psychological point of view, however, his deficiency is real. He
+    will probably never develop beyond the 11- or 12-year level or
+    be able to do satisfactory school work beyond the fifth or sixth
+    grade.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 10. WRITING FROM DICTATION. C. P., AGE 10-2;
+    MENTAL AGE 7-11]
+
+
+    _M. P. Boy, age 14; mental age 10-8; I Q 77._ Has been tested
+    four successive years, I Q being always between 75 and 80.
+    Brother to C. P. above. In school nearly eight years and has
+    been promoted to the fifth grade. At 16 was doing poor work in
+    the sixth grade. Good school advantages, as the father has tried
+    conscientiously to give his children "a good education."
+    Perfectly normal in appearance and in play activities and is
+    liked by other children. Seems to be thoroughly dependable both
+    in school and in his outside work. Will probably become an
+    excellent laborer and will pass as perfectly normal,
+    notwithstanding a grade of intelligence which will not develop
+    above 11 or 12 years.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 11. BALL AND FIELD TEST. M. P., AGE 14;
+    MENTAL AGE 10-8]
+
+What shall we say of cases like the last two which test at high-grade
+moronity or at border-line, but are well enough endowed in moral
+and personal traits to pass as normal in an uncomplicated social
+environment? According to the classical definition of feeble-mindedness
+such individuals cannot be considered defectives. Hardly any one would
+think of them as institutional cases. Among laboring men and servant
+girls there are thousands like them. They are the world's "hewers of
+wood and drawers of water." And yet, as far as intelligence is
+concerned, the tests have told the truth. These boys are uneducable
+beyond the merest rudiments of training. No amount of school instruction
+will ever make them intelligent voters or capable citizens in the true
+sense of the word. Judged psychologically they cannot be considered
+normal.
+
+It is interesting to note that M. P. and C. P. represent the level of
+intelligence which is very, very common among Spanish-Indian and Mexican
+families of the Southwest and also among negroes. Their dullness seems
+to be racial, or at least inherent in the family stocks from which they
+come. The fact that one meets this type with such extraordinary
+frequency among Indians, Mexicans, and negroes suggests quite forcibly
+that the whole question of racial differences in mental traits will have
+to be taken up anew and by experimental methods. The writer predicts
+that when this is done there will be discovered enormously significant
+racial differences in general intelligence, differences which cannot be
+wiped out by any scheme of mental culture.
+
+Children of this group should be segregated in special classes and be
+given instruction which is concrete and practical. They cannot master
+abstractions, but they can often be made efficient workers, able to look
+out for themselves. There is no possibility at present of convincing
+society that they should not be allowed to reproduce, although from a
+eugenic point of view they constitute a grave problem because of their
+unusually prolific breeding.
+
+DULL NORMALS (I Q USUALLY 80 TO 90). In this group are included those
+children who would not, according to any of the commonly accepted social
+standards, be considered feeble-minded, but who are nevertheless far
+enough below the actual average of intelligence among races of western
+European descent that they cannot make ordinary school progress or
+master other intellectual difficulties which average children are equal
+to. A few of this class test as low as 75 to 80 I Q, but the majority
+are not far from 85. The unmistakably normal children who go much below
+this (in California, at least) are usually Mexicans, Indians, or
+negroes.
+
+    _R. G. Negro boy, age 13-5; mental age 10-6; I Q approximately
+    80._ Normal in appearance and conduct, but very dull. Is
+    attempting fifth-grade work in a special class, but is failing.
+    From a fairly good home and has had ordinary school advantages.
+    In the examination his intelligence is very even as far as it
+    goes, but stops rather abruptly after the 10-year tests. Will
+    unquestionably pass as normal among unskilled laborers, but his
+    intelligence will never exceed the 12-year level and he is not
+    likely to advance beyond the seventh grade, if as far.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 12. BALL AND FIELD. R. G., AGE 13-5, MENTAL
+    AGE 10-6]
+
+
+    _F. D. Boy, tested at age 10-2; I Q 83, and again at 14-1;
+    I Q 79._ Mental age in the first test was 8-6 and in the second
+    test 11. Son of a barber. Father dead; mother capable; makes a
+    good home, and cares for her children well. At 10 was doing
+    unsatisfactory work in the fourth grade, and at 12
+    unsatisfactory work in low sixth. Good-looking, normal in
+    appearance and social development, and though occasionally
+    obstinate is usually steady. Any one unacquainted with his poor
+    school work and low I Q would consider him perfectly normal. No
+    physical or moral handicaps of any kind that could possibly
+    account for his retardation. Is simply dull. Needs purely a
+    vocational training, but may be able to complete the eighth
+    grade with low marks by the age of 16 or 17.
+
+
+    _G. G. Girl, age 12-4; mental age 10-10; I Q 82._ From average
+    home. Excellent educational advantages and no physical
+    handicaps. At 12 years was doing very poor work in fifth grade.
+    Appearance, play life, and attitude toward other children
+    normal. Simply dull. Will probably never go beyond the 12- or
+    13-year level and is not likely to get as far as the high
+    school.
+
+Those testing 80 and 90 will usually be able to reach the eighth grade,
+but ordinarily only after from one to three or four failures. They are
+so very numerous (about 15 per cent of the school enrollment) that it is
+doubtful whether we can expect soon to have special classes enough to
+accommodate all. The most feasible solution is a differentiated course
+of study with parallel classes in which every child will be allowed to
+make the best progress of which he is capable, without incurring the
+risk of failure and non-promotion. The so-called Mannheim system, or
+something similar to it, is what we need.
+
+AVERAGE INTELLIGENCE (I Q 90 TO 110). It is often said that the schools
+are made for the average child, but that "the average child does not
+exist." He does exist, and in very large numbers. About 60 per cent of
+all school children test between 90 and 110 I Q, and about 40 per cent
+between 95 and 105. That these children are average is attested by their
+school records as well as by their I Q's. Our records show that, of more
+than 200 children below 14 years of age and with I Q between 95 and 105,
+not one was making much more nor much less than average school progress.
+Four were two years retarded, but in each case this was due to late
+start, illness, or irregular attendance. Children who test close to 90,
+however, often fail to get along satisfactorily, while those testing
+near 110 are occasionally able to win an extra promotion.
+
+The children of this average group are seldom school problems, as far as
+ability to learn is concerned. Nor are they as likely to cause trouble
+in discipline as the dull and border-line cases. It is therefore hardly
+necessary to give illustrative cases here.
+
+The high school, however, does not fit their grade of intelligence as
+well as the elementary and grammar schools. High schools probably enroll
+a disproportionate number of pupils in the I Q range above 100. That is,
+the average intelligence among high-school pupils is above the average
+for the population in general. It is probably not far from 110. College
+students are, of course, a still more selected group, perhaps coming
+chiefly from the range above 115. The child whose school marks are
+barely average in the elementary grades, when measured against children
+in general, will ordinarily earn something less than average marks in
+high school, and perhaps excessively poor marks in college.
+
+SUPERIOR INTELLIGENCE (I Q 110 TO 120). Children of this group
+ordinarily make higher marks and are capable of making somewhat more
+rapid progress than the strictly average child. Perhaps most of them
+could complete the eight grades in seven years as easily as the average
+child does in eight years. They are not usually the best scholars, but
+on a scale of excellent, good, fair, poor, and failure they will usually
+rank as good, though of course the degree of application is a factor. It
+is rare, however, to find a child of this level who is positively
+indolent in his school work or who dislikes school. In high school they
+are likely to win about the average mark.
+
+Intelligence of 110 to 120 I Q is approximately five times as common
+among children of superior social status as among children of inferior
+social status; the proportion among the former being about 24 per cent
+of all, and among the latter only 5 per cent of all. The group is
+made up largely of children of the fairly successful mercantile or
+professional classes.
+
+The total number of children between 110 and 120 is almost exactly the
+same as the number between 80 and 90; namely, about 15 per cent. The
+distance between these two groups (say between 85 and 115) is as great
+as the distance between average intelligence and border-line deficiency,
+and it would be absurd to suppose that they could be taught to best
+advantage in the same classes. As a matter of fact, pupils between
+110 and 120 are usually held back to the rate of progress which the
+average child can make. They are little encouraged to do their best.
+
+VERY SUPERIOR INTELLIGENCE (I Q 120 TO 140). Children of this group are
+better than somewhat above average. They are unusually superior. Not
+more than 3 out of 100 go as high as 125 I Q, and only about 1 out of
+100 as high as 130. In the schools of a city of average population only
+about 1 child in 250 or 300 tests as high as 140 I Q.
+
+In a series of 476 unselected children there was not a single one
+reaching 120 whose social class was described as "below average."[29] Of
+the children of superior social status, about 10 per cent reached 120 or
+better. The 120-140 group is made up almost entirely of children whose
+parents belong to the professional or very successful business classes.
+The child of a skilled laborer belongs here occasionally, the child of a
+common laborer very rarely indeed. At least this is true in the smaller
+cities of California among populations made up of native-born Americans.
+In all probability it would not have been true in the earlier history of
+the country when ordinary labor was more often than now performed by men
+of average intelligence, and it would probably not hold true now among
+certain immigrant populations of good stock, but limited social and
+educational advantages.
+
+[29] In other investigations, however, we have found even brighter
+children from very inferior homes. See p. 117 for an example.
+
+What can children of this grade of ability do in school? The question
+cannot be answered as satisfactorily as one could wish, for the simple
+reason that such children are rarely permitted to do what they can. What
+they do accomplish is as follows: Of 54 children (of the 1000 unselected
+cases) falling in this group, 12½ per cent were advanced in the
+grades two years, approximately 54 per cent were advanced one year,
+28 per cent were in the grade where they belonged by chronological age,
+and three children, or 5½ per cent, were actually retarded one year.
+But wherever located, such children rarely get anything but the highest
+marks, and the evidence goes to show that most of them could easily be
+prepared for high school by the age of 12 years. Serious injury is done
+them by schools which believe in "putting on the brakes."
+
+The following are illustrations of children testing between 130 and 145.
+Not all are taken from the 1000 unselected tests. The writer has
+discovered several children of this grade as a result of lectures before
+teachers' institutes. It is his custom, in such lectures, to ask the
+teachers to bring in for a demonstration test the "brightest child in
+the city" (or county, etc.). The I Q resulting from such a test is
+usually between 130 and 140, occasionally a little higher.
+
+
+_Examples of very superior intelligence_
+
+    _Margaret P. Age 8-10; mental age 11-1; I Q 130._ Father only a
+    skilled laborer (house painter), but a man of unusual
+    intelligence and character for his social class. Home care above
+    average. M. P. has attended school a little less than three
+    years and is completing fourth grade. Marks all "excellent."
+    Health perfect. Social and moral traits of the very best. Is
+    obedient, conscientious, and unusually reliable for her age.
+    Quiet and confident bearing, but no touch of vanity.
+
+    M. P. is known to be related on her father's side to John
+    Wesley, and her maternal grandfather was a highly skilled
+    mechanic and the inventor of an important train-coupling device
+    used on all railroads.
+
+    Although she is not yet 9 years old and is completing the fourth
+    grade, she is still about a grade below where she belongs by
+    mental age. She could no doubt easily be made ready for high
+    school by the age of 12.
+
+
+    _J. R. Girl, age 12-9; mental age 16 (average adult); I Q
+    approximately 130._ Daughter of a university professor. In first
+    year of high school. From first grade up her marks have been
+    nearly all of the A rank. For first semester of high school four
+    of six grades were A, the others B. A wonderfully charming,
+    delightful girl in every respect. Play life perfectly normal.
+
+    _J. R.'s_ parents have moved about a great deal and she has
+    attended eight different schools. She is two years above grade
+    in school, but of this gain only one-half grade was made in
+    school; _the other grade and a half she gained in a little over
+    a year by staying out of school and working a little each day
+    under the instruction of her mother_. But for this she would
+    doubtless now be in the seventh grade instead of in high school.
+    As it is she is at least a grade below where she belongs by
+    mental age. Something better than an average college record may
+    be safely predicted for J. R.
+
+
+    _E. B. Girl, age 7-9; mental age 10-2; I Q 130._ E. B. was
+    selected by the teachers of a small California city as the
+    brightest school child in that city (school population about
+    500). Her parents are said to be unusually intelligent. E. B. is
+    in the third grade, a year advanced, but her mental level shows
+    that she belongs in the fourth. The test was made as a
+    demonstration test in the presence of about 150 teachers, all
+    of whom were charmed by her delightful personality and keen
+    responses. No trace of vanity or queerness of any kind. Health
+    excellent. E. B. ought to be ready for high school at 12; she
+    will really have the intelligence to do high-school work by 11.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 13. BALL AND FIELD TEST. E. B., AGE 7-9;
+    I Q 130]
+
+
+    _L. B. Girl, age 8-6; mental age 11-6; I Q 135._ Tested nearly
+    three years earlier, age 5-11; mental age 7-6; I Q 127. Daughter
+    of a university professor. At age of 8-6 was doing very superior
+    work in the fifth grade. Later, at age of 10-6, is in the
+    seventh grade with all her marks excellent. Has two sisters who
+    test almost as high, both completing the eighth grade at barely
+    12 years of age. L. B. looks rather delicate, and though a
+    little nervous is ordinarily strong. We have known her since her
+    early childhood. Like both her sisters, she is a favorite with
+    young and old, as nearly perfection as the most charming little
+    girl could be.
+
+
+    _R. S. Boy, age 6-5; mental age 9-6; I Q 148._ When tested at
+    age 5-2 he had a mental age of 7-6, I Q 142. Father a university
+    professor. R. S. entered school at exactly 6 years of age, and
+    at the present writing is 7½ years old and is entering the
+    third grade. Leads his class in school and takes delight in the
+    work. Is normal in play life and social traits and is dependable
+    and thoughtful beyond his years. Should enter high school not
+    later than 12; could probably be made ready a year earlier, but
+    as he is somewhat nervous this might not be wise.
+
+
+    _T. F. Boy, age 10-6; mental age 14; I Q 133._ At 13-6 tested at
+    "superior adult," and had vocabulary of 13,000 (also "superior
+    adult"). Son of a college professor. Did not go to school till
+    age of 9 years and was not taught to read till 8½. At this
+    writing he is 15½ years old and is a senior in high school.
+    He will complete the high-school course in three and one-half
+    years with A to B marks, mostly A. Gets his hardest mathematics
+    lessons in five to ten minutes. Science is his play. When he
+    discovered Hodge's _Nature Study and Life_ at age of 11 years he
+    literally slept with the book till he almost knew it by heart.
+    Since age 12 he has given much time to magazines on mechanics
+    and electricity. At 13 he installed a wireless apparatus
+    without other aid than his electrical magazines. He has, for a
+    boy of his age, a rather remarkable understanding of the
+    principles underlying electrical applications. He is known by
+    his playmates as "the boy with a hobby." Stamp collections,
+    butterfly and moth collections (over 70 different varieties),
+    seashore collections, and wireless apparatus all show that the
+    appellation is fully merited. He chooses his hobbies and "rides"
+    them entirely on his own initiative.
+
+
+    _J. S. Boy, age 8-2; mental age 11-4; I Q 138._ Father was a
+    lawyer, parents now dead. Is in high fourth grade. Leads his
+    class. Attractive, healthy, normal-appearing lad. Full of good
+    humor. Is loving and obedient, strongly attached to his foster
+    mother (an aunt). Composes verses and fables for pastime. Here
+    are a couple of verses composed before his eighth birthday. They
+    are reproduced without change of spelling or punctuation:--
+
+        _Christmas_
+
+        Hurrah for Christmas
+        And all it's joy's
+        That come that day
+        For girls and boy's.
+
+
+        _Flowers_
+
+        Flowers in the garden.
+        That is all you see
+        Who likes them best?
+        That's the honey bee.
+
+    J. S. ought to be in the fifth grade, instead of the fourth. He
+    will easily be able to enter college by the age of 15 if he is
+    allowed to make the progress which would be normal to a child of
+    his intelligence. But it is too much to expect that the school
+    will permit this.
+
+
+    _F. McA. Boy, age 10-3; mental age 14-6; I Q 142._ Father a
+    school principal. F. is leading his class of 24 pupils in the
+    high seventh grade. Has received so many extra promotions only
+    because his father insisted that the teachers allow him to try
+    the next grade. The dire consequences which they predicted have
+    never followed. F. is perfectly healthy and one of the most
+    attractive lads the writer has ever seen. He has the normal play
+    instincts, but when not at play he has the dignified bearing of
+    a young prince, although without vanity. His vocabulary is 9000
+    (14 years), and his ability is remarkably even in all
+    directions. F. should easily enter college by the age of 15.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 14. BALL AND FIELD F. McA., AGE 10-3, MENTAL
+    AGE 14-6]
+
+
+    _E. M. Boy, age 6-11; mental age 10; I Q 145._ Learned to read
+    at age of 5 without instruction and shortly afterward had
+    learned from geography maps the capitals of all the States of
+    the Union. Started to school at 7½. Entered the first grade
+    at 9 A.M. and had been promoted to the fourth grade by 3 P.M. of
+    the same day! Has now attended school a half-year and is in the
+    fifth grade, age 7 years, 8 months. Father is on the faculty of
+    a university.
+
+    E. M. is as superior in personal and moral traits as in
+    intelligence. Responsible, sturdy, playful, full of humor,
+    loving, obedient. Health is excellent. Has had no home
+    instruction in school work. His progress has been perfectly
+    natural.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 15. DRAWING DESIGNS FROM MEMORY. E. M.,
+    AGE 6-11; MENTAL AGE 10, I Q 145
+
+    (This performance is satisfactory for year 10)]
+
+The above list of "very superior" children includes only a few of those
+we have tested who belong to this grade of intelligence. Every child in
+the list is so interesting that it is hard to omit any. We have found
+all such children (with one or two exceptions not included here) so
+superior to average children in all sorts of mental and moral traits
+that one is at a loss to understand how the popular superstitions about
+the "queerness" of bright children could have originated or survived.
+Nearly every child we have found with I Q above 140 is the kind one
+feels, before the test is over, one would like to adopt. If the crime of
+kidnaping could ever be forgiven it would be in the case of a child like
+one of these.
+
+GENIUS AND "NEAR" GENIUS. Intelligence tests have not been in use long
+enough to enable us to define genius definitely in terms of I Q. The
+following two cases are offered as among the highest test records of
+which the writer has personal knowledge. It is doubtful whether more
+than one child in 10,000 goes as high as either. One case has been
+reported, however, in which the I Q was not far from 200. Such a
+record, if reliable, is certainly phenomenal.
+
+    _E. F. Russian boy, age 8-5; mental age 13; I Q approximately
+    155._ Mother is a university student apparently of very superior
+    intelligence. E. F. has a sister almost as remarkable as
+    himself. E. F. is in the sixth grade and at the head of his
+    class. Although about four grades advanced beyond his
+    chronological age he is still one grade retarded! He could
+    easily carry seventh-grade work. In all probability E. F. could
+    be made ready for college by the age of 12 years without injury
+    to body or mind. His mother has taken the only sensible course;
+    she has encouraged him without subjecting him to
+    overstimulation.
+
+    E. F. was selected for the test as probably one of the brightest
+    children in a city of a third of a million population. He may
+    not be the brightest in that city, but he is one of the three or
+    four most intelligent the writer has found after a good deal of
+    searching. He is probably equaled by not more than one in
+    several thousand unselected children. How impatiently one waits
+    to see the fruit of such a budding genius!
+
+
+    _B. F. Son of a minister, age 7-8; mental age 12-4; I Q 160._
+    Vocabulary 7000 (12 years). This test was not made by the
+    writer, but by one of his graduate students. The record included
+    the _verbatim_ responses, so that it was easy to verify the
+    scoring. There can be no doubt as to the substantial accuracy
+    of the test. This I Q of 160 is the highest one in the Stanford
+    University records. B. F. has excellent health, normal play
+    interests, and is a favorite among his playfellows. Parents had
+    not thought of him as especially remarkable. He is only in the
+    third grade, and is therefore about three grades below his
+    mental age.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 16. BALL AND FIELD. B. F., AGE 7-8; MENTAL
+    AGE 12-4; I Q 160
+
+    (This is a 12-year performance)]
+
+It is especially noteworthy that not one of the children we have
+described with I Q above 130 has ever had any unusual amount or kind of
+home instruction. In most cases the parents were not aware of their very
+great superiority. Nor can we give the credit to the school or its
+methods. The school has in most cases been a deterrent to their
+progress, rather than a help. These children have been taught in classes
+with average and inferior children, like those described in the first
+part of this chapter. Their high I Q is only an index of their
+extraordinary cerebral endowment. This endowment is for life. There is
+not the remotest probability that any of these children will deteriorate
+to the average level of intelligence with the onset of maturity. Such an
+event would be no less a miracle (barring insanity) than the development
+of an imbecile into a successful lawyer or physician.
+
+IS THE I Q OFTEN MISLEADING? Do the cases described in this chapter give
+a reliable picture as to what one may expect of the various I Q levels?
+Does the I Q furnish anything like a reliable index of an individual's
+general educational possibilities and of his social worth? Are there not
+"feeble-minded geniuses," and are there not children of exceptionally
+high I Q who are nevertheless fools?
+
+We have no hesitation in saying that there is not one case in fifty in
+which there is any serious contradiction between the I Q and the child's
+performances in and out of school. We cannot deny the existence of
+"feeble-minded geniuses," but after a good deal of search we have not
+found one. Occasionally, of course, one finds a feeble-minded person
+who is an expert penman, who draws skillfully, who plays a musical
+instrument tolerably well, or who handles number combinations with
+unusual rapidity; but these are not geniuses; they are not authors,
+artists, musicians, or mathematicians.
+
+As for exceptionally intelligent children who appear feeble-minded, we
+have found but one case, a boy of 10 years with an I Q of about 125.
+This boy, whom we have tested several times and whose development we
+have followed for five years, was once diagnosed by a physician as
+feeble-minded. His behavior among other persons than his familiar
+associates is such as to give this impression. Nothing less than an
+entire chapter would be adequate for a description of this case, which
+is in reality one of disturbed emotional and social development with
+superior intelligence.
+
+It should be emphasized, however, that what we have said about the
+significance of various I Q's holds only for the I Q's secured by the
+use of the Stanford revision. As we have shown elsewhere (p. 62 _ff._)
+the I Q yielded by other versions of the Binet tests are often so
+inaccurate as to be misleading.
+
+We have not found a single child who tested between 70 and 80 I Q by the
+Stanford revision who was able to do satisfactory school work in the
+grade where he belonged by chronological age. Such children are usually
+from two to three grades retarded by the age of 12 years. On the other
+hand, the child with an I Q of 120 or above is almost never found below
+the grade for his chronological age, and occasionally he is one or two
+grades above. Wherever located, his school work is so superior as to
+suggest strongly the desirability of extra promotions. Those who test
+between 96 and 105 are almost never more than one grade above or below
+where they belong by chronological age, and even the small displacement
+of one year is usually determined by illness, age of beginning school,
+etc.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VII
+
+RELIABILITY OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD
+
+
+GENERAL VALUE OF THE METHOD. In a former chapter we have noted certain
+imperfections of the scale devised by Binet and Simon; namely, that many
+of the tests were not correctly located, that the choice of tests was in
+a few cases unsatisfactory, that the directions for giving and scoring
+the tests were sometimes too indefinite, and that the upper and lower
+ranges of the scale especially stood in need of extensions and
+corrections. All of these faults have been quite generally admitted. The
+method itself, however, after being put to the test by psychologists of
+all countries and of all faiths, by the skeptical as well as the
+friendly, has amply demonstrated its value. The agreement on this point
+is as complete as it is regarding the scale's imperfections.
+
+The following quotations from prominent psychologists who have studied
+the method will serve to show how it is regarded by those most entitled
+to an opinion:--
+
+    There can be no question about the fact that the Binet-Simon
+    tests do not make half as frequent or half as great errors in
+    the mental ages (of feeble-minded children) as are included in
+    gradings based on careful, prolonged general observation by
+    experienced observers.[30]
+
+    [30] Dr. F. Kuhlmann: "The Binet-Simon Tests of Intelligence in Grading
+    Feeble-Minded Children," in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_ (1912),
+    p. 189.
+
+    All of the different authors who have made these researches
+    (with Binet's method) are in a general way unanimous in
+    recognizing that the principle of the scale is extremely
+    fortunate, and all believe that it offers the basis of a most
+    useful method for the examination of intelligence.[31]
+
+    [31] Dr. Otto Bobertag: "L'échelle métrique de l'intelligence," in
+    _L'Année Psychologique_ (1912), p. 272.
+
+    It serves as a relatively simple and speedy method of securing,
+    by means accessible to every one, a true insight into the
+    average level of ability of a child between 3 and 15 years of
+    age.[32]
+
+    [32] Dr. Ernest Meumann: _Experimentelle Pädagogik_ (1913), vol. II,
+    p. 277.
+
+    That, despite the differences in race and language, despite the
+    divergences in school organization and in methods of
+    instruction, there should be so decided agreement in the
+    reactions of the children--is, in my opinion, the best
+    vindication of the _principle_ of the tests that one could
+    imagine, because this agreement demonstrates that _the tests do
+    actually reach and discover the general developmental conditions
+    of intelligence_ (so far as these are operative in
+    public-school children of the present cultural epoch), and not
+    mere fragments of knowledge and attainments acquired by
+    chance.[33]
+
+    [33] Dr. W. Stern: _The Psychological Methods of Testing Intelligence._
+    Translated by Whipple (1913), p. 49.
+
+    It is without doubt the most satisfactory and accurate method of
+    determining a child's intelligence that we have, and so far
+    superior to everything else which has been proposed that as yet
+    there is nothing else to be considered.[34]
+
+    [34] Dr. H. H. Goddard: "The Binet Measuring Scale of
+    Intelligence; What it is and How it is to be Used," in _The
+    Training School Bulletin_ (1912).
+
+The value of the method lies both in the swiftness and the accuracy with
+which it works. One who knows how to apply the tests correctly and who
+is experienced in the psychological interpretation of responses can in
+forty minutes arrive at a more accurate judgment as to a subject's
+intelligence than would be possible without the tests after months or
+even years of close observation. The reasons for this have already been
+set forth.[35] The difference is something like that between measuring a
+person's height with a yardstick and estimating it by guess. That this
+is not an unfair statement of the case is well shown by the following
+candid confession by a psychologist who tested 200 juvenile delinquents
+brought before Judge Lindsey's court:--
+
+[35] See this volume, p. 24 _ff._
+
+    As a matter of interest I estimated the mental ages of 150 of my
+    subjects before testing them. In 54 of the estimates the error
+    was not more than one year in either direction; 70 of the
+    subjects were estimated too high, the average error being
+    2 years and 7 months; 26 of the subjects were estimated too low,
+    the average error being 2 years and 2 months. _These figures
+    would seem to imply that an estimate with nothing to support it
+    is wholly unreliable, more especially as many of the estimates
+    were four or five years wide of the mark._[36]
+
+    [36] C. S. Bluemel: "Binet Tests on 200 Delinquents," in _The Training
+    School Bulletin_ (1915), p. 192. (Italics inserted.)
+
+Criticisms of the Binet method have also been frequently voiced, but
+chiefly by persons who have had little experience with it or by those
+whose scientific training hardly justifies an opinion. It cannot be too
+strongly emphasized that eminence in law, medicine, education, or any
+other profession does not of itself enable any one to pass judgment on
+the validity of a psychological method.
+
+DEPENDENCE OF THE SCALE'S RELIABILITY ON THE TRAINING OF THE EXAMINER.
+On this point two radically different opinions have been urged. On the
+one hand, some have insisted that the results of a test made by other
+than a thoroughly trained psychologist are absolutely worthless. At the
+opposite extreme are a few who seem to think that any teacher or
+physician can secure perfectly valid results after a few hours'
+acquaintance with the tests.
+
+The dispute is one which cannot be settled by the assertion of opinion,
+and, unfortunately, thoroughgoing investigations have not yet been made
+as to the frequency and extent of errors made by untrained or partially
+trained examiners. The only study of this kind which has so far been
+reported is the following:--[37]
+
+[37] Samuel C. Kohs: "The Binet Test and the Training of Teachers," in
+_The Training School Bulletin_ (1914), pp. 113-17.
+
+Dr. Kohs gives the results of tests made by 58 inexperienced teachers
+who were taking a summer course in the Training School at Vineland. The
+class met three times a week for instruction in the use of the Binet
+scale. During the first week the students listened to three lectures by
+Dr. Goddard. The second week was given over to demonstration testing.
+Each student saw four children tested, and attended two discussion
+periods of an hour each. During the third, fourth, and fifth weeks each
+student tested one child per week, and observed the testing of two
+others. The student was allowed to carry the test through in his own
+way, but received criticism after it was finished. Twice a week
+Dr. Goddard spent an hour with the class, discussing experimental
+procedure. The subjects tested were feeble-minded children whose exact
+mental ages were already known, and for this reason it was possible to
+check up the accuracy of each student's work.
+
+Kohs's table of results for the trial testing of the 174 children
+showed:--
+
+  (1) That 50 per cent of the work was as exact as any one in the
+      laboratory could make it;
+
+  (2) That in an additional 38 per cent the results were within
+      three fifths of a year of being exact;
+
+  (3) That nearly 90 per cent of the work of the summer students was
+      sufficiently accurate for all practical purposes;
+
+  (4) That the records improved during the brief training so that
+      during the third week only one test missed the real mental age
+      by as much as a year.
+
+Since hardly any of these students had had any previous experience with
+the Binet tests, Dr. Kohs seems to be entirely justified in his
+conclusion that it is possible, in the brief period of six weeks, to
+teach people to use the tests with a reasonable degree of accuracy.
+
+What shall we say of the teacher or of the physician who has not even
+had this amount of instruction? The writer's experience forces him to
+agree with Binet and with Dr. Goddard, that any one with intelligence
+enough to be a teacher, and who is willing to devote conscientious study
+to the mastery of the technique, can use the scale accurately enough to
+get a better idea of a child's mental endowment than he could possibly
+get in any other way. It is necessary, however, for the untrained person
+to recognize his own lack of experience, and in no case would it be
+justifiable to base important action or scientific conclusions upon the
+results of the inexpert examiner. As Binet himself repeatedly insisted,
+the method is not absolutely mechanical, and cannot be made so by
+elaboration of instructions.
+
+It is sometimes held that the examination and classification of backward
+children for special instruction should be carried out by the school
+physicians. The fact is, however, that there is nothing in the
+physician's training to give him any advantage over the ordinary teacher
+in the use of the Binet tests. Because of her more intimate knowledge of
+children and because of her superior tact and adaptability, the average
+teacher is perhaps better equipped than the average physician to give
+intelligence tests.
+
+Finally, it should be emphasized that whatever the previous training or
+experience of the examiner may have been, his ability to adjust to the
+child's personality and his willingness to follow conscientiously the
+directions for giving the tests are important factors in his equipment.
+
+INFLUENCE OF THE SUBJECT'S ATTITUDE. One continually meets such queries
+as, "How do you know the subject did his best?" "Possibly the child was
+nervous or frightened," or, "Perhaps incorrect answers were purposely
+given." All such objections may be disposed of by saying that the
+competent examiner can easily control the experiment in such a way that
+embarrassment is soon replaced by self-confidence, and in such a way
+that effort is kept at its maximum. As for mischievous deception, it
+would be a poor clinicist who could not recognize and deal with the
+little that is likely to arise.
+
+Cautions regarding embarrassment, fatigue, fright, illness, etc. are
+given in Chapter IX. Most of the errors which have been reported along
+this line are such as can nearly always be avoided by ordinary prudence,
+coupled with a little power of observation.[38] We must not charge the
+mistakes of untrained and indiscreet examiners against the validity of
+the method itself.
+
+[38] See, for example, the rather ludicrous "errors" of the Binet method
+reported in _The Psychological Clinic_ for 1915, pp. 140 _ff._ and
+167 _ff._
+
+It is possibly true that even if the examiner is tactful and prudent an
+unfavorable attitude on the part of the subject may occasionally affect
+the results of a test to some extent, but it ought not seriously to
+invalidate one examination out of five hundred. The greatest danger is
+in the case of a young subject who has been recently arrested and
+brought before a court. Even here a little common sense and scientific
+insight should enable one to guard against a mistaken diagnosis.
+
+THE INFLUENCE OF COACHING. It might be supposed that after the
+intelligence scale had been used with a few pupils in a given school all
+of their fellows would soon be apprised of the nature of the tests, and
+so learn the correct responses. Experience shows, however, that there is
+little likelihood of such influence except in the case of a small
+minority of the tests. Experiments in the psychology of testimony have
+demonstrated that children's ability to report upon a complex set of
+experiences is astonishingly weak. In testing with the Stanford revision
+a child is ordinarily given from twenty-four to thirty different tests,
+many of which are made up of three or more items. Of the total forty to
+fifty items the child is ordinarily able to report but few, and these
+not always correctly.
+
+Such tests as memory for sentences and digits, drawing the square and
+diamond, reproducing the designs from memory, comparing weights and
+lines, describing and interpreting pictures, æsthetic comparison,
+vocabulary, dissected sentences, fables, reading for memories, finding
+differences and similarities, arithmetical reasoning, and the form-board
+test, are hardly subject to report at all. While almost any of the other
+tests might, theoretically, be communicated, there is little danger that
+many of them will be. It is assumed, of course, that the examiner will
+take proper precautions to prevent any of his blanks or other materials
+from falling into the hands of those who are to be examined.
+
+The following tests are the ones most subject to the influence of
+coaching: Ball and field, giving date, naming sixty words, finding
+rhymes, changing hands of clock, comprehension of physical relations,
+"induction test," and "ingenuity test."
+
+In several instances we have interviewed children an hour or two after
+they had taken the examination, in order to find out how many of the
+tests they could recall. A boy of 4 years, after repeated questioning,
+could only say: "He showed me some pictures. He had a knife and a penny.
+He told me to shut the door." A girl of 3 years could recall nothing
+whatever that was intelligible.
+
+An 8-year-old boy said: "He made me tie a knot. He asked me about a ship
+and an auto. He wanted me to count backwards. He made me say over some
+things, numbers and things."
+
+A boy of 12 years said: "He told me to say all the words I could think
+of. He said some foolish things and asked what was foolish [he could not
+repeat a single absurdity]. I had to put some blocks together. I had to
+do some problems in arithmetic [he could not repeat a single problem].
+He read some fables to me. [Asked about the fables he was able to recall
+only part of one, that of the fox and the crow.] He showed me the
+picture of a field and wanted to know how to find a ball."
+
+It is evident from the above samples of report that the danger of
+coaching increases considerably with the age of the children concerned.
+With young subjects the danger is hardly present at all; with children
+of the upper-grammar grades, in the high school, and most of all in
+prisons and reformatories, it must be taken into account. Alternative
+tests may sometimes be used to advantage when there is evidence of
+coaching on any of the regular tests. It would be desirable to have two
+or three additional scales which could be used interchangeably with the
+Binet-Simon.
+
+RELIABILITY OF REPEATED TESTS. Will the same tests give consistent
+results when used repeatedly with the same subject? In general we
+may say that they do. Something depends, however, on the age and
+intelligence of the subject and on the time interval between the
+examinations.
+
+Goddard proves that feeble-minded individuals whose intelligence has
+reached its full development continue to test at exactly the same mental
+age by the Binet scale, year after year. In their case, familiarity with
+the tests does not in the least improve the responses. At each retesting
+the responses given at previous examinations are repeated with only the
+most trivial variations. Of 352 feeble-minded children tested at
+Vineland, three years in succession, 109 gave absolutely no variation,
+232 showed a variation of not more than two fifths of a year, while 22
+gained as much as one year in the three tests. The latter, presumably,
+were younger children whose intelligence was still developing.
+
+Goddard has also tested 464 public-school children for three successive
+years. Approximately half of these showed normal progress or more in
+mental age, while most of the remainder showed somewhat less than normal
+progress.
+
+Bobertag's retesting of 83 normal children after an interval of
+a year gave results entirely in harmony with those of Goddard.
+The reapplication of the tests showed absolutely no influence of
+familiarity, the correlation of the two tests being almost perfect
+(.95). Those who tested "at age" in the first test had advanced, on
+the average, exactly one year. Those who tested _plus_ in the first
+test advanced in the twelve months about a year and a quarter, as we
+should expect those to do whose mental development is accelerated.
+Correspondingly, those who tested _minus_ at the first test advanced
+only about three fourths of a year in mental age during the
+interval.[39]
+
+[39] Otto Bobertag: "Ueber Intelligenz Prüfungen," in _Zeitsch. f.
+Angew. Psychol._ (1912), p. 521 _ff._
+
+Our own results with a mixed group of normal, superior, dull and
+feeble-minded children agree fully with the above findings. In this case
+the two tests were separated by an interval of two to four years, and
+the correlation between their results was practically perfect. The
+average difference between the I Q obtained in the second test and that
+obtained in the first was only 4 per cent, and the greatest difference
+found was only 8 per cent.[40]
+
+[40] See _The Stanford Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Scale
+for Measuring Intelligence_. (Warwick and York, 1916.)
+
+The repetition of the test at shorter intervals will perhaps affect the
+result somewhat more, but the influence is much less than one might
+expect. The writer has tested, at intervals of only a few days to a few
+weeks, 14 backward children of 12 to 18 years, and 8 normal children of
+5 to 13 years. The backward children showed an average improvement in
+the second test of about two months in mental age, the normal children
+an average improvement of little more than three months. No child varied
+in the second test more than half a year from the mental age first
+secured. On the whole, normal children profit more from the experience
+of a previous test than do the backward and feeble-minded.
+
+Berry tested 45 normal children and 50 defectives with the Binet 1908
+and 1911 scales at brief intervals. The author does not state which
+scale was applied first, but the mental ages secured by the two scales
+were practically the same when allowance was made for the slightly
+greater difficulty of the 1911 series of tests.[41]
+
+[41] Charles Scott Berry: "A Comparison of the Binet Tests of 1908 and
+1911," in _Journal of Educational Psychology_ (1912), pp. 444-51.
+
+We may conclude, therefore, that while it would probably be desirable
+to have one or more additional scales for alternative use in testing the
+same children at very brief intervals, the same scale may be used for
+repeated tests at intervals of a year or more with little danger of
+serious inaccuracy. Moreover, results like those set forth above are
+important evidence as to the validity of the test method.
+
+INFLUENCE OF SOCIAL AND EDUCATIONAL ADVANTAGES. The criticism has often
+been made that the responses to many of the tests are so much subject to
+the influence of school and home environment as seriously to invalidate
+the scale as a whole. Some of the tests most often named in this
+connection are the following: Giving age and sex; naming common objects,
+colors, and coins; giving the value of stamps; giving date; naming the
+months of the year and the days of the week; distinguishing forenoon and
+afternoon; counting; making change; reading for memories; naming sixty
+words; giving definitions; finding rhymes; and constructing a sentence
+containing three given words.
+
+It has in fact been found wherever comparisons have been made that
+children of superior social status yield a higher average mental age
+than children of the laboring classes. The results of Decroly and Degand
+and of Meumann, Stern, and Binet himself may be referred to in this
+connection. In the case of the Stanford investigation, also, it was
+found that when the unselected school children were grouped in three
+classes according to social status (superior, average, and inferior),
+the average I Q for the superior social group was 107, and that of the
+inferior social group 93. This is equivalent to a difference of one year
+in mental age with 7-year-olds, and to a difference of two years with
+14-year-olds.
+
+However, the common opinion that the child from a cultured home does
+better in tests solely by reason of his superior home advantages is an
+entirely gratuitous assumption. Practically all of the investigations
+which have been made of the influence of nature and nurture on mental
+performance agree in attributing far more to original endowment than to
+environments. Common observation would itself suggest that the social
+class to which the family belongs depends less on chance than on the
+parents' native qualities of intellect and character.
+
+The results of five separate and distinct lines of inquiry based on the
+Stanford data agree in supporting the conclusion that the children of
+successful and cultured parents test higher than children from wretched
+and ignorant homes for the simple reason that their heredity is better.
+The results of this investigation are set forth in full elsewhere.[42]
+
+[42] See _The Stanford Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon
+Measuring Scale of Intelligence_. (Warwick and York, 1916)
+
+It would, of course, be going too far to deny all possibility of
+environmental conditions affecting the result of an intelligence test.
+Certainly no one would expect that a child reared in a cage and denied
+all intercourse with other human beings could by any system of mental
+measurement test up to the level of normal children. There is, however,
+no reason to believe that _ordinary_ differences in social environment
+(apart from heredity), differences such as those obtaining among
+unselected children attending approximately the same general type of
+school in a civilized community, affects to any great extent the
+validity of the scale.
+
+A crucial experiment would be to take a large number of very young
+children of the lower classes and, after placing them in the most
+favorable environment obtainable, to compare their later mental
+development with that of children born into the best homes. No extensive
+study of this kind has been made, but the writer has tested twenty
+orphanage children who, for the most part, had come from very inferior
+homes. They had been in a well-conducted orphanage for from two to
+several years, and had enjoyed during that time the advantages of an
+excellent village school. Nevertheless, all but three tested below
+average, ranging from 75 to 90 I Q.
+
+The impotence of school instruction to neutralize individual differences
+in native endowment will be evident to any one who follows the school
+career of backward children. The children who are seriously retarded in
+school are not normal, and cannot be made normal by any refinement of
+educational method. As a rule, the longer the inferior child attends
+school, the more evident his inferiority becomes. It would hardly be
+reasonable, therefore, to expect that a little incidental instruction in
+the home would weigh very heavily against these same native differences
+in endowment. Cases like the following show conclusively that it does
+not:--
+
+    X is the son of unusually intelligent and well-educated parents.
+    The home is everything one would expect of people of scholarly
+    pursuits and cultivated tastes. But X has always been
+    irresponsible, troublesome, childish, and queer. He learned to
+    walk at 2 years, to talk at 3, and has always been delicate and
+    nervous. When brought for examination he was 8 years old. He had
+    twice attempted school work, but could accomplish nothing and
+    was withdrawn. His play-life was not normal, and other children,
+    younger than himself, abused and tormented him. The Binet tests
+    gave an I Q of approximately 75; that is, the retardation
+    amounted to about two years. The child was examined again three
+    years later. At that time, after attending school two years, he
+    had recently completed the first grade. This time the I Q was
+    73. Strange to say, the mother is encouraged and hopeful because
+    she sees that her boy is learning to read. She does not seem to
+    realize that at his age he ought to be within three years of
+    entering high school.
+
+    The forty-minute test had told more about the mental ability of
+    this boy than the intelligent mother had been able to learn in
+    eleven years of daily and hourly observation. For X is
+    feeble-minded; he will never complete the grammar school; he
+    will never be an efficient worker or a responsible citizen.
+
+    Let us change the picture. Z is a bright-eyed, dark-skinned girl
+    of 9 years. She is dark-skinned because her father is a mixture
+    of Indian and Spanish. The mother is of Irish descent. With her
+    strangely mated parents and two brothers she lives in a dirty,
+    cramped, and poorly furnished house in the country. The parents
+    are illiterate, and the brothers are retarded and dull, though
+    not feeble-minded.
+
+    It is Z's turn to be tested. I inquire the name. It is familiar,
+    for I have already tested the two stupid brothers. I also know
+    her ignorant parents and the miserable cabin in which she lives.
+    The examination begins with the 8-year tests. The responses are
+    quick and accurate. We proceed to the 9-year group. There is no
+    failure, and there is but one minor error. Successes and
+    failures alternate for a while until the latter prevail. Z has
+    tested at 11 years. In spite of her wretched home, she is
+    mentally advanced nearly 25 per cent. By the vocabulary test she
+    is credited with a knowledge of nearly 6000 words, or nearly
+    four times as many as X, the boy of cultured home and scholarly
+    parents, had learned by the age of 8 years.
+
+    Five years have passed. When given the test, Z was in the fourth
+    grade and, as we have already stated, 9 years of age. As a
+    result of the test she was transferred to the fifth grade. Later
+    she skipped again and at the age of 14 is a successful student
+    in the second year of high school. To assay her intelligence and
+    determine its quality was a task of forty-five minutes.
+
+The above cases, each of which could be paralleled by many others which
+we have found, will serve to illustrate the fact that exceptionally
+superior endowment is discoverable by the tests, however unfavorable the
+home from which it comes, and that inferior endowment cannot be
+normalized by all the advantages of the most cultured home. Quoting
+again from Stern, "The tests actually reach and discover the general
+developmental conditions of intelligence, and not mere fragments of
+knowledge and attainments acquired by chance."
+
+
+
+
+PART II
+
+GUIDE FOR THE USE OF THE STANFORD REVISION AND EXTENSION
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VIII
+
+GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
+
+
+NECESSITY OF SECURING ATTENTION AND EFFORT. The child's intelligence is
+to be judged by his success in the performance of certain tasks. These
+tasks may appear to the examiner to be very easy, indeed; but we must
+bear in mind that they are often anything but easy for the child. Real
+effort and attention are necessary for his success, and occasionally
+even his best efforts fall short of the desired result. If the tests are
+to display the child's real intellectual ability it will be necessary,
+therefore, to avoid as nearly as possible every disturbing factor which
+would divide his attention or in any other way injure the quality of
+his responses. To insure this it will be necessary to consider somewhat
+in detail a number of factors which influence effort, such as degree of
+quiet, the nature of surroundings, presence or absence of others, means
+of gaining the child's confidence, the avoidance of embarrassment,
+fatigue, etc.
+
+One should not expect, however, to secure an absolutely equal degree of
+attention from all subjects. The power to give sustained attention to a
+difficult task is characteristically weak in dull and feeble-minded
+children. What we should labor to secure is the maximum attention of
+which the child is capable, and if this is unsatisfactory without
+external cause, we are to regard the fact as symptomatic of inferior
+mental ability, not as an extenuating factor or an excuse for lack of
+success in the tests.
+
+Attention, of course, cannot be normal if any acute physical or mental
+disturbance is present. Toothache, headache, earache, nausea, fever,
+cold, etc., all render the test inadvisable. The same is true of mental
+anxiety or fear, as in the case of the child who has just been arrested
+and brought before the court.
+
+QUIET AND SECLUSION. The tests should be conducted in a quiet room,
+located where the noises of the street and other outside distractions
+cannot enter. A reasonably small room is better than a very large one,
+because it is more homelike. The furnishings of the room should be
+simple. A table and two chairs are sufficient. If the room contains a
+number of unfamiliar objects, such as psychological apparatus, pictures
+on the walls, etc., the attention of the child is likely to be drawn
+away from the tasks which he is given to do. The halls and corridors
+which it is sometimes necessary to use in testing school children are
+usually noisy, cold, or otherwise objectionable.
+
+PRESENCE OF OTHERS. A still more disturbing influence is the presence of
+other persons. Generally speaking, if accurate results are to be secured
+it is not permissible to have any auditor, besides possibly an
+assistant to record the responses. Even the assistant, however quiet and
+unobtrusive, is sometimes a disturbing element. Though something of a
+convenience, the assistant is by no means necessary, after the examiner
+has thoroughly mastered the procedure of the tests and has acquired some
+skill in the use of abbreviations in recording the answers. If an
+assistant or any other person is present, he should be seated somewhat
+behind the child, not too close, and should take no notice of the child
+either when he enters the room or at any time during the examination.
+
+At all events, the presence of parent, teacher, school principal, or
+governess is to be avoided. Contrary to what one might expect, these
+distract the child much more than a strange personality would do. Their
+critical attitude toward the child's performance is very likely to cause
+embarrassment. If the child is alone with the examiner, he is more at
+ease from the mere fact that he does not feel that there is a reputation
+to sustain. The praise so lavishly bestowed upon him by the friendly and
+sympathetic examiner lends to the same effect.
+
+As Binet emphasizes, if the presence of others cannot be avoided, it
+is at least necessary to require of them absolute silence. Parents,
+and sometimes teachers, have an almost irrepressible tendency to
+interrupt the examination with excuses for the child's failures and
+with disturbing explanations which are likely to aid the child in
+comprehending the required task. Without the least intention of doing
+so, they sometimes practically tell the child how to respond. Parents,
+especially, cannot refrain from scolding the child or showing impatience
+when his answers do not come up to expectation. This, of course,
+endangers the child's success still further.
+
+The psychologist is not surprised at such conduct. It would be foolish
+to expect average parents, even apart from their bias in the particular
+case at hand, to adopt the scientific attitude of the trained examiner.
+Since we cannot in a few moments at our disposal make them over into
+psychologists, our only recourse is to deal with them by exclusion.
+
+This is not to say that it is impossible to test a child satisfactorily
+in the presence of others. If the examiner is experienced, and if the
+child is not timid, it is sometimes possible to make a successful test
+in the presence of quite a number of auditors, provided they remain
+silent, refrain from staring, and otherwise conduct themselves with
+discretion. But not even the veteran examiner can always be sure of the
+outcome in demonstration testing.
+
+GETTING INTO "RAPPORT." The examiner's first task is to win the
+confidence of the child and overcome his timidity. Unless _rapport_ has
+first been established, the results of the first tests given are likely
+to be misleading. The time and effort necessary for accomplishing this
+are variable factors, depending upon the personality of both the
+examiner and the subject. In a majority of cases from three to five
+minutes should be sufficient, but in a few cases somewhat more time is
+necessary.
+
+The writer has found that when a strange child is brought to the clinic
+for examination, it is advantageous to go out of doors with him for a
+little walk around the university buildings. It is usually possible to
+return from such a stroll in a few minutes, with the child chattering
+away as though to an old friend. Another approach is to begin by showing
+the child some interesting object, such as a toy, or a form-board, or
+pictures not used in the test. The only danger in this method is that
+the child is likely to find the object so interesting that he may not be
+willing to abandon it for the tests, or that his mind will keep
+reverting to it during the examination.
+
+Still another method is to give the child his seat as soon as he is
+ushered into the room, and, after a word of greeting, which must be
+spoken in a kindly tone but without gushiness, to open up a conversation
+about matters likely to be of interest. The weather, place of residence,
+pets, sports, games, toys, travels, current events, etc., are suitable
+topics if rightly employed. When the child has begun to express himself
+without timidity and it is clear that his confidence has been gained,
+one may proceed, as though in continuance of the conversation, to
+inquire the name, age, and school grade. The examiner notes these down
+in the appropriate blanks, rather unconcernedly, at the same time
+complimenting the child (unless it is clearly a case of serious
+retardation) on the fine progress he has made with his studies.
+
+KEEPING THE CHILD ENCOURAGED. Nothing contributes more to a satisfactory
+_rapport_ than praise of the child's efforts. Under no circumstances
+should the examiner permit himself to show displeasure at a response,
+however absurd it may be. In general, the poorer the response, the
+better satisfied one should appear to be with it. An error is always to
+be passed by without comment, unless it is painfully evident to the
+child himself, in which case the examiner will do well to make some
+excuse for it; e.g., "You are not quite old enough to answer questions
+like that one; but, never mind, you are doing beautifully," etc.
+Exclamations like "fine!" "splendid!" etc., should be used lavishly.
+Almost any innocent deception is permissible which keeps the child
+interested, confident, and at his best level of effort. The examination
+should begin with tests that are fairly easy, in order to give the child
+a little experience with success before the more difficult tests are
+reached.
+
+THE IMPORTANCE OF TACT. It goes without saying that children's
+personalities are not so uniform and simple that we can adhere always to
+a single stereotyped procedure in working our way into their good
+graces. Suggestions like the above have their value, but, like rules of
+etiquette, they must be supported by the tact which comes of intuition
+and cannot be taught. The address which flatters and pleases one child
+may excite disgust in another. The examiner must scent the situation and
+adapt his method to it. One child is timid and embarrassed; another may
+think his mental powers are under suspicion and so react with sullen
+obstinacy; a third may be in an angry mood as a result of a recent
+playground quarrel. Situations like these are, of course, exceptional,
+but in any case it is necessary to create in the child a certain mood,
+or indefinable attitude of mind, before the test begins.
+
+PERSONALITY OF THE EXAMINER. Doubtless there are persons so lacking in
+personal adaptability that success in this kind of work would be for
+them impossible. The wooden, mechanical, matter-of-fact and unresponsive
+personality is as much out of place in the psychological clinic as the
+traditional bull in the china shop. It would make an interesting study
+for some one to investigate, by exact methods, the influence on test
+results of the personality of different examiners who have been equally
+trained in the methods to be employed and who are equally conscientious
+in applying them according to rules.
+
+On the whole, differences of this kind are probably not very great among
+experienced and reasonably competent examiners. Adaptability grows with
+experience and with increase of self-confidence. After a few score tests
+there should be no serious failure from inability to get into _rapport_
+with the child. Even in those rare cases where the child breaks down and
+cries from timidity, or perhaps refuses to answer out of embarrassment,
+the difficulty can be overcome by sufficient tact so that the
+examination may proceed as though nothing had happened.
+
+If the examiner has the proper psychological and personal equipment, the
+testing of twenty or thirty children forms a fairly satisfactory
+apprenticeship. Without psychological training, no amount of experience
+will guarantee absolute accuracy of the results.
+
+THE AVOIDANCE OF FATIGUE. Against the validity of intelligence tests it
+is often argued that the result of an examination depends a great deal
+on the time of day when it is made, whether in the morning hours when
+the mind is at its best, or in the afternoon when it is supposedly
+fatigued. Although no very extensive investigation has been made of this
+influence, there is no evidence that the ordinary fatigue incident to
+school work injures the child's performance appreciably. Our tests of
+1000 children showed no inferiority of results secured from 1 to 4 P.M.,
+as compared with tests made from 9 to 12 A.M.
+
+An explanation for this is not hard to find. Although school work causes
+fatigue, in the sense that a part of the child's available supply of
+mental energy is used up, there is always a reserve of energy sufficient
+to carry the child through a thirty-to fifty-minute test. The fact that
+the required tasks are novel and interesting to a high degree insures
+that the reserve energy will really be brought into play. This
+principle, of course, has its natural limits. The examiner would avoid
+testing a child who was exhausted either from work or play, or a child
+who was noticeably sleepy.
+
+DURATION OF THE EXAMINATION. About the only danger of fatigue lies in
+making the examination too long. Young children show symptoms of
+weariness much more quickly than older children, and it is therefore
+fortunate that not so much time is needed for testing them. The
+following allowances of time will usually be found sufficient:--
+
+    Children  3-5 years old         25-30 minutes
+        "     6-8     "   "         30-40    "
+        "     9-12    "   "         40-50    "
+        "    13-15    "   "         50-60    "
+    Adults                          60-90    "
+
+This allowance ordinarily includes the time necessary for getting into
+_rapport_ with the child, in addition to that actually consumed in the
+tests. But the examiner need not expect to hold fast to any schedule.
+Some subjects respond in a lively manner, others are exasperatingly
+slow. It is more often the mentally retarded child who answers slowly,
+but exceptions to this rule are not uncommon. One 8-year-old boy
+examined by the writer answered so hesitatingly that it required two
+sittings of nearly an hour each to complete the test. The result,
+however, showed a mental age of 11½ years, or an I Q of 143.
+
+It is permissible to hurry the child by an occasional "that's fine; now,
+quickly," etc., but in doing this caution must be exercised, or the
+child's mental process may be blocked. The appearance of nagging must be
+carefully avoided. If the test goes so slowly that it cannot be
+completed in the above limits of time, it is usually best to stop and
+complete the examination at another time. When this is not possible, it
+is advisable to take a ten-minute intermission and a little walk out of
+doors.
+
+Time can be saved by having all the necessary materials close at hand
+and conveniently arranged. The coins should be kept in a separate purse,
+and the pictures, colors, stamps, and designs for drawing should be
+mounted on stiff cardboard which may be punched and kept in a notebook
+cover. The series of sentences, digits, comprehension questions, fables,
+etc., should either be mounted in similar fashion, or else printed in
+full on the record sheets used in the tests. The latter is more
+convenient.[43] All other materials should be kept where they will not
+have to be hunted for.
+
+[43] Examiners will find it a great convenience to use the record
+booklet which has been specially devised for testing with the Stanford
+revision. It contains all the necessary printed material, including
+digits, sentences, absurdities, fables, the vocabulary list, the reading
+selection, the square and diamond for copying, etc., and in addition
+gives with each test the standard for scoring. It is so arranged as to
+afford ample room for a _verbatim_ record of all the child's responses,
+and contains other features calculated to make testing easy and
+accurate. Regarding purchasing of supplies see p. 141.
+
+Besides saving valuable time, a little methodical foresight of this kind
+adds to the success of the test. If the child is kept waiting, the test
+loses its interest and attention strays. See to it, if possible, that no
+lull occurs in the performance.
+
+Inexperienced examiners sometimes waste time foolishly by stopping to
+instruct the child on his failures. This is doubly bad, for besides
+losing time it makes the child conscious of the imperfection of his
+responses and creates embarrassment. Adhere to the purpose of the test,
+which is to ascertain the child's intellectual level, not to instruct
+him.
+
+DESIRABLE RANGE OF TESTING. There are two considerations here of equal
+importance. It is necessary to make the examination thorough, but in the
+pursuit of thoroughness we must be careful not to produce fatigue or
+ennui. Unless there is reason to suspect mental retardation, it is
+usually best to begin with the group of tests just below the child's
+age. However, if there is a failure in the tests of that group, it is
+necessary to go back and try all the tests of the previous group. In
+like manner the examination should be carried up the scale, until a test
+group has been found in which all the tests are failed.
+
+It must be admitted, however, that because of time limitations and
+fatigue, it is not always practicable to adhere to this ideal of
+thoroughness. In testing normal children, little error will result if we
+go back no farther than the year which yielded only one failure, and if
+we stop with the year in which there was only one success. _This is the
+lowest permissible limit of thoroughness._ Defectives are more uneven
+mentally than normal children, and therefore scatter their successes and
+failures over a wider range. With such subjects it is absolutely
+imperative that the test be thorough.
+
+In the case of defectives it is sometimes necessary to begin with random
+testing, until a rough idea is gained of the mental level. But the
+skilled observer soon becomes able to utilize symptoms in the child's
+conversation and conduct and to dispense with most of this preliminary
+exploration.
+
+ORDER OF GIVING THE TESTS. The child's efforts in the tests are
+sometimes markedly influenced by the order in which they are given. If
+language tests or memory tests are given first, the child is likely to
+be embarrassed. More suitable to begin with are those which test
+knowledge or judgment about objective things, such as the pictures,
+weights, stamps, bow-knot, colors, coins, counting pennies, number
+of fingers, right and left, time orientation, ball and field,
+paper-folding, etc. Tests like naming sixty words, finding rhymes,
+giving differences or similarities, making sentences, repeating
+sentences, and drawing are especially unsuitable because they tend to
+provoke self-consciousness.
+
+The tests as arranged in this revision are in the order which it is
+usually best to follow, but one should not hesitate to depart from the
+order given when it seems best in a given case to do so. It is necessary
+to be constantly alert so that when the child shows a tendency to balk
+at a given type of test, such as those of memory, language, numbers,
+drawing, "comprehension," etc., the work can be shifted to more
+agreeable tasks. When the child is at his ease again, it is usually
+possible to return to the troublesome tests with better success. In the
+case of 8-year-old D. C., who is a speech defective but otherwise above
+normal, it was quite impossible at the first sitting to give such tests
+as sentence-making, naming sixty words, reading, repeating sentences,
+giving definitions, etc.; at each test of this type the child's voice
+broke and he was ready to cry, due, no doubt, to sensitiveness regarding
+his speech defect. Others do everything willingly except the drawing and
+copying. The younger children sometimes refuse to repeat the sentences
+or digits. In all such cases it is best to pass on to something else.
+After a few minutes the rejected task may be done willingly.
+
+COAXING TO BE AVOIDED. Although we should always encourage the child to
+believe that he can answer correctly, if he will only try, we must avoid
+the common practice of dragging out responses by too much urging and
+coaxing. The sympathies of the examiner tend to lead him into the habit
+of repeating and explaining the question if the child does not answer
+promptly. This is nearly always a mistake, for the question is one which
+should be understood. Besides, explanations and coaxing are too often
+equivalent to answering the question for the child. It is almost
+impossible to impress this danger sufficiently upon the untrained
+examiner. One who is not familiar with the psychology of suggestion may
+put the answer in the child's mouth without suspecting what he is doing.
+
+ADHERING TO FORMULA. It cannot be too strongly emphasized that unless we
+follow a standardized procedure the tests lose their significance. The
+danger is chiefly that of unintentionally and unconsciously introducing
+variations which will affect the meaning of the test. One who has not
+had a thorough training in the methods of mental testing cannot
+appreciate how numerous are the opportunities for the unconscious
+transformation of a test. Many of these are pointed out in the
+description of the individual tests, but it would be folly to undertake
+to warn the experimenter against every possible error of this kind.
+Sometimes the omission or the addition of a single phrase in giving
+the test will alter materially the significance of the response.
+Only the trained psychologist can vary the formula without risk of
+invalidating the result, and even he must be on his guard. All sorts of
+misunderstandings regarding the correct placing of tests and regarding
+their accuracy or inaccuracy have come about through the failure of
+different investigators to follow the same procedure.
+
+One who would use the tests for any serious purpose, therefore,
+must study the procedure for each and every test until he knows it
+thoroughly. After that a considerable amount of practice is necessary
+before one learns to avoid slips. During the early stages of practice it
+is necessary to refer to the printed instructions frequently in order to
+check up errors before they have become habitual.
+
+The instructions hitherto available are at fault in not defining the
+procedure with sufficient definiteness, and it is the purpose of this
+volume to make good this deficiency as far as possible.
+
+It is too much, however, to suppose that the instructions can be made
+"fool-proof." With whatever definiteness they may be set forth,
+situations are sure to arise which the examiner cannot be formally
+prepared for. There is no limit to the multitude of misunderstandings
+possible. After testing hundreds of children one still finds new
+examples of misapprehension. In a few such cases the instruction may be
+repeated, if there is reason to think the child's hearing was at fault
+or if some extraordinary distraction has occurred. But unless otherwise
+stated in the directions, the repetition of a question is ordinarily to
+be avoided. Supplementary explanations are hardly ever permissible.
+
+In short, numberless situations may arise in the use of a test which may
+injure the validity of the response, events which cannot always be
+dealt with by preconceived rule. Accordingly, although we must urge
+unceasingly the importance of following the standard procedure, it is
+not to be supposed that formulas are an adequate substitute either for
+scientific judgment or for common sense.
+
+SCORING. The exact method of scoring the individual tests is set forth
+in the following chapters. Reference to the record booklet for use in
+testing will show that the records are to be kept in detail. Each
+subdivision of a test should be scored separately, in order that the
+clinical picture may be as complete as possible. This helps in the final
+evaluation of the results. It makes much difference, for example,
+whether success in repeating six digits is earned by repeating all three
+correctly or only one; or whether the child's lack of success with the
+absurdities is due to failure on two, three, four, or all of them. Time
+should be recorded whenever called for in the record blanks.
+
+RECORDING RESPONSES. Plus and minus signs alone are not usually
+sufficient. Whenever possible the entire response should be recorded. If
+the test results are to be used by any other person than the examiner,
+this is absolutely essential. Any other standard of completeness opens
+the door to carelessness and inaccuracy. In nearly all the tests, except
+that of naming sixty words, the examiner will find it possible by the
+liberal use of abbreviations to record practically the entire response
+_verbatim_. In doing so, however, one must be careful to avoid keeping
+the child waiting. Occasionally it is necessary to leave off recording
+altogether because of the embarrassment sometimes aroused in the child
+by seeing his answer written down. The writer has met the latter
+difficulty several times. When for any reason it is not feasible to
+record anything more than score marks, success may be indicated by the
+sign +, failure by -, and half credit by ½. An exceptionally good
+response may be indicated by ++ and an exceptionally poor response by --.
+If there is a slight doubt about a success or failure the sign? may
+be added to the + or -. In general, however, score the response either +
+or -, avoiding half credit as far as it is possible to do so.
+
+If the entire response is not recorded it is necessary to record at
+least the score mark for each test _when the test is given_. It must be
+borne in mind that the scoring is not a purely mechanical affair.
+Instead, the judgment of the examiner must come into play with every
+record made. If the scoring is delayed, there is not only the danger of
+forgetting a response, but the judgment is likely to be influenced by
+the subject's responses to succeeding questions. Our special record
+booklet contains wide margins, so that extended notes and observations
+regarding the child's responses and behavior can be recorded as the test
+proceeds.
+
+SCATTERING OF SUCCESSES. It is sometimes a source of concern to the
+untrained examiner that the successes and failures should be scattered
+over quite an extensive range of years. Why, it may be asked, should not
+a child who has 10-year intelligence answer correctly all the tests up
+to and including group X, and fail on all the tests beyond? There are
+two reasons why such is almost never the case. In the first place, the
+intelligence of an individual is ordinarily not even. There are many
+different kinds of intelligence, and in some of these the subject is
+better endowed than in others. A second reason lies in the fact that no
+test can be purely and simply a test of native intelligence. Given a
+certain degree of intelligence, accidents of experience and training
+bring it about that this intelligence will work more successfully with
+some kinds of material than with others. For both of these reasons there
+results a scattering of successes and failures over three or four years.
+The subject fails first in one or two tests of a group, then in two or
+three tests of the following group, the number of failures increasing
+until there are no successes at all. Success "tapers off" from
+100 per cent to 0. Once in a great while a child fails on several of the
+tests of a given year and succeeds with a majority of those in the next
+higher year. This is only an extreme instance of uneven intelligence or
+of specialized experience, and does not necessarily reflect upon the
+reliability of the tests for children in general. The method of
+calculation given above strikes a kind of average and gives the general
+level of intelligence, which is essentially the thing we want to know.
+
+SUPPLEMENTARY CONSIDERATIONS. It would be a mistake to suppose that any
+set of mental tests could be devised which would give us complete
+information about a child's native intelligence. There are no tests
+which are absolutely pure tests of intelligence. All are influenced to a
+greater or less degree also by training and by social environment. For
+this reason, all the ascertainable facts bearing on such influences
+should be added to the record of the mental examination, and should be
+given due weight in reaching a final conclusion as to the level of
+intelligence.
+
+The following supplementary information should be gathered, when
+possible:--
+
+  1.  Social status (very superior, superior, average, inferior, or
+      very inferior).
+
+  2.  The teacher's estimate of the child's intelligence (very
+      superior, superior, average, inferior, or very inferior).
+
+  3.  School opportunities, including years of attendance,
+      regularity, retardation or acceleration, etc.
+
+  4.  Quality of school work (very superior, superior, average,
+      inferior, or very inferior).
+
+  5.  Physical handicaps, if any (adenoids, diseased tonsils, partial
+      deafness, imperfect vision, malnutrition, etc.).
+
+In addition, the examiner will need to take account of the general
+attitude of the child during the examination. This is provided for in
+the record blanks under the heading "comments." The comments should
+describe as fully as possible the conduct and attitude of the child
+during the examination, with emphasis upon such disturbing factors as
+fear, timidity, unwillingness to answer, overconfidence, carelessness,
+lack of attention, etc. Sometimes, also, it is desirable to verify the
+child's age and to make record of the verification.
+
+Once more let it be urged that no degree of mechanical perfection of the
+tests can ever take the place of good judgment and psychological
+insight. Intelligence is too complicated to be weighed, like a bag of
+grain, by any one who can read figures.
+
+ALTERNATIVE TESTS. The tests designated as "alternative tests" are not
+intended for regular use. Inasmuch as they have been standardized and
+belong in the year group where they are placed, they may be used as
+substitute tests on certain occasions. Sometimes one of the regular
+tests is spoiled in giving it, or the requisite material for it may not
+be at hand. Sometimes there may be reason to suspect that the subject
+has become acquainted with some of the tests. In such cases it is a
+great convenience to have a few substitutes available.
+
+It is necessary, however, to warn against a possible misuse of
+alternative tests. _It is not permissible to count success in an
+alternative test as offsetting failure in a regular test._ This would
+give the subject too much leeway of failure. There are very exceptional
+cases, however, when it is legitimate to break this rule; namely, when
+one of the regular tests would be obviously unfair to the subject being
+tested. In year X, for example, one of the three alternative tests
+should be substituted for the reading test (X, 4) in case we are testing
+a subject who has not had the equivalent of at least two years of
+school work. In year VIII, it would be permissible to substitute the
+alternative test of naming six coins, instead of the vocabulary test, in
+the case of a subject who came from a home where English was not spoken.
+In VII, it would perhaps not be unfair to substitute the alternative
+test, in place of the test of copying a diamond, in the case of a
+subject who, because of timidity or embarrassment, refused to attempt
+the diamond. But it would be going entirely too far to substitute an
+alternative test in the place of every regular test which the subject
+responded to by silence. In the large majority of cases persistent
+silence deserves to be scored failure.
+
+Certain tests have been made alternatives because of their inferior
+value, some because the presence of other tests of similar nature in the
+same year rendered them less necessary.
+
+FINDING MENTAL AGE. As there are six tests in each age group from III to
+X, each test in this part of the scale counts 2 months toward mental
+age. There are eight tests in group XII, which, because of the omission
+of the 11-year group, have a combined value of 24 months, or 3 months
+each. Similarly, each of the six tests in XIV has a value of 4 months
+(24 ÷ 6 = 4). The tests of the "average adult" group are given a value
+of 5 months each, and those of the "superior adult" group a value of
+6 months each. These values are in a sense arbitrary, but they are
+justified in the fact that they are such as to cause ordinary adults to
+test at the "average adult" level.
+
+The calculation of mental age is therefore simplicity itself. The rule
+is: (1) Credit the subject with all the tests below the point where the
+examination begins (remembering that the examination goes back until a
+year group has been found in which all the tests are passed); and (2)
+add to this basal credit 2 months for each test passed successfully up
+to and including year X, 3 months for each test passed in XII, 4 months
+for each test passed in XIV, 5 months for each success in "average
+adult," and 6 months for each success in "superior adult."
+
+For example, let us suppose that a child passes all the tests in VI,
+five of the six tests in VII, three in VIII, two in IX, and one in X.
+The total credit earned is as follows:--
+
+                                                       _Years__Months_
+    Credit presupposed, years I to V                        5
+    Credit earned in VI, 6 tests passed, 2 months each      1
+    Credit earned in VII, 5 tests passed, 2 months each          10
+    Credit earned in VIII, 3 tests passed, 2 months each          6
+    Credit earned in IX, 2 tests passed, 2 months each            4
+    Credit earned in X, 1 test passed, 2 months                   2
+                                                          ----  ----
+        Total credit                                        7    10
+
+Taking a subject who tests higher, let us suppose the following tests
+are passed: All in X, six of the eight in XII, two of the six in XIV,
+and one of the six in "average adult." The total credit is as follows:--
+
+                                                       _Years__Months_
+    Credit presupposed, years I to IX                       9
+    Credit earned in X, 6 tests passed, 2 months each       1
+    Credit earned in XII, 6 tests passed, 3 months each     1     6
+    Credit earned in XIV, 2 tests passed, 4 months each     0     8
+    Credit earned in "average adult," 1 success, 5 months         5
+                                                          ----  ----
+        Total credit                                       12     7
+
+One other point: If one or more tests of a year group have been omitted,
+as sometimes happens either from oversight or lack of time, the question
+arises how the tests which were given in such a year group should be
+evaluated. Suppose, for example, a subject has been given only four of
+the six tests in a given year, and that he passes two, or half of those
+given. In such a case the probability would be that had all six tests
+been given, three would have been passed; that is, one half of all.
+It is evident, therefore, that when a test has been omitted, a
+proportionately larger value should be assigned to each of those given.
+
+If all six tests are given in any year group below XII, each has a value
+of 2 months. If only four are given, each has a value of 3 months
+(12 ÷ 4 = 3). If five tests only are given, each has a value of
+2.4 months (12 ÷ 5 = 2.4). If in year group XII only six of the eight
+tests are given, each has a value of 4 months (24 ÷ 6 = 4). If in the
+"average adult" group only five of the six tests are given, each has a
+value of 6 months instead of the usual 5 months. In this connection it
+will need to be remembered that the six "average adult" tests have a
+combined value of 30 months (6 tests, 5 months each); also that the
+combined value of the six "superior adult" tests is 36 months
+(6 × 6 = 36). Accordingly, if only five of the six "superior adult"
+tests are given, the value of each is 36 ÷ 5 = 7.2 months.
+
+For example, let us suppose that a subject has been tested as follows:
+All the six tests in X were given and all were passed; only six of the
+eight in XII were given and five were passed; five of the six in XIV
+were given and three were passed; five of the six in "average adult"
+were given and one was passed; five were given in "superior adult" and
+no credit earned. The result would be as follows:--
+
+                                                       _Years__Months_
+    Credit presupposed, years I to IX                       9
+    Credit earned in X, 6 given, 6 successes                1
+    Credit earned in XII, 6 given, 5 passed. Unit value
+        of each test given is 24 ÷ 6 = 4. Total value
+        of the 5 tests passed is 5 × 4 or                   1     8
+    Credit earned in XIV, 5 tests given, 3 passed. Unit
+        value of each of the 5 given is 24 ÷ 5 = 4.8.
+        Value of the 3 passed is 3 × 4.8, or                0    14+
+    Credit earned in "average adult," 5 tests given,
+        1 passed. Unit value of the 5 tests given is
+        30 ÷ 5 = 6. Value of the 1 success                  0     6
+    Credit earned in "superior adult"                       0     0
+                                                          ----  ----
+          Total credit                                     13     4+
+
+The calculation of mental age is really simpler than our verbal
+illustrations make it appear. After the operation has been performed
+twenty or thirty times, it can be done in less than a half-minute
+without danger of error.
+
+THE USE OF THE INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENT. As elsewhere explained, the mental
+age alone does not tell us what we want to know about a child's
+intelligence status. The significance of a given number of years of
+retardation or acceleration depends upon the age of the child. A
+3-year-old child who is retarded one year is ordinarily feeble-minded; a
+10-year-old retarded one year is only a little below normal. The child
+who at 3 years of age is retarded one year will probably be retarded two
+years at the age of 6, three years at the age of 9, and four years at
+the age of 12.
+
+What we want to know, therefore, is the ratio existing between mental
+age and real age. This is the intelligence quotient, or I Q. To find it
+we simply divide mental age (expressed in years and months) by real age
+(also expressed in years and months). The process is easier if we
+express each age in terms of months alone before dividing. The division
+can, of course, be performed almost instantaneously and with much less
+danger of error by the use of a slide rule or a division table. One who
+has to calculate many intelligence quotients should by all means use
+some kind of mechanical help.
+
+HOW TO FIND THE I Q OF ADULT SUBJECTS. Native intelligence, in so far as
+it can be measured by tests now available, appears to improve but little
+after the age of 15 or 16 years. It follows that in calculating the I Q
+of an adult subject, it will be necessary to disregard the years he has
+lived beyond the point where intelligence attains its final development.
+
+Although the location of this point is not exactly known, it will be
+sufficiently accurate for our purpose to assume its location at
+16 years. Accordingly, any person over 16 years of age, however old, is
+for purposes of calculating I Q considered to be just 16 years old. If a
+youth of 18 and a man of 60 years both have a mental age of 12 years,
+the I Q in each case is 12 ÷ 16, or .75.
+
+The significance of various values of the I Q is set forth
+elsewhere.[44] Here it need only be repeated that 100 I Q means exactly
+average intelligence; that nearly all who are below 70 or 75 I Q are
+feeble-minded; and that the child of 125 I Q is about as much above the
+average as the high-grade feeble-minded individual is below the average.
+For ordinary purposes all who fall between 95 and 105 I Q may be
+considered as average in intelligence.
+
+[44] See Chapter VI.
+
+MATERIAL FOR USE IN TESTING. It is strongly recommended that in testing
+by the Stanford revision the regular Stanford record booklets be
+used. These are so arranged as to make testing accurate, rapid, and
+convenient. They contain square, diamond, round field, vocabulary list,
+fables, sentences, digits, and selections for memory tests, the reading
+selection barred for scoring, the dissected sentences, arithmetical
+problems, etc. One is required for each child tested.[45]
+
+[45] Houghton Mifflin Company will supply all the printed material
+needed in the tests, including the lines for the forms for VI, 2, the
+four pictures for "enumeration," "description," and "interpretation,"
+the pictures for V, 3 and VI, 2, the colors, designs for X, 3, the code
+for Average Adult 6, and score cards for square, diamond, designs, and
+ball-and-field.
+
+This is all the material required for the use of the Stanford revision,
+except the five weights for IX, 2, and V, 1, and the Healy-Fernald
+Construction Puzzle for X. These may be purchased of C. H. Stoelting &
+Co., 3037 Carroll Avenue, Chicago. It is not necessary, however, to have
+the weights and the Construction Puzzle, as the presence of one or
+more alternative tests in each year makes it possible to substitute
+other tests instead of those requiring these materials. This saves
+considerable expense. Apart from these, which may either be made at home
+(see pages 278, 279) or dispensed with, the only necessary equipment for
+using the Stanford revision is a copy of this book with the accompanying
+set of printed matter, and the record booklets. The record booklets are
+supplied only in packages of 25.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IX
+
+Instructions For Year III
+
+
+III, 1. POINTING TO PARTS OF THE BODY
+
+PROCEDURE. After getting the child's attention, say: "_Show me your
+nose._" "_Put your finger on your nose._" Same with eyes, mouth, and
+hair.
+
+Tact is often necessary to overcome timidity. If two or three
+repetitions of the instruction fail to bring a response, point to the
+child's chin or ear and say: "_Is this your nose?_" "_No?_" "_Then where
+is your nose?_" Sometimes, after one has tried two or three parts of the
+test without eliciting any response, the child may suddenly release his
+inhibitions and answer all the questions promptly. In case of persistent
+refusal to respond it is best not to harass the child for an answer, but
+to leave the test for a while and return to it later. This is a rule
+which applies generally throughout the scale. In the case of one
+exceptionally timid little girl, it was impossible to get any response
+by the usual procedure, but immediately when a doll was shown the child
+pointed willingly to its nose, eyes, mouth, and hair. The device was
+successful because it withdrew the child's attention from herself and
+centered it upon something objective.
+
+SCORING. _Three responses out of four_ must be correct. Instead of
+pointing, the child sometimes responds by winking the eyes, opening the
+mouth, etc., which is counted as satisfactory.
+
+REMARKS. Binet's purpose in this test is to ascertain whether the
+subject is capable of comprehending simple language. The ability to
+comprehend and use language is indeed one of the most reliable
+indications of the grade of mental development. The appreciation of
+gestures comes first, then the comprehension of language heard, next the
+ability to repeat words and sentences mechanically, and finally the
+ability to use language as a means of communication. The present test,
+however, is not more strictly a test of language comprehension than the
+others of the 3-year group, and in any case it could not be said to mark
+the _beginning_ of the power to comprehend spoken language. That is
+fairly well advanced by the age of 2 years. The test closely resembles
+III, 2 (naming familiar objects), and III, 3 (enumeration of objects in
+a picture), except that it brings in a personal element and gives some
+clue to the development of the sense of self. All the data agree in
+locating the test at year III.
+
+
+III, 2. NAMING FAMILIAR OBJECTS
+
+PROCEDURE. Use a key, a penny, a closed knife, a watch, and an ordinary
+lead pencil. The key should be the usual large-sized doorkey, not one of
+the Yale type. The penny should not be too new, for the freshly made,
+untarnished penny resembles very little the penny usually seen. Any
+ordinary pocket knife may be used, and it is to be shown unopened. The
+formula is, "_What is this?_" or, "_Tell me what this is._"
+
+SCORING. There must be at least _three correct responses out of five_. A
+response is not correct unless the object is named. It is not sufficient
+for the child merely to show that he knows its use. A child, for
+example, may take the pencil and begin to mark with it, or go to the
+door and insert the key in the lock, but this is not sufficient. At the
+same time we must not be too arbitrary about requiring a particular
+name. "Cent" or "pennies" for "penny" is satisfactory, but "money" is
+not. The watch is sometimes called "a clock" or "a tick-tock," and we
+shall perhaps not be too liberal if we score these responses _plus_.
+"Pen" for "pencil," however, is unsatisfactory. Substitute names for
+"key" and "knife" are rarely given. Mispronunciations due to baby-talk
+are of course ignored.
+
+REMARKS. The purpose of this test is to find out whether the child has
+made the association between familiar objects and their names. The
+mental processes necessary to enable the child to pass this test are
+very elementary, and yet, as far as they go, they are fundamental.
+Learning the names of objects frequently seen is a form of mental
+activity in which the normally endowed child of 2 to 4 years finds great
+satisfaction. Any marked retardation in making such associations is a
+grave indication of the lack of that spontaneity which is so necessary
+for the development of the higher grades of intelligence. It would be
+entirely beside the point, therefore, to question the validity of the
+test on the ground that a given child may not have been _taught_ the
+names of the objects used. Practically all children 3 years old, however
+poor their environment, have made the acquaintance of at least three of
+the five objects, and if intelligence is normal they have learned their
+names as a result of spontaneous inquiry.
+
+Always use the list of objects here given, because it has been
+standardized. Any improvised selection would be sure to contain some
+objects either less or more familiar than those in the standardized
+list. Note also that three correct responses out of five are sufficient.
+If we required five correct answers out of six (like Kuhlmann), or three
+out of three (like Binet, Goddard, and Huey), the test would probably
+belong at the 4-year level. Binet states that this test is materially
+harder than that of naming objects in a picture, since in the latter the
+child selects from a number of objects in the picture those he knows
+best, while in the former test he must name the objects we have
+arbitrarily chosen. This difference does not hold, however, if we
+require only three correct responses out of five for passing the test of
+naming objects, instead of Binet's three out of three. All else being
+equal, it is of course easier to recognize and name a real object shown
+than it is to recognize and name it from a picture.
+
+
+III, 3. ENUMERATION OF OBJECTS IN PICTURES
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the three pictures designated as "Dutch Home," "River
+Scene," and "Post-Office." Say, "_Now I am going to show you a pretty
+picture._" Then, holding the first one before the child, close enough to
+permit distinct vision, say: "_Tell me what you see in this picture._"
+If there is no response, as sometimes happens, due to embarrassment or
+timidity, repeat the request in this form: "_Look at the picture and
+tell me everything you can see in it._" If there is still no response,
+say: "_Show me the ..._" (naming some object in the picture). Only one
+question of this type, however, is permissible. If the child answers
+correctly, say: "_That is fine; now tell me everything you see in the
+picture._" From this point the responses nearly always follow without
+further coaxing. Indeed, if _rapport_ has been properly cultivated
+before the test begins, the first question will ordinarily be
+sufficient. If the child names one or two things in a picture and then
+stops, urge him on by saying "_And what else_" Proceed with pictures _b_
+and _c_ in the same manner.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the child enumerates as many as _three_
+objects in _one_ picture _spontaneously_; that is, without intervening
+questions or urging. Anything better than enumeration (as description
+or interpretation) is also acceptable, but description is rarely
+encountered before 5 years and interpretation rarely before 9 or 10.[46]
+
+[46] See instructions for VII, 2, and XII, 7.
+
+REMARKS. The purpose of the test in this year is to find out whether the
+sight of a familiar object in a picture provokes recognition and calls
+up the appropriate name.[47] The average child of 3 or 4 years is in
+what Binet calls "the identification stage"; that is, familiar objects
+in a picture will be identified but not described, their relations to
+one another will not be grasped.
+
+[47] For a discussion of the significance of the different types of
+response, enumeration, description, and interpretation, see VII, 2, and
+XII, 7.
+
+In giving the test, always present the pictures in the same order,
+first Dutch Home, then River Scene, then Post-Office. The order of
+presentation will no doubt seem to the uninitiated too trivial a matter
+to insist upon, but a little experience teaches one that an apparently
+insignificant change in the procedure may exert a considerable influence
+upon the response. Some pictures tend more strongly than others to
+provoke a particular type of response. Some lend themselves especially
+to enumeration, others to description, others to interpretation. The
+pictures used in the Stanford revision have been selected from a number
+which have been tried because they are more uniform in this respect
+than most others in use. However, they are not without their
+differences, picture _b_, for example, tending more than the others to
+provoke description.
+
+There seems to be no disagreement as to the proper location of this
+test.
+
+
+III, 4. GIVING SEX
+
+PROCEDURE. If the subject is a boy, the formula is: "_Are you a little
+boy or a little girl?_" If a girl, "_Are you a little girl or a little
+boy?_" This variation in the formula is necessary because of the
+tendency in young children to repeat mechanically the last word of
+anything that is said to them. If there is no response, say: "_Are you a
+little girl?_" (if a boy); or, "_Are you a little boy?_" (if a girl). If
+the answer to the last question is "no" (or a shake of the head), we
+then say: "_Well, what are you? Are you a little boy or a little girl?_"
+(or _vice versa_).
+
+SCORING. The response is satisfactory if it indicates that the child has
+really made the discrimination, but we must be cautious about accepting
+any other response than the direct answer, "A little girl," or, "A
+little boy." "Yes" and "no" in response to the second question must be
+carefully checked up.
+
+REMARKS. Binet and Goddard say that 3-year-olds cannot pass this test
+and that 4-year-olds almost never fail. We can accept the last part of
+this statement, but not the first part. Nearly all of our 3-year-old
+subjects succeed with it.
+
+The test probably has nothing to do with sex consciousness, as such.
+Success in it would seem to depend on the ability to discriminate
+between familiar class names which are in a certain degree related.
+
+
+III, 5. GIVING THE FAMILY NAME
+
+PROCEDURE. The child is asked, "_What is your name?_" If the answer, as
+often happens, includes only the first name (Walter, for example), say:
+"_Yes, but what is your other name? Walter what?_" If the child is
+silent, or if he only repeats the first name, say: "_Is your name
+Walter ... ?_" (giving a fictitious name, as Jones, Smith, etc.). This
+question nearly always brings the correct answer if it is known.
+
+SCORING. Simply + or -. No attention is paid to faults of pronunciation.
+
+REMARKS. There is unanimous agreement that this test belongs in the
+3-year group. Although the child has not had as much opportunity to
+learn the family name as his first name, he is almost certain to have
+heard it more or less, and if his intelligence is normal the interest in
+self will ordinarily cause it to be remembered.
+
+The critic of the intelligence scale need not be unduly exercised over
+the fact that there may be an occasional child of 3 years who has never
+heard his family name. We have all read of such children, but they
+are so extremely rare that the chances of a given 3-year-old being
+unjustly penalized for this reason are practically negligible. In
+the second place, contingencies of this nature are throughout the
+scale consistently allowed for in the percentage of passes required
+for locating a test. Since (in the year groups below XIV) the
+individual tests are located at the age level where they are passed by
+60 to 70 per cent of unselected children of that age, it follows that
+the child of average ability _is expected_ to fail on about one third of
+the tests of his age group. The plan of the scale is such as to warrant
+this amount of leeway. But even granting the possibility that one
+subject out of a hundred or so may be unjustly penalized for lack of
+opportunity to acquire the knowledge which the test calls for, the
+injustice done does not greatly alter the result. A single test affects
+mental age only to the extent of two months, and the chances of two such
+injustices occurring with the same child are very slight. Herein lies
+the advantage of a multiplicity of tests. No test considered by itself
+is very dependable, but two dozen tests, properly arranged, are almost
+infinitely reliable.
+
+
+III, 6. REPEATING SIX TO SEVEN SYLLABLES
+
+PROCEDURE. Begin by saying: "_Can you say 'mamma'? Now, say 'nice
+kitty.'_" Then ask the child to say, "_I have a little dog._" Speak the
+sentence distinctly and with expression, but in a natural voice and not
+too slowly. If there is no response, the first sentence may be repeated
+two or three times. Then give the other two sentences: "_The dog runs
+after the cat_," and, "_In summer the sun is hot._" A great deal of tact
+is sometimes necessary to enlist the child's coöperation in this test.
+If he cannot be persuaded to try, the alternative test of three digits
+may be substituted.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if at least _one sentence is repeated
+without error after a single reading_. "Without error" is to be taken
+literally; there must be no omission, insertion, or transposition
+of words. Ignore indistinctness of articulation and defects of
+pronunciation as long as they do not mutilate the sentence beyond easy
+recognition.
+
+REMARKS. The test does not presuppose that the child should have
+the ability to make and use sentences like these for purposes of
+communication, or even that he should know the meaning of all the words
+they contain. Its purpose is to bring out the ability of the child to
+repeat a six-syllable series of more or less familiar language sounds.
+As every one knows, the normal child of 2 or 3 years is constantly
+imitating the speech of those around him and finds this a great source
+of delight. Long practice in the semi-mechanical repetition of language
+sounds is necessary for the learning of speech coördinations and is
+therefore an indispensable preliminary to the purposeful use of
+language. High-grade idiots and the lowest grade of imbeciles never
+acquire much facility in the repetition of language heard. The test gets
+at one of the simplest forms of mental integration.
+
+Binet says that children of 3 years _never_ repeat sentences of
+ten syllables. This is not strictly true, for six out of nineteen
+3-year-olds succeeded in doing so. All the data agree, however, that the
+_average_ child of 3 years repeats only six to seven syllables
+correctly.
+
+
+III. ALTERNATIVE TEST: REPEATING THREE DIGITS
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the following digits: 6-4-1, 3-5-2, 8-3-7. Begin with two
+digits, as follows: "_Listen; say 4-2_." "_Now, say 6-4-1_." "_Now, say
+3-5-2_," etc. Pronounce the digits in a distinct voice and with
+perfectly uniform emphasis at a rate just a little faster than one per
+second. Two per second, as recommended by Binet, is too rapid.
+
+Young subjects, because of their natural timidity in the presence of
+strangers, sometimes refuse to respond to this test. With subjects under
+5 or 6 years of age it is sometimes necessary in such cases to re-read
+the first series of digits several times in order to secure a response.
+The response thus secured, however, is not counted in scoring, the
+purpose of the re-reading being merely to break the child's silence. The
+second and third series may be read but once. With the digits tests
+above year IV the re-reading of a series is never permissible.
+
+SCORING. Passed if the child repeats correctly, _after a single reading,
+one series out of the three_ series given. Not only must the correct
+digits be given, but the order also must be correct.
+
+REMARKS. Others, on the basis of rather scanty data, have usually
+located this test at the 4-year level. Our results show that with the
+procedure described above it is fully as easy as the test of repeating
+sentences of 6 to 7 syllables.[48]
+
+[48] See p. 194 _ff._ for further discussion of the digits test.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER X
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR IV
+
+
+IV, 1. COMPARISON OF LINES
+
+PROCEDURE. Present the appropriate accompanying card with the lines in
+horizontal position. Point to the lines and say: "_See these lines. Look
+closely and tell me which one is longer. Put your finger on the longest
+one._" We use the superlative as well as the comparative form of _long_
+because it is often more familiar to young subjects. If the child does
+not respond, say: "_Show me which line is the biggest._" Then withdraw
+the card, turn it about a few times, and present it again with the
+position of the two lines reversed, saying: "_Now show me the longest._"
+Turn the card again and make a third presentation.
+
+SCORING. All three comparisons must be made correctly; or if only two
+responses out of three are correct, all three pairs are again shown,
+just as before, and if there is no error this time, the test is passed.
+The standard, therefore, is _three correct responses out of three, or
+five out of six_.
+
+Sometimes the child points, but at no particular part of the card. In
+such cases it may be difficult to decide whether he has failed to
+comprehend and to make the discrimination or has only been careless in
+pointing. It is then necessary to repeat the experiment until the
+evidence is clear.
+
+REMARKS. As noted by Binet, success in this test depends on the
+comprehension of the verbal directions rather than on actual
+discrimination of length. The child who would unerringly choose the
+larger of two pieces of candy might fail on the comparison of lines.
+However, since the child must correctly compare the lines three times in
+succession, or at least in five out of six trials, _willingness to
+attend_ also plays a part. The attention of the low-grade imbecile, or
+even of the normal child of 3 years, is not very obedient to the
+suggestions of the experimenter. It may be gained momentarily, but it is
+not easily held to the same task for more than a few seconds. Hence some
+children who perfectly comprehend this task fail to make a succession of
+correct comparisons because they are unable or unwilling to bring to
+bear even the small amount of attention which is necessary. This does
+not in the least condone the failure, for it is exactly in such
+voluntary control of mental processes that we find one of the most
+characteristic differences between bright and dull, or mature and
+immature subjects.
+
+There has been little disagreement as to the proper location of this
+test.
+
+
+IV, 2. DISCRIMINATION OF FORMS
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the forms supplied with this book. First, place the
+circle of the duplicate set at "X", and say: "_Show me one like
+this_," at the same time passing the finger around the circumference of
+the circle. If the child does not respond, say: "_Do you see all of
+these things?_" (running the finger over the various forms); "_And do
+you see this one?_" (pointing again to the circle); "_Now, find me
+another one just like this._" Use the square next, then the triangle,
+and the others in any order.
+
+Correct the child's first error by saying: "_No, find one just like
+this_" (again passing the finger around the outline of the form at "X").
+Make no comment on errors after the first one, proceeding at once with
+the next card, but each time the choice is correct encourage the child
+with a hearty "That's good," or something similar.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _seven out of ten_ choices, are correct,
+the first corrected error being counted.
+
+REMARKS. In the test of discriminating forms, unlike the test of
+comparing lines, lack of success is less often due to inability to
+understand the task than to failure to discriminate. The test may be
+regarded as a variation of the form-board test. It displays the
+subject's ability to compare and contrast successive visual perceptions
+of form. The accurate perception of even a fairly simple form requires
+the integration of a number of sensory elements into one whole. The
+forms used in this test have meaning. They are far from nonsense figures
+even for the (normal) child of 4 years, who has, of course, never heard
+about "triangles," "squares," "rectangles," etc. The meaning present at
+this level of intelligence is probably a compound of such factors as
+appreciation of symmetry and direction, and discrimination of quantity
+and number.
+
+Another element in success, especially in the latter part of the
+experiment, is the ability to make an _attentive_ comparison between the
+form shown and the others. The child may be satisfied to point to the
+first form his eye happens to fall upon. Far from being a legitimate
+excuse for failure, such an exhibition of inattention and of weakness of
+the critical faculty is symptomatic of a mental level below 4 years.
+
+In addition to counting the number of errors made, it is interesting to
+note with what forms they occur. To match the circle with the ellipse or
+the octagon, for example, is a less serious error than to match it with
+the square or triangle.
+
+This test was devised and standardized by Dr. Fred Kuhlmann. It is
+inserted here without essential alteration, except that the size
+recommended for the forms is slightly reduced and minor changes have
+been made in the wording of the directions. Our own results are
+favorable to the test and to the location assigned it by its author.
+
+
+IV, 3. COUNTING FOUR PENNIES
+
+PROCEDURE. Place four pennies in a horizontal row before the child. Say:
+"_See these pennies. Count them and tell me how many there are. Count
+them with your finger, this way_" (pointing to the first one on the
+child's left)--"_One_"--"_Now, go ahead._" If the child simply gives the
+number (whether right or wrong) without pointing, say: "_No; count them
+with your finger, this way_," starting him off as before. Have him count
+them aloud.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed only if the counting tallies with the
+pointing. It is not sufficient merely to state the correct number
+without pointing.
+
+REMARKS. Contrary to what one might think, this is not to any great
+extent a test of "schooling." Practically all children of this age have
+had opportunity to learn to count as far as four, and with normal
+children the spontaneous interest in number is such that very few
+4-year-olds, even from inferior social environment, fail to pass the
+test.
+
+While success requires more than the ability to repeat the number names
+by rote, it does not presuppose any power of calculation or a mastery of
+the number concepts from one to four. Many children who will readily
+say, mechanically, "one, two, three, four," when started off, are not
+able to pass the test. On the other hand, it is not expected that the
+child who passes will also necessarily understand that four is made up
+of two two's, or four one's, or three plus one, etc.
+
+Binet, Goddard, and Kuhlmann place this test in the 5-year group, but
+three separate series of tests made for the Stanford revision, as well
+as nearly all the statistics available from other sources, show that it
+belongs at 4 years.
+
+
+IV, 4. COPYING A SQUARE
+
+PROCEDURE. Place before the child a cardboard on which is drawn in heavy
+black lines a square about 1¼ inches on a side.[49] Give the child a
+pencil and say: "_You see that_ (pointing to the square). _I want you to
+make one just like it. Make it right here_ (showing where it is to be
+drawn). _Go ahead. I know you can do it nicely._"
+
+[49] No material is needed if the regular Stanford record blanks are
+used, as these all contain the square and diamond.
+
+Avoid such an expression as, "_I want you to draw a figure like that._"
+The child may not know the meaning of either _draw_ or _figure_. Also,
+in pointing to the model, take care not to run the finger around the
+four sides.
+
+Children sometimes have a deep-seated aversion to drawing on request and
+a bit of tactful urging may be necessary. Experience and tact will
+enable the experimenter in all but the rarest cases to come out
+victorious in these little battles with balky wills. Give three trials,
+saying each time: "_Make it exactly like this_," pointing to model.
+Make sure that the child is in an easy position and that the paper used
+is held so it cannot slip.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if at least _one drawing out of the three_
+is as good as those marked + on the score card. Young subjects usually
+reduce figures in drawing from copy, but size is wholly disregarded in
+scoring. It is of more importance that the right angles be fairly well
+preserved than that the lines should be straight or the corners entirely
+closed. The scoring of this test should be rather liberal.
+
+REMARKS. After the three copies have been made say: "_Which one do you
+like best?_" In this way we get an idea of the subject's power of
+auto-criticism, a trait in which the mentally retarded are nearly always
+behind normal children of their own age. Normal children, when young,
+reveal the same weakness to a certain extent. It is especially
+significant when the subject shows complete satisfaction with a very
+poor performance.
+
+Observe whether the child makes each part with careful effort, looking
+at the model from time to time, or whether the strokes are made in a
+haphazard way with only an initial glance at the original. The latter
+procedure is quite common with young or retarded subjects. Curiously
+enough, the first trial is more successful than either of the others,
+due perhaps to a waning of effort and attention.
+
+Note that pencil is used instead of pen and that only one success is
+necessary. Binet gives only one trial and requires pen. Goddard allows
+pencil, but permits only one trial. Kuhlmann requires pen and passes the
+child only when two trials out of three are successful. But these
+authors locate the test at 5 years. Our results show that nearly three
+fourths of 4-year-olds succeed with pencil in one out of three trials if
+the scoring is liberal. It makes a great deal of difference whether pen
+or pencil is used, and whether two successes are required or only one.
+No better illustration could be given of the fact that without
+thoroughgoing standardization of procedure and scoring the best mental
+test may be misleading as to the degree of intelligence it indicates.
+
+Copying a square is one of three drawing tests used in the Binet scale,
+the others being the diamond (year VII), and the designs to be copied
+from memory (year X). These tests do not to any great extent test what
+is usually known as "drawing ability." Only the square and the diamond
+tests are strictly comparable with one another, the other having a
+psychologically different purpose. In none of them does success seem to
+depend very much on the amount of previous instruction in drawing. To
+copy a figure like a square or a diamond requires first of all an
+appreciation of spacial relationships. The figure must be perceived as a
+whole, not simply as a group of meaningless lines. In the second place,
+success depends upon the ability to use the visual impression in guiding
+a rather complex set of motor coördinations. The latter is perhaps the
+main difficulty, and is one which is not fully overcome, at least for
+complicated movements, until well toward adult life.
+
+It is interesting to compare the square and the diamond as to relative
+difficulty. They have the same number of lines and in each case the
+opposite sides are parallel; but whereas 4-year intelligence is equal to
+the task of copying a square, the diamond ordinarily requires 7-year
+intelligence. Probably no one could have foreseen that a change in the
+angles would add so much to the difficulty of the figure. It would be
+worth while to devise and standardize still more complicated figures.
+
+
+IV, 5. COMPREHENSION, FIRST DEGREE
+
+PROCEDURE. After getting the child's attention, say: "_What must you do
+when you are sleepy?_" If necessary the question may be repeated a
+number of times, using a persuasive and encouraging tone of voice. No
+other form of question may be substituted. About twenty seconds may be
+allowed for an answer, though as a rule subjects of 4 or 5 years usually
+answer quite promptly or not at all.
+
+Proceed in the same way with the other two questions: "_What ought you
+to do when you are cold?_" "_What ought you to do when you are hungry?_"
+
+SCORING. There must be _two correct responses out of three_. No one form
+of answer is required. It is sufficient if the question is comprehended
+and given a reasonably sensible answer. The following are samples of
+correct responses:--
+
+  (a) "Go to bed." "Go to sleep." "Have my mother get me ready for
+      bed." "Lie still, not talk, and I'll soon be asleep."
+  (b) "Put on a coat" (or "cloak," "furs," "wrap up," etc.).
+      "Build a fire." "Run and I'll soon get warm." "Get close to
+      the stove." "Go into the house," or, "Go to bed," may possibly
+      deserve the score _plus_, though they are somewhat doubtful
+      and are certainly inferior to the responses just given.
+  (c) "Eat something." "Drink some milk." "Buy a lunch." "Have my
+      mamma spread some bread and butter," etc.
+
+With the comprehension questions in this year it is nearly always easy
+to decide whether the response is acceptable, failure being indicated
+usually either by silence or by an absurd or irrelevant answer. One
+8-year-old boy who had less than 4-year intelligence answered all three
+questions by putting his finger on his eye and saying: "I'd do that."
+"Have to cry" is a rather common incorrect response.
+
+REMARKS. The purpose of these questions is to ascertain whether the
+child can comprehend the situations suggested and give a reasonably
+pertinent reply. The first requirement, of course, is to understand the
+language; the second is to tell how the situation suggested should be
+met.
+
+The question may be raised whether a given child might not fail to
+answer the questions correctly and yet have the intelligence to do the
+appropriate thing if the real situation were present. This is at least
+conceivable, but since it would not be practicable to make the subject
+actually cold, sleepy, or hungry in order to observe his behavior, we
+must content ourselves with suggesting a situation to be imagined. It
+probably requires more intelligence to tell what one ought to do in a
+situation which has to be imagined than to do the right thing when the
+real situation is encountered.
+
+The comprehension questions of this year had not been standardized until
+the Stanford investigation of 1913-14. Questions _a_ and _b_ were
+suggested by Binet in 1905, while _c_ is new. They make an excellent
+test of 4-year intelligence.
+
+
+IV, 6. REPEATING FOUR DIGITS
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_Now, listen. I am going to say over some numbers and
+after I am through, I want you to say them exactly like I do. Listen
+closely and get them just right--4-7-3-9._" Same with 2-8-5-4 and
+7-2-6-1. The examiner should consume nearly four seconds in pronouncing
+each series, and should practice in advance until this speed can be
+closely approximated. If the child refuses to respond, the first series
+may be repeated as often as may be necessary to prove an attempt, but
+_success with a series which has been re-read may not be counted_. The
+second and third series may be pronounced but once.
+
+SCORING. Passed if the child repeats correctly, _after a single reading,
+one series out of the three_ series given. The order must be correct.
+
+REMARKS. The test of repeating four digits was not included by Binet in
+the scale and seems not to have been used by any of the Binet workers.
+It is passed by about three fourths of our 4-year-olds.
+
+
+IV. ALTERNATIVE TEST: REPEATING TWELVE TO THIRTEEN SYLLABLES
+
+The three sentences are:--
+
+  (a) "_The boy's name is John. He is a very good boy._"
+  (b) "_When the train passes you will hear the whistle blow._"
+  (c) "_We are going to have a good time in the country._"
+
+PROCEDURE. Get the child's attention and say: "_Listen, say this: 'Where
+is kitty?'_" After the child responds, add: "_Now say this ..._,"
+reading the first sentence in a natural voice, distinctly and with
+expression. If the child is too timid to respond, the first sentence may
+be re-read, but in this case the response is not counted. _Re-reading is
+permissible only with the first sentence._
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if at least _one sentence is repeated
+without error after a single reading_. As in the alternative test of
+year III, we ignore ordinary indistinctness and defects of pronunciation
+due to imperfect language development, but the sentence must be repeated
+without addition, omission, or transposition of words.
+
+REMARKS. Sentences of twelve syllables had not been standardized
+previous to the Stanford revision, but Binet locates memory for ten
+syllables at year V, and others have followed his example. Our own data
+show that even 4-year-olds are usually able to repeat twelve syllables
+with the procedure here set forth.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XI
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR V
+
+
+V, 1. COMPARISON OF WEIGHTS
+
+MATERIALS. It is necessary to have two weights, identical in shape,
+size, and appearance, weighing respectively 3 and 15 grams.[50] If
+manufactured weights are not at hand, it is easy to make satisfactory
+substitutes by taking stiff cardboard pill-boxes, about 1¼ inches in
+diameter, and filling them with cotton and shot to the desired weight.
+The shot must be embedded in the center of the cotton so as to prevent
+rattling. After the box has been loaded to the exact weight, the lid
+should be glued on firmly. If one does not have access to laboratory
+scales, it is always possible to secure the help of a druggist in the
+rather delicate task of weighing the boxes accurately. A set of pill-box
+weights will last through hundreds of tests, if handled carefully, but
+they will not stand rough usage. The manufactured blocks are more
+durable, and so more satisfactory in the long run. If the weights are
+not at hand, the alternative test may be substituted.
+
+[50] The weights required for this test, and also for IX, 2, may be
+purchased of C. H. Stoelting & Co., 3037 Carroll Avenue, Chicago,
+Illinois.
+
+PROCEDURE. Place the 3- and 15-gram weights on the table before the
+child some two or three inches apart. Say: "_You see these blocks. They
+look just alike, but one of them is heavy and one is light. Try them and
+tell me which one is heavier._" If the child does not respond, repeat
+the instructions, saying this time, "_Tell me which one is the
+heaviest._" (Many American children have heard only the superlative form
+of the adjective used in the comparison of two objects.)
+
+Sometimes the child merely points to one of the boxes or picks up one at
+random and hands it to the examiner, thinking he is asked to _guess_
+which is heaviest. We then say: "_No, that is not the way. You must take
+the boxes in your hands and try them, like this_" (illustrating by
+lifting with one hand, first one box and then the other, a few inches
+from the table). Most children of 5 years are then able to make the
+comparison correctly. Very young subjects, however, or older ones who
+are retarded, sometimes adopt the rather questionable method of lifting
+both weights in the same hand at once. This is always an unfavorable
+sign, especially if one of the blocks is placed in the hand on top of
+the other block.
+
+After the first trial, the weights are shuffled and again presented for
+comparison as before, _this time with the positions reversed_. The third
+trial follows with the blocks in the same position as in the first
+trial. Some children have a tendency to stereotyped behavior, which in
+this test shows itself by choosing always the block on a certain
+side. Hence the necessity of alternating the positions.[51] Reserve
+commendation until all three trials have been given.
+
+[51] For discussion of "stereotypy" see p. 203.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _two of the three_ comparisons are
+correct. If there is reason to suspect that the successful responses
+were due to lucky guesses, the test should be entirely repeated.
+
+REMARKS. This test is decidedly more difficult than that of comparing
+lines (IV, 1). It is doubtful, however, if we can regard the difference
+as one due primarily to the relative difficulty of visual discrimination
+and muscular discrimination. In fact, the test with weights hardly taxes
+sensory discrimination at all when used with children of 5-year
+intelligence. Success depends, in the first place, on the ability to
+understand the instructions; and in the second place, on the power to
+hold the instructions in mind long enough to guide the process of making
+the comparison. The test presupposes, in elementary form, a power which
+is operative in all the higher independent processes of thought, the
+power to neglect the manifold distractions of irrelevant sensations and
+ideas and to drive direct toward a goal. Here the goal is furnished by
+the instruction, "Try them and see which is heavier." This must be held
+firmly enough in mind to control the steps necessary for making the
+comparison. Ideas of piling the blocks on top of one another, throwing
+them, etc., must be inhibited. Sometimes the low-grade imbecile starts
+off in a very promising way, then apparently forgets the instructions
+(loses sight of the goal), and begins to play with the boxes in a random
+way. His mental processes are not consecutive, stable, or controlled. He
+is blown about at the mercy of every gust of momentary interest.
+
+There is very general agreement in the assignment of this test to
+year V.
+
+
+V, 2. NAMING COLORS
+
+MATERIALS. Use saturated red, yellow, blue, and green papers, about
+2 × 1 inch in size, pasted one half inch apart on white or gray
+cardboard. For sake of uniformity it is best to match the colors
+manufactured especially for this test.[52]
+
+[52] Printed cards showing these colors are included in the set of
+material furnished by the publishers of this book.
+
+PROCEDURE. Point to the colors in the order, red, yellow, blue, green.
+Bring the finger close to the color designated, in order that there may
+be no mistake as to which one is meant, and say: "_What is the name of
+that color?_" Do not say: "_What color is that?_" or, "_What kind of a
+color is that?_" Such a formula might bring the answer, "The first
+color"; or, "A pretty color." Still less would it do to say: "_Show me
+the red_," "_Show me the yellow_," etc. This would make it an entirely
+different test, one that would probably be passed a year earlier than
+the Binet form of the experiment. Nor is it permissible, after a color
+has been miscalled, to return to it and again ask its name.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed only if _all_ the colors are named correctly
+and without marked uncertainty. However, prefixing the adjective "dark,"
+or "light," before the name of a color is overlooked.
+
+REMARKS. Naming colors is not a test of color discrimination, for that
+capacity is well developed years below the level at which this test is
+used. All 5-year-olds who are not color blind discriminate among the
+four primary colors here used as readily as adults do. As stated by
+Binet, it is a test of the "verbalization of color perception." It tells
+us whether the child has associated the names of the four primary colors
+with his perceptual imagery of those colors.
+
+The _ability_ to make simple associations between a sense impression and
+a name is certainly present in normal children some time before the
+above color associations are actually made. Many objects of experience
+are correctly named two or three years earlier, and it may seem at
+first a little strange that color names are learned so late. But it must
+be remembered that the child does not have numerous opportunities to
+observe and hear the names of several colors at once, nor does the
+designation of colors by their names ordinarily have much practical
+value for the young child. When he finally learns their names, it is
+more because of his spontaneous interest in the world of sense. Lack of
+such spontaneous interest is always an unfavorable sign, and it is not
+surprising, therefore, that imbecile intelligence has ordinarily never
+taken the trouble to associate colors with their names. Girls are
+somewhat superior to boys in this test, due probably to a greater
+natural interest in colors.
+
+Binet originally placed this test in year VIII, changing it to year VII
+in the 1911 scale. Goddard places it in year VII, while Kuhlmann omits
+it altogether. With a single exception, all the actual statistics with
+normal children justify the location of the test in year V. Bobertag's
+figures are the exception, opposed to which are Rowe, Winch, Dumville,
+Dougherty, Brigham, and all three of the Stanford investigations.
+
+The test is probably more subject to the influence of home environment
+than most of the other tests of the scale, and if the social status of
+the child is low, failure would not be especially significant until
+after the age of 6 years. On the whole it is an excellent test.
+
+
+V, 3. ÆSTHETIC COMPARISON
+
+Use the three pairs of faces supplied with the printed forms. It goes
+without saying that improvised drawings may not be substituted for
+Binet's until they have first been standardized.
+
+PROCEDURE. Show the pairs in order from top to bottom. Say: "_Which of
+these two pictures is the prettiest?_" Use both the comparative and the
+superlative forms of the adjective. Do not use the question, "Which face
+is the uglier (ugliest)?" unless there is some difficulty in getting the
+child to respond. It is not permitted, in case of an incorrect response,
+to give that part of the test again and to allow the child a chance to
+correct his answer; or, in case this is done, we must consider only the
+original response in scoring.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed only if all _three_ comparisons are made
+correctly. Any marked uncertainty is failure. Sometimes the child
+laughingly designates the ugly picture as the prettier, yet shows by his
+amused expression that he is probably conscious of its peculiarity or
+absurdity. In such cases "pretty" seems to be given the meaning of
+"funny" or "amusing." Nevertheless, we score this response as failure,
+since it betokens a rather infantile tolerance of ugliness.
+
+REMARKS. From the psychological point of view this is a most interesting
+test. One might suppose that æsthetic judgment would be relatively
+independent of intelligence. Certainly no one could have known in
+advance of experience that intellectual retardation would reveal itself
+in weakness of the æsthetic sense about as unmistakably as in memory,
+practical judgment, or the comprehension of language. But such is the
+case. The development of the æsthetic sense parallels general mental
+growth rather closely. The imbecile of 4-year intelligence, even though
+he may have lived forty years, has no more chance of passing this test
+than any other test in year V. It would be profitable to devise and
+standardize a set of pictures of the same general type which would
+measure a less primitive stage of æsthetic development.
+
+The present test was located by Binet in year VI and has been retained
+in that year in other revisions; but three separate Stanford
+investigations, as well as the statistics of Winch, Dumville, Brigham,
+Rowe, and Dougherty, warrant its location in year V.
+
+
+V, 4. GIVING DEFINITIONS IN TERMS OF USE
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the words: _Chair_, _horse_, _fork_, _doll_, _pencil_,
+and _table_. Say: "_You have seen a chair. You know what a chair is.
+Tell me, what is a chair?_" And so on with the other words, always in
+the order in which they are named above.
+
+Occasionally there is difficulty in getting a response, which is
+sometimes due merely to the child's unwillingness to express his
+thoughts in sentences. The earlier tests require only words and phrases.
+In other cases silence is due to the rather indefinite form of the
+question. The child could answer, but is not quite sure what is expected
+of him. Whatever the cause, a little tactful urging is nearly always
+sufficient to bring a response. In this test we have not found the
+difficulty of overcoming silence nearly as great as others have stated
+it to be. In consecutive tests of 150 5- and 6-year-old children we
+encountered unbreakable silence with 8 words out of the total 900
+(150 × 6). This is less than 1 per cent. But tactful encouragement is
+sometimes necessary, and it is best to take the precaution of not giving
+the test until _rapport_ has been well established.
+
+The urging should take the following form: "_I'm sure you know what a
+... is. You have seen a .... Now, tell me, what is a ... ?_" That is, we
+merely repeat the question with a word of encouragement and in a
+coaxing tone of voice. It would not at all do to introduce other
+questions, like, "_What does a ... look like?_" or, "_What is a ...
+for?_" "_What do people do with a ... ?_"
+
+Sometimes, instead of attempting a definition (of _doll_, for example),
+the child begins to talk in a more or less irrelevant way, as "I have a
+great big doll. Auntie gave it to me for Christmas," etc. In such cases
+we repeat the question and say, "_Yes, but tell me; what is a doll?_"
+This is usually sufficient to bring the little chatter-box back to the
+task.
+
+Unless it is absolutely necessary to give the child lavish
+encouragement, it is best to withhold approval or disapproval until the
+test has been finished. If the first response is a poor one and we
+pronounce it "fine" or "very good," we tempt the child to persist in his
+low-grade type of definition. By withholding comment until the last word
+has been defined, we give greater play to spontaneity and initiative.
+
+SCORING. As a rule, children of 5 and 6 years define an object in terms
+of use, stating what it does, what it is for, what people do with it,
+etc. Definitions by description, by telling what substance it is made
+of, and by giving the class to which it belongs are grouped together as
+"definitions superior to use." It is not before 8 years that two thirds
+of the children spontaneously give a large proportion of definitions in
+terms superior to use.
+
+The test is passed in year V if _four words out of the six_ are defined
+in terms of use (or better than use). The following are examples of
+satisfactory responses:--
+
+    _Chair_: "To sit on." "You sit on it." "It is made of wood and
+    has legs and back," etc.
+
+    _Horse_: "To drive." "To ride." "What people drive." "To pull
+    the wagon." "It is big and has four legs," etc.
+
+    _Fork_: "To eat with." "To stick meat with." "It is hard and has
+    three sharp things," etc.
+
+    _Doll_: "To play with." "What you dress and put to bed." "To
+    rock," etc.
+
+    _Pencil_: "To write with." "To draw." "They write with it." "It
+    is sharp and makes a black mark."
+
+    _Table_: "To eat on." "What you put the dinner on." "Where you
+    write." "It is made of wood and has legs."
+
+Examples of failure are such responses as the following: "A chair is a
+chair"; "There is a chair"; or simply, "There" (pointing to a chair). We
+record such responses without pressing for a further definition. About
+the only other type of failure is silence.
+
+REMARKS. It is not the purpose of this test to find out whether the
+child knows the meaning of the words he is asked to define. Words have
+purposely been chosen which are perfectly familiar to all normal
+children of 5 years. But with young children there is a difference
+between knowing a word and giving a definition of it. Besides, we desire
+to find out how the child apperceives the word, or rather the object for
+which it stands; whether the thing is thought of in terms of use,
+appearance (shape, size, color, etc.), material composing it, or class
+relationships.
+
+This test, because it throws such interesting light on the maturity of
+the child's apperceptive processes, is one of the most valuable of all.
+It is possible to differentiate at least a half-dozen degrees of
+excellence in definitions, according to the intellectual maturity of the
+subject. A volume, indeed, could be written on the development of word
+definitions and the growth of meanings; but we will postpone further
+discussion until VIII, 5. Our concern at present is to know that
+children of 5 years should at least be able to define four of these six
+words in terms of use.
+
+Binet placed the test in year VI, but our own figures and those of
+nearly all the other investigations indicate that it is better located
+in year V.
+
+
+V, 5. THE GAME OF PATIENCE
+
+MATERIAL. Prepare two rectangular cards, each 2 × 3 inches, and divide
+one of them into two triangles by cutting it along one of its diagonals.
+
+PROCEDURE. Place the uncut card on the table with one of its longer
+sides to the child. By the side of this card, a little nearer the child
+and a few inches apart, lay the two halves of the divided rectangle with
+their hypothenuses turned from each other as follows:
+
+[Illustration]
+
+Then say to the child: "_I want you to take these two pieces_ (touching
+the two triangles) _and put them together so they will look exactly like
+this_" (pointing to the uncut card). If the child hesitates, we repeat
+the instructions with a little urging. Say nothing about hurrying, as
+this is likely to cause confusion. Give three trials, of one minute
+each. If only one trial is given, success is too often a result of
+chance moves; but luck is not likely to bring two successes in three
+trials. If the first trial is a failure, move the cut halves back to
+their original position and say: "_No; put them together so they will
+look like this_" (pointing to the uncut card). Make no other comment of
+approval or disapproval. Disregard in silence the inquiring looks of the
+child who tries to read his success or failure in your face.
+
+If one of the pieces is turned over, the task becomes impossible, and it
+is then necessary to turn the piece back to its original position and
+begin over, not counting this trial. Have the under side of the pieces
+marked so as to avoid the risk of presenting one of them to the child
+wrong side up.
+
+SCORING. There must be _two successes in three trials_. About the only
+difficulty in scoring is that of deciding what constitutes a trial. We
+count it a trial when the child brings the pieces together and (after
+few or many changes) leaves them in some position. Whether he succeeds
+after many moves, or leaves the pieces with approval in some absurd
+position, or gives up and says he cannot do it, his effort counts as one
+trial. A single trial may involve a number of unsuccessful changes of
+position in the two cards, but these changes may not consume altogether
+more than one minute.
+
+REMARKS. As aptly described by Binet, the operation has the following
+elements: "(1) To keep in mind the end to be attained, that is to say,
+the figure to be formed. It is necessary to comprehend this end and not
+to lose sight of it. (2) To try different combinations under the
+influence of this directing idea, which guides the efforts of the child
+even though he be unconscious of the fact. (3) To judge the formed
+combination, compare it with the model, and decide whether it is the
+correct one."
+
+It may be classed, therefore, as one of the many forms of the
+"combination method." Elements must be combined into some kind of whole
+under the guidance of a directing idea. In this respect it has something
+in common with the form-board test, the Ebbinghaus test, and the test
+with dissected sentences (XII, 4). Binet designates it a "test of
+patience," because success in it depends upon a certain willingness to
+persist in a line of action under the control of an idea.
+
+Not all failures in this test are equally significant. A bright child of
+5 years sometimes fails, but usually not without many trial combinations
+which he rejects one after another as unsatisfactory. A dull child of
+the same age often stops after he has brought the pieces into any sort
+of juxtaposition, however absurd, and may be quite satisfied with his
+foolish effort. His mind is not fruitful and he lacks the power of
+auto-criticism.
+
+It would be well worth while to work out a new and somewhat more
+difficult "test of patience," but with special care to avoid the
+puzzling features of the usual games of anagrams. The one given us by
+Binet is rather easy for year V, though plainly somewhat too difficult
+for year IV.
+
+
+V, 6. THREE COMMISSIONS
+
+PROCEDURE. After getting up from the chair and moving with the child to
+the center of the room, say: "_Now, I want you to do something for me.
+Here's a key. I want you to put it on that chair over there; then I want
+you to shut (or open) that door, and then bring me the box which you see
+over there_ (pointing in turn to the objects designated). _Do you
+understand? Be sure to get it right. First, put the key on the chair,
+then shut_ (open) _the door, then bring me the box_ (again pointing).
+_Go ahead._" Stress the words _first_ and _then_ so as to emphasize the
+order in which the commissions are to be executed.
+
+Give the commissions always in the above order. Do not repeat the
+instructions again or give any further aid whatever, even by the
+direction of the gaze. If the child stops or hesitates it is never
+permissible to say: "_What next?_" Have the self-control to leave the
+child alone with his task.
+
+SCORING. _All three commissions must be executed and in the proper
+order._ Failure may result, therefore, either from leaving out one or
+more of the commands or from changing the order. The former is more
+often the case.
+
+REMARKS. Success depends first on the ability to comprehend the
+commands, and secondly, on the ability to hold them in mind. It is
+therefore a test of memory, though of a somewhat different kind from
+that involved in repeating digits or sentences. It is an excellent test,
+for it throws light on a kind of intelligence which is demanded in all
+occupations and in everyday life. A more difficult test of the same type
+ought to be worked out for a higher age level.
+
+Binet originally located this test in year VI, but in 1911 changed it to
+year VII. This is unfortunate, for the three Stanford investigations, as
+well as the statistics of all other investigators, show conclusively
+that it is easy enough for year V.
+
+
+V. ALTERNATIVE TEST: GIVING AGE
+
+PROCEDURE. The formula is simply, "_How old are you?_" The child of this
+age is, of course, not expected to know the date of his birthday, but
+merely how many years old he is.
+
+SCORING. About the only danger in scoring is in the failure to verify
+the child's response. Some children give an incorrect answer with
+perfect assurance, and it is therefore always necessary to verify.
+
+REMARKS. Inability to give the age may or may not be significant. If the
+child has arrived at the age of 7 or 8 years and has had anything like a
+normal social environment, failure in the test is an extremely
+unfavorable sign. But if the child is an orphan or has grown up in
+neglect, ignorance of age has little significance for intelligence.
+About all we can say is that if a child gives his age correctly, it is
+because he has had sufficient interest and intelligence to remember
+verbal statements which have been made concerning him in his presence.
+He may even pass the test without attaching any definite meaning to the
+word "year." On the other hand, if he has lived seven or eight years in
+a normal environment, it is safe to assume that he has heard his age
+given many times, and failure to remember it would then indicate either
+a weak memory or a grave inferiority of spontaneous interests, or both.
+Normal children have a natural interest in the things they hear said
+about themselves, while the middle-grade imbecile of even 40 years may
+fail to remember his age, however often he may have heard it stated.
+
+Binet placed the test in year VI of the 1908 series, but omitted it
+altogether in 1911. Kuhlmann and Goddard also omit it, perhaps wisely.
+Nevertheless, it is always interesting to give as a supplementary test.
+Children from good homes acquire the knowledge about a year earlier than
+those from less favorable surroundings. Unselected children of
+California ordinarily pass the test at 5 years.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VI
+
+
+VI, 1. DISTINGUISHING RIGHT AND LEFT
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the child: "_Show me your right hand._" After this is
+responded to, say: "_Show me your left ear._" Then: "_Show me your right
+eye._" Stress the words _left_ and _ear_ rather strongly and equally;
+also _right_ and _eye_. If there is one error, repeat the test, this
+time with left hand, right ear, and left eye. Carefully avoid giving any
+help by look of approval or disapproval, by glancing at the part of the
+body indicated, or by supplementary questions.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if all three questions are answered
+correctly, or if, in case of one error, the three additional questions
+are all answered correctly. The standard, therefore, _is three out of
+three, or five out of six_.
+
+The chief danger of variation among different examiners in scoring
+comes from double responses. For example, the child may point first to
+one ear and then to the other. In all cases of double response, the rule
+is to count the second response and disregard the first. This holds
+whether the first response was wrong and the second right, or _vice
+versa_.
+
+REMARKS. It is interesting to follow the child's acquisitions
+of language distinctions relating to spacial orientation. Other
+distinctions of this type are those between up and down, above and
+below, near and far, before and behind, etc. As Bobertag has pointed
+out, the child first masters such distinctions as up and down, above and
+below, before and behind, etc., and arrives at a knowledge of right and
+left rather tardily.
+
+How may we explain the late distinction of right and left as compared
+with up and down? At least four theories may be advanced: (1) Something
+depends on the frequency with which children have occasion to make the
+respective distinctions. (2) It may be explained on the supposition that
+kinæsthetic sensations are more prominently involved in distinctions of
+up and down than in distinctions of right and left. It is certainly true
+that, in distinguishing the two sides of a thing, less bodily movement
+is ordinarily required than in distinctions of its upper and lower
+aspects. The former demands only a shift of the eyes, the latter often
+requires an upward or downward movement of the head. (3) It may be due
+to the fact that the appearance of an object is more affected by
+differences in vertical orientation than by those of horizontal
+orientation. We see an object now from one side, now from the other, and
+the two aspects easily blend, while the two aspects corresponding to
+above and below are not viewed in such rapid succession and so remain
+much more distinct from one another in the child's mind. Or, (4), the
+difference may be mainly a matter of language. The child undoubtedly
+hears the words _up_ and _down_ much oftener than _right_ and _left_,
+and thus learns their meaning earlier. Horizontal distinctions are
+commonly made in such terms as _this side_ and _that side_, or merely by
+pointing, while in the case of vertical distinctions the words _up_ and
+_down_ are used constantly. This last explanation is a very plausible
+one, but it is very probable that other factors are also involved.
+
+The distinction between right and left has a certain inherent and more
+or less mysterious difficulty. To convince one's self of this it is only
+necessary to try a little experiment on the first fifty persons one
+chances to meet. The experiment is as follows. Say: "I am going to ask
+you a question and I want you to answer it as quickly as you can." Then
+ask: "Which is your right hand?" About forty persons out of fifty will
+answer correctly without a second's hesitation, several will require two
+or three seconds to respond, while a few, possibly four or five
+per cent, will grow confused and perhaps be unable to respond for five
+or ten seconds. Some very intelligent adults cannot possibly tell which
+is the right or left hand without first searching for a scar or some
+other distinguishing mark which is known to be on a particular hand.
+Others resort to incipient movements of writing, and since, of course,
+every one knows which hand he writes with, the writing movements
+automatically initiated give the desired clue. One bright little girl of
+8 years responded by trying to wink first one eye and then the other.
+Asked why she did this, she said she knew she could wink her left eye,
+but not her right! One who is resourceful enough to adopt such an
+ingenious method is surely not less intelligent than the one who is able
+to respond by a direct instead of an intermediate association.
+
+It seems that normal people never encounter a corresponding difficulty
+in distinguishing up and down. The writer has questioned several hundred
+without finding a single instance, whereas a great many have to employ
+some intermediate association in order to distinguish right and left. It
+is the "p's and q's" that children must be told to mind; not the "p's
+and b's." The former is a horizontal, the latter a vertical distinction.
+
+Considering the difficulty which normal adults sometimes have in
+distinguishing right and left, is it fair to use this test as a measure
+of intelligence? We may answer in the affirmative. It is fair because
+normal adults, notwithstanding momentary uncertainty, are invariably
+able to make the distinction, if not by direct association, then by an
+intermediate one. We overlook the momentary confusion and regard only
+the correctness of the response. Subjects who are below middle-grade
+imbecile, however long they have lived, seldom pass the test.
+
+This test found a place in year VI of Binet's 1908 scale, but was
+shifted to year VII in the 1911 revision. The Stanford statistics, and
+all other available data, with the exception of Bobertag's, justify its
+retention in year VI. It is possible that the children of different
+nations do not have equal opportunity and stimulus for learning the
+distinction between right and left, but the data show that as far as
+American and English children are concerned we have a right to expect
+this knowledge in children of 6 years.
+
+
+VI, 2. FINDING OMISSIONS IN PICTURES
+
+PROCEDURE. Show the pictures to the child one at a time in the order in
+which they are lettered, _a_, _b_, _c_, _d_. When the first picture is
+shown (that with the eye lacking), say: "_There is something wrong with
+this face. It is not all there. Part of it is left out. Look carefully
+and tell me what part of the face is not there._" Often the child gives
+an irrelevant answer; as, "The feet are gone," "The stomach is not
+there," etc. These statements are true, but they do not satisfy the
+requirements of the test, so we say: "_No; I am talking about the face.
+Look again and tell me what is left out of the face._" If the correct
+response does not follow, we point to the place where the eye should be
+and say: "_See, the eye is gone._" When picture _b_ is shown we say
+merely: "_What is left out of this face?_" Likewise with picture _c_.
+For picture _d_ we say: "_What is left out of this picture?_" No help of
+any kind is given unless (if necessary) with the first picture. With the
+others we confine ourselves to the single question, and the answer
+should be given promptly, say within twenty to twenty-five seconds.
+
+SCORING. Passed if the omission is correctly pointed out in _three out
+of four_ of the pictures. Certain minor errors we may overlook, such as
+"eyes" instead of "eye" for the first picture; "nose and one ear"
+instead of merely "nose" for the third; "hands" instead of "arms" for
+the fourth, etc. Errors like the following, however, count as failure:
+"The other eye," or "The other ear" for the first or third; "The ears"
+for the fourth, etc.
+
+REMARKS. The test is one of the two or three dozen forms of the
+so-called "completion test," all of which have it in common that from
+the given parts of a whole the missing parts are to be found. The whole
+to be completed may be a word, a sentence, a story, a picture, a group
+of pictures, an object, or in fact almost anything. Sometimes all the
+parts of the whole are given and only the arrangement or order is to be
+found, as in the test with dissected sentences.
+
+Further discussion of the completion test will be found in connection
+with test 4, year XII. For the present we will only observe that
+notwithstanding a certain similarity among the tests of this type, they
+do not all call into play the same mental processes. The factor most
+involved may be verbal language coherence, visual perception of form,
+the association of abstract ideas, etc. To pass Binet's test with
+mutilated pictures requires, (1) that the parts of the picture be
+perceived as constituting a whole; and (2) that the idea of a human face
+or form be so easily and so clearly reproducible that it may act, even
+before it comes fully into consciousness, as a model or pattern, for the
+criticism of the picture shown. The younger the child, the less
+adequate, in this sense, is his perceptual familiarity with common
+objects. In standardizing a series of "absurd pictures," the writer has
+found that normal children of 3 years often see nothing wrong in a
+picture which shows a cat with two legs or a hen with four legs. Such
+children would, of course, never mistake a cat for a hen. Their trouble
+lies in the inability to call up in clear form a "free idea" of a cat or
+a hen for comparison with the perceptual presentation offered by the
+picture. Middle-grade imbeciles of adult age have much the same
+difficulty as normal children of 4 years in recognizing mutilations or
+absurdities in pictures of familiar objects.
+
+Binet first placed this test in year VII, changing it to year VIII in
+the 1911 revision. In other revisions it has been retained in year VII,
+although all the available statistics except Bobertag's warrant its
+location in year VI.
+
+
+VI, 3. COUNTING THIRTEEN PENNIES
+
+PROCEDURE. The procedure is the same as in the test of counting four
+pennies (year IV, test 3). If the first response contains only a minor
+error, such as the omission of a number in counting, failure to tally
+with the finger, etc., a second trial is given.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if there is _one success in two trials_.
+Success requires that the counting should tally with the pointing. It is
+not sufficient merely to state the number of pennies without pointing,
+for unless the child points and counts aloud we cannot be sure that his
+correct answer may not be the joint result of two errors in opposite
+directions and equal; for example, if one penny were skipped and
+another were counted twice the total result would still be correct, but
+the performance would not satisfy the requirements.
+
+REMARKS. Does success in this test depend upon intelligence or upon
+schooling? The answer is, intelligence mainly. There are possibly a few
+normal 6-year-old children who could not pass the test for lack of
+instruction, but children of this age usually have enough spontaneous
+interest in numbers to acquire facility in counting as far as 13 without
+formal teaching. Certainly, inability to do so by the age of 7 years is
+a suspicious sign unless the child's environment has been extraordinarily
+unfavorable. On the other hand, feeble-minded adults of the 5-year level
+usually have to have a great deal of instruction before they acquire
+the ability to count 13, and many of them are hardly able to learn it at
+all. So much does our learning depend on original endowment.
+
+Binet originally placed this test in year VII, but moved it to year VI
+in 1911. All the statistics, without exception, show that this change
+was justified. Bobertag says that nearly all 7-year-olds who are not
+feeble-minded can pass it, a statement with which we can fully agree.
+
+
+VI, 4. COMPREHENSION, SECOND DEGREE
+
+PROCEDURE. The questions used in this year are:--
+
+  (a) "_What's the thing to do if it is raining when you start to
+      school?_"
+  (b) "_What's the thing to do if you find that your house is on
+      fire?_"
+  (c) "_What's the thing to do if you are going some place and
+      miss your train (car)?_"
+
+Note that the wording of the first part of the questions is slightly
+different from that in year IV, test 5.
+
+If there is no response, or if the child looks puzzled, the question may
+be repeated once or twice. The form of the question must not under any
+circumstances be altered. Question _b_, for example, would be materially
+changed if we should say: "_Suppose you were to come home from school
+and find that your house was burning up. What would you do?_" The
+expression "burning up" would probably be much less likely to suggest
+calling a fireman than would the words "on fire."
+
+SCORING. _Two out of three_ must be answered correctly. The harder the
+comprehension questions are, the greater the variety of answers and the
+greater the difficulty of scoring. Because of the difficulty many
+examiners find in scoring this test, we will list the most common
+satisfactory, unsatisfactory, and doubtful responses to each question.
+
+(a) _If it is raining when you start to school_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Take umbrella," "Bring a parasol," "Put on
+    rubbers," "Wear an overcoat," etc. This type of response
+    occurred 61 times out of 72 successes. "Have my father bring me"
+    also counts _plus_.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Go home," "Stay at home," "Stay in the
+    house," "Have the rainbow," "Stay in school," etc. "Stay at
+    home" is the most common failure and might at first seem to the
+    examiner to be a satisfactory response. As a matter of fact,
+    this answer rests on a slight misunderstanding of the question,
+    the import of which is that one is to go to school and it is
+    raining.
+
+    _Doubtful._ "Run" as an answer is a little more troublesome. It
+    may reasonably be scored _plus_ if it can be ascertained that
+    the child is accustomed to meet the situation in this way. It is
+    a common response with children in those regions of the
+    Southwest where rains are so infrequent that umbrellas are
+    rarely used. "Bring my lunch" may be considered a satisfactory
+    response in case the child is in the habit of so doing on rainy
+    days.
+
+(b) _If you find that your house is on fire_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Ring the fire alarm," "Call the firemen," "Call
+    for help," "Put water on it," etc.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ The most common failure, accounting for nearly
+    half of all, is to suggest finding other shelter; _e.g._, "Go to
+    the hotel," "Get another house," "Stay with your friends,"
+    "Build a new house," etc. Others are: "Tell them you are sorry
+    it burned down," "Be careful and not let it burn again," "Have
+    it insured," "Cry," "Call the policeman," etc.
+
+    _Doubtful._ Instead of suggesting measures to put out the fire,
+    a good many children suggest mere escape or the saving of
+    household articles. Responses of this type are: "Jump out of the
+    windows," "Save yourself," "Get out as fast as you can," "Save
+    the baby," "Get my dolls and jewelry and hurry and get out."
+    These answers are about one seventh as frequent as the perfectly
+    satisfactory ones, and the rule for scoring them is a matter of
+    some importance. Under certain circumstances the logical thing
+    to do would be to save one's self or valuables without wasting
+    time trying to call help. There may be no help in reach, or a
+    fire which the child imagines may be too far along for help to
+    be effective. In order to avoid the possibility of doing a
+    subject an injustice, it may be desirable to score such answers
+    _plus_. We must not be too arbitrary.
+
+(c) _If you miss your train_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ The answer we expect is, "Wait for another,"
+    "Take the next car," or something to that effect. This type of
+    answer includes about 85 per cent of the responses which do not
+    belong obviously in the unsatisfactory group. "Take a jitney" is
+    a modern variation of this response which must be counted as
+    satisfactory.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ These are endless. One continues to meet new
+    examples of absurdity, however many children one has tested. The
+    possibilities are literally inexhaustible, but the following are
+    among the most common: "Wait for it to come back," "Have to
+    walk," "Be mad," "Don't swear," "Run and try to catch it," "Try
+    to jump on," "Don't go to that place," "Go to the next station,"
+    etc.
+
+    _Doubtful._ The main doubtful response is, "Go home again,"
+    "Come back next day and catch another," etc. In small or
+    isolated towns having only one or two trains per day, this is
+    the logical thing to do, and in such cases the score is _plus_.
+    Fortunately, only about one answer in ten gives rise to any
+    difference of opinion among even partly trained examiners.
+
+REMARKS. The three comprehension questions of this group were all
+suggested by Binet in 1905. Only one of them, however, "What would you
+do if you were going some place and missed your train?" was incorporated
+in the 1908 or 1911 series, and this was used in year X with seven
+others much harder. The other two remained unstandardized previous to
+the Stanford investigation.[53]
+
+[53] For general discussion of the comprehension questions as a test,
+see p. 158.
+
+
+VI, 5. NAMING FOUR COINS
+
+PROCEDURE. Show a nickel, a penny, a quarter, and a dime, asking each
+time: "_What is that?_" If the child misunderstands and answers,
+"Money," or "A piece of money," we say: "_Yes, but what do you call that
+piece of money?_" Show the coins always in the order given above.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _three of the four_ questions are
+correctly answered. Any correct designation of a coin is satisfactory,
+including provincialisms like "two bits" for the 25-cent piece, etc. If
+the child changes his response for a coin, we count the second answer
+and ignore the first. No supplementary questions are permissible.
+
+REMARKS. Some of the critics of the Binet scale regard this test as of
+little value, because, they say, the ability to identify pieces of money
+depends entirely on instruction or other accidents of environment. The
+figures show, however, that it is not greatly influenced by differences
+of social environment, although children from poor homes do slightly
+better with it than those from homes of wealth and culture. The fact
+seems to be that practically all children by the age of 6 years have
+had opportunity to learn the names of the smaller coins, and if they
+have failed to learn them it betokens a lack of that spontaneity of
+interest in things which we have mentioned so often as a fundamental
+presupposition of intelligence. It is by no means a test of mere
+mechanical memory.
+
+This test was given a place in year VII of Binet's 1908 scale, the coins
+used being the 1-sou, 2-sous, 10-sous, and 5-franc pieces. It was
+omitted from the Binet 1911 revision and also from that of Goddard.
+Kuhlmann retains it in year VII. Others, however, have required all four
+coins to be correctly named, and when this standard is used the test is
+difficult enough for year VII. Germany has six coins up to and including
+the 1-mark piece, all of which could be named by 76 per cent of
+Bobertag's 7-year-olds. With the coins and the standard of scoring used
+in the Stanford revision the test belongs well in year VI.
+
+
+VI, 6. REPEATING SIXTEEN TO EIGHTEEN SYLLABLES
+
+The sentences are:--
+
+  (a) "_We are having a fine time. We found a little mouse in the
+      trap._"
+  (b) "_Walter had a fine time on his vacation. He went fishing
+      every day._"
+  (c) "_We will go out for a long walk. Please give me my pretty
+      straw hat._"
+
+PROCEDURE. The instructions should be given as follows: "_Now, listen. I
+am going to say something and after I am through I want you to say it
+over just like I do. Understand? Listen carefully and be sure to say
+exactly what I say._" Then read the first sentence rather slowly, in a
+distinct voice, and with expression. If the response is not too bad,
+praise the child's efforts. Then proceed with the second and third
+sentences, prefacing each with an exhortation to "say exactly what I
+say."
+
+In this year and in the memory-for-sentences test of later years it is
+not permissible to re-read even the first sentence. The only reason for
+allowing a repetition of one of the sentences in the earlier test of
+this kind was to overcome the child's timidity. With children of 6 years
+or upward we seldom encounter the timidity which sometimes makes it so
+hard to secure responses in some of the tests of the earlier years.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed _if at least one sentence out of three is
+repeated without error, or if two are repeated with not more than one
+error each_. A single omission, insertion, or transposition counts as an
+error. Faults of pronunciation are of course overlooked. It is not
+sufficient that the thought be reproduced intact; the exact language
+must be repeated. The responses should be recorded _verbatim_. This is
+easily done if record blanks used for scoring have the sentences printed
+in full.
+
+REMARKS. In this test and in later tests of memory for sentences, it is
+interesting to ask after each response: "_Did you get it right?_" As in
+the tests with digits, it is an unfavorable sign when the child is
+perfectly satisfied with a very poor response.
+
+It is evident that tests of this type give opportunity for different
+degrees of failure. To repeat only a half or a third of each sentence is
+much more serious than to make but one error in each sentence (one word
+omitted, inserted, or misplaced). It would be possible to use the same
+sentences at three or four different age levels, by setting the
+appropriate standard for success at each age. If the standard is one
+sentence out of three repeated with no more than two errors, the test
+belongs in year V. If we require two absolutely correct responses out of
+three, the test belongs at about year VII. The shifting standard is
+rendered unnecessary, however, by the use of other tests of the same
+kind, easier ones in the lower years and more difficult ones in the
+upper.
+
+Sentences of sixteen syllables found a place in Binet's 1908 scale and
+were correctly located in year VI, but later revisions, including that
+of Binet, have omitted the test.
+
+
+VI. ALTERNATIVE TEST: FORENOON AND AFTERNOON
+
+PROCEDURE. If it is morning, ask: "_Is it morning or afternoon?_" If it
+is afternoon, put the question in the reverse form, "_Is it afternoon or
+morning?_" This precaution is necessary because of the tendency of some
+children to choose always the latter of two alternatives. Do not
+cross-question the child or give any suggestion that might afford a clue
+as to the correct answer.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the correct response is given with
+apparent assurance. If the child says he is not sure but _thinks_ it
+forenoon (or afternoon, as the case may be), we score the response a
+failure even if the answer happens to be correct. However, this type of
+response is not often encountered.
+
+REMARKS. It is interesting to follow the child's development with regard
+to orientation in time. This development proceeds much more slowly than
+we are wont to assume. Certain distinctions with regard to space, as up
+and down, come much earlier. As Binet remarks, schools sometimes try to
+teach the events of national history to children whose time orientation
+is so rudimentary that they do not even know morning from afternoon!
+
+The test has two rather serious faults: (1) It gives too much play to
+chance, for since only two alternatives are offered, guesses alone would
+give about fifty per cent of correct responses. (2) We cannot be sure
+that the verbal distinction between forenoon and afternoon always
+corresponds the two divisions of the day. It is possible that the
+temporal discrimination precedes the formation of the correct verbal
+association.
+
+This test was included in the year VI group of the 1908 scale, but was
+omitted from the 1911 revision. Nearly all the data except Bobertag's
+show that it is rather easy for year VI, though too difficult for
+year V. Bobertag's figures would place the test in year VII. Possibly
+the corresponding German words are not as easy to learn as our _morning_
+and _afternoon_.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XIII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VII
+
+
+VII, 1. GIVING THE NUMBER OF FINGERS
+
+PROCEDURE. "_How many fingers have you on one hand?_" "_How many on the
+other hand?_" "_How many on both hands together?_" If the child begins
+to count in response to any of the questions, say: "_No, don't count.
+Tell me without counting._" Then repeat the question.
+
+SCORING. Passed _if all three questions are answered correctly and
+promptly_ without the necessity of counting. Some subjects do not
+understand the question to include the thumbs. We disregard this if the
+number of fingers exclusive of thumbs is given correctly.
+
+REMARKS. Like the two tests of counting pennies, this one, also, throws
+light on the child's spontaneous interest in numbers. However, the
+mental processes it calls into play are a little less simple than those
+required for mere counting. If the child is able to give the number of
+fingers, it is ordinarily because he has previously counted them and has
+remembered the result. The memory would hardly be retained but for a
+certain interest in numbers as such. Middle-grade imbeciles of even
+adult age seldom remember how many fingers they have, however often
+they may have been told. They are not able to form accurate concepts of
+other than the simplest number relationships, and numbers have little
+interest or meaning for them.
+
+Binet gave this test a place in year VII of the 1908 series, but omitted
+it in the 1911 revision. Goddard omits it, while Kuhlmann retains it in
+year VII, where, according to our own figures, it unmistakably belongs.
+Bobertag finds it rather easy for year VII, though too difficult for
+year VI.
+
+Our data prove that this test fulfills the requirements of a good test.
+It shows a rapid but even rise from year V to year VIII in the per cent
+passing, the agreement among the different testers is extraordinarily
+close, and it is relatively little influenced by training and social
+environment. For these reasons, and because it is so easy to give and
+score with uniformity, it well deserves a place in the scale.
+
+
+VII, 2. DESCRIPTION OF PICTURES
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the same pictures as in III, 3, presenting them always in
+the following order: Dutch Home, River Scene, Post-Office. The formula
+for the test in this year is somewhat different from that of year III.
+Say: "_What is this picture about? What is this a picture of?_" Use the
+double question, and follow the formula exactly. It would ruin the test
+to say: "_Tell me everything you see in this picture_," for this form of
+question tends to provoke the enumeration response even with intelligent
+children of this age.
+
+When there is no response, the question may be repeated as often as is
+necessary to break the silence.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _two of the three_ pictures are described
+or interpreted. Interpretation, however, is seldom encountered at this
+age. Often the response consists of a mixture of enumeration and
+description. The rule is that the reaction to a picture should not
+be scored _plus_ unless it is made up chiefly of description (or
+interpretation).
+
+Study of the following samples of satisfactory responses will give a
+fairly definite idea of the requirements for satisfactory description:--
+
+_Picture (a): satisfactory responses_
+
+    "The little girl is crying. The mother is looking at her and
+    there is a little kitten on the floor."
+
+    "The mother is watching the baby, and the cat is looking at a
+    hole in the floor, and there is a lamp and a table so I guess
+    it's a dining room."
+
+    "The little girl has wooden shoes. Her mother is sitting in a
+    chair and has a funny cap on her head. The cat is sitting on the
+    floor and there is a basket by the mother and a table with
+    something on it."
+
+    "It's about Holland. The little Dutch girl is crying and the
+    mother is sitting down."
+
+    "A little Dutch girl and her mother and that's a kitten, and the
+    little girl has her hand up as if she was doing something to her
+    forehead. She has shoes that curve up in front."
+
+    "Dutch lady, and the little baby doesn't want to come to her
+    mother and the cat is looking for some mice."
+
+    "The mother is sitting down and the little one has her hands up
+    over her eyes. There's a pail by the mother and a chair with
+    some clothes on it and a table with dishes. And here's a lamp
+    and here's some curtains."
+
+_Picture (b): satisfactory responses_
+
+    "Some people in a boat. The water is high and if they don't look
+    out the boat will tip over."
+
+    "Some Indians and a lady and man. They are in a boat on the
+    river and the boat is about to upset, and there are some dead
+    trees going to fall."
+
+    "There's a lot of water coming up to drown the people. There are
+    two people in the boat and the boat is sinking."
+
+    "There's some people sailing in a canoe and the woman is leaning
+    over on the man because she is afraid."
+
+    "There's an Indian and some white people in the boat. I suppose
+    they are out for a ride in a canoe."
+
+    "Picture about some man and lady in a canoe and going down to
+    the sea."
+
+    "They are taking a boat ride on the ocean and the water is up so
+    high that one of them is scared. Here are some trees and two of
+    them are going to fall down. Here's a little place or bridge you
+    can stand on. The man is touching this one's head and this one
+    has his hand on the cover."
+
+    "The water is splashing all over. There's trees on this bank and
+    there's a rock and some trees falling down. The people have a
+    blanket over them."
+
+_Picture (c): satisfactory responses_
+
+    "A man selling eggs and two men reading the paper together and
+    two men watching."
+
+    "A few men reading a newspaper and one has a basket of eggs and
+    this one has been fishing."
+
+    "There's a man with a basket of eggs and another is reading the
+    paper and a woman is hanging out clothes. There's a house near."
+
+    "There's a man trying to read the paper and the others want to
+    read it too. Here's a lady walking up to the barn. There are
+    houses over there and one man has a basket."
+
+    "There's a big brick house and five men by it and a man with a
+    basket of eggs and a post-office sign and a lady going home."
+
+    "They are all looking at the paper. He is looking over the other
+    man's shoulder and this one is looking at the back of the paper.
+    There's a woman cleaning up her back yard and some coops for
+    hens."
+
+    "A man reading a paper, a man with eggs, a woman and a tree and
+    another house. That man has an apron on. This is the
+    post-office."
+
+Unsatisfactory responses are those made up entirely or mainly of
+enumeration. A phrase or two of description intermingled with a larger
+amount of enumeration counts _minus_. Sometimes the description is
+satisfactory as far as it goes, but is exceedingly brief. In such cases
+a little tactful urging ("_Go ahead_," etc.) will extend the response
+sufficiently to reveal its true character.
+
+REMARKS. Description is better than enumeration because it involves
+putting the elements of a picture together in a simple way or noting
+their qualities. This requires a higher type of mental association
+(combinative power) than mere enumeration. An unusually complete
+description indicates relative wealth of mental content and facility of
+association.
+
+Binet placed this test in year VII, and it seems to have been retained
+in this location in all revisions except Bobertag's. However, the
+statistics of various workers show much disagreement. Lack of agreement
+is easily accounted for by the fact that different investigators have
+used different series of pictures and doubtless also different standards
+for success. The pictures used by Binet have little action or detail and
+are therefore rather difficult for description. On the other hand, the
+Jingleman-Jack pictures used by Kuhlmann represent such familiar
+situations and have so much action that even 5- or 6-year intelligence
+seldom fails with them. The pictures we employ belong without question
+in year VII.
+
+No better proof than the above could be found to show how ability of a
+given kind does not make its appearance suddenly. There is no one time
+in the life of even a single child when the power to describe pictures
+suddenly develops. On the contrary, pictures of a certain type will
+ordinarily provoke description, rather than enumeration, as early as
+5 or 6 years; others not before 7 or 8 years, or even later.
+
+
+VII, 3. REPEATING FIVE DIGITS
+
+PROCEDURE. Use: 3-1-7-5-9; 4-2-3-8-5; 9-8-1-7-6. Tell the child to
+listen and to say after you just what you say. Then read the first
+series of digits at a slightly faster rate than one per second, in a
+distinct voice, and with perfectly uniform emphasis. _Avoid rhythm._
+
+In previous tests with digits, it was permissible to re-read the first
+series if the child refused to respond. In this year, and in the digits
+tests of later years, this is not permissible. Warning is not given as
+to the number of digits to be repeated. Before reading each series, get
+the child's attention. Do not stare at the child during the response, as
+this is disconcerting. Look aside or at the record sheet.
+
+SCORING. Passed if the child repeats correctly, after a single reading,
+_one series out of the three_ series given. The order must be correct.
+
+REMARKS. Psychologically the repetition of digits differs from the
+repetition of sentences mainly in the fact that digits have less meaning
+(fewer associations) than the words of a sentence. It is because they
+are not as well knit together in meaning that three digits tax the
+memory as much as six syllables making up a sentence.
+
+Testing auditory memory for digits is one of the oldest of intelligence
+tests. It is easy to give and lends itself well to exact quantitative
+standardization. Its value has been questioned, however, on two grounds:
+(1) That it is not a test of pure memory, but depends largely on
+attention; and (2) that the results are too much influenced by the
+child's type of imagery. As to the first objection, it is true that more
+than one mental function is brought into play by the test. The same may
+be said of every other test in the Binet scale and for that matter of
+any test that could be devised. It is impossible to isolate any function
+for separate testing. In fact, the functions called memory, attention,
+perception, judgment, etc., never operate in isolation. There are no
+separate and special "faculties" corresponding to such terms, which are
+merely convenient names for characterizing mental processes of various
+types. In any test it is "general ability" which is operative, perhaps
+now _chiefly_ in remembering, at another time _chiefly_ in sensory
+discrimination, again in reasoning, etc.
+
+The second objection, that the test is largely invalidated by the
+existence of imagery types, is not borne out by the facts. Experiments
+have shown that pure imagery types are exceedingly rare, and that
+children, especially, are characterized by "mixed" imagery. There are
+probably few subjects so lacking in auditory imagery as to be placed at
+a serious disadvantage in this test.
+
+Lengthening a series by the addition of a single digit adds greatly to
+the difficulty. While four digits can usually be repeated by children of
+4 years, five digits belong in year VII and six in year X.
+
+It is always interesting to note the type of errors made. The most
+common error is to omit one or more of the digits, usually in the first
+part of the series. If the child's ability is decidedly below the test
+he may give only the last two or three out of the five or six heard.
+Substitutions are also quite frequent, and if so many substitutions are
+made as to give a series quite unlike that which the child has heard, it
+is an unfavorable sign, indicating weakness of the critical sense which
+is so often found with low-level intelligence. In case of extreme
+weakness of the power of auto-criticism, the child in response to the
+series 9-8-1-7-6-, may say 1-2-3-4-5-6, or perhaps merely a couple of
+digits like 8-6, and still express complete satisfaction with his absurd
+response. After each series, therefore, the examiner should say, "_Was
+it right?_"[54] Very young subjects, however, have a tendency to answer
+"yes" to any question of this type, and it is therefore best not to call
+for criticism of a performance below the age of 6 or 7 years.
+
+[54] "_Was it wrong?_" is not an equivalent question and should not be
+used.
+
+Digit series of a given length are not always of equal difficulty, and
+for this reason it is never wise to use series improvised at the moment
+of the experiment. We must avoid especially series of regularly
+ascending or descending value, the repetition at regular intervals of a
+particular digit, and all other peculiarities of arrangement which would
+favor the grouping of the digits for easier retention.
+
+It remains to mention two or three further cautions in regard to
+procedure. It is best to begin with a series about one digit below the
+child's expected ability. If the child has a probable intelligence of
+about 6 or 7 years, we should begin with four digits; in case of
+probable 10-year intelligence we begin with five digits, etc. On the
+other hand, we should avoid beginning too far down, because then the
+result is too much complicated by the effects of practice and fatigue.
+
+It is not necessary, and often it is not expedient, to give the digits
+tests of all the different years in succession; that is, without other
+tests intervening. While this may be permissible with older children, in
+young children the power of sustained attention is so weak that no
+single kind of test should occupy more than two or three minutes.
+Children below 6 or 7 years should ordinarily be given the tests in the
+order in which they are listed in the record booklet.
+
+In his 1911 revision of the scale Binet unfortunately shifted this test
+from year VII to year VIII. Goddard follows his example, but Kuhlmann
+retains it in year VII. The data from more than a dozen leading
+investigations in America, England, and Germany agree in showing that
+the test should remain in year VII.
+
+
+VII, 4. TYING A BOW-KNOT
+
+PROCEDURE. Prepare a shoestring tied in a bow-knot around a stick. The
+knot should be an ordinary "double bow," with wings not over three or
+four inches long. Make this ready in advance of the experiment and show
+the child only the completed knot.
+
+Place the model before the subject with the wings pointing to the right
+and left, and say: "_You know what kind of knot this is, don't you? It
+is a bow-knot. I want you to take this other piece of string and tie the
+same kind of knot around my finger._" At the same time give the child a
+piece of shoestring, of the same length as that which is tied around the
+stick, and hold out a finger pointed toward the child and in convenient
+position for the operation. It is better to have the subject tie the
+string around the examiner's finger than around a pencil or other object
+because the latter often falls out of the string and is otherwise
+awkward to handle.
+
+Some children who assert that they do not know how to tie a bow-knot are
+sometimes nevertheless successful when urged to try. It is always
+necessary, therefore, to secure an actual trial.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if a double bow-knot (both ends folded in)
+is made _in not more than a minute_. A single bow-knot (only one end
+folded in) counts half credit, because children are often accustomed to
+use the single bow altogether. The usual plain common knot, which
+precedes the bow-knot proper, must not be omitted if the response is to
+count as satisfactory, for without this preliminary plain knot a
+bow-knot will not hold and is of no value. To be satisfactory the knot
+should also be drawn up reasonably close, not left gaping.
+
+REMARKS. This test, which had not before been standardized, was
+suggested to the writer by the late Dr. Huey, who in a conversation
+once remarked upon the frequent inability of feeble-minded adults to
+perform the little motor tasks which are universally learned by normal
+persons in childhood. The test was therefore incorporated in the
+Stanford trial series of 1913-14 and tried with 370 non-selected
+children within two months of the 6th, 7th, 8th, or 9th birthday. It was
+expected that the test would probably be found to belong at about the
+8-year level, but it proved to be easy enough for year VII, where
+69 per cent of the children passed it. Only 35 per cent of the
+6-year-olds succeeded, but after that age the per cent passing increased
+rapidly to 94 per cent at 9 years.
+
+This little experiment, simple as it is, seems to fulfill reasonably
+well the requirements of a good test. The main objection which might be
+brought against it is that it is much subject to the influence of
+training. If this were true in any marked degree, the mentally retarded
+children of 7-year intelligence should be expected to succeed better
+with it than mentally advanced children of the same mental level, since
+the former would have had at least two or three years more in which to
+learn the task. A comparison of the two groups, however, shows no great
+difference. The factor of age, apart from mental age, affects the
+results so little that it is evident we have here a real test of
+intelligence.
+
+It would, of course, be easy to imagine a child of 7 years who had not
+had reasonable opportunity to make the acquaintance of bow-knots or to
+learn to tie them. But such children are seldom encountered in the ages
+above 6 or 7. Of 68 7-year-olds who were asked whether they had ever
+seen a bow-knot ("a knot like that") only two replied in the negative.
+It cannot be denied, however, that specific instruction and special
+stimulus to practice do play a certain part. This is suggested by the
+fact that girls excel the boys somewhat at each age, doubtless because
+bow-knots play a larger rôle in feminine apparel. Social status affects
+the results in only a moderate degree, though it might be supposed that
+poor ragamuffins, on the one hand, and children of the very rich, on the
+other, would both make a poor showing in this test; the former because
+of their scanty apparel, the latter because they sometimes have servants
+to dress them.
+
+The following are probably the chief factors determining success with
+this test: (1) Interest in common objective things; (2) ability to form
+permanent associative connections between successive motor coördinations
+(memory for a series of acts); and (3) skill in the acquisition of
+voluntary motor control. The last factor is probably much less important
+than the other two. Motor awkwardness often prolongs the time from the
+usual ten or fifteen seconds to thirty or forty seconds, but it is
+rarely a cause of a failure. The important thing is to be able to
+reproduce the appropriate succession of acts, acts which nearly all
+children of 7 years, under the joint stimulus of example and spontaneous
+interest, have before performed or tried to perform.
+
+
+VII, 5. GIVING DIFFERENCES FROM MEMORY
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_What is the difference between a fly and a
+butterfly?_" If the child does not seem to understand, say: "_You know
+flies, do you not? You have seen flies? And you know the butterflies!
+Now, tell me the difference between a fly and a butterfly._" Proceed in
+the same way with _stone and egg_, and _wood and glass_. A little
+coaxing is sometimes necessary to secure a response, but supplementary
+questions and suggestions of every kind are to be avoided. For example,
+it would not be permissible for the examiner to say: "_Which is larger,
+a fly or a butterfly?_" This would give the child his cue and he would
+immediately answer, "A butterfly." The child must be left to find a
+difference by himself. Sometimes a difference is given, but without any
+indication as to its direction, as, for example, "One is bigger than the
+other" (for fly and butterfly). It is then permissible to ask: "_Which
+is bigger?_"
+
+SCORING. Passed if a real difference is given in _two out of three
+comparisons_. It is not necessary, however, that an _essential_
+difference be given; the difference may be trivial, only it must be a
+real one. The following are samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory
+responses:--
+
+_Fly and butterfly_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Butterfly is larger." "Butterfly has bigger
+    wings." "Fly is black and a butterfly is not." "Butterfly is
+    yellow (or white, etc.) and fly is black." "Fly bites you and
+    butterfly don't." "Butterfly has powder on its wings, fly does
+    not." "Fly flies straighter." "Butterfly is outdoors and a fly
+    is in the house." "Flies are more dangerous to our health."
+    "Flies haven't anything to sip honey with." "Butterfly doesn't
+    live as long as a fly." "Butterfly comes from a caterpillar."
+
+    Sometimes a double contrast is meant, but not fully expressed;
+    as, "A fly is small and a butterfly is pretty." Here the thought
+    is probably correct, only the language is awkward.
+
+    Of 102 correct responses, 70 were in terms of size, or size plus
+    color or form; 12 were in terms of both form and color; 6 in
+    terms of color alone; and the rest scattered among such
+    responses as those mentioned above.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ These are mostly misstatements of facts; as:
+    "Fly is bigger." "Fly has legs and butterfly hasn't." "Butterfly
+    has no feet and fly has." "Butterfly makes butter." "Fly is a
+    fly and a butterfly is not." Failures due to misstatement of
+    fact are of endless variety. If an indefinite response is given,
+    like "The fly is different," or "They don't look alike," we ask,
+    "_How is it different?_" or, "_Why don't they look alike?_" It
+    is satisfactory if the child then gives a correct answer.
+
+_Stone and egg_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Stone is harder." "Egg is softer." "Egg breaks
+    easier." "Egg breaks and stone doesn't." "Stone is heavier."
+    "Egg is white and stone is not." "Egg has a shell and stone does
+    not." "Eggs have a white and a yellow in them." "You put eggs in
+    a pudding." "An egg is rounder than a stone." We may also accept
+    statements which are only qualifiedly true; as, "You can break
+    an egg, but not a stone." Likewise double but incomplete
+    comparisons are satisfactory; as, "An egg you fry and a stone
+    you throw," "A stone is tough and an egg you eat," etc.
+
+    A little over three fourths of the comparisons made by children
+    of 6, 7, and 8 years are in terms of hardness. The other
+    responses are widely scattered.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "A stone is bigger (or smaller) than an egg."
+    "A stone is square and an egg is round." "An egg is yellow and a
+    stone is white." "Stones are red (or black, etc.) and eggs are
+    white." "An egg is to eat and a stone is to plant." "An egg is
+    round and a stone is sometimes round."
+
+    It will be noted that the above responses are partly true and
+    partly false. The error they contain renders them unacceptable.
+    Most of the failures are due to misstatements as to size, shape,
+    or color, but occasionally one meets a bizarre answer.
+
+_Wood and glass_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Glass breaks easier than wood." "Glass breaks
+    and wood does not." "Wood is stronger than glass." "Glass you
+    can see through and wood you can't." "Glass cuts you and wood
+    doesn't." "You get splinters from wood and you don't from
+    glass." "Glass melts and wood doesn't." "Wood burns and glass
+    doesn't." "Wood has bark and glass hasn't." "Wood grows and
+    glass doesn't." "Glass is heavier than wood." "Glass glistens in
+    the sun and wood does not."
+
+    An incomplete double comparison is also counted satisfactory;
+    as, "Wood you can burn and glass you can see through."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Wood is black and glass is white." (Color
+    differences are always unsatisfactory in this comparison unless
+    transparency is also mentioned.) "Glass is square and wood is
+    round." "Glass is bigger than wood" (or _vice versa_). "Wood is
+    oblong and glass is square." "Glass is thin and wood is thick."
+    "Wood is made out of trees and glass out of windows." "There is
+    no glass in wood."
+
+    The two most frequent types of failures are misstatements
+    regarding color and thickness. The other failures are widely
+    scattered.
+
+REMARKS. The test is one which all the critics agree in commending,
+largely because it is so little influenced by ordinary school
+experience. Its excellence lies mainly, however, in the fact that it
+throws light upon the character of the child's higher thought processes,
+for thinking means essentially the association of ideas on the basis of
+differences or similarities. Nearly all thought processes, from the most
+complex to the very simplest, involve to a greater or less degree one or
+the other of these two types of association. They are involved in the
+simple judgments made by children, in the appreciation of puns, in
+mechanical inventions, in the creation of poetry, in the scientific
+classification of natural phenomena, and in the origination of the
+hypotheses of science or philosophy.
+
+The ability to note differences precedes somewhat the ability to note
+resemblances, though the contrary has sometimes been asserted by
+logician-psychologists. The difficulty of the test is greatly increased
+by the fact that the objects to be compared are not present to the
+senses, which means that the free ideas must be called up for comparison
+and contrast. Failure may result either from weakness in the power of
+ideational representation of objects, or from the inadequacy of the
+associations themselves, or from both. Probably both factors are usually
+involved.
+
+Intellectual development is especially evident in increased ability to
+note _essential_ differences and likenesses, as contrasted with those
+which are trivial, superficial, and accidental. To distinguish an egg
+from a stone on the basis of one being organic, the other inorganic
+matter requires far higher intelligence than to distinguish them on the
+basis of shape, color, fragibility, etc. It is not till well toward the
+adult stage that the ability to give very essential likenesses and
+differences becomes prominent, and when we get a comparison of this type
+from a child of 7 or 8 years it is a very favorable sign.
+
+It would be well worth while to standardize a new test of this kind for
+use in the upper years and especially adapted to display the ability to
+give essential likenesses and differences. At year VII we must accept as
+satisfactory any real difference.
+
+One point remains. In the tests of giving differences and similarities,
+it is well to make note of any tendency to _stereotypy_, by which is
+meant the mechanical reappearance of the same idea, or element, in
+successive responses. For example, the child begins by comparing fly and
+butterfly on the basis of size; as, "A butterfly is bigger than a fly."
+So far, this is quite satisfactory; but the child with a tendency to
+stereotypy finds himself unable to get away from the dominating idea of
+size and continues to make it the basis of the other comparisons: "A
+stone is larger than an egg," "Wood is larger than glass," etc. In case
+of stereotypy in all three responses, we should have to score the total
+response failure even though the idea employed happened to fit all three
+parts of the question. As a rule it is encountered only with very young
+children or with older children who are mentally retarded. It is
+therefore an unfavorable sign.
+
+Although this test has been universally used in year VIII, all the
+available statistics, with the exception of Bobertag's and Bloch's,
+indicate that it is decidedly too easy for that year. Binet himself says
+that nearly all 7-year-olds pass it. Goddard finds 97 per cent passing
+at year VIII, and Dougherty 90 per cent at year VI. With the standard of
+scoring given in the present revision, and with the substitution of
+_stone and egg_ instead of the more difficult _paper and cloth_, the
+test is unquestionably easy enough for year VII.
+
+
+VII, 6. COPYING A DIAMOND
+
+PROCEDURE. On a white cardboard draw in heavy black lines a diamond with
+the longer diagonal three inches and the shorter diagonal an inch and a
+half. The specially prepared record booklet contains the diamond as well
+as many other conveniences.
+
+Place the model before the child with the longer diagonal pointing
+directly toward him, and giving him _pen and ink_ and paper, say: "_I
+want you to draw one exactly like this._" Give three trials, saying each
+time: "_Make it exactly like this one._" In repeating the above formula,
+merely point to the model; do not pass the fingers around its edge.
+
+Unlike the test of copying a square in year IV, there is seldom any
+difficulty in getting the child to try this one. By the age of 7 the
+child has grown much less timid and has become more accustomed to the
+use of writing materials.
+
+Note whether the child draws each part carefully, looking at the model
+from time to time, or whether the strokes are made in a more or less
+haphazard manner with only an initial glance at the original.
+
+After each trial, say to the child: "_Is it good?_" And after the three
+copies have been made say: "_Which one is the best?_" Retarded children
+are sometimes entirely satisfied with the most nondescript drawings
+imaginable, but they are more likely correctly to pick out the best of
+three than to render a correct judgment about the worth of each drawing
+separately.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _two of the three_ drawings are at least
+as good as those marked satisfactory on the score card. The diamond
+should be drawn approximately in the correct position, and the diagonals
+must not be reversed. Disregard departures from the model with respect
+to size.
+
+REMARKS. The test is a good one. Age and training, apart from
+intelligence, affect it only moderately. There are few adult imbeciles
+of 6-year intelligence who are able to pass it, while but few subjects
+who have reached the 8-year level fail on it.[55]
+
+[55] For further discussion of drawing tests, see V, 1, and X, 3.
+
+This test was located in year VII of the 1908 scale, but was shifted to
+year VI in Binet's 1911 revision. The change was without justification,
+for Binet expressly states, both in 1908 and 1911, that only half of the
+6-year-olds succeed with it. The large majority of investigations have
+given too low a proportion of successes at 6 years to warrant its
+location at that age, particularly if pen is required instead of pencil.
+Location at year VI would be warranted only on the condition that the
+use of pencil be permitted and only one success required in three
+trials.
+
+
+VII, ALTERNATIVE TEST 1: NAMING THE DAYS OF THE WEEK
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_You know the days of the week, do you not? Name the
+days of the week for me._" Sometimes the child begins by naming various
+annual holidays, as Christmas, Fourth of July, etc. Perhaps he has not
+comprehended the task; at any rate, we give him one more trial by
+stopping him and saying: "_No; that is not what I mean. I want you to
+name the days of the week._" No supplementary questions are permissible,
+and we must be careful not to show approval or disapproval in our looks
+as the child is giving his response.
+
+If the days have been named in correct order, we check up the response
+to see whether the real order of days is known or whether the names have
+only been repeated mechanically. This is done by asking the following
+questions: "_What day comes before Tuesday?_" "_What day comes before
+Thursday?_" "_What day comes before Friday?_"
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if, within _fifteen seconds_, the days of
+the week are _all named in correct order_, and if the child succeeds in
+at least _two of the three check questions_. We disregard the point of
+beginning.
+
+REMARKS. The test has been criticized as too dependent on rote memory.
+Bobertag says a child may pass it without having any adequate conception
+of "week," "yesterday," "day before yesterday," etc. This criticism
+holds if the test is given according to the older procedure, but does
+not apply with the procedure above recommended. The "checking-up"
+questions enable us at once to distinguish responses that are given by
+rote from those which rest upon actual knowledge.
+
+The test has been shown to be much more influenced by age, apart from
+intelligence, than most other tests of the scale. Notwithstanding this
+fault, it seems desirable to keep the test, at least as an alternative,
+because it forms one of a group which may be designated as tests of time
+orientation. The others of this group are: "_Distinguishing forenoon and
+afternoon_" (VI), "_Giving the date_" and "_Naming the months_" (IX). It
+would be well if we had even more of this type, for interest in the
+passing of time and in the names of time divisions is closely correlated
+with intelligence. One reason for the inferiority of the dull and
+feeble-minded in tests of this type is that their mental associations
+are weaker and less numerous. The greater poverty of their associations
+brings it about that their remembered experiences are less definitely
+located in time with reference to other events.
+
+The test was located in year IX of the 1908 scale, but was omitted from
+the 1911 revision. Kuhlmann also omits it, while Goddard places it in
+year VIII. The statistics from every American investigation, however,
+warrant its location in year VII. It may be located in year VIII only on
+the condition that the child be required to name the days backwards, and
+that within a rather low time limit.
+
+
+VII, ALTERNATIVE TEST 2: REPEATING THREE DIGITS REVERSED
+
+PROCEDURE. The digits used are: 2-8-3; 4-2-7; 5-9-6. The test should be
+given after, but not immediately after, the tests of repeating digits
+forwards.
+
+Say to the child: "_Listen carefully. I am going to read some numbers
+again, but this time I want you to say them backwards. For example, if I
+should say 1-2-3, you would say 3-2-1. Do you understand?_" When it is
+evident that the child has grasped the instructions, say: "_Ready now;
+listen carefully, and be sure to say the numbers backwards._" Then read
+the series at the same rate and in the same manner as in the other
+digits tests. It is not permissible to re-read any of the series.
+
+If the first series is repeated forwards instead of backwards series
+exhort the child to listen carefully and to be sure to repeat the
+numbers backwards.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _one series out of three_ is repeated
+backwards without error.
+
+REMARKS. The test of repeating digits backwards was suggested by
+Bobertag in 1911, but appears not to have been used or standardized
+previous to the Stanford investigation.
+
+It is very much harder to repeat a series of digits backwards in the
+direct order at year VII, and six at year X. Reversing the order places
+three digits in year VII, four in year X, five in year XII, and six in
+"average adult." Even intelligent adults sometimes have difficulty in
+repeating six digits backwards, once in three trials.
+
+As a test of intelligence this test is better than that of repeating
+digits in the direct order. It is less mechanical and makes a much
+heavier demand on attention. The digits must be so firmly fixated in
+memory that they can be held there long enough to be told off, one by
+one, backwards.
+
+Feeble-minded children find this test especially difficult, perhaps
+mainly because of its element of novelty. School children are often
+asked to write numbers dictated by the teacher, and even the very dull
+acquire a certain proficiency in doing so; but the test of repeating
+digits backwards requires a certain facility in adjusting to a new task,
+exactly the sort of thing in which the feeble-minded are so markedly
+deficient.
+
+As a rule the response consumes much more time than in the other digits
+test. This is particularly true when the series to be repeated backwards
+contains four or more digits. The chance of success is greatly increased
+if the subject first thinks the series through two or three times in the
+direct order before attempting the reverse order. The subject who
+responds immediately is likely to begin correctly, but to give the first
+part of the original series in the direct order. For example, 6-5-2-8 is
+given 8-2-6-5.
+
+Sometimes the child gives one or two numbers and then stops, having
+completely lost the rest of the series in the stress of adjusting to the
+novel and relatively difficult task of beginning with the final digit.
+In such cases the feeble-minded are prone to fill in with any numbers
+they may happen to think of. A good method for the subject is to break
+the series up into groups and to give each group separately. Thus,
+6-5-2-8 is given 8-2 (pause) 5-6. As a rule only the more intelligent
+subjects adopt this method. One 12-year-old girl attending high school
+was able to repeat eight digits backwards by the aid of this device.
+
+It would be well worth while to investigate the relation of this test to
+imagery type. Such a study would have to make use of adult subjects
+trained in introspection. It would seem that success might be favored by
+the ability to translate the auditory impression into visual imagery, so
+that the remembered numbers could be read off as from a book; but this
+may or may not be the case. At any rate, success seems to depend largely
+upon the ability to manipulate mental imagery.
+
+The degree of certainty as to the correctness of the response is usually
+much less than in repeating digits forwards.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XIV
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VIII
+
+
+VIII, 1. THE BALL-AND-FIELD TEST (SCORE 2, INFERIOR PLAN)
+
+PROCEDURE. Draw a circle about two and one half inches in diameter,
+leaving a small gap in the side next the child. Say: "_Let us suppose
+that your baseball has been lost in this round field. You have no idea
+what part of the field it is in. You don't know what direction it came
+from, how it got there, or with what force it came. All you know is
+that the ball is lost somewhere in the field. Now, take this pencil and
+mark out a path to show me how you would hunt for the ball so as to be
+sure not to miss it. Begin at the gate and show me what path you would
+take._"[56]
+
+[56] The Stanford record booklet contains the circle ready for use.
+
+Give the instructions always as worded above. Avoid using an expression
+like, "_Show me how you would walk around in the field_"; the word
+_around_ might suggest a circular path.
+
+Sometimes the child merely points or tells how he would go. It is then
+necessary to say: "_No; you must mark out your path with the pencil so I
+can see it plainly._" Other children trace a path only a little way and
+stop, saying: "Here it is." We then say: "_But suppose you have not
+found it yet. Which direction would you go next?_" In this way the child
+must be kept tracing a path until it is evident whether any plan governs
+his procedure.
+
+SCORING. The performances secured with this test are conveniently
+classified into four groups, representing progressively higher types.
+The first two types represent failures; the third is satisfactory at
+year VIII, the fourth at year XII. They may be described as follows:--
+
+    _Type a_ (failure). The child fails to comprehend the
+    instructions and either does nothing at all or else, perhaps,
+    takes the pencil and makes a few random strokes which could not
+    be said to constitute a search.
+
+    _Type b_ (also failure). The child comprehends the instructions
+    and carries out a search, but without any definite plan. Absence
+    of plan is evidenced by the crossing and re-crossing of paths,
+    or by "breaks." A break means that the pencil is lifted up and
+    set down in another part of the field. Sometimes only two or
+    three fragments of paths are drawn, but more usually the field
+    is pretty well filled up with random meanderings which cross
+    each other again and again. Other illustrations of type _b_ are:
+    A single straight or curved line going direct to the ball, short
+    haphazard dashes or curves, bare suggestion of a fan or spiral.
+
+    _Type c_ (satisfactory at year VIII). A successful performance
+    at year VIII is characterized by the presence of a plan, but one
+    ill-adapted to the purpose. That some forethought is exercised
+    is evidenced, (1) by fewer crossings, (2) by a tendency either
+    to make the lines more or less parallel or else to give them
+    some kind of symmetry, and (3) by fewer breaks. The
+    possibilities of type _c_ are almost unlimited, and one is
+    continually meeting new forms. We have distinguished more than
+    twenty of these, the most common of which may be described as
+    follows:--
+
+     1. Very rough or zigzag circles or similarly imperfect spirals.
+     2. Segments of curves joined in a more or less symmetrical fashion.
+     3. Lines going back and forth across the field, joined at the ends
+        and not intended to be parallel.
+     4. The "wheel plan," showing lines radiating from near the center
+        of the field toward the circumference.
+     5. The "fan plan," showing a number of lines radiating (usually)
+        from the gate and spreading out over the field.
+     6. "Fan ellipses" or "fan spirals" radiating from the gate like the
+        lines just described.
+     7. The "leaf plan," "rib plan," or "tree plan," with lines branching
+        off from a trunk line like ribs, veins of a leaf, or branches of
+        a tree.
+     8. Parallel lines which cross at right angles and mark off the field
+        like a checkerboard.
+     9. Paths making one or more fairly symmetrical geometrical figures,
+        like a square, a diamond, a star, a hexagon, etc.
+    10. A combination of two or more of the above plans.
+
+    _Type d_ (satisfactory at year XII). Performances of this type
+    meet perfectly, or almost perfectly, the logical requirements of
+    the problem. The paths are almost or quite parallel, and there
+    are no intersections or breaks. The possibilities of type _d_
+    are fewer and embrace chiefly the  following:--
+
+     1. A spiral, perfect or almost perfect, and beginning either at
+     the gate or at the center of the field. 2. Concentric circles.
+     3. Transverse lines, parallel or almost so, and joined at the
+     ends.
+
+Up to about 4 years most children failed entirely to comprehend the
+task. By the age of 6 years the task is usually understood, but the
+search is conducted without plan. Type _c_ is not attained by two
+thirds before the mental level of 8 years, and score 3 ordinarily not
+until 11 or 12 years.
+
+Grading presents some difficulties because of occasional border-line
+performances which have a value almost midway between the types _b_ and
+_c_ or between _c_ and _d_. Frequent reference to the scoring card will
+enable the examiner, after a little experience, to score nearly all the
+doubtful performances satisfactorily.
+
+REMARKS. The ball-and-field problem may be called a test of practical
+judgment. Unlike a majority of the other tests, it gives the subject a
+chance to show how well he can meet the demands of a real, rather
+than an imagined, situation. Tests like this, involving practical
+adjustments, are valuable in rounding out the scale, which, as left by
+Binet, placed rather excessive emphasis on abstract reasoning and the
+comprehension of language. The test requires little time and always
+arouses the child's interest.
+
+Our analysis of the responses of nearly 1500 subjects shows that
+improvement with increasing mental age is steady and fairly rapid.
+Occasionally, however, one meets a high-grade performance with children
+of 6 or 7 years, and a low-grade performance with adults of average
+intelligence. Like all the other tests of the scale, it is unreliable
+when used alone.
+
+
+VIII, 2. COUNTING BACKWARDS FROM 20 TO 1
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the child: "_You can count backwards, can you not? I
+want you to count backwards for me from 20 to 1. Go ahead._" In the
+great majority of cases this is sufficient; the child comprehends the
+task and begins. If he does not comprehend, and is silent, or starts in,
+perhaps, to count forwards from 1 or 20, say: "_No; I want you to count
+backwards from 20 to 1, like this: 20-19-18, and clear on down to 1.
+Now, go ahead._"
+
+Insist upon the child trying it even though he asserts he cannot do it.
+In many such cases an effort is crowned with success. Say nothing about
+hurrying, as this confuses some subjects. Prompting is not permissible.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the child counts from 20 to 1 _in not
+over forty seconds and with not more than a single error_ (one omission
+or one transposition). Errors which the child spontaneously corrects are
+not counted as errors.
+
+REMARKS. The statistics on this test agree remarkably well. It is
+plainly too easy for year IX, and no one has found it easy enough for
+year VII. The main lack of uniformity has been in the adherence to a
+time limit. Binet required that the task be completed in twenty seconds,
+and Goddard and most others adhere rather strictly to this rule.
+Kuhlmann, however, allows thirty seconds if there is no error and twenty
+seconds if one error is committed. We agree with Bobertag that owing to
+the nature of this test we should not be pedantic about the time. While
+a majority of children who are able to count backwards do the task in
+twenty seconds, there are some intelligent but deliberate subjects who
+require as much as thirty-five or forty seconds. If the counting is done
+with assurance and without stumbling, there is no reason why we should
+not allow even forty seconds. Beyond this, however, our generosity
+should not go, because of the chance it would give for the use of
+special devices such as counting forwards each time to the next number
+wanted.
+
+It may be said that counting backwards is a test of schooling, and to a
+certain extent this is true. It is reasonable to suppose that special
+training would enable the child to pass the test a little earlier than
+he would otherwise be able to do, though it is doubtful whether many
+children below 7 years of age have had enough of such training to
+influence the performance very materially. On the other hand, when the
+child has reached an intelligence level of 8 or at most 9 years, he is
+ordinarily able to count from 20 to 1 whether he has ever tried it
+before or not.
+
+What psychological factors are involved in this test? It presupposes, in
+the first place, the ability to count from 1 to 20. But this alone does
+not guarantee success in counting backwards. Something more is required
+than a mere rote memory for the number names in their order from 1 up to
+20. The quantitative relationships of the numbers must also be
+apprehended if the task is to be performed smoothly without a great deal
+of special training. In addition to being reasonably secure in his
+knowledge of the number relationships involved, the child must be able
+to give sustained attention until the task is completed. His mental
+processes must be dominated by the guiding idea, "count backwards."
+Associations which do not harmonize with this aim, or which fail to
+further it, must be inhibited. Even momentary relaxation of attention
+means a loss of directive force in the guiding idea and the dominance of
+better known associations which may be suggested by the task, but are
+out of harmony with it. Thus, if a child momentarily loses sight of the
+end after counting backwards successfully from 20 to 14, he is likely to
+be overpowered by the law of habit and begin counting forwards,
+14-15-16-17, etc. We may regard the test, therefore, as a test of
+attention, or prolonged thought control. The ability to exercise
+unbroken vigilance for a period of twenty or thirty seconds is rarely
+found below the level of 7- or 8-year intelligence.
+
+
+VIII, 3. COMPREHENSION, THIRD DEGREE
+
+The questions for this year are:--
+
+  (a) "_What's the thing for you to do when you have broken
+      something which belongs to some one else?_"
+  (b) "_What's the thing for you to do when you notice on your way
+      to school that you are in danger of being tardy?_"
+  (c) "_What's the thing for you to do if a playmate hits you
+      without meaning to do it?_"
+
+The procedure is the same as in previous comprehension questions.[57]
+Each question may be repeated once or twice, but its form must not be
+changed. No explanations are permissible.
+
+[57] See IV, 5, and VI, 4.
+
+SCORING:--
+
+_Question a (If you have broken something)_
+
+    _Satisfactory responses_ are those suggesting either restitution
+    or apology, or both. Confession is not satisfactory unless
+    accompanied by apology. The following are satisfactory: "Buy a
+    new one." "Pay for it." "Give them something instead of it."
+    "Have my father mend it." "Apologize." "Tell them I'm sorry,
+    that I did not mean to break it," etc. Of 92 correct answers, 76
+    suggested restitution, while 16 suggested apology, or apology
+    and restitution.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Tell them I did it." "Go tell my mother."
+    "Feel sorry." "Be ashamed." "Pick it up," etc. Mere confession
+    accounts for over 20 per cent of all failures.
+
+_Question b (In danger of being tardy)_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ The expected response is, "Hurry," "Walk
+    faster," or something to that effect. One bright city boy said
+    he would take a car. Of the answers not obviously incorrect,
+    nearly 95 per cent suggest hurrying. The rule ordinarily
+    recommended is to grade all other responses _minus_. But this
+    rule is too sweeping to be followed blindly. One who would use
+    intelligence tests must learn to discriminate. "I would go back
+    home and not go to school that day" is a good answer in those
+    cases (fortunately rare) in which children are forbidden by the
+    teacher to enter the schoolroom if tardy. "Go back home and get
+    mother to write an excuse" would be good policy if by so doing
+    the child might escape the danger of incurring an extreme
+    penalty. When teachers inflict absurd penalties for unexcused
+    tardiness, it is the part of wisdom for children to incur no
+    risks! When such a response is given, it is well to inquire into
+    the school's method of dealing with tardiness and to score the
+    response accordingly.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Go to the principal." "Tell the teacher I
+    couldn't help it." "Have to get an excuse." "Go to school
+    anyway." "Get punished." "Not do it again." "Not play hooky."
+    "Start earlier next time," etc.
+
+    Lack of success results oftenest from failure to get the exact
+    shade of meaning conveyed by the question. It is implied, of
+    course, that something is to be done at once to avoid tardiness;
+    but the subject of dull comprehension may suggest a suitable
+    thing to do in case tardiness has been incurred. Hence the
+    response, "I would go to the principal and explain." Answers of
+    this type are always unsatisfactory.
+
+_Question c (Playmate hits you)_
+
+    _Satisfactory responses_ are only those which suggest either
+    excusing or overlooking the act. These ideas are variously
+    expressed as follows: "I would excuse him" (about half of all
+    the correct answers). "I would say 'yes' if he asked my pardon."
+    "I would say it was all right." "I would take it for a joke." "I
+    would just be nice to him." "I would go right on playing." "I
+    would take it kind-hearted." "I would not fight or run and tell
+    on him." "I would not blame him for it." "Ask him to be more
+    careful," etc.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory responses_ are all those not of the above two
+    types; as: "I would hit them back." "I would not hit them back,
+    but I would get even some other way." "Tell them not to do it
+    again." "Tell them to 'cut it out.'" "Tell him it's a wrong
+    thing to do." "Make him excuse himself." "Make him say he's
+    sorry." "Would not play with him." "Tell my mamma." "I would ask
+    him why he did it." "He'd say 'excuse me' and I'd say 'thank
+    you.'" "He should excuse me." "He is supposed to say 'excuse
+    me.'"
+
+REMARKS. All three comprehension questions of this year were used by
+Binet, Goddard, Huey, and others in year X; two of them in the "easy
+series" and one in the "hard series." The Stanford data show that they
+belong at the 8-year level on the standard of scoring above set forth.
+The three differ little among themselves in difficulty, but all of them
+are decidedly easier than the other five used by Binet. It would be
+absurd to go on using the comprehension questions as Binet bunched them,
+eight together, ranging in difficulty from one which is easy enough for
+6-year intelligence ("What's the thing to do if you miss your train?")
+to one which is hard for the 12-year level ("Why is a bad act done when
+one is angry more excusable than the same act done when one is not
+angry?").
+
+
+VIII, 4. GIVING SIMILARITIES; TWO THINGS
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the child: "_I am going to name two things which are
+alike in some way, and I want you to tell me how they are alike. Wood
+and coal: in what way are they alike?_" Proceed in the same manner
+with:--
+
+    _An apple and a peach._
+    _Iron and silver._
+    _A ship and an automobile._
+
+After the first pair the formula may be abbreviated to "_In what way are
+... and ... alike?_" It is often necessary to insist a little if the
+child is silent or says he does not know, but in doing this we must
+avoid supplementary questions and suggestions. In giving the first pair,
+for example, it would not be permissible to ask such additional
+questions as, "_What do you use wood for? What do you use coal for? And
+now, how are wood and coal alike?_" This is really putting the answer in
+the child's mouth. It is only permissible to repeat the original
+question in a persuasive tone of voice, and perhaps to add: "_I'm sure
+you can tell me how ... and ... are alike_," or something to that
+effect.
+
+A very common mistake which the child makes is to give differences
+instead of similarities. This tendency is particularly strong if test 5,
+year VII (giving differences), has been given earlier in the sitting,
+but it happens often enough in other cases also to suggest that finding
+differences is, to a much greater extent than finding similarities, the
+child's preferred method of making a comparison. When a difference is
+given, instead of a similarity, we say: "_No, I want you to tell me how
+they are alike. In what way are ... and ... alike?_" Unless the child is
+of rather low intelligence level this is sufficient, but the mentally
+retarded sometimes continue to give differences persistently in spite
+of repeated admonitions, or if they cease to do so for one or two
+comparisons, they are likely to repeat the mistake in the latter part of
+the test.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if a likeness is given in _two out of four_
+comparisons. We accept as satisfactory any real likeness, whether
+fundamental or superficial, though, of course, the more essential the
+resemblance, the better indication it is of intelligence. The following
+are samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory answers:--[58]
+
+[58] For aid in classifying the responses in this and certain other
+tests the writer is indebted to Miss Grace Lyman.
+
+(a) _Wood and coal_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Both burn." "Both keep you warm." "Both are
+    used for fuel." "Both are vegetable matter." "Both come from the
+    ground." "Can use them both for running engines." "Both hard."
+    "Both heavy." "Both cost money."
+
+    Of 80 correct answers, 64, or 80 per cent, referred in one way
+    or another to combustibility.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ Most frequent is the persistent giving of a
+    difference instead of a similarity. This accounts for a little
+    over half of all the failures. About half of the remainder are
+    cases of inability to give any response. Incorrect statements
+    with regard to color are rather common. Sample failures of this
+    type are: "Both are black," or "Both the same color." Other
+    failures are: "Both are dirty on the outside;" "You can't break
+    them;" "Coal burns better;" "Wood is lighter than coal," etc.
+
+(b) _An apple and a peach_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Both are round." "Both the same shape." "They
+    are about the same color." "Both nearly always have some red on
+    them." "Both good to eat." "Can make pies of both of them."
+    "Both can be cooked." "Both mellow when they are ripe." "Both
+    have a stem" (or seeds, skin, etc.). "Both come from trees."
+    "Can be dried in the same way." "Both are fruits." "Both green
+    (in color) when they are not ripe."
+
+    Of 82 correct answers, 25 per cent mention color; 25 per cent,
+    form; 22 per cent, edibility; 20 per cent, having stem, seed, or
+    skin; and 5 per cent, that both grow on trees.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Both taste the same." "Both have a lot of
+    seeds." "Both have a fuzzy skin." "An apple is bigger than a
+    peach." "One is red and one is white," etc.
+
+    Again, over 50 per cent of the failures are due to giving
+    differences and about 18 per cent to silence.
+
+(c) _Iron and silver_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Both are metals" (or mineral). "Both come out
+    of the ground." "Both cost money." "Both are heavy." "Both are
+    hard." "Both can be melted." "Both can be bent." "Both used for
+    utensils." "You manufacture things out of both of them." "Both
+    can be polished."
+
+    These are named most frequently in the following order: (1)
+    hardness, (2) origin from the ground, (3) heaviness, (4) use in
+    making things.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Both thin" (or thick). "Sometimes they are
+    the same shape." "Both the same color." "A little silver and
+    lots of iron weigh the same." "Both made by the same company."
+    "They rust the same." "You can't eat them" (!)[59]
+
+    [59] One is here reminded of the puzzling conundrum, "Why is a
+    brick like an elephant?" The answer being, "Because neither can
+    climb a tree!" A response of this type states a fact, but because
+    of its bizarre nature should hardly be counted satisfactory.
+
+    Of 60 failures, 32 were due to giving differences and 14 to
+    silence or unwillingness to hazard a reply.
+
+(d) _A ship and an automobile_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Both means of travel." "Both go." "You ride in
+    them." "Both take you fast." "They both use fuel." "Both run by
+    machinery." "Both have a steering gear." "Both have engines in
+    them." "Both have wood in them." "Both can be wrecked." "Both
+    break if they hit a rock."
+
+    About 45 per cent of the answers are in terms of running or
+    travel, 37 per cent in terms of machinery or structure, the rest
+    scattered.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Both black" (or some other color). "Both very
+    big." "They are made alike." "Both run on wheels." "Ship is for
+    the water and automobile for the land." "Ship goes on water and
+    an automobile sometimes goes in water." "An auto can go faster."
+    "Ship is run by coal and automobile by gasoline."
+
+    Of 51 failures, 32 were due to giving differences and 14 to
+    failure to reply.
+
+REMARKS. The test of finding similarities was first used by Binet in
+1905. Our results show that it is fully as satisfactory as the test of
+giving differences. The test reveals in a most interesting way one of
+the fundamental weaknesses of the feeble mind. Young normal children,
+say of 7 or 8 years, often fail to pass, but it is the feeble-minded who
+give the greatest number of absurd answers and who also find greatest
+difficulty in resisting the tendency to give differences.[60]
+
+[60] For further discussion of the processes involved, see VII, 5.
+
+
+VIII, 5. GIVING DEFINITIONS SUPERIOR TO USE
+
+PROCEDURE. The words for this year are _balloon_, _tiger_, _football_,
+and _soldier_. Ask simply: "_What is a balloon?_" etc.
+
+If it appears that any of the words are not familiar to the child,
+substitution may be made from the following: _automobile_,
+_battle-ship_, _potato_, _store_.
+
+Make no comments on the responses until all the words have been given.
+In case of silence or hesitation in answering, the question may be
+repeated with a little encouragement; but supplementary questions are
+never in order. Ordinarily there is no difficulty in securing a response
+to the definition test of this year. The trouble comes in scoring the
+response.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if two of the four words are defined in
+terms superior to use. "Superior to use" includes chiefly: (a)
+Definitions which describe the object or tell something of its nature
+(form, size, color, appearance, etc.); (b) definitions which give the
+substance or the materials or parts composing it; and (c) those which
+tell what class the object belongs to or what relation it bears to
+other classes of objects.
+
+It is possible to distinguish different grades of definitions in each of
+the above classes. A definition by description (type _a_) may be brief
+and partial, mentioning only one or two qualities or characteristics, or
+it may be relatively rich and complete. Likewise with definitions of
+type _b_. Classificatory definitions (type _c_) are of particularly
+uneven value, the lowest order being those which subsume the object to
+be defined under a remote class and give few if any characteristics to
+distinguish it from other members of the same class; as, for example, "A
+football is a thing you can have fun with," or, "A soldier is a person."
+The best classificatory definitions are those which subsume the object
+under the next higher class and give the more essential traits (perhaps
+a number of them) which distinguish the object from others of the class
+named; as, for example, "A tiger is a large animal like a cat; it lives
+in the jungle and eats men and other animals," or, "A soldier is a man
+who goes to war." These shades of distinction give interesting and
+valuable clues to the maturity and richness of the apperceptive
+processes, but for purposes of scoring it is necessary merely to decide
+whether the definition is given in terms superior to use.
+
+The following are samples of satisfactory definitions, those for each
+word being arranged roughly in the order of their value from excellent
+to barely passing:--
+
+(a) _Balloon_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "A balloon is a means of traveling through the
+    air." "It is a kind of airship, made of cloth and filled with
+    air so it can go up." "It is big and made of cloth. It has gas
+    in it and carries people up in a basket that's fastened on to
+    the bottom." "It is a thing you hold by a string and it goes
+    up." "It is like a big bag with air in it." "It is a big thing
+    that goes up."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To go up in the air." "What you go up in."
+    "When you go up." "They go up in it." "It's full of gas." "To
+    carry you up." "A balloon is a balloon," etc. "It is big." "They
+    go up," etc.
+
+(b) _Tiger_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "It is a wild animal of the cat family." "It is
+    an animal that's a cousin to the lion." "It is an animal that
+    lives in the jungle." "It is a wild animal." "It looks like a
+    big cat." "It lives in the woods and eats flesh." "Something
+    that eats people."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To eat you up." "To kill people." "To travel
+    in the circus." "What eats people." "It is a tiger," etc. "You
+    run from it," etc.
+
+(c) _Football_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "It is a leather bag filled with air and made
+    for kicking." "It is a ball you kick." "It is a thing you play
+    with." "It is made of leather and is stuffed with air." "It is a
+    thing you kick." "It is brown and filled with air." "It is a
+    thing shaped like a watermelon."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To kick." "To play with." "What they play
+    with." "Boys play with it." "It's filled with air." "It is a
+    football." "It is a basket ball." "It is round." "You kick it."
+
+(d) _Soldier_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "A man who goes to war." "A brave man." "A man
+    that walks up and down and carries a gun." "It is a man who
+    minds his captain and stands still and walks straight." "It is a
+    man who goes to war and shoots." "It is a man who stands
+    straight and marches."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To shoot." "To go to war." "It is a soldier."
+    "A soldier that marches." "He fights." "He shoots." "What
+    fights," etc. "When you march and shoot."
+
+Silence accounts for only a small proportion of the failures with
+children of 8, 9, and 10 years.
+
+REMARKS. The "use definitions" sometimes given at this age are usually
+of slightly better quality than those given in year V. Younger children
+more often use the infinitive form, "to play with" (doll), "to drive"
+(horse), "to eat on" (table), etc. Use definitions of this year more
+often begin with "they," or "what"; as, "they go up in it" (balloon),
+"they kick it" (football), etc.
+
+Why, it may be asked, is the use definition regarded as inferior to the
+descriptive or the classificatory definition? Is not the use to which an
+object may be put the most essential thing about it, for the child at
+least? Is it not more important to know that a fork is to eat with than
+to be able to name the material it is made of? Is not the use primary
+and does it not determine most of the physical characteristics of the
+object?
+
+The above questions may sound reasonable, but they are based on poor
+psychology. We must rest our case upon the facts. The first lesson which
+the student of child psychology must learn is that it is unsafe to set
+up criteria of intelligence, of maturity, or of any other mental trait
+on the basis of theoretical considerations. Experiment teaches that
+normal children of 5 or 6 years, also older feeble-minded persons of the
+5-year intelligence level, define objects in terms of use; also that
+normal children of 8 or 9 years and older feeble-minded persons of this
+mental level have for the most part developed beyond the stage of use
+definitions into the descriptive or classificatory stage. An ounce of
+fact is worth a ton of theory.
+
+The test has usually been located in year IX, with the requirement of
+three successes out of five trials and with somewhat more rigid scoring
+of the individual definitions. When only two successes are required in
+four trials, and when scored leniently, the test belongs at the 8-year
+level.
+
+
+VIII, 6. VOCABULARY; TWENTY DEFINITIONS, 3600 WORDS
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the list of words given in the record booklet. Say to the
+child: "_I want to find out how many words you know. Listen; and when I
+say a word you tell me what it means._" If the child can read, give him
+a printed copy of the word list and let him look at each word as you
+pronounce it.
+
+The words are arranged approximately (though not exactly) in the order
+of their difficulty, and it is best to begin with the easier words and
+proceed to the harder. With children under 9 or 10 years, begin with the
+first. Apparently normal children of 10 years may safely be credited
+with the first ten words without being asked to define them. Apparently
+normal children of 12 may begin with word 16, and 15-year-olds with
+word 21. Except with subjects of almost adult intelligence there is no
+need to give the last ten or fifteen words, as these are almost never
+correctly defined by school children. A safe rule to follow is to
+continue until eight or ten successive words have been missed and to
+score the remainder _minus_ without giving them.
+
+The formula is as follows: "What is an _orange_?" "What is a _bonfire_?"
+"_Roar_; what does _roar_ mean?" "_Gown_; what is a _gown_?" "What does
+_tap_ mean?" "What does _scorch_ mean?" "What is a _puddle_?" etc.
+
+Some children at first show a little hesitation about answering,
+thinking that a strictly formal definition is expected. In such cases a
+little encouragement is necessary; as: "_You know what a bonfire is. You
+have seen a bonfire. Now, what is a bonfire?_" If the child still
+hesitates, say: "_Just tell me in your own words; say it any way you
+please. All I want is to find out whether you know what a bonfire is._"
+Do not torture the child, however, by undue insistence. If he persists
+in his refusal to define a word which he would ordinarily be expected to
+know, it is better to pass on to the next one and to return to the
+troublesome word later. Above all, avoid helping the child by
+illustrating the use of a word in a sentence. Adhere strictly to the
+formula given above. If the definition as given does not make it clear
+whether the child has the correct idea, say: "_Explain_," or, "_I don't
+understand; explain what you mean._"
+
+Encourage the child frequently by saying: "That's fine. You are doing
+beautifully. You know lots of words," etc. Never tell the child his
+definition is not correct, and never ask for a different definition.
+
+Avoid saying anything which would suggest a model form of definition, as
+the type of definition which the child spontaneously chooses throws
+interesting light on the degree of maturity of the apperceptive
+processes. Record all definitions _verbatim_ if possible, or at least
+those which are exceptionally good, poor, or doubtful.
+
+SCORING. Credit a response in full if it gives one correct meaning for
+the word, regardless of whether that meaning is the most common one, and
+regardless of whether it is the original or a derived meaning.
+Occasionally half credit may be given, but this should be avoided as far
+as possible.
+
+To find the entire vocabulary, multiply the number of words known by
+180. (This list is made up of 100 words selected by rule from a
+dictionary containing 18,000 words.) Thus, the child who defines
+20 words correctly has a vocabulary of 20 × 180 = 3600 words; 50 correct
+definitions would mean a vocabulary of 9000 words, etc. The following
+are the standards for different years, as determined by the vocabulary
+reached by 60 to 65 per cent of the subjects of the various mental
+levels:--
+
+     8 years          20 words    vocabulary  3,600
+    10 years          30 words    vocabulary  5,400
+    12 years          40 words    vocabulary  7,200
+    14 years          50 words    vocabulary  9,000
+    Average adult     65 words    vocabulary 11,700
+    Superior adult    75 words    vocabulary 13,500
+
+Although the form of the definition is significant, it is not taken into
+consideration in scoring. The test is intended to explore the range of
+ideas rather than the evolution of thought forms. When it is evident
+that the child has one fairly correct meaning for a word, he is given
+full credit for it, however poorly the definition may have been stated.
+
+While there is naturally some difficulty now and then in deciding
+whether a given definition is correct, this happens much less frequently
+than one would expect. In order to get a definite idea of the extent of
+error due to the individual differences among examiners, we have had the
+definitions of 25 subjects graded independently by 10 different persons.
+The result showed an average difference below 3 in the number of
+definitions scored _plus_. Since these subjects attempted on an average
+about 60 words, the average number of doubtful definitions per subject
+was below 5 per cent of the number attempted.
+
+An idea of the degree of leniency to be exercised may be had from the
+following examples of definitions, which are mostly of low grade, but
+acceptable unless otherwise indicated:--
+
+   1. _Orange._ "An orange is to eat." "It is yellow and grows on a
+      tree." (Both full credit.)
+
+   2. _Bonfire._ "You burn it outdoors." "You burn some leaves or
+      things." "It's a big fire." (All full credit.)
+
+   3. _Roar._ "A lion roars." "You holler loud." (Full credit.)
+
+   4. _Gown._ "To sleep in." "It's a nightie." "It's a nice gown that
+      ladies wear." (All full credit.)
+
+   7. _Puddle._ "You splash in it." "It's just a puddle of water."
+      (Both full credit.)
+
+   9. _Straw._ "It grows in the field." "It means wheat-straw." "The
+      horses eat it." (All full credit.)
+
+  10. _Rule._ "The teacher makes rules." "It means you can't do
+      something." "You make marks with it," i.e., a ruler, often
+      called a _rule_ by school children. (All full credit.)
+
+  11. _Afloat._ "To float on the water." "A ship floats." (Both full
+      credit.)
+
+  12. _Eyelash._ If the child says, "It's over the eye," tell him to
+      point to it, as often the word is confused with _eyebrow_.
+
+  14. _Copper._ "It's a penny." "It means some copper wire." (Both
+      full credit.)
+
+  15. _Health._ "It means good health or bad health." "It means
+      strong." (Both full credit.)
+
+  17. _Guitar._ "You play on it." (Full credit.)
+
+  18. _Mellow._ If the child says, "It means a mellow apple," ask
+      what kind of apple that would be. For full credit the answer
+      must be "soft," "mushy," etc.
+
+  19. _Pork._ If the answer is "meat," ask what animal it comes
+      from. Half credit if wrong animal is named.
+
+  21. _Plumbing._ "You fix pipes." (Full credit.)
+
+  25. _Southern._ If the answer is "Southern States," or
+      "Southern California," say: "_Yes; but what does 'southern'
+      mean?_" Do not credit unless explanation is forthcoming.
+
+  26. _Noticeable._ "You notice a thing." (Full credit.)
+
+  29. _Civil._ "Civil War." (Failure unless explained.) "It means to
+      be nice." (Full credit.)
+
+  30. _Treasury._ Give half credit for definitions like "Valuables,"
+      "Lots of money," etc.; i.e., if the word is confused with
+      _treasure._
+
+  32. _Ramble._ "To go about fast." (Half credit.)
+
+  38. _Nerve._ Half credit if the slang use is defined, "You've got
+      nerve," etc.
+
+  41. _Majesty._ "What you say to a king." (Full credit.)
+
+  45. _Sportive._ "To like sports." (Half credit.) "Playful" or
+      "happy." (Full credit.)
+
+  46. _Hysterics._ "You laugh and cry at the same time." "A kind of
+      sickness." "A kind of fit." (All full credit.)
+
+  48. _Repose._ "You pose again." (Failure.)
+
+  52. _Coinage._ "A place where they make money." (Half credit.)
+
+  56. _Dilapidated._ "Something that's very old." (Half credit.)
+
+  58. _Conscientious._ "You're careful how you do your work." (Full
+      credit.)
+
+  60. _Artless._ "No art." (Failure unless correctly explained.)
+
+  61. _Priceless._ "It has no price." (Failure.)
+
+  66. _Promontory._ "Something prominent." (Failure unless child can
+      explain what it refers to.)
+
+  68. _Milksop._ "You sop up milk." (Failure.)
+
+  73. _Harpy._ "A kind of bird." (Full credit.)
+
+  80. _Exaltation._ "You feel good." (Full credit.)
+
+  85. _Retroactive._ "Acting backward." (Full credit.)
+
+  92. _Theosophy._ "A religion." (Full credit.)
+
+It is seen from the above examples that a very liberal standard has been
+used. Leniency in judging definitions is necessary because the child's
+power of expression lags farther behind his understanding than is true
+of adults, and also because for the young subject the word has a
+relatively less unitary existence.
+
+REMARKS. Our vocabulary test was derived by selecting the last word
+of every sixth column in a dictionary containing approximately
+18,000 words, presumably the 18,000 most common words in the language.
+The test is based on the assumption that 100 words selected according to
+some arbitrary rule will be a large enough sampling to afford a fairly
+reliable index of a subject's entire vocabulary. Rather extensive
+experimentation with this list and others chosen in a similar manner
+has proved that the assumption is justified. Tests of the same
+75 individuals with five different vocabulary tests of this type showed
+that the average difference between two tests of the same person was
+less than 5 per cent. This means that any one of the five tests used is
+reliable enough for all practical purposes. It is of no special
+importance that a given child's vocabulary is 8000 rather than 7600; the
+significance lies in the fact that it is approximately 8000 and not
+4000, 12,000, or some other widely different number.
+
+It may seem to the reader almost incredible that so small a sampling of
+words would give a reliable index of an individual's vocabulary. That it
+does so is due to the operation of the ordinary laws of chance. It is
+analogous to predicting the results of an election when only a small
+proportion of the ballots have been counted. It is known that a ballot
+box contains 600 votes, and if when only 30 have been counted it is
+found that they are divided between two candidates in the proportion of
+20 and 10, it is safe to predict that a complete count will give the two
+candidates approximately 400 and 200 respectively.[61] In 1914 about
+1,000,000 votes were cast for governor in California, and when only
+10,000 votes had been counted, or a hundredth of all, it was announced
+and conceded that Governor Johnson had been reëlected by the 150,000
+plurality. The completed count gave him 188,505 plurality. The error was
+less than 4 per cent of the total vote.
+
+[61] Supposing the ballots to have been shuffled.
+
+The vocabulary test has a far higher value than any other single test of
+the scale. Used with children of English-speaking parents (with children
+whose home language is not English it is of course unreliable), it
+probably has a higher value than any three other tests in the scale. Our
+statistics show that in a large majority of cases the vocabulary test
+alone will give us an intelligence quotient within 10 per cent of that
+secured by the entire scale. Out of hundreds of English-speaking
+children we have not found one testing significantly above age who had a
+significantly low vocabulary; and correspondingly, those who test much
+below age never have a high vocabulary.
+
+Occasionally, however, a subject tests somewhat higher or lower in
+vocabulary than the mental age would lead us to expect. This is often
+the case with dull children in cultured homes and with very intelligent
+children whose home environment has not stimulated language development.
+But even in these cases we are not seriously misled, for the dull child
+of fortunate home surroundings shows his dullness in the quality of his
+definitions if not in their quantity; while the bright child of
+illiterate parents shows his intelligence in the aptness and accuracy of
+his definitions.
+
+We have not worked out a satisfactory method of scoring the quality of
+definitions in our vocabulary test, but these differences will be
+readily observed by the trained examiner. Definitions in terms of use
+and definitions which are slightly inaccurate or hazy are quite
+characteristic of the lower mental ages. Children of the lower mental
+age have also a tendency to venture wild guesses at words they do not
+know. This is especially characteristic of retarded subjects and is
+another example of their weakness of auto-criticism. One feeble-minded
+boy of 12 years, with a mental age of 8 years, glibly and confidently
+gave definitions for every one of the hundred words. About 70 of the
+definitions were pure nonsense.
+
+This vocabulary test was arranged and partially standardized by Mr.
+H. G. Childs and the writer in 1911. Many experiments since then have
+proved its value as a test of intelligence.
+
+
+VIII, ALTERNATIVE TEST 1: NAMING SIX COINS
+
+PROCEDURE is exactly as in VI, 5 (naming four coins). The dollar should
+be shown before the half-dollar.
+
+SCORING. _All six coins must be correctly named._ If a response is
+changed the rule is to count the second answer and ignore the first.
+
+REMARKS. Binet used nine pieces and required knowledge of all at year X
+(1908), but at year IX in the 1911 revision. Most other workers have
+used the same method, with the test located in either year IX or year X.
+
+
+VIII, ALTERNATIVE TEST 2: WRITING FROM DICTATION
+
+PROCEDURE. Give the child pen, ink, and paper, place him in a
+comfortable position for writing, and say: "_I want you to write
+something for me as nicely as you can. Write these words: 'See the
+little boy.' Be sure to write it all: 'See the little boy.'_"
+
+Do not dictate the words separately, but give the sentence as a whole.
+Further repetition of the sentence is not permissible, as ability to
+remember what has been dictated is a part of the test. Copy, of course,
+must not be shown.
+
+SCORING. Passed if the sentence is written legibly enough to be easily
+recognized, and if no word has been omitted. Ordinary mistakes of
+spelling are disregarded. The rule is that the mistake in spelling must
+not mutilate the word beyond easy recognition. The performance may be
+graded by the use of Thorndike's handwriting scale. The handwriting of
+8-year-old children who have been in school not less than one year or
+more than two usually falls between quality 7 and quality 9 on this
+scale, but we shall, perhaps, not be too liberal if we consider a
+performance satisfactory which does not grade below quality 6, provided
+it is not seriously mutilated by errors, omissions, etc.[62]
+
+[62] See scoring card for samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory
+performances.
+
+REMARKS. This test found a place in year VIII of Binet's 1908 scale, but
+has been omitted from all the other revisions, including Binet's own.
+Bobertag did not even regard the test as worthy of a trial. The
+universal criticism has been that it is a test of schooling rather than
+of intelligence. That the performance depends, in a certain sense, upon
+special instruction is self-evident. Without such instruction no child
+of 8 years, however intelligent, would be able to pass the test. Nature
+does not give us a conventionalized language, either written or spoken.
+It must be acquired. It is also true that a high-grade feeble-minded
+child, say 8 years of age and of 6-year intelligence, is sometimes
+(though not always) able to pass the test after two years of
+school instruction. It is exceedingly improbable, however, that a
+feeble-minded subject with less than 6-year intelligence will ever be
+able to pass this test, however long he remains in school.
+
+The conclusions to be drawn from these facts are as follows: (1)
+Inability to pass the test should not be counted against the child
+unless it is known that he has had at least a full year of the usual
+school instruction. (2) Ability to pass the test after only two years of
+school instruction is almost certain proof that the child has reached a
+mental level of at least 6 years. (3) Failure to pass the test must be
+regarded as a grave symptom in the case of the child 9 or more years of
+age who is known to have attended school as much as two years. (4) For
+mental levels higher than 8 years the test has hardly any diagnostic
+value, since feeble-minded persons of 8- or 9-year intelligence can
+usually be taught to write quite legibly.
+
+If the limitations above set forth are kept in mind, the test is by no
+means without value, and is always worth giving as a supplementary test.
+Learning to write simple sentences from dictation is no mean
+accomplishment. It demands, in the first place, a fairly complete
+mastery of rather difficult muscular coördinations. Moreover, these
+coördinations must be firmly associated with the corresponding letters
+and words, for if the writing coördinations are not fairly automatic, so
+much attention will be required to carry them out that the child will
+not be able to remember what he has been told to write. The necessity of
+remembering the passage acts as a distraction, and writing from
+dictation is therefore a more difficult task than writing from copy.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XV
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR IX
+
+
+IX, 1. GIVING THE DATE
+
+PROCEDURE. Ask the following questions in order:--
+
+  (a) "_What day of the week is it to-day?_"
+  (b) "_What month is it?_"
+  (c) "_What day of the month is it?_"
+  (d) "_What year is it?_"
+
+If the child misunderstands and gives the day of the month for the day
+of the week, or _vice versa_, we merely repeat the question with
+suitable emphasis, but give no other help.
+
+SCORING. An error of three days in either direction is allowed for _c_,
+but _a_, _b_, and _d_ must all be given correctly. If the child makes an
+error and spontaneously corrects it, the change is allowed, but
+corrections must not be called for or suggested.
+
+REMARKS. Binet originally located this test in year IX, but
+unfortunately moved it to year VIII in the 1911 revision. Kuhlmann,
+Goddard, and Huey all retain it in year IX, where, according to our own
+data, it unquestionably belongs. With the exception of Binet's 1911
+results, the statistics for the test are in remarkably close agreement
+for children in France, Germany, England, and Eastern and Western United
+States. It seems that practically all children in civilized countries
+have ample opportunity to learn the divisions of the year, month, and
+week, and to become oriented with respect to these divisions. Special
+instruction is doubtless capable of hastening time orientation to a
+certain degree, but not greatly. Binet tells of a French _école
+maternelle_ attended by children 4 to 6 years of age, where instruction
+was given daily in regard to the date, and yet not a single one of the
+children was able to pass this test. This is a beautiful illustration of
+the futility of precocious teaching. In spite of well-meant instruction,
+it is not until the age of 8 or 9 years that children have enough
+comprehension of time periods, and sufficient interest in them, to keep
+very close track of the date. Failure to pass the test at the age of
+10 or 11 years is a decidedly unfavorable sign, unless the error is very
+slight.
+
+The fact that normal adults are occasionally unable to give the day of
+the month is no argument against the validity of the test, since the
+system of tests is so constructed as to allow for accidental failures on
+any particular test. As a matter of fact, very nearly 100 per cent of
+normal 12-year-old children pass this test.
+
+The unavoidable fault of the test is its lack of uniformity in
+difficulty at different dates. It is easier for school children to give
+the day of the week on Monday or Friday than on Tuesday, Wednesday, or
+Thursday. Mistakes in giving the day of the month are less likely to
+occur at the beginning or end of the month than at any other time, while
+mistakes in naming the month are most likely to occur then.
+
+It is interesting to compare the four parts of this test in regard to
+difficulty. Binet and Bobertag both state that ability to name the year
+comes last, but they give no figures. Our own data show that the four
+parts of the test are of almost exactly the same difficulty and that
+this is true at all ages.
+
+
+IX, 2. ARRANGING FIVE WEIGHTS
+
+Use the five weights, 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 grams. Be sure that the
+weights are identical in appearance. The weights may be made as
+described under V, 1, or they may be purchased of C. H. Stoelting & Co.,
+Chicago, Illinois. If no weights are at hand one of the alternative
+tests may be substituted.
+
+PROCEDURE. Place the five boxes on the table in an irregular group
+before the child and say: "_See the boxes. They all look alike, don't
+they? But they are not alike. Some of them are heavy, some are not quite
+so heavy, and some are still lighter. No two weigh the same. Now, I want
+you to find the heaviest one and place it here. Then find the one that
+is just a little lighter and put it here. Then put the next lighter one
+here, and the next lighter one here, and the lightest of all at this
+end_ (pointing each time at the appropriate spot). _Do you understand?_"
+Whatever the child answers, in order to make sure that he does
+understand, we repeat the instructions thus: "_Remember now, that no two
+weights are the same. Find the heaviest one and put it here, the next
+heaviest here, and lighter, lighter, until you have the very lightest
+here. Ready; go ahead._"
+
+It is best to follow very closely the formula here given, otherwise
+there is danger of stating the directions so abstractly that the subject
+could not comprehend them. A formula like "_I want you to arrange the
+blocks in a gradually decreasing series according to weight_" would be
+Greek to most children of 10 years.
+
+If the subject still seems at a loss to know what to do, the
+instructions may be again repeated. But no further help of any kind may
+be given. Do not tell the subject to take the blocks one at a time in
+the hand and try them, and do not illustrate by hefting the blocks
+yourself. It is a part of the test to let the subject find his own
+method.
+
+Give three trials, shuffling the boxes after each. Do not repeat the
+instructions before the second and third trials unless the subject has
+used an absurd procedure in the previous trial.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the blocks are arranged in the correct
+order _twice out of three trials_. Always record the order of
+arrangement and note the number and extent of displacement. Obviously an
+arrangement like 12-6-15-3-9 is very much more serious than one like
+15-12-6-9-3, but we require that two trials be absolutely without error.
+
+Scoring is facilitated if the blocks are marked on the bottom so that
+they may be easily identified. It is then necessary to exercise some
+care to see that the subject does not examine the bottom of the blocks
+for a clue as to the correct order.
+
+REMARKS. Binet originally located this test in year IX, but in his 1911
+revision changed it to year VIII. Other revisions have retained it in
+year IX. The correct location depends upon the weights used and upon the
+procedure and scoring. Kuhlmann uses weights of 3, 9, 18, 27, 36, and
+45 grams, and this probably makes the test easier. Bobertag tried two
+sets of boxes, one set being of larger dimensions than the other. The
+larger gave decidedly the more errors. If we require only one success in
+three trials the test could be located a year or two lower in the scale,
+while three successes as a standard would require that it be moved
+upward possibly as much as two years.
+
+Much depends also on whether the child is left to find his own method,
+and on this there has been much difference of procedure. Kuhlmann,
+Bobertag, and Wallin illustrate the correct method of making the
+comparison by first hefting and arranging the weights while the subject
+looks on. We prefer to keep the test in its original form, and with the
+procedure and scoring we have used it is well located in year IX.
+
+Wallin carries his assistance still further by saying, after the first
+block has been placed, "Now, find the heaviest of the four," and after
+the second has been placed, "Now, find the heaviest of the three," etc.
+Finally, when the arrangement has been made, he tells the subject to try
+them again to make sure the order is correct, allowing the subject to
+make whatever changes he thinks necessary. This procedure robs the test
+of its most valuable features. The experiment was not devised primarily
+as a test of sensory discrimination, for it has long been recognized
+that individuals who have developed as far as the 9- or 10-year level of
+intelligence are ordinarily but little below normal in sensory capacity.
+
+Psychologically, the test resembles that of comparing weights in V, 1.
+Success depends, in the first place, upon the correct comprehension of
+the task and the setting of a goal to be attained; secondly, upon the
+choice of a suitable method for realizing the goal; and finally, upon
+the ability to keep the end clearly in consciousness until all the steps
+necessary for its attainment have been gone through. Elementary as are
+the processes involved, they represent the prototype of all purposeful
+behavior. The statesman, the lawyer, the teacher, the physician, the
+carpenter, all in their own way and with their own materials, are
+continually engaged in setting goals, choosing means, and inhibiting the
+multitudinous appeals of irrelevant and distracting ideas.
+
+In this experiment the subject may fail in any one of the three
+requirements of the test or in all of them. (1) He may not comprehend
+the instructions and so be unable to set the goal. (2) Though
+understanding what is expected of him, he may adopt an absurd method of
+carrying out the task. Or (3) he may lose sight of the end and begin to
+play with the blocks, stacking them on top of one another, building
+trains, tossing them about, etc. Sometimes the guiding idea is not
+completely lost, but is weakened or rendered only partially operative.
+In such a case the subject may compare some of the blocks carefully,
+place others without trying them at all, but continue in his
+half-rational, half-irrational procedure until all the blocks have been
+arranged.
+
+It is essential, therefore, to supplement the mere record of success or
+failure by jotting down a brief but accurate description of the
+performance. Note any hesitation or inability to grasp the instructions.
+Note especially any absurd procedure, such as placing all the blocks
+without hefting any of them, comparing only some of them, holding them
+up and shaking them, hefting two at once in the same hand, etc. The
+ideal method, of course, is to try all the blocks carefully before
+placing any of them, then to make a tentative arrangement, and finally,
+to correct this tentative arrangement by means of individual
+comparisons. A slight departure from this method does not always bring
+failure, but it renders success less probable. As a rule it is only the
+very intelligent children of 10 years who think to test out their first
+arrangement by making a final and additional trial of each block in
+turn. Contrary to what might be supposed, success is slightly favored by
+hefting the blocks successively with one hand rather than by taking one
+in each hand for simultaneous comparison, but as the child cannot be
+expected to know this, we must regard the two methods as equally
+logical.
+
+The test of arranging weights has met universal praise. Its special
+advantage is that it tests the subject's intelligence in the
+manipulation of _things_ rather than his capacity for dealing with
+_abstractions_. It tests his ability to do something rather than his
+ability to express himself in language. It throws light upon certain
+factors of motor adaptation and practical judgment which play a great
+part in the everyday life of the average human being. It depends as
+little upon school, perhaps, as any other test of the scale, and it is
+readily usable with children of all nations without danger of being
+materially altered in translation Moreover, it is always an interesting
+test for the child. Bobertag goes so far as to say that any 8- or 9-year
+child who passes this test cannot possibly be feeble-minded. This may be
+true; but the converse is hardly the case; that is, the failure of older
+children is by no means certain proof of mental retardation. The same
+observation, however, applies equally well to many other of the Binet
+tests, some of which correlate more closely with true mental age than
+this one. A rather considerable fraction of normal 12-year-olds fail on
+it, and it is in fact somewhat less dependable than certain other tests
+if we wish to differentiate between 9-year and 11-year intelligence. But
+it is a test we could ill afford to eliminate.[63]
+
+[63] Compare with V, 1.
+
+
+IX, 3. MAKING CHANGE
+
+PROCEDURE. Ask the following questions in the order here given:--
+
+  (a) "_If I were to buy 4 cents worth of candy and should give
+      the storekeeper 10 cents, how much money would I get back?_"
+  (b) "_If I bought 13 cents worth and gave the storekeeper
+      15 cents, how much would I get back?_"
+  (c) "_If I bought 4 cents worth and gave the storekeeper
+      25 cents, how much would I get back?_"
+
+Coins are not used, and the subject is not allowed the help of pencil
+and paper. If the subject forgets the statement of the problem, it is
+permissible to repeat it once, but only once. The response should be
+made in ten or fifteen seconds for each problem.
+
+SCORING, The test is passed if _two out of three_ problems are answered
+correctly in the allotted time. In case two answers are given to a
+problem, we follow the usual rule of counting the second and ignoring
+the first.
+
+REMARKS. Problems of this nature, when thoroughly standardized, are
+extremely valuable as tests of intelligence. The difficulty of the test,
+as we have used it, does not lie in the subtraction of 4 from 10, 12
+from 15, etc. Such subtractions, when given as problems in subtraction,
+are readily solved by practically all normal 8-year-olds who have
+attended school as much as two years. The problems of the test have a
+twofold difficulty: (1) The statement of the problem must be
+comprehended and held in mind until the solution has been arrived at;
+(2) the problem is so stated that the subject must himself select the
+fundamental operation which applies. The latter difficulty is somewhat
+the greater of the two, addition sometimes being employed instead of
+subtraction.
+
+It is just such difficulties as this that prove so perplexing to the
+feeble-minded. High-grade defectives, although they require more than
+the usual amount of drill and are likely to make occasional errors, are
+nevertheless capable of learning to add, subtract, multiply, and divide
+fairly well. Their main trouble comes in deciding which of these
+operations a given problem calls for. They can master routine, but as
+regards initiative, judgment, and power to reason they are little
+educable. The psychology and pedagogy of mental deficiency is epitomized
+in this statement.
+
+There has been little disagreement as to the proper location of the test
+of making change, but various procedures have been employed. Coins have
+generally been employed, in which case the subject is actually allowed
+to make the change. Most other revisions have also given only a single
+problem, usually 4 cents out of 20 cents, or 4 out of 25, or 9 out of
+25. It is evident that these are not all of equal difficulty. There is
+general agreement, however, that normal children of 9 years should be
+able to make simple change.
+
+
+IX, 4. REPEATING FOUR DIGITS REVERSED
+
+The series are 6-5-2-8; 4-9-3-7; 3-6-2-9.
+
+PROCEDURE AND SCORING. Exactly as in VII, alternate test 2.[64]
+
+[64] See discussion, p. 207 _ff._
+
+
+IX, 5. USING THREE WORDS IN A SENTENCE
+
+PROCEDURE The words used are:--
+
+  (a) _Boy_, _ball_, _river_.
+  (b) _Work_, _money_, _men_.
+  (c) _Desert_, _rivers_, _lakes_.
+
+Say: "_You know what a sentence is, of course. A sentence is made up of
+some words which say something. Now, I am going to give you three words,
+and you must make up a sentence that has all three words in it. The
+three words are 'boy,' 'ball,' 'river.' Go ahead and make up a sentence
+that has all three words in it._" The others are given in the same way.
+
+Note that the subject is not shown the three words written down, and
+that the reply is to be given orally.
+
+If the subject does not understand what is wanted, the instruction may
+be repeated, but it is not permissible to illustrate what a sentence is
+by giving one. There must be no preliminary practice.
+
+A curious misunderstanding which is sometimes encountered comes from
+assuming that the sentence must be constructed entirely of the three
+words given. If it appears that the subject is stumbling over this
+difficulty, we explain: "_The three words must be put with some other
+words so that all of them together will make a sentence._"
+
+Nothing is said about hurrying, but if a sentence is not given within
+one minute the rule is to count that part of the test a failure and to
+proceed to the next trio of words.
+
+Give only one trial for each part of the test.
+
+Do not specially caution the child to avoid giving more than one
+sentence, as this is implied in the formula used and should be
+understood.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _two of the three_ sentences are
+satisfactory. In order to be satisfactory a sentence must fulfill the
+following requirements: (1) It must either be a simple sentence, or, if
+compound, must not contain more than two distinct ideas; and (2) it must
+not express an absurdity.
+
+Slight changes in one or more of the key words are disregarded, as
+_river_ for _rivers_, etc.
+
+The scoring is difficult enough to justify rather extensive
+illustration.
+
+(a) _Boy, ball, river_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ An analysis of 128 satisfactory responses gave
+    the following classification:--
+
+    (1) Simple sentence containing a simple subject and a simple
+    predicate; as: "The boy threw his ball into the river." "The boy
+    lost his ball in the river." "The boy's ball fell into the
+    river." "The boy swam into the river after his ball," etc. This
+    group contains 76 per cent of the correct responses.
+
+    (2) A sentence with a simple subject and a compound predicate;
+    as: "A boy went to the river and took his ball with him." About
+    8 per cent of all were of this type.
+
+    (3) A complex sentence containing a relative clause (2 per cent
+    only); as: "The boy ran after his ball which was rolling toward
+    the river."
+
+    (4) A compound sentence containing two independent clauses
+    (about 14 per cent); as: "The boy had a ball and he lost it in
+    the river."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ The failures fall into four chief groups:--
+
+    (1) Sentences with three clauses (or else three separate
+    sentences).
+
+    (2) Sentences containing an absurdity.
+
+    (3) Sentences which omit one of the key words.
+
+    (4) Silence, due ordinarily to inability to comprehend the task.
+
+    Group 1 includes 78 per cent of the failures; group 2, about
+    12 per cent; and group 3 and 4 about 5 per cent each. Samples of
+    group 1 are: "There was a boy, and he bought a ball, and it fell
+    into the river." "I saw a boy, and he had a ball, and he was
+    playing by the river." Illustration of an absurd sentence, "The
+    boy was swimming in the river and he was playing ball."
+
+(b) _Work, money, men_
+
+    _Satisfactory_:--
+
+    (1) Sentence with a simple subject and simple predicate
+    (including 75 per cent of 116 satisfactory responses); as: "Men
+    work for their money." "Men get money for their work," etc.
+
+    (2) A complex sentence with a relative clause (12 per cent of
+    correct answers); as: "Men who work earn much money." "It is
+    easy for men to earn money if they are willing to work," etc.
+
+    (3) A compound sentence with two independent, coördinate clauses
+    (13 per cent); as: "Men work and they earn money." "Some men
+    have money and they do not work."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory_:--
+
+    (1) Three clauses; as: "I know a man and he has money, and he
+    works at the store."
+
+    (2) Sentences which are absurd or meaningless; as: "Men work
+    with their money."
+
+    (3) Omission of one of the words.
+
+    (4) Inability to respond.
+
+(c) _Desert, rivers, lakes_
+
+    _Satisfactory_:--
+
+    (1) Sentences with a simple subject and a simple predicate
+    (including 84 per cent of 126 correct answers); as: "There are
+    no rivers or lakes in the desert." "The desert has one river and
+    one lake," etc.
+
+    (2) A complex sentence with a relative clause (only 2 per cent);
+    as: "In the desert there was a river which flowed into a lake."
+
+    (3) A compound sentence with two independent, coördinate clauses
+    (11 per cent); as: "We went to the desert, and it had no rivers
+    or lakes."
+
+    (4) A compound, complex sentence (3 per cent of all); as: "There
+    was a desert, and near by there was a river that emptied into a
+    lake."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory_:--
+
+    (1) Sentences with three clauses (40 per cent of all failures);
+    as: "A desert is dry, rivers are long, lakes are rough."
+
+    (2) Sentences containing an absurdity (12 per cent of the
+    failures): as: "a desert is dry, rivers are long, lakes are
+    filled with swimming boys." "The lake went through the desert
+    and the river." "There was a desert and rivers and lakes in the
+    forest." "The desert is full of rivers and lakes."
+
+    (3) Omission of one of the words (40 per cent of the failures).
+
+    (4) Inability to respond (8 per cent).
+
+REMARKS. The test of constructing a sentence containing given words was
+first used by Masselon and is known as "the Masselon experiment."
+Meumann, who used it in a rather extended experiment,[65] finds it a
+good test of intelligence and a reliable index as to the richness,
+definiteness, and maturity of the associative processes. As Meumann
+shows, it is instructive to study the qualitative differences between
+the responses of bright and dull children, apart from questions of
+sentence structure. These differences are especially discernible
+in (a) the logical qualities of the associations, and (b) the
+definiteness of statement. As regards (a), bright children are much
+more likely to use the given words as keystones in the construction of a
+sentence which would be logically suggested by them. For example,
+_donkey_, _blows_, suggest some such sentence as, "The donkey receives
+blows because he is lazy." In like manner we have found that the words
+_work_, _money_, _men_ usually suggest to the more intelligent children
+a sentence like "Men work for their money" (or "because they need
+money," etc.), while the dull child is more likely to give some such
+sentence as "The men have work and they don't have much money." That is,
+the sentence of the dull child, even though correct in structure and
+free enough from outright absurdity to satisfy the standard of scoring
+which we have set forth, is likely to express ideas which are more or
+less nondescript, ideas not logically suggested by the set of words
+given.
+
+[65] "Ueber eine neue Methode der Intelligenzprüfung und über den Wert
+der Kombinationsmethoden," in _Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie
+und Experimentelle Pädagogik_ (1912), pp. 145-63.
+
+The experiment is one of the many forms of the "completion test," or
+"the combination method." As we have already noted, the power to combine
+more or less separate and isolated elements into a logical whole is one
+of the most essential features of intelligence. The ability to do so in
+a given case depends, in the first place, upon the number and logical
+quality of the associations which have previously been made with each of
+the given elements separately, and in the second place, upon the
+readiness with which these ideational stores yield up the particular
+associations necessary for weaving the given words into some kind of
+unity. The child must pass from what is given to what is not given but
+merely suggested. This requires a certain amount of invention. Scattered
+fragments must be conceived as the skeleton of a thought, and this
+skeleton, or partial skeleton, must be assembled and made whole. The
+task is analogous to that which confronts the palæontologist, who is
+able to reconstruct, with a high degree of certainty, the entire
+skeleton of an extinct animal from the evidence furnished by three or
+four fragments of bones. It is no wonder, therefore, that subjects whose
+ideational stores are scanty, and whose associations are based upon
+accidental rather than logical connections, find the test one of
+peculiar difficulty. Invention thrives in a different soil.
+
+Binet located this test in year X. Goddard and Kuhlmann assign it the
+same location, though their actual statistics agree closely with our
+own. Our procedure makes the test somewhat easier than that of Binet,
+who gave only one trial and used the somewhat more difficult words
+_Paris_, _river_, _fortune_. Others have generally followed the Binet
+procedure, merely substituting for Paris the name of a city better known
+to the subject. Binet's requirement of a written response also makes the
+test harder.
+
+Perhaps the greatest obstacle to uniformity in the use of the test comes
+from the difficulty of scoring, particularly in deciding whether the
+sentence contains enough absurdity to disqualify it, and whether it
+expresses three separate ideas or only two. It is hoped that the rather
+large variety of sample responses which we have given will reduce these
+difficulties to a minimum.
+
+An additional word is necessary in regard to what constitutes an
+absurdity in (b). A sentence like "There are some rivers and lakes in
+the desert" is not an absurdity in certain parts of Western United
+States. In Professor Ordahl's tests at Reno, Nevada, many children whose
+intelligence was altogether above suspicion gave this reply. The
+statement is, indeed, perfectly true for the semi-arid region in the
+vicinity of Reno known as "the desert." On the other hand, such
+sentences as "The desert is full of rivers and lakes," or "There are
+forty rivers and lakes in the desert," can hardly be considered
+satisfactory. Similar difficulties are presented by (c), though not so
+frequently. "Men who work do not have money" expresses, unfortunately,
+more truth than nonsense.
+
+
+IX, 6. FINDING RHYMES
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the child: "_You know what a rhyme is, of course. A
+rhyme is a word that sounds like another word. Two words rhyme if they
+end in the same sound. Understand?_" Whether the child says he
+understands or not, we proceed to illustrate what a rhyme is, as
+follows: "_Take the two words 'hat' and 'cat.' They sound alike and so
+they make a rhyme. 'Hat,' 'rat,' 'cat,' 'bat' all rhyme with one
+another._"
+
+That is, we first explain what a rhyme is and then we give an
+illustration. A large majority of American children who have reached the
+age of 9 years understand perfectly what a rhyme is, without any
+illustration. A few, however, think they understand, but do not; and in
+order to insure that all are given equal advantage it is necessary never
+to omit the illustration.
+
+After the illustration say: "_Now, I am going to give you a word and you
+will have one minute to find as many words as you can that rhyme with
+it. The word is 'day.' Name all the words you can think of that rhyme
+with 'day.'_"
+
+If the child fails with the first word, before giving the second we
+repeat the explanation and give sample rhymes for _day_; otherwise we
+proceed without further explanation to _mill_ and _spring_, saying,
+"_Now, you have another minute to name all the words you can think of
+that rhyme with 'mill,'_" etc. Apart from the mention of "one minute"
+say nothing to suggest hurrying, as this tends to throw some children
+into mental confusion.
+
+SCORING. Passed if in _two out of the three_ parts of the experiment the
+child finds _three words_ which rhyme with the word given, the time
+limit for each series being _one minute_. Note that in each case there
+must be three words in addition to the word given. These must be real
+words, not meaningless syllables or made-up words. However, we should be
+liberal enough to accept such words as _ding_ (from "ding-dong ") for
+_spring_, _Jill_ (see "Jack and Jill") for _mill_, _Fay_ (girl's name)
+for _day_, etc.
+
+REMARKS. At first thought it would seem that the demands made by this
+test upon intelligence could not be very great. Sound associations
+between words may be contrasted unfavorably with associations like those
+of cause and effect, part to whole, whole to part, opposites, etc. But
+when we pass from _a-priori_ considerations to an examination of the
+actual data, we find that the giving of rhymes is closely correlated
+with general intelligence.
+
+The 9-year-olds who test at or above 10 years nearly always do well in
+finding rhymes, while 9-year-olds who test as low as 8 years seldom
+pass. When a test thus shows high correlation with the scale as a whole,
+we must either accept the test as valid or reject the scale altogether.
+While the feeble-minded do not do as well in this test as normal
+children of corresponding mental age, the percentage successes for them
+rises rapidly between mental age 8 and mental age 10 or 11.
+
+Closer psychological analysis of the processes involved will show why
+this is true. To find rhymes for a given word means that one must hunt
+out verbal associations under the direction of a guiding idea. Every
+word has innumerable associations and many of these tend, in greater or
+less degree, to be aroused when the stimulus word is given. In order to
+succeed with the test, however, it is necessary to inhibit all
+associations which are not relevant to the desired end. The directing
+idea must be held so firmly in mind that it will really direct the
+thought associations. Besides acting to inhibit the irrelevant, it must
+create a sort of magnetic stress (to borrow a figure from physics) which
+will give dominance to those associative tendencies pointing in the
+right direction. Even the feeble-minded child of imbecile grade has in
+his vocabulary a great many words which rhyme with _day_, _mill_, and
+_spring_. He fails on the test because his verbal associations cannot be
+subjugated to the influence of a directing idea. The end to be attained
+does not dominate consciousness sufficiently to create more than a faint
+stress. Instead of a single magnetic pole there is a conflict of forces.
+The result is either chaos or partial success. _Mill_ may suggest
+_hill_, and then perhaps the directing idea becomes suddenly inoperative
+and the child gives _mountain_, _valley_, or some other irrelevant
+association. The lack of associations, however, is a more frequent cause
+of failure than inability to inhibit the irrelevant.
+
+If any one supposes that finding rhymes does not draw upon the higher
+mental powers, let him try the experiment upon himself in various stages
+of mental efficiency, say at 9 A.M., when mentally refreshed by a good
+night of sleep and again when fatigued and sleepy. Poets questioned by
+Galton on this point all testified to the greater difficulty of finding
+rhymes when mentally fatigued. In this and in many other respects the
+mental activities of the fatigued or sleepy individual approach the type
+of mentation which is normal to the feeble-minded.
+
+It is important to note that adults make a less favorable showing
+in this test than normal children of corresponding mental age,
+Mr. Knollin's "hoboes" of 12-year intelligence doing hardly as well as
+school children of 10-year intelligence. Those who are habitually
+employed in school exercises probably acquire an adeptness in verbal
+associations which is later gradually lost in the preoccupations of real
+life.
+
+There has been more disagreement as to the proper location of this test
+than of any other test of the Binet scale. Binet placed it in year XII
+of the 1908 scale, but shifted it to year XV in 1911. Kuhlmann retains
+it in year XII, while Goddard drops it down to year XI. However, when we
+examine the actual statistics for normal children we do not find very
+marked disagreement, and such disagreement as is present can be largely
+accounted for by variations in procedure and by differing conclusions
+drawn from identical data. In the first place, Binet gave but one trial.
+This, of course, makes the test much harder than when three trials are
+given and only two successes are required. To make one trial equal in
+difficulty to three trials we should perhaps need to demand only two
+rhymes, instead of three, in the one trial. In the second place, the
+word used by Binet (_obeissance_) is much harder than one-syllable words
+like _day_, _mill_, and _spring_. Finally, the wide shift of the test
+from year XII to year XV was not justified by the statistics of Binet
+himself, and the figures of Kuhlmann and Goddard are really in
+exceptionally close agreement with our own, notwithstanding the fact
+that Goddard required three successes instead of two. In four series of
+tests, considered together, we have found 62 per cent passing at
+year IX, 81 per cent at year X, 83 per cent at year XI, and 94 per cent
+at year XII.
+
+
+IX, ALTERNATIVE TEST 1: NAMING THE MONTHS
+
+PROCEDURE. Simply ask the subject to "_name all the months of the
+year_." Do not start him off by naming one month; give no look of
+approval or disapproval as the months are being named, and make no
+suggestions or comments of any kind.
+
+When the months have been named, we "check up" the performance by
+asking: "_What month comes before April?_" "_What month comes before
+July?_" "_What month comes before November?_"
+
+SCORING. Passed if the months are named in about _fifteen or twenty
+seconds with no more than one error_ of omission, repetition, or
+displacement, and if _two out of the three check questions_ are answered
+correctly. Disregard place of beginning.
+
+REMARKS. Some are inclined to consider this test of little value,
+because of its supposed dependence on accidental training. With this
+opinion we cannot fully agree. The arguments already given in favor of
+the retention of naming the days of the week (year VII), apply equally
+well in the present case. It has been shown, however, that age, apart
+from intelligence, does have some effect on the ability to name the
+months. Defective adults of 9-year intelligence do about as well with it
+as normal children of 10-year intelligence.
+
+The test appears in year X of Binet's 1908 scale and in year IX of the
+1911 revision. Goddard places it correctly in year IX, while Kuhlmann
+and Bobertag have omitted it.
+
+
+IX, ALTERNATIVE TEST 2: COUNTING THE VALUE OF STAMPS
+
+PROCEDURE. Place before the subject a cardboard on which are pasted
+three 1-cent and three 2-cent stamps arranged as follows: 111222. Be
+sure to lay the card so that the stamps will be right side up for the
+child. Say: "_You know, of course, how much a stamp like this costs_
+(pointing to a 1-cent stamp). _And you know how much one like this
+costs_ (pointing to a 2-cent stamp). _Now, how much money would it take
+to buy all these stamps?_"
+
+Do not tell the individual values of the stamps if these are not known,
+for it is a part of the test to ascertain whether the child's
+spontaneous curiosity has led him to find out and remember their values.
+If the individual values are known, but the first answer is wrong, a
+second trial may be given. In such cases, however, it is necessary to be
+on guard against guessing.
+
+If the child merely names an incorrect sum without saying anything to
+indicate how he arrived at his answer, it is well to tell him to figure
+it up aloud. "_Tell me how you got it._"
+
+SCORING. Passed if the correct value is given in not over fifteen
+seconds.
+
+REMARKS. The value of this test may be questioned on two grounds: (1)
+That it has an ambiguous significance, since failure to pass it may
+result either from incorrect addition or from lack of knowledge of the
+individual values of the stamps; (2) that familiarity with stamps and
+their values is so much a matter of accident and special instruction
+that the test is not fair.
+
+Both criticisms are in a measure valid. The first, however, applies
+equally well to a great many useful intelligence tests. In fact, it is
+only a minority in which success depends on but one factor. The other
+criticism has less weight than would at first appear. While it is, of
+course, not impossible for an intelligent child to arrive at the age of
+9 years without having had reasonable opportunity to learn the cost of
+the common postage stamps, the fact is that a large majority have had
+the opportunity and that most of those of normal intelligence have taken
+advantage of it. It is necessary once more to emphasize the fact that in
+its method of locating a test the Binet system makes ample allowance for
+"accidental" failures.
+
+Like the tests of naming coins, repeating the names of the days of the
+week or the months of the year, giving the date, tying a bow-knot,
+distinguishing right and left, naming the colors, etc., this one also
+throws light on the child's spontaneous interest in common objects. It
+is mainly the children of deficient intellectual curiosity who do not
+take the trouble to learn these things at somewhere near the expected
+age.
+
+The test was located in year VIII of the Binet scale. However, Binet
+used coins, three single and three double sous. Since we do not have
+either a half-cent or a 2-cent coin, it has been necessary to substitute
+postage stamps. This changes the nature of the test and makes it much
+harder. It becomes less a test of ability to do a simple sum, and more a
+test of knowledge as to the value of the stamps used. That the test is
+easy enough for year VIII when it can be given in the original form is
+indicated by all the French, German, and English statistics available,
+but four separate series of Stanford tests agree in finding it too hard
+for year VIII when stamps are substituted and the test is carried out
+according to the procedure described above.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XVI
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR X
+
+
+X, 1. VOCABULARY (THIRTY DEFINITIONS, 5400 WORDS)
+
+PROCEDURE AND SCORING AS IN VIII, 6. At year X, thirty words should be
+correctly defined.
+
+
+X, 2. DETECTING ABSURDITIES
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the child: "_I am going to read a sentence which has
+something foolish in it, some nonsense. I want you to listen carefully
+and tell me what is foolish about it._" Then read the sentences, rather
+slowly and in a matter-of-fact voice, saying after each: "_What is
+foolish about that?_" The sentences used are the following:--
+
+  (a) "_A man said: 'I know a road from my house to the city which
+      is downhill all the way to the city and downhill all the way
+      back home.'_"
+  (b) "_An engineer said that the more cars he had on his train the
+      faster he could go._"
+  (c) "_Yesterday the police found the body of a girl cut into
+      eighteen pieces. They believe that she killed herself._"
+  (d) "_There was a railroad accident yesterday, but it was not very
+      serious. Only forty-eight people were killed._"
+  (e) "_A bicycle rider, being thrown from his bicycle in an
+      accident, struck his head against a stone and was instantly
+      killed. They picked him up and carried him to the hospital,
+      and they do not think he will get well again._"
+
+Each should ordinarily be answered within thirty seconds. If the child
+is silent, the sentence should be repeated; but no other questions or
+suggestions of any kind are permissible. Such questions as "_Could the
+road be downhill both ways?_" or, "_Do you think the girl could have
+killed herself?_" would, of course, put the answer in the child's mouth.
+It is even best to avoid laughing as the sentence is read.
+
+Owing to the child's limited power of expression it is not always easy
+to judge from the answer given whether the absurdity has really been
+detected or not. In such cases ask him to explain himself, using some
+such formula as: "_I am not sure I know what you mean. Explain what you
+mean. Tell me what is foolish in the sentence I read._" This usually
+brings a reply the correctness or incorrectness of which is more
+apparent, while at the same time the formula is so general that it
+affords no hint as to the correct answer. Additional questions must be
+used with extreme caution.
+
+SCORING. Passed if the absurdity is detected in _four out of the five_
+statements. The following are samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory
+answers:--
+
+(a) _The road downhill_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "If it was downhill to the city it would be
+    uphill coming back." "It can't be downhill both directions."
+    "That could not be." "That is foolish. (Explain.) Because it
+    must be uphill one way or the other." "That would be a funny
+    road. (Explain.) No road can be like that. It can't be downhill
+    both ways."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Perhaps he took a little different road
+    coming back." "I guess it is a very crooked road." "Coming back
+    he goes around the hill." "The man lives down in a valley." "The
+    road was made that way so it would be easy." "Just a road. I
+    don't see anything foolish." "He should say, 'a road which
+    goes.'"
+
+(b) _What the engineer said_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "If he has more cars he will go slower." "It is
+    the other way. If he wants to go faster he mustn't have so many
+    cars." "The man didn't mean what he said, or else it was a slip
+    of the tongue." "That's the way it would be if he was going
+    downhill." "Foolish, because the cars don't help pull the
+    train." "He ought to say _slower_, not _faster_."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "A long train is nicer." "The engine pulls
+    harder if the train has lots of cars." "That's all right. I
+    suppose he likes a big train." "Nothing foolish; when I went to
+    the city I saw a train that had lots of cars and it was going
+    awfully fast." "He should have said, 'the faster I can _run_.'"
+
+(c) _The girl who was thought to have killed herself_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "She could not have cut herself into eighteen
+    pieces." "She would have been dead before that." "She might have
+    cut two or three pieces off, but she couldn't do the rest."
+    (Laughing) "Well, she may have killed herself; but if she did
+    it's a sure thing that some one else came along after and
+    chopped her up." "That policeman must have been a fool.
+    (Explain.) To think that she could chop herself into eighteen
+    pieces."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "_Think_ that she killed herself; they _know_
+    she did." "They can't be sure. Some one may have killed her."
+    "It was a foolish girl to kill herself." "How can they tell who
+    killed her?" "No girl would kill herself unless she was crazy."
+    "It ought to read: 'They think that she committed suicide.'"
+
+(d) _The railroad accident_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "That was very serious." "I should like to know
+    what you would call a serious accident!" "You could say it was
+    not serious if two or three people were killed, but
+    forty-eight,--that is serious."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "It was a foolish mistake that made the
+    accident." "They couldn't help it. It was an accident." "It
+    might have been worse." "Nothing foolish; it's just sad."
+
+(e) _The bicycle rider_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "How could he get well after he was already
+    killed?" "Why, he's already dead." "No use to take a dead man to
+    the hospital." "They ought to have taken him to a grave-yard!"
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Foolish to fall off of a bicycle. He should
+    have known how to ride." "They ought to have carried him home.
+    (Why?) So his folks could get a doctor." "He should have been
+    more careful." "Maybe they can cure him if he isn't hurt very
+    bad." "There's nothing foolish in that."
+
+REMARKS. The detection of absurdities is one of the most ingenious and
+serviceable tests of the entire scale. It is little influenced by
+schooling, and it comes nearer than any other to being a test of
+that species of mother-wit which we call common sense. Like the
+"comprehension questions," it may be called a test of judgment, using
+this term in the colloquial and not in the logical sense. The stupid
+person, whether depicted in literature, proverb, or the ephemeral joke
+column, is always (and justly, it would seem) characterized by a huge
+tolerance for absurd contradictions and by a blunt sensitivity for the
+fine points of a joke. Intellectual discrimination and judgment are
+inferior. The ideas do not cross-light each other, but remain relatively
+isolated. Hence, the most absurd contradictions are swallowed, so to
+speak, without arousing the protest of the critical faculty. The latter,
+indeed, is only a name for the tendency of intellectually irreconcilable
+elements to clash. If there is no clash, if the elements remain apart,
+it goes without saying that there will be no power of criticism.
+
+The critical faculty begins its development in the early years and
+strengthens _pari passu_ with the growing wealth of inter-associations
+among ideas; but in the average child it is not until the age of about
+10 years that it becomes equal to tasks like those presented in this
+test. Eight-year intelligence hardly ever scores more than two or three
+correct answers out of five. By 12, the critical ability has so far
+developed that the test is nearly always passed. It is an invaluable
+test for the higher grades of mental deficiency.
+
+As a test of the critical powers Binet first used "trap questions"; as,
+for example, "Is snow red or black?" The results were disappointing, for
+it was found that owing to timidity, deference, and suggestibility
+normal children often failed on such questions. Deference is more marked
+in normal than in feeble-minded children, and it is because of the
+influence of this trait that it is necessary always to forewarn the
+subject that the sentence to be given contains nonsense.
+
+Binet located the test in year XI of the 1908 scale, but changed it to
+year X in 1911. Goddard and Kuhlmann retain it in year XI. The large
+majority of the statistics, including those of Goddard and Kuhlmann,
+warrant the location of the test in year X. Not all have used the same
+absurdities, and these have not been worded uniformly. Most have
+required three successes out of five, but Bobertag and Kuhlmann require
+three out of four; Bobertag's procedure is also different in that he
+does not forewarn the child that an absurdity is to follow.
+
+The present form of the test is the result of three successive
+refinements. It will be noted that we have made two substitutions in
+Binet's list of absurdities. Those omitted from the original scale are:
+"_I have three brothers--Paul, Ernest, and myself_," and, "_If I were
+going to commit suicide I would not choose Friday, because Friday is an
+unlucky day and would bring me misfortune._" The last has a puzzling
+feature which makes it much too hard for year X, and the other is
+objectionable with children who are accustomed to hear a foreign
+language in which the form of expression used in the absurdity is
+idiomatically correct.
+
+The two we have substituted for these objectionable absurdities are,
+"The road downhill" and "What the engineer said." The five we have
+used, though of nearly equal difficulty, are here listed in the order
+from easiest to hardest. Our series as a whole is slightly easier than
+Binet's.
+
+
+X, 3. DRAWING DESIGNS FROM MEMORY
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the designs shown on the accompanying printed form. If
+copies are used they must be exact in size and shape. Before showing the
+card say: "_This card has two drawings on it. I am going to show them to
+you for ten seconds, then I will take the card away and let you draw
+from memory what you have seen. Examine both drawings carefully and
+remember that you have only ten seconds._"
+
+Provide pencil and paper and then show the card for ten seconds, holding
+it at right angles to the child's line of vision and with the designs in
+the position given in the plate. Have the child draw the designs
+immediately after they are removed from sight.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _one of the designs is reproduced
+correctly and the other about half correctly_. "Correctly" means that
+the _essential plan_ of the design has been grasped and reproduced.
+Ordinary irregularities due to lack of motor skill or to hasty execution
+are disregarded. "Half correctly" means that some essential part of the
+design has been omitted or misplaced, or that parts have been added.
+
+The sample reproductions shown on the scoring card will serve as a
+guide. It will be noted that an inverted design, or one whose right and
+left sides have been transposed, is counted only half correct, however
+perfect it many be in other respects; also that design _b_ is counted
+only half correct if the inner rectangle is not located off center.
+
+REMARKS. Binet states that the main factors involved in success are
+"attention, visual memory, and a little analysis." The power of rapid
+analysis would seem to be the most important, for if the designs are
+analyzed they may be reproduced from a verbal memory of the analysis.
+Without some analysis it would hardly be possible to remember the
+designs at all, as one of them contains thirteen lines and the other
+twelve. The memory span for unrelated objects is far too limited to
+permit us to grasp and retain that number of unrelated impressions.
+Success is possible only by grouping the lines according to their
+relationships, so that several of them are given a unitary value and
+remembered as one. In this manner, the design to the right, which is
+composed of twelve lines, may be reduced to four elements: (1) The outer
+rectangle; (2) the inner rectangle; (3) the off-center position of the
+inner rectangle; and (4) the joining of the angles. Of course the child
+does not ordinarily make an analysis as explicit as this; but analysis
+of some kind, even though it be unconscious, is necessary to success.
+
+Ability to pass the test indicates the presence, in a certain definite
+amount, of the tendency for the contents of consciousness to fuse into a
+meaningful whole. Failure indicates that the elements have maintained
+their unitary character or have fused inadequately. It is seen,
+therefore, that the test has a close kinship with the test of memory for
+sentences. The latter, also, permits the fusion or grouping of
+impressions according to meaning, with the result that five or six times
+as many meaningful syllables as nonsense syllables or digits can be
+retained.
+
+Binet had many more failures on design _a_ than on design _b_. This was
+probably due to the fact that he showed the designs with our _b_ to the
+left. A majority of subjects, probably because of the influence of
+reading habits, examine first the figure to the left, and because of the
+short time allowed for the inspection are unable to devote much time to
+the design at the right. We have placed the design of greater intrinsic
+difficulty at the left, with the result that the failures are almost
+equally divided between the two.
+
+Binet used this test in his unstandardized series of 1905, omitted it in
+1908, but included it in the 1911 revision, locating it in year X.
+Except for Goddard, who recommends year XI, there is rather general
+agreement that the test belongs at year X. Our own data show that it may
+be placed either at year X or year XI, according as the grading is rigid
+or lenient.
+
+
+X, 4. READING FOR EIGHT MEMORIES
+
+MATERIAL. We use Binet's selection, slightly adapted, as follows:--
+
+    _New York, September 5th. A fire last night burned three houses
+    near the center of the city. It took some time to put it out.
+    The loss was fifty thousand dollars, and seventeen families lost
+    their homes. In saving a girl, who was asleep in a bed, a
+    fireman was burned on the hands._
+
+The copy of the selection used by the subject should be printed in heavy
+type and should not contain the bars dividing it into memories. The
+Stanford record booklet contains the selection in two forms, one
+suitable for use in scoring, the other in heavy type to be read by the
+subject.
+
+PROCEDURE. Hand the selection to the subject, who should be seated
+comfortably in a good light, and say: "_I want you to read this for me
+as nicely as you can._" The subject must read aloud.
+
+Pronounce all the words which the subject is unable to make out, not
+allowing more than five seconds' hesitation in such a case.
+
+Record all errors made in reading the selection, and the exact time. By
+"error" is meant the omission, substitution, transposition, or
+mispronunciation of one word.
+
+The subject is not warned in advance that he will be asked to report
+what he has read, but as soon as he has finished reading, put the
+selection out of sight and say: "_Very well done. Now, I want you to
+tell me what you read. Begin at the first and tell everything you can
+remember._" After the subject has repeated everything he can recall and
+has stopped, say: "_And what else? Can you remember any more of it?_"
+Give no other aid of any kind. It is of course not permissible, when the
+child stops, to prompt him with such questions as, "_And what next?
+Where were the houses burned? What happened to the fireman?_" etc. The
+report must be spontaneous.
+
+Now and then, though not often, a subject hesitates or even refuses to
+try, saying he is unable to do it. Perhaps he has misunderstood the
+request and thinks he is expected to repeat the selection word for word,
+as in the tests of memory for sentences. We urge a little and repeat:
+"_Tell me in your own words all you can remember of it._" Others
+misunderstand in a different way, and thinking they are expected to tell
+merely what the story is about, they say: "It was about some houses that
+burned." In such cases we repeat the instructions with special emphasis
+on the words _all you can remember_.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed _if the selection is read in thirty-five
+seconds with not more than two errors, and if the report contains at
+least eight "memories."_ By underscoring the memories correctly
+reproduced, and by interlineations to show serious departures from the
+text, the record can be made complete with a minimum of trouble.
+
+The main difficulty in scoring is to decide whether a memory has been
+reproduced correctly enough to be counted. Absolutely literal
+reproduction is not expected. The rule is to count all memories whose
+thought is reproduced with only minor changes in the wording. "It took
+quite a while" instead of "it took some time" is satisfactory; likewise,
+"got burnt" for "was burned"; "who was sleeping" for "who was asleep";
+"are homeless" for "lost their homes"; "in the middle" for "near the
+center"; "a big fire" for "a fire," etc.
+
+Memories as badly mutilated as the following, however, are not counted:
+"A lot of buildings" for "three houses;" "a man" for "a fireman"; "who
+was sick" for "who was asleep"; etc. Occasionally we may give half
+credit, as in the case of "was seventeen thousand dollars" for "was
+fifty thousand dollars"; "and fifteen families" for "and seventeen
+families," etc.
+
+REMARKS. Are we warranted in using at all as a measure of intelligence a
+test which depends as much on instruction as this one does? Many are
+inclined to answer this question in the negative. The test has been
+omitted from the revisions of Goddard, Kuhlmann, and Binet himself. As
+regards Binet's earlier test of reading for two memories, in year VIII,
+there could hardly be any difference of opinion. The ability to read at
+that age depends so much on the accident of environment that the test is
+meaningless unless we know all about the conditions which have
+surrounded the child.
+
+The use of the test in year X, however, is a very different matter.
+There are comparatively few children of that age who will fail to pass
+it for lack of the requisite school instruction. Children of 10 years
+who have attended school with reasonable regularity for three years are
+practically always able to read the selection in thirty-five seconds and
+without over two mistakes unless they are retarded almost to the
+border-line of mental deficiency. Of our 10-year-olds who failed to meet
+the test, only a fourth did so because of inability to meet the reading
+requirements as regards time or mistakes. The remaining failures were
+caused by inadequate report, and most of these subjects were of the
+distinctly retarded group.
+
+We may conclude, therefore, that given anything approaching normal
+educational advantages, the test is really a measure of intelligence.
+Used with due caution, it is perhaps as valuable as any other test in
+the scale. It is only necessary, in case of failure, to ascertain the
+facts regarding the child's educational opportunities. Even this
+precaution is superfluous in case the subject tests as low as 8 years by
+the remainder of the scale. A safe rule is to omit the test from the
+calculation of mental age if the subject has not attended school the
+equivalent of two or three years.
+
+It has been contended by some that tests in which success depends upon
+language mastery cannot be real tests of intelligence. By such critics
+language tests have been set over against intelligence tests as
+contrasting opposites. It is easy to show, however, that this view is
+superficial and psychologically unsound. Every one who has an
+acquaintance with the facts of mental growth knows that language mastery
+of some degree is the _sine qua non_ of conceptual thinking. Language
+growth, in fact, mirrors the entire mental development. There are few
+more reliable indications of a subject's stage of intellectual maturity
+than his mastery of language.
+
+The rate of reading, for example, is a measure of the rate of
+association. Letters become associated together in certain combinations
+making words, words into word groups and sentences. Recognition is for
+the most part an associative process. Rapid and accurate association
+will mean ready recognition of the printed form. Since language units
+(whether letters, words, or word groups) have more or less preferred
+associations according to their habitual arrangement into larger units,
+it comes about that in the normal mind under normal conditions these
+preferred sequences arouse the apperceptive complex necessary to make a
+running recognition rapid and easy. It is reasonable to suppose that in
+the subnormal mind the habitual common associations are less firmly
+fixed, thus diminishing the effectiveness of the ever-changing
+apperceptive expectancy. Reading is, therefore, largely dependent on
+what James calls the "fringe of consciousness" and the "consciousness of
+meaning." In reading connected matter, every unit is big with a mass of
+tendencies. The smaller and more isolated the unit, the greater is the
+number of possibilities. Every added unit acts as a modifier limiting
+the number of tendencies, until we have finally, in case of a large
+mental unit, a fairly manageable whole. When the most logical and
+suitable of these associations arise easily from subconsciousness to
+consciousness, recognition is made easy, and their doing so will depend
+on whether the habitual relations of the elements have left permanent
+traces in the mind.
+
+The reading of the subnormal subject bears a close analogy to the
+reading of nonsense matter by the normal person. It has been ascertained
+by experiment that such reading requires about twice as much time as the
+reading of connected matter. This is true for the reason that out of
+thousands of associations possible with each word, no particular
+association is favored. The apperceptive expectancy, practically _nil_
+in the reading of nonsense material, must be decidedly deficient in all
+poor reading.
+
+Furthermore, in the case of the ordinary reader there is a feeling of
+rightness or wrongness about the thought sequences. That less
+intelligent subjects have this sense of fitness to a much less degree is
+evidenced by their passing over words so mutilated in pronunciation as
+to deprive them of all meaning. The transposition of letters and words,
+and the failure to observe marks of punctuation, point to the same
+thing. In other words, all the reading of the stupid subject is with
+material which to him is more or less nonsensical.[66]
+
+[66] See "Genius and Stupidity," by Lewis M. Terman, in _Pedagogical
+Seminary_, September, 1906, p. 340 _ff._
+
+A little observation will convince one that mentally retarded subjects,
+even when they possess a reasonable degree of fluency in recognizing
+printed words, do not sense shades of meaning. Their reading is by small
+units. Words and phrases do not fuse into one mental content, but remain
+relatively unconnected. The expression is monotonous and the voice has
+more of the unnatural "schoolroom" pitch. They read more slowly, more
+often misplace the emphasis, and miscall more words. In short, one who
+has psychological insight and is acquainted with reading standards can
+easily detect the symptoms of intellectual inferiority by hearing a dull
+subject read a brief selection.
+
+The giving of memories is also significant. Feeble-minded adults who
+have been well schooled are sometimes able to read the words of the text
+fairly fluently, but are usually unable to give more than a scanty
+report of what has been read. The scope of attention has been exhausted
+in the mere recognition and pronouncing of words. In general, the
+greater the mechanical difficulties which a subject encounters, the less
+adequate is his report of memories.
+
+The test has, however, one real fault. School children have a certain
+advantage in it over older persons _of the same mental age_ whose school
+experience is less recent. Adult subjects tend to give their report in
+less literal form. It is necessary, therefore, to give credit for the
+reproduction of the ideas of the passage rather than for strictly
+literal "memories."
+
+The selection we have used is, with minor changes, the same as Binet's.
+His selection was divided into nineteen memories. The one here given has
+twenty-one memories. Binet used the test both in year VIII and year IX,
+requiring two memories at year VIII and six memories at year IX. When we
+require eight memories, as we have done, the test becomes difficult
+enough for non-selected school children of 10 years. Location in year X
+seems preferable, because it insures that the child will almost
+certainly have had the schooling requisite for learning to read a
+selection of this difficulty, even if he has started to school at a
+later age than is customary. Naturally, placing the test higher in the
+scale makes it more a test of report and less a test of ability to
+recognize and pronounce printed words.
+
+
+X, 5. COMPREHENSION, FOURTH DEGREE
+
+The questions for this year are:--
+
+  (a) "_What ought you to say when some one asks your opinion
+      about a person you don't know very well?_"
+  (b) "_What ought you to do before undertaking (beginning)
+      something very important?_"
+  (c) "_Why should we judge a person more by his actions than by
+      his words?_"
+
+The PROCEDURE is the same as for the previous comprehension tests. Each
+question may be repeated, but its form must not be changed. It is not
+permissible to make any explanation whatever as to the meaning of the
+question, except to substitute _beginning_ for _undertaking_ when (b)
+seems not to be comprehended.
+
+SCORING. _Two out of the three_ questions must be answered
+satisfactorily. Study of the following classified responses should make
+scoring fairly easy in most cases:--
+
+(a) _When some one asks your opinion_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "I would say I don't know him very well"
+    (42 per cent of the correct answers). "Tell him what I know and
+    no more" (34 per cent of correct answers). "I would say that I'd
+    rather not express any opinion about him" (20 per cent of the
+    correct answers). "Tell him to ask some one else." "I would not
+    express any opinion."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ Unsatisfactory responses are due either to
+    failure to grasp the import of the question, or to inability to
+    suggest the appropriate action demanded by the situation.
+
+    The latter form of failure is the more common; e.g.: "I'd say
+    they are nice." "Say you like them." "Say what I think." "Say
+    it's none of their business." "Tell them I mind my own
+    business." "Say I would get acquainted with them." "Say that I
+    don't talk about people." "Say I didn't know how he looked."
+    "Tell them you ought not to say such things; you might get into
+    trouble." "I wouldn't say anything." "I would try to answer."
+    "Say I did not know his name," etc.
+
+    The following are samples of failure due to mistaking the import
+    of the question: "I'd say, 'How do you do?'" "Say,'I'm glad to
+    meet you.'"
+
+(b) _Before undertaking something important_
+
+    _Satisfactory responses_ fall into the following classes:--
+    (1) Brief statement of preliminary consideration; as: "Think
+        about it." "Look it over." "Plan it all out." "Make your
+        plans." "Stop and think," etc.
+    (2) Special emphasis on preliminary preparation and correct
+        procedure; as: "Find out the best way to do it." "Find out
+        what it is." "Get everything ready." "Do every little thing
+        that would help you." "Get all the details you can." "Take
+        your time and figure it out," etc.
+    (3) Asking help; as: "Ask some one to help you who knows all
+        about it." "Pray, if you are a Christian." "Ask advice,"
+        etc.
+    (4) Preliminary testing of ability, self-analysis, etc.; as:
+        "Try something easier first." "Practice and make sure I
+        could do it." "Learn how to do it," etc.
+    (5) Consider the wisdom or propriety of doing it: "Think whether
+        it would be best to do it." "See whether it would be
+        possible."
+
+    About 65 per cent of the correct responses belong either to
+    group (1) or (2), about 20 per cent to group (3), and most of
+    the remainder to group (4).
+
+    _Unsatisfactory responses_ are of the following types:--
+    (1) Due to mistaking the import of the question; e.g.: "Ask for
+        it." "Ought to say please." "Ask whose it is." Replies of
+        this kind can be nearly all eliminated by repeating the
+        question, using _beginning_ instead of _undertaking_.
+    (2) Replies more or less absurd or irrelevant; as: "Promise to
+        do your best." "Wash your face and hands." "Get a lot of
+        insurance." "Dress up and take a walk." "Tell your name."
+        "Know whether it's correct." "Begin at the beginning." "Say
+        you will do it." "See if it's a fake." "Go to school a long
+        time." "Pass an examination." "Do what is right." "Add up
+        and see how much it will cost." "Say I would do it." "Just
+        start doing it." "Go away." "Consult a doctor." "See if you
+        have time," etc.
+
+(c) _Why we should judge a person more by his actions than by his words_
+
+    _Satisfactory responses_ fall into the following classes:--
+    (1) Words and deeds both mentioned and contrasted in
+        reliability; as: "Actions speak louder than words" (this in
+        8 per cent of successes). "You can tell more by his actions
+        than by his words." "He might talk nice and do bad things."
+        "Sometimes people say things and don't do them." "It's not
+        what you say but what you do that counts." "Talk is cheap;
+        when he does a thing you can believe it." "People don't do
+        everything they say." "A man might steal but talk like a
+        nice man." Over 45 per cent of all correct responses belong
+        to group (1).
+    (2) Acts stressed without mention of words; as: "You can tell by
+        his actions whether he is good or not." "If he _acts_ nice
+        he _is_ nice." "Actions show for themselves." Group (2)
+        contains about 25 per cent of the correct responses.
+    (3) Emphasis on unreliability of words; as: "You can't tell by
+        his words, he might lie or boast." "Because you can't always
+        believe what people say." (Group (3) contains 15 per cent of
+        the correct responses.)
+    (4) Responses which state that a man's deeds are sometimes
+        better than his words; as: "He might talk ugly and still not
+        do bad things." "Some really kind-hearted people scold and
+        swear." "A man's words may be worse than his deeds," etc.
+        Group (4) contains over 10 per cent of the correct
+        responses.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory responses_ are usually due to inability to
+    comprehend the meaning of the question. If there is a complete
+    lack of comprehension the result is either silence or a totally
+    irrelevant response. If there is partial comprehension of the
+    question the response may be partially relevant, but fail to
+    make the expected distinction.
+
+    The following are sample failures: "You could tell by his words
+    that he was educated." "It shows he is polite if he acts nice."
+    "Sometimes people aren't polite." "Actions show who he might
+    be." "Acts may be foolish." "Words ain't right." "A man might be
+    dumb." "A fellow don't know what he says." "Some people can
+    talk, but don't have control of themselves." "You can tell by
+    his acts whether he goes with bad people." "If he doesn't act
+    right you know he won't talk right." "Actions show if he has
+    manners." "Might get embarrassed and not talk good." "He may not
+    know how to express his thoughts." "He might be a rich man but a
+    poor talker." "He might say the wrong thing and afterwards be
+    sorry for it," etc. (The last four are nearer correct than the
+    others, but they fall just short of expressing the essential
+    contrast.)
+
+REMARKS. For discussion of the comprehension questions as a test of
+intelligence, see page 158.
+
+Binet used eight questions, three "easy" and five "difficult," and
+required that five out of eight be answered correctly in year X. The
+eight were as follows:--
+
+  (1) What to do when you have missed your train.
+  (2) When you have been struck by a playmate, etc.
+  (3) When you have broken something, etc.
+  (4) When about to be late for school.
+  (5) When about to undertake something important.
+  (6) Why excuse a bad act committed in anger more readily than a bad
+      act committed without anger.
+  (7) What to do if some one asks your opinion, etc.
+  (8) Why can you judge a person better by his actions, etc.
+
+As we have shown, questions 1, 2, 3, and 4 are much too easy for year X.
+Question 6 is hard enough for year XII. We have omitted it because it
+was not needed and is not entirely satisfactory.
+
+
+X, 6. NAMING SIXTY WORDS
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_Now, I want to see how many different words you can
+name in three minutes. When I say ready, you must begin and name the
+words as fast as you can, and I will count them. Do you understand? Be
+sure to do your very best, and remember that just any words will do,
+like 'clouds,' 'dog,' 'chair,' 'happy'--Ready; go ahead!_"
+
+The instructions may be repeated if the subject does not understand what
+is wanted. As a rule the task is comprehended instantly and entered into
+with great zest.
+
+Do not stare at the child, and do not say anything as the test proceeds
+unless there is a pause of fifteen seconds. In this event say: "_Go
+ahead, as fast as you can. Any words will do._" Repeat this urging after
+every pause of fifteen seconds.
+
+Some subjects, usually rather intelligent ones, hit upon the device of
+counting or putting words together in sentences. We then break in with:
+"_Counting_ (or _sentences_, as the case may be) _not allowed. You must
+name separate words. Go ahead._"
+
+Record the individual words if possible, and mark the end of each
+half-minute. If the words are named so rapidly that they cannot be taken
+down, it is easy to keep the count by making a pencil stroke for each
+word. If the latter method is employed, repeated words may be indicated
+by making a cross instead of a single stroke. Always make record of
+repetitions.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _sixty_ words, exclusive of repetitions,
+are named in three minutes. It is not allowable to accept twenty words
+in one minute or forty words in two minutes as an equivalent of the
+expected score. Only real words are counted.
+
+REMARKS. Scoring, as we have seen, takes account only of the number of
+words. It is instructive, however, to note the kind of words given. Some
+subjects, more often those of the 8- or 9-year intelligence level, give
+mainly isolated, detached words. As well stated by Binet, "Little
+children exhaust an idea in naming it. They say, for example, _hat_, and
+then pass on to another word without noticing that hats differ in color,
+in form, have various parts, different uses and accessories, and that in
+enumerating all these they could find a large number of words."
+
+Others quickly take advantage of such relationships and name many parts
+of an object before leaving it, or name a number of other objects
+belonging to the same class. _Hat_, for example, suggests _cap_, _hood_,
+_coat_, _shirt_, _shoes_, _stockings_, etc. _Pencil_ suggests _book_,
+_slate_, _paper_, _desk_, _ink_, _map_, _school-yard_, _teacher_, etc.
+Responses of this type may be made up of ten or a dozen plainly distinct
+word groups.
+
+Another type of response consists in naming only objects present, or
+words which present objects immediately suggest. It is unfortunate that
+this occurs, since rooms in which testing is done vary so much with
+respect to furnishings. The subject who chooses this method is obviously
+handicapped if the room is relatively bare. One way to avoid this
+influence is to have all subjects name the words with eyes closed, but
+the distraction thus caused is sometimes rather disturbing. It is
+perhaps best for the present to adhere to the original procedure, and to
+follow the rule of making tests in a room containing few furnishings in
+addition to the necessary table and chairs.
+
+A fourth type of response is that including a large proportion of
+unusual or abstract words. This is the best of all, and is hardly ever
+found except with subjects who are above the 11-year intelligence level.
+
+It goes without saying that a response need not belong entirely to any
+one of the above types. Most responses, in fact, are characterized by a
+mixture of two or three of the types, one of them perhaps being
+dominant.
+
+Though not without its shortcomings, the test is interesting and
+valuable. Success in it does not, as one might suppose, depend solely
+upon the size of the vocabulary. Even 8-year-olds ordinarily know the
+meaning of more than 3000 words, and by 10 years the vocabulary usually
+exceeds 5000 words, or eighty times as many as the child is expected to
+name in three minutes. The main factors in success are two, (1) richness
+and variety of previously made associations with common words; and (2)
+the readiness of these associations to reinstate themselves. The young
+or the retarded subject fishes in the ocean of his vocabulary with a
+single hook, so to speak. He brings up each time only one word. The
+subject endowed with superior intelligence employs a net (the idea of a
+class, for example) and brings up a half-dozen words or more. The latter
+accomplishes a greater amount and with less effort; but it requires
+intelligence and will power to avoid wasting time with detached words.
+
+One is again and again astonished at the poverty of associations which
+this test discloses with retarded subjects. For twenty or thirty seconds
+such children may be unable to think of a single word. It would be
+interesting if at such periods we could get a glimpse into the subject's
+consciousness. There must be some kind of mental content, but it seems
+too vague to be crystallized in words. The ready association of thoughts
+with definite words connotes a relatively high degree of intellectual
+advancement. Language forms are the short-hand of thought; without
+facile command of language, thinking is vague, clumsy, and ineffective.
+Conversely, vague mental content entails language shortage.
+
+Occasionally a child of 11- or 12-year intelligence will make a poor
+showing in this test. When this happens it is usually due either to
+excessive embarrassment or to a strange persistence in running down all
+the words of a given class before launching out upon a new series.
+Occasionally, too, an intelligent subject wastes time in thinking up a
+beautiful list of big or unusual words. As stated by Bobertag, success
+is favored by a certain amount of "intellectual nonchalance," a
+willingness to ignore sense and a readiness to break away from a train
+of associations as soon as the "point of diminishing returns" has been
+reached. This doubtless explains why adults sometimes make such a
+surprisingly poor showing in the test. They have less "intellectual
+nonchalance" than children, are less willing to subordinate such
+considerations as completeness and logical connection to the demands of
+speed. Knollin's unemployed men of 12- to 13-year intelligence succeeded
+no better than school children of the 10-year level.
+
+We do not believe, however, that this fault is serious enough to warrant
+the elimination of the test. The fact is that in a large majority of
+cases the score which it yields agrees fairly closely with the result of
+the scale as a whole. Subjects more than a year or two below the mental
+age of 10 years seldom succeed. Those more than a year or two above the
+10-year level seldom fail.
+
+There is another reason why the test should be retained, it often has
+significance beyond that which appears in the mere number of words
+given. The naming of unusual and abstract words is an instance of this.
+An unusually large number of repetitions has symptomatic significance
+in the other direction. It indicates a tendency to mental stereotypy, so
+frequently encountered in testing the feeble-minded. The proportion of
+repetitions made by normal children of the 10- or 11-year intelligence
+level rarely exceeds 2 or 3 per cent of the total number of words named;
+those of older retarded children of the same level occasionally reach
+6 or 8 per cent.
+
+It is conceivable, of course, that a more satisfactory test of this
+general nature could be devised; such, for example, as having the
+subject name all the words he can of a given class (four-footed animals,
+things to eat, articles of household furniture, trees, birds, etc.). The
+main objection to this form of the test is that the performance would in
+all probability be more influenced by environment and formal instruction
+than is the case with the test of naming sixty words.
+
+One other matter remains to be mentioned; namely, the relative number of
+words named in the half-minute periods. As would be expected, the rate
+of naming words decreases as the test proceeds. In the case of the
+10-year-olds, we find the average number of words for the six successive
+half-minutes to be as follows:--
+
+    18, 12½, 10½, 9, 8½, 7.
+
+Some subjects maintain an almost constant rate throughout the test,
+others rapidly exhaust themselves, while a very few make a bad beginning
+and improve as they go. As a rule it is only the very intelligent who
+improve after the first half-minute. On the other hand, mentally
+retarded subjects and very young normals exhaust themselves so quickly
+that only a few words are named in the last minute.
+
+Binet first located this test in year XI, but shifted it to year XII in
+1911. Goddard and Kuhlmann retain it in year XI, though Goddard's
+statistics suggest year X as the proper location, and Kuhlmann's even
+suggest year IX. Kuhlmann, however, accepts fifty words as satisfactory
+in case the response contains a considerable proportion of abstract or
+unusual words. All the American statistics except Rowe's agree in
+showing that the test is easy enough for year X.
+
+
+X, ALTERNATIVE TEST 1: REPEATING SIX DIGITS
+
+The digit series used are 3-7-4-8-5-9; and 5-2-1-7-4-6.
+
+The PROCEDURE and SCORING are the same as in VII, 3, except that only
+two trials are given, one of which must be correct. The test is somewhat
+too easy for year 10 when three trials are given.
+
+The test of repeating six digits did not appear in the Binet scale and
+seems not to have been standardized until inserted in the Stanford
+series.
+
+
+X, ALTERNATIVE TEST 2: REPEATING TWENTY TO TWENTY-TWO SYLLABLES
+
+The sentences for this year are:--
+
+  (a) "_The apple tree makes a cool, pleasant shade on the ground
+      where the children are playing._"
+  (b) "_It is nearly half-past one o'clock; the house is very
+      quiet and the cat has gone to sleep._"
+  (c) "_In summer the days are very warm and fine; in winter it
+      snows and I am cold._"
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING exactly as in VI, 6.
+
+REMARKS. It is interesting to note that five years of mental growth are
+required to pass from the ability to repeat sixteen or eighteen
+syllables (year VI) to the ability to repeat twenty or twenty-two
+syllables. Similarly in memory for digits. Five digits are almost as
+easy at year VII as six at year X. Two explanations are available: (1)
+The increased difficulty may be accounted for by a relatively slow
+growth of memory power after the age of 6 or 7 years; or (2) the
+increase in difficulty may be real, expressing an inner law as to the
+behavior of the memory span in dealing with material of increasing
+length. Both factors are probably involved.
+
+This is another of the Stanford additions to the scale. Average children
+of 10 years ordinarily pass it, but older, retarded children of 10-year
+mental age make a poorer showing. In the case of mentally retarded
+adults, especially, the verbal memory is less exact than that of school
+children of the same mental age.
+
+
+X, ALTERNATIVE TEST 3: CONSTRUCTION PUZZLE A (HEALY AND FERNALD)
+
+MATERIAL. Use the form-board pictured on page 279. This may be
+purchased of C. H. Stoelting & Co., Chicago, Illinois. A home-made one
+will do as well if care is taken to get the dimensions exact.
+Quarter-inch wood should be used. The inside of the frame should be
+3 × 4 inches, and the dimensions of the blocks should be as follows:
+1+3/16 × 3; 1 × 1½; 1 × 2¾; 1 × 1½; 1¼ × 2.
+
+PROCEDURE. Place the frame on the table before the subject, the short
+side nearest him. The blocks are placed in an irregular position on the
+side of the frame away from the subject. Take care that the board with
+the blocks in place is not exposed to view in advance of the experiment.
+
+Say: "_I want you to put these blocks in this frame so that all the
+space will be filled up. If you do it rightly they will all fit in and
+there will be no space left over. Go ahead._"
+
+Do not tell the subject to see how quickly he can do it. Say nothing
+that would even suggest hurrying, for this tends to call forth the
+trial-and-error procedure even with intelligent subjects.
+
+[Illustration]
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the child succeeds in fitting the blocks
+into place _three times in a total time of five minutes for the three
+trials_.
+
+The method of procedure is fully as important as the time, but is not so
+easily scored in quantitative terms. Nevertheless, the examiner should
+always take observations on the method employed, noting especially
+any tendency to make and to repeat moves which lead to obvious
+impossibilities; i.e., moves which leave a space obviously unfitted to
+any of the remaining pieces. Some subjects repeat an absurd move many
+times over; others make an absurd move, but promptly correct it; others,
+and these are usually the bright ones, look far enough ahead to avoid
+error altogether.
+
+REMARKS. This test was devised by Professor Freeman, was adapted
+slightly by Healy and Fernald, and was first standardized by
+Dr. Kuhlmann. Miss Gertrude Hall has also standardized it, but on a
+different procedure from that described above.[67]
+
+[67] _Eugenics and Social Welfare Bulletin_, No. 5, The State Board of
+Charities, Albany, New York.
+
+The test has a lower correlation with intelligence than most of the
+other tests of the scale. Many bright children of 10-year intelligence
+adopt the trial-and-error method and have little success, while retarded
+older children of only 8-year intelligence sometimes succeed. Age, apart
+from intelligence, seems to play an important part in determining the
+nature of the performance. A favorable feature of the test, however, is
+the fact that it makes no demand on language ability and that it brings
+into play an aspect of intelligence which is relatively neglected by the
+remainder of the scale. For this reason it is at least worth keeping as
+an alternative test.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XVII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR XII
+
+
+XII, 1. VOCABULARY (FORTY DEFINITIONS, 7200 WORDS)
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING as in previous vocabulary tests.[68] In this case
+forty words must be defined.
+
+[68] See VIII, 6.
+
+
+XII, 2. DEFINING ABSTRACT WORDS
+
+PROCEDURE. The words to be defined are _pity_, _revenge_, _charity_,
+_envy_, and _justice_. The formula is, "_What is pity? What do we mean
+by pity?_" and so on with the other words. If the meaning of the
+response is not clear, ask the subject to explain what he means. If the
+definition is in terms of the word itself, as "Pity means to pity
+someone," "Revenge is to take revenge," etc., it is then necessary to
+say: "_Yes, but what does it mean to pity some one?_" or, "_What does it
+mean to take revenge?_" etc. Only supplementary questions of this kind
+are permissible.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _three of the five_ words are
+satisfactorily defined. The definition need not be strictly logical nor
+the language elegant. It is sufficient if the definition shows that the
+meaning of the word is known. Definitions which define by means of an
+illustration are acceptable. The following are samples of satisfactory
+and unsatisfactory responses:--
+
+(a) _Pity_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "To be sorry for some one." "To feel
+    compassion." "To have sympathy for a person." "To feel bad for
+    some one." "It means you help a person out and don't like to
+    have him suffer." "To have a feeling for people when they are
+    treated wrong." "If anybody gets hurt real bad you pity them."
+    "It's when you feel sorry for a tramp and give him something to
+    eat." "If some one is in trouble and you know how it feels to be
+    in that condition, you pity him." "You see something that's
+    wrong and have your feeling aroused."
+
+    Of 130 correct responses, 85, or 65 per cent, defined _pity_ as
+    "to feel sorry for some one," or words to that effect. Less than
+    10 per cent defined by means of illustration.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To think of the poor." "To be good to
+    others." "To help." "It means sorrow." "Mercy." "To cheer people
+    up." "It means 'What a pity!'" "To be ashamed." "To be sick or
+    poor." "It's when you break something."
+
+    Apart from inability to reply, which accounts for nearly one
+    fourth of the failures, there is no predominant type of
+    unsatisfactory response.
+
+(b) _Revenge_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "To get even with some one." "To get back on
+    him." "To do something to the one who has done something to
+    you." "To hurt them back." "To pay it back," or "Do something
+    back." "To do something mean in return." "To square up with a
+    person." "When somebody slaps you, you slap back." "You kill a
+    person if he does something to you."
+
+    The expression "to get even" was found in 42 per cent of 120
+    correct answers; "to pay it back," or "To do something back," in
+    20 per cent; "To get back on him," in 17 per cent. About
+    8 per cent were illustrations.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To be mad." "You try to hurt them." "To
+    fight." "You hate a person." "To kill them." "It means hateful."
+    "To try again." "To think evil of some one." "To hate some one
+    who has done you wrong." "To let a person off." "To go away from
+    something."
+
+    Inability to reply accounts for a little over 40 per cent of the
+    failures.
+
+(c) _Charity_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "To give to the poor." "To help those who are
+    needy." "It is charity if you are poor and somebody helps you."
+    "To give to somebody without pay."
+
+    Of 110 correct replies, 72 per cent were worded substantially
+    like the first or second given above.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "A person who helps the poor." "A place where
+    poor people get food and things." "It is a good life." "To be
+    happy." "To be poor." "Charity is being treated good." "It is to
+    be charitable." "Charity is selling something that is not worth
+    much." "It means to be good" or "to be kind."
+
+    When the last named response is given, we should say: "_Explain
+    what you mean._" If this brings an amplification of the response
+    to "It means to do things for the poor," or the equivalent, the
+    score is _plus_. "Charity means love" is also _minus_ if the
+    statement cannot be further explained and is merely rote memory
+    of the passage in the 13th chapter of 1st Corinthians. Simply
+    "To help" or "To give" is unsatisfactory. Half of the failures
+    are due to inability to reply.
+
+(d) _Envy_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "You envy some one who has something you want."
+    "It's the way you feel when you see some one with something
+    nicer than you have." "It's when a poor girl sees a rich girl
+    with nice dresses and things." "You hate some one because
+    they've got something you want." "Jealousy" (satisfactory if
+    subject can explain what _jealousy_ means; otherwise it is
+    _minus_). "It's when you see a person better off than you are."
+
+    Nearly three fourths of the correct responses say in substance,
+    "You envy a person who has something you want." Most of the
+    others are concrete illustrations.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To hate some one," or simply "To hate." "You
+    don't like 'em." "Bad feeling toward any one." "To be a great
+    man or woman." "Not to be nice to people." "What we do to our
+    enemies."
+
+    Inability to respond accounts for 55 per cent of the failures.
+
+(e) _Justice_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "To give people what they deserve." "It means
+    that everybody is treated the same way, whether he is rich or
+    poor." "It's what you get when you go to court." "If one does
+    something and gets punished, that's justice." "To do the square
+    thing." "To give everybody his dues." "Let every one have what's
+    coming to him." "To do the right thing by any one." "If two
+    people do the same thing and they let one go without punishing,
+    that is not justice."
+
+    Approximately 38 per cent of 102 correct responses referred to
+    treating everybody the same way; 25 per cent to "doing the
+    square thing", 12 per cent were concrete illustrations; and
+    4 per cent were definitions of what justice is not.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "It means to have peace." "It is where they
+    have court." "It's the Courthouse." "To be honest." "Where one
+    is just" (_minus_, unless further explained). "To do right"
+    (_minus_, unless in explaining _right_ the subject gives a
+    definition of _justice_).
+
+    It is very necessary, in case of such answers as "Justice is to
+    do right," "To be just," etc., that the subject be urged to
+    explain further what he means. "To do right" includes nearly
+    12 per cent of all answers, and is given by the very brightest
+    children. Most of these are able, when urged, to complete the
+    definition in a satisfactory manner.
+
+REMARKS. The reader may be surprised that the ability to define common
+abstract words should develop so late. Most children who have had
+anything like ordinary home or school environment have doubtless heard
+all of these words countless times before the age of 12 years.
+Nevertheless, the statistics from the test show unmistakably that before
+this age such words have but limited and vague meaning. Other vocabulary
+studies confirm this fact so completely that we may say there is hardly
+any trait in which 12- to 14-year intelligence more uniformly excels
+that of the 9- or 10-year level.
+
+This is readily understandable when we consider the nature of abstract
+meanings and the intellectual processes by which we arrive at them.
+Unlike such words as _tree_, _house_, etc., the ideas they contain are
+not the immediate result of perceptual processes, in which even childish
+intelligence is adept, but are a refined and secondary product of
+relationships between other ideas. They require the logical processes of
+comparison, abstraction, and generalization. One cannot see justice, for
+example, but one is often confronted with situations in which justice or
+injustice is an element; and given a certain degree of abstraction and
+generalization, out of such situations the idea of justice will
+gradually be evolved.
+
+The formation and use of abstract ideas, of one kind or another,
+represent, _par excellence_, the "higher thought processes." It is not
+without significance that delinquents who test near the border-line of
+mental deficiency show such inferior ability in arriving at correct
+generalizations regarding matters of social and moral relationships. We
+cannot expect a mind of defective generalizing ability to form very
+definite or correct notions about justice, law, fairness, ownership
+rights, etc.; and if the ideas themselves are not fairly clear, the
+rules of conduct based upon them cannot make a very powerful appeal.[69]
+
+[69] See also p. 298 _ff._
+
+Binet used the words _charity_, _justice_, and _kindness_, and required
+two successes. In the 1911 revision he shifted the test from year XI to
+year XII, where it more nearly belongs. Goddard also places it in
+year XII and uses Binet's words, translating _bonté_, however, as
+_goodness_ instead of _kindness_. Kuhlmann retains the test in year XI
+and adds _bravery_ and _revenge_, requiring three correct definitions
+out of five. Bobertag uses _pity_, _envy_, and _justice_, requires two
+correct definitions, and finds the test just hard enough for year XII.
+
+After using the words _goodness_ and _kindness_ in two series of tests,
+we have discarded them as objectionable in that they give rise to so
+many doubtful definitions. Even intelligent children often say:
+"Goodness means to do something good," "Kindness means to be kind to
+some one," etc. These definitions in a circle occur less than half as
+often with _pity_, _revenge_, and _envy_, which are also superior to
+_charity_ and _justice_ in this respect.
+
+The relative difficulty of our five words is indicated by the order in
+which we have listed them in the test (i.e., beginning with the easiest
+and ending with the hardest). On the standard of three correct
+definitions, these words fit very accurately in year XII.
+
+
+XII, 3. THE BALL-AND-FIELD TEST (SUPERIOR PLAN)
+
+PROCEDURE, as in year VIII, test 1.
+
+SCORING. Score 3 (or superior plan) is required for passing in
+year XII.[70]
+
+[70] See scoring card.
+
+
+XII, 4. DISSECTED SENTENCES
+
+The following disarranged sentences are used:--
+
+    FOR THE STARTED AN WE COUNTRY EARLY AT HOUR
+
+    TO ASKED PAPER MY TEACHER CORRECT I MY
+
+    A DEFENDS DOG GOOD HIS BRAVELY MASTER
+
+These should be printed in type like that used above. The Stanford
+record booklet contains the sentences in convenient form.
+
+It is not permissible to substitute written words or printed script, as
+that would make the test harder. All the words should be printed in caps
+in order that no clue shall be given as to the first word in a sentence.
+For a similar reason the period is omitted.
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_Here is a sentence that has the words all mixed up so
+that they don't make any sense. If the words were changed around in the
+right order they would make a good sentence. Look carefully and see if
+you can tell me how the sentence ought to read._"
+
+Give the sentences in the order in which they are listed in the record
+booklet. Do not tell the subject to see how quickly he can do it,
+because with this test any suggestion of hurrying is likely to produce a
+kind of mental paralysis. If the subject has no success with the first
+sentence in one minute, read it off correctly for him, somewhat slowly,
+and pointing to each word as it is spoken. Then proceed to the second
+and third, allowing one minute for each.
+
+Give no further help. It is not permissible, in case an incorrect
+response is given, to ask the subject to try again, or to say: "_Are you
+sure that is right?_" "_Are you sure you have not left out any words?_"
+etc. Instead, maintain absolute silence. However, the subject is
+permitted to make as many changes in his response as he sees fit,
+provided he makes them spontaneously and within the allotted time.
+Record the entire response.
+
+Once in a great while the subject misunderstands the task and thinks the
+only requirement is to use all the words given, and that it is permitted
+to add as many other words as he likes. It is then necessary to repeat
+the instructions and to allow a new trial.
+
+SCORING. _Two sentences out of three must be correctly given within the
+minute allotted to each._ It is understood, of course, that if the first
+sentence has to be read for the subject, both the other responses must
+be given correctly.
+
+A sentence is not counted correct if a single word is omitted, altered,
+or inserted, or if the order given fails to make perfect sense.
+
+Certain responses are not absolutely incorrect, but are objectionable as
+regards sentence structure, or else fail to give the exact meaning
+intended. These are given half credit. Full credit on one, and half
+credit on each of the other two, is satisfactory. The following are
+samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory responses:--
+
+(a)
+    _Satisfactory._
+       "We started for the country at an early hour."
+       "At an early hour we started for the country."
+       "We started at an early hour for the country."
+    _Unsatisfactory._
+       "We started early at an hour for the country."
+       "Early at an hour we started for the country."
+       "We started early for the country."
+    _Half credit._
+       "For the country at an early hour we started."
+       "For the country we started at an early hour."
+
+(b)
+    _Satisfactory._
+       "I asked my teacher to correct my paper."
+    _Unsatisfactory._
+       "My teacher asked to correct my paper."
+       "To correct my paper I asked my teacher."
+    _Half credit._
+       "My teacher I asked to correct my paper."
+
+(c)
+    _Satisfactory._
+       "A good dog defends his master bravely."
+       "A good dog bravely defends his master."
+    _Unsatisfactory._
+       "A dog defends his master bravely."
+       "A bravely dog defends his master."
+       "A good dog defends his bravely master."
+       "A good brave dog defends his master."
+    _Half credit._
+       "A dog defends his good master bravely."
+       "A dog bravely defends his good master."
+       "A good master bravely defends his dog."
+
+REMARKS. This is an excellent test. It involves no knowledge which may
+not be presupposed at the age in which it is given, and success
+therefore depends very little on experience. The worst that can be urged
+against it is that it may possibly be influenced to a certain extent by
+the amount of reading the subject has done. But this has not been
+demonstrated. At any rate, the test satisfies the most important
+requirement of a test of intelligence; namely, the percentage of
+successes increases rapidly and steadily from the lower to the higher
+levels of mental age.
+
+This experiment can be regarded as a variation of the completion test.
+Binet tells us, in fact, that it was directly suggested by the
+experiment of Ebbinghaus. As will readily be observed, however, it
+differs to a certain extent from the Ebbinghaus completion test.
+Ebbinghaus omits parts of a sentence and requires the subject to supply
+the omissions. In this test we give all the parts and require the
+formation of a sentence by rearrangement. The two experiments are
+psychologically similar in that they require the subject to relate given
+fragments into a meaningful whole. Success depends upon the ability of
+intelligence to utilize hints, or clues, and this in turn depends on the
+logical integrity of the associative processes. All but the highest
+grade of the feeble-minded fail with this test.
+
+This test is found in year XI of Binet's 1908 series and in year XII of
+his 1911 revision. Goddard and Kuhlmann retain it in the original
+location. That it is better placed in year XII is indicated by all the
+available statistics with normal children, except those of Goddard. With
+this exception, the results of various investigators for year XII are in
+remarkably close agreement, as the following figures will show:--
+
+    _Per cent passing at year XII_
+
+    Binet                           66
+    Kuhlmann                        68
+    Bobertag                        78
+    Dougherty                       64
+    Strong                          72
+    Léviste and Morlé               70
+    Stanford series (1911)          62
+    Stanford series (1913)          57
+    Stanford series (1914)          62
+    Princeton data                  61
+
+This agreement is noteworthy considering that no two experiments seem to
+have used exactly the same arrangement of words, and that some have
+presented the words of a sentence in a single line, others in two or
+three lines. A single line would appear to be somewhat easier.
+
+
+XII, 5. INTERPRETATION OF FABLES (SCORE 4)
+
+The following fables are used:--
+
+(a) _Hercules and the Wagoner_
+
+    _A man was driving along a country road, when the wheels
+    suddenly sank in a deep rut. The man did nothing but look at the
+    wagon and call loudly to Hercules to come and help him. Hercules
+    came up, looked at the man, and said: "Put your shoulder to the
+    wheel, my man, and whip up your oxen." Then he went away and
+    left the driver._
+
+(b) _The Milkmaid and her Plans_
+
+    _A milkmaid was carrying her pail of milk on her head, and was
+    thinking to herself thus: "The money for this milk will buy
+    4 hens; the hens will lay at least 100 eggs; the eggs will
+    produce at least 75 chicks; and with the money which the chicks
+    will bring I can buy a new dress to wear instead of the ragged
+    one I have on." At this moment she looked down at herself,
+    trying to think how she would look in her new dress; but as she
+    did so the pail of milk slipped from her head and dashed upon
+    the ground. Thus all her imaginary schemes perished in a moment._
+
+(c) _The Fox and the Crow_
+
+    _A crow, having stolen a bit of meat, perched in a tree and held
+    it in her beak. A fox, seeing her, wished to secure the meat,
+    and spoke to the crow thus: "How handsome you are! and I have
+    heard that the beauty of your voice is equal to that of your
+    form and feathers. Will you not sing for me, so that I may judge
+    whether this is true?" The crow was so pleased that she opened
+    her mouth to sing and dropped the meat, which the fox
+    immediately ate._
+
+(d) _The Farmer and the Stork_
+
+    _A farmer set some traps to catch cranes which had been eating
+    his seed. With them he caught a stork. The stork, which had not
+    really been stealing, begged the farmer to spare his life,
+    saying that he was a bird of excellent character, that he was
+    not at all like the cranes, and that the farmer should have pity
+    on him. But the farmer said: "I have caught you with these
+    robbers, and you will have to die with them."_
+
+(e) _The Miller, His Son, and the Donkey_
+
+    _A miller and his son were driving their donkey to a neighboring
+    town to sell him. They had not gone far when a child saw them
+    and cried out: "What fools those fellows are to be trudging
+    along on foot when one of them might be riding." The old man,
+    hearing this, made his son get on the donkey, while he himself
+    walked. Soon, they came upon some men. "Look," said one of them,
+    "see that lazy boy riding while his old father has to walk." On
+    hearing this, the miller made his son get off, and he climbed on
+    the donkey himself. Farther on they met a company of women, who
+    shouted out: "Why, you lazy old fellow, to ride along so
+    comfortably while your poor boy there can hardly keep pace by
+    the side of you!" And so the good-natured miller took his boy up
+    behind him and both of them rode. As they came to the town a
+    citizen said to them, "Why, you cruel fellows! You two are
+    better able to carry the poor little donkey than he is to carry
+    you." "Very well," said the miller, "we will try." So both of
+    them jumped to the ground, got some ropes, tied the donkey's
+    legs to a pole and tried to carry him. But as they crossed the
+    bridge the donkey became frightened, kicked loose and fell into
+    the stream._
+
+PROCEDURE. Present the fables in the order in which they are given
+above. The method is to say to the subject:
+
+"_You know what a fable is? You have heard fables?_" Whatever the
+answer, proceed to explain a fable as follows: "_A fable, you know, is a
+little story, and is meant to teach us a lesson. Now, I am going to read
+a fable to you. Listen carefully, and when I am through I will ask you
+to tell me what lesson the fable teaches us. Ready; listen._" After
+reading the fable, say: "_What lesson does that teach us?_" Record the
+response _verbatim_ and proceed with the next as follows: "_Here is
+another. Listen again and tell me what lesson this fable teaches us_,"
+etc.
+
+As far as possible, avoid comment or commendation until all the fables
+have been given. If the first answer is of an inferior type and we
+express too much satisfaction with it, we thereby encourage the
+subject to continue in his error. On the other hand, never express
+dissatisfaction with a response, however absurd or _malapropos_ it may
+be. Many subjects are anxious to know how well they are doing and
+continually ask, "Did I get that one right?" It is sufficient to say,
+"You are getting along nicely," or something to that effect. Offer no
+comments, suggestions, or questions which might put the subject on the
+right track. This much self-control is necessary if we would make the
+conditions of the test uniform for all subjects.
+
+The only occasion when a supplementary question is permissible is in
+case of a response whose meaning is not clear. Even then we must be
+cautious and restrict ourselves to some such question as, "_What do you
+mean?_" or, "_Explain; I don't quite understand what you mean_." The
+scoring of fables is somewhat difficult at best, and this additional
+question is often sufficient to place the response very definitely in
+the right or wrong column.
+
+SCORING. Give score 2, i.e., 2 points, for a correct answer, and 1 for
+an answer which deserves half credit. The test is passed in year XII
+_if 4 points are earned_; that is, if two responses are correct or if
+one is correct and two deserve half credit.
+
+Score 2 means that the fable has been correctly interpreted and that the
+lesson it teaches has been stated in general terms.
+
+There are two types of response which may be given half credit. They
+include (1) the interpretations which are stated in general terms and
+are fairly plausible, but are not exactly correct; and (2) those which
+are perfectly correct as to substance, but are not generalized.
+
+We overlook ordinary faults of expression and regard merely the
+essential meaning of the response.
+
+The only way to explain the method is by giving copious illustrations.
+If the following sample responses are carefully studied, a reasonable
+degree of expertness in scoring fables may be acquired with only a
+limited amount of actual practice. The sampling may appear to the reader
+needlessly prolix, but experience has taught us that in giving
+directions for the scoring of tests error always lies on the side of
+taking too much for granted.
+
+(a) _Hercules and the Wagoner_
+
+    _Full credit; score 2._ "God helps those who help themselves."
+    "Do not depend on others." "Help yourself before calling for
+    help." "It teaches that we should rely upon ourselves."
+
+    The following are not quite so good, but are nevertheless
+    considered satisfactory. "We should always try, even if it looks
+    hard and we think we can't do it." "When in trouble try to get
+    out of it yourself." "We've got to do things without help." "Not
+    to be lazy."
+
+    _Half credit; score 1._ This is most often given for the
+    response which contains the correct idea, but states it in terms
+    of the concrete situation, e.g.: "The man ought to have tried
+    himself first." "Hercules wanted to teach the man to help
+    himself." "The driver was too much inclined to depend on
+    others." "The man was too lazy. He should not have called for
+    help until he had tried to get out by himself." "To get out and
+    try instead of watching."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory; score 0._ Failures are mainly of five
+    varieties: (1) generalized interpretations which entirely miss
+    the point; (2) crude interpretations which not only miss the
+    point, but are also stated in terms of the concrete situation;
+    (3) irrelevant or incoherent remarks; (4) efforts to repeat the
+    story; and (5) inability to respond.
+
+    Sample failures of type (1), entirely incorrect generalizations:
+    "Teaches us to look where we are going." "Not to ask for
+    anything when there is no one to help." "To help those who are
+    in trouble." "Teaches us to be polite." "How to help others."
+    "Not to be cruel to horses." "Always to do what people tell you"
+    (or "obey orders," etc.). "Not to be foolish" (or stupid, etc.).
+    "If you would have a thing well done, do it yourself."
+
+    Failures of type (2), crude interpretations stated in concrete
+    terms: "How to get out of the mud." "Not to get stuck in the
+    mud." "To carry a stick along to pry yourself out if you get
+    into a mud-hole." "To help any one who is stuck in the mud."
+    "Taught Hercules to help the horses along and not whip them too
+    hard." "Not to be mean like Hercules."
+
+    Failures of type (3), irrelevant responses: "It was foolish not
+    to thank him." "He should have helped the driver." "Hercules was
+    mean." "If any one helps himself the horses will try." "The
+    driver should have done what Hercules told him." "He wanted the
+    man to help the oxen."
+
+    Type (4): Efforts to repeat the story.
+
+    Type (5): Inability to respond.
+
+(b) _The Maid and the Eggs_
+
+    _Full credit; score 2._ "Teaches us not to build air-castles."
+    "Don't count your chickens before they are hatched." "Not to
+    plan too far ahead." Slightly inferior, but still acceptable:
+    "Never make too many plans." "Don't count on the second thing
+    till you have done the first."
+
+    _Half credit; score 1._ "It teaches us not to have our minds on
+    the future when we carry milk on the head." "She was building
+    air-castles and so lost her milk." "She was planning too far
+    ahead."
+
+    The responses just given are examples of fairly correct
+    interpretations in non-generalized terms. The following are
+    examples of generalized interpretations which fall below the
+    accuracy required for full credit: "Never make plans." "Not to
+    be too proud." "To keep our mind on what we are doing." "Don't
+    cross a bridge till you come to it." "Don't count your _eggs_
+    before they are hatched." "Not to be wanting things; learn to
+    wait." "Not to imagine; go ahead and do it."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory; score 0._ Type (1), entirely incorrect
+    generalization: "That money does not buy everything." "Not to be
+    greedy." "Not to be selfish." "Not to waste things." "Not to
+    take risks like that." "Not to think about clothes." "Count your
+    chickens before they are hatched."
+
+    Type (2), very crude interpretations stated in concrete terms:
+    "Not to carry milk on the head." "Teaches her to watch and not
+    throw down her head." "To carry her head straight." "Not to
+    spill milk." "To keep your chickens and you will make more
+    money."
+
+    Type (3), irrelevant responses: "She wanted the money." "Teaches
+    us to read and write" (18-year-old of 8-year intelligence).
+    "About a girl who was selling some milk."
+
+    Type (4), effort to repeat the story.
+
+    Type (5), inability to respond.
+
+(c) _The Fox and the Crow_
+
+    _Full credit; score 2._ "Teaches us not to listen to flattery."
+    "Don't let yourself be flattered." "It is not safe to believe
+    people who flatter us." "We had better look out for people who
+    brag on us."
+
+    _Half credit; score 1._ Correct idea in concrete terms: "The
+    crow was so proud of herself that she lost all she had." "The
+    crow listened to flattery and got left." "Not to be proud and
+    let people think you can sing when you can't." "If anybody
+    brags on you don't sing or do what he tells you."
+
+    Pertinent but somewhat inferior generalizations: "Not to be too
+    proud." "Pride goes before a fall." "To be on our guard against
+    people who are our enemies." "Not to do everything people tell
+    you." "Don't trust every slick fellow you meet."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory; score 0._ Type (1), incorrect generalization:
+    "Not to go with people you don't know." "Not to be selfish." "To
+    share your food." "Look before you leap." "Not to listen to
+    evil." "Not to steal." "Teaches honesty." "Not to covet." "Think
+    for yourself." "Teaches wisdom." "Never listen to advice."
+    "Never let any one get ahead of you." "To figure out what they
+    are going to do." "Never try to do two things at once." "How to
+    get what you want."
+
+    Type (2), very crude interpretation stated in terms of the
+    concrete situation: "Not to sing before you eat." "Not to hold a
+    thing in your mouth; eat it." "To eat a thing before you think
+    of your beauty." "To swallow it before you sing." "To be on your
+    watch when you have food in your mouth."
+
+    Type (3), irrelevant responses: "The fox was greedy." "The fox
+    was slicker than what the crow was." "The crow ought not to have
+    opened her mouth." "The crow should just have shaken her head."
+    "It served the crow right for stealing the meat." "The fox
+    wanted the meat and just told the crow that to get it."
+    "Foolishness." "Guess that's where the old fox got his
+    name--'Old Foxy'--Don't teach us anything."
+
+    Type (4), efforts to repeat the story.
+
+    Type (5), inability to respond.
+
+(d) _The Farmer and the Stork_
+
+    _Full credit; score 2._ "You are judged by the company you
+    keep." "Teaches us to keep out of bad company." "Birds of a
+    feather flock together." "If you go with bad people you are
+    counted like them." "We should choose our friends carefully."
+    "Don't go with bad people." "Teaches us to avoid the appearance
+    of evil."
+
+    _Half credit; score 1._ "The stork should not have been with the
+    cranes." "Teaches him not to go with robbers." "Don't go with
+    people who are not of your nation." "Not to follow others."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory; score 0._ Type (1), incorrect generalization:
+    "Not to steal." "Not to tell lies." "Not to give excuses." "A
+    poor excuse is better than none." "Not to trust what people
+    say." "Not to listen to excuses." "Not to harm animals that do
+    no harm." "To have pity on others." "Not to be cruel." "To be
+    kind to birds." "Not to blame people for what they don't do."
+    "Teaches that those who do good often suffer for those who do
+    evil." "To tend to your own business." "Not to meddle with other
+    people's things." "Not to trespass on people's property." "Not
+    to think you are so nice." "To keep out of mischief."
+
+    Type (2), very crude interpretations in concrete terms: "Taught
+    the stork to look where it stepped and not walk into a trap."
+    "Taught the stork to keep out of the man's field." "Not to take
+    the seeds."
+
+    Type (3), irrelevant responses: "The farmer was right; storks do
+    eat grain." "Served the stork right, he was stealing too." "He
+    should try to help the stork out of the field."
+
+    Type (4), efforts to repeat the story.
+
+    Type (5), inability to reply.
+
+(e) _The Miller, His Son, and the Donkey_
+
+    _Full credit; score 2._ "When you try to please everybody you
+    please nobody." "Don't listen to everybody; you can't please
+    them all." "Don't take every one's advice." "Don't try to do
+    what everybody tells you." "Use your own judgment." "Have a mind
+    of your own." "Make up your mind and stick to it." "Don't be
+    wishy-washy." "Have confidence in your own opinions."
+
+    _Half credit; score 1._ Interpretations which are generalized
+    but somewhat inferior: "Never take any one's advice" (too
+    sweeping a conclusion). "Don't take foolish advice." "Take your
+    own advice." "It teaches us that people don't always agree."
+
+    Correct idea but not generalized: "They were fools to listen to
+    everybody." "They should have walked or rode just as they
+    thought best, without listening to other people."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory; score 0._ Type (1), incorrect generalization:
+    "To do right." "To do what people tell you." "To be kind to old
+    people." "To be polite." "To serve others." "Not to be cruel to
+    animals." "To have sympathy for beasts of burden." "To be
+    good-natured." "Not to load things on animals that are small."
+    "That it is always better to leave things as they are." "That
+    men were not made for beasts of burden."
+
+    Type (2), very crude interpretations stated in concrete terms:
+    "Not to try to carry the donkey." "That walking is better than
+    riding." "The people should have been more polite to the old
+    man." "That the father should be allowed to ride."
+
+    Type (3), irrelevant responses: "The men were too heavy for the
+    donkey." "They ought to have stayed on and they would not have
+    fallen into the stream." "It teaches about a man and he lost his
+    donkey."
+
+    Type (4), efforts to repeat the story.
+
+    Type (5), inability to respond.
+
+REMARKS. The fable test, or the "test of generalization," as it may
+aptly be named, was used by the writer in a study of the intellectual
+processes of bright and dull boys in 1905,[71] and was further
+standardized by the writer and Mr. Childs in 1911.[72] It has proved its
+worth in a number of investigations. It has been necessary, however, to
+simplify the rather elaborate method of scoring which was proposed in
+1911, not because of any logical fault of the method, but because of the
+difficulty in teaching examiners to use the system correctly. The method
+explained above is somewhat coarser, but it has the advantage of being
+much easier to learn.
+
+[71] "Genius and Stupidity," in _Pedagogical Seminary_, vol. xiii,
+pp. 307-73.
+
+[72] "A Tentative Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Measuring
+Scale of Intelligence," _Journal of Educational Psychology_ (1912).
+
+The generalization test presents for interpretation situations which are
+closely paralleled in the everyday social experience of human beings. It
+tests the subject's ability to understand motives underlying acts or
+attitudes. It gives a clue to the status of the social consciousness.
+This is highly important in the diagnosis of the upper range of mental
+defectiveness. The criterion of the subnormal's fitness for life outside
+an institution is his ability to understand social relations and to
+adjust himself to them. Failure of a subnormal to meet this criterion
+may lead him to break common conventions, and to appear disrespectful,
+sulky, stubborn, or in some other way queer and exceptional. He is
+likely to be misunderstood, because he so easily misunderstands others.
+The skein of human motives is too complex for his limited intelligence
+to untangle.
+
+Ethnological studies have shown in an interesting way the social origin
+of the moral judgment. The rectitude of the moral life, therefore,
+depends on the accuracy of the social judgment. It would be interesting
+to know what proportion of offenders have transgressed moral codes
+because of continued failure to grasp the essential lessons presented
+by human situations.
+
+For the intelligent child even the common incidents of life carry an
+endless succession of lessons in right conduct. On the average school
+playground not an hour passes without some happening which is fraught
+with a moral hint to those who have intelligence enough to generalize
+the situation. A boy plays unfairly and is barred from the game. One
+bullies his weaker companion and arouses the anger and scorn of all his
+fellows. Another vents his braggadocio and feels at once the withering
+scorn of those who listen. Laziness, selfishness, meanness, dishonesty,
+ingratitude, inconstancy, inordinate pride, and the countless other
+faults all have their social penalties. The child of normal intelligence
+sees the point, draws the appropriate lesson and (provided emotions and
+will are also normal) applies it more or less effectively as a guide to
+his own conduct. To the feeble-minded child, all but lacking in the
+power of abstraction and generalization, the situation conveys no such
+lesson. It is but a muddle of concrete events without general
+significance; or even if its meaning is vaguely apprehended, the powers
+of inhibition are insufficient to guarantee that right action will
+follow.
+
+It is for this reason that the generalization test is so valuable in the
+mental examinations of delinquents. It presents a moral situation,
+imagined, to be sure, but none the less real to the individual of normal
+comprehension. It tells us quickly whether the subject tested is able to
+see beyond the incidents of the given situation and to grasp their wider
+relations--whether he is able to generalize the concrete.
+
+The following responses made by feeble-minded delinquents from
+16 to 21 years of age demonstrate sufficiently their inability to
+comprehend the moral situation:--
+
+    _Hercules and the Wagoner._ "Teaches you to look where you are
+    going." "Not to help any one who is stuck in the mud." "Not to
+    whip oxen." "Teaches that Hercules was mean." "Teaches us to
+    carry a stick along to pry the wheels out."
+
+    _The Fox and the Crow._ "Not to sing when eating." "To keep away
+    from strangers." "To swallow it before you sing." "Not to be
+    stingy." "Not to listen to evil." "The fox was wiser than the
+    crow." "Not to be selfish with food." "Not to do two things at
+    once." "To hang on to what you've got."
+
+    _The Farmer and the Stork._ "Teaches the stork to look where he
+    steps." "Not to be cruel like the farmer." "Not to tell lies."
+    "Not to butt into other people's things." "To be kind to birds."
+    "Teaches us how to get rid of troublesome people." "Never go
+    with anything else."
+
+The following are the responses of an 18-year-old delinquent
+(intelligence level 10 years) to the five fables:--
+
+    _Maid and Eggs._ "She was thinking about getting the dress and
+    spilled the milk. Teaches selfishness."
+
+    _Hercules and the Wagoner._ "He wanted to help the oxen out."
+
+    _Fox and Crow._ "Guess that's where the fox got his name--'Old
+    Foxy.' Don't teach us anything."
+
+    _Farmer and Stork._ "Try and help the stork out of the field."
+
+    _Miller, Son, and Donkey._ "They was all big fools and mean to
+    the donkey."
+
+One does not require very profound psychological insight to see that a
+person of this degree of comprehension is not promising material for
+moral education. His weakness in the ability to generalize a moral
+situation is not due to lack of instruction, but is inherent in the
+nature of his mental processes, all of which have the infantile quality
+of average 9- or 10-year intelligence. Well-instructed normal children
+of 10 years ordinarily succeed no better. The ability to draw the
+correct lesson from a social situation is little developed below the
+mental level of 12 or 13 years.
+
+The test is also valuable because it throws light on the subject's
+ability to appreciate the finer shades of meaning. The mentally retarded
+often show marked inferiority in this respect. They sense, perhaps, in a
+general way the trend of the story, but they fail to comprehend much
+that to us seems clearly expressed. They do not get what is left for the
+reader to infer, because they are insensible to the thought fringes. It
+is these which give meaning to the fable. The dull subject may be able
+to image the objects and activities described, but taken in the rough
+such imagery gets him nowhere.
+
+Finally, the test is almost free from the danger of coaching. The
+subject who has been given a number of fables along with twenty-five or
+thirty other tests can as a rule give only hazy and inaccurate testimony
+as to what he has been put through. Moreover, we have found that, even
+if a subject has previously heard a fable, that fact does not materially
+increase his chances of giving a correct interpretation. If the
+situation depicted in the fable is beyond the subject's power of
+comprehension even explicit instruction has little effect upon the
+quality of the response.
+
+Incidentally, this observation raises the question whether the use of
+proverbs, mottoes, fables, poetry, etc., in the moral instruction of
+children may not often be futile because the material is not fitted to
+the child's power of comprehension. Much of the school's instruction in
+history and literature has a moral purpose, but there is reason to
+suspect that in this field schools often make precocious attempts in
+"generalizing" exercises.
+
+
+XII, 6. REPEATING FIVE DIGITS REVERSED
+
+The series are 3-1-8-7-9; 6-9-4-8-2; 5-2-9-6-1.
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING. Exactly as in years VII and IX.[73]
+
+[73] See discussion, p. 207 _ff._
+
+
+XII, 7. INTERPRETATION OF PICTURES
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the same pictures as in III, 1, and VII, 2, and the
+additional picture _d_. Present in the same order. The formula to begin
+with is identical with that in VII, 2: "_Tell me what this picture is
+about. What is this a picture of?_" This formula is chosen because it
+does not suggest specifically either description or interpretation, and
+is therefore adapted to show the child's spontaneous or natural mode of
+apperception. However, in case, this formula fails to bring spontaneous
+interpretation for three of the four pictures, we then return to those
+pictures on which the subject has failed and give a second trial with
+the formula: "_Explain this picture_." A good many subjects who failed
+to interpret the pictures spontaneously do so without difficulty when
+the more specific formula is used.
+
+If the response is so brief as to be difficult to classify, the subject
+should be urged to amplify by some such injunction as "_Go ahead_," or
+"_Explain what you mean_."
+
+One more caution. It is necessary to refrain from voicing a single word
+of commendation or approval until all the pictures have been responded
+to. A moment's thought will reveal the absolute necessity of adhering to
+this rule. Often a subject will begin by giving an inferior type of
+response (description, say) to the first picture, but with the second
+picture adjusts better to the task and responds satisfactorily. If in
+such a case the first (unsatisfactory) response were greeted with an
+approving "That's fine, you are doing splendidly," the likelihood of any
+improvement taking place as the test proceeds would be greatly lessened.
+
+SCORING. _Three pictures out of four_ must be satisfactorily
+interpreted. "Satisfactorily" means that the interpretation given should
+be reasonably plausible; not necessarily the exact one the artist had in
+mind, yet not absurd. The following classified responses will serve as
+a fairly secure guide for scoring:--
+
+(a) _Dutch Home_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Child has spilled something and is getting a
+    scolding." "The baby has hurt herself and the mother is
+    comforting her." "The baby is crying because she is hungry and
+    the mother has nothing to give her." "The little girl has been
+    naughty and is about to be punished." "The baby is crying
+    because she does not like her dinner." "There's bread on the
+    table and the mother won't let the little girl have it and so
+    she is crying." "The baby is begging for something and is crying
+    because her mamma won't give it to her." "It's a poor family.
+    The father is dead and they don't have enough to eat."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "The baby is crying and the mother is looking
+    at her" (description). "It's in Holland, and there's a little
+    girl crying, and a mamma, and there's a dish on the table"
+    (mainly description). "The mother is teaching the child to walk"
+    (absurd interpretation).
+
+(b) _River Scene_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Man and lady eloping to get married and an
+    Indian to row for them." "I think it represents a honeymoon
+    trip." "In frontier days and a man and his wife have been
+    captured by the Indians." "It's a perilous journey and they have
+    engaged the Indian to row for them."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "They are shooting the rapids." "An Indian
+    rowing a man and his wife down the river" (mainly description).
+    "A storm at sea" (absurd interpretation). "Indians have rescued
+    a couple from a shipwreck." "They have been up the river and
+    are riding down the rapids."
+
+    The following responses are somewhat doubtful, but should
+    probably be scored _minus_: "People going out hunting and have
+    Indian for a guide." "The man has rescued the woman from the
+    Indians." "It's a camping trip."
+
+(c) _Post-Office_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "It's a lot of old farmers. They have come to
+    the post-office to get the paper, which only comes once a week,
+    and they are all happy." "There's something funny in the paper
+    about one of the men and they are all laughing about it." "They
+    are reading about the price of eggs, and they look very happy so
+    I guess the price has gone up." "It's a bunch of country
+    politicians reading the election news."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "A man has just come out of the post-office
+    and is reading to his friends." "It's a little country town and
+    they are looking at the paper." "A man is reading the paper and
+    the others are looking on and laughing." "Some men are reading a
+    paper and laughing, and the other man has brought some eggs to
+    market, and it's in a little country town." (All the above are
+    mainly description.)
+
+    Responses like the following are somewhat better, but hardly
+    satisfactory: "They are reading something funny in the paper."
+    "They are reading the ads." "They are laughing about something
+    in the newspaper," etc.
+
+(d) _Colonial Home_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "They are lovers and have quarreled." "The man
+    has to go away for a long time, maybe to war, and she is afraid
+    he won't return." "He has proposed and she has rejected him, and
+    she is crying because she hated to disappoint him." "The woman
+    is crying because her husband is angry and leaving her." "The
+    man is a messenger and has brought the woman bad news."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "The husband is leaving and the dog is looking
+    at the lady." "It's a picture to show how people dressed in
+    colonial times." "The lady is crying and the man is trying to
+    comfort her." "The man is going away. The woman is angry because
+    he is going. The dog has a ball in its mouth and looks happy,
+    and the man looks sad."
+
+    Such responses as the following are doubtful, but rather _minus_
+    than _plus_: "A picture of George Washington's home." "They
+    have lost their money and they are sad" (gratuitous
+    interpretation). "The man has struck the woman."
+
+    Doubt sometimes arises as to the proper scoring of imaginative
+    or gratuitous interpretations. The following are samples of
+    such: (a) "The little girl is crying because she wants a new
+    dress and the mother is telling her she can have one when
+    Christmas comes if she will be good." (b) "The man and woman
+    have gone up the river to visit some friends and an Indian guide
+    is bringing them home." (c) "Some old Rubes are reading about
+    a circus that's going to come." (d) "Napoleon leaving his
+    wife."
+
+Sometimes these imaginative responses are given by very bright subjects,
+under the impression that they are asked to "make up" a story based on
+the picture. We may score them _plus_, provided they are not too much
+out of harmony with the situation and actions represented in the
+picture. Interpretations so gratuitous as to have little or no bearing
+upon the scene depicted should be scored _minus_.
+
+REMARKS. The test of picture interpretation has been variously located
+from 12 to 15 years. It cannot be too strongly emphasized that
+everything depends on the nature of the pictures used, the form in which
+the question is put, and the standard for scoring. The Jingleman-Jack
+pictures used by Kuhlmann are as easy to interpret at 10 years as the
+Stanford pictures at 12. Spontaneous interpretation ("What is this a
+picture of?" or "What do you see in this picture?") comes no more
+readily at 14 years than provoked interpretation ("Explain this
+picture") at 12. The standard of scoring is no less important. If with
+the Stanford pictures we require three satisfactory responses out of
+four, the test belongs at the 12-year level, but the standard of two
+correct out of four can be met a year or two earlier.
+
+Even after we have agreed upon a given series of pictures, the formula
+for giving the test, and upon the requisite number of passes, there
+remains still the question as to the proper degree of liberality in
+deciding what constitutes interpretation. There is no single point in
+mental development where the "ability to interpret pictures" sweeps in
+with a rush. Like the development of most other abilities, it comes by
+slow degrees, beginning even as early as 6 years.
+
+The question is, therefore, to decide whether a given response contains
+as much and as good interpretation as we have a right to expect at the
+age level where the test has been placed. It is imperative for any one
+who would use the scale correctly to acquaint himself thoroughly with
+the procedure and standards described above.
+
+
+XII, 8. GIVING SIMILARITIES, THREE THINGS
+
+PROCEDURE. The procedure is the same as in VIII, 4, but with the
+following words:--
+
+  (a) _Snake_, _cow_, _sparrow_.
+  (b) _Book_, _teacher_, _newspaper_.
+  (c) _Wool_, _cotton_, _leather_.
+  (d) _Knife-blade_, _penny_, _piece of wire_.
+  (e) _Rose_, _potato_, _tree_.
+
+As before, a little tactful urging is occasionally necessary in order to
+secure a response.
+
+SCORING. _Three satisfactory responses out of five_ are necessary for
+success. Any real similarity is acceptable, whether fundamental or
+superficial, although the giving of fundamental likenesses is especially
+symptomatic of good intelligence.
+
+Failures may be classified under four heads: (1) Leaving one of the
+words out of consideration; (2) giving a difference instead of a
+similarity; (3) giving a similarity that is not real or that is too
+bizarre or far-fetched; and (4) inability to respond. Types (1), (3),
+and (4) are almost equally numerous, while type (2) is not often
+encountered at this level of intelligence.
+
+This test provokes doubtful responses somewhat oftener than the earlier
+test of giving similarities. Those giving greatest difficulty are the
+indefinite statements like "All are useful," "All are made of the same
+material," etc. Fortunately, in most of these cases an additional
+question is sufficient to determine whether the subject has in mind a
+real similarity. Questions suitable for this purpose are: "Explain what
+you mean," "In what respect are they all useful?" "What material do
+you mean?" etc. Of course it is only permissible to make use of
+supplementary questions of this kind when they are necessary in order to
+clarify a response which has already been made.
+
+While the amateur examiner is likely to have more or less trouble in
+deciding upon scores, this difficulty rapidly disappears with
+experience. The following samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory
+responses will serve as a fairly adequate guide in dealing with doubtful
+cases:--
+
+(a) _Snake_, _cow_, _sparrow_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "All are animals" (or creatures, etc.). "All
+    live on the land." "All have blood" (or flesh, bones, eyes,
+    skin, etc.). "All move about." "All breathe air." "All are
+    useful" (_plus_ only if subject can give a use which they have
+    in common). "All have a little intelligence" (or sense,
+    instinct, etc.).
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "All have legs." "All are dangerous." "All
+    feed on grain" (or grass, etc.). "All are much afraid of man."
+    "All frighten you." "All are warm-blooded." "All get about the
+    same way." "All walk on the ground." "All can bite." "All
+    holler." "All drink water." "A snake crawls, a cow walks, and a
+    sparrow flies" (or some other difference). "They are not alike."
+
+(b) _Book_, _teacher_, _newspaper_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "All teach." "You learn from all." "All give you
+    information." "All help you get an education." "All are your
+    good friends" (_plus_ if subject can explain how). "All are
+    useful" (_plus_ if subject can explain how).
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "All tell you the news." "A teacher writes,
+    and a book and newspaper have writing." "They are not alike."
+    "All read." "All use the alphabet."
+
+(c) _Wool_, _cotton_, _leather_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "All used for clothing." "We wear them all."
+    "All grow" (_plus_ if subject can explain). "All have to be sent
+    to the factory to be made into things." "All are useful" (_plus_
+    if subject can give a use which all have in common). "All are
+    valuable" (_plus_ if explained).
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "All come from plants." "All grow on animals."
+    "All came off the top of something." "All are things." "They are
+    pretty." "All spell alike." "All are furry" (or soft, hard,
+    etc.).
+
+(d) _Knife-blade_, _penny_, _piece of wire_
+
+    _Satisfactory_. "All are made from minerals" (or metals). "All
+    come from mines." "All are hard material."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "All are made of steel" (or copper, iron,
+    etc.). "All are made of the same metal." "All cut." "All bend
+    easily." "All are used in building a house." "All are
+    worthless." "All are useful in fixing things." "All have an
+    end." "They are small." "All weigh the same." "Can get them all
+    at a hardware store." "You can buy things with all of them."
+    "You buy them with money." "One is sharp, one is round, and one
+    is long" (or some other difference).
+
+    Such answers as "All are found in a boy's pocket," or "Boys like
+    them," are not altogether bad, but hardly deserve to be called
+    satisfactory. "All are useful" is _minus_ unless the subject can
+    give a use which they have in common, which in this case he is
+    not likely to do. Bizarre uses are also _minus_; as, "All are
+    good for a watch fob," "Can use all for paper weights," etc.
+
+(e) _Rose_, _potato_, _tree_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "All are plants." "All grow from the ground."
+    "All have leaves" (or roots, etc.). "All have to be planted."
+    "All are parts of nature." "All have colors."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "All are pretty." "All bear fruit." "All have
+    pretty flowers." "All grow on bushes." "All are valuable" (or
+    useful). "They grow close to a house." "All are ornamental."
+    "All are shrubbery."
+
+REMARKS. The words of each series lend themselves readily to
+classification into a next higher class. This is the best type of
+response, but with most of the series it accounts for less than two
+thirds of the successes among subjects of 12-year intelligence. The
+proportion is less than one third for subjects of 10-year intelligence
+and nearly three fourths at the 14-year level. It would be possible and
+very desirable to devise and standardize an additional test of this
+kind, but requiring the giving of an essential resemblance or
+classificatory similarity.
+
+For discussion of the psychological factors involved in the similarities
+test, see VII, 5.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XVIII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR XIV.
+
+
+XIV, 1. VOCABULARY (FIFTY DEFINITIONS, 9000 WORDS)
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING, as in VIII, X, and XII. At year XIV fifty words
+must be correctly defined.
+
+
+XIV, 2. INDUCTION TEST: FINDING A RULE
+
+PROCEDURE. Provide six sheets of thin blank paper, say 8½ × 11 inches.
+Take the first sheet, and telling the subject to watch what you do, fold
+it once, and in the middle of the folded edge tear out or cut out a
+small notch; then ask the subject to tell you _how many holes there will
+be in the paper when it is unfolded_. The correct answer, _one_, is
+nearly always given without hesitation. But whatever the answer, unfold
+the paper and hold it up broadside for the subject's inspection. Next,
+take another sheet, fold it once as before and say: "_Now, when we
+folded it this way and tore out a piece, you remember it made one hole
+in the paper. This time we will give the paper another fold and see how
+many holes we shall have._" Then proceed to fold the paper again, this
+time in the other direction, and tear out a piece from the folded side
+and ask how many holes there will be when the paper is unfolded. After
+recording the answer, unfold the paper, hold it up before the subject so
+as to let him see the result. The answer is often incorrect and the
+unfolded sheet is greeted with an exclamation of surprise. The governing
+principle is seldom made out at this stage of the experiment. But
+regardless of the correctness or incorrectness of the first and second
+answers, proceed with the third sheet. Fold it once and say: "_When we
+folded it this way there was one hole._" Then fold it again and say:
+"_And when we folded it this way there were two holes._" At this point
+fold the paper a third time and say: "_Now, I am folding it again. How
+many holes will it have this time when I unfold it?_" Record the answer
+and again unfold the paper while the subject looks on.
+
+Continue in the same manner with sheets four, five, and six, adding one
+fold each time. In folding each sheet recapitulate the results with the
+previous sheets, saying (with the sixth, for example): "_When we folded
+it this way there was one hole, when we folded it again there were two,
+when we folded it again there were four, when we folded it again there
+were eight, when we folded it again there were sixteen; now, tell me
+how many holes there will be if we fold it once more._" In the
+recapitulation avoid the expression "_When we folded it once, twice,
+three times_," etc., as this often leads the subject to double the
+numeral heard instead of doubling the number of holes in the previously
+folded sheet. After the answer is given, do not fail to unfold the paper
+and let the subject view the result.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed _if the rule is grasped by the time the
+sixth sheet is reached_; that is, the subject may pass after five
+incorrect responses, provided the sixth is correct and the governing
+rule can then be given. It is not permissible to ask for the rule until
+all six parts of the experiment have been given. Nothing must be said
+which could even suggest the operation of a rule. Often, however, the
+subject grasps the principle after two or three steps and gives it
+spontaneously. In this case it is unnecessary to proceed with the
+remaining steps.
+
+REMARKS. This test was first used by the writer in a comparative study
+of the intellectual processes of bright and dull boys in 1905, but it
+was not standardized until 1914. Rather extensive data indicate that it
+is a genuine test of intelligence. Of 14-year-old school children
+testing between 96 and 105 I Q, 59 per cent passed this test; of
+14-year-olds testing below 96 I Q, 41 per cent passed; of those testing
+above 105, 71 per cent passed. That is, the test agrees well with the
+results obtained by the scale as a whole. Of "average adults" only
+10 per cent fail; and of "superior adults," fewer than 5 per cent. As a
+rule, the higher the grade of intelligence, the fewer the steps
+necessary for grasping the rule. Of the superior adults, only
+35 per cent fail to get the rule as early as the end of the fourth step.
+
+The test is little affected by schooling, and apart from differences in
+intelligence it is little influenced by age. Other advantages of the
+test are the keen interest it always arouses and its independence of
+language ability. It has been used successfully with immigrant subjects
+who had been in this country but a few months.
+
+We have named the experiment an "induction test." It might be supposed
+that the solution would ordinarily be arrived at by deduction, or by an
+_a-priori_ logical analysis of the principle involved. This, however, is
+rarely the case. Not one average adult out of ten reasons out the
+situation in this purely logical manner. It is ordinarily only after one
+or more mistakes have been made and have been exposed by the examiner
+holding up the unfolded paper to view that the correct principle is
+grasped. In the absence of deductive reasoning the subject must note
+that each unfolded sheet contains twice as many holes as the previous
+one, and must infer that folding the paper again will again double the
+number. The ability tested is the ability to generalize from
+particulars where the common element of the particulars can be discerned
+only by the selective action of attention, in this case attention to the
+fact that each number is the double of its predecessor.
+
+
+XIV, 3. GIVING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN A PRESIDENT AND A KING
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_There are three main differences between a president
+and a king; what are they?_" If the subject stops after one difference
+is given, we urge him on, if possible, until three are given.
+
+SCORING. The three differences relate to power, tenure, and manner of
+accession. Only these differences are considered correct, and the
+successful response must include at least two of the three. We disregard
+crudities of expression and note merely whether the subject has the
+essential idea. As regards power, for example, any of the following
+responses are satisfactory: "The king is absolute and the president is
+not." "The king rules by himself, but the president rules with the help
+of the people." "Kings can have things their own way more than
+presidents can," etc.
+
+It may be objected that the reverse of this is sometimes true, that the
+king of to-day often has less power than the average president.
+Sometimes subjects mention this fact, and when they do we credit them
+with this part of the test. As a matter of fact, however, this answer is
+seldom given.
+
+Sometimes the subject does not stop until he has given a half-dozen or
+more differences, and in such cases the first three differences may be
+trivial and some of the later ones essential. The question then arises
+whether we should disregard the errors and pass the subject on his later
+correct responses. The rule in such cases is to ask the subject to pick
+out the "three main differences."
+
+Sometimes accession and tenure are given in the form of a single
+contrast, as: "The president is elected, but the king inherits his
+throne and rules for life." This answer entitles the subject to credit
+for both accession and tenure, the contrast as regards tenure being
+plainly implied.
+
+Unsatisfactory contrasts are of many kinds and are often amusing. Some
+of the most common are the following:--
+
+    "A king wears a crown." "A king has jewels." "A king sits on a
+    throne." ("A king sets on a thorn" as one feeble-minded boy put
+    it!) "A king lives in a palace." "A king has courtiers." "A king
+    is very dignified." "A king dresses up more." "A president has
+    less pomp and ceremony." "A president is more ready to receive
+    the people." "A king sits on a chair all the time and a
+    president does not." "No differences; it's just names." "A
+    president does not give titles." "A king has a larger salary."
+    "A king has royal blood." "A king is in more danger." "They have
+    a different title." "A king is more cruel." "Kings have people
+    beheaded." "A king rules in a monarchy and a president in a
+    republic." "A king rules in a foreign country." "A president is
+    elected and a king fights for his office." "A president appoints
+    governors and a king does not." "A president lets the lawyers
+    make the laws." "Everybody works for a king."
+
+It is surprising to see how often trivial differences like the above are
+given. About thirty "average adults" out of a hundred, including
+high-school students, give at least one unsatisfactory contrast.
+
+The test has been criticized as depending too much on schooling. The
+criticism is to a certain extent valid when the test is used with young
+subjects, say of 10 or 12 years. It is not valid, however, if the use of
+the test is confined to older subjects. With the latter, it is not a
+test of knowledge, but of the discriminative capacity to deal with
+knowledge already in the possession of the subject. It would be
+difficult to find an adult, not actually feeble-minded, who is ignorant
+of the facts called for: That the king inherits his throne, while the
+president is elected; that the tenure of the king is for life, and that
+of the president for a term of years; that kings ordinarily have, or are
+supposed to have, more power. Even the relatively stupid adult knows
+this; but he also knows that kings are different from presidents in
+having crowns, thrones, palaces, robes, courtiers, larger pay, etc., and
+he makes no discrimination as regards the relative importance of these
+differences.
+
+The test is psychologically related to that of giving differences in
+year VII and to the two tests of finding similarities; but it differs
+from these in requiring a comparison based on fundamental rather than
+accidental distinctions. The idea is good and should be worked out in
+additional tests of the same type.
+
+The test first appeared in the Binet revised scale of 1911. Kuhlmann
+omits it, and besides our own there are few statistics bearing on it.
+Our results show that if two essential differences are required, the
+test belongs where we have placed it, but that if only one essential
+difference is required, the test is easy enough for year XII.
+
+
+XIV, 4. PROBLEM QUESTIONS
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the subject: "_Listen, and see if you can understand
+what I read._" Then read the following three problems, rather slowly and
+with expression, pausing after each long enough for the subject to find
+an answer:--
+
+  (a) "_A man who was walking in the woods near a city stopped
+      suddenly, very much frightened, and then ran to the nearest
+      policeman, saying that he had just seen hanging from the limb
+      of a tree a ... a what?_"
+  (b) "_My neighbor has been having queer visitors. First a doctor
+      came to his house, then a lawyer, then a minister (preacher or
+      priest). What do you think happened there?_"
+  (c) "_An Indian who had come to town for the first time in his
+      life saw a white man riding along the street. As the white man
+      rode by, the Indian said--'The white man is lazy; he walks
+      sitting down.' What was the white man riding on that caused
+      the Indian to say, 'He walks sitting down'?_"
+
+Do not ask questions calculated to draw out the correct response, but
+wait in silence for the subject's spontaneous answer. It is permissible,
+however, to re-read the passage if the subject requests it.
+
+SCORING. _Two responses out of three must be satisfactory._ The
+following explanations and examples will make clear the requirements of
+the test:--
+
+(a) _What the man saw hanging_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ The only correct answer for the first is "A man
+    who had hung himself" (or who had committed suicide, been
+    hanged, etc.). We may also pass the following answer: "Dead
+    branches that looked like a man hanging."
+
+    A good many subjects answer simply, "A man." This answer cannot
+    be scored because of the impossibility of knowing what is in the
+    subject's mind, and in such cases it is always necessary to say:
+    "_Explain what you mean._" The answer to this interrogation
+    always enables us to score the response.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ There is an endless variety of failures: "A
+    snake," "A monkey," "A robber," or "A tramp" being the most
+    common. Others include such answers as "A bear," "A tiger," "A
+    wild cat," "A cat," "A bird," "An eagle," "A bird's nest," "A
+    hornet's nest," "A leaf," "A swing," "A boy in a swing," "A
+    basket of flowers," "An egg," "A ghost," "A white sheet,"
+    "Clothes," "A purse," etc.
+
+(b) _My neighbor_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ The expected answer is "A death," "Some one has
+    died," etc. We must always check up this response, however, by
+    asking what the lawyer came for, and this must also be answered
+    correctly.
+
+    While it is expected that the subject will understand that the
+    doctor came to attend a sick person, the lawyer to make his
+    will, and the minister to preach the funeral, there are a few
+    other ingenious interpretations which pass as satisfactory. For
+    example, "A man got hurt in an accident; the doctor came to make
+    him well, the lawyer to see about damages, and then he died and
+    the preacher came for the funeral." Or, "A man died, the lawyer
+    came to help the widow settle the estate and the preacher came
+    for the funeral." We can hardly expect the 14-year-old child to
+    know that it is not the custom to settle an estate until after
+    the funeral.
+
+    The following excellent response was given by an enlightened
+    young eugenist: "A marriage; the doctor came to examine them and
+    see if they were fit to marry, the lawyer to arrange the
+    marriage settlement, and the minister to marry them." The
+    following logical responses occurred once each: "A murder. The
+    doctor came to examine the body, the lawyer to get evidence, and
+    the preacher to preach the funeral." "An unmarried girl has
+    given birth to a child. The lawyer was employed to get the man
+    to marry her and then the preacher came to perform the wedding
+    ceremony." Perhaps some will consider this interpretation too
+    far-fetched to pass. But it is perfectly logical and,
+    unfortunately, represents an occurrence which is not so very
+    rare.
+
+    If an incorrect answer is first given and then corrected, the
+    correction is accepted.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ The failures again are quite varied, but are
+    most frequently due to failure to understand the lawyer's
+    mission. Of 66 tabulated failures, 26 are accounted for in this
+    way, while only 6 are due to inability to state the part played
+    by the minister. The most common incorrect responses are: "A
+    baby born" (accounting for 5 out of 66 failures); "A divorce"
+    (very common with the children tested by Dr. Ordahl, at Reno,
+    Nevada!); "A marriage"; "A divorce and a remarriage"; "A
+    dinner"; "An entertainment"; "Some friends came to chat," etc.
+    In 20 failures out of 66, marriage was incorrectly connected
+    with a will, a divorce, the death of a child, etc.
+
+    The following are not bad, but hardly deserve to pass: "Sickness
+    and trouble; the lawyer and minister came to help him out of
+    trouble." Or, "Somebody was sick; the lawyer wanted his money
+    and the minister came to see how he was." A few present a still
+    more logical interpretation, but so far-fetched that it is
+    doubtful whether they should count as passes; for example: "A
+    man and his wife had a fight. One got hurt and had to have the
+    doctor, then they had a lawyer to get them divorced, then the
+    minister came to marry one of them." Again, "Some one is dying
+    and is getting married and making his will before he dies."
+
+(c) _What the man was riding on_
+
+    The only correct response is "Bicycle." The most common error is
+    _horse_ (or _donkey_), accounting for 48 out of 71 tabulated
+    failures. Vehicles, like _wagon_, _buggy_, _automobile_, or
+    _street car_, were mentioned in 14 out of 71 failures. Bizarre
+    replies are: "A cripple in a wheel chair"; "A person riding on
+    some one's back," etc.
+
+REMARKS. The experiment is a form of the completion test. Elements of a
+situation are given, out of which the entire situation is to be
+constructed. This phase of intelligence has already been discussed.[74]
+
+[74] See IX, 5, and XII, 4.
+
+While it is generally admitted that the underlying idea of this test is
+good, some have criticized Binet's selection of problems. Meumann thinks
+the lawyer element of the second is so unfamiliar to children as to
+render that part of the test unfair. Several "armchair" critics have
+mentioned the danger of nervous shock from the first problem. Bobertag
+throws out the test entirely and substitutes a completion test modeled
+after that of Ebbinghaus. Our own results are altogether favorable to
+the test. If it is used in year XIV, Meumann's objection hardly holds,
+for American children of that age do ordinarily know something about
+making wills. As for the danger of shock from the first problem, we have
+never once found the slightest evidence of this much-feared result. The
+subject always understands that the situation depicted is hypothetical,
+and so answers either in a matter-of-fact manner or with a laugh.
+
+The bicycle problem is our own invention. Binet used the other two and
+required both to be answered correctly. The test was located in year XII
+of the 1908 scale, and in year XV of the 1911 revision. Goddard and
+Kuhlmann retain it in the original location. The Stanford results of
+1911, 1912, 1914, and 1915 agree in showing the test too difficult for
+year XII, even when only two out of three correct responses are
+required. If the original form of the experiment is used, it is
+exceedingly difficult for year XV. As here given it fits well at
+year XIV.
+
+
+XIV, 5. ARITHMETICAL REASONING
+
+PROCEDURE. The following problems, printed in clear type, are shown one
+at a time to the subject, who reads each problem aloud and (with the
+printed problem still before him) finds the answer without the use of
+pencil or paper.
+
+  (a) _If a man's salary is $20 a week and he spends $14 a week,
+      how long will it take him to save $300?_
+  (b) _If 2 pencils cost 5 cents, how many pencils can you buy for
+      50 cents?_
+  (c) _At 15 cents a yard, how much will 7 feet of cloth cost?_
+
+Only one minute is allowed for each problem, but nothing is said about
+hurrying. While one problem is being solved, the others should be hidden
+from view. It is not permissible, if the subject gives an incorrect
+answer, to ask him to solve the problem again. The following exception,
+however, is made to this rule: If the answer given to the third problem
+indicates that the word _yard_ has been read as _feet_, the subject is
+asked to read the problem through again carefully (aloud) and to tell
+how he solved it. No further help of any kind may be given.
+
+SCORING. _Two of the three_ problems must be solved correctly within the
+minute allotted to each. No credit is allowed for correct method if the
+answer is wrong.
+
+REMARKS. We have selected these problems from the list used by Bonser in
+his _Study of the Reasoning Ability of Children in the Fourth, Fifth,
+and Sixth School Grades_.[75]
+
+[75] Columbia University Contributions to Education, no. 37, 1910.
+
+Our tests of 279 "at age" children between 12 and 15 years reveal the
+surprising fact that the test as here used and scored is not passed by
+much over half of the children of any age in the grades below the
+high-school age. Of the high-school pupils 19 per cent failed to pass,
+21 per cent of ordinarily successful business men (!), and 27 per cent
+of Knollin's unemployed men testing up to the "average adult" level. To
+find average intelligence cutting such a sorry figure raises the
+question whether the ancient definition of man as "the rational animal"
+is justified by the facts. The truth is, _average_ intelligence does not
+do a great deal of abstract, logical reasoning, and the little it does
+is done usually under the whip of necessity.
+
+At first thought these problems will doubtless appear to the reader to
+be mere tests of schooling. It is true, of course, that in solving them
+the subject makes use of knowledge which is ordinarily obtained in
+school; but this knowledge (that is, knowledge of reading and of
+addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division) is possessed by
+practically all adults who are not feeble-minded, and by many who are.
+Success, therefore, depends upon the ability to apply this knowledge
+readily and accurately to the problems given--precisely the kind of
+ability in which a deficiency cannot be made good by school training. We
+can teach even morons how to read problems and how to add, subtract,
+multiply, and divide with a fair degree of accuracy; the trouble comes
+when they try to decide which of these processes the problem calls for.
+This may require intelligence of high or low order, according to the
+difficulty of the problem. As for the present test, we have shown that
+almost totally unschooled men of "average adult" intelligence pass this
+test as frequently as high-school seniors of the same mental level.
+
+
+XIV, 6. REVERSING HANDS OF CLOCK
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the subject: "_Suppose it is six twenty-two o'clock,
+that is, twenty-two minutes after six; can you see in your mind where
+the large hand would be, and where the small hand would be?_" Subjects
+of 12- to 14-year intelligence practically always answer this in the
+affirmative. Then continue: "_Now, suppose the two hands of the clock
+were to trade places, so that the large hand takes the place where the
+small hand was, and the small hand takes the place where the large hand
+was. What time would it then be?_"
+
+Repeat the test with the hands at 8.10 (10 minutes after 8), and again
+with the hands at 2.46 (14 minutes before 3).
+
+The subject is not allowed to look at a clock or watch, or to aid
+himself by drawing, but must work out the problem mentally. As a rule
+the answer is given within a few seconds or not at all. If an answer is
+not forthcoming within two minutes the score is failure.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _two of the three_ problems are solved
+within the following range of accuracy: the first solution is considered
+correct if the answer falls between 4.30 and 4.35, inclusive; the second
+if the answer falls between 1.40 and 1.45, and the third if the answer
+falls between 9.10 and 9.15.
+
+REMARKS. It appears that success in the test chiefly depends upon
+voluntary control over constructive visual imagery. Weakness of visual
+imagery may account for the failure of a considerable percentage of
+adults to pass the test. Visual imagery, however, is not absolutely
+necessary to success. One 8-year-old prodigy, who had 12-year
+intelligence, arrived in forty seconds at a strictly mathematical
+solution for the second problem, as follows: "If it is 2.46, and the
+hands trade places, then the little hand has gone about one fourth of
+the distance from 9 o'clock to 10 o'clock. One fourth of 60 minutes is
+15 minutes, and so the time would be 15 minutes after 9 o'clock." Such a
+solution is certainly possible by the use of verbal imagery of any type.
+
+The test shows a high correlation with mental age, but more than most
+others it is subject to the influence of cribbing. For this reason,
+other positions of the clock hands should be tried out for the purpose
+of finding substitute experiments of equal difficulty. Until such
+experiments have been made, it will be necessary to confine the
+experiment to the three positions here presented.
+
+Schooling seems to have no influence whatever on the percentage of
+passes.
+
+This test was first used by Binet in 1905, but was not included in
+either the 1908 or 1911 series. Goddard and Kuhlmann both include the
+test in their revisions, placing it in year XV. They give only two
+problems (our _a_ and _c_) and require that both be answered correctly.
+Neither Goddard nor Kuhlmann, however, indicates the degree of error
+permitted.
+
+Something depends upon original position of the hands. Binet used 6.20
+and 2.46. For some reason the 2.46 arrangement is much more difficult
+than either 8.10 or 6.22, yielding almost twice as many failures as
+either of the other positions.
+
+
+XIV, ALTERNATIVE TESTS: REPEATING SEVEN DIGITS
+
+This time, as in year X, only two series are given, one of which must be
+repeated without error. The two series are: 2-1-8-3-4-3-9 and
+9-7-2-8-4-7-5. Note that in none of the tests of repeating digits is it
+permissible to warn the subject of the number to be given.
+
+REMARKS. Binet originally placed this test in year XII, giving three
+trials, but later moved it to year XV. Goddard and Kuhlmann retain it in
+year XII. Our data show that when three trials are given the test is too
+easy for year XIV, but that it fits this age when only two trials are
+allowed; that after the age of 12 or 14 years memory for relatively
+meaningless material, like digits or nonsense syllables, improves but
+little; and that above this level it does not correlate very closely
+with intelligence.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XIX
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR "AVERAGE ADULT"
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, 1: VOCABULARY (SIXTY-FIVE DEFINITIONS, 11,700 WORDS)
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING, as in previous vocabulary tests.[76] At the
+average adult level sixty-five words should be correctly defined.
+
+[76] See VIII, 6.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, 2: INTERPRETATION OF FABLES (SCORE 8)
+
+PROCEDURE. As in year XII, test 6. Use the same fables.
+
+SCORING. The method of scoring is the same as for XII, but the total
+score must be 8 points to satisfy the requirements at this level.
+
+REMARKS. For discussion of test, see XII, 5.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, 3: DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ABSTRACT TERMS
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: _What is the difference between_:--
+
+  (a) _Laziness and idleness?_
+  (b) _Evolution and revolution?_
+  (c) _Poverty and misery?_
+  (d) _Character and reputation?_
+
+SCORING. _Three correct contrasting definitions out of four_ are
+necessary for a pass. It is not sufficient merely to give a correct
+meaning for each word of a pair; the subject must point out a difference
+between the two words so as to make a real contrast. For example, if the
+subject defines _evolution_ as a "growth" or "gradual change," and
+_revolution_ as the turning of a wheel on its axis, the experimenter
+should say: "_Yes, but I want you to tell me the difference between
+evolution and revolution._" If the contrast is not then forthcoming the
+response is marked _minus_.
+
+The following are sample definitions which may be considered
+acceptable:--
+
+    (a) _Laziness and idleness._ "It is laziness if you won't
+    work, and idleness if you are willing to work but haven't any
+    job." "Lots of men are idle who are not lazy and would like to
+    work if they had something to do." "Laziness means you don't
+    want to work; idleness means you are not doing anything just
+    now." "Idle people may be lazy, or they may just happen to be
+    out of a job." "It is laziness when you don't like to work, and
+    idleness when you are not working." "An idle person might be
+    willing to work; a lazy man won't work." "Laziness comes from
+    within; idleness may be forced upon one." "Laziness is aversion
+    to activity; idleness is simply the state of inactivity."
+    "Laziness is idleness from choice or preference; idleness means
+    doing nothing."
+
+    The essential contrast, accordingly, is that _laziness refers to
+    unwillingness to work; idleness to the mere fact of inactivity_.
+    This contrast must be expressed, however clumsily.
+
+    (b) _Evolution and revolution._ "Evolution is a gradual
+    change; revolution is a sudden change." "Evolution is natural
+    development; revolution is sudden upheaval." "Evolution means an
+    unfolding or development; revolution means a complete upsetting
+    of everything." "Evolution is the gradual development of a
+    country or government; revolution is a quick change of
+    government." "Evolution takes place by natural force; a
+    revolution is caused by an outside force." "Evolution is growth;
+    revolution is a quick change from existing conditions."
+    "Evolution is a natural change; revolution is a violent
+    change." "Evolution is growth step by step; revolution is more
+    sudden and radical in its action." "Evolution is a change
+    brought about by peaceful development, while revolution is
+    brought about by an uprising."
+
+    The essential distinction, accordingly, is that _evolution means
+    a gradual, natural, or slow change, while revolution means a
+    sudden, forced, or violent change_. Non-contrasting definitions,
+    even when the individual terms are defined correctly, are not
+    satisfactory.
+
+    (c) _Poverty and misery._ "Poverty is when you are poor;
+    misery means suffering." "Only the poor are in poverty, but
+    everybody can be miserable." "Poverty is the lowest stage of
+    poorness; misery means pain." "The poor are not always
+    miserable, and the rich are miserable sometimes." "Poverty means
+    to be in want; misery comes from any kind of suffering or
+    anguish." "The poor are in poverty; the sick are in misery."
+    "Poverty is the condition of being very poor financially; misery
+    is a feeling which any class of people can have." "One who is
+    poor is in poverty; one who is wretched or doesn't enjoy life is
+    in misery." "Poverty comes from lack of money; misery, from lack
+    of happiness or comfort." "Misery means distress. It can come
+    from poverty or many other things."
+
+    (d) _Character and reputation._ "Character is what you are;
+    reputation is what people say about you." "You have character if
+    you are honest; but you might be honest and still have a bad
+    reputation among people who misjudge you." "Character is your
+    real self; reputation is the opinion people have about you."
+    "Your character depends upon yourself; reputation depends on
+    what others think of you." "Character means your real morals;
+    reputation is the way you are known in the world." "A man has a
+    good character if he would not do evil; but a man may have a
+    good reputation and still have a bad character."
+
+A little practice and a good deal of discrimination are necessary for
+the correct grading of responses to this test. Subjects are often so
+clumsy in expression that their responses are anything but clear. It is
+then necessary to ask them to explain what they mean. Further
+questioning, however, is not permissible. For uniformity in scoring it
+is necessary to bear in mind that the definitions given must, in order
+to be satisfactory, express the essential distinction between the two
+words.
+
+REMARKS. What we have said regarding the psychological significance of
+test 2, year XII, applies equally well here. The test on the whole is a
+valuable one. Our statistics show that it is not, as some critics have
+thought, mainly a test of schooling.
+
+The main criticism to be made is that it imposes a somewhat difficult
+task upon the power of language expression. For this reason it is
+necessary in scoring to disregard clumsiness of expression and to look
+only to the essential correctness or incorrectness of the thought.
+
+This test first appeared in year XIII of Binet's 1908 scale. The terms
+used were "happiness and honor"; "evolution and revolution"; "event and
+advent"; "poverty and misery"; "pride and pretension." In the 1911
+revision, "happiness and honor" and "pride and pretension" were dropped,
+and the other three pairs were moved up to the adult group, two out of
+three successes being required for a pass. Kuhlmann places it in
+year XV, using "happiness and honor" instead of our "character and
+reputation," and requires three successes out of five.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, 4: PROBLEM OF THE ENCLOSED BOXES
+
+PROCEDURE. Show the subject a cardboard box about one inch on a side.
+Say: "_You see this box; it has two smaller boxes inside of it, and each
+one of the smaller boxes contains a little tiny box. How many boxes are
+there altogether, counting the big one?_" To be sure that the subject
+understands repeat the statement of the problem: "_First the large box,
+then two smaller ones, and each of the smaller ones contains a little
+tiny box._"
+
+Record the response, and, showing another box, say: "_This box has two
+smaller boxes inside, and each of the smaller boxes contains two tiny
+boxes. How many altogether? Remember, first the large box, then two
+smaller ones, and each smaller one contains two tiny boxes._"
+
+The third problem, which is given in the same way, states that there are
+_three_ smaller boxes, each of which contains _three_ tiny boxes.
+
+In the fourth problem there are _four_ smaller boxes, each containing
+_four_ tiny boxes.
+
+The problem must be given orally, and the solution must be found without
+the aid of pencil or paper. Only one half-minute is allowed for each
+problem. Note that each problem is stated twice.
+
+A correction is permitted, provided it is offered spontaneously and does
+not seem to be the result of guessing. Guessing can be checked up by
+asking the subject to explain the solution.
+
+SCORING. _Three of the four_ problems must be solved correctly within
+the half-minute allotted to each.
+
+REMARKS. Success depends, in the first place, upon ability to comprehend
+the statement of the problem and to hold its conditions in mind.
+Subjects much below the 12-year level of intelligence are often unable
+to do this.
+
+Granting that the problem has been comprehended, success seems to depend
+chiefly upon the facility with which the constructive imagination
+manipulates concrete visual imagery. In this respect it resembles the
+problem of reversing the hands of a clock. With some subjects, however,
+verbal imagery alone is operative. Tactual imagery would, of course,
+serve the purpose as well.
+
+This is as good a place as any to emphasize the fact that the
+introspective study of mental imagery has little to contribute to the
+measurement of intelligence. Intelligence tests are concerned with the
+total result of a thought process, rather than with the imagery supports
+of that process. Thought may be carried on almost equally well by
+various kinds of imagery. As Galton showed, a person can be taught to
+carry on arithmetical processes by the use of smell imagery. The kind of
+imagery employed is the product of slight, innate preferences
+complicated by the more or less accidental effects of habit.
+
+We may say that imagery is to thinking what scaffolding is to
+architecture. The important thing is the completed building rather than
+the nature of the scaffolding employed in erecting it. No one thinks of
+blaming the ill construction of a building upon the kind of scaffolding
+used, for if the architect and builder are competent satisfactory
+scaffolding will be found. Just as little are deficiencies or
+peculiarities of imagery the real cause of low-order intelligence. We
+cannot increase intelligence by formal drill in the use of supposedly
+important kinds of mental imagery, any more than we can transform a
+plain carpenter into a Michael Angelo by instructing him in the use of
+scaffolding materials such as were employed in the construction of St.
+Peter's Cathedral.
+
+This test is of our own invention and has been brought to its present
+form only after a good deal of preliminary experimentation. It
+correlates fairly well with mental age as determined by the scale as a
+whole. It was passed by 55 per cent of high-school pupils and by
+65 per cent of unschooled business men. Success in it is thus seen not
+to depend upon schooling.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, 5: REPEATING SIX DIGITS REVERSED
+
+The series used are: 4-7-1-9-5-2; 5-8-3-2-9-4; and 7-5-2-6-3-8.
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING, as in year VII, alternative 2.
+
+REMARKS. The test is passed by approximately half of "average adults"
+and by three fourths of "superior adults." It shows no effect of
+schooling, the uneducated business men even surpassing our high-school
+students.
+
+For the higher levels of intelligence, especially, the test is superior
+to that of repeating digits in the direct order. It is less mechanical
+and makes heavier demands upon higher intelligence.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, 6: USING A CODE
+
+PROCEDURE. Show the subject the code given on the accompanying form.
+Say: "_See these diagrams here. Look and you will see that they contain
+all the letters of the alphabet. Now, examine the arrangement of the
+letters. They go_ (pointing) _a b c, d e f, g h i, j k l, m n o, p q r,
+s t u v, w x y z. You see the letters in the first two diagrams are
+arranged in the up-and-down order_ (pointing again), _and the letters in
+the other two diagrams run in just the opposite way from the hands of a
+clock_ (pointing). _Look again and you will see that the second diagram
+is drawn just like the first, except that each letter has a dot with it,
+and that the last diagram is like the third except that here, also, each
+letter has a dot. Now, all of this represents a code; that is, a secret
+language. It is a real code, one that was used in the Civil War for
+sending secret messages. This is the way it works: we draw the lines
+which hold a letter, but leave out the letter. Here, for example, is the
+way we would write 'spy?'_" Then write the word _spy_, pointing out
+carefully where each letter comes from, and emphasizing the fact that
+the dot must be used in addition to the lines in writing any letter in
+the second or the fourth diagram. Illustrate also with _war_.
+
+Then add: "_I am going to have you write something for me; remember now,
+how the letters go, first_ (pointing, as before) _a b c, d e f, g h i,
+then j k l, m n o, p q r, then s t u v, then w x y z. And don't forget
+the dots for the letters in this diagram and this one_" (pointing). At
+this point, take away the diagrams and tell the subject to write the
+words _come quickly_. Say nothing about hurrying.
+
+The subject is given a pencil, but is allowed to draw only the symbols
+for the words _come quickly_. He is not permitted to reproduce the
+entire code and then to copy the code letters from his reproduction.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the words are written in _six minutes and
+without more than two errors_. Omission of a dot counts as only a half
+error.
+
+REMARKS. It is not easy to analyze the mental functions which contribute
+to success in the code test. Contrary to what might be supposed, success
+does not necessarily depend upon getting and retaining a visual picture
+of the diagrams. Kinæsthetic imagery will answer the purpose just as
+well, or the original visual impression may even be translated at once
+into auditory-verbal imagery and remembered as such. The significance of
+the test must be expressed in other terms than the kind of imagery it
+may happen to bring into play.
+
+Healy and Fernald describe the task of writing a code sentence without
+copy as one which requires "close attention and steadiness of purpose."
+They also emphasize the fact that the attention must be directed inward,
+since there is no object of interest before the senses and since no
+special stimulus to attention is offered by the experimenter.
+Observations we have made on subjects during the test confirm this view
+as to the factors involved.
+
+That inability to remember the code as a whole is not a common cause of
+failure is shown by the fact that subjects above 12-year intelligence
+who have failed on the test are nearly always able to reproduce the
+diagrams and insert the letters in their proper places. To give the code
+form of a given letter without copy, however, makes a much heavier
+demand on attention. Nearly all subjects find it necessary to trace the
+code form, in imagination, from the beginning up to each letter whose
+code form is sought. Subjects of superior intelligence, however,
+sometimes hit upon the device of remembering the position of the
+individual key letters e.g. (the first letter of each figure) from
+which, as a base, any desired letter form may be quickly sought out.
+
+The test correlates well with mental age, but for some reason not
+apparent it is passed by a larger percentage of high-school pupils than
+unschooled adults of the same mental level.
+
+The code test was first described by Healy and Fernald in their "Tests
+for Practical Mental Classification."[77] The authors gave no data,
+however, which would indicate the mental level to which the test
+belongs. Dr. Goddard incorporated it in year XV of his revision of the
+Binet scale, but also fails to give statistics. The location given
+the test in the Stanford revision is based on tests of nearly
+500 individuals ranging from a mental level of 12 years to that of
+"superior adult." It appears that the test is considerably more
+difficult than most had thought it to be.
+
+[77] _Psychological Review Monographs_ (1911), vol. XIII, no. 2, p. 51.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, ALTERNATIVE TEST 1: REPEATING TWENTY-EIGHT SYLLABLES
+
+The sentences for this test are:--
+
+  (a) _Walter likes very much to go on visits to his grandmother,
+      because she always tells him many funny stories._
+  (b) _Yesterday I saw a pretty little dog in the street. It had
+      curly brown hair, short legs, and a long tail._
+
+PROCEDURE. Exactly as in VI, 6. Emphasize that the sentence must be
+repeated without a single change of any sort. Get attention before
+giving each sentence.
+
+SCORING. Passed _if one sentence is repeated without a single error_. In
+VI and X we scored the response as satisfactory if one sentence was
+repeated without error, or if two were repeated with not more than one
+error each.
+
+REMARKS. The test of repeating sentences is not as satisfactory in the
+higher intelligence levels as in the lower. It is too mechanical to tax
+very heavily the higher thought processes. It does, however, have a
+certain correlation with intelligence. Contrary to what one would have
+expected, uneducated adults of "average adult" intelligence surpassed
+our high-school students of the same mental level.
+
+Binet located this test in year XII of the 1908 series, but shifted it
+to year XV in 1911. The American versions of the Binet scale have
+usually retained it in year XII, though Goddard admits that the
+sentences are somewhat too difficult for that year. Kuhlmann puts the
+test in year XII, but reduces the sentences to twenty-four syllables and
+permits one re-reading. We give only two trials and our sentences are
+considerably more difficult. With the procedure and scoring we have
+used, the test is rather easy for the "average adult" group, but a
+little too hard for year XIV.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, ALTERNATIVE TEST 2: COMPREHENSION OF PHYSICAL RELATIONS
+
+
+(a) _Problem regarding the path of a cannon ball_
+
+PROCEDURE. Draw on a piece of paper a horizontal line six or eight
+inches long. Above it, an inch or two, draw a short horizontal line
+about an inch long and parallel to the first. Tell the subject that the
+long line represents the perfectly level ground of a field, and that the
+short line represents a cannon. Explain that the cannon is "_pointed
+horizontally (on a level) and is fired across this perfectly level
+field_." After it is clear that these conditions of the problem are
+comprehended, we add: "_Now, suppose that this cannon is fired off and
+that the ball comes to the ground at this point here_ (pointing to the
+farther end of the line which represents the field). _Take this pencil
+and draw a line which will show what path the cannon ball will take from
+the time it leaves the mouth of the cannon till it strikes the ground._"
+
+SCORING. There are four types of response: (1) A straight diagonal line
+is drawn from the cannon's mouth to the point where the ball strikes.
+(2) A straight line is drawn from the cannon's mouth running
+horizontally until almost directly over the goal, at which point the
+line drops almost or quite vertically. (3) The path from the cannon's
+mouth first rises considerably from the horizontal, at an angle perhaps
+of between ten to forty-five degrees, and finally describes a gradual
+curve downward to the goal. (4) The line begins almost on a level and
+drops more rapidly toward the end of its course.
+
+Only the last is satisfactory. Of course, nothing like a mathematically
+accurate solution of the problem is expected. It is sufficient if the
+response belongs to the fourth type above instead of being absurd, as
+the other types described are. Any one who has ever thrown stones should
+have the data for such an approximate solution. Not a day of schooling
+is necessary.
+
+
+(b) _Problem as to the weight of a fish in water_
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the subject: "_You know, of course, that water holds
+up a fish that is placed in it. Well, here is a problem. Suppose we have
+a bucket which is partly full of water. We place the bucket on the
+scales and find that with the water in it it weighs exactly 45 pounds.
+Then we put a 5-pound fish into the bucket of water. Now, what will the
+whole thing weigh?_"
+
+SCORING. Many subjects even as low as 9- or 10-year intelligence will
+answer promptly, "Why, 45 pounds and 5 pounds makes 50 pounds, of
+course." But this is not sufficient. We proceed to ask, with serious
+demeanor: "_How can this be correct, since the water itself holds up the
+fish?_" The young subject who has answered so glibly now laughs
+sheepishly and apologizes for his error, saying that he answered without
+thinking, etc. This response is scored failure without further
+questioning.
+
+Other subjects, mostly above the 14-year level, adhere to the answer
+"50 pounds," however strongly we urge the argument about the water
+holding up the fish. In response to our question, "_How can that be the
+case?_" it is sufficient if the subject replies that "The weight is
+there just the same; the scales have to hold up the bucket and the
+bucket has to hold up the water," or words to that effect. Only some
+such response as this is satisfactory. If the subject keeps changing his
+answer or says that he _thinks_ the weight would be 50 pounds, but is
+not certain, the score is failure.
+
+
+(c) _Difficulty of hitting a distant mark_
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the subject: "_You know, do you not, what it means
+when they say a gun 'carries 100 yards'? It means that the bullet goes
+that far before it drops to amount to anything._" All boys and most
+girls more than a dozen years old understand this readily. If the
+subject does not understand, we explain again what it means for a gun
+"to carry" a given distance. When this part is clear, we proceed as
+follows: "_Now, suppose a man is shooting at a mark about the size of a
+quart can. His rifle carries perfectly more than 100 yards. With such a
+gun is it any harder to hit the mark at 100 yards than it is at
+50 yards?_" After the response is given, we ask the subject to explain.
+
+SCORING. Simply to say that it would be easier at 50 yards is not
+sufficient, nor can we pass the response which merely states that it is
+"easier to aim" at 50 yards. The correct principle must be given, one
+which shows the subject has appreciated the fact that a small deviation
+from the "bull's-eye" at 50 yards, due to incorrect aim, becomes a
+larger deviation at 100 yards. However, the subject is not required to
+know that the deviation at 100 yards is exactly twice as great as at
+50 yards. A certain amount of questioning is often necessary before we
+can decide whether the subject has the correct principle in mind.
+
+SCORING THE ENTIRE TEST. _Two of the three problems_ must be solved in
+such a way as to satisfy the requirements above set forth.
+
+REMARKS. These problems were devised by the writer. They yield
+interesting results, when properly given, but are not without their
+faults. Sometimes a very superior subject fails, while occasionally an
+inferior subject unexpectedly succeeds. On the whole, however the test
+correlates fairly well with mental age. At the 14-year level less than
+50 per cent pass; of "average adults," from 60 to 75 per cent are
+successful. Few "superior adults" fail.
+
+The test as here given is little influenced by the formal instruction
+given in the grades or the high school. In fact, 80 per cent of our
+uneducated business men, as contrasted with 65 per cent of high-school
+juniors and seniors, passed the test. Success probably depends in the
+main upon previous interest in physical relationships and upon the
+ability to understand phenomena of this kind which the subject has had
+opportunity to observe.
+
+It would be interesting to standardize a longer series of problems
+designed to test a subject's comprehension of common physical
+relationships. In the first few months of life a normal child learns
+that objects unsupported fall to the ground. Later he learns that fire
+burns; that birds fly in the air; that fish do not sink in the water;
+that water does not run uphill; that it is easy to lift a leg or arm as
+one lies prone in the water; that mud is thrown from a rotating wheel
+(and always in the same direction); that a stone which is flying
+through the air swiftly is more dangerous than one which is moving
+slowly; that it is more dangerous to be run over by a train than by a
+buggy; that it is hard to run against a strong wind; that cyclones blow
+down trees and houses; that a rapidly moving train creates a stronger
+wind than a slower train; that a feather falls through the air with less
+speed than a stone; that a falling object gains momentum; that a heavy
+moving object is harder to stop than a light object moving at the same
+rate; that freezing water bursts pipes; that sounds sometimes give
+echoes; that rainbows cannot be approached; that a lamp seems dim by
+daylight; that by day the stars are not visible and the moon only barely
+visible; that the headlights of an approaching automobile or train are
+blinding; that if the room in which we are reading is badly lighted we
+must hold the book nearer to the eyes; that running makes the heart beat
+faster and increases the rate of breathing; that if we are cold we can
+get warm by running; that whirling rapidly makes us dizzy; that heat or
+exercise will cause perspiration, etc.
+
+Although the causes of some of these phenomena are not understood even
+by intelligent adults without some instruction, the facts themselves are
+learned by the normal individual from his own experience. The higher the
+mental level and the greater the curiosity, the more observant one is
+about such matters and the more one learns. Many items of knowledge such
+as we have mentioned could and should be standardized for various mental
+levels. In devising tests of this kind we should, of course, have to
+look out for the influences of formal instruction.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XX
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR "SUPERIOR ADULT"
+
+
+SUPERIOR ADULT, 1: VOCABULARY (SEVENTY-FIVE DEFINITIONS, 13,500 WORDS)
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING, as in previous vocabulary tests. At the "superior
+adult" level seventy-five words should be known.
+
+The test is passed by only one third of those at the "average adult"
+level, but by about 90 per cent of "superior adults." Ability to pass
+the test is relatively independent of the number of years the subject
+has attended school, our business men showing even a higher percentage
+of passes than high-school pupils.
+
+
+SUPERIOR ADULT, 2: BINET'S PAPER-CUTTING TEST
+
+PROCEDURE. Take a piece of paper about six inches square and say:
+"_Watch carefully what I do. See, I fold the paper this way_ (folding it
+once over in the middle), _then I fold it this way_ (folding it again in
+the middle, but at right angles to the first fold). _Now, I will cut out
+a notch right here_" (indicating). At this point take scissors and cut
+out a small notch from the middle of the side which presents but one
+edge. Throw the fragment which has been cut out into the waste-basket or
+under the table. Leave the folded paper exposed to view, but pressed
+flat against the table. Then give the subject a pencil and a second
+sheet of paper like the one already used and say: "_Take this piece of
+paper and make a drawing to show how the other sheet of paper would look
+if it were unfolded. Draw lines to show the creases in the paper and
+show what results from the cutting._"
+
+The subject is not permitted to fold the second sheet, but must solve
+the problem by the imagination unaided.
+
+Note that we do not say, "_Draw the holes_," as this would inform the
+subject that more than one hole is expected.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed _if the creases in the paper are properly
+represented, if the holes are drawn in the correct number, and if they
+are located correctly_, that is, both on the same crease and each about
+halfway between the center of the paper and the side. The shape of the
+holes is disregarded.
+
+Failure may be due to error as regards the creases or the number and
+location of the holes, or it may involve any combination of the above
+errors.
+
+REMARKS. Success seems to depend upon constructive visual imagination.
+The subject must first be able to construct in imagination the creases
+which result from the folding, and secondly, to picture the effects of
+the cutting as regards number of holes and their location. It appears
+that a solution is seldom arrived at, even in the case of college
+students, by logical mathematical thinking. Our unschooled subjects even
+succeeded somewhat better than high-school and college students of the
+same mental level.
+
+Binet placed this test in year XIII of the 1908 scale, but shifted it to
+the adult group in the 1911 revision. Goddard retains it in the adult
+group, while Kuhlmann places it in year XV. There have also been certain
+variations in the procedure employed. As given in the Stanford revision
+the test is passed by hardly any subjects below the 14-year level, but
+by about one third of "average adults" and by the large majority of
+"superior adults."
+
+
+SUPERIOR ADULT, 3: REPEATING EIGHT DIGITS
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING, the same as in previous tests with digits
+reversed. The series used are: 7-2-5-3-4-8-9-6; 4-9-8-5-3-7-6-2; and
+8-3-7-9-5-4-8-2.
+
+Guard against rhythm and grouping in reading the digits and do not give
+warning as to the number to be given.
+
+The test is passed by about one third of "average adults" and by over
+two thirds of "superior adults." The test shows no marked difference
+between educated and uneducated subjects of the same mental level.
+
+
+SUPERIOR ADULT, 4: REPEATING THOUGHT OF PASSAGE
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_I am going to read a little selection of about six or
+eight lines. When I am through I will ask you to repeat as much of it as
+you can. It doesn't make any difference whether you remember the exact
+words or not, but you must listen carefully so that you can tell me
+everything it says._" Then read the following selections, pausing after
+each for the subject's report, which should be recorded _verbatim_:--
+
+  (a) "_Tests such as we are now making are of value both for the
+      advancement of science and for the information of the person
+      who is tested. It is important for science to learn how people
+      differ and on what factors these differences depend. If we can
+      separate the influence of heredity from the influence of
+      environment, we may be able to apply our knowledge so as to
+      guide human development. We may thus in some cases correct
+      defects and develop abilities which we might otherwise
+      neglect._"
+  (b) "_Many opinions have been given on the value of life. Some
+      call it good, others call it bad. It would be nearer correct
+      to say that it is mediocre; for on the one hand, our
+      happiness is never as great as we should like, and on the
+      other hand, our misfortunes are never as great as our enemies
+      would wish for us. It is this mediocrity of life which
+      prevents it from being radically unjust._"
+
+Sometimes the subject hesitates to begin, thinking, in spite of our
+wording of the instructions, that a perfect reproduction is expected.
+Others fall into the opposite misunderstanding and think that they are
+prohibited from using the words of the text and must give the thought
+entirely in their own language. In cases of hesitation we should urge
+the subject a little and remind him that he is to express the thought of
+the selection in whatever way he prefers; that the main thing is to tell
+what the selection says.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the subject is able to repeat in
+reasonably consecutive order the main thoughts of at least one of the
+selections. Neither elegance of expression nor _verbatim_ repetition is
+expected. We merely want to know whether the leading thoughts in the
+selection have been grasped and remembered.
+
+All grades of accuracy are found, both in the comprehension of the
+selection and in the recall, and it is not always easy to draw the line
+between satisfactory and unsatisfactory responses. The following sample
+performances will serve as a guide:--
+
+_Selection (a)_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "The tests which we are making are given for the
+    advancement of science and for the information of the person
+    tested. By scientific means we will be able to separate
+    characteristics derived from heredity and environment and to
+    treat each class separately. By doing so we can more accurately
+    correct defects."
+
+    "Tests like these are for two purposes. First to develop a
+    science, and second to apply it to the person to help him. The
+    tests are to find out how you differ from another and to measure
+    the difference between your heredity and environment."
+
+    "These tests are given to see if we can separate heredity and
+    environment and to see if we can find out how one person differs
+    from another. We can then correct these differences and teach
+    people more effectively."
+
+    "The tests that we are now making are valuable along both
+    scientific and personal lines. By using them it can be found out
+    where a person is weak and where he is strong. We can then
+    strengthen his weak points and remedy some things that would
+    otherwise be neglected. They are of great benefit to science and
+    to the person concerned."
+
+    "Tests such as we are now making are of great importance because
+    they aim to show in what respects we differ from others and why,
+    and if they do this they will be able to guide us into the right
+    channel and bring success instead of failure."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Tests such as we are now making are of value
+    both for the advancement of science and for the information of
+    the person interested. It is necessary to know this."
+
+    "Such tests as we are now making show about the human mind and
+    show in what channels we are fitted. It is the testing of each
+    individual between his effects of inheritancy and environment."
+
+    "It is very interesting for us to study science for two reasons;
+    first, to test our mental ability, and second for the further
+    development of science."
+
+    "Tests such as we are now making help in two ways; it helps the
+    scientists and it gives information to the people."
+
+    "Tests are being given to pupils to-day to better them and to
+    aid science for generations to come. If each person knows
+    exactly his own beliefs and ideas and faults he can find out
+    exactly what kind of work he is fitted for by heredity. The
+    tests show that environment doesn't count, for if you are all
+    right you will get along anyway." (Note invention.)
+
+_Selection (b)_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "There are different opinions about life. Some
+    call it good and some bad. It would be more correct to say that
+    it is middling, because we are never as happy as we would like
+    to be and we are never as sad as our enemies want us to be."
+
+    "One hears many judgments about life. Some say it is good, while
+    others say it is bad. But it is really neither of the extremes.
+    Life is mediocre. We do not have as much good as we desire, nor
+    do we have as much misfortune as others want us to have.
+    Nevertheless, we have enough good to keep life from being
+    unjust."
+
+    "Some people have different views of life from others. Some say
+    it is bad, others say it is good. It is better to class life as
+    mediocre, as it is never as good as we wish it, and on the other
+    hand, it might be worse."
+
+    "Some people think differently of life. Some think it good, some
+    bad, others mediocre, which is nearest correct. It brings
+    unhappiness to us, but not as much as our enemies want us to
+    have."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Some say life is good, some say it is
+    mediocre. Even though some say it is mediocre they say it is
+    right."
+
+    "There are two sides of life. Some say it is good while others
+    say it is bad. To some, life is happy and they get all they can
+    out of life. For others life is not happy and therefore they
+    fail to get all there is in life."
+
+    "One hears many different judgments of life. Some call it good,
+    some call it bad. It brings unhappiness and it does not have
+    enough pleasure. It should be better distributed."
+
+    "There are different opinions of the value of life. Some say it
+    is good and some say it is bad. Some say it is mediocrity. Some
+    think it brings happiness while others do not."
+
+    "Nowadays there is much said about the value of life. Some say
+    it is good, while others say it is bad. A person should not have
+    an ill feeling toward the value of life, and he should not be
+    unjust to any one. Honesty is the best policy. People who are
+    unjust are more likely to be injured by their enemies." (Note
+    invention.)
+
+REMARKS. Contrary to what the subject is led to expect, the test is less
+a test of memory than of ability to comprehend the drift of an abstract
+passage. A subject who fully grasps the meaning of the selection as it
+is read is not likely to fail because of poor memory. Mere verbal memory
+improves but little after the age of 14 or 15 years, as is shown by the
+fact that our adults do little better than eighth-grade children in
+repeating sentences of twenty-eight syllables. On the other hand, adult
+intelligence is vastly superior in the comprehension and retention of a
+logically presented group of abstract ideas.
+
+There is nothing in which stupid persons cut a poorer figure than in
+grappling with the abstract. Their thinking clings tenaciously to the
+concrete; their concepts are vague or inaccurate; the interrelations
+among their concepts are scanty in the extreme; and such poor mental
+stores as they have are little available for ready use.
+
+A few critics have objected to the use of tests demanding abstract
+thinking, on the ground that abstract thought is a very special aspect
+of intelligence and that facility in it depends almost entirely on
+occupational habits and the accidents of education. Some have even gone
+so far as to say that we are not justified, on the basis of any number
+of such tests, in pronouncing a subject backward or defective. It is
+supposed that a subject who has no capacity in the use of abstract ideas
+may nevertheless have excellent intelligence "along other lines." In
+such cases, it is said, we should not penalize the subject for his
+failures in handling abstractions, but substitute, instead, tests
+requiring motor coördination and the manipulation of things, tests in
+which the supposedly dull child often succeeds fairly well.
+
+From the psychological point of view, such a proposal is naïvely
+unpsychological. It is in the very essence of the higher thought
+processes to be conceptual and abstract. What the above proposal amounts
+to is, that if the subject is not capable of the more complex and
+strictly human type of thinking, we should ignore this fact and estimate
+his intelligence entirely on the ability he displays to carry on mental
+operations of a more simple and primitive kind. This would be like
+asking the physician to ignore the diseased parts of his patient's body
+and to base his diagnosis on an examination of the organs which are
+sound!
+
+The present test throws light in an interesting way on the integrity of
+the critical faculty. Some subjects are unwilling to extend the report
+in the least beyond what they know to be approximately correct, while
+others with defective powers of auto-criticism manufacture a report
+which draws heavily on the imagination, perhaps continuing in garrulous
+fashion as long as they can think of anything having the remotest
+connection with any thought in the selection. We have included, for each
+selection, one illustration of this type in the sample failures given
+above.
+
+The worst fault of the test is its susceptibility to the influence of
+schooling. Our uneducated adults of even "superior adult" intelligence
+often fail, while about two thirds of high-school pupils succeed. The
+unschooled adults have a marked tendency either to give a summary which
+is inadequate because of its extreme brevity, or else to give a
+criticism of the thought which the passage contains.
+
+This test first appeared in Binet's 1911 revision, in the adult group.
+Binet used only selection (b), and in a slightly more difficult form
+than we have given above. Goddard gives the test like Binet and retains
+it in the adult group. Kuhlmann locates it in year XV, using only
+selection (a). On the basis of over 300 tests of adults we find the
+test too difficult for the "average adult" level, even on the basis of
+only one success in two trials and when scored on the rather liberal
+standard above set forth.
+
+
+SUPERIOR ADULT, 5: REPEATING SEVEN DIGITS REVERSED
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING, the same as in previous tests of this kind. The
+series are: 4-1-6-2-5-9-3; 3-8-2-6-4-7-5; and 9-4-5-2-8-3-7.
+
+We have collected fewer data on this test than on any of the others, as
+it was added later to the test series. As far as we have used it we have
+found few "average adults" who pass, while about half the "superior
+adults" do so.
+
+
+SUPERIOR ADULT, 6: INGENUITY TEST
+
+PROCEDURE. Problem _a_ is stated as follows:--
+
+    _A mother sent her boy to the river and told him to bring back
+    exactly 7 pints of water. She gave him a 3-pint vessel and a
+    5-pint vessel. Show me how the boy can measure out exactly
+    7 pints of water, using nothing but these two vessels and not
+    guessing at the amount. You should begin by filling the 5-pint
+    vessel first. Remember, you have a 3-pint vessel and a 5-pint
+    vessel and you must bring back exactly 7 pints._
+
+The problem is given orally, but may be repeated if necessary.
+
+The subject is not allowed pencil or paper and is requested to give his
+solution orally as he works it out. It is then possible to make a
+complete record of the method employed.
+
+The subject is likely to resort to some such method as to "fill the
+3-pint vessel two thirds full," or, "I would mark the inside of the
+5-pint vessel so as to show where 4 pints come to," etc. We inform the
+subject that such a method is not allowable; that this would be
+guessing, since he could not be sure when the 3-pint vessel was two
+thirds full (or whether he had marked off his 5-pint vessel accurately).
+Tell him he must _measure_ out the water without any guesswork. Explain
+also, that it is a fair problem, not a "catch."
+
+Say nothing about pouring from one vessel to another, but if the subject
+asks whether this is permissible the answer is "yes."
+
+The time limit for each problem is 5 minutes. If the subject fails on
+the first problem, we explain the solution in full and then proceed to
+the next.
+
+The second problem is like the first, except that a 5-pint vessel and a
+7-pint vessel are given, to get 8 pints, the subject being told to begin
+by filling the 5-pint vessel.
+
+In the third problem 4 and 9 are given, to get 7, the instruction being
+to "begin by filling the 4-pint vessel."
+
+Note that in each problem we instruct the subject how to begin. This is
+necessary in order to secure uniformity of conditions. It is possible to
+solve all of the problems by beginning with either of the two vessels,
+but the solution is made very much more difficult if we begin in the
+direction opposite from that recommended.
+
+Give no further aid. It is necessary to refrain from comment of every
+kind.
+
+SCORING. _Two of the three_ problems must be solved correctly within the
+5 minutes allotted to each.
+
+REMARKS. We have called this a test of ingenuity. The subject who is
+given the problem finds himself involved in a difficulty from which he
+must extricate himself. Means must be found to overcome an obstacle.
+This requires practical judgement and a certain amount of inventive
+ingenuity. Various possibilities must be explored and either accepted
+for trial or rejected. If the amount of invention called for seems to
+the reader inconsiderable, let it be remembered that the important
+inventions of history have not as a rule had a Minerva birth, but
+instead have developed by successive stages, each involving but a small
+step in advance.
+
+It is unnecessary to emphasize at length the function of invention in
+the higher thought processes. In one form or another it is present in
+all intellectual activity; in the creation and use of language, in art,
+in social adjustments, in religion, and in philosophy, as truly as in
+the domains of science and practical affairs. Certainly this is true if
+we accept Mason's broad definition of invention as including "every
+change in human activity made designedly and systematically."[78] From
+the psychological point of view, perhaps, Mason is justified in looking
+upon the great inventor as "an epitome of the genius of the world." To
+develop a Krag-Joergensen from a bow and arrow, a "velvet-tipped"
+lucifer match from the primitive fire-stick, or a modern piano from the
+first crude, stringed, musical instrument has involved much the same
+intellectual processes as have been operative in transforming fetishism
+and magic into religion and philosophy, or scattered fragments of
+knowledge into science.
+
+[78] Otis T. Mason: _The Origins of Inventions_. (London, 1902.)
+
+Psychologically, invention depends upon the constructive imagination;
+that is, upon the ability to abstract from what is immediately present
+to the senses and to picture new situations with their possibilities and
+consequences. Images are united in order to form new combinations.
+
+As we have several times emphasized, the decisive intellectual
+differences among human beings are not greatly dependent upon mere sense
+discrimination or native retentiveness. Far more important than the raw
+mass of sense data is the correct shooting together of the sense
+elements in memory and imagination. This is but another name for
+invention. It is the synthetic, or apperceptive, activity of the mind
+that gives the "seven-league boots" to genius. It is, however, a kind of
+ability which is possessed by all minds to a greater or less degree. Any
+test has its value which gives a clue, as this test does, to the
+subject's ability in this direction.
+
+The test was devised by the writer and used in 1905 in a study of the
+intellectual processes of bright and dull boys, but it was not at that
+time standardized. It has been found to belong at a much higher mental
+level than was at first supposed. Only an insignificant number pass the
+test below the mental age of 14 years, and about two thirds of "average
+adults" fail. Of our "superior adults" somewhat more than 75 per cent
+succeed. Formal education influences the test little or not at all, the
+unschooled business men making a somewhat better showing than the
+high-school students.
+
+
+
+
+SELECTED REFERENCES
+
+
+The following classified lists include only the most important
+references under each topic. So many investigations have been made with
+the Binet-Simon tests in the last few years, and so many articles have
+been written in evaluation of the method, that a complete bibliography
+of the subject would require thirty or forty pages. Those who desire to
+make a more thorough study of the literature are referred to the
+admirable annotated bibliography compiled by Samuel C. Kohs, and
+published by Warwick & York, Baltimore. Kohs's Bibliography contains
+254 references, and is complete to January 1, 1914.
+
+
+BINET-SIMON TESTS OF NORMAL CHILDREN
+
+   1. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Le développement de l'intelligence
+      chez les enfants"; in _Année psychologique_ (1908), vol. 14,
+      pp. 1-94.
+
+      Exposition of the original 1908 scale with results.
+
+   2. Binet, A. "Nouvelles recherches sur la mesure du niveau
+      intellectuel chez les enfants d'école"; in _Année
+      psychologique_ (1911), vol. 17, pp. 145-201.
+
+      Presents the 1911 revision.
+
+   3. Bobertag, O. "Ueber Intelligenzprüfungen (nach der Methode von
+      Binet und Simon)"; in _Zeitschrift für angewande Psychologie_
+      (1911), vol. 5, pp. 105-203; and (1912), vol. 6, pp. 495-537.
+
+      Analysis of 400 cases and criticism of method and results.
+
+   4. Dougherty, M. L. "Report on the Binet-Simon Tests given to Four
+      Hundred and Eighty-three Children in the Public Schools of
+      Kansas City, Kansas"; in _Journal of Educational Psychology_
+      (1913), vol. 4, pp. 338-52.
+
+   5. Goddard, H. H. "The Binet-Simon Measuring Scale for
+      Intelligence, Revised"; in _Training School Bulletin_ (1911),
+      vol. 8, pp. 56-62.
+
+   6. Hoffman, A. "Vergleichende Intelligenzprüfungen an Vorschülern
+      und Volksschülern"; in _Zeitschrift für angewande Psychologie_
+      (1913), vol. 8, pp. 102-20.
+
+      One hundred and fifty-six subjects. Ages seven, nine, and ten.
+
+   7. Johnston, Katherine L. "Binet's Method for the Measurement of
+      Intelligence; Some Results"; in _Journal of Experimental
+      Pedagogy_ (1911), vol. 1, pp. 24-31.
+
+      Results of 200 tests of school children.
+
+   8. Kuhlmann, F. "Some Results of Examining 1000 Public-School
+      Children with a Revision of the Binet-Simon Tests of
+      Intelligence by Untrained Teachers"; in _Journal of
+      Psycho-Asthenics_ (1914), vol. 18, pp. 150-79, and 233-69.
+
+   9. Phillips, Byron A. "The Binet Tests applied to Colored
+      Children"; in _Psychological Clinic_ (1914), pp. 190-96.
+
+      A comparison of 86 colored and 137 white children.
+
+  10. Rogers, Agnes L., _and_ McIntyre, J. L. "The Measurement of
+      Intelligence in Children by the Binet-Simon Scale"; in
+      _British Journal of Psychology_ (1914), vol. 7, pp. 265-300.
+
+  11. Rowe, E. C. "Five Hundred Forty-Seven White and Two Hundred
+      Sixty-Eight Indian Children tested by the Binet-Simon Tests";
+      in _Pedagogical Seminary_ (1914), vol. 21, pp. 454-69.
+
+  12. Strong, Alice C. "Three Hundred Fifty White and Colored
+      Children measured by the Binet-Simon Measuring Scale of
+      Intelligence"; in _Pedagogical Seminary_ (1913), vol. 20,
+      pp. 485-515.
+
+  13. Terman, L. M., _and_ Childs, H. G. "A Tentative Revision and
+      Extension of the Binet-Simon Measuring Scale of Intelligence"; in
+      _Journal of Educational Psychology_ (1912), vol. 3, pp. 61-74,
+      133-43, 198-208, and 277-89.
+
+      Results of 396 tests of California school-children.
+
+  14. Terman, Lyman, Ordahl, Galbreath, _and_ Talbert. _The Stanford
+      Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Measuring Scale of
+      Intelligence._ (1916.)
+
+      Detailed analysis of the results secured by testing 1000
+      unselected school-children within two months of a birthday.
+
+  15. Weintrob, J. _and_ R. "The Influence of Environment on Mental
+      Ability as shown by the Binet Tests"; in _Journal of
+      Educational Psychology_ (1912), pp. 577-86.
+
+  16. Winch, W. H. "Binet's Mental Tests: What They Are, and What We
+      Can Do with Them"; in _Child Study_ (London), 1913, 1914,
+      1915, and 1916.
+
+      An extended series of articles setting forth results of tests with
+      normal children, and giving valuable criticisms and suggestions.
+
+
+BINET-SIMON TESTS OF THE FEEBLE-MINDED
+
+  17. Chotzen, F. "Die Intelligenzprüfungsmethode von Binet-Simon
+      bei schwachsinnigen Kindern"; in _Zeitschrift für angewande
+      Psychologie_ (1912), vol. 6, pp. 411-94.
+
+      A critical study of the results of 280 tests.
+
+  18. Goddard, H. H. "Four Hundred Feeble-Minded Children classified
+      by the Binet Method"; in _Pedagogical Seminary_ (1910),
+      vol. 17, pp. 387-97; also in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_
+      (1910), vol. 15, pp. 17-30.
+
+      Offers important evidence of the value of the Binet-Simon method.
+
+  19. Kuhlmann, F. "The Binet and Simon Tests of Intelligence in
+      Grading Feeble-Minded Children"; in _Journal of
+      Psycho-Asthenics_ (1912), vol. 16, pp. 173-93.
+
+      Analysis of results from 1300 cases.
+
+
+BINET-SIMON TESTS OF DELINQUENTS
+
+  20. Bluemel, C. S. "Binet Tests on Two Hundred Juvenile
+      Delinquents"; in _Training School Bulletin_ (1915),
+      pp. 187-93.
+
+  21. Goddard, H. H. _The Criminal Imbecile._ The Macmillan Company.
+      (1915.) 157 pages.
+
+      An analysis of the mentality of three murderers of moron or
+      borderline intelligence.
+
+  22. Goddard, H. H. "The Responsibility of Children in the Juvenile
+      Court"; in _Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology_
+      (September, 1912).
+
+      Analysis of 100 tests of juvenile delinquents.
+
+  23. Healy, William. _The Individual Delinquent._ Little, Brown &
+      Co. (1915.) 830 pages.
+
+      A textbook on delinquents. Gives results of many Binet-Simon
+      tests.
+
+  24. Spaulding, Edith R. "The Results of Mental and Physical
+      Examination of Four Hundred Women Offenders"; in _Journal of
+      Criminal Law and Criminology_ (1915), pp. 704-17.
+
+  25. Sullivan, W. C. "La mesure du développement intellectuel chez
+      les jeunes délinquantes"; in _Année psychologique_ (1912),
+      vol. 18, pp. 341-61.
+
+  26. Williams, J. Harold. _A Study of 150 Delinquent Boys._
+      Bulletin no. 1, Research Laboratory of the Buckel Foundation.
+      (1915.) 15 pages.
+
+      The Stanford revision used. Report of over 400 cases to follow.
+
+
+BINET-SIMON TESTS OF SUPERIOR CHILDREN
+
+  27. Jeronutti, A. "Ricerche psicologiche sperimentali sugli alunni
+      molto intelligenti"; in _Lab. di Psicol. Sperim. della Reg.
+      Univ. Roma_. (1912)
+
+      Out of fifteen hundred school and kindergarten children, ages five
+      to twelve, fourteen were selected by the teachers as the
+      brightest. The Binet test showed them to be from one to three
+      years in advance of their chronological ages.
+
+  28. Terman, L. M. "The Mental Hygiene of Exceptional Children"; in
+      _Pedagogical Seminary_ (1915), vol. 22, pp. 529-37.
+
+      Data on 31 children testing above 120 I. Q.
+
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR GIVING THE BINET-SIMON TESTS
+
+  29. Binet, A., _and_ Simon, Th. _A Method of Measuring the
+      Development of Intelligence in Young Children._ Chicago
+      Medical Book Company. (1915.) 82 pages.
+
+      Authorized translation of Binet's final instructions for giving
+      the tests.
+
+  30. Goddard, H. H. "A Measuring Scale of Intelligence"; in
+      _Training School Bulletin_ (1910), vol. 6, pp. 146-55.
+
+      Condensed translation of Binet's 1908 _Measuring Scale of
+      Intelligence_.
+
+  31. Goddard, H. H. "The Binet-Simon Measuring Scale for
+      Intelligence, Revised"; in _Training School Bulletin_ (1911),
+      vol. 8, pp. 56-62.
+
+  32. Goddard, H. H. "Standard Method for Giving the Binet Test"; in
+      _Training School Bulletin_ (1913), vol. 10, pp. 23-30.
+
+  33. Kuhlmann, F. "A Revision of the Binet-Simon System for
+      Measuring the Intelligence of Children"; Monograph Supplement
+      of _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_ (September, 1912), 41 pages.
+
+  34. Wallin, J. E. W. "A Practical Guide for the Administration of
+      the Binet-Simon Scale for Measuring Intelligence"; in _The
+      Psychological Clinic_ (1911), vol. 5, pp. 217-38.
+
+
+CRITICISMS AND EVALUATIONS OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD
+
+  35. Berry, C. S. "A Comparison of the Binet Tests of 1908 and
+      1911"; in _Journal of Educational Psychology_ (1912), vol. 3,
+      pp. 444-51.
+
+  36. Bobertag, O. "Ueber Intelligenzprüfungen (nach der Methode von
+      Binet und Simon)"; in _Zeitschrift für angewande Psychologie_.
+      (A, 1911), vol. 5, pp. 105-203; (B, 1912), vol. 6,
+      pp. 495-537.
+
+      Accepts the method and gives valuable suggestions for improvement.
+
+  37. Brigham, Carl C. "An Experimental Critique of the Binet-Simon
+      Scale"; in _Journal of Educational Psychology_ (1914),
+      pp. 439-48.
+
+      Finds the scale 96% efficient.
+
+  38. Goddard, H. H. "The Reliability of the Binet-Simon Measuring
+      Scale of Intelligence"; in _Proceedings of the Fourth
+      International Congress of School Hygiene_ (1913), vol. 5,
+      pp. 693-99.
+
+      Application of the theory of probability to the results proves the
+      extremely small liability of error.
+
+  39. Kohs, Samuel C. "The Practicability of the Binet Scale and the
+      Question of the Borderline Case"; in _Training School
+      Bulletin_ (1916), pp. 211-23.
+
+      Analysis of cases showing the reliability of the scale.
+
+  40. Kuhlmann, F. "Binet and Simon's System for Measuring the
+      Intelligence of Children"; in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_
+      (1911), vol. 15, pp. 79-92.
+
+      Finds the method of the greatest value.
+
+  41. Kuhlmann, F. "A Reply to Dr. L. P. Ayres's Criticism of the
+      Binet and Simon System for Measuring the Intelligence of
+      Children"; in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_ (1911), vol. 16,
+      pp. 58-67.
+
+      Many of the Ayres criticisms are shown to be unfounded.
+
+  42. Meumann, E. _Vorlesungen zur Einführung in die Experimentelle
+      Pädagogik_ (1913), vol. 2, pp. 130-300.
+
+      Summary of the literature on Binet tests up to 1913. Accepts the
+      method but gives suggestions for improvement. This summary and
+      other writings of Meumann on the psychology of endowment are
+      reviewed by Lewis M. Terman in a series of four articles in
+      the _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_ for 1915.
+
+  43. Otis, A. S. "Some Logical and Mathematical Aspects of the
+      Measurement of Intelligence by the Binet-Simon Method"; in
+      _The Psychological Review_ (April and June, 1916).
+
+      Considers the Binet-Simon method imperfect from the mathematical
+      point of view.
+
+  44. Schmitt, Clara. _Standardization of Tests for Defective
+      Children._ Psychological Monographs (1915), no. 83, 181 pages.
+
+      Contains (pp. 52-67) a discussion of the "Fallacies and
+      Inadequacies of the Binet-Simon Series." Most of the
+      criticisms here given are either superficial or unfair, some
+      of them apparently being due to a lack of acquaintance with
+      Binet's writings.
+
+  45. Stern, W. _The Psychological Methods of Measuring
+      Intelligence._ Translated by G. M. Whipple. (1913.) 160 pages.
+
+      A splendid critical discussion of the Binet-Simon method. Should
+      be read by every one who would use the scale.
+
+  46. Terman, L. M. "Suggestions for Revising, Extending, and
+      Supplementing the Binet Intelligence Tests"; in _Journal of
+      Psycho-Asthenics_ (1913), vol. 18, pp. 20-33.
+
+  47. Terman, L. M. "Psychological Principles Underlying the
+      Binet-Simon Scale and Some Practical Considerations for its
+      Correct Use"; in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_ (1913),
+      vol. 18, pp. 93-104.
+
+  48. Terman, L. M. "A Report of the Buffalo Conference on the
+      Binet-Simon Tests of Intelligence"; in _Pedagogical Seminary_
+      (1913), vol. 20, pp. 549-54.
+
+      Abstracts of papers presented at the above conference.
+
+  49. Terman, Lyman, Ordahl, Galbreath, _and_ Talbert. _The Stanford
+      Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Scale for Measuring
+      Intelligence._ (1916.)
+
+      Contains a chapter on the validity of the individual tests and on
+      considerations relating to the formation of an intelligence
+      scale.
+
+  50. Terman _and_ Knollin. "The Detection of Borderline Deficiency
+      by the Binet-Simon Method"; in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_
+      (June, 1916).
+
+      A comparison of the accuracy of the Stanford and other revisions
+      with borderline cases.
+
+  51. Trèves _and_ Saffiotti. "L'échelle métrique de l'intelligence
+      modifiée selon la méthode Trèves-Saffiotti"; in _Année
+      Psychologique_ (1912), pp. 327-40.
+
+      Criticize the age-grade method of measuring intelligence and
+      propose a substitute.
+
+  52. Wallin, J. E. W. _Experimental Studies of Mental Defectives. A
+      Critique of the Binet-Simon Tests._ Warwick & York. (1912.)
+
+      Criticism based on the use of the scale with epileptics.
+
+  53. Yerkes _and_ Bridges. _A Point Scale for Measuring Mental
+      Ability._ Warwick & York.
+
+      Authors think the point scale preferable to the Binet-Simon
+      method.
+
+
+BOOKS ON MENTAL DEFICIENCY
+
+  54. Binet, A., _and_ Simon, Th. _Mentally Defective Children._
+      Translated from the French by W. B. Drummond. Longmans, Green
+      & Co. (1914.) 171 pages.
+
+      Discusses the psychology, pedagogy, and medical examination of
+      defectives.
+
+  55. Goddard, H. H. _Feeble-Mindedness; Its Causes and
+      Consequences._ The Macmillan Company. (1913.) 599 pages.
+
+      The most important single volume on the subject. Extensive data on
+      the causes of feeble-mindedness and excellent clinical  pictures
+      of all grades of mental defects.
+
+  56. Goddard, H. H. _The Kallikak Family._ The Macmillan Company.
+      (1914.) 121 pages.
+
+      An epoch-making study of the hereditary transmission of mental
+      deficiency in a degenerate family.
+
+  57. Holmes, Arthur. _The Conservation of the Child._ J. B.
+      Lippincott Company. (1912.) 345 pages.
+
+      Methods of examination and treatment of defective children.
+
+  58. Holmes, Arthur. _The Backward Child._ Bobbs-Merrill Company.
+      (1915.)
+
+      A popular treatment of the handling of backward children.
+
+  59. Huey, E. B. _Backward and Feeble-Minded Children._ Warwick &
+      York. (1912.) 221 pages.
+
+      Devoted mainly to clinical accounts of borderline cases.
+
+  60. Lapage, C. P. _Feeble-Mindedness in Children of School Age._
+      The University Press, Manchester, England. (1911.) 359 pages.
+
+  61. Sherlock, E. B. _The Feeble-Minded; A Guide to Study and
+      Practice._ The Macmillan Company. (1911.) 327 pages.
+
+  62. Tredgold, A. F. _Mental Deficiency (Amentia)._ Baillière,
+      Tindall, and Cox. London, England. (2d ed. 1914.) 491 pages.
+
+      The best medical treatment of the subject.
+
+
+STUDIES OF THE PROGRESS OF CHILDREN THROUGH THE GRADES
+
+  63. Ayres, Leonard P. _Laggards in our Schools._ The Russell Sage
+      Foundation. (1909.) 236 pages.
+
+      Interesting and instructive discussion of school retardation and
+      its causes.
+
+  64. Blan, Louis B. _A Special Study of the Incidence of
+      Retardation._ Teachers College, Columbia University,
+      Contributions to Education, no. 40. (1911.) 111 pages.
+
+      Review of the literature and a statistical study of the progress
+      of 4579 children.
+
+  65. Keyes, C. H. _Progress Through the Grades of City Schools._
+      Teachers College, Columbia University, Contributions to
+      Education, no. 42. (1911.) 79 pages.
+
+      Important study of the progress of several thousand children.
+
+  66. Strayer, George D. _Age and Grade Census of Schools and
+      Colleges._ Bulletin no. 451, U.S. Bureau of Education. (1911.)
+      144 pages.
+
+      Statistics of the age-grade status of the children in 318 cities.
+
+  67. See also the _Reports_ of leading school surveys, such as
+      those of New York, Salt Lake City, Butte, Springfield (Mass.),
+      Denver, Cleveland, etc.
+
+
+REFERENCES ON THE SPECIAL CLASS FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
+
+  68. Huey, E. B. "The Education of Defectives and the Training of
+      Teachers for Special Classes"; in _Journal of Educational
+      Psychology_ (1913), pp. 545-50.
+
+  69. Goddard, H. H. _School Training of Defective Children._ World
+      Book Company. (1914.) 97 pages.
+
+      Based on his survey of the treatment of backward children in the
+      schools of New York City.
+
+  70. Holmes, W. H. _School Organization and the Individual Child._
+      The Davis Press, Worcester, Massachusetts. (1912.) 211 pages.
+
+      A comprehensive account of the efforts which have been made to
+      adjust the school to the capacities of individual children.
+
+  71. Maennel, B. _Auxiliary Education._ Translated from the German
+      by Emma Sylvester. Doubleday, Page & Co. (1909.) 267 pages.
+
+  72. Van Sickle, J. H., Witmer, L., _and_ Ayres, L. P. _Provision
+      for Exceptional Children in Public Schools._ Bulletin no. 461,
+      U.S. Bureau of Education. (1911.) 92 pages.
+
+  73. Shaer, I. "Special Classes for Bright Children in an English
+      Elementary School"; in _Journal of Educational Psychology_
+      (1913), pp. 209-22.
+
+  74. Stern, W. "The Supernormal Child"; in _Journal of Educational
+      Psychology_ (1911), pp. 143-48 and 181-90.
+
+      A strong plea for special classes for superior children.
+
+  75. Vaney, V. _Les classes pour enfants arrières._ Bulletin de la
+      Société libre pour l'étude psychologique de l'enfant (1911),
+      pp. 53-152.
+
+      Report of the French National Commission appointed to investigate
+      methods of treatment and training.
+
+  76. Witmer, L. _The Special Class for Backward Children._ The
+      Psychological Clinic Press, Philadelphia. (1911.) 275 pages.
+
+      An account of the special class conducted in connection with the
+      University of Pennsylvania Summer School.
+
+
+LIST OF BINET'S MOST IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE MEASUREMENT OF
+INTELLIGENCE
+
+  77. Binet, A. _L'Étude experimentale de l'intelligence._ Paris:
+      Schleicher frères. (1903.)
+
+  78. Binet, A. "A Propos de la mesure de l'intelligence"; in _Année
+      psychologique_ (1905), vol. 11, pp. 69-82.
+
+  79. Binet, A. _Les enfants anormaux; guide pour l'admission des
+      enfants anormaux dans les classes de perfectionnement._ Paris:
+      Colin (1907.)
+
+  80. Binet, A. _Comment les instituteurs jugent-ils l'intelligence
+      d'un ecolier?_ Bulletin de la Société libre pour l'étude
+      psychologique de l'enfant (1910), no. 10, pp. 172-82.
+
+  81. Binet, A. "Nouvelles recherches sur la mesure du niveau
+      intellectuel chez les enfants d'école"; in _Année
+      psychologique_ (1911), vol. 17, pp. 145-201.
+
+  82. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Sur la nécessité d'établir un
+      diagnostique scientifique des états inférieurs de
+      l'intelligence"; in _Année psychologique_ (1905), vol. 11,
+      pp. 163-90.
+
+  83. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Méthodes nouvelles pour le
+      diagnostique du niveau intellectuel des anormaux"; in _Année
+      psychologique_ (1905), vol. 11, pp. 191-244.
+
+  84. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Application des Méthodes nouvelles
+      au diagnostique du niveau intellectuel chez des enfants
+      normaux et anormaux d'hospice et d'école primaire"; in _Année
+      psychologique_ (1905), vol. 11, pp. 245-336.
+
+  85. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Le développement de l'intelligence
+      chez les enfants"; in _Année psychologique_ (1908), vol. 14,
+      pp. 1-94.
+
+  86. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Langage et pensée"; in _Année
+      psychologique_ (1908), vol. 14, pp. 284-339.
+
+  87. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "L'intelligence des imbeciles"; in
+      _Année psychologique_ (1909), vol. 15, pp. 1-147.
+
+  88. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Nouvelle théorie psychologique et
+      clinique de la démence"; in _Année psychologique_ (1909),
+      vol. 15, pp. 168-272.
+
+  89. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. _La mesure du développement de
+      l'intelligence chez les jeunes enfants._ Bulletin de la
+      Société libre pour l'étude psychologique de l'enfant (1911),
+      no. 11, pp. 187-256.
+
+
+
+
+SUGGESTIONS FOR A TEACHER'S PRIVATE LIBRARY
+
+
+ON EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
+
+  Ayres, L. P. _Laggards in our Schools._ The Russell Sage
+      Foundation. (1909.) 236 pages.
+
+      Treats the amount and causes of school retardation.
+
+  Binet, A., _and_ Simon, Th. _Mentally Defective Children._
+      Translated from the French by W. B. Drummond. Longmans, Green
+      & Co. (1914.) 171 pages.
+
+      Discusses the psychology, pedagogy and medical examination of
+      defectives.
+
+  Binet, A., _and_ Simon, Th. _A Method of Measuring the Development
+      of Intelligence in Young Children._ Chicago Medical Book
+      Company. (1915.) 82 pages.
+
+      Authorized translation of Binet's final instructions for giving
+      the tests.
+
+  Goddard, H. H. _Feeble-Mindedness; Its Causes and Consequences._
+      The Macmillan Company. (1913.) 599 pages.
+
+      The most important single volume on the subject.
+
+  Goddard, H. H. _The Kallikak Family._ The Macmillan Company.
+      (1914.) 121 pages.
+
+      A study of the hereditary transmission of mental deficiency in one
+      family.
+
+  Goddard, H. H. _School Training of Defective Children._ World Book
+      Company. (1914.) 97 pages.
+
+      Admirable treatment of the entire subject.
+
+  Goddard, H. H. _The Criminal Imbecile._ The Macmillan Company.
+      (1915.) 157 pages.
+
+      An analysis of three murderers of borderline intelligence.
+
+  Holmes, Arthur. _The Conservation of the Child._ J. B. Lippincott
+      Company. (1912.) 345 pages.
+
+      Methods of examination and treatment of defective children.
+
+  Holmes, Arthur. _The Backward Child._ The Bobbs-Merrill Co.
+      (1915.)
+
+      A popular treatment of the subject.
+
+  Holmes, W. H. _School Organization and the Individual Child._ The
+      Davis Press, Worcester, Massachusetts. (1912) 211 pages.
+
+      A comprehensive account of methods of adjusting school work to the
+      capacity of the individual child.
+
+  Huey, E. B. _Backward and Feeble-Minded Children._ Warwick & York.
+      (1912.) 221 pages.
+
+      Clinical studies of borderline cases.
+
+  Kelynack, T. N. (_Editor_). _Defective Children._ John Bale, Sons,
+      and Daniellson, London. (1915.) 447 pages.
+
+      Written by many authors and devoted to all kinds of physical and
+      mental defects.
+
+  Kuhlmann, F. "A Revision of the Binet-Simon System for Measuring
+      the Intelligence of Children." Monograph Supplement of
+      _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_. (1912.) 41 pages.
+
+      Contains instructions for use of the Kuhlmann revision.
+
+  Stern, W. _The Psychological Method of Measuring Intelligence._
+      Translated from the German by G. M. Whipple. Warwick & York.
+      (1913.) 160 pages.
+
+  Terman, Lyman, Ordahl, Galbreath, _and_ Talbert. _The Stanford
+      Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Scale for Measuring
+      Intelligence._ (1916.)
+
+      Extended analysis of 1000 tests. Data on the relation of
+      intelligence to school success, social status, etc.
+
+  Terman, Lewis M. _The Hygiene of the School Child._ Houghton
+      Mifflin Company. (1914.) 417 pages.
+
+      Devoted to the physical defects of school children.
+
+  Tredgold, A. F. _Mental Deficiency (Amentia)._ Baillière, Tindall
+      & Cox, London. (1914.) 491 pages.
+
+      The best medical treatment of the subject.
+
+  Whipple, G. M. _Manual of Mental and Physical Tests._ Warwick &
+      York. Vol. I (1914), 365 pages; vol. II (1915), 336 pages.
+
+      The best treatment of mental tests other than those of the Binet
+      system.
+
+  Witmer, L. _The Special Class for Backward Children._ The
+      Psychological Clinic Press, Philadelphia. (1911.) 275 pages.
+
+      Problems encountered in connection with the special class.
+
+
+MAGAZINES
+
+  _The Training School Bulletin._ Published monthly by the Training
+      School, Vineland, New Jersey. Edited by H. H. Goddard and
+      E. R. Johnstone.
+
+  _The Psychological Clinic._ Published monthly by the Psychological
+      Clinic Press, Philadelphia. Edited by Lightner Witmer.
+
+  _The Journal of Delinquency._ Published bi-monthly by the Whittier
+      State School, Whittier, California. Edited by Williams,
+      Goddard, Terman, and others.
+
+  _The Journal of Psycho-Asthenics._ Published quarterly at
+      Faribault, Minnesota. Organ of the American Association for
+      the Study of the Feeble-Minded. Edited by A. C. Rogers and F.
+      Kuhlmann.
+
+  _The Journal of Educational Psychology._ Published by Warwick &
+      York, Baltimore. Edited by J. Carleton Bell.
+
+
+
+
+INDEX
+
+
+  Abstract thought, tests of, 344.
+
+  Absurdities, 255 _ff._
+
+  Adolescence, and variability in intelligence, 67.
+
+  Adult intelligence, 54.
+
+  Adults, how to find I Q of adults, 140.
+
+  Æsthetic comparison, 165 _ff._
+
+  Age, test of giving age, 173 _ff._
+
+  Age standards, 40.
+
+  Alternative tests, 136.
+
+  Amateur testing, 107 _ff._
+
+  Apperception, 169.
+
+  Arithmetical reasoning, 319 _ff._
+
+  Association processes, 274.
+
+  Attention, during the test, 121.
+
+  Attitude of the subject, 109.
+
+  Auto-criticism, 156, 171, 195.
+
+  Average intelligence, 94 _ff._
+
+
+  Ball and field test, 210 _ff._, 286.
+
+  Berry, C. S., 114.
+
+  Binet,
+    on how teachers judge intelligence, 28 _ff._;
+    Binet's conception of intelligence, 44 _ff._, 123, 149, 151, 154,
+      156, 159, 165, 171, 173, 180, 181, 183, 185, 186, 190, 196, 203,
+      205, 217, 231, 232, 234, 247, 251, 252, 254, 258, 260, 261, 264,
+      276, 285, 289, 315, 322, 327, 333, 339, 345.
+
+  Binet-Simon method,
+    nature and derivation of the scale, 36 _ff._, 47 _ff._;
+    limitations of, 48 _ff._
+
+  Bloch, 203.
+
+  Bluemel, C. S., 107.
+
+  Bobertag, Otto, 106, 113, 176, 178, 180, 181, 185, 188, 190, 203, 206,
+    232, 237, 240, 252, 275, 285, 318.
+
+  Borderline intelligence, 79, 87 _ff._
+
+  Bow-knot, test of tying, 196 _ff._
+
+  Brigham, 165, 166.
+
+
+  Change, test of making change, 240 _ff._
+
+  Childs, H. G., 231, 298.
+
+  Coaching, 110 _ff._
+
+  Code test, 330 _ff._
+
+  Color naming, 163 _ff._
+
+  Combination method, 171. _See also_ Completion test.
+
+  Commissions, 172 _ff._
+
+  Comparison of lines, 151 _ff._
+
+  Completion test, 179, 246, 289.
+
+  Comprehension questions, 157 _ff._, 181 _ff._, 215 _ff._, 268 _ff._
+
+  Conditions favorable to testing, 121 _ff._
+
+  Counting,
+    four pennies, 154;
+    thirteen pennies, 180;
+    counting backwards, 213.
+
+  Crime,
+    relation to feeble-mindedness, 8 _ff._;
+    cost of, 12.
+
+  Cuneo, Irene, 51.
+
+
+  Davenport, C. B., 10.
+
+  Definitions,
+    in terms of use, 167;
+    superior to use, 221;
+    of abstract words, 281 _ff._, and 324 _ff._
+    _See also_ Vocabulary tests.
+
+  "Degenerate" families, 9 _ff._
+
+  Delinquency, relation to feeble-mindedness, 7 _ff._
+
+  Diamond, test of copying diamond, 204.
+
+  Differences, test of finding, 199, 313 _ff._
+
+  Digits. _See_ Memory for digits.
+
+  Discrimination of forms, 152 _ff._
+
+  Dissected sentences, 286 _ff._
+
+  Distribution of intelligence, 65 _ff._, 78 _ff._
+
+  Dougherty, 165, 166, 203.
+
+  Drawing, 156, 204, 260.
+
+  Dull normals, 92 _ff._
+
+  Dumville, 165, 166.
+
+
+  Ebbinghaus, 289, 318.
+
+  Emotion, 49.
+
+  Enclosed boxes, 327 _ff._
+
+  Endowment, 4, 19 _ff._
+
+  Environment, influence on test, 114 _ff._
+
+  Eugenics, 9 _ff._
+
+  Examination, duration of, 127 _ff._
+
+  Examiner, qualifications of, 124 _ff._
+
+
+  Fables, interpretation of, 290 _ff._
+
+  Fatigue, influence of, on test, 126 _ff._
+
+  Feeble-minded, proportion of school-children feeble-minded, 6.
+
+  Feeble-mindedness,
+    value of tests for, 5 _ff._;
+    psychological analysis, 23;
+    definition, 80;
+    examples, 82 _ff._
+
+  Fernald, G. G., 8.
+
+  Fernald, Grace, 56, 278, 280, 332.
+
+  Fingers, test of giving number of, 189 _ff._
+
+  Freeman, Frank N., 280.
+
+  Functions, tested by Binet scale, 42 _ff._
+
+
+  Galbreath, Neva, 51.
+
+  Galton, 328.
+
+  General intelligence, 42 _ff._
+
+  Generalization, tests of, 298.
+
+  Genius. _See_ Superior intelligence.
+
+  Goddard, H. H., 8, 106, 112, 154, 156, 165, 173, 185, 190, 196, 203,
+    206, 213, 234, 245, 251, 252, 259, 264, 276, 285, 289, 319, 322,
+    323, 332, 333, 339, 345.
+
+  Grading, value of intelligence tests in, 16.
+
+
+  Hall, Gertrude, 280.
+
+  Healy-Fernald, 56, 278, 280, 332.
+
+  Heredity, use of tests in the study of, 19.
+
+  Hill folk, 10.
+
+  Hollingworth, Leta S., 71.
+
+  Huey, E. B., 197, 217, 234.
+
+
+  Imagery, 195, 209, 321, 339.
+
+  Induction test, 310 _ff._
+
+  Ingenuity test, 346.
+
+  Intelligence,
+    analysis of, _see_ remarks under instructions for each test;
+    superior, 12 _ff._, 95 _ff._,
+    teachers' estimates of, 13, 24, 26, 28, 75;
+    general, 42 _ff._;
+    definitions of, 44 _ff._
+
+  Intelligence quotient, 53, 55, 63, 65 _ff._;
+    validity of, 68;
+    classification and significance, 79 _ff._, 140 _ff._
+
+
+  Jukes family, 10.
+
+
+  Kallikak family, 9.
+
+  Knollin, H. E., 18, 51, 54, 63.
+
+  Kohs, S. C., 107 _ff._
+
+  Kuhlmann, F., 56, 105, 153, 154, 156, 165, 173, 185, 190, 193, 196,
+    206, 214, 217, 234, 247, 251, 252, 259, 264, 276, 280, 285, 289,
+    315, 319, 322, 323, 327, 333, 339, 345.
+
+
+  Language comprehension, 143, 144.
+
+  Limitations of the Binet scale, 48 _ff._
+
+  Lombroso, 7.
+
+  Lyman, Grace, 51.
+
+
+  Mason, Otis, 347.
+
+  Masselon, 245.
+
+  Material used in the tests, 141.
+
+  Memory,
+    for sentences, 149 _ff._, 160, 185, 332;
+    for passages, 340;
+    for designs, 260;
+    for digits, 150, 159, 193, 207, 242, 277, 301, 322, 329, 340, 345.
+
+  Mental age, 39 _ff._;
+    effect of Stanford revision on, 62;
+    how to calculate, 137 _ff._
+
+  Mental deficiency. _See_ Feeble-mindedness.
+
+  Meumann, Ernst, 46, 106, 245, 318.
+
+  Moral development, dependence of, on intelligence, 11 _ff._
+
+
+  Nam family, 10.
+
+  Name, test of giving name, 147 _ff._
+
+  Naming coins, 184 _ff._, 231.
+
+  Naming familiar objects, 143 _ff._
+
+  Normals, dull, 92 _ff._
+
+
+  Ordahl, Dr. George, 8.
+
+  Ordahl, Louise Ellison, 8.
+
+
+  Paper-cutting test, 338.
+
+  Physical defects, effects of, on intelligence, 19.
+
+  Physical relations, comprehension of, 333 _ff._
+
+  Physicians, as Binet testers, 34.
+
+  Pictures,
+    enumeration of objects in, 145;
+    description of, 190 _ff._;
+    interpretation of, 302;
+    finding omissions in, 178.
+
+  Pointing to parts of body, 142 _ff._
+
+  Practical judgment, 212.
+
+  President and king, giving differences between, 313.
+
+  Problem questions, 315 _ff._
+
+  Procedure, necessity of uniformity in, 32 _ff._, 131 _ff._
+
+  Promotions, on basis of intelligence tests, 16 _ff._
+
+
+  Race differences, 91.
+
+  Range of testing, 129.
+
+  Rapport, 124 _ff._
+
+  Reading, test of reading for memories, 262.
+
+  Record booklet, 128.
+
+  Recording responses, 133 _ff._
+
+  Reliability of the scale, 76 _ff._, 105 _ff._
+
+  Repeated tests, 112 _ff._
+
+  Retardation,
+    cost of, 1, 13 _ff._;
+    training of retarded children, 4 _ff._, 24 _ff._, 73 _ff._
+
+  Reversing hands of clock, 321 _ff._
+
+  Rhymes, test of finding, 248.
+
+  Right and left, 175 _ff._
+
+  Rowe, E. P., 165, 166, 277.
+
+  Rowland, Eleanor, 18.
+
+
+  Scattering of successes, 134 _ff._
+
+  School success and intelligence, 73 _ff._
+
+  Scoring, 132. _See also_ instructions for scoring each test.
+
+  Seclusion during test, 122.
+
+  Sex, test of giving, 146 _ff._
+
+  Sex differences in intelligence, 68 _ff._
+
+  Similarities, test of finding, 217 _ff._, 306 _ff._
+
+  Sixty words, 272 _ff._
+
+  Social class and intelligence, 72 _ff._, 114 _ff._
+
+  Spearman, C., definition of intelligence, 46.
+
+  Special classes, 5.
+
+  Square, test of copying, 155 _ff._
+
+  Stamps, test of counting value of, 252.
+
+  Standardization, value of, 30.
+
+  Stanford revision of the Binet scale, 51 _ff._
+
+  Stereotypy, 203.
+
+  Stern, W., 46, 106, 118.
+
+  Stigmata, 7.
+
+  Structural psychology, 43.
+
+  Superior intelligence, tests of superior children, 12 _ff._, 95 _ff._
+
+  Supplementary information, 135.
+
+
+  Teachers' estimates of intelligence, 13, 24, 26, 28, 75.
+
+  Terman, Lewis M., 63, 267, 298.
+
+  Three words, test of using, in a sentence, 242 _ff._
+
+  Time orientation,
+    forenoon and afternoon, 187 _ff._;
+    days of the week, 205 _ff._;
+    giving date, 234 _ff._;
+    naming months, 251 _ff._
+
+
+  Unemployment, relation of, to intelligence, 18.
+
+
+  Validity of the tests, 76 _ff._
+
+  Vocabulary tests, 224, 255, 281, 310, 324, 338.
+
+  Vocational guidance, use of intelligence tests in, 17, 49.
+
+  Volition, 49.
+
+
+  Waddle, Charles, 52.
+
+  Wallin, 237.
+
+  Weights, comparison of, 161, 236 _ff._
+
+  Williams, Dr. J. Harold, 9, 54.
+
+  Winch, W. H., 165, 166.
+
+  Writing from dictation, 231 _ff._
+
+
+  Yerkes, R. M., 70.
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Measurement of Intelligence, by 
+Lewis Madison Terman
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE MEASUREMENT OF INTELLIGENCE ***
+
+***** This file should be named 20662-8.txt or 20662-8.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        https://www.gutenberg.org/2/0/6/6/20662/
+
+Produced by Audrey Longhurst, Laura Wisewell and the Online
+Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+https://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+https://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at https://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit https://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
+donations.  To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     https://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
diff --git a/old/20662-8.zip b/old/20662-8.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..365dc81
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/20662-8.zip
diff --git a/old/20662-page-images.zip b/old/20662-page-images.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..fb4701d
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/20662-page-images.zip
diff --git a/old/20662.txt b/old/20662.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4b11772
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/20662.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,13921 @@
+Project Gutenberg's The Measurement of Intelligence, by Lewis Madison Terman
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+
+Title: The Measurement of Intelligence
+       An Explanation of and a Complete Guide for the Use of the
+       Stanford Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon
+       Intelligence Scale
+
+Author: Lewis Madison Terman
+
+Editor: Ellwood P. Cubberley
+
+Release Date: February 25, 2007 [EBook #20662]
+
+Language: English
+
+Character set encoding: ASCII
+
+*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE MEASUREMENT OF INTELLIGENCE ***
+
+
+
+
+Produced by Audrey Longhurst, Laura Wisewell and the Online
+Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+                          RIVERSIDE TEXTBOOKS
+                              IN EDUCATION
+
+
+                     EDITED BY ELLWOOD P. CUBBERLEY
+
+                         PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION
+                   LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY
+
+
+                    DIVISION OF SECONDARY EDUCATION
+                     UNDER THE EDITORIAL DIRECTION
+                          OF ALEXANDER INGLIS
+
+                         PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION
+                           HARVARD UNIVERSITY
+
+
+
+
+                            THE MEASUREMENT
+                            OF INTELLIGENCE
+
+
+                        AN EXPLANATION OF AND A
+                   COMPLETE GUIDE FOR THE USE OF THE
+                   STANFORD REVISION AND EXTENSION OF
+                  _The Binet-Simon Intelligence Scale_
+
+                                   BY
+
+                            LEWIS M. TERMAN
+                         PROFESSOR OF EDUCATION
+                   LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY
+
+                             [Illustration]
+
+                        HOUGHTON MIFFLIN COMPANY
+                 BOSTON NEW YORK CHICAGO SAN FRANCISCO
+                     The Riverside Press Cambridge
+
+
+
+
+                  COPYRIGHT, 1916, BY LEWIS M. TERMAN
+
+                          ALL RIGHTS RESERVED
+
+
+
+                          The Riverside Press
+                       CAMBRIDGE . MASSACHUSETTS
+                         PRINTED IN THE U.S.A.
+
+
+
+
+                             To the Memory
+                                   OF
+                              ALFRED BINET
+
+      PATIENT RESEARCHER, CREATIVE THINKER, UNPRETENTIOUS SCHOLAR;
+                     INSPIRING AND FRUITFUL DEVOTEE
+                                   OF
+                         INDUCTIVE AND DYNAMIC
+                               PSYCHOLOGY
+
+
+
+
+EDITOR'S INTRODUCTION
+
+
+The present volume appeals to the editor of this series as one of the
+most significant books, viewed from the standpoint of the future of our
+educational theory and practice, that has been issued in years. Not only
+does the volume set forth, in language so simple that the layman can
+easily understand, the large importance for public education of a
+careful measurement of the intelligence of children, but it also
+describes the tests which are to be given and the entire procedure of
+giving them. In a clear and easy style the author sets forth scientific
+facts of far-reaching educational importance, facts which it has cost
+him, his students, and many other scientific workers, years of
+painstaking labor to accumulate.
+
+Only very recently, practically only within the past half-dozen years,
+have scientific workers begun to appreciate fully the importance of
+intelligence tests as a guide to educational procedure, and up to the
+present we have been able to make but little use of such tests in our
+schools. The conception in itself has been new, and the testing
+procedure has been more or less unrefined and technical. The following
+somewhat popular presentation of the idea and of the methods involved,
+itself based on a scientific monograph which the author is publishing
+elsewhere, serves for the first time to set forth in simple language the
+technical details of giving such intelligence tests.
+
+The educational significance of the results to be obtained from
+careful measurements of the intelligence of children can hardly be
+overestimated. Questions relating to the choice of studies, vocational
+guidance, schoolroom procedure, the grading of pupils, promotional
+schemes, the study of the retardation of children in the schools,
+juvenile delinquency, and the proper handling of subnormals on the
+one hand and gifted children on the other,--all alike acquire new
+meaning and significance when viewed in the light of the measurement
+of intelligence as outlined in this volume. As a guide to the
+interpretation of the results of other forms of investigation relating
+to the work, progress, and needs of children, intelligence tests form a
+very valuable aid. More than all other forms of data combined, such
+tests give the necessary information from which a pupil's possibilities
+of future mental growth can be foretold, and upon which his further
+education can be most profitably directed.
+
+The publication of this revision and extension of the original
+Binet-Simon scale for measuring intelligence, with the closer adaptation
+of it to American conditions and needs, should mark a distinct step in
+advance in our educational procedure. It means the perfection of another
+and a very important measuring stick for evaluating educational
+practices, and in particular for diagnosing individual possibilities and
+needs. Just now the method is new, and its use somewhat limited, but it
+is the confident prediction of many students of the subject that, before
+long, intelligence tests will become as much a matter of necessary
+routine in schoolroom procedure as a blood-count now is in physical
+diagnosis. That our schoolroom methods will in turn become much more
+intelligent, and that all classes of children, but especially the gifted
+and the slow, will profit by such intellectual diagnosis, there can be
+but little question.
+
+That any parent or teacher, without training, can give these tests, the
+author in no way contends. However, the observations of Dr. Kohs, cited
+in Chapter VII, as well as the experience of the author and others who
+have given courses in intelligence testing to teachers, alike indicate
+that sufficient skill to enable teachers and school principals to give
+such tests intelligently is not especially difficult to acquire. This
+being the case it may be hoped that the requisite training to enable
+them to handle these tests may be included, very soon, as a part of the
+necessary pedagogical equipment of those who aspire to administrative
+positions in our public and private schools.
+
+Besides being of special importance to school officers and to students
+of education in colleges and normal schools, this volume can confidently
+be recommended to physicians and social workers, and to teachers and
+parents interested in intelligence measurements, as at once the simplest
+and the best explanation of the newly-evolved intelligence tests, which
+has so far appeared in print.
+
+    ELLWOOD P. CUBBERLEY.
+
+
+
+
+PREFACE
+
+
+The constant and growing use of the Binet-Simon intelligence scale in
+public schools, institutions for defectives, reform schools, juvenile
+courts, and police courts is sufficient evidence of the intrinsic
+worth of the method. It is generally recognized, however, that the
+serviceableness of the scale has hitherto been seriously limited, both
+by the lack of a sufficiently detailed guide and by a number of
+recognized imperfections in the scale itself. The Stanford revision and
+extension has been worked out for the purpose of correcting as many as
+possible of these imperfections, and it is here presented with a rather
+minute description of the method as a whole and of the individual tests.
+
+The aim has been to present the explanations and instructions so clearly
+and in such an untechnical form as to make the book of use, not only to
+the psychologist, but also to the rank and file of teachers, physicians,
+and social workers. More particularly, it is designed as a text for use
+in normal schools, colleges, and teachers' reading-circles.
+
+While the use of the intelligence scale for research purposes and for
+accurate diagnosis will of necessity always be restricted to those who
+have had extensive training in experimental psychology, the author
+believes that the time has come when its wider use for more general
+purposes should be encouraged.
+
+However, it cannot be too strongly emphasized that no one, whatever his
+previous training may have been, can make proper use of the scale unless
+he is willing to learn the method of procedure and scoring down to the
+minutest detail. A general acquaintance with the nature of the
+individual tests is by no means sufficient.
+
+Perhaps the best way to learn the method will be to begin by studying
+the book through, in order to gain a general acquaintance with the
+tests; then, if possible, to observe a few examinations; and finally to
+take up the procedure for detailed study in connection with practice
+testing. Twenty or thirty tests, made with constant reference to the
+procedure as described in Part II, should be sufficient to prepare the
+teacher or physician to make profitable use of the scale.
+
+The Stanford revision of the scale is the result of a number of
+investigations, made possible by the cooeperation of the author's
+graduate students. Grateful acknowledgment is especially due to
+Professor H. G. Childs, Miss Grace Lyman, Dr. George Ordahl, Dr. Louise
+Ellison Ordahl, Miss Neva Galbreath, Mr. Wilford Talbert, Mr. J. Harold
+Williams, and Mr. Herbert E. Knollin. Without their assistance this book
+could not have been written.
+
+    STANFORD UNIVERSITY,
+        _April, 1916_.
+
+
+
+
+CONTENTS
+
+
+PART I. PROBLEMS AND RESULTS
+
+CHAPTER I
+
+THE USES OF INTELLIGENCE TESTS                                         3
+
+  Intelligence tests of retarded school children. Intelligence
+  tests of the feeble-minded. Intelligence tests of delinquents.
+  Intelligence tests of superior children. Intelligence tests as a
+  basis for grading. Intelligence tests for vocational fitness.
+  Other uses of intelligence tests.
+
+CHAPTER II
+
+SOURCES OF ERROR IN JUDGING INTELLIGENCE                              22
+
+  Are intelligence tests superfluous? The necessity of standards.
+  The intelligence of retarded children usually overestimated. The
+  intelligence of superior children usually underestimated. Other
+  fallacies in the estimation of intelligence. Binet's
+  questionnaire on teachers' methods of judging intelligence.
+  Binet's experiment on how teachers test intelligence.
+
+CHAPTER III
+
+DESCRIPTION OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD                                 36
+
+  Essential nature of the scale. How the scale was derived. List of
+  tests. How the scale is used. Special characteristics of the
+  Binet-Simon method. The use of age standards. The kind of mental
+  functions brought into play. Binet would test "general
+  intelligence." Binet's conception of general intelligence. Other
+  conceptions of intelligence. Guiding principles in choice and
+  arrangement of tests. Some avowed limitations of the Binet tests.
+
+CHAPTER IV
+
+NATURE OF THE STANFORD REVISION AND EXTENSION                         51
+
+  Sources of data. Method of arriving at a revision. List of tests
+  in the Stanford revision and extension. Summary of changes.
+  Effects of the revision on the mental ages secured.
+
+CHAPTER V
+
+ANALYSIS OF ONE THOUSAND INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS                       65
+
+  The distribution of intelligence. The validity of the
+  intelligence quotient. Sex differences. Intelligence of the
+  different social classes. The relation of the I Q to the quality
+  of the child's school work. The relation between I Q and grade
+  progress. Correlation between I Q and the teachers' estimates of
+  the children's intelligence. The validity of the individual
+  tests.
+
+CHAPTER VI
+
+THE SIGNIFICANCE OF VARIOUS INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS                    78
+
+  Frequency of different degrees of intelligence. Classification of
+  intelligence quotients. Feeble-mindedness. Border-line cases.
+  Examples of border-line deficiency. Dull normals. Average
+  intelligence. Superior intelligence. Very superior intelligence.
+  Examples of very superior intelligence. Genius and "near" genius.
+  Is the I Q often misleading?
+
+CHAPTER VII
+
+RELIABILITY OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD                                105
+
+  General value of the method. Dependence of the scale's
+  reliability on the training of the examiner. Influence of the
+  subject's attitude. The influence of coaching. Reliability of
+  repeated tests. Influence of social and educational advantages.
+
+
+PART II
+
+GUIDE FOR THE USE OF THE STANFORD REVISION AND EXTENSION
+
+CHAPTER VIII
+
+GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS                                                 121
+
+  Necessity of securing attention and effort. Quiet and seclusion.
+  Presence of others. Getting into _rapport_. Keeping the child
+  encouraged. The importance of tact. Personality of the examiner.
+  The avoidance of fatigue. Duration of the examination. Desirable
+  range of testing. Order of giving the tests. Coaxing to be
+  avoided. Adhering to formula. Scoring. Recording responses.
+  Scattering of successes. Supplementary considerations.
+  Alternative tests. Finding mental age. The use of the
+  intelligence quotient. How to find the I Q of adult subjects.
+  Material for use in testing.
+
+CHAPTER IX
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR III
+
+  1. Pointing to parts of the body                                   142
+  2. Naming familiar objects                                         143
+  3. Enumeration of objects in pictures                              145
+  4. Giving sex                                                      146
+  5. Giving the family name                                          147
+  6. Repeating six to seven syllables                                149
+     Alternative test: Repeating three digits                        150
+
+CHAPTER X
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR IV
+
+  1. Comparison of lines                                             151
+  2. Discrimination of forms                                         152
+  3. Counting four pennies                                           154
+  4. Copying a square                                                155
+  5. Comprehension, first degree                                     157
+  6. Repeating four digits                                           159
+     Alternative test: Repeating twelve to thirteen syllables        160
+
+CHAPTER XI
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR V
+
+  1. Comparison of weights                                           161
+  2. Naming colors                                                   163
+  3. AEsthetic comparison                                             165
+  4. Giving definitions in terms of use                              167
+  5. The game of patience                                            169
+  6. Three commissions                                               172
+     Alternative test: Giving age                                    173
+
+CHAPTER XII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VI
+
+  1. Distinguishing right and left                                   175
+  2. Finding omissions in pictures                                   178
+  3. Counting thirteen pennies                                       180
+  4. Comprehension, second degree                                    181
+  5. Naming four coins                                               184
+  6. Repeating sixteen to eighteen syllables                         185
+     Alternative test: Forenoon and afternoon                        187
+
+CHAPTER XIII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VII
+
+  1. Giving the number of fingers                                    189
+  2. Description of pictures                                         190
+  3. Repeating five digits                                           193
+  4. Tying a bow-knot                                                196
+  5. Giving differences from memory                                  199
+  6. Copying a diamond                                               204
+     Alternative test 1: Naming the days of the week                 205
+     Alternative test 2: Repeating three digits reversed             207
+
+CHAPTER XIV
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VIII
+
+  1. The ball-and-field test                                         210
+  2. Counting backwards from 20 to 1                                 213
+  3. Comprehension, third degree                                     215
+  4. Giving similarities, two things                                 217
+  5. Giving definitions superior to use                              221
+  6. Vocabulary (20 definitions, 3600 words)                         224
+     Alternative test 1: Naming six coins                            231
+     Alternative test 2: Writing from dictation                      231
+
+CHAPTER XV
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR IX
+
+  1. Giving the date                                                 234
+  2. Arranging five weights                                          236
+  3. Making change                                                   240
+  4. Repeating four digits reversed                                  242
+  5. Using three words in a sentence                                 242
+  6. Finding rhymes                                                  248
+     Alternative test 1: Naming the months                           251
+     Alternative test 2: Counting the value of stamps                252
+
+CHAPTER XVI
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR X
+
+  1. Vocabulary (30 definitions, 5400 words)                         255
+  2. Detecting absurdities                                           255
+  3. Drawing designs from memory                                     260
+  4. Reading for eight memories                                      262
+  5. Comprehension, fourth degree                                    268
+  6. Naming sixty words                                              272
+     Alternative test 1: Repeating six digits                        277
+     Alternative test 2: Repeating twenty to twenty-two syllables    277
+     Alternative test 3: Healy's Construction Puzzle A               278
+
+CHAPTER XVII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR XII
+
+  1. Vocabulary (40 definitions, 7200 words)                         281
+  2. Defining abstract words                                         281
+  3. The ball-and-field test (superior plan)                         286
+  4. Dissected sentences                                             286
+  5. Interpretation of fables (score 4)                              290
+  6. Repeating five digits reversed                                  301
+  7. Interpretation of pictures                                      302
+  8. Giving similarities, three things                               306
+
+CHAPTER XVIII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR XIV
+
+  1. Vocabulary (50 definitions, 9000 words)                         310
+  2. Induction test: finding a rule                                  310
+  3. Giving differences between a president and a king               313
+  4. Problem questions                                               315
+  5. Arithmetical reasoning                                          319
+  6. Reversing hands of a clock                                      321
+     Alternative test: Repeating seven digits                        322
+
+CHAPTER XIX
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR "AVERAGE ADULT"
+
+  1. Vocabulary (65 definitions, 11,700 words)                       324
+  2. Interpretation of fables (score 8)                              324
+  3. Differences between abstract terms                              324
+  4. Problem of the enclosed boxes                                   327
+  5. Repeating six digits reversed                                   329
+  6. Using a code                                                    330
+     Alternative test 1: Repeating twenty-eight syllables            332
+     Alternative test 2: Comprehension of physical relations         333
+
+CHAPTER XX
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR "SUPERIOR ADULT"
+
+  1. Vocabulary (75 definitions, 13,500 words)                       338
+  2. Binet's paper-cutting test                                      338
+  3. Repeating eight digits                                          340
+  4. Repeating thought of passage                                    340
+  5. Repeating seven digits reversed                                 345
+  6. Ingenuity test                                                  345
+
+SELECTED REFERENCES                                                  349
+
+INDEX                                                                359
+
+
+
+
+FIGURES AND DIAGRAMS
+
+
+  1. Distribution of Mental Ages of 62 Normal Adults                  55
+  2. Distribution of I Q's of 905 Unselected Children, 5-14 Years
+     of Age                                                           66
+  3. Median I Q of 457 Boys and 448 Girls, for the Ages 5-14 Years    69
+  4. Diamond drawn by R. W.; Age 13-10; Mental Age 7-6                82
+  5. Writing from Dictation. R. M., Age 15; Mental Age 9              83
+  6. Ball and Field Test. I. M., Age 14-2; Mental Age 9               84
+  7. Diamond drawn by A. W.                                           85
+  8. Drawing Designs from Memory. H. S., Age 11; Mental Age 8-3       86
+  9. Ball and Field Test. S. F., Age 17; Mental Age 11-6              88
+ 10. Writing from Dictation. C. P., Age 10-2; Mental Age 7-11         90
+ 11. Ball and Field Test. M. P., Age 14; Mental Age 10-8              91
+ 12. Ball and Field Test. R. G., Age 13-5; Mental Age 10-6            93
+ 13. Ball and Field Test. E. B., Age 7-9; I Q 130                     98
+ 14. Ball and Field Test. F. McA., Age 10-3; Mental Age 14-6         100
+ 15. Drawing Designs from Memory. E. M., Age 6-11; Mental Age 10,
+     I Q 145                                                         101
+ 16. Ball and Field Test. B. F., Age 7-8; Mental Age 12-4; I Q 160   102
+ 17. Healy and Fernald Construction Puzzle                           279
+
+
+
+
+THE MEASUREMENT OF INTELLIGENCE
+
+PART I
+
+PROBLEMS AND RESULTS
+
+
+
+
+THE MEASUREMENT OF INTELLIGENCE
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER I
+
+THE USES OF INTELLIGENCE TESTS
+
+
+INTELLIGENCE TESTS OF RETARDED SCHOOL CHILDREN. Numerous studies of the
+age-grade progress of school children have afforded convincing evidence
+of the magnitude and seriousness of the retardation problem. Statistics
+collected in hundreds of cities in the United States show that between a
+third and a half of the school children fail to progress through the
+grades at the expected rate; that from 10 to 15 per cent are retarded
+two years or more; and that from 5 to 8 per cent are retarded at least
+three years. More than 10 per cent of the $400,000,000 annually expended
+in the United States for school instruction is devoted to re-teaching
+children what they have already been taught but have failed to learn.
+
+The first efforts at reform which resulted from these findings were
+based on the supposition that the evils which had been discovered could
+be remedied by the individualizing of instruction, by improved methods
+of promotion, by increased attention to children's health, and by other
+reforms in school administration. Although reforms along these lines
+have been productive of much good, they have nevertheless been in a
+measure disappointing. The trouble was, they were too often based upon
+the assumption that under the right conditions all children would be
+equally, or almost equally, capable of making satisfactory school
+progress. Psychological studies of school children by means of
+standardized intelligence tests have shown that this supposition is not
+in accord with the facts. It has been found that children do not fall
+into two well-defined groups, the "feeble-minded" and the "normal."
+Instead, there are many grades of intelligence, ranging from idiocy on
+the one hand to genius on the other. Among those classed as normal, vast
+individual differences have been found to exist in original mental
+endowment, differences which affect profoundly the capacity to profit
+from school instruction.
+
+We are beginning to realize that the school must take into account, more
+seriously than it has yet done, the existence and significance of these
+differences in endowment. Instead of wasting energy in the vain attempt
+to hold mentally slow and defective children up to a level of progress
+which is normal to the average child, it will be wiser to take account of
+the inequalities of children in original endowment and to differentiate
+the course of study in such a way that each child will be allowed to
+progress at the rate which is normal to him, whether that rate be rapid
+or slow.
+
+While we cannot hold all children to the same standard of school
+progress, we can at least prevent the kind of retardation which involves
+failure and the repetition of a school grade. It is well enough
+recognized that children do not enter with very much zest upon school
+work in which they have once failed. Failure crushes self-confidence and
+destroys the spirit of work. It is a sad fact that a large proportion of
+children in the schools are acquiring the habit of failure. The remedy,
+of course, is to measure out the work for each child in proportion to
+his mental ability.
+
+Before an engineer constructs a railroad bridge or trestle, he studies
+the materials to be used, and learns by means of tests exactly the
+amount of strain per unit of size his materials will be able to
+withstand. He does not work empirically, and count upon patching up the
+mistakes which may later appear under the stress of actual use. The
+educational engineer should emulate this example. Tests and forethought
+must take the place of failure and patchwork. Our efforts have been too
+long directed by "trial and error." It is time to leave off guessing and
+to acquire a scientific knowledge of the material with which we have to
+deal. When instruction must be repeated, it means that the school, as
+well as the pupil, has failed.
+
+Every child who fails in his school work or is in danger of failing
+should be given a mental examination. The examination takes less than
+one hour, and the result will contribute more to a real understanding of
+the case than anything else that could be done. It is necessary to
+determine whether a given child is unsuccessful in school because of
+poor native ability, or because of poor instruction, lack of interest,
+or some other removable cause.
+
+It is not sufficient to establish any number of special classes, if they
+are to be made the dumping-ground for all kinds of troublesome
+cases--the feeble-minded, the physically defective, the merely backward,
+the truants, the incorrigibles, etc. Without scientific diagnosis and
+classification of these children the educational work of the special
+class must blunder along in the dark. In such diagnosis and
+classification our main reliance must always be in mental tests,
+properly used and properly interpreted.
+
+INTELLIGENCE TESTS OF THE FEEBLE-MINDED. Thus far intelligence tests
+have found their chief application in the identification and grading of
+the feeble-minded. Their value for this purpose is twofold. In the first
+place, it is necessary to ascertain the degree of defect before it is
+possible to decide intelligently upon either the content or the method
+of instruction suited to the training of the backward child. In the
+second place, intelligence tests are rapidly extending our conception of
+"feeble-mindedness" to include milder degrees of defect than have
+generally been associated with this term. The earlier methods of
+diagnosis caused a majority of the higher grade defectives to be
+overlooked. Previous to the development of psychological methods the
+low-grade moron was about as high a type of defective as most physicians
+or even psychologists were able to identify as feeble-minded.
+
+Wherever intelligence tests have been made in any considerable number in
+the schools, they have shown that not far from 2 per cent of the
+children enrolled have a grade of intelligence which, however long they
+live, will never develop beyond the level which is normal to the average
+child of 11 or 12 years. The large majority of these belong to the moron
+grade; that is, their mental development will stop somewhere between the
+7-year and 12-year level of intelligence, more often between 9 and 12.
+
+The more we learn about such children, the clearer it becomes that they
+must be looked upon as real defectives. They may be able to drag
+along to the fourth, fifth, or sixth grades, but even by the age of
+16 or 18 years they are never able to cope successfully with the more
+abstract and difficult parts of the common-school course of study. They
+may master a certain amount of rote learning, such as that involved in
+reading and in the manipulation of number combinations but they cannot
+be taught to meet new conditions effectively or to think, reason, and
+judge as normal persons do.
+
+It is safe to predict that in the near future intelligence tests will
+bring tens of thousands of these high-grade defectives under the
+surveillance and protection of society. This will ultimately result in
+curtailing the reproduction of feeble-mindedness and in the elimination
+of an enormous amount of crime, pauperism, and industrial inefficiency.
+It is hardly necessary to emphasize that the high-grade cases, of the
+type now so frequently overlooked, are precisely the ones whose
+guardianship it is most important for the State to assume.
+
+INTELLIGENCE TESTS OF DELINQUENTS. One of the most important facts
+brought to light by the use of intelligence tests is the frequent
+association of delinquency and mental deficiency. Although it has long
+been recognized that the proportion of feeble-mindedness among
+offenders is rather large, the real amount has, until recently, been
+underestimated even by the most competent students of criminology.
+
+The criminologists have been accustomed to give more attention to the
+physical than to the mental correlates of crime. Thus, Lombroso and
+his followers subjected thousands of criminals to observation and
+measurement with regard to such physical traits as size and shape of the
+skull, bilateral asymmetries, anomalies of the ear, eye, nose, palate,
+teeth, hands, fingers, hair, dermal sensitivity, etc. The search was for
+physical "stigmata" characteristic of the "criminal type."
+
+Although such studies performed an important service in creating a
+scientific interest in criminology, the theories of Lombroso have been
+wholly discredited by the results of intelligence tests. Such tests have
+demonstrated, beyond any possibility of doubt, that the most important
+trait of at least 25 per cent of our criminals is mental weakness. The
+physical abnormalities which have been found so common among prisoners
+are not the stigmata of criminality, but the physical accompaniments of
+feeble-mindedness. They have no diagnostic significance except in so far
+as they are indications of mental deficiency. Without exception, every
+study which has been made of the intelligence level of delinquents has
+furnished convincing testimony as to the close relation existing between
+mental weakness and moral abnormality. Some of these findings are as
+follows:--
+
+    Miss Renz tested 100 girls of the Ohio State Reformatory and
+    reported 36 per cent as certainly feeble-minded. In every one of
+    these cases the commitment papers had given the pronouncement
+    "intellect sound."
+
+    Under the direction of Dr. Goddard the Binet tests were given to
+    100 juvenile court cases, chosen at random, in Newark, New
+    Jersey. Nearly half were classified as feeble-minded. One boy
+    17 years old had 9-year intelligence; another of 151/2 had
+    8-year intelligence.
+
+    Of 56 delinquent girls 14 to 20 years of age tested by Hill and
+    Goddard, almost half belonged either to the 9- or the 10-year
+    level of intelligence.
+
+    Dr. G. G. Fernald's tests of 100 prisoners at the Massachusetts
+    State Reformatory showed that at least 25 per cent were
+    feeble-minded.
+
+    Of 1186 girls tested by Miss Dewson at the State Industrial
+    School for Girls at Lancaster, Pennsylvania, 28 per cent were
+    found to have subnormal intelligence.
+
+    Dr. Katherine Bement Davis's report on 1000 cases entered in the
+    Bedford Home for Women, New York, stated that there was no doubt
+    but that at least 157 were feeble-minded. Recently there has
+    been established at this institution one of the most important
+    research laboratories of the kind in the United States, with a
+    trained psychologist, Dr. Mabel Fernald, in charge.
+
+    Of 564 prostitutes investigated by Dr. Anna Dwyer in connection
+    with the Municipal Court of Chicago, only 3 per cent had gone
+    beyond the fifth grade in school. Mental tests were not made,
+    but from the data given it is reasonably certain that half or
+    more were feeble-minded.
+
+    Tests, by Dr. George Ordahl and Dr. Louise Ellison Ordahl, of
+    cases in the Geneva School for Girls, Geneva, Illinois, showed
+    that, on a conservative basis of classification, at least
+    18 per cent were feeble-minded. At the Joliet Prison, Illinois,
+    the same authors found 50 per cent of the female prisoners
+    feeble-minded, and 26 per cent of the male prisoners. At the St.
+    Charles School for Boys 26 per cent were feeble-minded.
+
+    Tests, by Dr. J. Harold Williams, of 150 delinquents in the
+    Whittier State School for Boys, Whittier, California, gave
+    28 per cent feeble-minded and 25 per cent at or near the
+    border-line. About 300 other juvenile delinquents tested by
+    Mr. Williams gave approximately the same figures. As a result of
+    these findings a research laboratory has been established at the
+    Whittier School, with Dr. Williams in charge. In the girls'
+    division of the Whittier School, Dr. Grace Fernald collected a
+    large amount of psychological data on more than 100 delinquent
+    girls. The findings of this investigation agree closely with
+    those of Dr. Williams for the boys.
+
+    At the State Reformatory, Jeffersonville, Indiana, Dr. von
+    Klein-Schmid, in an unusually thorough psychological study of
+    1000 young adult prisoners, finds the proportion of
+    feeble-mindedness not far from 50 per cent.
+
+But it is needless to multiply statistics. Those given are but samples.
+Tests are at present being made in most of the progressive prisons,
+reform schools, and juvenile courts throughout the country, and while
+there are minor discrepancies in regard to the actual percentage who are
+feeble-minded, there is no investigator who denies the fearful role
+played by mental deficiency in the production of vice, crime, and
+delinquency.[1]
+
+[1] See References at end of volume.
+
+Heredity studies of "degenerate" families have confirmed, in a striking
+way, the testimony secured by intelligence tests. Among the best known
+of such families are the "Kallikaks," the "Jukes," the "Hill Folk," the
+"Nams," the "Zeros," and the "Ishmaelites."
+
+    _The Kallikak family._ Martin Kallikak was a youthful soldier in
+    the Revolutionary War. At a tavern frequented by the militia he
+    met a feeble-minded girl, by whom he became the father of a
+    feeble-minded son. In 1912 there were 480 known direct
+    descendants of this temporary union. It is known that 36 of
+    these were illegitimates, that 33 were sexually immoral, that 24
+    were confirmed alcoholics, and that 8 kept houses of ill-fame.
+    The explanation of so much immorality will be obvious when it is
+    stated that of the 480 descendants, 143 were known to be
+    feeble-minded, and that many of the others were of questionable
+    mentality.
+
+    A few years after returning from the war this same Martin
+    Kallikak married a respectable girl of good family. From this
+    union 496 individuals have been traced in direct descent, and in
+    this branch of the family there were no illegitimate children,
+    no immoral women, and only one man who was sexually loose. There
+    were no criminals, no keepers of houses of ill-fame, and only
+    two confirmed alcoholics. Again the explanation is clear when it
+    is stated that this branch of the family did not contain a
+    single feeble-minded individual. It was made up of doctors,
+    lawyers, judges, educators, traders, and landholders.[2]
+
+    [2] H. H. Goddard: _The Kallikak Family_. (1914.) 141 pp.
+
+    _The Hill Folk._ The Hill Folk are a New England family of which
+    709 persons have been traced. Of the married women, 24 per cent
+    had given birth to illegitimate offspring, and 10 per cent were
+    prostitutes. Criminal tendencies were clearly shown in
+    24 members of the family, while alcoholism was still more
+    common. The proportion of feeble-minded was 48 per cent. It was
+    estimated that the Hill Folk have in the last sixty years cost
+    the State of Massachusetts, in charitable relief, care of
+    feeble-minded, epileptic, and insane, conviction and punishment
+    for crime, prostitution pauperism, etc., at least $500,000.[3]
+
+    [3] Danielson and Davenport: _The Hill Folk_. Eugenics Record Office,
+    Memoir No. 1. 1912. 56 pp.
+
+    The Nam family and the Jukes give equally dark pictures as
+    regards criminality, licentiousness, and alcoholism, and
+    although feeble-mindedness was not as fully investigated in
+    these families as in the Kallikaks and the Hill Folk, the
+    evidence is strong that it was a leading trait. The 784 Nams who
+    were traced included 187 alcoholics, 232 women and 199 men known
+    to be licentious, and 40 who became prisoners. It is estimated
+    that the Nams have already cost the State nearly $1,500,000.[4]
+
+    [4] Estabrook and Davenport: _The Nam Family_. Eugenics Record Office
+    Memoir No. 2. (1912). 85 pp.
+
+    Of 540 Jukes, practically one fifth were born out of wedlock, 37
+    were known to be syphilitic, 53 had been in the poorhouse, 76
+    had been sentenced to prison, and of 229 women of marriageable
+    age 128 were prostitutes. The economic damage inflicted upon the
+    State of New York by the Jukes in seventy-five years was
+    estimated at more than $1,300,000, to say nothing of diseases
+    and other evil influences which they helped to spread.[5]
+
+    [5] R. L. Dugdale: _The Jukes_. (Fourth edition, 1910.) 120 pp. G. P.
+    Putnam's Sons.
+
+But why do the feeble-minded tend so strongly to become delinquent? The
+answer may be stated in simple terms. Morality depends upon two things:
+(a) the ability to foresee and to weigh the possible consequences for
+self and others of different kinds of behavior; and (b) upon the
+willingness and capacity to exercise self-restraint. That there are many
+intelligent criminals is due to the fact that (a) may exist without
+(b). On the other hand, (b) presupposes (a). In other words, not
+all criminals are feeble-minded, but all feeble-minded are at least
+potential criminals. That every feeble-minded woman is a potential
+prostitute would hardly be disputed by any one. Moral judgment, like
+business judgment, social judgment, or any other kind of higher thought
+process, is a function of intelligence. Morality cannot flower and fruit
+if intelligence remains infantile.
+
+All of us in early childhood lacked moral responsibility. We were as
+rank egoists as any criminal. Respect for the feelings, the property
+rights, or any other kind of rights, of others had to be laboriously
+acquired under the whip of discipline. But by degrees we learned that
+only when instincts are curbed, and conduct is made to conform to
+principles established formally or accepted tacitly by our neighbors,
+does this become a livable world for any of us. Without the intelligence
+to generalize the particular, to foresee distant consequences of present
+acts, to weigh these foreseen consequences in the nice balance of
+imagination, morality cannot be learned. When the adult body, with its
+adult instincts, is coupled with the undeveloped intelligence and weak
+inhibitory powers of a 10-year-old child, the only possible outcome,
+except in those cases where constant guardianship is exercised by
+relatives or friends, is some form of delinquency.
+
+Considering the tremendous cost of vice and crime, which in all
+probability amounts to not less than $500,000,000 per year in the United
+States alone, it is evident that psychological testing has found here
+one of its richest applications. Before offenders can be subjected
+to rational treatment a mental diagnosis is necessary, and while
+intelligence tests do not constitute a complete psychological diagnosis,
+they are, nevertheless, its most indispensable part.
+
+INTELLIGENCE TESTS OF SUPERIOR CHILDREN. The number of children with
+very superior ability is approximately as great as the number of
+feeble-minded. The future welfare of the country hinges, in no small
+degree, upon the right education of these superior children. Whether
+civilization moves on and up depends most on the advances made by
+creative thinkers and leaders in science, politics, art, morality, and
+religion. Moderate ability can follow, or imitate, but genius must show
+the way.
+
+Through the leveling influences of the educational lockstep such
+children at present are often lost in the masses. It is a rare child who
+is able to break this lockstep by extra promotions. Taking the country
+over, the ratio of "accelerates" to "retardates" in the school is
+approximately 1 to 10. Through the handicapping influences of poverty,
+social neglect, physical defects, or educational maladjustments, many
+potential leaders in science, art, government, and industry are denied
+the opportunity of a normal development. The use we have made of
+exceptional ability reminds one of the primitive methods of surface
+mining. It is necessary to explore the nation's hidden resources of
+intelligence. The common saying that "genius will out" is one of those
+dangerous half-truths with which too many people rest content.
+
+Psychological tests show that children of superior ability are very
+likely to be misunderstood in school. The writer has tested more than a
+hundred children who were as much above average intelligence as moron
+defectives are below. The large majority of these were found located
+below the school grade warranted by their intellectual level. One third
+had failed to reap any advantage whatever, in terms of promotion, from
+their very superior intelligence. Even genius languishes when kept
+over-long at tasks that are too easy.
+
+Our data show that teachers sometimes fail entirely to recognize
+exceptional superiority in a pupil, and that the degree of such
+superiority is rarely estimated with anything like the accuracy which is
+possible to the psychologist after a one-hour examination. _B. F._, for
+example, was a little over 71/2 years old when tested. He was in the
+third grade, and was therefore thought by his teacher to be accelerated
+in school. This boy's intelligence, however, was found to be above the
+12-year level. There is no doubt that his mental ability would have
+enabled him, with a few months of individual instruction, to carry fifth
+or even sixth-grade work as easily as third, and without injury to body
+or mind. Nevertheless, the teacher and both the parents of this child
+had found nothing remarkable about him. In reality he belongs to a grade
+of genius not found oftener than once in several thousand cases.
+
+Another illustration is that of a boy of 101/2 years who tested at the
+"average adult" level. He was doing superior work in the sixth grade,
+but according to the testimony of the teacher had "no unusual ability."
+It was ascertained from the parents that this boy, at an age when most
+children are reading fairy stories, had a passion for standard medical
+literature and textbooks in physical science. Yet, after more than a
+year of daily contact with this young genius (who is a relative of
+Meyerbeer, the composer), the teacher had discovered no symptoms of
+unusual ability.[6]
+
+[6] See p. 26 _ff._ for further illustrations of this kind.
+
+Teachers should be better trained in detecting the signs of superior
+ability. Every child who consistently gets high marks in his school work
+with apparent ease should be given a mental examination, and if his
+intelligence level warrants it he should either be given extra
+promotions, or placed in a special class for superior children where
+faster progress can be made. The latter is the better plan, because it
+obviates the necessity of skipping grades; it permits rapid but
+continuous progress.
+
+The usual reluctance of teachers to give extra promotions probably rests
+upon three factors: (1) mere inertia; (2) a natural unwillingness to
+part with exceptionally satisfactory pupils; and (3) the traditional
+belief that precocious children should be held back for fear of dire
+physical or mental consequences.
+
+In order to throw light on the question whether exceptionally bright
+children are specially likely to be one-sided, nervous, delicate,
+morally abnormal, socially unadaptable, or otherwise peculiar, the
+writer has secured rather extensive information regarding 31 children
+whose mental age was found by intelligence tests to be 25 per cent above
+the actual age. This degree of intelligence is possessed by about
+2 children out of 100, and is nearly as far above average intelligence
+as high-grade feeble-mindedness is below. The supplementary information,
+which was furnished in most cases by the teachers, may be summarized as
+follows:--
+
+  1. _Ability special or general._ In the case of 20 out of 31 the
+      ability is decidedly general, and with 2 it is mainly general.
+      The talents of 5 are described as more or less special, but
+      only in one case is it remarkably so. Doubtful 4.
+
+  2. _Health._ 15 are said to be perfectly healthy; 13 have one or
+      more physical defects; 4 of the 13 are described as delicate;
+      4 have adenoids; 4 have eye-defects; 1 lisps; and 1 stutters.
+      These figures are about the same as one finds in any group of
+      ordinary children.
+
+  3. _Studiousness._ "Extremely studious," 15; "usually studious" or
+      "fairly studious," 11; "not particularly studious," 5; "lazy,"
+      0.
+
+  4. _Moral traits._ Favorable traits only, 19; one or more
+      unfavorable traits, 8; no answer, 4. The eight with
+      unfavorable moral traits are described as follows: 2 are "very
+      self-willed"; 1 "needs close watching"; 1 is "cruel to
+      animals"; 1 is "untruthful"; 1 is "unreliable"; 1 is "a
+      bluffer"; 1 is "sexually abnormal," "perverted," and
+      "vicious."
+
+      It will be noted that with the exception of the last child,
+      the moral irregularities mentioned can hardly be regarded,
+      from the psychological point of view, as essentially abnormal.
+      It is perhaps a good rather than a bad sign for a child to be
+      self-willed; most children "need close watching"; and a
+      certain amount of untruthfulness in children is the rule and
+      not the exception.
+
+  5. _Social adaptability._ Socially adaptable, 25; not adaptable,
+      2; doubtful, 4.
+
+  6. _Attitude of other children._ "Favorable," "friendly," "liked
+      by everybody," "much admired," "popular," etc., 26; "not
+      liked," 1; "inspires repugnance," 1; no answer, 1.
+
+  7. _Is child a leader?_ "Yes," 14; "no," or "not particularly,"
+      12; doubtful, 5.
+
+  8. _Is play life normal?_ "Yes," 26; "no," 1; "hardly," 1;
+      doubtful, 3.
+
+  9. _Is child spoiled or vain?_ "No," 22; "yes," 5; "somewhat," 2;
+      no answer, 2.
+
+According to the above data, exceptionally intelligent children are
+fully as likely to be healthy as ordinary children; their ability is far
+more often general than special, they are studious above the average,
+really serious faults are not common among them, they are nearly always
+socially adaptable, are sought after as playmates and companions, their
+play life is usually normal, they are leaders far oftener than other
+children, and notwithstanding their many really superior qualities they
+are seldom vain or spoiled.
+
+It would be greatly to the advantage of such children if their superior
+ability were more promptly and fully recognized, and if (under proper
+medical supervision, of course) they were promoted as rapidly as their
+mental development would warrant. Unless they are given the grade of
+work which calls forth their best efforts, they run the risk of falling
+into lifelong habits of submaximum efficiency. The danger in the case of
+such children is not over-pressure, but under-pressure.
+
+INTELLIGENCE TESTS AS A BASIS FOR GRADING. Not only in the case of
+retarded or exceptionally bright children, but with many others also,
+intelligence tests can aid in correctly placing the child in school.
+
+The pupil who enters one school system from another is a case in point.
+Such a pupil nearly always suffers a loss of time. The indefensible
+custom is to grade the newcomer down a little, because, forsooth, the
+textbooks he has studied may have differed somewhat from those he is
+about to take up, or because the school system from which he comes may
+be looked upon as inferior. Teachers are too often suspicious of all
+other educational methods besides their own. The present treatment
+accorded such children, which so often does them injustice and injury,
+should be replaced by an intelligence test. The hour of time required
+for the test is a small matter in comparison with the loss of a school
+term by the pupils.
+
+Indeed, it would be desirable to make all promotions on the basis
+chiefly of intellectual ability. Hitherto the school has had to rely on
+tests of information because reliable tests of intelligence have not
+until recently been available. As trained Binet examiners become more
+plentiful, the information standard will have to give way to the
+criterion which asks merely that the child shall be able to do the work
+of the next higher grade. The brief intelligence test is not only more
+enlightening than the examination; it is also more hygienic. The school
+examination is often for the child a source of worry and anxiety; the
+mental test is an interesting and pleasant experience.
+
+INTELLIGENCE TESTS FOR VOCATIONAL FITNESS. The time is probably not far
+distant when intelligence tests will become a recognized and widely used
+instrument for determining vocational fitness. Of course, it is not
+claimed that tests are available which will tell us unerringly exactly
+what one of a thousand or more occupations a given individual is best
+fitted to pursue. But when thousands of children who have been tested by
+the Binet scale have been followed out into the industrial world, and
+their success in various occupations noted, we shall know fairly
+definitely the vocational significance of any given degree of mental
+inferiority or superiority. Researches of this kind will ultimately
+determine the minimum "intelligence quotient" necessary for success in
+each leading occupation.
+
+Industrial concerns doubtless suffer enormous losses from the employment
+of persons whose mental ability is not equal to the tasks they are
+expected to perform. The present methods of trying out new employees,
+transferring them to simpler and simpler jobs as their inefficiency
+becomes apparent, is wasteful and to a great extent unnecessary. A
+cheaper and more satisfactory method would be to employ a psychologist
+to examine applicants for positions and to weed out the unfit. Any
+business employing as many as five hundred or a thousand workers, as,
+for example, a large department store, could save in this way several
+times the salary of a well-trained psychologist.
+
+That the industrially inefficient are often of subnormal intelligence
+has already been demonstrated in a number of psychological
+investigations. Of 150 "hoboes" tested under the direction of the writer
+by Mr. Knollin, at least 15 per cent belonged to the moron grade of
+mental deficiency, and almost as many more were border-line cases. To be
+sure, a large proportion were found perfectly normal, and a few even
+decidedly superior in mental ability, but the ratio of mental deficiency
+was ten or fifteen times as high as that holding for the general
+population. Several had as low as 9- or 10-year intelligence, and one
+had a mental level of 7 years. The industrial history of such subjects,
+as given by themselves, was always about what the mental level would
+lead us to expect--unskilled work, lack of interest in accomplishment,
+frequent discharge from jobs, discouragement, and finally the "road."
+
+The above findings have been fully paralleled by Mr. Glenn Johnson and
+Professor Eleanor Rowland, of Reed College, who tested 108 unemployed
+charity cases in Portland, Oregon. Both of these investigators made use
+of the Stanford revision of the Binet scale, which is especially
+serviceable in distinguishing the upper-grade defectives from normals.
+
+It hardly needs to be emphasized that when charity organizations help
+the feeble-minded to float along in the social and industrial world, and
+to produce and rear children after their kind, a doubtful service is
+rendered. A little psychological research would aid the united charities
+of any city to direct their expenditures into more profitable channels
+than would otherwise be possible.
+
+OTHER USES OF INTELLIGENCE TESTS. Another important use of intelligence
+tests is in the study of the factors which influence mental development.
+It is desirable that we should be able to guard the child against
+influences which affect mental development unfavorably; but as long as
+these influences have not been sifted, weighed, and measured, we have
+nothing but conjecture on which to base our efforts in this direction.
+
+When we search the literature of child hygiene for reliable evidence as
+to the injurious effects upon mental ability of malnutrition, decayed
+teeth, obstructed breathing, reduced sleep, bad ventilation,
+insufficient exercise, etc., we are met by endless assertion painfully
+unsupported by demonstrated fact. We have, indeed, very little exact
+knowledge regarding the mental effects of any of the factors just
+mentioned. When standardized mental tests have come into more general
+use, such influences will be easy to detect wherever they are really
+present.
+
+Again, the most important question of heredity is that regarding the
+inheritance of intelligence; but this is a problem which cannot be
+attacked at all without some accurate means of identifying the thing
+which is the object of study. Without the use of scales for measuring
+intelligence we can give no better answer as to the essential difference
+between a genius and a fool than is to be found in legend and fiction.
+
+Applying this to school children, it means that without such tests we
+cannot know to what extent a child's mental performances are determined
+by environment and to what extent by heredity. Is the place of the
+so-called lower classes in the social and industrial scale the result of
+their inferior native endowment, or is their apparent inferiority merely
+a result of their inferior home and school training? Is genius more
+common among children of the educated classes than among the children of
+the ignorant and poor? Are the inferior races really inferior, or are
+they merely unfortunate in their lack of opportunity to learn?
+
+Only intelligence tests can answer these questions and grade the raw
+material with which education works. Without them we can never
+distinguish the results of our educational efforts with a given child
+from the influence of the child's original endowment. Such tests would
+have told us, for example, whether the much-discussed "wonder children,"
+such as the Sidis and Wiener boys and the Stoner girl, owe their
+precocious intellectual prowess to superior training (as their parents
+believe) or to superior native ability. The supposed effects upon mental
+development of new methods of mind training, which are exploited so
+confidently from time to time (e.g., the Montessori method and the
+various systems of sensory and motor training for the feeble-minded),
+will have to be checked up by the same kind of scientific measurement.
+
+In all these fields intelligence tests are certain to play an
+ever-increasing role. With the exception of moral character there
+is nothing as significant for a child's future as his grade of
+intelligence. Even health itself is likely to have less influence in
+determining success in life. Although strength and swiftness have always
+had great survival value among the lower animals, these characteristics
+have long since lost their supremacy in man's struggle for existence.
+For us the rule of brawn has been broken, and intelligence has become
+the decisive factor in success. Schools, railroads, factories, and the
+largest commercial concerns may be successfully managed by persons who
+are physically weak or even sickly. One who has intelligence constantly
+measures opportunities against his own strength or weakness and adjusts
+himself to conditions by following those leads which promise most toward
+the realization of his individual possibilities.
+
+All classes of intellects, the weakest as well as the strongest, will
+profit by the application of their talents to tasks which are consonant
+with their ability. When we have learned the lessons which intelligence
+tests have to teach, we shall no longer blame mentally defective workmen
+for their industrial inefficiency, punish weak-minded children because
+of their inability to learn, or imprison and hang mentally defective
+criminals because they lacked the intelligence to appreciate the
+ordinary codes of social conduct.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER II
+
+SOURCES OF ERROR IN JUDGING INTELLIGENCE
+
+
+ARE INTELLIGENCE TESTS SUPERFLUOUS? Binet tells us that he often
+encountered the criticism that intelligence tests are superfluous, and
+that in going to so much trouble to devise his measuring scale he was
+forcing an open door. Those who made this criticism believed that the
+observant teacher or parent is able to make an offhand estimate of a
+child's intelligence which is accurate enough. "It is a stupid teacher,"
+said one, "who needs a psychologist to tell her which pupils are not
+intelligent." Every one who uses intelligence tests meets this attitude
+from time to time.
+
+This should not be surprising or discouraging. It is only natural that
+those who are unfamiliar with the methods of psychology should
+occasionally question their validity or worth, just as there are many
+excellent people who do not "believe in" vaccination against typhoid and
+small pox, operations for appendicitis, etc.
+
+There is an additional reason why the applications of psychology have to
+overcome a good deal of conservatism and skepticism; namely, the fact
+that every one, whether psychologically trained or not, acquires in the
+ordinary experiences of life a certain degree of expertness in the
+observation and interpretation of mental traits. The possession of this
+little fund of practical working knowledge makes most people slow to
+admit any one's claim to greater expertness. When the astronomer tells
+us the distance to Jupiter, we accept his statement, because we
+recognize that our ordinary experience affords no basis for judgment
+about such matters. But every one acquires more or less facility in
+distinguishing the coarser differences among people in intelligence,
+and this half-knowledge naturally generates a certain amount of
+resistance to the more refined method of tests.
+
+It should be evident, however, that we need more than the ability merely
+to distinguish a genius from a simpleton, just as a physician needs
+something more than the ability to distinguish an athlete from a man
+dying of consumption. It is necessary to have a definite and accurate
+diagnosis, one which will differentiate more finely the many degrees and
+qualities of intelligence. Just as in the case of physical illness, we
+need to know not merely that the patient is sick, but also why he is
+sick, what organs are involved, what course the illness will run, and
+what physical work the patient can safely undertake, so in the case of a
+retarded child, we need to know the exact degree of intellectual
+deficiency, what mental functions are chiefly concerned in the defect,
+whether the deficiency is due to innate endowment, to physical illness,
+or to faults of education, and what lines of mental activity the child
+will be able to pursue with reasonable hope of success. In the diagnosis
+of a case of malnutrition, the up-to-date physician does not depend upon
+general symptoms, but instead makes a blood test to determine the exact
+number of red corpuscles per cubic millimeter of blood and the exact
+percentage of haemoglobin. He has learned that external appearances are
+often misleading. Similarly, every psychologist who is experienced in
+the mental examination of school children knows that his own or the
+teacher's estimate of a child's intelligence is subject to grave and
+frequent error.
+
+THE NECESSITY OF STANDARDS. In the first place, in order to judge an
+individual's intelligence it is necessary to have in mind some standard
+as to what constitutes normal intelligence. This the ordinary parent or
+teacher does not have. In the case of school children, for example, each
+pupil is judged with reference to the average intelligence of the
+class. But the teacher has no means of knowing whether the average for
+her class is above, equal to, or below that for children in general. Her
+standard may be too high, too low, vague, mechanical, or fragmentary.
+The same, of course, holds in the case of parents or any one else
+attempting to estimate intelligence on the basis of common observation.
+
+THE INTELLIGENCE OF RETARDED CHILDREN USUALLY OVERESTIMATED. One of the
+most common errors made by the teacher is to overestimate the
+intelligence of the over-age pupil. This is because she fails to take
+account of age differences and estimates intelligence on the basis of
+the child's school performance in the grade where he happens to be
+located. She tends to overlook the fact that quality of school work is
+no index of intelligence unless age is taken into account. The question
+should be, not, "Is this child doing his school work well?" but rather,
+"In what school grade should a child of this age be able to do
+satisfactory work?" A high-grade imbecile may do average work in the
+first grade, and a high-grade moron average work in the third or fourth
+grade, provided only they are sufficiently over-age for the grade in
+question.
+
+Our experience in testing children for segregation in special classes
+has time and again brought this fallacy of teachers to our attention. We
+have often found one or more feeble-minded children in a class after
+the teacher had confidently asserted that there was not a single
+exceptionally dull child present. In every case where there has been
+opportunity to follow the later school progress of such a child the
+validity of the intelligence test has been fully confirmed.
+
+The following are typical examples of the neglect of teachers to take
+the age factor into account when estimating the intelligence of the
+over-age child:--
+
+    _A. R. Girl, age 11; in low second grade._ She was able to do
+    the work of this grade, not well, but passably. The teacher's
+    judgment as to this child's intelligence was "dull but not
+    defective." What the teacher overlooked was the fact that she
+    had judged the child by a 7-year standard, and that, instead of
+    only being able to do the work of the second grade
+    indifferently, a child of this age should have been equal to the
+    work of the fifth grade. In reality, A. R. is definitely
+    feeble-minded. Although she is from a home of average culture,
+    is 11 years old, and has attended school five years, she has
+    barely the intelligence of the average child of six years.
+
+    _D. C. Boy, age 17; in fifth grade._ His teacher knew that he
+    was dull, but had not thought of him as belonging to the class
+    of feeble-minded. She had judged this boy by the 11-year
+    standard and had perhaps been further misled by his normal
+    appearance and exceptionally satisfactory behavior. The Binet
+    test quickly showed that he had a mental level of approximately
+    9 years. There is little probability that his comprehension will
+    ever surpass that of the average 10-year-old.
+
+    _R. A. Boy, age 17; mental age 11; sixth grade; school work
+    "nearly average"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average."_
+    Test plainly shows this child to be a high-grade moron, or
+    border-liner at best. Had attended school regularly 11 years and
+    had made 6 grades. Teacher had compared child with his
+    12-year-old classmates.
+
+    _H. A. Boy, age 14; mental age 9-6; low fourth grade; school
+    work "inferior"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average."_
+    The teacher blamed the inferior quality of school work to "bad
+    home environment." As a matter of fact, the boy's father is
+    feeble-minded and the normality of the mother is questionable.
+    An older brother is in a reform school. We are perfectly safe in
+    predicting that this boy will not complete the eighth grade even
+    if he attends school till he is 21 years of age.
+
+    _F. I. Boy, age 12-11; mental age 9-4; third grade; school work
+    "average"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average"; social
+    environment "average"; health good and attendance regular._
+    Intelligence and school success are what we should expect of an
+    average 9-year-old.
+
+    _D. A. Boy, age 12; mental age 9-2; third grade; school work
+    "inferior"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average."_
+    Teacher imputes inferior school work to "absence from school and
+    lack of interest in books"; we have yet to find a child with a
+    mental age 25 per cent below chronological age who _was_
+    particularly interested in books or enthusiastic about school.
+
+    _C. U. Girl, age 10; mental age 7-8; second grade; school work
+    "average"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average."_
+    Teacher blames adenoids and bad teeth for retardation. No doubt
+    of child's mental deficiency.
+
+    _P. I. Girl, age 8-10; mental age 6-7; has been in first grade
+    21/2 years; school work "average"; teacher's estimate of
+    intelligence "average."_ The mother and one brother of this girl
+    are both feeble-minded.
+
+    _H. O. Girl, age 7-10; mental age 5-2; first grade for 2 years;
+    school work "inferior"; teacher's estimate of intelligence
+    "average."_ The teacher nevertheless adds, "This child is not
+    normal, but her ability to respond to drill shows that she has
+    intelligence." It is of course true that even feeble-minded
+    children of 5-year intelligence are able to profit a little from
+    drill. Their weakness comes to light in their inability to
+    perform higher types of mental activity.
+
+THE INTELLIGENCE OF SUPERIOR CHILDREN USUALLY UNDERESTIMATED. We have
+already mentioned the frequent failure of teachers and parents to
+recognize superior ability.[7] The fallacy here is again largely due to
+the neglect of the age factor, but the resulting error is in the
+opposite direction from that set forth above. The superior child is
+likely to be a year or two younger than the average child of his grade,
+and is accordingly judged by a standard which is too high. The following
+are illustrations:--
+
+[7] See p. 13 _ff._
+
+    _M. L. Girl, age 11-2; mental age "average adult" (16); sixth
+    grade; school work "superior"; teacher's estimate of
+    intelligence "average."_ Teacher credits superior school work to
+    "unusual home advantages." Father a college professor. The
+    teacher considers the child accelerated in school. In reality
+    she ought to be in the second year of high school instead of in
+    the sixth grade.
+
+    _H. A. Boy, age 11; mental age 14; sixth grade; school work
+    "average"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average."_
+    According to the supplementary information the boy is
+    "wonderfully attentive," "studious," and possessed of
+    "all-round ability." The estimate of "average intelligence" was
+    probably the result of comparing him with classmates who
+    averaged about a year older.
+
+    _K. R. Girl, age 6-1; mental age 8-5; second grade; school work
+    "average"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "superior"; social
+    environment "average."_ Is it not evident that a child from
+    ordinary social environment, who does work of average quality in
+    the second grade when barely 6 years of age, should be judged
+    "very superior" rather than merely "superior" in intelligence?
+    The intelligence quotient of this girl is 140, which is not
+    reached by more than one child in two hundred.
+
+    _S. A. Boy, age 8-10; mental age 10-9; fourth grade; school work
+    "average"; teacher's estimate of intelligence "average."_
+    Teacher attributed school acceleration to "studiousness" and
+    "delight in school work." It would be more reasonable to infer
+    that these traits are indications of unusually superior
+    intelligence.
+
+OTHER FALLACIES IN THE ESTIMATION OF INTELLIGENCE. Another source
+of error in the teacher's judgment comes from the difficulty in
+distinguishing genuine dullness from the mental condition which results
+sometimes from unfavorable social environment or lack of training.
+
+    _V. P. Boy, age 7._ Had attended school one year and had
+    profited very little from the instruction. He had learned to
+    read very little, spoke chiefly in monosyllables, and seemed
+    "queer." The teacher suspected his intelligence and asked for a
+    mental examination. The Binet test showed that except for
+    vocabulary, which was unusually low, there was practically no
+    mental retardation. Inquiry disclosed the fact that the boy's
+    parents were uneducated deaf-mutes, and that the boy had
+    associated little with other children. Four years later this boy
+    was doing fairly well in school, though a year retarded because
+    of his unfavorable home environment.
+
+    _X. Y. Boy, age 10._ Son of a successful business man, he was
+    barely able to read in the second reader. The Binet test
+    revealed an intelligence level which was absolutely normal. The
+    boy was removed to a special class where he could receive
+    individual attention, and two years later was found doing good
+    work in a regular class of the fifth grade. His bad beginning
+    seemed to have been due to an unfavorable attitude toward school
+    work, due in turn to lack of discipline in the home, and to the
+    fact that because of the father's frequent change of business
+    headquarters the boy had never attended one school longer than
+    three months.
+
+Another source of error in judging intelligence from common observation
+is the tendency to overestimate the intelligence of the sprightly,
+talkative, sanguine child, and to underestimate the intelligence of the
+child who is less emotional, reacts slowly, and talks little. One
+occasionally finds a feeble-minded adult, perhaps of only 9- or 10-year
+intelligence, whose verbal fluency, mental liveliness, and
+self-confidence would mislead the offhand judgment of even the
+psychologist. One individual of this type, a border-line case at best,
+was accustomed to harangue street audiences and had served as "major" in
+"Kelly's Army," a horde of several hundred unemployed men who a few
+years ago organized and started to march from San Francisco to
+Washington.
+
+BINET'S QUESTIONNAIRE ON TEACHERS' METHODS OF JUDGING INTELLIGENCE.[8]
+Aroused by the skepticism so often shown toward his test method, Binet
+decided to make a little study of the methods by which teachers are
+accustomed to arrive at a judgment as to a child's intelligence.
+Accordingly, through the cooeperation of the director of elementary
+education in Paris, he secured answers from a number of teachers to the
+following questions:--
+
+[8] See p. 169 _ff._ of reference 2, at end of this book
+
+  1. _By what means do you judge the intelligence of your pupils?_
+  2. _How often have you been deceived in your judgments?_
+
+About 40 replies were received. Most of the answers to the first
+question were vague, one-sided, "verbal," or bookish. Only a few showed
+much psychological discrimination as to what intelligence is and
+what its symptoms are. There was a very general tendency to judge
+intelligence by success in one or more of the school studies. Some
+thought that ability to master arithmetic was a sure criterion. Others
+were influenced almost entirely by the pupil's ability to read. One
+teacher said that the child who can "read so expressively as to make you
+feel the punctuation" is certainly intelligent, an observation which is
+rather good, as far as it goes. A few judged intelligence by the pupil's
+knowledge of such subjects as history and geography, which, as Binet
+points out, is to confound intelligence with the ability to memorize.
+"Memory," says Binet, is a "great simulator of intelligence." It is a
+wise teacher who is not deceived by it. Only a small minority mentioned
+resourcefulness in play, capacity to adjust to practical situations, or
+any other out-of-school criteria.
+
+Some suggested asking the pupil such questions as the following:--
+
+    "Why do you love your parents?" "If it takes three persons seven
+    hours to do a piece of work, would it take seven persons any
+    longer?" "Which would you rather have, a fourth of a pie, or a
+    half of a half?" "Which is heavier, a pound of feathers or a
+    pound of lead?" "If you had twenty cents what would you do with
+    it?"
+
+A great many based their judgment mainly on the general appearance of
+the face and eyes. An "active" or "passive" expression of the eyes was
+looked upon as especially significant. One teacher thought that a mere
+"glance of the eye" was sufficient to display the grade of intelligence.
+If the eyes are penetrating, reflective, or show curiosity, the child
+must be intelligent; if they are heavy and expressionless, he must be
+dull. The mobility of countenance came in for frequent mention, also the
+shape of the head.
+
+No one will deny that intelligence displays itself to a greater or
+less extent in the features; but how, asks Binet, are we going to
+_standardize_ a "glance of the eye" or an "expression of curiosity" so
+that it will serve as an exact measure of intelligence?
+
+The fact is, the more one sees of feeble-minded children, the less
+reliance one comes to place upon facial expression as a sign of
+intelligence. Some children who are only slightly backward have the
+general appearance of low-grade imbeciles. On the other hand, not a few
+who are distinctly feeble-minded are pretty and attractive. With many
+such children a ready smile takes the place of comprehension. If the
+smile is rather sweet and sympathetic, as is often the case, the
+observer is almost sure to be deceived.
+
+As regards the shape of the head, peculiar conformation of the ears, and
+other "stigmata," science long ago demonstrated that these are
+ordinarily of little or no significance.
+
+In reply to the second question, some teachers stated that they never
+made a mistake, while others admitted failure in one case out of three.
+Still others said, "Once in ten years," "once in twenty years," "once in
+a thousand times," etc.
+
+As Binet remarks, the answers to this question are not very enlightening.
+In the first place, the teacher as a rule loses sight of the pupil when
+he has passed from her care, and seldom has opportunity of finding out
+whether his later success belies her judgment or confirms it. Errors go
+undiscovered for the simple reason that there is no opportunity to check
+them up. In the second place, her estimate is so rough that an error
+must be very great in order to have any meaning. If I say that a man is
+six feet and two inches tall, it is easy enough to apply a measuring
+stick and prove the correctness or incorrectness of my assertion. But if
+I say simply that the man is "rather tall," or "very tall," the error
+must be very extreme before we can expose it, particularly since the
+estimate can itself be checked up only by observation and not by
+controlled experiment.
+
+The teachers' answers seem to justify three conclusions:--
+
+1. Teachers do not have a very definite idea of what constitutes
+intelligence. They tend to confuse it variously with capacity for
+memorizing, facility in reading, ability to master arithmetic, etc. On
+the whole, their standard is too academic. They fail to appreciate the
+one-sidedness of the school's demands upon intelligence.
+
+In a quaintly humorous passage discussing this tendency, Binet
+characterizes the child in a class as _denature_, a French word which we
+may translate (though rather too literally) as "denatured." Too often
+this "denatured" child of the classroom is the only child the teacher
+knows.
+
+2. In judging intelligence teachers are too easily deceived by a
+sprightly attitude, a sympathetic expression, a glance of the eye, or a
+chance "bump" on the head.
+
+3. Although a few teachers seem to realize the many possibilities of
+error, the majority show rather undue confidence in the accuracy of
+their judgment.
+
+BINET'S EXPERIMENT ON HOW TEACHERS TEST INTELLIGENCE.[9] Finally, Binet
+had three teachers come to his laboratory to judge the intelligence of
+children whom they had never seen before. Each spent an afternoon in the
+laboratory and examined five pupils. In each case the teacher was left
+free to arrive at a conclusion in her own way. Binet, who remained in
+the room and took notes, recounts with playful humor how the teachers
+were unavoidably compelled to resort to the much-abused test method,
+although their attempts at using it were sometimes, from the
+psychologist's point of view, amusingly clumsy.
+
+[9] See p. 182 _ff._ of reference 2 at end of this book.
+
+One teacher, for example, questioned the children about some canals and
+sluices which were in the vicinity, asking what their purpose was and
+how they worked. Another showed the children some pretty pictures,
+which she had brought with her for the purpose, and asked questions
+about them. Showing the picture of a garret, she asked how a garret
+differs from an ordinary room. One teacher asked whether in building a
+factory it was best to have the walls thick or thin. As King Edward had
+just died, another teacher questioned the children about the details of
+this event, in order to find out whether they were in the habit of
+reading the newspapers, or understood the things they heard others read.
+Other questions related to the names of the streets in the neighborhood,
+the road one should take to reach a certain point in the vicinity, etc.
+Binet notes that many of the questions were special, and were only
+applicable with the children of this particular school.
+
+The method of proposing the questions and judging the responses was also
+at fault. The teachers did not adhere consistently to any definite
+formula in giving a particular test to the different children. Instead,
+the questions were materially altered from time to time. One teacher
+scored the identical response differently for two children, giving one
+child more credit than the other because she had already judged his
+intelligence to be superior. In several cases the examination was
+needlessly delayed in order to instruct the child in what he did not
+know.
+
+The examination ended, quite properly for a teacher's examination, with
+questions about history, literature, the metric system, etc., and with
+the recitation of a fable.
+
+A comparison of the results showed hardly any agreement among the
+estimates of the three teachers. When questioned about the standard that
+had been taken in arriving at their conclusions, one teacher said she
+had taken the answers of the first pupil as a point of departure, and
+that she had judged the other pupils by this one. Another judged all the
+children by a child of her acquaintance whom she knew to be intelligent.
+This was, of course, an unsafe method, because no one could say how the
+child taken as an ideal would have responded to the tests used with the
+five children.
+
+In summarizing the result of his little experiment, Binet points out
+that the teachers employed, as if by instinct, the very method which he
+himself recommends. In using it, however, they made numerous errors.
+Their questions were often needlessly long. Several were "dilemma
+questions," that is, answerable by _yes_ or _no_. In such cases chance
+alone will cause fifty per cent of the answers to be correct. Some of
+the questions were merely tests of school knowledge. Others were
+entirely special, usable only with the children of this particular
+school on this particular day. Not all of the questions were put in the
+same terms, and a given response did not always receive the same score.
+When the children responded incorrectly or incompletely, they were often
+given help, but not always to the same extent. In other words, says
+Binet, it was evident that "the teachers employed very awkwardly a very
+excellent method."
+
+The above remark is as pertinent as it is expressive. As the statement
+implies, the test method is but a refinement and standardization of the
+common-sense approach. Binet remarks that most people who inquire into
+his method of measuring intelligence do so expecting to find something
+very surprising and mysterious; and on seeing how much it resembles the
+methods which common sense employs in ordinary life, they heave a sigh
+of disappointment and say, "Is that all?" Binet reminds us that the
+difference between the scientific and unscientific way of doing a thing
+is not necessarily a difference in the _nature_ of the method; it is
+often merely a difference in _exactness_. Science does the thing better,
+because it does it more accurately.
+
+It was of course not the purpose of Binet to cast a slur upon the good
+sense and judgment of teachers. The teachers who took part in the little
+experiment described above were Binet's personal friends. The errors he
+points out in his entertaining and good-humored account of the
+experiment are inherent in the situation. They are the kind of errors
+which any person, however discriminating and observant, is likely to
+make in estimating the intelligence of a subject without the use of
+standardized tests.
+
+It is the writer's experience that the teacher's estimate of a child's
+intelligence is much more reliable than that of the average parent; more
+accurate even than that of the physician who has not had psychological
+training.
+
+Indeed, it is an exceptional school physician who is able to give any
+very valuable assistance to teachers in the classification of mentally
+exceptional children for special pedagogical treatment.
+
+This is only to be expected, for the physician has ordinarily had much
+less instruction in psychology than the teacher, and of course
+infinitely less experience in judging the mental performances of
+children. Even if graduated from a first-rank medical school, the
+instruction he has received in the important subject of mental
+deficiency has probably been less adequate than that given to the
+students of a standard normal school. As a rule, the doctor has no
+equipment or special fitness which gives him any advantage over the
+teacher in acquiring facility in the use of intelligence tests.
+
+As for parents, it would of course be unreasonable to expect from them a
+very accurate judgment regarding the mental peculiarities of their
+children. The difficulty is not simply that which comes from lack of
+special training. The presence of parental affection renders impartial
+judgment impossible. Still more serious are the effects of habituation
+to the child's mental traits. As a result of such habituation the most
+intelligent parent tends to develop an unfortunate blindness to all
+sorts of abnormalities which exist in his own children.
+
+The only way of escape from the fallacies we have mentioned lies in the
+use of some kind of refined psychological procedure. Binet testing is
+destined to become universally known and practiced in schools, prisons,
+reformatories, charity stations, orphan asylums, and even ordinary
+homes, for the same reason that Babcock testing has become universal in
+dairying. Each is indispensable to its purpose.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER III
+
+DESCRIPTION OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD
+
+
+ESSENTIAL NATURE OF THE SCALE. The Binet scale is made up of an extended
+series of tests in the nature of "stunts," or problems, success in which
+demands the exercise of intelligence. As left by Binet, the scale
+consists of 54 tests, so graded in difficulty that the easiest lie well
+within the range of normal 3-year-old children, while the hardest tax
+the intelligence of the average adult. The problems are designed
+primarily to test native intelligence, not school knowledge or home
+training. They try to answer the question "How intelligent is this
+child?" How much the child has learned is of significance only in so far
+as it throws light on his ability to learn more.
+
+Binet fully appreciated the fact that intelligence is not homogeneous,
+that it has many aspects, and that no one kind of test will display it
+adequately. He therefore assembled for his intelligence scale tests of
+many different types, some of them designed to display differences of
+memory, others differences in power to reason, ability to compare, power
+of comprehension, time orientation, facility in the use of number
+concepts, power to combine ideas into a meaningful whole, the maturity
+of apperception, wealth of ideas, knowledge of common objects, etc.
+
+HOW THE SCALE WAS DERIVED. The tests were arranged in order of
+difficulty, as found by trying them upon some 200 normal children of
+different ages from 3 to 15 years. It was found, for illustration, that
+a certain test was passed by only a very small proportion of the younger
+children, say the 5-year-olds, and that the number passing this test
+increased rapidly in the succeeding years until by the age of 7 or
+8 years, let us say, practically all the children were successful.
+If, in our supposed case, the test was passed by about two thirds to
+three fourths of the normal children aged 7 years, it was considered by
+Binet a test of 7-year intelligence. In like manner, a test passed by
+65 to 75 per cent of the normal 9-year-olds was considered a test of
+9-year intelligence, and so on. By trying out many different tests in
+this way it was possible to secure five tests to represent each age from
+3 to 10 years (excepting age 4, which has only four tests), five for
+age 12, five for 15, and five for adults, making 54 tests in all.
+
+LIST OF TESTS. The following is the list of tests as arranged by Binet
+in 1911, shortly before his untimely death:--
+
+_Age 3:_
+    1. Points to nose, eyes, and mouth.
+    2. Repeats two digits.
+    3. Enumerates objects in a picture.
+    4. Gives family name.
+    5. Repeats a sentence of six syllables.
+
+_Age 4:_
+    1. Gives his sex.
+    2. Names key, knife, and penny.
+    3. Repeats three digits.
+    4. Compares two lines.
+
+_Age 5:_
+    1. Compares two weights.
+    2. Copies a square.
+    3. Repeats a sentence of ten syllables.
+    4. Counts four pennies.
+    5. Unites the halves of a divided rectangle.
+
+_Age 6:_
+    1. Distinguishes between morning and afternoon.
+    2. Defines familiar words in terms of use.
+    3. Copies a diamond.
+    4. Counts thirteen pennies.
+    5. Distinguishes pictures of ugly and pretty faces.
+
+_Age 7:_
+    1. Shows right hand and left ear.
+    2. Describes a picture.
+    3. Executes three commissions, given simultaneously.
+    4. Counts the value of six sous, three of which are double.
+    5. Names four cardinal colors.
+
+_Age 8:_
+    1. Compares two objects from memory.
+    2. Counts from 20 to 0.
+    3. Notes omissions from pictures.
+    4. Gives day and date.
+    5. Repeats five digits.
+
+_Age 9:_
+    1. Gives change from twenty sous.
+    2. Defines familiar words in terms superior to use.
+    3. Recognizes all the pieces of money.
+    4. Names the months of the year, in order.
+    5. Answers easy "comprehension questions."
+
+_Age 10:_
+    1. Arranges five blocks in order of weight.
+    2. Copies drawings from memory.
+    3. Criticizes absurd statements.
+    4. Answers difficult "comprehension questions."
+    5. Uses three given words in not more than two sentences.
+
+_Age 12:_
+    1. Resists suggestion.
+    2. Composes one sentence containing three given words.
+    3. Names sixty words in three minutes.
+    4. Defines certain abstract words.
+    5. Discovers the sense of a disarranged sentence.
+
+_Age 15:_
+    1. Repeats seven digits.
+    2. Finds three rhymes for a given word.
+    3. Repeats a sentence of twenty-six syllables.
+    4. Interprets pictures.
+    5. Interprets given facts.
+
+_Adult:_
+    1. Solves the paper-cutting test.
+    2. Rearranges a triangle in imagination.
+    3. Gives differences between pairs of abstract terms.
+    4. Gives three differences between a president and a king.
+    5. Gives the main thought of a selection which he has heard read.
+
+It should be emphasized that merely to name the tests in this way gives
+little idea of their nature and meaning, and tells nothing about Binet's
+method of conducting the 54 experiments. In order to use the tests
+intelligently it is necessary to acquaint one's self thoroughly with the
+purpose of each test, its correct procedure, and the psychological
+interpretation of different types of response.[10]
+
+[10] See Part II of this volume, and References 1 and 29, for discussion
+and interpretation of the individual tests.
+
+In fairness to Binet, it should also be borne in mind that the scale of
+tests was only a rough approximation to the ideal which the author had
+set himself to realize. Had his life been spared a few years longer, he
+would doubtless have carried the method much nearer perfection.
+
+HOW THE SCALE IS USED. By means of the Binet tests we can judge the
+intelligence of a given individual by comparison with standards of
+intellectual performance for normal children of different ages. In order
+to make the comparison it is only necessary to begin the examination of
+the subject at a point in the scale where all the tests are passed
+successfully, and to continue up the scale until no more successes are
+possible. Then we compare our subject's performances with the standard
+for normal children of the same age, and note the amount of acceleration
+or retardation.
+
+Let us suppose the subject being tested is 9 years of age. If he goes as
+far in the tests as normal 9-year-old children ordinarily go, we can say
+that the child has a "mental age" of 9 years, which in this case is
+normal (our child being 9 years of age). If he goes only as far as
+normal 8-year-old children ordinarily go, we say that his "mental age"
+is 8 years. In like manner, a mentally defective child of 9 years may
+have a "mental age" of only 4 years, or a young genius of 9 years may
+have a mental age of 12 or 13 years.
+
+SPECIAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD. Psychologists had
+experimented with intelligence tests for at least twenty years before
+the Binet scale made its appearance. The question naturally suggests
+itself why Binet should have been successful in a field where previous
+efforts had been for the most part futile. The answer to this question
+is found in three essential differences between Binet's method and those
+formerly employed.
+
+1. _The use of age standards._ Binet was the first to utilize the idea
+of age standards, or norms, in the measurement of intelligence. It will
+be understood, of course, that Binet did not set out to invent tests of
+10-year intelligence, 6-year intelligence, etc. Instead, as already
+explained, he began with a series of tests ranging from very easy to
+very difficult, and by trying these tests on children of different ages
+and noting the percentages of successes in the various years, he was
+able to locate them (approximately) in the years where they belonged.
+
+This plan has the great advantage of giving us standards which are
+easily grasped. To say, for illustration, that a given subject has a
+grade of intelligence equal to that of the average child of 8 years is a
+statement whose general import does not need to be explained. Previous
+investigators had worked with subjects the degree of whose intelligence
+was unknown, and with tests the difficulty of which was equally unknown.
+An immense amount of ingenuity was spent in devising tests which were
+used in such a way as to preclude any very meaningful interpretation of
+the responses.
+
+The Binet method enables us to characterize the intelligence of a child
+in a far more definite way than had hitherto been possible. Current
+descriptive terms like "bright," "moderately bright," "dull," "very
+dull," "feeble-minded," etc., have had no universally accepted meaning.
+A child who is designated by one person as "moderately bright" may be
+called "very bright" by another person. The degree of intelligence which
+one calls "moderate dullness," another may call "extreme dullness," etc.
+But every one knows what is meant by the term 8-year mentality, 4-year
+mentality, etc., even if he is not able to define these grades of
+intelligence in psychological terms; and by ascertaining experimentally
+what intellectual tasks children of different ages can perform, we are,
+of course, able to make our age standards as definite as we please.
+
+Why should a device so simple have waited so long for a discoverer? We
+do not know. It is of a class with many other unaccountable mysteries in
+the development of scientific method. Apparently the idea of an
+age-grade method, as this is called, did not come to Binet himself until
+he had experimented with intelligence tests for some fifteen years. At
+least his first provisional scale, published in 1905, was not made up
+according to the age-grade plan. It consisted merely of 30 tests,
+arranged roughly in order of difficulty. Although Binet nowhere gives
+any account of the steps by which this crude and ungraded scale was
+transformed into the relatively complete age-grade scale of 1908, we can
+infer that the original and ingenious idea of utilizing age norms was
+suggested by the data collected with the 1905 scale. However the
+discovery was made, it ranks, perhaps, from the practical point of view,
+as the most important in all the history of psychology.
+
+2. _The kind of mental functions brought into play._ In the second
+place, the Binet tests differ from most of the earlier attempts in that
+they are designed to test the higher and more complex mental processes,
+instead of the simpler and more elementary ones. Hence they set
+problems for the reasoning powers and ingenuity, provoke judgments about
+abstract matters, etc., instead of attempting to measure sensory
+discrimination, mere retentiveness, rapidity of reaction, and the like.
+Psychologists had generally considered the higher processes too complex
+to be measured directly, and accordingly sought to get at them
+indirectly by correlating supposed intelligence with simpler processes
+which could readily be measured, such as reaction time, rapidity of
+tapping, discrimination of tones and colors, etc. While they were
+disputing over their contradictory findings in this line of exploration,
+Binet went directly to the point and succeeded where they had failed.
+
+It is now generally admitted by psychologists that higher intelligence
+is little concerned in such elementary processes as those mentioned
+above. Many of the animals have keen sensory discrimination.
+Feeble-minded children, unless of very low grade, do not differ very
+markedly from normal children in sensitivity of the skin, visual
+acuity, simple reaction time, type of imagery, etc. But in power of
+comprehension, abstraction, and ability to direct thought, in the nature
+of the associative processes, in amount of information possessed, and in
+spontaneity of attention, they differ enormously.
+
+3. _Binet would test "general intelligence."_ Finally, Binet's success
+was largely due to his abandonment of the older "faculty psychology"
+which, far from being defunct, had really given direction to most of the
+earlier work with mental tests. Where others had attempted to measure
+memory attention, sense discrimination, etc., as separate faculties or
+functions, Binet undertook to ascertain the _general level_ of
+intelligence. Others had thought the task easier of accomplishment by
+measuring each division or aspect of intelligence separately, and
+summating the results. Binet, too, began in this way, and it was only
+after years of experimentation by the usual methods that he finally
+broke away from them and undertook, so to speak, to triangulate the
+height of his tower without first getting the dimensions of the
+individual stones which made it up.
+
+The assumption that it is easier to measure a part, or one aspect, of
+intelligence than all of it, is fallacious in that the parts are not
+separate parts and cannot be separated by any refinement of experiment.
+They are interwoven and intertwined. Each ramifies everywhere and
+appears in all other functions. The analogy of the stones of the tower
+does not really apply. Memory, for example, cannot be tested separately
+from attention, or sense-discrimination separately from the associative
+processes. After many vain attempts to disentangle the various
+intellective functions, Binet decided to test their combined functional
+capacity without any pretense of measuring the exact contribution
+of each to the total product. It is hardly too much to say that
+intelligence tests have been successful just to the extent to which they
+have been guided by this aim.
+
+Memory, attention, imagination, etc., are terms of "structural
+psychology." Binet's psychology is dynamic. He conceives intelligence as
+the sum total of those thought processes which consist in mental
+adaptation. This adaptation is not explicable in terms of the old mental
+"faculties." No one of these can explain a single thought process, for
+such process always involves the participation of many functions whose
+separate roles are impossible to distinguish accurately. Instead of
+measuring the intensity of various mental states (psycho-physics), it is
+more enlightening to measure their combined effect on adaptation. Using
+a biological comparison, Binet says the old "faculties" correspond to
+the separate tissues of an animal or plant, while his own "scheme of
+thought" corresponds to the functioning organ itself. For Binet,
+psychology is the science of behavior.
+
+BINET'S CONCEPTION OF GENERAL INTELLIGENCE. In devising tests of
+intelligence it is, of course, necessary to be guided by some
+assumption, or assumptions, regarding the nature of intelligence. To
+adopt any other course is to depend for success upon happy chance.
+
+However, it is impossible to arrive at a final definition of
+intelligence on the basis of _a-priori_ considerations alone. To demand,
+as critics of the Binet method have sometimes done, that one who would
+measure intelligence should first present a complete definition of it,
+is quite unreasonable. As Stern points out, electrical currents were
+measured long before their nature was well understood. Similar
+illustrations could be drawn from the processes involved in chemistry
+physiology, and other sciences. In the case of intelligence it may be
+truthfully said that no adequate definition can possibly be framed which
+is not based primarily on the symptoms empirically brought to light by
+the test method. The best that can be done in advance of such data is to
+make tentative assumptions as to the probable nature of intelligence,
+and then to subject these assumptions to tests which will show their
+correctness or incorrectness. New hypotheses can then be framed for
+further trial, and thus gradually we shall be led to a conception of
+intelligence which will be meaningful and in harmony with all the
+ascertainable facts.
+
+Such was the method of Binet. Only those unacquainted with Binet's
+more than fifteen years of labor preceding the publication of his
+intelligence scale would think of accusing him of making no effort to
+analyze the mental processes which his tests bring into play. It is true
+that many of Binet's earlier assumptions proved untenable, and in this
+event he was always ready, with exceptional candor and intellectual
+plasticity, to acknowledge his error and to plan a new line of attack.
+
+Binet's conception of intelligence emphasizes three characteristics of
+the thought process: (1) Its tendency to take and maintain a definite
+direction; (2) the capacity to make adaptations for the purpose of
+attaining a desired end; and (3) the power of auto-criticism.[11]
+
+[11] See Binet and Simon: "L'intelligence des imbeciles," in _L'Annee
+Psychologique_ (1909), pp. 1-147. The last division of this article is
+devoted to a discussion of the essential nature of the higher thought
+processes, and is a wonderful example of that keen psychological
+analysis in which Binet was so gifted.
+
+How these three aspects of intelligence enter into the performances with
+various tests of the scale is set forth from time to time in our
+directions for giving and interpreting the individual tests.[12] An
+illustration which may be given here is that of the "patience test," or
+uniting the disarranged parts of a divided rectangle. As described by
+Binet, this operation has the following elements: "(1) to keep in mind
+the end to be attained, that is to say, the figure to be formed; (2) to
+try different combinations under the influence of this directing idea,
+which guides the efforts of the subject even though he may not be
+conscious of the fact; and (3) to judge the combination which has been
+made, to compare it with the model, and to decide whether it is the
+correct one."
+
+[12] See especially pages 162 and 238.
+
+Much the same processes are called for in many other of the Binet tests,
+particularly those of arranging weights, rearranging dissected
+sentences, drawing a diamond or square from copy, finding a sentence
+containing three given words, counting backwards, etc.
+
+However, an examination of the scale will show that the choice of tests
+was not guided entirely by any single formula as to the nature of
+intelligence. Binet's approach was a many-sided one. The scale includes
+tests of time orientation, of three or four kinds of memory, of
+apperception, of language comprehension, of knowledge about common
+objects, of free association, of number mastery, of constructive
+imagination, and of ability to compare concepts, to see contradictions,
+to combine fragments into a unitary whole, to comprehend abstract terms,
+and to meet novel situations.
+
+OTHER CONCEPTIONS OF INTELLIGENCE. It is interesting to compare Binet's
+conception of intelligence with the definitions which have been offered
+by other psychologists. According to Ebbinghaus, for example, the
+essence of intelligence lies in comprehending together in a unitary,
+meaningful whole, impressions and associations which are more or less
+independent, heterogeneous, or even partly contradictory. "Intellectual
+ability consists in the elaboration of a whole into its worth and
+meaning by means of many-sided combination, correction, and completion
+of numerous kindred associations.... It is a _combination activity_."
+
+Meumann offers a twofold definition. From the psychological point of
+view, intelligence is the power of independent and creative elaboration
+of new products out of the material given by memory and the senses. From
+the practical point of view, it involves the ability to avoid errors, to
+surmount difficulties, and to adjust to environment.
+
+Stern defines intelligence as "the general capacity of an individual
+consciously to adjust his thinking to new requirements: it is general
+adaptability to new problems and conditions of life."
+
+Spearman, Hart, and others of the English school define intelligence as
+a "common central factor" which participates in all sorts of
+special mental activities. This factor is explained in terms of a
+psycho-physiological hypothesis of "cortex energy," "cerebral
+plasticity," etc.
+
+The above definitions are only to a slight extent contradictory or
+inharmonious. They differ mainly in point of view or in the location of
+the emphasis. Each expresses a part of the truth, and none all of it. It
+will be evident that the conception of Binet is broad enough to include
+the most important elements in each of the other definitions quoted.
+
+GUIDING PRINCIPLES IN CHOICE AND ARRANGEMENT OF TESTS. In choosing his
+tests Binet was guided by the conception of intelligence which we have
+set forth above. Tests were devised which would presumably bring
+into play the various mental processes thought to be concerned in
+intelligence, and then these tests were tried out on normal children of
+different ages. If the percentage of passes for a given test increased
+but little or not at all in going from younger to older children this
+test was discarded. On the other hand, if the proportion of passes
+increased rapidly with age, and if children of a given age, who on other
+grounds were known to be bright, passed more frequently than children of
+the same age who were known to be dull, then the test was judged a
+satisfactory test of intelligence. As we have shown elsewhere,[13]
+practically all of Binet's tests fulfill these requirements reasonably
+well, a fact which bears eloquent testimony to the keen psychological
+insight of their author.
+
+[13] See p. 55.
+
+In arranging the tests into a system Binet's guiding principle was to
+find an arrangement of the tests which would cause an average child of
+any given age to test "at age"; that is, the average 5-year-old must
+show a mental age of 5 years, the average 8-year-old a mental age of
+8 years, etc. In order to secure this result Binet found that his data
+seemed to require the location of an individual test in that year where
+it was passed by about two thirds to three fourths of unselected
+children.
+
+It was in the assembling of the tests that the most serious faults of
+the scale had their origin. Further investigation has shown that a great
+many of the tests were misplaced as much as one year, and several of
+them two years. On the whole, the scale as Binet left it was decidedly
+too easy in the lower ranges, and too difficult in the upper. As a
+result, the average child of 5 years was caused to test at not far from
+6 years, the average child of 12 years not far from 11. In the Stanford
+revision an effort has been made to correct this fault, along with
+certain other generally recognized imperfections.
+
+SOME AVOWED LIMITATIONS OF THE BINET TESTS. The Binet tests have often
+been criticized for their unfitness to perform certain services which in
+reality they were never meant to render. This is unfair. We cannot make
+a just evaluation of the scale without bearing in mind its avowed
+limitations.
+
+For example, the scale does not pretend to measure the entire mentality
+of the subject, but only _general intelligence_. There is no pretense of
+testing the emotions or the will beyond the extent to which these
+naturally display themselves in the tests of intelligence. The scale was
+not designed as a tool for the analysis of those emotional or volitional
+aberrations which are concerned in such mental disorders as hysteria,
+insanity, etc. These conditions do not present a progressive reduction
+of intelligence to the infantile level, and in most of them other
+factors besides intelligence play an important role. Moreover, even in
+the normal individual the fruitfulness of intelligence, the direction in
+which it shall be applied, and its methods of work are to a certain
+extent determined by the extraneous factors of emotion and volition.
+
+It should, nevertheless, be pointed out that defects of intelligence, in
+a large majority of cases, also involve disturbances of the emotional
+and volitional functions. We do not expect to find perfectly normal
+emotions or will power of average strength coupled with marked
+intellectual deficiency, and as a matter of fact such a combination is
+rare indeed. In the course of an examination with the Binet tests, the
+experienced clinical psychologist is able to gain considerable insight
+into the subject's emotional and volitional equipment, even though the
+method was designed primarily for another purpose.
+
+A second misunderstanding can be avoided by remembering that the Binet
+scale does not pretend to bring to light the idiosyncrasies of special
+talent, but only to measure the general level of intelligence. It cannot
+be used for the discovery of exceptional ability in drawing, painting,
+music, mathematics, oratory, salesmanship, etc., because no effort is
+made to explore the processes underlying these abilities. It can,
+therefore, never serve as a _detailed chart_ for the vocational guidance
+of children, telling us which will succeed in business, which in art,
+which in medicine, etc. It is not a new kind of phrenology. At the same
+time, as we have already pointed out, _it is capable of bounding roughly
+the vocational territory in which an individual's intelligence will
+probably permit success, nothing else preventing_.[14]
+
+[14] See p. 17.
+
+In the third place, it must not be supposed that the scale can be used
+as a complete pedagogical guide. Although intelligence tests furnish
+data of the greatest significance for pedagogical procedure, they do not
+suggest the appropriate educational methods in detail. These will
+have to be worked out in a practical way for the various grades of
+intelligence, and at great cost of labor and patience.
+
+Finally, in arriving at an estimate of a subject's grade of intelligence
+and his susceptibility to training, it would be a mistake to ignore the
+data obtainable from other sources. No competent psychologist, however
+ardent a supporter of the Binet method he might be, would recommend such
+a policy. Those who accept the method as all-sufficient are as much in
+error as those who consider it as no more important than any one of a
+dozen other approaches. Standardized tests have already become and will
+remain by far the most reliable single method for grading intelligence,
+but the results they furnish will always need to be interpreted in the
+light of supplementary information regarding the subject's personal
+history, including medical record, accidents, play habits, industrial
+efficiency, social and moral traits, school success, home environment,
+etc. Without question, however, the improved Binet tests will contribute
+more than all other data combined to the end of enabling us to forecast
+a child's possibilities of future improvement, and this is the
+information which will aid most in the proper direction of his
+education.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IV
+
+NATURE OF THE STANFORD REVISION AND EXTENSION
+
+
+Although the Binet scale quickly demonstrated its value as an instrument
+for the classification of mentally-retarded and otherwise exceptional
+children, it had, nevertheless, several imperfections which greatly
+limited its usefulness. There was a dearth of tests at the higher mental
+levels, the procedure was so inadequately defined that needless
+disagreement came about in the interpretation of data, and so many of
+the tests were misplaced as to make the results of an examination more
+or less misleading, particularly in the case of very young subjects and
+those near the adult level. It was for the purpose of correcting
+these and certain other faults that the Stanford investigation was
+planned.[15]
+
+[15] The writer wishes to acknowledge his very great indebtedness to
+Miss Grace Lyman, Dr. George Ordahl, Dr. Louise Ellison Ordahl, Miss
+Neva Galbreath, Mr. Wilford Talbert, Dr. J. Harold Williams, Mr. Herbert
+E. Knollin, and Miss Irene Cuneo for their cooeperation in making the
+tests on which the Stanford revision is chiefly based. Without their
+loyal assistance the investigation could not have been carried through.
+
+Grateful acknowledgment is also made to the many public school teachers
+and principals for their generous and invaluable cooeperation in
+furnishing subjects for the tests, and in supplying, sometimes at
+considerable cost of labor, the supplementary information which was
+called for regarding the pupils tested. Their contribution was made in
+the interest of educational science, and without expectation of personal
+benefits of any kind. Their professional spirit cannot be too highly
+commended.
+
+SOURCES OF DATA. Our revision is the result of several years of work,
+and involved the examination of approximately 2300 subjects, including
+1700 normal children, 200 defective and superior children, and more than
+400 adults.
+
+Tests of 400 of the 1700 normal children had been made by Childs and
+Terman in 1910-11, and of 300 children by Trost, Waddle, and Terman in
+1911-12. For various reasons, however, the results of these tests did
+not furnish satisfactory data for a thoroughgoing revision of the scale.
+Accordingly a new investigation was undertaken, somewhat more extensive
+than the others, and more carefully planned. Its main features may be
+described as follows:--
+
+1. The first step was to assemble as nearly as possible all the results
+which had been secured for each test of the scale by all the workers of
+all countries. The result was a large sheet of tabulated data for each
+individual test, including percentages passing the test at various ages,
+conditions under which the results were secured, method of procedure,
+etc. After a comparative study of these data, and in the light of
+results we had ourselves secured, a provisional arrangement of the tests
+was prepared for try-out.
+
+2. In addition to the tests of the original Binet scale, 40 additional
+tests were included for try-out. This, it was expected, would make
+possible the elimination of some of the least satisfactory tests, and at
+the same time permit the addition of enough new ones to give at least
+six tests, instead of five, for each age group.
+
+3. A plan was then devised for securing subjects who should be as nearly
+as possible representative of the several ages. The method was to select
+a school in a community of average social status, a school attended by
+all or practically all the children in the district where it was
+located. In order to get clear pictures of age differences the tests
+were confined to children who were within two months of a birthday. To
+avoid accidental selection, _all_ the children within two months of a
+birthday were tested, in whatever grade enrolled. Tests of foreign-born
+children, however, were eliminated in the treatment of results. There
+remained tests of approximately 1000 children, of whom 905 were between
+5 and 14 years of age.
+
+4. The children's responses were, for the most part, recorded
+_verbatim_. This made it possible to re-score the records according
+to any desired standard, and thus to fit a test more perfectly to the
+age level assigned it.
+
+5. Much attention was given to securing uniformity of procedure. A
+half-year was devoted to training the examiners and another half-year to
+the supervision of the testing. In the further interests of uniformity
+all the records were scored by one person (the writer).
+
+METHOD OF ARRIVING AT A REVISION. The revision of the scale below
+the 14-year level was based almost entirely on the tests of the
+above-mentioned 1,000 unselected children. The guiding principle was to
+secure an arrangement of the tests and a standard of scoring which would
+cause the median mental age of the unselected children of each age group
+to coincide with the median chronological age. That is, a correct scale
+must cause the _average_ child of 5 years to test exactly at 5, the
+_average_ child at 6 to test exactly at 6, etc. Or, to express the same
+fact in terms of intelligence quotient,[16] a correct scale must give a
+median intelligence quotient of unity, or 100 per cent, for unselected
+children of each age.
+
+[16] The intelligence quotient (often designated as I Q) is the ratio of
+mental age to chronological age. (See pp. 65 _ff._ and 78 _ff._)
+
+If the median mental age resulting at any point from the provisional
+arrangement of tests was too high or too low, it was only necessary to
+change the location of certain of the tests, or to change the standard
+of scoring, until an order of arrangement and a standard of passing were
+found which would throw the median mental age where it belonged. We had
+already become convinced, for reasons too involved for presentation
+here, that no satisfactory revision of the Binet scale was possible on
+any theoretical considerations as to the percentage of passes which an
+individual test ought to show in a given year in order to be considered
+standard for that year.
+
+As was to be expected, the first draft of the revision did not prove
+satisfactory. The scale was still too hard at some points, and too easy
+at others. In fact, three successive revisions were necessary, involving
+three separate scorings of the data and as many tabulations of the
+mental ages, before the desired degree of accuracy was secured. As
+finally revised, the scale gives a median intelligence quotient closely
+approximating 100 for the unselected children of each age from 4 to 14.
+
+Since our school children who were above 14 years and still in the
+grades were retarded left-overs, it was necessary to base the revision
+above this level on the tests of adults. These included 30 business men
+and 150 "migrating" unemployed men tested by Mr. H. E. Knollin, 150
+adolescent delinquents tested by Mr. J. Harold Williams, and 50
+high-school students tested by the writer.
+
+The extension of the scale in the upper range is such that ordinarily
+intelligent adults, little educated, test up to what is called the
+"average adult" level. Adults whose intelligence is known from other
+sources to be superior are found to test well up toward the "superior
+adult" level, and this holds whether the subjects in question are well
+educated or practically unschooled. The almost entirely unschooled
+business men, in fact, tested fully as well as high-school juniors and
+seniors.
+
+Figure 1 shows the distribution of mental ages for 62 adults, including
+the 30 business men and the 32 high-school pupils who were over 16 years
+of age. It will be noted that the middle section of the graph represents
+the "mental ages" falling between 15 and 17. This is the range which we
+have designated as the "average adult" level. Those above 17 are called
+"superior adults," those between 13 and 15, "inferior adults." Subjects
+much over 15 years of age who test in the neighborhood of 12 years may
+ordinarily be considered border-line cases.
+
+[Illustration: FIG. 1. DISTRIBUTION OF MENTAL AGES OF 62 NORMAL ADULTS]
+
+The following method was employed for determining the validity of a
+test. The children of each age level were divided into three groups
+according to intelligence quotient, those testing below 90, those
+between 90 and 109, and those with an intelligence quotient of 110 or
+above. The percentages of passes on each individual test at or near that
+age level were then ascertained separately for these three groups. If a
+test fails to show a decidedly higher proportion of passes in the
+superior I Q group than in the inferior I Q group, it cannot be regarded
+as a satisfactory test of intelligence. On the other hand, a test which
+satisfies this criterion must be accepted as valid or the entire scale
+must be rejected. Henceforth it stands or falls with the scale as a
+whole.
+
+When tried out by this method, some of the tests which have been most
+criticized showed a high degree of reliability; certain others which
+have been considered excellent proved to be so little correlated with
+intelligence that they had to be discarded.
+
+After making a few necessary eliminations, 90 tests remained, or 36 more
+than the number included in the Binet 1911 scale. There are 6 at each
+age level from 3 to 10, 8 at 12, 6 at 14, 6 at "average adult," 6 at
+"superior adult," and 16 alternative tests. The alternative tests, which
+are distributed among the different groups, are intended to be used only
+as substitutes when one or more of the regular tests have been rendered,
+by coaching or otherwise, undesirable.[17]
+
+[17] See p. 137 _ff._ for explanations regarding the calculation of
+mental age and the use of alternative tests.
+
+Of the 36 new tests, 27 were added and standardized in the various
+Stanford investigations. Two tests were borrowed from the Healy-Fernald
+series, one from Kuhlmann, one was adapted from Bonser, and the
+remaining five were amplifications or adaptations of some of the earlier
+Binet tests.
+
+Following is a complete list of the tests of the Stanford revision.
+Those designated _al._ are alternative tests. The guide for giving and
+scoring the tests is presented at length in Part II of this volume.
+
+
+_The Stanford revision and extension_
+
+_Year III._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Points to parts of body. (3 to 4.)
+         Nose; eyes; mouth; hair.
+    2. Names familiar objects. (3 to 5.)
+         Key, penny, closed knife, watch, pencil.
+    3. Pictures, enumeration or better. (At least 3 objects enumerated
+       in one picture.)
+         (a) Dutch Home; (b) River Scene; (c) Post-Office.
+    4. Gives sex.
+    5. Gives last name.
+    6. Repeats 6 to 7 syllables. (1 to 3.)
+   Al. Repeats 3 digits. (1 success in 3 trials. Order correct.)
+
+_Year IV._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Compares lines. (3 trials, no error.)
+    2. Discrimination of forms. (Kuhlmann.) (Not over 3 errors.)
+    3. Counts 4 pennies. (No error.)
+    4. Copies square. (Pencil. 1 to 3.)
+    5. Comprehension, 1st degree. (2 to 3.) (Stanford addition.)
+         "What must you do": "When you are sleepy?" "Cold?" "Hungry?"
+    6. Repeats 4 digits. (1 to 3. Order correct.) (Stanford addition.)
+   Al. Repeats 12 to 13 syllables. (1 to 3 absolutely correct, or 2 with
+       1 error each.)
+
+_Year V._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Comparison of weights. (2 to 3.)
+         3-15; 15-3; 3-15.
+    2. Colors. (No error.)
+         Red; yellow; blue; green.
+    3. AEsthetic comparison. (No error.)
+    4. Definitions, use or better. (4 to 6.)
+         Chair; horse; fork; doll; pencil; table.
+    5. Patience, or divided rectangle. (2 to 3 trials. 1 minute each.)
+    6. Three commissions. (No error. Order correct.)
+   Al. Age.
+
+_Year VI._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Right and left. (No error.)
+         Right hand; left ear; right eye.
+    2. Mutilated pictures. (3 to 4 correct.)
+    3. Counts 13 pennies. (1 to 2 trials, without error.)
+    4. Comprehension, 2d degree. (2 to 3.) "What's the thing for
+       you to do":
+         (a) "If it is raining when you start to school?"
+         (b) "If you find that your house is on fire?"
+         (c) "If you are going some place and miss your car?"
+    5. Coins. (3 to 4.)
+         Nickel; penny; quarter; dime.
+    6. Repeats 16 to 18 syllables. (1 to 3 absolutely correct, or 2
+       with 1 error each.)
+   Al. Morning or afternoon.
+
+_Year VII._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Fingers. (No error.) Right; left; both.
+    2. Pictures, description or better. (Over half of performance
+       description:) Dutch Home; River Scene; Post-Office.
+    3. Repeats 5 digits. (1 to 3. Order correct.)
+    4. Ties bow-knot. (Model shown. 1 minute.) (Stanford addition.)
+    5. Gives differences. (2 to 3.)
+         Fly and butterfly; stone and egg; wood and glass.
+    6. Copies diamond. (Pen. 2 to 3.)
+Al. 1. Names days of week. (Order correct. 2 to 3 checks correct.)
+Al. 2. Repeats 3 digits backwards. (1 to 3.)
+
+_Year VIII._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Ball and field. (Inferior plan or better.) (Stanford addition.)
+    2. Counts 20 to 1. (40 seconds. 1 error allowed.)
+    3. Comprehension, 3d degree. (2 to 3.) "What's the thing for you to
+       do":
+         (a) "When you have broken something which belongs to some one
+             else?"
+         (b) "When you are on your way to school and notice that you are
+             in danger of being tardy?"
+         (c) "If a playmate hits you without meaning to do it?"
+    4. Gives similarities, two things. (2 to 4.) (Stanford addition.)
+         Wood and coal; apple and peach; iron and silver; ship and
+         automobile.
+    5. Definitions superior to use. (2 to 4.)
+         Balloon; tiger; football; soldier.
+    6. Vocabulary, 20 words. (Stanford addition. For list of words used,
+       see record booklet.)
+Al. 1. First six coins. (No error.)
+Al. 2. Dictation. ("See the little boy." Easily legible. Pen. 1 minute.)
+
+_Year IX._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Date. (Allow error of 3 days in _c_, no error in _a_, _b_, or _d_.)
+         (a) day of week; (b) month; (c) day of month; (d) year.
+    2. Weights. (3, 6, 9, 12, 15. Procedure not illustrated. 2 to 3.)
+    3. Makes change. (2 to 3. No coins, paper, or pencil.)
+         10--4; 15--12; 25--4.
+    4. Repeats 4 digits backwards. (1 to 3.) (Stanford addition.)
+    5. Three words. (2 to 3. Oral. 1 sentence or not over 2 cooerdinate
+       clauses.)
+         Boy, river, ball; work, money, men; desert, rivers, lakes.
+    6. Rhymes. (3 rhymes for two of three words. 1 minute for each part.)
+         Day; mill; spring.
+Al. 1. Months. (15 seconds and 1 error in naming. 2 checks of 3 correct.)
+Al. 2. Stamps, gives total value. (Second trial if individual values are
+       known.)
+
+_Year X._ (_6 tests, 2 months each._)
+    1. Vocabulary, 30 words. (Stanford addition.)
+    2. Absurdities. (4 to 5. Warn. Spontaneous correction allowed.) (Four
+       of Binet's, one Stanford.)
+    3. Designs. (1 correct, 1 half correct. Expose 10 seconds.)
+    4. Reading and report. (8 memories. 35 seconds and 2 mistakes in
+       reading.) (Binet's selection.)
+    5. Comprehension, 4th degree. (2 to 3. Question may be repeated.)
+         (a) "What ought you to say when some one asks your opinion
+             about a person you don't know very well?"
+         (b) "What ought you to do before undertaking (beginning)
+             something very important?"
+         (c) "Why should we judge a person more by his actions than by
+             his words?"
+    6. Names 60 words. (Illustrate with clouds, dog, chair, happy.)
+Al. 1. Repeats 6 digits. (1 to 2. Order correct.) (Stanford addition.)
+Al. 2. Repeats 20 to 22 syllables. (1 to 3 correct, or 2 with 1 error
+       each.)
+Al. 3. Form board. (Healy-Fernald Puzzle A. 3 times in 5 minutes.)
+
+_Year XII._ (_8 tests, 3 months each._)
+    1. Vocabulary, 40 words. (Stanford addition.)
+    2. Abstract words. (3 to 5.)
+         Pity; revenge; charity; envy; justice.
+    3. Ball and field. (Superior plan.) (Stanford addition.)
+    4. Dissected sentences. (2 to 3. 1 minute each.)
+    5. Fables. (Score 4; i.e., two correct or the equivalent in half
+       credits.) (Stanford addition.)
+         Hercules and Wagoner; Maid and Eggs; Fox and Crow;
+         Farmer and Stork; Miller, Son, and Donkey.
+    6. Repeats 5 digits backwards. (1 to 3.) (Stanford addition.)
+    7. Pictures, interpretation. (3 to 4. "Explain this picture.")
+         Dutch Home; River Scene; Post-Office; Colonial Home.
+    8. Gives similarities, three things. (3 to 5.) (Stanford addition.)
+         Snake, cow, sparrow; book, teacher, newspaper; wool, cotton,
+         leather; knife-blade, penny, piece of wire; rose, potato,
+         tree.
+
+_Year XIV._ (_6 tests, 4 months each._)
+    1. Vocabulary, 50 words. (Stanford addition.)
+    2. Induction test. (Gets rule by 6th folding.) (Stanford addition.)
+    3. President and king. (Power; accession; tenure. 2 to 3.)
+    4. Problems of fact. (2 to 3.) (Binet's two and one Stanford
+       addition.)
+    5. Arithmetical reasoning. (1 minute each. 2 to 3.) (Adapted from
+       Bonser.)
+    6. Clock. (2 to 3. Error must not exceed 3 or 4 minutes.)
+         6.22. 8.10. 2.46.
+   Al. Repeats 7 digits. (1 to 2. Order correct.)
+
+"AVERAGE ADULT." (_6 tests, 5 months each._)
+    1. Vocabulary, 65 words. (Stanford addition.)
+    2. Interpretation of fables. (Score 8.) (Stanford addition.)
+    3. Difference between abstract words. (3 real contrasts out of 4.)
+         Laziness and idleness; evolution and revolution; poverty and
+         misery; character and reputation.
+    4. Problem of the enclosed boxes. (3 to 4.) (Stanford addition.)
+    5. Repeats 6 digits backwards. (1 to 3.) (Stanford addition.)
+    6. Code, writes "Come quickly." (2 errors. Omission of dot counts
+       half error. Illustrate with "war" and "spy.") (From Healy and
+       Fernald.)
+Al. 1. Repeats 28 syllables. (1 to 2 absolutely correct.)
+Al. 2. Comprehension of physical relations. (2 to 3.) (Stanford addition.)
+         Path of cannon ball; weight of fish in water; hitting distant
+         mark.
+
+"SUPERIOR ADULT." (_6 tests, 6 months each._)
+    1. Vocabulary, 75 words. (Stanford addition.)
+    2. Binet's paper-cutting test. (Draws, folds, and locates holes.)
+    3. Repeats 8 digits. (1 to 3. Order correct.) (Stanford addition.)
+    4. Repeats thought of passage heard. (1 to 2.) (Binet's and Wissler's
+       selections adapted.)
+    5. Repeats 7 digits backwards. (1 to 3.) (Stanford addition.)
+    6. Ingenuity test. (2 to 3. 5 minutes each.) (Stanford addition.)
+
+
+SUMMARY OF CHANGES. A comparison of the above list with either the Binet
+1908 or 1911 series will reveal many changes. On the whole, it differs
+somewhat more from the Binet 1911 scale than from that of 1908. Thus, of
+the 49 tests below the "adult" group in the 1911 scale, 2 are eliminated
+and 29 are relocated. Of these, 25 are moved downward and 4 upward. The
+shifts are as follows:--
+
+    Down 1 year, 18
+    Down 2 years, 4
+    Down 3 years, 2
+    Down 6 years, 1
+      Up 1 year,  3
+      Up 2 years, 1
+
+Of the adult group in Binet's 1911 series 1 is eliminated, 2 are moved
+up to "superior adult," and 1 is moved up to 14. Accordingly, of Binet's
+entire 54 tests, we have eliminated 3 and relocated 32, leaving only 19
+in the positions assigned them by Binet. The 3 eliminated are: repeating
+2 digits, resisting suggestion, and "reversed triangle."
+
+The revision is really more extensive than the above figures would
+suggest, since minor changes have been made in the scoring of a great
+many tests in order to make them fit better the locations assigned them.
+Throughout the scale the procedure and scoring have been worked over and
+made more definite with the idea of promoting uniformity. This phase of
+the revision is perhaps more important than the mere relocation of
+tests. Also, the addition of numerous tests in the upper ranges of the
+scale affects very considerably the mental ages above the level of
+10 or 11 years.
+
+EFFECTS OF THE REVISION ON THE MENTAL AGES SECURED. The most important
+effect of the revision is to reduce the mental ages secured in the lower
+ranges of the scale, and to raise considerably the mental ages above
+10 or 11 years. This difference also obtains, though to a somewhat
+smaller extent, between the Stanford revision and those of Goddard and
+Kuhlmann.
+
+For example, of 104 adult individuals testing by the Stanford revision
+between 12 and 14 years, and who were therefore somewhat above the level
+of feeble-mindedness as that term is usually defined, 50 per cent tested
+below 12 years by the Goddard revision. That the dull and border-line
+adults are so much more readily distinguished from the feeble-minded by
+the Stanford revision than by other Binet series is due as much to the
+addition of tests in the upper groups as to the relocation of existing
+tests.
+
+On the other hand, the Stanford revision causes young subjects to test
+lower than any other version of the Binet scale. At 5 or 6 years the
+mental ages secured by the Stanford revision average from 6 to 10 months
+lower than other revisions yield.
+
+The above differences are more significant than would at first appear.
+An error of 10 months in the mental age of a 5-year-old is as serious as
+an error of 20 months in the case of a 10-year-old. Stating the error in
+terms of the intelligence quotient makes it more evident. Thus, an error
+of 10 months in the mental age of a 5-year-old means an error of almost
+15 per cent in the intelligence quotient. A scale which tests this much
+too low would cause the child with a true intelligence quotient of 75
+(which ordinarily means feeble-mindedness or border-line intelligence)
+to test at 90, or only slightly below normal.
+
+Three serious consequences came from the too great ease of the original
+Binet scale at the lower end, and its too great difficulty at the upper
+end:--
+
+1. In young subjects the higher grades of mental deficiency were
+overlooked, because the scale caused such subjects to test only a little
+below normal.
+
+2. The proportion of feeble-mindedness among adult subjects was greatly
+overestimated, because subjects who were really of the 12- or 13-year
+mental level could only earn a mental age of about 11 years.
+
+3. Confusion resulted in efforts to trace the mental growth of either
+feeble-minded or normal children. For example, by other versions of the
+Binet scale an average 5-year-old will show an intelligence quotient
+probably not far from 110 or 115; at 9, an intelligence quotient of
+about 100; and at 14, an intelligence quotient of about 85 or 90.
+
+By such a scale the true border-line case would test approximately as
+follows:--
+
+    At age 5, 90 I Q (apparently not far below normal).
+    At age 9, 75 I Q (border-line).
+    At age 14, 65 I Q (moron deficiency).
+
+On the other hand, re-tests of children by the Stanford revision have
+been found to yield intelligence quotients almost identical with those
+secured from two to four years earlier by the same tests. Those who
+graded feeble-minded in the first test graded feeble-minded in the
+second test: the dull remained dull, the average remained average, the
+superior remained superior, and always in approximately the same
+degree.[18]
+
+[18] See "Some Problems relating to the Detection of Border-line Cases
+of Mental Deficiency," by Lewis M. Terman and H. E. Knollin, in _Journal
+of Psycho-Asthemes_, June, 1916.
+
+It is unnecessary to emphasize further the importance of having an
+intelligence scale which is equally accurate at all points. Absolute
+perfection in this respect is not claimed for the Stanford revision, but
+it is believed to be at least free from the more serious errors of other
+Binet arrangements.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER V
+
+ANALYSIS OF 1000 INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS
+
+
+An extended account of the 1000 tests on which the Stanford revision is
+chiefly based has been presented in a separate monograph. This chapter
+will include only the briefest summary of some of those results of the
+investigation which contribute to the intelligent use of the revision.
+
+THE DISTRIBUTION OF INTELLIGENCE. The question as to the manner in which
+intelligence is distributed is one of great practical as well as
+theoretical importance. One of the most vital questions which can be
+asked by any nation of any age is the following: "How high is the
+average level of intelligence among our people, and how frequent are the
+various grades of ability above and below the average?" With the
+development of standardized tests we are approaching, for the first time
+in history, a possible answer to this question.
+
+Most of the earlier Binet studies, however, have thrown little light on
+the distribution of intelligence because of their failure to avoid the
+influence of accidental selection in choosing subjects for testing. The
+method of securing subjects for the Stanford revision makes our results
+on this point especially interesting.[19] It is believed that the
+subjects used for this investigation were as nearly representative of
+average American-born children as it is possible to secure.
+
+[19] See p. 52 _ff._ for method used to avoid accidental selection of
+subjects for the Stanford investigation.
+
+The intelligence quotients for these 1000 unselected children were
+calculated, and their distribution was plotted for the ages separately.
+The distribution was found fairly symmetrical at each age from 5 to 14.
+At 15 the range is on either side of 90 as a median, and at 16 on either
+side of 80 as a median. That the 15- and 16-year-olds test low is due to
+the fact that these children are left-over retardates and are below
+average in intelligence.
+
+[Illustration: FIG. 2. DISTRIBUTION OF I Q'S OF 905 UNSELECTED
+CHILDREN. 5-14 YEARS OF AGE]
+
+The I Q's were then grouped in ranges of ten. In the middle group were
+thrown those from 96 to 105; the ascending groups including in order the
+I Q's from 106 to 115, 116 to 125, etc.; correspondingly with the
+descending groups. Figure 2 shows the distribution found by this
+grouping for the 905 children of ages 5 to 14 combined. The subjects
+above 14 are not included in this curve because they are left-overs and
+not representative of their ages.
+
+The distribution for the ages combined is seen to be remarkably
+symmetrical. The symmetry for the separate ages was hardly less marked,
+considering that only 80 to 120 children were tested at each age. In
+fact, the range, including the middle 50 per cent of I Q's, was found
+practically constant from 5 to 14 years. The tendency is for the middle
+50 per cent to fall (approximately) between 93 and 108.
+
+Three important conclusions are justified by the above facts:--
+
+1. Since the frequency of the various grades of intelligence decreases
+_gradually_ and at no point abruptly on each side of the median, it is
+evident that there is no definite dividing line between normality and
+feeble-mindedness, or between normality and genius. Psychologically, the
+mentally defective child does not belong to a distinct type, nor does
+the genius. There is no line of demarcation between either of these
+extremes and the so-called "normal" child. The number of mentally
+defective individuals in a population will depend upon the standard
+arbitrarily set up as to what constitutes mental deficiency. Similarly
+for genius. It is exactly as we should undertake to classify all people
+into the three groups: abnormally tall, normally tall, and abnormally
+short.[20]
+
+[20] See Chapter VI for discussion of the significance of various I Q's.
+
+2. The common opinion that extreme deviations below the median are more
+frequent than extreme deviations above the median seems to have no
+foundation in fact. Among unselected school children, at least, for
+every child of any given degree of deficiency there is another child as
+far above the average I Q as the former is below. We have shown
+elsewhere the serious consequences of neglect of this fact.[21]
+
+[21] See p. 12 _ff._
+
+3. The traditional view that variability in mental traits becomes more
+marked during adolescence is here contradicted, as far as intelligence
+is concerned, for the distribution of I Q's is practically the same at
+each age from 5 to 14. For example, 6-year-olds differ from one another
+fully as much as do 14-year-olds.
+
+THE VALIDITY OF THE INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENT. The facts presented above
+argue strongly for the validity of the I Q as an expression of a child's
+intelligence status. This follows necessarily from the similar nature of
+the distributions at the various ages. The inference is that a child's
+I Q, as measured by this scale, remains relatively constant. Re-tests of
+the same children at intervals of two to five years support the
+inference. Children of superior intelligence do not seem to deteriorate
+as they get older, nor dull children to develop average intelligence.
+Knowing a child's I Q, we can predict with a fair degree of accuracy the
+course of his later development.
+
+The mental age of a subject is meaningless if considered apart from
+chronological age. It is only the ratio of retardation or acceleration
+to chronological age (that is, the I Q) which has significance.
+
+It follows also that if the I Q is a valid expression of intelligence,
+as it seems to be, then the Binet-Simon "age-grade method" becomes
+transformed automatically into a "point-scale method," if one wants to
+use it that way. As such it is superior to any other point scale that
+has been proposed, because it includes a larger number of tests and its
+points have definite meaning.[22]
+
+[22] For discussion of the supposed advantages of the "point-scale
+method," see Yerkes and Bridges: _A New Point Scale for Measuring Mental
+Ability_. (Warwick and York, 1915.)
+
+SEX DIFFERENCES. The question as to the relative intelligence of the
+sexes is one of perennial interest and great social importance. The
+ancient hypothesis, the one which dates from the time when only men
+concerned themselves with scientific hypotheses, took for granted the
+superiority of the male. With the development of individual psychology,
+however, it was soon found that as far as the evidence of mental tests
+can be trusted the _average_ intelligence of women and girls is as high
+as that of men and boys.
+
+If we accept this result we are then confronted with the difficult
+problem of finding an explanation for the fact that so few of those who
+have acquired eminence in the various intellectual fields have been
+women. Two explanations have been proposed: (1) That women become
+eminent less often than men simply for lack of opportunity and stimulus;
+and (2) that while the average intelligence of the sexes is the same,
+extreme variations may be more common in males. It is pointed out that
+not only are there more eminent men than eminent women, but that
+statistics also show a preponderance of males in institutions for the
+mentally defective. Accordingly it is often said that women are grouped
+closely about the average, while men show a wider range of distribution.
+
+[Illustration: FIG. 3. MEDIAN I Q OF 457 BOYS (UNBROKEN LINE) AND
+448 GIRLS (DOTTED LINE) FOR THE AGES 5-14 YEARS]
+
+Many hundreds of articles and books of popular or quasi-scientific
+nature have been written on one aspect or another of this question of
+sex difference in intelligence; but all such theoretical discussions
+taken together are worth less than the results of one good experiment.
+Let us see what our 1000 I Q's have to offer toward a solution of the
+problem.
+
+1. When the I Q's of the boys and girls were treated separately there
+was found a small but fairly constant superiority of the girls up to the
+age of 13 years. At 14, however, the curve for the girls dropped below
+that for boys. This is shown in Figure 3.
+
+The supplementary data, including the teachers' estimates of
+intelligence on a scale of five, the teachers' judgments in regard to
+the quality of the school work, and records showing the age-grade
+distribution of the sexes, were all sifted for evidence as to the
+genuineness of the apparent superiority of the girls age for age. The
+results of all these lines of inquiry support the tests in suggesting
+that the superiority of the girls is probably real even up to and
+including age 14, the apparent superiority of the boys at this age being
+fully accounted for by the more frequent elimination of 14-year-old
+girls from the grades by promotion to the high school.[23]
+
+[23] It will be remembered that this series of tests did not follow up
+and test those who had been promoted to high school.
+
+2. However, the superiority of girls over boys is so slight (amounting
+at most ages to only 2 to 3 points in terms of I Q) that for practical
+purposes it would seem negligible. This offers no support to the opinion
+expressed by Yerkes and Bridges that "at certain ages serious injustice
+will be done individuals by evaluating their scores in the light of
+norms which do not take account of sex differences."
+
+3. Apart from the small superiority of girls, the distribution of
+intelligence in the two sexes is not different. The supposed wider
+variation of boys is not found. Girls do not group themselves about the
+median more closely than do boys. The range of I Q including the middle
+fifty per cent is approximately the same for the two sexes.[24]
+
+[24] For an extensive summary of other data on the variability of the
+sexes see the article by Leta S. Hollingworth, in _The American Journal
+of Sociology_ (January, 1914), pp. 510-30. It is shown that the findings
+of others support the conclusions set forth above.
+
+4. When the results for the individual tests were examined, it was found
+that not many showed very extreme differences as to the per cent of boys
+and girls passing. In a few cases, however, the difference was rather
+marked.
+
+The boys were decidedly better in arithmetical reasoning, giving
+differences between a president and a king, solving the form board,
+making change, reversing hands of clock, finding similarities, and
+solving the "induction test." The girls were superior in drawing designs
+from memory, aesthetic comparison, comparing objects from memory,
+answering the "comprehension questions," repeating digits and sentences,
+tying a bow-knot, and finding rhymes.
+
+Accordingly, our data, which for the most part agree with the results of
+others, justify the conclusion that the intelligence of girls, at least
+up to 14 years, does not differ materially from that of boys either as
+regards the average level or the range of distribution. It may still be
+argued that the mental development of boys beyond the age of 14 years
+lasts longer and extends farther than in the case of girls, but as a
+matter of fact this opinion receives little support from such tests as
+have been made on men and women college students.
+
+The fact that so few women have attained eminence may be due to wholly
+extraneous factors, the most important of which are the following: (1)
+The occupations in which it is possible to achieve eminence are for the
+most part only now beginning to open their doors to women. Women's
+career has been largely that of home-making, an occupation in which
+eminence, in the strict sense of the word, is impossible. (2) Even of
+the small number of women who embark upon a professional career, a
+majority marry and thereafter devote a fairly large proportion of their
+energy to bearing and rearing children. (3) Both the training given to
+girls and the general atmosphere in which they grow up are unfavorable
+to the inculcation of the professional point of view, and as a result
+women are not spurred on by deep-seated motives to constant and
+strenuous intellectual endeavor as men are. (4) It is also possible that
+the emotional traits of women are such as to favor the development of
+the sentiments at the expense of innate intellectual endowment.
+
+INTELLIGENCE OF THE DIFFERENT SOCIAL CLASSES. Of the 1000 children, 492
+were classified by their teachers according to social class into the
+following five groups: _very inferior_, _inferior_, _average_,
+_superior_, and _very superior_. A comparative study was then made of
+the distribution of I Q's for these different groups.[25]
+
+[25] The results of this comparison have been set forth in detail in the
+monograph of source material and some of the conclusions have been set
+forth on p. 115 _ff._ of the present volume.
+
+The data may be summarized as follows:--
+
+    1. The median I Q for children of the superior social class is
+    about 7 points above, and that of the inferior social class
+    about 7 points below, the median I Q of the average social
+    group. This means that by the age of 14 inferior class children
+    are about one year below, and superior class children one year
+    above, the median mental age for all classes taken together.
+
+    2. That the children of the superior social classes make a
+    better showing in the tests is probably due, for the most part,
+    to a superiority in original endowment. This conclusion is
+    supported by five supplementary lines of evidence: (a) the
+    teachers' rankings of the children according to intelligence;
+    (b) the age-grade progress of the children; (c) the quality
+    of the school work; (d) the comparison of older and younger
+    children as regards the influence of social environment; and
+    (e) the study of individual cases of bright and dull children
+    in the same family.
+
+    3. In order to facilitate comparison, it is advisable to express
+    the intelligence of children of all social classes in terms of
+    the same objective scale of intelligence. This scale should be
+    based on the median for all classes taken together.
+
+    4. As regards their responses to individual tests, our children
+    of a given social class were not distinguishable from children
+    of the same intelligence in any other social class.
+
+THE RELATION OF THE I Q TO THE QUALITY OF THE CHILD'S SCHOOL WORK. The
+school work of 504 children was graded by the teachers on a scale of
+five grades: _very inferior_, _inferior_, _average_, _superior_, and
+_very superior_. When this grouping was compared with that made on the
+basis of I Q, fairly close agreement was found. However, in about one
+case out of ten there was rather serious disagreement; a child, for
+example, would be rated as doing _average_ school work when his I Q
+would place him in the _very inferior_ intelligence group.
+
+When the data were searched for explanations of such disagreements it
+was found that most of them were plainly due to the failure of teachers
+to take into account the age of the child when grading the quality of
+his school work.[26] When allowance was made for this tendency there
+were no disagreements which justified any serious suspicion as to the
+accuracy of the intelligence scale. Minor disagreements may, of course,
+be disregarded, since the quality of school work depends in part on
+other factors than intelligence, such as industry, health, regularity of
+attendance, quality of instruction, etc.
+
+[26] See p. 24 _ff._
+
+THE RELATION BETWEEN I Q AND GRADE PROGRESS. This comparison, which was
+made for the entire 1000 children, showed a fairly high correlation, but
+also some astonishing disagreements. Nine-year intelligence was found
+all the way from grade 1 to grade 7, inclusive; 10-year intelligence all
+the way from grade 2 to grade 7; and 12-year intelligence all the way
+from grade 3 to grade 8. Plainly the school's efforts at grading fail to
+give homogeneous groups of children as regards mental ability. On the
+whole, the grade location of the children did not fit their mental ages
+much better than it did their chronological ages.
+
+When the data were examined, it was found that practically every child
+whose grade failed to correspond fairly closely with his mental age was
+either exceptionally bright or exceptionally dull. Those who tested
+between 96 and 105 I Q were never seriously misplaced in school. The
+very dull children, however, were usually located from one to three
+grades above where they belonged by mental age, and the duller the
+child the more serious, as a rule, was the misplacement. On the other
+hand, the very bright children were nearly always located from one to
+three grades below where they belonged by mental age, and the brighter
+the child the more serious the school's mistake. The child of 10-year
+mental age in the second grade, for example, is almost certain to be
+about 7 or 8 years old; the child of 10-year intelligence in the sixth
+grade is almost certain to be 13 to 15 years of age.
+
+All this is due to one fact, and one alone: _the school tends to promote
+children by age rather than ability_. The bright children are held back,
+while the dull children are promoted beyond their mental ability. The
+retardation problem is exactly the reverse of what we have thought it to
+be. It is the bright children who are retarded, and the dull children
+who are accelerated.
+
+The remedy is to be sought in differentiated courses (special classes)
+for both kinds of mentally exceptional children. Just as many special
+classes are needed for superior children as for the inferior. The social
+consequences of suitable educational advantages for children of superior
+ability would no doubt greatly exceed anything that could possibly
+result from the special instruction of dullards and border-line
+cases.[27]
+
+[27] See Chapter VI for further discussion of the school progress
+possible to children of various I Q's.
+
+Special study of the I Q's between 70 and 79 revealed the fact that a
+child of this grade of intelligence _never_ does satisfactory work in
+the grade where he belongs by chronological age. By the time he has
+attended school four or five years, such a child is usually found doing
+"very inferior" to "average" work in a grade from two to four years
+below his age.
+
+On the other hand, the child with an I Q of 120 or above is almost never
+found below the grade for his chronological age, and occasionally he is
+one or two grades above. Wherever located, his work is always "superior"
+or "very superior," and the evidence suggests strongly that it would
+probably remain so even if extra promotions were granted.
+
+CORRELATION BETWEEN I Q AND THE TEACHERS' ESTIMATES OF THE CHILDREN'S
+INTELLIGENCE. By the Pearson formula the correlation found between the
+I Q's and the teachers' rankings on a scale of five was .48. This is
+about what others have found, and is both high enough and low enough to
+be significant. That it is moderately high in so far corroborates the
+tests. That it is not higher means that either the teachers or the tests
+have made a good many mistakes.
+
+When the data were searched for evidence on this point, it was found, as
+we have shown in Chapter II, that the fault was plainly on the part of
+the teachers. The serious mistakes were nearly all made with children
+who were either over age or under age for their grade, mostly the
+former. In estimating children's intelligence, just as in grading their
+school success, the teachers often failed to take account of the age
+factor. For example, the child whose mental age was, say, two years
+below normal, and who was enrolled in a class with children about two
+years younger than himself, was often graded "average" in intelligence.
+
+The tendency of teachers is to estimate a child's intelligence according
+to the quality of his school work _in the grade where he happens to be
+located_. This results in overestimating the intelligence of older,
+retarded children, and underestimating the intelligence of the younger,
+advanced children. The disagreements between the tests and the teachers'
+estimates are thus found, when analyzed, to confirm the validity of the
+test method rather than to bring it under suspicion.
+
+THE VALIDITY OF THE INDIVIDUAL TESTS. The validity of each test was
+checked up by measuring it against the scale as a whole in the manner
+described on p. 55. For example, if 10-year-old children having 11-year
+intelligence succeed with a given test decidedly better than 10-year-old
+children who have 9-year intelligence, then either this test must be
+accepted as valid or the scale as a whole must be rejected. Since we
+know, however, that the scale as a whole has at least a reasonably high
+degree of reliability, this method becomes a sure and ready means of
+judging the worth of a test.
+
+When the tests were tried out in this way it was found that some of
+those which have been most criticized have in reality a high correlation
+with intelligence. Among these are naming the days of the week, giving
+the value of stamps, counting thirteen pennies, giving differences
+between president and king, finding rhymes, giving age, distinguishing
+right and left, and interpretation of pictures. Others having a high
+reliability are the vocabulary tests, arithmetical reasoning, giving
+differences, copying a diamond, giving date, repeating digits in reverse
+order, interpretation of fables, the dissected sentence test, naming
+sixty words, finding omissions in pictures, and recognizing absurdities.
+
+Among the somewhat less satisfactory tests are the following: repeating
+digits (direct order), naming coins, distinguishing forenoon and
+afternoon, defining in terms of use, drawing designs from memory, and
+aesthetic comparison. Binet's "line suggestion" test correlated so little
+with intelligence that it had to be thrown out. The same was also true
+of two of the new tests which we had added to the series for try-out.
+
+Tests showing a medium correlation with the scale as a whole include
+arranging weights, executing three commissions, naming colors, giving
+number of fingers, describing pictures, naming the months, making
+change, giving superior definitions, finding similarities, reading for
+memories, reversing hands of clock, defining abstract words, problems of
+fact, bow-knot, induction test, and comprehension questions.
+
+A test which makes a good showing on this criterion of agreement with
+the scale as a whole becomes immune to theoretical criticisms. Whatever
+it appears to be from mere inspection, it is a real measure of
+intelligence. Henceforth it stands or falls with the scale as a whole.
+
+The reader will understand, of course, that no single test used alone
+will determine accurately the general level of intelligence. A great
+many tests are required; and for two reasons: (1) because intelligence
+has many aspects; and (2) in order to overcome the accidental influences
+of training or environment. If many tests are used no one of them need
+show more than a moderately high correlation with the scale as a whole.
+As stated by Binet, "Let the tests be rough, if there are only enough of
+them."
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VI
+
+THE SIGNIFICANCE OF VARIOUS INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS
+
+
+FREQUENCY OF DIFFERENT DEGREES OF INTELLIGENCE. Before we can interpret
+the results of an examination it is necessary to know how frequently an
+I Q of the size found occurs among unselected children. Our tests of
+1000 unselected children enable us to answer this question with some
+degree of definiteness. A study of these 1000 I Q's shows the following
+significant facts:--
+
+  The lowest   1 % go to 70 or below, the highest   1 % reach 130 or above
+   "    "      2 %  "  " 73  "   "      "    "      2 %   "   128  "   "
+   "    "      3 %  "  " 76  "   "      "    "      3 %   "   125  "   "
+   "    "      5 %  "  " 78  "   "      "    "      5 %   "   122  "   "
+   "    "     10 %  "  " 85  "   "      "    "     10 %   "   116  "   "
+   "    "     15 %  "  " 88  "   "      "    "     15 %   "   113  "   "
+   "    "     20 %  "  " 91  "   "      "    "     20 %   "   110  "   "
+   "    "     25 %  "  " 92  "   "      "    "     25 %   "   108  "   "
+   "    "  33+1/3%  "  " 95  "   "      "    "  33+1/3%   "   106  "   "
+
+Or, to put some of the above facts in another form:--
+
+  The child reaching          110 is equaled or excelled by 20 out of 100
+   "    "       "    (about)  115 "     "    "     "     "  10  "  "   "
+   "    "       "       "     125 "     "    "     "     "   3  "  "   "
+   "    "       "       "     130 "     "    "     "     "   1  "  "   "
+
+Conversely, we may say regarding the subnormals that:--
+
+  The child testing at (about) 90 is equaled or excelled by 80 out of 100
+   "    "      "    "     "    85 "     "    "     "     "  90  "  "   "
+   "    "      "    "     "    75 "     "    "     "     "  97  "  "   "
+   "    "      "    "     "    70 "     "    "     "     "  99  "  "   "
+
+CLASSIFICATION OF INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENTS. What do the above I Q's imply
+in such terms as feeble-mindedness, border-line intelligence, dullness,
+normality, superior intelligence genius, etc.? When we use these terms
+two facts must be borne in mind: (1) That the boundary lines between
+such groups are absolutely arbitrary, a matter of definition only; and
+(2) that the individuals comprising one of the groups do not make up a
+homogeneous type.
+
+Nevertheless, since terms like the above are convenient and will
+probably continue to be used, it is desirable to give them as much
+definiteness as possible. On the basis of the tests we have made,
+including many cases of all grades of intelligence, the following
+suggestions are offered for the classification of intelligence
+quotients:--
+
+    _I Q_         _Classification_
+
+    Above 140     "Near" genius or genius.
+      120-140     Very superior intelligence.
+      110-120     Superior intelligence.
+       90-110     Normal, or average, intelligence.
+       80- 90     Dullness, rarely classifiable as feeble-mindedness.
+       70- 80     Border-line deficiency, sometimes classifiable as
+                    dullness, often as feeble-mindedness.
+     Below 70     Definite feeble-mindedness.
+
+Of the feeble-minded, those between 50 and 70 I Q include most of the
+morons (high, middle, and low), those between 20 or 25 and 50 are
+ordinarily to be classed as imbeciles, and those below 20 or 25 as
+idiots. According to this classification the adult idiot would range up
+to about 3-year intelligence as the limit, the adult imbecile would have
+a mental level between 3 and 7 years, and the adult moron would range
+from about 7-year to 11-year intelligence.
+
+It should be added, however, that the classification of I Q's for the
+various sub-grades of feeble-mindedness is not very secure, for the
+reason that the exact curves of mental growth have not been worked out
+for such grades. As far as the public schools are concerned this does
+not greatly matter, as they never enroll idiots and very rarely even the
+high-grade imbecile. School defectives are practically all of the moron
+and border-line grades, and these it is important teachers should be
+able to recognize. The following discussions and illustrative cases will
+perhaps give a fairly definite idea of the significance of various
+grades of intelligence.[28]
+
+[28] The clinical descriptions to be given are not complete and are
+designed merely to aid the examiner in understanding the significance of
+intelligence quotients found.
+
+FEEBLE-MINDEDNESS (RARELY ABOVE 75 I Q.) There are innumerable grades of
+mental deficiency ranging from somewhat below average intelligence to
+profound idiocy. In the literal sense every individual below the average
+is more or less mentally weak or feeble. Only a relatively small
+proportion of these, however, are technically known as feeble-minded. It
+is therefore necessary to set forth the criterion as to what constitutes
+feeble-mindedness in the commonly accepted sense of that word.
+
+The definition in most general use is the one framed by the Royal
+College of Physicians and Surgeons of London, and adopted by the English
+Royal Commission on Mental Deficiency. It is substantially as follows:--
+
+_A feeble-minded person is one who is incapable, because of mental
+defect existing from birth or from an early age, (a) of competing on
+equal terms with his normal fellows; or (b) of managing himself or his
+affairs with ordinary prudence._
+
+Two things are to be noted in regard to this definition: In the first
+place, it is stated in terms of social and industrial efficiency. Such
+efficiency, however, depends not merely on the degree of intelligence,
+but also on emotional, moral, physical, and social traits as well. This
+explains why some individuals with I Q somewhat below 75 can hardly be
+classed as feeble-minded in the ordinary sense of the term, while others
+with I Q a little above 75 could hardly be classified in any other
+group.
+
+In the second place, the criterion set up by the definition is not very
+definite because of the vague meaning of the expression "ordinary
+prudence." Even the expression "competing on equal terms" cannot be
+taken literally, else it would include also those who are merely dull.
+It is the second part of the definition that more nearly expresses the
+popular criterion, for as long as an individual manages his affairs in
+such a way as to be self-supporting, and in such a way as to avoid
+becoming a nuisance or burden to his fellowmen, he escapes the
+institutions for defectives and may pass for normal.
+
+The most serious defect of the definition comes from the lax
+interpretation of the term "ordinary prudence," etc. The popular
+standard is so low that hundreds of thousands of high grade defectives
+escape identification as such. Moreover, there are many grades of
+severity in social and industrial competition. For example, most of the
+members of such families as the Jukes, the Nams, the Hill Folk, and the
+Kallikaks are able to pass as normal in their own crude environment, but
+when compelled to compete with average American stock their deficiency
+becomes evident. It is therefore necessary to supplement the social
+criterion with a more strictly psychological one.
+
+For this purpose there is nothing else as significant as the I Q. All
+who test below 70 I Q by the Stanford revision of the Binet-Simon scale
+should be considered feeble-minded, and it is an open question whether
+it would not be justifiable to consider 75 I Q as the lower limit of
+"normal" intelligence. Certainly a large proportion falling between
+70 and 75 can hardly be classed as other than feeble-minded, even
+according to the social criterion.
+
+
+_Examples of feeble-minded school children_
+
+    _F. C. Boy, age 8-6; mental age 4-2; I Q approximately 50._ From
+    a very superior home. Has had the best medical care and other
+    attention. Attended a private kindergarten until rejected
+    because he required so much of the teacher's time and appeared
+    uneducable. Will probably develop to about the 6- or 7-year
+    mental level. High grade imbecile. Has since been committed to a
+    state institution. Cases as low as F. C. very rarely get into
+    the public schools.
+
+
+    _R. W. Boy, age 13-10; mental age 7-6; I Q approximately 55._
+    Home excellent. Is pubescent. Because of age and maturity has
+    been promoted to the third grade, though he can hardly do the
+    work of the second. Has attended school more than six years.
+    Will probably never develop much if any beyond 8 years, and will
+    never be self-supporting. Low-grade moron.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 4. DIAMOND DRAWN BY R. W., AGE 13-10; MENTAL
+    AGE 7-6]
+
+
+    _M. S. Girl, age 7-6; mental age 4-6; I Q 60._ Father a
+    gardener, home conditions and medical attention fair. Has twice
+    attempted first grade, but without learning to read more than a
+    few words. In each case teacher requested parents to withdraw
+    her. "Takes" things. Is considered "foolish" by the other
+    children. Will probably never develop beyond a mental level of
+    8 years.
+
+
+    _R. M. Boy, age 15; mental age 9; I Q 60._ Decidedly superior
+    home environment and care. After attending school eight years is
+    in fifth grade, though he cannot do the work of the fourth
+    grade. Parents unable to teach him to respect property. Boys
+    torment him and make his life miserable. At middle-moron level
+    and has probably about reached the limit of his development. Has
+    since been committed to a state institution.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 5. WRITING FROM DICTATION. R. M., AGE 15;
+    MENTAL AGE 9]
+
+
+    _S. M. Girl, age 19-2; mental age 10; I Q approximately 65 (not
+    counting age beyond 16)._ From very superior family. Has
+    attended public and private schools twelve years and has been
+    promoted to seventh grade, where she cannot do the work. Appears
+    docile and childlike, but is subject to spells of disobedience
+    and stubbornness. Did not walk until 4 years old. Plays with
+    young children. Susceptible to attention from men and has to be
+    constantly guarded. Writing excellent, knows the number
+    combinations, but missed all the absurdities and has the
+    vocabulary of an average 10-year-old. The type from which
+    prostitutes often come.
+
+
+    _R. H. Boy, age 14; mental age 8-4; I Q 65._ Father Irish,
+    mother Spanish. Family comfortable and home care average. Has
+    attended school eight years and is unable to do fourth-grade
+    work satisfactorily. Health excellent and attendance regular.
+    Reads in fourth reader without expression and with little
+    comprehension of what is read. Fair skill in number
+    combinations. Writing and drawing very poor. Cannot use a ruler.
+    Has no conception of an inch.
+
+    R. H. is described as high-tempered, irritable, lacking in
+    physical activity, clumsy, and unsteady. Plays little. Just
+    "stands around." Indifferent to praise or blame, has little
+    sense of duty, plays underhand tricks. Is slow, absent-minded,
+    easily confused, in thought, never shows appreciation or
+    interest. So apathetic that he does not hear commands. Voice
+    droning. Speech poor in colloquial expressions.
+
+    Three years later, at age of 17, was in a special class
+    attempting sixth-grade work. Reported as doing "absolutely
+    nothing" in that grade. Still sullen, indifferent, and slow in
+    grasping directions, and lacking in play interests. "No
+    apperception of anything, but has mastered such mechanical
+    things as reading (calling the words) and the fundamentals in
+    arithmetic."
+
+    In school work, moral traits, and out-of-school behavior R. H.
+    shows himself to be a typical case of moron deficiency.
+
+
+    _I. M. Girl, age 14-2; mental age 9; I Q approximately 65._
+    Father a laborer. Does unsatisfactory work in fourth grade.
+    Plays with little girls. A menace to the morals of the school
+    because of her sex interests and lack of self-restraint. Rather
+    good-looking if one does not hunt for appearances of
+    intelligence. Mental reactions intolerably slow. Will develop
+    but little further and will always pass as feeble-minded in any
+    but the very lowest social environment.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 6. BALL AND FIELD TEST. I. M., AGE 14-2;
+    MENTAL AGE 9]
+
+
+    _G. V. Boy, age 10; mental age 6-4; I Q 65._ Father Spanish,
+    mother English. Family poor but fairly respectable. Brothers and
+    sisters all retarded. In high first grade. Work all very poor
+    except writing, drawing, and hand work, in all of which he
+    excels. Is quiet and inactive, lacks self-confidence, and plays
+    little. Mentally slow, inert, "thick," and inattentive. Health
+    fair.
+
+    Three years later G. V. was in the low third grade and still
+    doing extremely poor work in everything except manual training,
+    drawing, and writing. Is not likely ever to go beyond the fourth
+    or fifth grade however long he remains in school.
+
+
+    _V. J. Girl, age 11-6; mental age 8; I Q 70._ Has been tested
+    three times in the last five years, always with approximately
+    the same result in terms of I Q. Home fair to inferior. Has been
+    in a special class two years and in school altogether nearly six
+    years. Is barely able to do third-grade work. Her
+    feeble-mindedness is recognized by teachers and by other pupils.
+    Belongs at about middle-moron to high-moron level.
+
+
+    _A. W. Boy, age 9-4; mental age 7; I Q 75._ A year and a half
+    ago he tested at 6-2. From superior family, brothers of very
+    superior intelligence. In school three years and has made about
+    a grade and a half. Has higher I Q than V. J. described above,
+    but his deficiency is fully as evident. Is generally recognized
+    as mentally defective. Slyly abstracted one of the pennies used
+    in the test and slipped it into his pocket. Has caused much
+    trouble at school by puncturing bicycle tires. High-grade moron.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 7. DIAMOND DRAWN BY A. W.]
+
+
+    _A. C. Boy, age 12; mental age 8-5; I Q 70._ From Portuguese
+    family of ten children. Has a feeble-minded brother. Parents in
+    comfortable circumstances and respectable. A. C. has attended
+    school regularly since he was 6 years old. Trying unsuccessfully
+    to do the work of the fourth grade. Reads poorly in the third
+    reader. Hesitates, repeats, miscalls words, and never gets the
+    thought. Writes about like a first-grade pupil. Cannot solve
+    such simple problems as "How many marbles can you buy for ten
+    cents if one marble costs five cents?" even when he has marbles
+    and money in his hands. Described by teacher as "mentally slow
+    and inert, inattentive, easily distracted, memory poor, ideas
+    vague and often absurd, does not appreciate stories, slow at
+    comprehending commands." Is also described as "unruly,
+    boisterous, disobedient, stubborn, and lacking sense of
+    propriety. Tattles."
+
+    Three years later, at age of 15, was in a special class and was
+    little if any improved. He had, however, learned the mechanics
+    of reading and had mastered the number combinations.
+    Deficiencies described as "of wide range." Conduct, however, had
+    improved. Was "working hard to get on."
+
+    A. C. must be considered definitely feeble-minded.
+
+
+    _H. S. Boy, age 11; mental age 8-3; I Q approximately 75._ At
+    8 years tested at 6. Parents highly educated, father a scholar.
+    Brother and sister of very superior intelligence. Started to
+    school at 7, but was withdrawn because of lack of progress.
+    Started again at 8 and is now doing poor work in the second
+    grade. Weakly and nervous. Painfully aware of his inability to
+    learn. During the test keeps saying, "I tried anyway," "It's all
+    I can do if I try my best, ain't it?" etc. Regarded defective by
+    other children. Will probably never be able to do work beyond
+    the fourth or fifth grade and is not likely to develop above the
+    11-year level, if as high.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 8. DRAWING DESIGNS FROM MEMORY. H. S.,
+    AGE 11; MENTAL AGE 8-3]
+
+
+    _I. S. Boy, age 9-6; mental age 7; I Q 75._ German parentage.
+    Started to school at 6. Now in low second grade and unable to do
+    the work. Health good. Inattentive, mentally slow and inert,
+    easily distracted, speech is monotone. Equally poor in reading,
+    writing, and numbers. I. S. is described as quiet, sullen,
+    indifferent, lazy, and stubborn. Plays little.
+
+    Three years later had advanced from low second to low fourth
+    grade, but was as poor as ever in his school work. "Miscalls the
+    simplest words." Moral traits unsatisfactory. May reach sixth or
+    seventh grade if he remains in school long enough.
+
+    I. S. learned to walk at 2 years and to talk at 3.
+
+The above are cases of such marked deficiency that there could be no
+disagreement among competent judges in classifying them in the group of
+"feeble-minded." All are definitely institutional cases. It is a matter
+of record, however, that one of the cases, H. S., was diagnosed by a
+physician (without test) as "backward but not a defective." and with the
+added encouragement that "the backwardness will be outgrown." Of course
+the reverse is the case; the deficiency is becoming more and more
+apparent as the boy approaches the age where more is expected of him.
+
+In at least three of the above cases (S. M., I. S., and I. M.) the
+teachers had not identified the backwardness as feeble-mindedness. Not
+far from 2 children out of 100, or 2 out of 1000, in the average public
+school are as defective as some of those just described. Teachers get so
+accustomed to seeing a few of them in every group of 200 or 300 pupils
+that they are likely to regard them as merely dull,--"dreadfully dull,"
+of course,--but not defective.
+
+Children like these, for their own good and that of other pupils, should
+be kept out of the regular classes. They will rarely be equal to the
+work of the fifth grade, however long they attend school. They will
+make a little progress in a well-managed special class, but with the
+approach of adolescence, at latest, the State should take them into
+custodial care for its own protection.
+
+BORDER-LINE CASES (USUALLY BETWEEN 70 AND 80 I Q). The border-line cases
+are those which fall near the boundary generally recognized as such and
+the higher group usually classed as normal but dull. They are the
+doubtful cases, the ones we are always trying (rarely with success) to
+restore to normality.
+
+It must be emphasized, however, that this doubtful group is not marked
+off by definite I Q limits. Some children with I Q as high as 75 or even
+80 will have to be classified as feeble-minded; some as low as 70 I Q
+may be so well endowed in other mental traits that they may manage as
+adults to get along fairly well in a simple environment. The ability to
+compete with one's fellows in the social and industrial world does not
+depend upon intelligence alone. Such factors as moral traits, industry,
+environment to be encountered, personal appearance, and influential
+relatives are also involved. Two children classified above as
+feeble-minded had an I Q as high as 75. In these cases the emotional,
+moral, or physical qualities were so defective as to render a normal
+social life out of the question. This is occasionally true even with an
+I Q as high as 80. Some of the border-line cases, with even less
+intelligence, may be so well endowed in other mental traits that they
+are capable of becoming dependable unskilled laborers, and of supporting
+a family after a fashion.
+
+
+_Examples of border-line deficiency_
+
+    _S. F. Girl, age 17; mental age 11-6; I Q approximately 72
+    (disregarding age above 16 years)._ Father intelligent; mother
+    probably high-grade defective. Lives in a good home with aunt,
+    who is a woman of good sense and skillful in her management of
+    the girl. S. F. has attended excellent schools for eleven years
+    and has recently been promoted to the seventh grade. The teacher
+    admits, however, that she cannot do the work of that grade, but
+    says, "I haven't the heart to let her fail in the sixth grade
+    for the third time." She studies very hard and says she wants to
+    become a teacher! At the time the test was made she was actually
+    studying her books from two to three hours daily at home. The
+    aunt, who is very intelligent, had never thought of this girl as
+    feeble-minded, and had suffered much concern and humiliation
+    because of her inability to teach her to conduct herself
+    properly toward men and not to appropriate other people's
+    property.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 9. BALL AND FIELD TEST S. F., AGE 17; MENTAL
+    AGE 11-6]
+
+    S. F. is ordinarily docile, but is subject to fits of anger and
+    obstinacy. She finally determined to leave her home, threatening
+    to take up with a man unless allowed to work elsewhere. Since
+    then she has been tried out in several families, but after a
+    little while in a place she flies into a rage and leaves. She is
+    a fairly capable houseworker when she tries.
+
+    This young woman is feeble-minded and should be classed as such.
+    She is listed here with the border-line cases simply for the
+    reason that she belongs to a group whose mental deficiency is
+    almost never recognized without the aid of a psychological test.
+    Probably no physician could be found who would diagnose the
+    case, on the basis of a medical examination alone, as one of
+    feeble-mindedness.
+
+
+    _F. H. Boy, age 16-6; mental age 11-5; I Q approximately 72
+    (disregarding age above 16 years)._ Tested for three successive
+    years without change of more than four points in I Q. Father a
+    laborer, dull, subject to fits of rage, and beats the boy.
+    Mother not far from border-line. F. H. has always had the best
+    of school advantages and has been promoted to the seventh grade.
+    Is really about equal to fifth-grade work. Fairly rapid and
+    accurate in number combinations, but cannot solve arithmetical
+    problems which require any reasoning. Reads with reasonable
+    fluency, but with little understanding. Appears exceedingly
+    good-natured, but was once suspended from school for hurling
+    bricks at a fellow pupil. Played a "joke" on another pupil by
+    fastening a dangerous, sharp-pointed, steel paper-file in the
+    pupil's seat for him to sit down on. He is cruel, stubborn, and
+    plays truant, but is fairly industrious when he gets a job as
+    errand or delivery boy. Discharged once for taking money.
+
+    F. H. is generally called "queer," but is not ordinarily thought
+    of as feeble-minded. His deficiency is real, however, and it is
+    altogether doubtful whether he will be able to make a living and
+    to keep out of trouble, though he is now (at age 20) employed as
+    messenger boy for the Western Union at $30 per month. This is
+    considerably less than pick-and-shovel men get in the community
+    where he lives. Delinquents and criminals often belong to this
+    level of intelligence.
+
+
+    _W. C. Boy, age 16-8; mental age 12; I Q 75 (disregarding age
+    above 16 years)._ Father a college professor. All the other
+    children in the family of unusually superior intelligence. When
+    tested (four years ago) was trying to do seventh-grade work, but
+    with little success. Wanted to leave school and learn farming,
+    but father insisted on his getting the usual grammar-school and
+    high-school education. Made $25 one summer by raising vegetables
+    on a vacant lot. In the four years since the test was made he
+    has managed to get into high school. Teachers say that in spite
+    of his best efforts he learns next to nothing, and they regard
+    him as hopelessly dull. Is docile, lacks all aggressiveness,
+    looks stupid, and has head circumference an inch below normal.
+
+    Here is a most pitiful case of the overstimulated backward child
+    in a superior family. Instead of nagging at the boy and urging
+    him on to attempt things which are impossible to his inferior
+    intelligence, his parents should take him out of school and put
+    him at some kind of work which he could do. If the boy had been
+    the son of a common laborer he would probably have left school
+    early and have become a dependable and contented laborer. In a
+    very simple environment he would probably not be considered
+    defective.
+
+
+    _C. P. Boy, age 10-2; mental age 7-11; I Q 78._ Portuguese boy,
+    son of a skilled laborer. One of eleven children, most of whom
+    have about this same grade of intelligence. Has attended school
+    regularly for four years. Is in the third grade, but cannot do
+    the work. Except for extreme stubbornness his social development
+    is fairly normal. Capable in plays and games, but is regarded as
+    impossible in his school work. Like his brother, M. P., the next
+    case to be described, he will doubtless become a fairly reliable
+    laborer at unskilled work and will not be regarded, in his
+    rather simple environment, as a defective. From the
+    psychological point of view, however, his deficiency is real. He
+    will probably never develop beyond the 11- or 12-year level or
+    be able to do satisfactory school work beyond the fifth or sixth
+    grade.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 10. WRITING FROM DICTATION. C. P., AGE 10-2;
+    MENTAL AGE 7-11]
+
+
+    _M. P. Boy, age 14; mental age 10-8; I Q 77._ Has been tested
+    four successive years, I Q being always between 75 and 80.
+    Brother to C. P. above. In school nearly eight years and has
+    been promoted to the fifth grade. At 16 was doing poor work in
+    the sixth grade. Good school advantages, as the father has tried
+    conscientiously to give his children "a good education."
+    Perfectly normal in appearance and in play activities and is
+    liked by other children. Seems to be thoroughly dependable both
+    in school and in his outside work. Will probably become an
+    excellent laborer and will pass as perfectly normal,
+    notwithstanding a grade of intelligence which will not develop
+    above 11 or 12 years.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 11. BALL AND FIELD TEST. M. P., AGE 14;
+    MENTAL AGE 10-8]
+
+What shall we say of cases like the last two which test at high-grade
+moronity or at border-line, but are well enough endowed in moral
+and personal traits to pass as normal in an uncomplicated social
+environment? According to the classical definition of feeble-mindedness
+such individuals cannot be considered defectives. Hardly any one would
+think of them as institutional cases. Among laboring men and servant
+girls there are thousands like them. They are the world's "hewers of
+wood and drawers of water." And yet, as far as intelligence is
+concerned, the tests have told the truth. These boys are uneducable
+beyond the merest rudiments of training. No amount of school instruction
+will ever make them intelligent voters or capable citizens in the true
+sense of the word. Judged psychologically they cannot be considered
+normal.
+
+It is interesting to note that M. P. and C. P. represent the level of
+intelligence which is very, very common among Spanish-Indian and Mexican
+families of the Southwest and also among negroes. Their dullness seems
+to be racial, or at least inherent in the family stocks from which they
+come. The fact that one meets this type with such extraordinary
+frequency among Indians, Mexicans, and negroes suggests quite forcibly
+that the whole question of racial differences in mental traits will have
+to be taken up anew and by experimental methods. The writer predicts
+that when this is done there will be discovered enormously significant
+racial differences in general intelligence, differences which cannot be
+wiped out by any scheme of mental culture.
+
+Children of this group should be segregated in special classes and be
+given instruction which is concrete and practical. They cannot master
+abstractions, but they can often be made efficient workers, able to look
+out for themselves. There is no possibility at present of convincing
+society that they should not be allowed to reproduce, although from a
+eugenic point of view they constitute a grave problem because of their
+unusually prolific breeding.
+
+DULL NORMALS (I Q USUALLY 80 TO 90). In this group are included those
+children who would not, according to any of the commonly accepted social
+standards, be considered feeble-minded, but who are nevertheless far
+enough below the actual average of intelligence among races of western
+European descent that they cannot make ordinary school progress or
+master other intellectual difficulties which average children are equal
+to. A few of this class test as low as 75 to 80 I Q, but the majority
+are not far from 85. The unmistakably normal children who go much below
+this (in California, at least) are usually Mexicans, Indians, or
+negroes.
+
+    _R. G. Negro boy, age 13-5; mental age 10-6; I Q approximately
+    80._ Normal in appearance and conduct, but very dull. Is
+    attempting fifth-grade work in a special class, but is failing.
+    From a fairly good home and has had ordinary school advantages.
+    In the examination his intelligence is very even as far as it
+    goes, but stops rather abruptly after the 10-year tests. Will
+    unquestionably pass as normal among unskilled laborers, but his
+    intelligence will never exceed the 12-year level and he is not
+    likely to advance beyond the seventh grade, if as far.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 12. BALL AND FIELD. R. G., AGE 13-5, MENTAL
+    AGE 10-6]
+
+
+    _F. D. Boy, tested at age 10-2; I Q 83, and again at 14-1;
+    I Q 79._ Mental age in the first test was 8-6 and in the second
+    test 11. Son of a barber. Father dead; mother capable; makes a
+    good home, and cares for her children well. At 10 was doing
+    unsatisfactory work in the fourth grade, and at 12
+    unsatisfactory work in low sixth. Good-looking, normal in
+    appearance and social development, and though occasionally
+    obstinate is usually steady. Any one unacquainted with his poor
+    school work and low I Q would consider him perfectly normal. No
+    physical or moral handicaps of any kind that could possibly
+    account for his retardation. Is simply dull. Needs purely a
+    vocational training, but may be able to complete the eighth
+    grade with low marks by the age of 16 or 17.
+
+
+    _G. G. Girl, age 12-4; mental age 10-10; I Q 82._ From average
+    home. Excellent educational advantages and no physical
+    handicaps. At 12 years was doing very poor work in fifth grade.
+    Appearance, play life, and attitude toward other children
+    normal. Simply dull. Will probably never go beyond the 12- or
+    13-year level and is not likely to get as far as the high
+    school.
+
+Those testing 80 and 90 will usually be able to reach the eighth grade,
+but ordinarily only after from one to three or four failures. They are
+so very numerous (about 15 per cent of the school enrollment) that it is
+doubtful whether we can expect soon to have special classes enough to
+accommodate all. The most feasible solution is a differentiated course
+of study with parallel classes in which every child will be allowed to
+make the best progress of which he is capable, without incurring the
+risk of failure and non-promotion. The so-called Mannheim system, or
+something similar to it, is what we need.
+
+AVERAGE INTELLIGENCE (I Q 90 TO 110). It is often said that the schools
+are made for the average child, but that "the average child does not
+exist." He does exist, and in very large numbers. About 60 per cent of
+all school children test between 90 and 110 I Q, and about 40 per cent
+between 95 and 105. That these children are average is attested by their
+school records as well as by their I Q's. Our records show that, of more
+than 200 children below 14 years of age and with I Q between 95 and 105,
+not one was making much more nor much less than average school progress.
+Four were two years retarded, but in each case this was due to late
+start, illness, or irregular attendance. Children who test close to 90,
+however, often fail to get along satisfactorily, while those testing
+near 110 are occasionally able to win an extra promotion.
+
+The children of this average group are seldom school problems, as far as
+ability to learn is concerned. Nor are they as likely to cause trouble
+in discipline as the dull and border-line cases. It is therefore hardly
+necessary to give illustrative cases here.
+
+The high school, however, does not fit their grade of intelligence as
+well as the elementary and grammar schools. High schools probably enroll
+a disproportionate number of pupils in the I Q range above 100. That is,
+the average intelligence among high-school pupils is above the average
+for the population in general. It is probably not far from 110. College
+students are, of course, a still more selected group, perhaps coming
+chiefly from the range above 115. The child whose school marks are
+barely average in the elementary grades, when measured against children
+in general, will ordinarily earn something less than average marks in
+high school, and perhaps excessively poor marks in college.
+
+SUPERIOR INTELLIGENCE (I Q 110 TO 120). Children of this group
+ordinarily make higher marks and are capable of making somewhat more
+rapid progress than the strictly average child. Perhaps most of them
+could complete the eight grades in seven years as easily as the average
+child does in eight years. They are not usually the best scholars, but
+on a scale of excellent, good, fair, poor, and failure they will usually
+rank as good, though of course the degree of application is a factor. It
+is rare, however, to find a child of this level who is positively
+indolent in his school work or who dislikes school. In high school they
+are likely to win about the average mark.
+
+Intelligence of 110 to 120 I Q is approximately five times as common
+among children of superior social status as among children of inferior
+social status; the proportion among the former being about 24 per cent
+of all, and among the latter only 5 per cent of all. The group is
+made up largely of children of the fairly successful mercantile or
+professional classes.
+
+The total number of children between 110 and 120 is almost exactly the
+same as the number between 80 and 90; namely, about 15 per cent. The
+distance between these two groups (say between 85 and 115) is as great
+as the distance between average intelligence and border-line deficiency,
+and it would be absurd to suppose that they could be taught to best
+advantage in the same classes. As a matter of fact, pupils between
+110 and 120 are usually held back to the rate of progress which the
+average child can make. They are little encouraged to do their best.
+
+VERY SUPERIOR INTELLIGENCE (I Q 120 TO 140). Children of this group are
+better than somewhat above average. They are unusually superior. Not
+more than 3 out of 100 go as high as 125 I Q, and only about 1 out of
+100 as high as 130. In the schools of a city of average population only
+about 1 child in 250 or 300 tests as high as 140 I Q.
+
+In a series of 476 unselected children there was not a single one
+reaching 120 whose social class was described as "below average."[29] Of
+the children of superior social status, about 10 per cent reached 120 or
+better. The 120-140 group is made up almost entirely of children whose
+parents belong to the professional or very successful business classes.
+The child of a skilled laborer belongs here occasionally, the child of a
+common laborer very rarely indeed. At least this is true in the smaller
+cities of California among populations made up of native-born Americans.
+In all probability it would not have been true in the earlier history of
+the country when ordinary labor was more often than now performed by men
+of average intelligence, and it would probably not hold true now among
+certain immigrant populations of good stock, but limited social and
+educational advantages.
+
+[29] In other investigations, however, we have found even brighter
+children from very inferior homes. See p. 117 for an example.
+
+What can children of this grade of ability do in school? The question
+cannot be answered as satisfactorily as one could wish, for the simple
+reason that such children are rarely permitted to do what they can. What
+they do accomplish is as follows: Of 54 children (of the 1000 unselected
+cases) falling in this group, 121/2 per cent were advanced in the
+grades two years, approximately 54 per cent were advanced one year,
+28 per cent were in the grade where they belonged by chronological age,
+and three children, or 51/2 per cent, were actually retarded one year.
+But wherever located, such children rarely get anything but the highest
+marks, and the evidence goes to show that most of them could easily be
+prepared for high school by the age of 12 years. Serious injury is done
+them by schools which believe in "putting on the brakes."
+
+The following are illustrations of children testing between 130 and 145.
+Not all are taken from the 1000 unselected tests. The writer has
+discovered several children of this grade as a result of lectures before
+teachers' institutes. It is his custom, in such lectures, to ask the
+teachers to bring in for a demonstration test the "brightest child in
+the city" (or county, etc.). The I Q resulting from such a test is
+usually between 130 and 140, occasionally a little higher.
+
+
+_Examples of very superior intelligence_
+
+    _Margaret P. Age 8-10; mental age 11-1; I Q 130._ Father only a
+    skilled laborer (house painter), but a man of unusual
+    intelligence and character for his social class. Home care above
+    average. M. P. has attended school a little less than three
+    years and is completing fourth grade. Marks all "excellent."
+    Health perfect. Social and moral traits of the very best. Is
+    obedient, conscientious, and unusually reliable for her age.
+    Quiet and confident bearing, but no touch of vanity.
+
+    M. P. is known to be related on her father's side to John
+    Wesley, and her maternal grandfather was a highly skilled
+    mechanic and the inventor of an important train-coupling device
+    used on all railroads.
+
+    Although she is not yet 9 years old and is completing the fourth
+    grade, she is still about a grade below where she belongs by
+    mental age. She could no doubt easily be made ready for high
+    school by the age of 12.
+
+
+    _J. R. Girl, age 12-9; mental age 16 (average adult); I Q
+    approximately 130._ Daughter of a university professor. In first
+    year of high school. From first grade up her marks have been
+    nearly all of the A rank. For first semester of high school four
+    of six grades were A, the others B. A wonderfully charming,
+    delightful girl in every respect. Play life perfectly normal.
+
+    _J. R.'s_ parents have moved about a great deal and she has
+    attended eight different schools. She is two years above grade
+    in school, but of this gain only one-half grade was made in
+    school; _the other grade and a half she gained in a little over
+    a year by staying out of school and working a little each day
+    under the instruction of her mother_. But for this she would
+    doubtless now be in the seventh grade instead of in high school.
+    As it is she is at least a grade below where she belongs by
+    mental age. Something better than an average college record may
+    be safely predicted for J. R.
+
+
+    _E. B. Girl, age 7-9; mental age 10-2; I Q 130._ E. B. was
+    selected by the teachers of a small California city as the
+    brightest school child in that city (school population about
+    500). Her parents are said to be unusually intelligent. E. B. is
+    in the third grade, a year advanced, but her mental level shows
+    that she belongs in the fourth. The test was made as a
+    demonstration test in the presence of about 150 teachers, all
+    of whom were charmed by her delightful personality and keen
+    responses. No trace of vanity or queerness of any kind. Health
+    excellent. E. B. ought to be ready for high school at 12; she
+    will really have the intelligence to do high-school work by 11.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 13. BALL AND FIELD TEST. E. B., AGE 7-9;
+    I Q 130]
+
+
+    _L. B. Girl, age 8-6; mental age 11-6; I Q 135._ Tested nearly
+    three years earlier, age 5-11; mental age 7-6; I Q 127. Daughter
+    of a university professor. At age of 8-6 was doing very superior
+    work in the fifth grade. Later, at age of 10-6, is in the
+    seventh grade with all her marks excellent. Has two sisters who
+    test almost as high, both completing the eighth grade at barely
+    12 years of age. L. B. looks rather delicate, and though a
+    little nervous is ordinarily strong. We have known her since her
+    early childhood. Like both her sisters, she is a favorite with
+    young and old, as nearly perfection as the most charming little
+    girl could be.
+
+
+    _R. S. Boy, age 6-5; mental age 9-6; I Q 148._ When tested at
+    age 5-2 he had a mental age of 7-6, I Q 142. Father a university
+    professor. R. S. entered school at exactly 6 years of age, and
+    at the present writing is 71/2 years old and is entering the
+    third grade. Leads his class in school and takes delight in the
+    work. Is normal in play life and social traits and is dependable
+    and thoughtful beyond his years. Should enter high school not
+    later than 12; could probably be made ready a year earlier, but
+    as he is somewhat nervous this might not be wise.
+
+
+    _T. F. Boy, age 10-6; mental age 14; I Q 133._ At 13-6 tested at
+    "superior adult," and had vocabulary of 13,000 (also "superior
+    adult"). Son of a college professor. Did not go to school till
+    age of 9 years and was not taught to read till 81/2. At this
+    writing he is 151/2 years old and is a senior in high school.
+    He will complete the high-school course in three and one-half
+    years with A to B marks, mostly A. Gets his hardest mathematics
+    lessons in five to ten minutes. Science is his play. When he
+    discovered Hodge's _Nature Study and Life_ at age of 11 years he
+    literally slept with the book till he almost knew it by heart.
+    Since age 12 he has given much time to magazines on mechanics
+    and electricity. At 13 he installed a wireless apparatus
+    without other aid than his electrical magazines. He has, for a
+    boy of his age, a rather remarkable understanding of the
+    principles underlying electrical applications. He is known by
+    his playmates as "the boy with a hobby." Stamp collections,
+    butterfly and moth collections (over 70 different varieties),
+    seashore collections, and wireless apparatus all show that the
+    appellation is fully merited. He chooses his hobbies and "rides"
+    them entirely on his own initiative.
+
+
+    _J. S. Boy, age 8-2; mental age 11-4; I Q 138._ Father was a
+    lawyer, parents now dead. Is in high fourth grade. Leads his
+    class. Attractive, healthy, normal-appearing lad. Full of good
+    humor. Is loving and obedient, strongly attached to his foster
+    mother (an aunt). Composes verses and fables for pastime. Here
+    are a couple of verses composed before his eighth birthday. They
+    are reproduced without change of spelling or punctuation:--
+
+        _Christmas_
+
+        Hurrah for Christmas
+        And all it's joy's
+        That come that day
+        For girls and boy's.
+
+
+        _Flowers_
+
+        Flowers in the garden.
+        That is all you see
+        Who likes them best?
+        That's the honey bee.
+
+    J. S. ought to be in the fifth grade, instead of the fourth. He
+    will easily be able to enter college by the age of 15 if he is
+    allowed to make the progress which would be normal to a child of
+    his intelligence. But it is too much to expect that the school
+    will permit this.
+
+
+    _F. McA. Boy, age 10-3; mental age 14-6; I Q 142._ Father a
+    school principal. F. is leading his class of 24 pupils in the
+    high seventh grade. Has received so many extra promotions only
+    because his father insisted that the teachers allow him to try
+    the next grade. The dire consequences which they predicted have
+    never followed. F. is perfectly healthy and one of the most
+    attractive lads the writer has ever seen. He has the normal play
+    instincts, but when not at play he has the dignified bearing of
+    a young prince, although without vanity. His vocabulary is 9000
+    (14 years), and his ability is remarkably even in all
+    directions. F. should easily enter college by the age of 15.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 14. BALL AND FIELD F. McA., AGE 10-3, MENTAL
+    AGE 14-6]
+
+
+    _E. M. Boy, age 6-11; mental age 10; I Q 145._ Learned to read
+    at age of 5 without instruction and shortly afterward had
+    learned from geography maps the capitals of all the States of
+    the Union. Started to school at 71/2. Entered the first grade
+    at 9 A.M. and had been promoted to the fourth grade by 3 P.M. of
+    the same day! Has now attended school a half-year and is in the
+    fifth grade, age 7 years, 8 months. Father is on the faculty of
+    a university.
+
+    E. M. is as superior in personal and moral traits as in
+    intelligence. Responsible, sturdy, playful, full of humor,
+    loving, obedient. Health is excellent. Has had no home
+    instruction in school work. His progress has been perfectly
+    natural.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 15. DRAWING DESIGNS FROM MEMORY. E. M.,
+    AGE 6-11; MENTAL AGE 10, I Q 145
+
+    (This performance is satisfactory for year 10)]
+
+The above list of "very superior" children includes only a few of those
+we have tested who belong to this grade of intelligence. Every child in
+the list is so interesting that it is hard to omit any. We have found
+all such children (with one or two exceptions not included here) so
+superior to average children in all sorts of mental and moral traits
+that one is at a loss to understand how the popular superstitions about
+the "queerness" of bright children could have originated or survived.
+Nearly every child we have found with I Q above 140 is the kind one
+feels, before the test is over, one would like to adopt. If the crime of
+kidnaping could ever be forgiven it would be in the case of a child like
+one of these.
+
+GENIUS AND "NEAR" GENIUS. Intelligence tests have not been in use long
+enough to enable us to define genius definitely in terms of I Q. The
+following two cases are offered as among the highest test records of
+which the writer has personal knowledge. It is doubtful whether more
+than one child in 10,000 goes as high as either. One case has been
+reported, however, in which the I Q was not far from 200. Such a
+record, if reliable, is certainly phenomenal.
+
+    _E. F. Russian boy, age 8-5; mental age 13; I Q approximately
+    155._ Mother is a university student apparently of very superior
+    intelligence. E. F. has a sister almost as remarkable as
+    himself. E. F. is in the sixth grade and at the head of his
+    class. Although about four grades advanced beyond his
+    chronological age he is still one grade retarded! He could
+    easily carry seventh-grade work. In all probability E. F. could
+    be made ready for college by the age of 12 years without injury
+    to body or mind. His mother has taken the only sensible course;
+    she has encouraged him without subjecting him to
+    overstimulation.
+
+    E. F. was selected for the test as probably one of the brightest
+    children in a city of a third of a million population. He may
+    not be the brightest in that city, but he is one of the three or
+    four most intelligent the writer has found after a good deal of
+    searching. He is probably equaled by not more than one in
+    several thousand unselected children. How impatiently one waits
+    to see the fruit of such a budding genius!
+
+
+    _B. F. Son of a minister, age 7-8; mental age 12-4; I Q 160._
+    Vocabulary 7000 (12 years). This test was not made by the
+    writer, but by one of his graduate students. The record included
+    the _verbatim_ responses, so that it was easy to verify the
+    scoring. There can be no doubt as to the substantial accuracy
+    of the test. This I Q of 160 is the highest one in the Stanford
+    University records. B. F. has excellent health, normal play
+    interests, and is a favorite among his playfellows. Parents had
+    not thought of him as especially remarkable. He is only in the
+    third grade, and is therefore about three grades below his
+    mental age.
+
+    [Illustration: FIG. 16. BALL AND FIELD. B. F., AGE 7-8; MENTAL
+    AGE 12-4; I Q 160
+
+    (This is a 12-year performance)]
+
+It is especially noteworthy that not one of the children we have
+described with I Q above 130 has ever had any unusual amount or kind of
+home instruction. In most cases the parents were not aware of their very
+great superiority. Nor can we give the credit to the school or its
+methods. The school has in most cases been a deterrent to their
+progress, rather than a help. These children have been taught in classes
+with average and inferior children, like those described in the first
+part of this chapter. Their high I Q is only an index of their
+extraordinary cerebral endowment. This endowment is for life. There is
+not the remotest probability that any of these children will deteriorate
+to the average level of intelligence with the onset of maturity. Such an
+event would be no less a miracle (barring insanity) than the development
+of an imbecile into a successful lawyer or physician.
+
+IS THE I Q OFTEN MISLEADING? Do the cases described in this chapter give
+a reliable picture as to what one may expect of the various I Q levels?
+Does the I Q furnish anything like a reliable index of an individual's
+general educational possibilities and of his social worth? Are there not
+"feeble-minded geniuses," and are there not children of exceptionally
+high I Q who are nevertheless fools?
+
+We have no hesitation in saying that there is not one case in fifty in
+which there is any serious contradiction between the I Q and the child's
+performances in and out of school. We cannot deny the existence of
+"feeble-minded geniuses," but after a good deal of search we have not
+found one. Occasionally, of course, one finds a feeble-minded person
+who is an expert penman, who draws skillfully, who plays a musical
+instrument tolerably well, or who handles number combinations with
+unusual rapidity; but these are not geniuses; they are not authors,
+artists, musicians, or mathematicians.
+
+As for exceptionally intelligent children who appear feeble-minded, we
+have found but one case, a boy of 10 years with an I Q of about 125.
+This boy, whom we have tested several times and whose development we
+have followed for five years, was once diagnosed by a physician as
+feeble-minded. His behavior among other persons than his familiar
+associates is such as to give this impression. Nothing less than an
+entire chapter would be adequate for a description of this case, which
+is in reality one of disturbed emotional and social development with
+superior intelligence.
+
+It should be emphasized, however, that what we have said about the
+significance of various I Q's holds only for the I Q's secured by the
+use of the Stanford revision. As we have shown elsewhere (p. 62 _ff._)
+the I Q yielded by other versions of the Binet tests are often so
+inaccurate as to be misleading.
+
+We have not found a single child who tested between 70 and 80 I Q by the
+Stanford revision who was able to do satisfactory school work in the
+grade where he belonged by chronological age. Such children are usually
+from two to three grades retarded by the age of 12 years. On the other
+hand, the child with an I Q of 120 or above is almost never found below
+the grade for his chronological age, and occasionally he is one or two
+grades above. Wherever located, his school work is so superior as to
+suggest strongly the desirability of extra promotions. Those who test
+between 96 and 105 are almost never more than one grade above or below
+where they belong by chronological age, and even the small displacement
+of one year is usually determined by illness, age of beginning school,
+etc.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VII
+
+RELIABILITY OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD
+
+
+GENERAL VALUE OF THE METHOD. In a former chapter we have noted certain
+imperfections of the scale devised by Binet and Simon; namely, that many
+of the tests were not correctly located, that the choice of tests was in
+a few cases unsatisfactory, that the directions for giving and scoring
+the tests were sometimes too indefinite, and that the upper and lower
+ranges of the scale especially stood in need of extensions and
+corrections. All of these faults have been quite generally admitted. The
+method itself, however, after being put to the test by psychologists of
+all countries and of all faiths, by the skeptical as well as the
+friendly, has amply demonstrated its value. The agreement on this point
+is as complete as it is regarding the scale's imperfections.
+
+The following quotations from prominent psychologists who have studied
+the method will serve to show how it is regarded by those most entitled
+to an opinion:--
+
+    There can be no question about the fact that the Binet-Simon
+    tests do not make half as frequent or half as great errors in
+    the mental ages (of feeble-minded children) as are included in
+    gradings based on careful, prolonged general observation by
+    experienced observers.[30]
+
+    [30] Dr. F. Kuhlmann: "The Binet-Simon Tests of Intelligence in Grading
+    Feeble-Minded Children," in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_ (1912),
+    p. 189.
+
+    All of the different authors who have made these researches
+    (with Binet's method) are in a general way unanimous in
+    recognizing that the principle of the scale is extremely
+    fortunate, and all believe that it offers the basis of a most
+    useful method for the examination of intelligence.[31]
+
+    [31] Dr. Otto Bobertag: "L'echelle metrique de l'intelligence," in
+    _L'Annee Psychologique_ (1912), p. 272.
+
+    It serves as a relatively simple and speedy method of securing,
+    by means accessible to every one, a true insight into the
+    average level of ability of a child between 3 and 15 years of
+    age.[32]
+
+    [32] Dr. Ernest Meumann: _Experimentelle Paedagogik_ (1913), vol. II,
+    p. 277.
+
+    That, despite the differences in race and language, despite the
+    divergences in school organization and in methods of
+    instruction, there should be so decided agreement in the
+    reactions of the children--is, in my opinion, the best
+    vindication of the _principle_ of the tests that one could
+    imagine, because this agreement demonstrates that _the tests do
+    actually reach and discover the general developmental conditions
+    of intelligence_ (so far as these are operative in
+    public-school children of the present cultural epoch), and not
+    mere fragments of knowledge and attainments acquired by
+    chance.[33]
+
+    [33] Dr. W. Stern: _The Psychological Methods of Testing Intelligence._
+    Translated by Whipple (1913), p. 49.
+
+    It is without doubt the most satisfactory and accurate method of
+    determining a child's intelligence that we have, and so far
+    superior to everything else which has been proposed that as yet
+    there is nothing else to be considered.[34]
+
+    [34] Dr. H. H. Goddard: "The Binet Measuring Scale of
+    Intelligence; What it is and How it is to be Used," in _The
+    Training School Bulletin_ (1912).
+
+The value of the method lies both in the swiftness and the accuracy with
+which it works. One who knows how to apply the tests correctly and who
+is experienced in the psychological interpretation of responses can in
+forty minutes arrive at a more accurate judgment as to a subject's
+intelligence than would be possible without the tests after months or
+even years of close observation. The reasons for this have already been
+set forth.[35] The difference is something like that between measuring a
+person's height with a yardstick and estimating it by guess. That this
+is not an unfair statement of the case is well shown by the following
+candid confession by a psychologist who tested 200 juvenile delinquents
+brought before Judge Lindsey's court:--
+
+[35] See this volume, p. 24 _ff._
+
+    As a matter of interest I estimated the mental ages of 150 of my
+    subjects before testing them. In 54 of the estimates the error
+    was not more than one year in either direction; 70 of the
+    subjects were estimated too high, the average error being
+    2 years and 7 months; 26 of the subjects were estimated too low,
+    the average error being 2 years and 2 months. _These figures
+    would seem to imply that an estimate with nothing to support it
+    is wholly unreliable, more especially as many of the estimates
+    were four or five years wide of the mark._[36]
+
+    [36] C. S. Bluemel: "Binet Tests on 200 Delinquents," in _The Training
+    School Bulletin_ (1915), p. 192. (Italics inserted.)
+
+Criticisms of the Binet method have also been frequently voiced, but
+chiefly by persons who have had little experience with it or by those
+whose scientific training hardly justifies an opinion. It cannot be too
+strongly emphasized that eminence in law, medicine, education, or any
+other profession does not of itself enable any one to pass judgment on
+the validity of a psychological method.
+
+DEPENDENCE OF THE SCALE'S RELIABILITY ON THE TRAINING OF THE EXAMINER.
+On this point two radically different opinions have been urged. On the
+one hand, some have insisted that the results of a test made by other
+than a thoroughly trained psychologist are absolutely worthless. At the
+opposite extreme are a few who seem to think that any teacher or
+physician can secure perfectly valid results after a few hours'
+acquaintance with the tests.
+
+The dispute is one which cannot be settled by the assertion of opinion,
+and, unfortunately, thoroughgoing investigations have not yet been made
+as to the frequency and extent of errors made by untrained or partially
+trained examiners. The only study of this kind which has so far been
+reported is the following:--[37]
+
+[37] Samuel C. Kohs: "The Binet Test and the Training of Teachers," in
+_The Training School Bulletin_ (1914), pp. 113-17.
+
+Dr. Kohs gives the results of tests made by 58 inexperienced teachers
+who were taking a summer course in the Training School at Vineland. The
+class met three times a week for instruction in the use of the Binet
+scale. During the first week the students listened to three lectures by
+Dr. Goddard. The second week was given over to demonstration testing.
+Each student saw four children tested, and attended two discussion
+periods of an hour each. During the third, fourth, and fifth weeks each
+student tested one child per week, and observed the testing of two
+others. The student was allowed to carry the test through in his own
+way, but received criticism after it was finished. Twice a week
+Dr. Goddard spent an hour with the class, discussing experimental
+procedure. The subjects tested were feeble-minded children whose exact
+mental ages were already known, and for this reason it was possible to
+check up the accuracy of each student's work.
+
+Kohs's table of results for the trial testing of the 174 children
+showed:--
+
+  (1) That 50 per cent of the work was as exact as any one in the
+      laboratory could make it;
+
+  (2) That in an additional 38 per cent the results were within
+      three fifths of a year of being exact;
+
+  (3) That nearly 90 per cent of the work of the summer students was
+      sufficiently accurate for all practical purposes;
+
+  (4) That the records improved during the brief training so that
+      during the third week only one test missed the real mental age
+      by as much as a year.
+
+Since hardly any of these students had had any previous experience with
+the Binet tests, Dr. Kohs seems to be entirely justified in his
+conclusion that it is possible, in the brief period of six weeks, to
+teach people to use the tests with a reasonable degree of accuracy.
+
+What shall we say of the teacher or of the physician who has not even
+had this amount of instruction? The writer's experience forces him to
+agree with Binet and with Dr. Goddard, that any one with intelligence
+enough to be a teacher, and who is willing to devote conscientious study
+to the mastery of the technique, can use the scale accurately enough to
+get a better idea of a child's mental endowment than he could possibly
+get in any other way. It is necessary, however, for the untrained person
+to recognize his own lack of experience, and in no case would it be
+justifiable to base important action or scientific conclusions upon the
+results of the inexpert examiner. As Binet himself repeatedly insisted,
+the method is not absolutely mechanical, and cannot be made so by
+elaboration of instructions.
+
+It is sometimes held that the examination and classification of backward
+children for special instruction should be carried out by the school
+physicians. The fact is, however, that there is nothing in the
+physician's training to give him any advantage over the ordinary teacher
+in the use of the Binet tests. Because of her more intimate knowledge of
+children and because of her superior tact and adaptability, the average
+teacher is perhaps better equipped than the average physician to give
+intelligence tests.
+
+Finally, it should be emphasized that whatever the previous training or
+experience of the examiner may have been, his ability to adjust to the
+child's personality and his willingness to follow conscientiously the
+directions for giving the tests are important factors in his equipment.
+
+INFLUENCE OF THE SUBJECT'S ATTITUDE. One continually meets such queries
+as, "How do you know the subject did his best?" "Possibly the child was
+nervous or frightened," or, "Perhaps incorrect answers were purposely
+given." All such objections may be disposed of by saying that the
+competent examiner can easily control the experiment in such a way that
+embarrassment is soon replaced by self-confidence, and in such a way
+that effort is kept at its maximum. As for mischievous deception, it
+would be a poor clinicist who could not recognize and deal with the
+little that is likely to arise.
+
+Cautions regarding embarrassment, fatigue, fright, illness, etc. are
+given in Chapter IX. Most of the errors which have been reported along
+this line are such as can nearly always be avoided by ordinary prudence,
+coupled with a little power of observation.[38] We must not charge the
+mistakes of untrained and indiscreet examiners against the validity of
+the method itself.
+
+[38] See, for example, the rather ludicrous "errors" of the Binet method
+reported in _The Psychological Clinic_ for 1915, pp. 140 _ff._ and
+167 _ff._
+
+It is possibly true that even if the examiner is tactful and prudent an
+unfavorable attitude on the part of the subject may occasionally affect
+the results of a test to some extent, but it ought not seriously to
+invalidate one examination out of five hundred. The greatest danger is
+in the case of a young subject who has been recently arrested and
+brought before a court. Even here a little common sense and scientific
+insight should enable one to guard against a mistaken diagnosis.
+
+THE INFLUENCE OF COACHING. It might be supposed that after the
+intelligence scale had been used with a few pupils in a given school all
+of their fellows would soon be apprised of the nature of the tests, and
+so learn the correct responses. Experience shows, however, that there is
+little likelihood of such influence except in the case of a small
+minority of the tests. Experiments in the psychology of testimony have
+demonstrated that children's ability to report upon a complex set of
+experiences is astonishingly weak. In testing with the Stanford revision
+a child is ordinarily given from twenty-four to thirty different tests,
+many of which are made up of three or more items. Of the total forty to
+fifty items the child is ordinarily able to report but few, and these
+not always correctly.
+
+Such tests as memory for sentences and digits, drawing the square and
+diamond, reproducing the designs from memory, comparing weights and
+lines, describing and interpreting pictures, aesthetic comparison,
+vocabulary, dissected sentences, fables, reading for memories, finding
+differences and similarities, arithmetical reasoning, and the form-board
+test, are hardly subject to report at all. While almost any of the other
+tests might, theoretically, be communicated, there is little danger that
+many of them will be. It is assumed, of course, that the examiner will
+take proper precautions to prevent any of his blanks or other materials
+from falling into the hands of those who are to be examined.
+
+The following tests are the ones most subject to the influence of
+coaching: Ball and field, giving date, naming sixty words, finding
+rhymes, changing hands of clock, comprehension of physical relations,
+"induction test," and "ingenuity test."
+
+In several instances we have interviewed children an hour or two after
+they had taken the examination, in order to find out how many of the
+tests they could recall. A boy of 4 years, after repeated questioning,
+could only say: "He showed me some pictures. He had a knife and a penny.
+He told me to shut the door." A girl of 3 years could recall nothing
+whatever that was intelligible.
+
+An 8-year-old boy said: "He made me tie a knot. He asked me about a ship
+and an auto. He wanted me to count backwards. He made me say over some
+things, numbers and things."
+
+A boy of 12 years said: "He told me to say all the words I could think
+of. He said some foolish things and asked what was foolish [he could not
+repeat a single absurdity]. I had to put some blocks together. I had to
+do some problems in arithmetic [he could not repeat a single problem].
+He read some fables to me. [Asked about the fables he was able to recall
+only part of one, that of the fox and the crow.] He showed me the
+picture of a field and wanted to know how to find a ball."
+
+It is evident from the above samples of report that the danger of
+coaching increases considerably with the age of the children concerned.
+With young subjects the danger is hardly present at all; with children
+of the upper-grammar grades, in the high school, and most of all in
+prisons and reformatories, it must be taken into account. Alternative
+tests may sometimes be used to advantage when there is evidence of
+coaching on any of the regular tests. It would be desirable to have two
+or three additional scales which could be used interchangeably with the
+Binet-Simon.
+
+RELIABILITY OF REPEATED TESTS. Will the same tests give consistent
+results when used repeatedly with the same subject? In general we
+may say that they do. Something depends, however, on the age and
+intelligence of the subject and on the time interval between the
+examinations.
+
+Goddard proves that feeble-minded individuals whose intelligence has
+reached its full development continue to test at exactly the same mental
+age by the Binet scale, year after year. In their case, familiarity with
+the tests does not in the least improve the responses. At each retesting
+the responses given at previous examinations are repeated with only the
+most trivial variations. Of 352 feeble-minded children tested at
+Vineland, three years in succession, 109 gave absolutely no variation,
+232 showed a variation of not more than two fifths of a year, while 22
+gained as much as one year in the three tests. The latter, presumably,
+were younger children whose intelligence was still developing.
+
+Goddard has also tested 464 public-school children for three successive
+years. Approximately half of these showed normal progress or more in
+mental age, while most of the remainder showed somewhat less than normal
+progress.
+
+Bobertag's retesting of 83 normal children after an interval of
+a year gave results entirely in harmony with those of Goddard.
+The reapplication of the tests showed absolutely no influence of
+familiarity, the correlation of the two tests being almost perfect
+(.95). Those who tested "at age" in the first test had advanced, on
+the average, exactly one year. Those who tested _plus_ in the first
+test advanced in the twelve months about a year and a quarter, as we
+should expect those to do whose mental development is accelerated.
+Correspondingly, those who tested _minus_ at the first test advanced
+only about three fourths of a year in mental age during the
+interval.[39]
+
+[39] Otto Bobertag: "Ueber Intelligenz Pruefungen," in _Zeitsch. f.
+Angew. Psychol._ (1912), p. 521 _ff._
+
+Our own results with a mixed group of normal, superior, dull and
+feeble-minded children agree fully with the above findings. In this case
+the two tests were separated by an interval of two to four years, and
+the correlation between their results was practically perfect. The
+average difference between the I Q obtained in the second test and that
+obtained in the first was only 4 per cent, and the greatest difference
+found was only 8 per cent.[40]
+
+[40] See _The Stanford Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Scale
+for Measuring Intelligence_. (Warwick and York, 1916.)
+
+The repetition of the test at shorter intervals will perhaps affect the
+result somewhat more, but the influence is much less than one might
+expect. The writer has tested, at intervals of only a few days to a few
+weeks, 14 backward children of 12 to 18 years, and 8 normal children of
+5 to 13 years. The backward children showed an average improvement in
+the second test of about two months in mental age, the normal children
+an average improvement of little more than three months. No child varied
+in the second test more than half a year from the mental age first
+secured. On the whole, normal children profit more from the experience
+of a previous test than do the backward and feeble-minded.
+
+Berry tested 45 normal children and 50 defectives with the Binet 1908
+and 1911 scales at brief intervals. The author does not state which
+scale was applied first, but the mental ages secured by the two scales
+were practically the same when allowance was made for the slightly
+greater difficulty of the 1911 series of tests.[41]
+
+[41] Charles Scott Berry: "A Comparison of the Binet Tests of 1908 and
+1911," in _Journal of Educational Psychology_ (1912), pp. 444-51.
+
+We may conclude, therefore, that while it would probably be desirable
+to have one or more additional scales for alternative use in testing the
+same children at very brief intervals, the same scale may be used for
+repeated tests at intervals of a year or more with little danger of
+serious inaccuracy. Moreover, results like those set forth above are
+important evidence as to the validity of the test method.
+
+INFLUENCE OF SOCIAL AND EDUCATIONAL ADVANTAGES. The criticism has often
+been made that the responses to many of the tests are so much subject to
+the influence of school and home environment as seriously to invalidate
+the scale as a whole. Some of the tests most often named in this
+connection are the following: Giving age and sex; naming common objects,
+colors, and coins; giving the value of stamps; giving date; naming the
+months of the year and the days of the week; distinguishing forenoon and
+afternoon; counting; making change; reading for memories; naming sixty
+words; giving definitions; finding rhymes; and constructing a sentence
+containing three given words.
+
+It has in fact been found wherever comparisons have been made that
+children of superior social status yield a higher average mental age
+than children of the laboring classes. The results of Decroly and Degand
+and of Meumann, Stern, and Binet himself may be referred to in this
+connection. In the case of the Stanford investigation, also, it was
+found that when the unselected school children were grouped in three
+classes according to social status (superior, average, and inferior),
+the average I Q for the superior social group was 107, and that of the
+inferior social group 93. This is equivalent to a difference of one year
+in mental age with 7-year-olds, and to a difference of two years with
+14-year-olds.
+
+However, the common opinion that the child from a cultured home does
+better in tests solely by reason of his superior home advantages is an
+entirely gratuitous assumption. Practically all of the investigations
+which have been made of the influence of nature and nurture on mental
+performance agree in attributing far more to original endowment than to
+environments. Common observation would itself suggest that the social
+class to which the family belongs depends less on chance than on the
+parents' native qualities of intellect and character.
+
+The results of five separate and distinct lines of inquiry based on the
+Stanford data agree in supporting the conclusion that the children of
+successful and cultured parents test higher than children from wretched
+and ignorant homes for the simple reason that their heredity is better.
+The results of this investigation are set forth in full elsewhere.[42]
+
+[42] See _The Stanford Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon
+Measuring Scale of Intelligence_. (Warwick and York, 1916)
+
+It would, of course, be going too far to deny all possibility of
+environmental conditions affecting the result of an intelligence test.
+Certainly no one would expect that a child reared in a cage and denied
+all intercourse with other human beings could by any system of mental
+measurement test up to the level of normal children. There is, however,
+no reason to believe that _ordinary_ differences in social environment
+(apart from heredity), differences such as those obtaining among
+unselected children attending approximately the same general type of
+school in a civilized community, affects to any great extent the
+validity of the scale.
+
+A crucial experiment would be to take a large number of very young
+children of the lower classes and, after placing them in the most
+favorable environment obtainable, to compare their later mental
+development with that of children born into the best homes. No extensive
+study of this kind has been made, but the writer has tested twenty
+orphanage children who, for the most part, had come from very inferior
+homes. They had been in a well-conducted orphanage for from two to
+several years, and had enjoyed during that time the advantages of an
+excellent village school. Nevertheless, all but three tested below
+average, ranging from 75 to 90 I Q.
+
+The impotence of school instruction to neutralize individual differences
+in native endowment will be evident to any one who follows the school
+career of backward children. The children who are seriously retarded in
+school are not normal, and cannot be made normal by any refinement of
+educational method. As a rule, the longer the inferior child attends
+school, the more evident his inferiority becomes. It would hardly be
+reasonable, therefore, to expect that a little incidental instruction in
+the home would weigh very heavily against these same native differences
+in endowment. Cases like the following show conclusively that it does
+not:--
+
+    X is the son of unusually intelligent and well-educated parents.
+    The home is everything one would expect of people of scholarly
+    pursuits and cultivated tastes. But X has always been
+    irresponsible, troublesome, childish, and queer. He learned to
+    walk at 2 years, to talk at 3, and has always been delicate and
+    nervous. When brought for examination he was 8 years old. He had
+    twice attempted school work, but could accomplish nothing and
+    was withdrawn. His play-life was not normal, and other children,
+    younger than himself, abused and tormented him. The Binet tests
+    gave an I Q of approximately 75; that is, the retardation
+    amounted to about two years. The child was examined again three
+    years later. At that time, after attending school two years, he
+    had recently completed the first grade. This time the I Q was
+    73. Strange to say, the mother is encouraged and hopeful because
+    she sees that her boy is learning to read. She does not seem to
+    realize that at his age he ought to be within three years of
+    entering high school.
+
+    The forty-minute test had told more about the mental ability of
+    this boy than the intelligent mother had been able to learn in
+    eleven years of daily and hourly observation. For X is
+    feeble-minded; he will never complete the grammar school; he
+    will never be an efficient worker or a responsible citizen.
+
+    Let us change the picture. Z is a bright-eyed, dark-skinned girl
+    of 9 years. She is dark-skinned because her father is a mixture
+    of Indian and Spanish. The mother is of Irish descent. With her
+    strangely mated parents and two brothers she lives in a dirty,
+    cramped, and poorly furnished house in the country. The parents
+    are illiterate, and the brothers are retarded and dull, though
+    not feeble-minded.
+
+    It is Z's turn to be tested. I inquire the name. It is familiar,
+    for I have already tested the two stupid brothers. I also know
+    her ignorant parents and the miserable cabin in which she lives.
+    The examination begins with the 8-year tests. The responses are
+    quick and accurate. We proceed to the 9-year group. There is no
+    failure, and there is but one minor error. Successes and
+    failures alternate for a while until the latter prevail. Z has
+    tested at 11 years. In spite of her wretched home, she is
+    mentally advanced nearly 25 per cent. By the vocabulary test she
+    is credited with a knowledge of nearly 6000 words, or nearly
+    four times as many as X, the boy of cultured home and scholarly
+    parents, had learned by the age of 8 years.
+
+    Five years have passed. When given the test, Z was in the fourth
+    grade and, as we have already stated, 9 years of age. As a
+    result of the test she was transferred to the fifth grade. Later
+    she skipped again and at the age of 14 is a successful student
+    in the second year of high school. To assay her intelligence and
+    determine its quality was a task of forty-five minutes.
+
+The above cases, each of which could be paralleled by many others which
+we have found, will serve to illustrate the fact that exceptionally
+superior endowment is discoverable by the tests, however unfavorable the
+home from which it comes, and that inferior endowment cannot be
+normalized by all the advantages of the most cultured home. Quoting
+again from Stern, "The tests actually reach and discover the general
+developmental conditions of intelligence, and not mere fragments of
+knowledge and attainments acquired by chance."
+
+
+
+
+PART II
+
+GUIDE FOR THE USE OF THE STANFORD REVISION AND EXTENSION
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER VIII
+
+GENERAL INSTRUCTIONS
+
+
+NECESSITY OF SECURING ATTENTION AND EFFORT. The child's intelligence is
+to be judged by his success in the performance of certain tasks. These
+tasks may appear to the examiner to be very easy, indeed; but we must
+bear in mind that they are often anything but easy for the child. Real
+effort and attention are necessary for his success, and occasionally
+even his best efforts fall short of the desired result. If the tests are
+to display the child's real intellectual ability it will be necessary,
+therefore, to avoid as nearly as possible every disturbing factor which
+would divide his attention or in any other way injure the quality of
+his responses. To insure this it will be necessary to consider somewhat
+in detail a number of factors which influence effort, such as degree of
+quiet, the nature of surroundings, presence or absence of others, means
+of gaining the child's confidence, the avoidance of embarrassment,
+fatigue, etc.
+
+One should not expect, however, to secure an absolutely equal degree of
+attention from all subjects. The power to give sustained attention to a
+difficult task is characteristically weak in dull and feeble-minded
+children. What we should labor to secure is the maximum attention of
+which the child is capable, and if this is unsatisfactory without
+external cause, we are to regard the fact as symptomatic of inferior
+mental ability, not as an extenuating factor or an excuse for lack of
+success in the tests.
+
+Attention, of course, cannot be normal if any acute physical or mental
+disturbance is present. Toothache, headache, earache, nausea, fever,
+cold, etc., all render the test inadvisable. The same is true of mental
+anxiety or fear, as in the case of the child who has just been arrested
+and brought before the court.
+
+QUIET AND SECLUSION. The tests should be conducted in a quiet room,
+located where the noises of the street and other outside distractions
+cannot enter. A reasonably small room is better than a very large one,
+because it is more homelike. The furnishings of the room should be
+simple. A table and two chairs are sufficient. If the room contains a
+number of unfamiliar objects, such as psychological apparatus, pictures
+on the walls, etc., the attention of the child is likely to be drawn
+away from the tasks which he is given to do. The halls and corridors
+which it is sometimes necessary to use in testing school children are
+usually noisy, cold, or otherwise objectionable.
+
+PRESENCE OF OTHERS. A still more disturbing influence is the presence of
+other persons. Generally speaking, if accurate results are to be secured
+it is not permissible to have any auditor, besides possibly an
+assistant to record the responses. Even the assistant, however quiet and
+unobtrusive, is sometimes a disturbing element. Though something of a
+convenience, the assistant is by no means necessary, after the examiner
+has thoroughly mastered the procedure of the tests and has acquired some
+skill in the use of abbreviations in recording the answers. If an
+assistant or any other person is present, he should be seated somewhat
+behind the child, not too close, and should take no notice of the child
+either when he enters the room or at any time during the examination.
+
+At all events, the presence of parent, teacher, school principal, or
+governess is to be avoided. Contrary to what one might expect, these
+distract the child much more than a strange personality would do. Their
+critical attitude toward the child's performance is very likely to cause
+embarrassment. If the child is alone with the examiner, he is more at
+ease from the mere fact that he does not feel that there is a reputation
+to sustain. The praise so lavishly bestowed upon him by the friendly and
+sympathetic examiner lends to the same effect.
+
+As Binet emphasizes, if the presence of others cannot be avoided, it
+is at least necessary to require of them absolute silence. Parents,
+and sometimes teachers, have an almost irrepressible tendency to
+interrupt the examination with excuses for the child's failures and
+with disturbing explanations which are likely to aid the child in
+comprehending the required task. Without the least intention of doing
+so, they sometimes practically tell the child how to respond. Parents,
+especially, cannot refrain from scolding the child or showing impatience
+when his answers do not come up to expectation. This, of course,
+endangers the child's success still further.
+
+The psychologist is not surprised at such conduct. It would be foolish
+to expect average parents, even apart from their bias in the particular
+case at hand, to adopt the scientific attitude of the trained examiner.
+Since we cannot in a few moments at our disposal make them over into
+psychologists, our only recourse is to deal with them by exclusion.
+
+This is not to say that it is impossible to test a child satisfactorily
+in the presence of others. If the examiner is experienced, and if the
+child is not timid, it is sometimes possible to make a successful test
+in the presence of quite a number of auditors, provided they remain
+silent, refrain from staring, and otherwise conduct themselves with
+discretion. But not even the veteran examiner can always be sure of the
+outcome in demonstration testing.
+
+GETTING INTO "RAPPORT." The examiner's first task is to win the
+confidence of the child and overcome his timidity. Unless _rapport_ has
+first been established, the results of the first tests given are likely
+to be misleading. The time and effort necessary for accomplishing this
+are variable factors, depending upon the personality of both the
+examiner and the subject. In a majority of cases from three to five
+minutes should be sufficient, but in a few cases somewhat more time is
+necessary.
+
+The writer has found that when a strange child is brought to the clinic
+for examination, it is advantageous to go out of doors with him for a
+little walk around the university buildings. It is usually possible to
+return from such a stroll in a few minutes, with the child chattering
+away as though to an old friend. Another approach is to begin by showing
+the child some interesting object, such as a toy, or a form-board, or
+pictures not used in the test. The only danger in this method is that
+the child is likely to find the object so interesting that he may not be
+willing to abandon it for the tests, or that his mind will keep
+reverting to it during the examination.
+
+Still another method is to give the child his seat as soon as he is
+ushered into the room, and, after a word of greeting, which must be
+spoken in a kindly tone but without gushiness, to open up a conversation
+about matters likely to be of interest. The weather, place of residence,
+pets, sports, games, toys, travels, current events, etc., are suitable
+topics if rightly employed. When the child has begun to express himself
+without timidity and it is clear that his confidence has been gained,
+one may proceed, as though in continuance of the conversation, to
+inquire the name, age, and school grade. The examiner notes these down
+in the appropriate blanks, rather unconcernedly, at the same time
+complimenting the child (unless it is clearly a case of serious
+retardation) on the fine progress he has made with his studies.
+
+KEEPING THE CHILD ENCOURAGED. Nothing contributes more to a satisfactory
+_rapport_ than praise of the child's efforts. Under no circumstances
+should the examiner permit himself to show displeasure at a response,
+however absurd it may be. In general, the poorer the response, the
+better satisfied one should appear to be with it. An error is always to
+be passed by without comment, unless it is painfully evident to the
+child himself, in which case the examiner will do well to make some
+excuse for it; e.g., "You are not quite old enough to answer questions
+like that one; but, never mind, you are doing beautifully," etc.
+Exclamations like "fine!" "splendid!" etc., should be used lavishly.
+Almost any innocent deception is permissible which keeps the child
+interested, confident, and at his best level of effort. The examination
+should begin with tests that are fairly easy, in order to give the child
+a little experience with success before the more difficult tests are
+reached.
+
+THE IMPORTANCE OF TACT. It goes without saying that children's
+personalities are not so uniform and simple that we can adhere always to
+a single stereotyped procedure in working our way into their good
+graces. Suggestions like the above have their value, but, like rules of
+etiquette, they must be supported by the tact which comes of intuition
+and cannot be taught. The address which flatters and pleases one child
+may excite disgust in another. The examiner must scent the situation and
+adapt his method to it. One child is timid and embarrassed; another may
+think his mental powers are under suspicion and so react with sullen
+obstinacy; a third may be in an angry mood as a result of a recent
+playground quarrel. Situations like these are, of course, exceptional,
+but in any case it is necessary to create in the child a certain mood,
+or indefinable attitude of mind, before the test begins.
+
+PERSONALITY OF THE EXAMINER. Doubtless there are persons so lacking in
+personal adaptability that success in this kind of work would be for
+them impossible. The wooden, mechanical, matter-of-fact and unresponsive
+personality is as much out of place in the psychological clinic as the
+traditional bull in the china shop. It would make an interesting study
+for some one to investigate, by exact methods, the influence on test
+results of the personality of different examiners who have been equally
+trained in the methods to be employed and who are equally conscientious
+in applying them according to rules.
+
+On the whole, differences of this kind are probably not very great among
+experienced and reasonably competent examiners. Adaptability grows with
+experience and with increase of self-confidence. After a few score tests
+there should be no serious failure from inability to get into _rapport_
+with the child. Even in those rare cases where the child breaks down and
+cries from timidity, or perhaps refuses to answer out of embarrassment,
+the difficulty can be overcome by sufficient tact so that the
+examination may proceed as though nothing had happened.
+
+If the examiner has the proper psychological and personal equipment, the
+testing of twenty or thirty children forms a fairly satisfactory
+apprenticeship. Without psychological training, no amount of experience
+will guarantee absolute accuracy of the results.
+
+THE AVOIDANCE OF FATIGUE. Against the validity of intelligence tests it
+is often argued that the result of an examination depends a great deal
+on the time of day when it is made, whether in the morning hours when
+the mind is at its best, or in the afternoon when it is supposedly
+fatigued. Although no very extensive investigation has been made of this
+influence, there is no evidence that the ordinary fatigue incident to
+school work injures the child's performance appreciably. Our tests of
+1000 children showed no inferiority of results secured from 1 to 4 P.M.,
+as compared with tests made from 9 to 12 A.M.
+
+An explanation for this is not hard to find. Although school work causes
+fatigue, in the sense that a part of the child's available supply of
+mental energy is used up, there is always a reserve of energy sufficient
+to carry the child through a thirty-to fifty-minute test. The fact that
+the required tasks are novel and interesting to a high degree insures
+that the reserve energy will really be brought into play. This
+principle, of course, has its natural limits. The examiner would avoid
+testing a child who was exhausted either from work or play, or a child
+who was noticeably sleepy.
+
+DURATION OF THE EXAMINATION. About the only danger of fatigue lies in
+making the examination too long. Young children show symptoms of
+weariness much more quickly than older children, and it is therefore
+fortunate that not so much time is needed for testing them. The
+following allowances of time will usually be found sufficient:--
+
+    Children  3-5 years old         25-30 minutes
+        "     6-8     "   "         30-40    "
+        "     9-12    "   "         40-50    "
+        "    13-15    "   "         50-60    "
+    Adults                          60-90    "
+
+This allowance ordinarily includes the time necessary for getting into
+_rapport_ with the child, in addition to that actually consumed in the
+tests. But the examiner need not expect to hold fast to any schedule.
+Some subjects respond in a lively manner, others are exasperatingly
+slow. It is more often the mentally retarded child who answers slowly,
+but exceptions to this rule are not uncommon. One 8-year-old boy
+examined by the writer answered so hesitatingly that it required two
+sittings of nearly an hour each to complete the test. The result,
+however, showed a mental age of 111/2 years, or an I Q of 143.
+
+It is permissible to hurry the child by an occasional "that's fine; now,
+quickly," etc., but in doing this caution must be exercised, or the
+child's mental process may be blocked. The appearance of nagging must be
+carefully avoided. If the test goes so slowly that it cannot be
+completed in the above limits of time, it is usually best to stop and
+complete the examination at another time. When this is not possible, it
+is advisable to take a ten-minute intermission and a little walk out of
+doors.
+
+Time can be saved by having all the necessary materials close at hand
+and conveniently arranged. The coins should be kept in a separate purse,
+and the pictures, colors, stamps, and designs for drawing should be
+mounted on stiff cardboard which may be punched and kept in a notebook
+cover. The series of sentences, digits, comprehension questions, fables,
+etc., should either be mounted in similar fashion, or else printed in
+full on the record sheets used in the tests. The latter is more
+convenient.[43] All other materials should be kept where they will not
+have to be hunted for.
+
+[43] Examiners will find it a great convenience to use the record
+booklet which has been specially devised for testing with the Stanford
+revision. It contains all the necessary printed material, including
+digits, sentences, absurdities, fables, the vocabulary list, the reading
+selection, the square and diamond for copying, etc., and in addition
+gives with each test the standard for scoring. It is so arranged as to
+afford ample room for a _verbatim_ record of all the child's responses,
+and contains other features calculated to make testing easy and
+accurate. Regarding purchasing of supplies see p. 141.
+
+Besides saving valuable time, a little methodical foresight of this kind
+adds to the success of the test. If the child is kept waiting, the test
+loses its interest and attention strays. See to it, if possible, that no
+lull occurs in the performance.
+
+Inexperienced examiners sometimes waste time foolishly by stopping to
+instruct the child on his failures. This is doubly bad, for besides
+losing time it makes the child conscious of the imperfection of his
+responses and creates embarrassment. Adhere to the purpose of the test,
+which is to ascertain the child's intellectual level, not to instruct
+him.
+
+DESIRABLE RANGE OF TESTING. There are two considerations here of equal
+importance. It is necessary to make the examination thorough, but in the
+pursuit of thoroughness we must be careful not to produce fatigue or
+ennui. Unless there is reason to suspect mental retardation, it is
+usually best to begin with the group of tests just below the child's
+age. However, if there is a failure in the tests of that group, it is
+necessary to go back and try all the tests of the previous group. In
+like manner the examination should be carried up the scale, until a test
+group has been found in which all the tests are failed.
+
+It must be admitted, however, that because of time limitations and
+fatigue, it is not always practicable to adhere to this ideal of
+thoroughness. In testing normal children, little error will result if we
+go back no farther than the year which yielded only one failure, and if
+we stop with the year in which there was only one success. _This is the
+lowest permissible limit of thoroughness._ Defectives are more uneven
+mentally than normal children, and therefore scatter their successes and
+failures over a wider range. With such subjects it is absolutely
+imperative that the test be thorough.
+
+In the case of defectives it is sometimes necessary to begin with random
+testing, until a rough idea is gained of the mental level. But the
+skilled observer soon becomes able to utilize symptoms in the child's
+conversation and conduct and to dispense with most of this preliminary
+exploration.
+
+ORDER OF GIVING THE TESTS. The child's efforts in the tests are
+sometimes markedly influenced by the order in which they are given. If
+language tests or memory tests are given first, the child is likely to
+be embarrassed. More suitable to begin with are those which test
+knowledge or judgment about objective things, such as the pictures,
+weights, stamps, bow-knot, colors, coins, counting pennies, number
+of fingers, right and left, time orientation, ball and field,
+paper-folding, etc. Tests like naming sixty words, finding rhymes,
+giving differences or similarities, making sentences, repeating
+sentences, and drawing are especially unsuitable because they tend to
+provoke self-consciousness.
+
+The tests as arranged in this revision are in the order which it is
+usually best to follow, but one should not hesitate to depart from the
+order given when it seems best in a given case to do so. It is necessary
+to be constantly alert so that when the child shows a tendency to balk
+at a given type of test, such as those of memory, language, numbers,
+drawing, "comprehension," etc., the work can be shifted to more
+agreeable tasks. When the child is at his ease again, it is usually
+possible to return to the troublesome tests with better success. In the
+case of 8-year-old D. C., who is a speech defective but otherwise above
+normal, it was quite impossible at the first sitting to give such tests
+as sentence-making, naming sixty words, reading, repeating sentences,
+giving definitions, etc.; at each test of this type the child's voice
+broke and he was ready to cry, due, no doubt, to sensitiveness regarding
+his speech defect. Others do everything willingly except the drawing and
+copying. The younger children sometimes refuse to repeat the sentences
+or digits. In all such cases it is best to pass on to something else.
+After a few minutes the rejected task may be done willingly.
+
+COAXING TO BE AVOIDED. Although we should always encourage the child to
+believe that he can answer correctly, if he will only try, we must avoid
+the common practice of dragging out responses by too much urging and
+coaxing. The sympathies of the examiner tend to lead him into the habit
+of repeating and explaining the question if the child does not answer
+promptly. This is nearly always a mistake, for the question is one which
+should be understood. Besides, explanations and coaxing are too often
+equivalent to answering the question for the child. It is almost
+impossible to impress this danger sufficiently upon the untrained
+examiner. One who is not familiar with the psychology of suggestion may
+put the answer in the child's mouth without suspecting what he is doing.
+
+ADHERING TO FORMULA. It cannot be too strongly emphasized that unless we
+follow a standardized procedure the tests lose their significance. The
+danger is chiefly that of unintentionally and unconsciously introducing
+variations which will affect the meaning of the test. One who has not
+had a thorough training in the methods of mental testing cannot
+appreciate how numerous are the opportunities for the unconscious
+transformation of a test. Many of these are pointed out in the
+description of the individual tests, but it would be folly to undertake
+to warn the experimenter against every possible error of this kind.
+Sometimes the omission or the addition of a single phrase in giving
+the test will alter materially the significance of the response.
+Only the trained psychologist can vary the formula without risk of
+invalidating the result, and even he must be on his guard. All sorts of
+misunderstandings regarding the correct placing of tests and regarding
+their accuracy or inaccuracy have come about through the failure of
+different investigators to follow the same procedure.
+
+One who would use the tests for any serious purpose, therefore,
+must study the procedure for each and every test until he knows it
+thoroughly. After that a considerable amount of practice is necessary
+before one learns to avoid slips. During the early stages of practice it
+is necessary to refer to the printed instructions frequently in order to
+check up errors before they have become habitual.
+
+The instructions hitherto available are at fault in not defining the
+procedure with sufficient definiteness, and it is the purpose of this
+volume to make good this deficiency as far as possible.
+
+It is too much, however, to suppose that the instructions can be made
+"fool-proof." With whatever definiteness they may be set forth,
+situations are sure to arise which the examiner cannot be formally
+prepared for. There is no limit to the multitude of misunderstandings
+possible. After testing hundreds of children one still finds new
+examples of misapprehension. In a few such cases the instruction may be
+repeated, if there is reason to think the child's hearing was at fault
+or if some extraordinary distraction has occurred. But unless otherwise
+stated in the directions, the repetition of a question is ordinarily to
+be avoided. Supplementary explanations are hardly ever permissible.
+
+In short, numberless situations may arise in the use of a test which may
+injure the validity of the response, events which cannot always be
+dealt with by preconceived rule. Accordingly, although we must urge
+unceasingly the importance of following the standard procedure, it is
+not to be supposed that formulas are an adequate substitute either for
+scientific judgment or for common sense.
+
+SCORING. The exact method of scoring the individual tests is set forth
+in the following chapters. Reference to the record booklet for use in
+testing will show that the records are to be kept in detail. Each
+subdivision of a test should be scored separately, in order that the
+clinical picture may be as complete as possible. This helps in the final
+evaluation of the results. It makes much difference, for example,
+whether success in repeating six digits is earned by repeating all three
+correctly or only one; or whether the child's lack of success with the
+absurdities is due to failure on two, three, four, or all of them. Time
+should be recorded whenever called for in the record blanks.
+
+RECORDING RESPONSES. Plus and minus signs alone are not usually
+sufficient. Whenever possible the entire response should be recorded. If
+the test results are to be used by any other person than the examiner,
+this is absolutely essential. Any other standard of completeness opens
+the door to carelessness and inaccuracy. In nearly all the tests, except
+that of naming sixty words, the examiner will find it possible by the
+liberal use of abbreviations to record practically the entire response
+_verbatim_. In doing so, however, one must be careful to avoid keeping
+the child waiting. Occasionally it is necessary to leave off recording
+altogether because of the embarrassment sometimes aroused in the child
+by seeing his answer written down. The writer has met the latter
+difficulty several times. When for any reason it is not feasible to
+record anything more than score marks, success may be indicated by the
+sign +, failure by -, and half credit by 1/2. An exceptionally good
+response may be indicated by ++ and an exceptionally poor response by --.
+If there is a slight doubt about a success or failure the sign? may
+be added to the + or -. In general, however, score the response either +
+or -, avoiding half credit as far as it is possible to do so.
+
+If the entire response is not recorded it is necessary to record at
+least the score mark for each test _when the test is given_. It must be
+borne in mind that the scoring is not a purely mechanical affair.
+Instead, the judgment of the examiner must come into play with every
+record made. If the scoring is delayed, there is not only the danger of
+forgetting a response, but the judgment is likely to be influenced by
+the subject's responses to succeeding questions. Our special record
+booklet contains wide margins, so that extended notes and observations
+regarding the child's responses and behavior can be recorded as the test
+proceeds.
+
+SCATTERING OF SUCCESSES. It is sometimes a source of concern to the
+untrained examiner that the successes and failures should be scattered
+over quite an extensive range of years. Why, it may be asked, should not
+a child who has 10-year intelligence answer correctly all the tests up
+to and including group X, and fail on all the tests beyond? There are
+two reasons why such is almost never the case. In the first place, the
+intelligence of an individual is ordinarily not even. There are many
+different kinds of intelligence, and in some of these the subject is
+better endowed than in others. A second reason lies in the fact that no
+test can be purely and simply a test of native intelligence. Given a
+certain degree of intelligence, accidents of experience and training
+bring it about that this intelligence will work more successfully with
+some kinds of material than with others. For both of these reasons there
+results a scattering of successes and failures over three or four years.
+The subject fails first in one or two tests of a group, then in two or
+three tests of the following group, the number of failures increasing
+until there are no successes at all. Success "tapers off" from
+100 per cent to 0. Once in a great while a child fails on several of the
+tests of a given year and succeeds with a majority of those in the next
+higher year. This is only an extreme instance of uneven intelligence or
+of specialized experience, and does not necessarily reflect upon the
+reliability of the tests for children in general. The method of
+calculation given above strikes a kind of average and gives the general
+level of intelligence, which is essentially the thing we want to know.
+
+SUPPLEMENTARY CONSIDERATIONS. It would be a mistake to suppose that any
+set of mental tests could be devised which would give us complete
+information about a child's native intelligence. There are no tests
+which are absolutely pure tests of intelligence. All are influenced to a
+greater or less degree also by training and by social environment. For
+this reason, all the ascertainable facts bearing on such influences
+should be added to the record of the mental examination, and should be
+given due weight in reaching a final conclusion as to the level of
+intelligence.
+
+The following supplementary information should be gathered, when
+possible:--
+
+  1.  Social status (very superior, superior, average, inferior, or
+      very inferior).
+
+  2.  The teacher's estimate of the child's intelligence (very
+      superior, superior, average, inferior, or very inferior).
+
+  3.  School opportunities, including years of attendance,
+      regularity, retardation or acceleration, etc.
+
+  4.  Quality of school work (very superior, superior, average,
+      inferior, or very inferior).
+
+  5.  Physical handicaps, if any (adenoids, diseased tonsils, partial
+      deafness, imperfect vision, malnutrition, etc.).
+
+In addition, the examiner will need to take account of the general
+attitude of the child during the examination. This is provided for in
+the record blanks under the heading "comments." The comments should
+describe as fully as possible the conduct and attitude of the child
+during the examination, with emphasis upon such disturbing factors as
+fear, timidity, unwillingness to answer, overconfidence, carelessness,
+lack of attention, etc. Sometimes, also, it is desirable to verify the
+child's age and to make record of the verification.
+
+Once more let it be urged that no degree of mechanical perfection of the
+tests can ever take the place of good judgment and psychological
+insight. Intelligence is too complicated to be weighed, like a bag of
+grain, by any one who can read figures.
+
+ALTERNATIVE TESTS. The tests designated as "alternative tests" are not
+intended for regular use. Inasmuch as they have been standardized and
+belong in the year group where they are placed, they may be used as
+substitute tests on certain occasions. Sometimes one of the regular
+tests is spoiled in giving it, or the requisite material for it may not
+be at hand. Sometimes there may be reason to suspect that the subject
+has become acquainted with some of the tests. In such cases it is a
+great convenience to have a few substitutes available.
+
+It is necessary, however, to warn against a possible misuse of
+alternative tests. _It is not permissible to count success in an
+alternative test as offsetting failure in a regular test._ This would
+give the subject too much leeway of failure. There are very exceptional
+cases, however, when it is legitimate to break this rule; namely, when
+one of the regular tests would be obviously unfair to the subject being
+tested. In year X, for example, one of the three alternative tests
+should be substituted for the reading test (X, 4) in case we are testing
+a subject who has not had the equivalent of at least two years of
+school work. In year VIII, it would be permissible to substitute the
+alternative test of naming six coins, instead of the vocabulary test, in
+the case of a subject who came from a home where English was not spoken.
+In VII, it would perhaps not be unfair to substitute the alternative
+test, in place of the test of copying a diamond, in the case of a
+subject who, because of timidity or embarrassment, refused to attempt
+the diamond. But it would be going entirely too far to substitute an
+alternative test in the place of every regular test which the subject
+responded to by silence. In the large majority of cases persistent
+silence deserves to be scored failure.
+
+Certain tests have been made alternatives because of their inferior
+value, some because the presence of other tests of similar nature in the
+same year rendered them less necessary.
+
+FINDING MENTAL AGE. As there are six tests in each age group from III to
+X, each test in this part of the scale counts 2 months toward mental
+age. There are eight tests in group XII, which, because of the omission
+of the 11-year group, have a combined value of 24 months, or 3 months
+each. Similarly, each of the six tests in XIV has a value of 4 months
+(24 / 6 = 4). The tests of the "average adult" group are given a value
+of 5 months each, and those of the "superior adult" group a value of
+6 months each. These values are in a sense arbitrary, but they are
+justified in the fact that they are such as to cause ordinary adults to
+test at the "average adult" level.
+
+The calculation of mental age is therefore simplicity itself. The rule
+is: (1) Credit the subject with all the tests below the point where the
+examination begins (remembering that the examination goes back until a
+year group has been found in which all the tests are passed); and (2)
+add to this basal credit 2 months for each test passed successfully up
+to and including year X, 3 months for each test passed in XII, 4 months
+for each test passed in XIV, 5 months for each success in "average
+adult," and 6 months for each success in "superior adult."
+
+For example, let us suppose that a child passes all the tests in VI,
+five of the six tests in VII, three in VIII, two in IX, and one in X.
+The total credit earned is as follows:--
+
+                                                       _Years__Months_
+    Credit presupposed, years I to V                        5
+    Credit earned in VI, 6 tests passed, 2 months each      1
+    Credit earned in VII, 5 tests passed, 2 months each          10
+    Credit earned in VIII, 3 tests passed, 2 months each          6
+    Credit earned in IX, 2 tests passed, 2 months each            4
+    Credit earned in X, 1 test passed, 2 months                   2
+                                                          ----  ----
+        Total credit                                        7    10
+
+Taking a subject who tests higher, let us suppose the following tests
+are passed: All in X, six of the eight in XII, two of the six in XIV,
+and one of the six in "average adult." The total credit is as follows:--
+
+                                                       _Years__Months_
+    Credit presupposed, years I to IX                       9
+    Credit earned in X, 6 tests passed, 2 months each       1
+    Credit earned in XII, 6 tests passed, 3 months each     1     6
+    Credit earned in XIV, 2 tests passed, 4 months each     0     8
+    Credit earned in "average adult," 1 success, 5 months         5
+                                                          ----  ----
+        Total credit                                       12     7
+
+One other point: If one or more tests of a year group have been omitted,
+as sometimes happens either from oversight or lack of time, the question
+arises how the tests which were given in such a year group should be
+evaluated. Suppose, for example, a subject has been given only four of
+the six tests in a given year, and that he passes two, or half of those
+given. In such a case the probability would be that had all six tests
+been given, three would have been passed; that is, one half of all.
+It is evident, therefore, that when a test has been omitted, a
+proportionately larger value should be assigned to each of those given.
+
+If all six tests are given in any year group below XII, each has a value
+of 2 months. If only four are given, each has a value of 3 months
+(12 / 4 = 3). If five tests only are given, each has a value of
+2.4 months (12 / 5 = 2.4). If in year group XII only six of the eight
+tests are given, each has a value of 4 months (24 / 6 = 4). If in the
+"average adult" group only five of the six tests are given, each has a
+value of 6 months instead of the usual 5 months. In this connection it
+will need to be remembered that the six "average adult" tests have a
+combined value of 30 months (6 tests, 5 months each); also that the
+combined value of the six "superior adult" tests is 36 months
+(6 x 6 = 36). Accordingly, if only five of the six "superior adult"
+tests are given, the value of each is 36 / 5 = 7.2 months.
+
+For example, let us suppose that a subject has been tested as follows:
+All the six tests in X were given and all were passed; only six of the
+eight in XII were given and five were passed; five of the six in XIV
+were given and three were passed; five of the six in "average adult"
+were given and one was passed; five were given in "superior adult" and
+no credit earned. The result would be as follows:--
+
+                                                       _Years__Months_
+    Credit presupposed, years I to IX                       9
+    Credit earned in X, 6 given, 6 successes                1
+    Credit earned in XII, 6 given, 5 passed. Unit value
+        of each test given is 24 / 6 = 4. Total value
+        of the 5 tests passed is 5 x 4 or                   1     8
+    Credit earned in XIV, 5 tests given, 3 passed. Unit
+        value of each of the 5 given is 24 / 5 = 4.8.
+        Value of the 3 passed is 3 x 4.8, or                0    14+
+    Credit earned in "average adult," 5 tests given,
+        1 passed. Unit value of the 5 tests given is
+        30 / 5 = 6. Value of the 1 success                  0     6
+    Credit earned in "superior adult"                       0     0
+                                                          ----  ----
+          Total credit                                     13     4+
+
+The calculation of mental age is really simpler than our verbal
+illustrations make it appear. After the operation has been performed
+twenty or thirty times, it can be done in less than a half-minute
+without danger of error.
+
+THE USE OF THE INTELLIGENCE QUOTIENT. As elsewhere explained, the mental
+age alone does not tell us what we want to know about a child's
+intelligence status. The significance of a given number of years of
+retardation or acceleration depends upon the age of the child. A
+3-year-old child who is retarded one year is ordinarily feeble-minded; a
+10-year-old retarded one year is only a little below normal. The child
+who at 3 years of age is retarded one year will probably be retarded two
+years at the age of 6, three years at the age of 9, and four years at
+the age of 12.
+
+What we want to know, therefore, is the ratio existing between mental
+age and real age. This is the intelligence quotient, or I Q. To find it
+we simply divide mental age (expressed in years and months) by real age
+(also expressed in years and months). The process is easier if we
+express each age in terms of months alone before dividing. The division
+can, of course, be performed almost instantaneously and with much less
+danger of error by the use of a slide rule or a division table. One who
+has to calculate many intelligence quotients should by all means use
+some kind of mechanical help.
+
+HOW TO FIND THE I Q OF ADULT SUBJECTS. Native intelligence, in so far as
+it can be measured by tests now available, appears to improve but little
+after the age of 15 or 16 years. It follows that in calculating the I Q
+of an adult subject, it will be necessary to disregard the years he has
+lived beyond the point where intelligence attains its final development.
+
+Although the location of this point is not exactly known, it will be
+sufficiently accurate for our purpose to assume its location at
+16 years. Accordingly, any person over 16 years of age, however old, is
+for purposes of calculating I Q considered to be just 16 years old. If a
+youth of 18 and a man of 60 years both have a mental age of 12 years,
+the I Q in each case is 12 / 16, or .75.
+
+The significance of various values of the I Q is set forth
+elsewhere.[44] Here it need only be repeated that 100 I Q means exactly
+average intelligence; that nearly all who are below 70 or 75 I Q are
+feeble-minded; and that the child of 125 I Q is about as much above the
+average as the high-grade feeble-minded individual is below the average.
+For ordinary purposes all who fall between 95 and 105 I Q may be
+considered as average in intelligence.
+
+[44] See Chapter VI.
+
+MATERIAL FOR USE IN TESTING. It is strongly recommended that in testing
+by the Stanford revision the regular Stanford record booklets be
+used. These are so arranged as to make testing accurate, rapid, and
+convenient. They contain square, diamond, round field, vocabulary list,
+fables, sentences, digits, and selections for memory tests, the reading
+selection barred for scoring, the dissected sentences, arithmetical
+problems, etc. One is required for each child tested.[45]
+
+[45] Houghton Mifflin Company will supply all the printed material
+needed in the tests, including the lines for the forms for VI, 2, the
+four pictures for "enumeration," "description," and "interpretation,"
+the pictures for V, 3 and VI, 2, the colors, designs for X, 3, the code
+for Average Adult 6, and score cards for square, diamond, designs, and
+ball-and-field.
+
+This is all the material required for the use of the Stanford revision,
+except the five weights for IX, 2, and V, 1, and the Healy-Fernald
+Construction Puzzle for X. These may be purchased of C. H. Stoelting &
+Co., 3037 Carroll Avenue, Chicago. It is not necessary, however, to have
+the weights and the Construction Puzzle, as the presence of one or
+more alternative tests in each year makes it possible to substitute
+other tests instead of those requiring these materials. This saves
+considerable expense. Apart from these, which may either be made at home
+(see pages 278, 279) or dispensed with, the only necessary equipment for
+using the Stanford revision is a copy of this book with the accompanying
+set of printed matter, and the record booklets. The record booklets are
+supplied only in packages of 25.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER IX
+
+Instructions For Year III
+
+
+III, 1. POINTING TO PARTS OF THE BODY
+
+PROCEDURE. After getting the child's attention, say: "_Show me your
+nose._" "_Put your finger on your nose._" Same with eyes, mouth, and
+hair.
+
+Tact is often necessary to overcome timidity. If two or three
+repetitions of the instruction fail to bring a response, point to the
+child's chin or ear and say: "_Is this your nose?_" "_No?_" "_Then where
+is your nose?_" Sometimes, after one has tried two or three parts of the
+test without eliciting any response, the child may suddenly release his
+inhibitions and answer all the questions promptly. In case of persistent
+refusal to respond it is best not to harass the child for an answer, but
+to leave the test for a while and return to it later. This is a rule
+which applies generally throughout the scale. In the case of one
+exceptionally timid little girl, it was impossible to get any response
+by the usual procedure, but immediately when a doll was shown the child
+pointed willingly to its nose, eyes, mouth, and hair. The device was
+successful because it withdrew the child's attention from herself and
+centered it upon something objective.
+
+SCORING. _Three responses out of four_ must be correct. Instead of
+pointing, the child sometimes responds by winking the eyes, opening the
+mouth, etc., which is counted as satisfactory.
+
+REMARKS. Binet's purpose in this test is to ascertain whether the
+subject is capable of comprehending simple language. The ability to
+comprehend and use language is indeed one of the most reliable
+indications of the grade of mental development. The appreciation of
+gestures comes first, then the comprehension of language heard, next the
+ability to repeat words and sentences mechanically, and finally the
+ability to use language as a means of communication. The present test,
+however, is not more strictly a test of language comprehension than the
+others of the 3-year group, and in any case it could not be said to mark
+the _beginning_ of the power to comprehend spoken language. That is
+fairly well advanced by the age of 2 years. The test closely resembles
+III, 2 (naming familiar objects), and III, 3 (enumeration of objects in
+a picture), except that it brings in a personal element and gives some
+clue to the development of the sense of self. All the data agree in
+locating the test at year III.
+
+
+III, 2. NAMING FAMILIAR OBJECTS
+
+PROCEDURE. Use a key, a penny, a closed knife, a watch, and an ordinary
+lead pencil. The key should be the usual large-sized doorkey, not one of
+the Yale type. The penny should not be too new, for the freshly made,
+untarnished penny resembles very little the penny usually seen. Any
+ordinary pocket knife may be used, and it is to be shown unopened. The
+formula is, "_What is this?_" or, "_Tell me what this is._"
+
+SCORING. There must be at least _three correct responses out of five_. A
+response is not correct unless the object is named. It is not sufficient
+for the child merely to show that he knows its use. A child, for
+example, may take the pencil and begin to mark with it, or go to the
+door and insert the key in the lock, but this is not sufficient. At the
+same time we must not be too arbitrary about requiring a particular
+name. "Cent" or "pennies" for "penny" is satisfactory, but "money" is
+not. The watch is sometimes called "a clock" or "a tick-tock," and we
+shall perhaps not be too liberal if we score these responses _plus_.
+"Pen" for "pencil," however, is unsatisfactory. Substitute names for
+"key" and "knife" are rarely given. Mispronunciations due to baby-talk
+are of course ignored.
+
+REMARKS. The purpose of this test is to find out whether the child has
+made the association between familiar objects and their names. The
+mental processes necessary to enable the child to pass this test are
+very elementary, and yet, as far as they go, they are fundamental.
+Learning the names of objects frequently seen is a form of mental
+activity in which the normally endowed child of 2 to 4 years finds great
+satisfaction. Any marked retardation in making such associations is a
+grave indication of the lack of that spontaneity which is so necessary
+for the development of the higher grades of intelligence. It would be
+entirely beside the point, therefore, to question the validity of the
+test on the ground that a given child may not have been _taught_ the
+names of the objects used. Practically all children 3 years old, however
+poor their environment, have made the acquaintance of at least three of
+the five objects, and if intelligence is normal they have learned their
+names as a result of spontaneous inquiry.
+
+Always use the list of objects here given, because it has been
+standardized. Any improvised selection would be sure to contain some
+objects either less or more familiar than those in the standardized
+list. Note also that three correct responses out of five are sufficient.
+If we required five correct answers out of six (like Kuhlmann), or three
+out of three (like Binet, Goddard, and Huey), the test would probably
+belong at the 4-year level. Binet states that this test is materially
+harder than that of naming objects in a picture, since in the latter the
+child selects from a number of objects in the picture those he knows
+best, while in the former test he must name the objects we have
+arbitrarily chosen. This difference does not hold, however, if we
+require only three correct responses out of five for passing the test of
+naming objects, instead of Binet's three out of three. All else being
+equal, it is of course easier to recognize and name a real object shown
+than it is to recognize and name it from a picture.
+
+
+III, 3. ENUMERATION OF OBJECTS IN PICTURES
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the three pictures designated as "Dutch Home," "River
+Scene," and "Post-Office." Say, "_Now I am going to show you a pretty
+picture._" Then, holding the first one before the child, close enough to
+permit distinct vision, say: "_Tell me what you see in this picture._"
+If there is no response, as sometimes happens, due to embarrassment or
+timidity, repeat the request in this form: "_Look at the picture and
+tell me everything you can see in it._" If there is still no response,
+say: "_Show me the ..._" (naming some object in the picture). Only one
+question of this type, however, is permissible. If the child answers
+correctly, say: "_That is fine; now tell me everything you see in the
+picture._" From this point the responses nearly always follow without
+further coaxing. Indeed, if _rapport_ has been properly cultivated
+before the test begins, the first question will ordinarily be
+sufficient. If the child names one or two things in a picture and then
+stops, urge him on by saying "_And what else_" Proceed with pictures _b_
+and _c_ in the same manner.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the child enumerates as many as _three_
+objects in _one_ picture _spontaneously_; that is, without intervening
+questions or urging. Anything better than enumeration (as description
+or interpretation) is also acceptable, but description is rarely
+encountered before 5 years and interpretation rarely before 9 or 10.[46]
+
+[46] See instructions for VII, 2, and XII, 7.
+
+REMARKS. The purpose of the test in this year is to find out whether the
+sight of a familiar object in a picture provokes recognition and calls
+up the appropriate name.[47] The average child of 3 or 4 years is in
+what Binet calls "the identification stage"; that is, familiar objects
+in a picture will be identified but not described, their relations to
+one another will not be grasped.
+
+[47] For a discussion of the significance of the different types of
+response, enumeration, description, and interpretation, see VII, 2, and
+XII, 7.
+
+In giving the test, always present the pictures in the same order,
+first Dutch Home, then River Scene, then Post-Office. The order of
+presentation will no doubt seem to the uninitiated too trivial a matter
+to insist upon, but a little experience teaches one that an apparently
+insignificant change in the procedure may exert a considerable influence
+upon the response. Some pictures tend more strongly than others to
+provoke a particular type of response. Some lend themselves especially
+to enumeration, others to description, others to interpretation. The
+pictures used in the Stanford revision have been selected from a number
+which have been tried because they are more uniform in this respect
+than most others in use. However, they are not without their
+differences, picture _b_, for example, tending more than the others to
+provoke description.
+
+There seems to be no disagreement as to the proper location of this
+test.
+
+
+III, 4. GIVING SEX
+
+PROCEDURE. If the subject is a boy, the formula is: "_Are you a little
+boy or a little girl?_" If a girl, "_Are you a little girl or a little
+boy?_" This variation in the formula is necessary because of the
+tendency in young children to repeat mechanically the last word of
+anything that is said to them. If there is no response, say: "_Are you a
+little girl?_" (if a boy); or, "_Are you a little boy?_" (if a girl). If
+the answer to the last question is "no" (or a shake of the head), we
+then say: "_Well, what are you? Are you a little boy or a little girl?_"
+(or _vice versa_).
+
+SCORING. The response is satisfactory if it indicates that the child has
+really made the discrimination, but we must be cautious about accepting
+any other response than the direct answer, "A little girl," or, "A
+little boy." "Yes" and "no" in response to the second question must be
+carefully checked up.
+
+REMARKS. Binet and Goddard say that 3-year-olds cannot pass this test
+and that 4-year-olds almost never fail. We can accept the last part of
+this statement, but not the first part. Nearly all of our 3-year-old
+subjects succeed with it.
+
+The test probably has nothing to do with sex consciousness, as such.
+Success in it would seem to depend on the ability to discriminate
+between familiar class names which are in a certain degree related.
+
+
+III, 5. GIVING THE FAMILY NAME
+
+PROCEDURE. The child is asked, "_What is your name?_" If the answer, as
+often happens, includes only the first name (Walter, for example), say:
+"_Yes, but what is your other name? Walter what?_" If the child is
+silent, or if he only repeats the first name, say: "_Is your name
+Walter ... ?_" (giving a fictitious name, as Jones, Smith, etc.). This
+question nearly always brings the correct answer if it is known.
+
+SCORING. Simply + or -. No attention is paid to faults of pronunciation.
+
+REMARKS. There is unanimous agreement that this test belongs in the
+3-year group. Although the child has not had as much opportunity to
+learn the family name as his first name, he is almost certain to have
+heard it more or less, and if his intelligence is normal the interest in
+self will ordinarily cause it to be remembered.
+
+The critic of the intelligence scale need not be unduly exercised over
+the fact that there may be an occasional child of 3 years who has never
+heard his family name. We have all read of such children, but they
+are so extremely rare that the chances of a given 3-year-old being
+unjustly penalized for this reason are practically negligible. In
+the second place, contingencies of this nature are throughout the
+scale consistently allowed for in the percentage of passes required
+for locating a test. Since (in the year groups below XIV) the
+individual tests are located at the age level where they are passed by
+60 to 70 per cent of unselected children of that age, it follows that
+the child of average ability _is expected_ to fail on about one third of
+the tests of his age group. The plan of the scale is such as to warrant
+this amount of leeway. But even granting the possibility that one
+subject out of a hundred or so may be unjustly penalized for lack of
+opportunity to acquire the knowledge which the test calls for, the
+injustice done does not greatly alter the result. A single test affects
+mental age only to the extent of two months, and the chances of two such
+injustices occurring with the same child are very slight. Herein lies
+the advantage of a multiplicity of tests. No test considered by itself
+is very dependable, but two dozen tests, properly arranged, are almost
+infinitely reliable.
+
+
+III, 6. REPEATING SIX TO SEVEN SYLLABLES
+
+PROCEDURE. Begin by saying: "_Can you say 'mamma'? Now, say 'nice
+kitty.'_" Then ask the child to say, "_I have a little dog._" Speak the
+sentence distinctly and with expression, but in a natural voice and not
+too slowly. If there is no response, the first sentence may be repeated
+two or three times. Then give the other two sentences: "_The dog runs
+after the cat_," and, "_In summer the sun is hot._" A great deal of tact
+is sometimes necessary to enlist the child's cooeperation in this test.
+If he cannot be persuaded to try, the alternative test of three digits
+may be substituted.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if at least _one sentence is repeated
+without error after a single reading_. "Without error" is to be taken
+literally; there must be no omission, insertion, or transposition
+of words. Ignore indistinctness of articulation and defects of
+pronunciation as long as they do not mutilate the sentence beyond easy
+recognition.
+
+REMARKS. The test does not presuppose that the child should have
+the ability to make and use sentences like these for purposes of
+communication, or even that he should know the meaning of all the words
+they contain. Its purpose is to bring out the ability of the child to
+repeat a six-syllable series of more or less familiar language sounds.
+As every one knows, the normal child of 2 or 3 years is constantly
+imitating the speech of those around him and finds this a great source
+of delight. Long practice in the semi-mechanical repetition of language
+sounds is necessary for the learning of speech cooerdinations and is
+therefore an indispensable preliminary to the purposeful use of
+language. High-grade idiots and the lowest grade of imbeciles never
+acquire much facility in the repetition of language heard. The test gets
+at one of the simplest forms of mental integration.
+
+Binet says that children of 3 years _never_ repeat sentences of
+ten syllables. This is not strictly true, for six out of nineteen
+3-year-olds succeeded in doing so. All the data agree, however, that the
+_average_ child of 3 years repeats only six to seven syllables
+correctly.
+
+
+III. ALTERNATIVE TEST: REPEATING THREE DIGITS
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the following digits: 6-4-1, 3-5-2, 8-3-7. Begin with two
+digits, as follows: "_Listen; say 4-2_." "_Now, say 6-4-1_." "_Now, say
+3-5-2_," etc. Pronounce the digits in a distinct voice and with
+perfectly uniform emphasis at a rate just a little faster than one per
+second. Two per second, as recommended by Binet, is too rapid.
+
+Young subjects, because of their natural timidity in the presence of
+strangers, sometimes refuse to respond to this test. With subjects under
+5 or 6 years of age it is sometimes necessary in such cases to re-read
+the first series of digits several times in order to secure a response.
+The response thus secured, however, is not counted in scoring, the
+purpose of the re-reading being merely to break the child's silence. The
+second and third series may be read but once. With the digits tests
+above year IV the re-reading of a series is never permissible.
+
+SCORING. Passed if the child repeats correctly, _after a single reading,
+one series out of the three_ series given. Not only must the correct
+digits be given, but the order also must be correct.
+
+REMARKS. Others, on the basis of rather scanty data, have usually
+located this test at the 4-year level. Our results show that with the
+procedure described above it is fully as easy as the test of repeating
+sentences of 6 to 7 syllables.[48]
+
+[48] See p. 194 _ff._ for further discussion of the digits test.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER X
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR IV
+
+
+IV, 1. COMPARISON OF LINES
+
+PROCEDURE. Present the appropriate accompanying card with the lines in
+horizontal position. Point to the lines and say: "_See these lines. Look
+closely and tell me which one is longer. Put your finger on the longest
+one._" We use the superlative as well as the comparative form of _long_
+because it is often more familiar to young subjects. If the child does
+not respond, say: "_Show me which line is the biggest._" Then withdraw
+the card, turn it about a few times, and present it again with the
+position of the two lines reversed, saying: "_Now show me the longest._"
+Turn the card again and make a third presentation.
+
+SCORING. All three comparisons must be made correctly; or if only two
+responses out of three are correct, all three pairs are again shown,
+just as before, and if there is no error this time, the test is passed.
+The standard, therefore, is _three correct responses out of three, or
+five out of six_.
+
+Sometimes the child points, but at no particular part of the card. In
+such cases it may be difficult to decide whether he has failed to
+comprehend and to make the discrimination or has only been careless in
+pointing. It is then necessary to repeat the experiment until the
+evidence is clear.
+
+REMARKS. As noted by Binet, success in this test depends on the
+comprehension of the verbal directions rather than on actual
+discrimination of length. The child who would unerringly choose the
+larger of two pieces of candy might fail on the comparison of lines.
+However, since the child must correctly compare the lines three times in
+succession, or at least in five out of six trials, _willingness to
+attend_ also plays a part. The attention of the low-grade imbecile, or
+even of the normal child of 3 years, is not very obedient to the
+suggestions of the experimenter. It may be gained momentarily, but it is
+not easily held to the same task for more than a few seconds. Hence some
+children who perfectly comprehend this task fail to make a succession of
+correct comparisons because they are unable or unwilling to bring to
+bear even the small amount of attention which is necessary. This does
+not in the least condone the failure, for it is exactly in such
+voluntary control of mental processes that we find one of the most
+characteristic differences between bright and dull, or mature and
+immature subjects.
+
+There has been little disagreement as to the proper location of this
+test.
+
+
+IV, 2. DISCRIMINATION OF FORMS
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the forms supplied with this book. First, place the
+circle of the duplicate set at "X", and say: "_Show me one like
+this_," at the same time passing the finger around the circumference of
+the circle. If the child does not respond, say: "_Do you see all of
+these things?_" (running the finger over the various forms); "_And do
+you see this one?_" (pointing again to the circle); "_Now, find me
+another one just like this._" Use the square next, then the triangle,
+and the others in any order.
+
+Correct the child's first error by saying: "_No, find one just like
+this_" (again passing the finger around the outline of the form at "X").
+Make no comment on errors after the first one, proceeding at once with
+the next card, but each time the choice is correct encourage the child
+with a hearty "That's good," or something similar.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _seven out of ten_ choices, are correct,
+the first corrected error being counted.
+
+REMARKS. In the test of discriminating forms, unlike the test of
+comparing lines, lack of success is less often due to inability to
+understand the task than to failure to discriminate. The test may be
+regarded as a variation of the form-board test. It displays the
+subject's ability to compare and contrast successive visual perceptions
+of form. The accurate perception of even a fairly simple form requires
+the integration of a number of sensory elements into one whole. The
+forms used in this test have meaning. They are far from nonsense figures
+even for the (normal) child of 4 years, who has, of course, never heard
+about "triangles," "squares," "rectangles," etc. The meaning present at
+this level of intelligence is probably a compound of such factors as
+appreciation of symmetry and direction, and discrimination of quantity
+and number.
+
+Another element in success, especially in the latter part of the
+experiment, is the ability to make an _attentive_ comparison between the
+form shown and the others. The child may be satisfied to point to the
+first form his eye happens to fall upon. Far from being a legitimate
+excuse for failure, such an exhibition of inattention and of weakness of
+the critical faculty is symptomatic of a mental level below 4 years.
+
+In addition to counting the number of errors made, it is interesting to
+note with what forms they occur. To match the circle with the ellipse or
+the octagon, for example, is a less serious error than to match it with
+the square or triangle.
+
+This test was devised and standardized by Dr. Fred Kuhlmann. It is
+inserted here without essential alteration, except that the size
+recommended for the forms is slightly reduced and minor changes have
+been made in the wording of the directions. Our own results are
+favorable to the test and to the location assigned it by its author.
+
+
+IV, 3. COUNTING FOUR PENNIES
+
+PROCEDURE. Place four pennies in a horizontal row before the child. Say:
+"_See these pennies. Count them and tell me how many there are. Count
+them with your finger, this way_" (pointing to the first one on the
+child's left)--"_One_"--"_Now, go ahead._" If the child simply gives the
+number (whether right or wrong) without pointing, say: "_No; count them
+with your finger, this way_," starting him off as before. Have him count
+them aloud.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed only if the counting tallies with the
+pointing. It is not sufficient merely to state the correct number
+without pointing.
+
+REMARKS. Contrary to what one might think, this is not to any great
+extent a test of "schooling." Practically all children of this age have
+had opportunity to learn to count as far as four, and with normal
+children the spontaneous interest in number is such that very few
+4-year-olds, even from inferior social environment, fail to pass the
+test.
+
+While success requires more than the ability to repeat the number names
+by rote, it does not presuppose any power of calculation or a mastery of
+the number concepts from one to four. Many children who will readily
+say, mechanically, "one, two, three, four," when started off, are not
+able to pass the test. On the other hand, it is not expected that the
+child who passes will also necessarily understand that four is made up
+of two two's, or four one's, or three plus one, etc.
+
+Binet, Goddard, and Kuhlmann place this test in the 5-year group, but
+three separate series of tests made for the Stanford revision, as well
+as nearly all the statistics available from other sources, show that it
+belongs at 4 years.
+
+
+IV, 4. COPYING A SQUARE
+
+PROCEDURE. Place before the child a cardboard on which is drawn in heavy
+black lines a square about 11/4 inches on a side.[49] Give the child a
+pencil and say: "_You see that_ (pointing to the square). _I want you to
+make one just like it. Make it right here_ (showing where it is to be
+drawn). _Go ahead. I know you can do it nicely._"
+
+[49] No material is needed if the regular Stanford record blanks are
+used, as these all contain the square and diamond.
+
+Avoid such an expression as, "_I want you to draw a figure like that._"
+The child may not know the meaning of either _draw_ or _figure_. Also,
+in pointing to the model, take care not to run the finger around the
+four sides.
+
+Children sometimes have a deep-seated aversion to drawing on request and
+a bit of tactful urging may be necessary. Experience and tact will
+enable the experimenter in all but the rarest cases to come out
+victorious in these little battles with balky wills. Give three trials,
+saying each time: "_Make it exactly like this_," pointing to model.
+Make sure that the child is in an easy position and that the paper used
+is held so it cannot slip.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if at least _one drawing out of the three_
+is as good as those marked + on the score card. Young subjects usually
+reduce figures in drawing from copy, but size is wholly disregarded in
+scoring. It is of more importance that the right angles be fairly well
+preserved than that the lines should be straight or the corners entirely
+closed. The scoring of this test should be rather liberal.
+
+REMARKS. After the three copies have been made say: "_Which one do you
+like best?_" In this way we get an idea of the subject's power of
+auto-criticism, a trait in which the mentally retarded are nearly always
+behind normal children of their own age. Normal children, when young,
+reveal the same weakness to a certain extent. It is especially
+significant when the subject shows complete satisfaction with a very
+poor performance.
+
+Observe whether the child makes each part with careful effort, looking
+at the model from time to time, or whether the strokes are made in a
+haphazard way with only an initial glance at the original. The latter
+procedure is quite common with young or retarded subjects. Curiously
+enough, the first trial is more successful than either of the others,
+due perhaps to a waning of effort and attention.
+
+Note that pencil is used instead of pen and that only one success is
+necessary. Binet gives only one trial and requires pen. Goddard allows
+pencil, but permits only one trial. Kuhlmann requires pen and passes the
+child only when two trials out of three are successful. But these
+authors locate the test at 5 years. Our results show that nearly three
+fourths of 4-year-olds succeed with pencil in one out of three trials if
+the scoring is liberal. It makes a great deal of difference whether pen
+or pencil is used, and whether two successes are required or only one.
+No better illustration could be given of the fact that without
+thoroughgoing standardization of procedure and scoring the best mental
+test may be misleading as to the degree of intelligence it indicates.
+
+Copying a square is one of three drawing tests used in the Binet scale,
+the others being the diamond (year VII), and the designs to be copied
+from memory (year X). These tests do not to any great extent test what
+is usually known as "drawing ability." Only the square and the diamond
+tests are strictly comparable with one another, the other having a
+psychologically different purpose. In none of them does success seem to
+depend very much on the amount of previous instruction in drawing. To
+copy a figure like a square or a diamond requires first of all an
+appreciation of spacial relationships. The figure must be perceived as a
+whole, not simply as a group of meaningless lines. In the second place,
+success depends upon the ability to use the visual impression in guiding
+a rather complex set of motor cooerdinations. The latter is perhaps the
+main difficulty, and is one which is not fully overcome, at least for
+complicated movements, until well toward adult life.
+
+It is interesting to compare the square and the diamond as to relative
+difficulty. They have the same number of lines and in each case the
+opposite sides are parallel; but whereas 4-year intelligence is equal to
+the task of copying a square, the diamond ordinarily requires 7-year
+intelligence. Probably no one could have foreseen that a change in the
+angles would add so much to the difficulty of the figure. It would be
+worth while to devise and standardize still more complicated figures.
+
+
+IV, 5. COMPREHENSION, FIRST DEGREE
+
+PROCEDURE. After getting the child's attention, say: "_What must you do
+when you are sleepy?_" If necessary the question may be repeated a
+number of times, using a persuasive and encouraging tone of voice. No
+other form of question may be substituted. About twenty seconds may be
+allowed for an answer, though as a rule subjects of 4 or 5 years usually
+answer quite promptly or not at all.
+
+Proceed in the same way with the other two questions: "_What ought you
+to do when you are cold?_" "_What ought you to do when you are hungry?_"
+
+SCORING. There must be _two correct responses out of three_. No one form
+of answer is required. It is sufficient if the question is comprehended
+and given a reasonably sensible answer. The following are samples of
+correct responses:--
+
+  (a) "Go to bed." "Go to sleep." "Have my mother get me ready for
+      bed." "Lie still, not talk, and I'll soon be asleep."
+  (b) "Put on a coat" (or "cloak," "furs," "wrap up," etc.).
+      "Build a fire." "Run and I'll soon get warm." "Get close to
+      the stove." "Go into the house," or, "Go to bed," may possibly
+      deserve the score _plus_, though they are somewhat doubtful
+      and are certainly inferior to the responses just given.
+  (c) "Eat something." "Drink some milk." "Buy a lunch." "Have my
+      mamma spread some bread and butter," etc.
+
+With the comprehension questions in this year it is nearly always easy
+to decide whether the response is acceptable, failure being indicated
+usually either by silence or by an absurd or irrelevant answer. One
+8-year-old boy who had less than 4-year intelligence answered all three
+questions by putting his finger on his eye and saying: "I'd do that."
+"Have to cry" is a rather common incorrect response.
+
+REMARKS. The purpose of these questions is to ascertain whether the
+child can comprehend the situations suggested and give a reasonably
+pertinent reply. The first requirement, of course, is to understand the
+language; the second is to tell how the situation suggested should be
+met.
+
+The question may be raised whether a given child might not fail to
+answer the questions correctly and yet have the intelligence to do the
+appropriate thing if the real situation were present. This is at least
+conceivable, but since it would not be practicable to make the subject
+actually cold, sleepy, or hungry in order to observe his behavior, we
+must content ourselves with suggesting a situation to be imagined. It
+probably requires more intelligence to tell what one ought to do in a
+situation which has to be imagined than to do the right thing when the
+real situation is encountered.
+
+The comprehension questions of this year had not been standardized until
+the Stanford investigation of 1913-14. Questions _a_ and _b_ were
+suggested by Binet in 1905, while _c_ is new. They make an excellent
+test of 4-year intelligence.
+
+
+IV, 6. REPEATING FOUR DIGITS
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_Now, listen. I am going to say over some numbers and
+after I am through, I want you to say them exactly like I do. Listen
+closely and get them just right--4-7-3-9._" Same with 2-8-5-4 and
+7-2-6-1. The examiner should consume nearly four seconds in pronouncing
+each series, and should practice in advance until this speed can be
+closely approximated. If the child refuses to respond, the first series
+may be repeated as often as may be necessary to prove an attempt, but
+_success with a series which has been re-read may not be counted_. The
+second and third series may be pronounced but once.
+
+SCORING. Passed if the child repeats correctly, _after a single reading,
+one series out of the three_ series given. The order must be correct.
+
+REMARKS. The test of repeating four digits was not included by Binet in
+the scale and seems not to have been used by any of the Binet workers.
+It is passed by about three fourths of our 4-year-olds.
+
+
+IV. ALTERNATIVE TEST: REPEATING TWELVE TO THIRTEEN SYLLABLES
+
+The three sentences are:--
+
+  (a) "_The boy's name is John. He is a very good boy._"
+  (b) "_When the train passes you will hear the whistle blow._"
+  (c) "_We are going to have a good time in the country._"
+
+PROCEDURE. Get the child's attention and say: "_Listen, say this: 'Where
+is kitty?'_" After the child responds, add: "_Now say this ..._,"
+reading the first sentence in a natural voice, distinctly and with
+expression. If the child is too timid to respond, the first sentence may
+be re-read, but in this case the response is not counted. _Re-reading is
+permissible only with the first sentence._
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if at least _one sentence is repeated
+without error after a single reading_. As in the alternative test of
+year III, we ignore ordinary indistinctness and defects of pronunciation
+due to imperfect language development, but the sentence must be repeated
+without addition, omission, or transposition of words.
+
+REMARKS. Sentences of twelve syllables had not been standardized
+previous to the Stanford revision, but Binet locates memory for ten
+syllables at year V, and others have followed his example. Our own data
+show that even 4-year-olds are usually able to repeat twelve syllables
+with the procedure here set forth.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XI
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR V
+
+
+V, 1. COMPARISON OF WEIGHTS
+
+MATERIALS. It is necessary to have two weights, identical in shape,
+size, and appearance, weighing respectively 3 and 15 grams.[50] If
+manufactured weights are not at hand, it is easy to make satisfactory
+substitutes by taking stiff cardboard pill-boxes, about 11/4 inches in
+diameter, and filling them with cotton and shot to the desired weight.
+The shot must be embedded in the center of the cotton so as to prevent
+rattling. After the box has been loaded to the exact weight, the lid
+should be glued on firmly. If one does not have access to laboratory
+scales, it is always possible to secure the help of a druggist in the
+rather delicate task of weighing the boxes accurately. A set of pill-box
+weights will last through hundreds of tests, if handled carefully, but
+they will not stand rough usage. The manufactured blocks are more
+durable, and so more satisfactory in the long run. If the weights are
+not at hand, the alternative test may be substituted.
+
+[50] The weights required for this test, and also for IX, 2, may be
+purchased of C. H. Stoelting & Co., 3037 Carroll Avenue, Chicago,
+Illinois.
+
+PROCEDURE. Place the 3- and 15-gram weights on the table before the
+child some two or three inches apart. Say: "_You see these blocks. They
+look just alike, but one of them is heavy and one is light. Try them and
+tell me which one is heavier._" If the child does not respond, repeat
+the instructions, saying this time, "_Tell me which one is the
+heaviest._" (Many American children have heard only the superlative form
+of the adjective used in the comparison of two objects.)
+
+Sometimes the child merely points to one of the boxes or picks up one at
+random and hands it to the examiner, thinking he is asked to _guess_
+which is heaviest. We then say: "_No, that is not the way. You must take
+the boxes in your hands and try them, like this_" (illustrating by
+lifting with one hand, first one box and then the other, a few inches
+from the table). Most children of 5 years are then able to make the
+comparison correctly. Very young subjects, however, or older ones who
+are retarded, sometimes adopt the rather questionable method of lifting
+both weights in the same hand at once. This is always an unfavorable
+sign, especially if one of the blocks is placed in the hand on top of
+the other block.
+
+After the first trial, the weights are shuffled and again presented for
+comparison as before, _this time with the positions reversed_. The third
+trial follows with the blocks in the same position as in the first
+trial. Some children have a tendency to stereotyped behavior, which in
+this test shows itself by choosing always the block on a certain
+side. Hence the necessity of alternating the positions.[51] Reserve
+commendation until all three trials have been given.
+
+[51] For discussion of "stereotypy" see p. 203.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _two of the three_ comparisons are
+correct. If there is reason to suspect that the successful responses
+were due to lucky guesses, the test should be entirely repeated.
+
+REMARKS. This test is decidedly more difficult than that of comparing
+lines (IV, 1). It is doubtful, however, if we can regard the difference
+as one due primarily to the relative difficulty of visual discrimination
+and muscular discrimination. In fact, the test with weights hardly taxes
+sensory discrimination at all when used with children of 5-year
+intelligence. Success depends, in the first place, on the ability to
+understand the instructions; and in the second place, on the power to
+hold the instructions in mind long enough to guide the process of making
+the comparison. The test presupposes, in elementary form, a power which
+is operative in all the higher independent processes of thought, the
+power to neglect the manifold distractions of irrelevant sensations and
+ideas and to drive direct toward a goal. Here the goal is furnished by
+the instruction, "Try them and see which is heavier." This must be held
+firmly enough in mind to control the steps necessary for making the
+comparison. Ideas of piling the blocks on top of one another, throwing
+them, etc., must be inhibited. Sometimes the low-grade imbecile starts
+off in a very promising way, then apparently forgets the instructions
+(loses sight of the goal), and begins to play with the boxes in a random
+way. His mental processes are not consecutive, stable, or controlled. He
+is blown about at the mercy of every gust of momentary interest.
+
+There is very general agreement in the assignment of this test to
+year V.
+
+
+V, 2. NAMING COLORS
+
+MATERIALS. Use saturated red, yellow, blue, and green papers, about
+2 x 1 inch in size, pasted one half inch apart on white or gray
+cardboard. For sake of uniformity it is best to match the colors
+manufactured especially for this test.[52]
+
+[52] Printed cards showing these colors are included in the set of
+material furnished by the publishers of this book.
+
+PROCEDURE. Point to the colors in the order, red, yellow, blue, green.
+Bring the finger close to the color designated, in order that there may
+be no mistake as to which one is meant, and say: "_What is the name of
+that color?_" Do not say: "_What color is that?_" or, "_What kind of a
+color is that?_" Such a formula might bring the answer, "The first
+color"; or, "A pretty color." Still less would it do to say: "_Show me
+the red_," "_Show me the yellow_," etc. This would make it an entirely
+different test, one that would probably be passed a year earlier than
+the Binet form of the experiment. Nor is it permissible, after a color
+has been miscalled, to return to it and again ask its name.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed only if _all_ the colors are named correctly
+and without marked uncertainty. However, prefixing the adjective "dark,"
+or "light," before the name of a color is overlooked.
+
+REMARKS. Naming colors is not a test of color discrimination, for that
+capacity is well developed years below the level at which this test is
+used. All 5-year-olds who are not color blind discriminate among the
+four primary colors here used as readily as adults do. As stated by
+Binet, it is a test of the "verbalization of color perception." It tells
+us whether the child has associated the names of the four primary colors
+with his perceptual imagery of those colors.
+
+The _ability_ to make simple associations between a sense impression and
+a name is certainly present in normal children some time before the
+above color associations are actually made. Many objects of experience
+are correctly named two or three years earlier, and it may seem at
+first a little strange that color names are learned so late. But it must
+be remembered that the child does not have numerous opportunities to
+observe and hear the names of several colors at once, nor does the
+designation of colors by their names ordinarily have much practical
+value for the young child. When he finally learns their names, it is
+more because of his spontaneous interest in the world of sense. Lack of
+such spontaneous interest is always an unfavorable sign, and it is not
+surprising, therefore, that imbecile intelligence has ordinarily never
+taken the trouble to associate colors with their names. Girls are
+somewhat superior to boys in this test, due probably to a greater
+natural interest in colors.
+
+Binet originally placed this test in year VIII, changing it to year VII
+in the 1911 scale. Goddard places it in year VII, while Kuhlmann omits
+it altogether. With a single exception, all the actual statistics with
+normal children justify the location of the test in year V. Bobertag's
+figures are the exception, opposed to which are Rowe, Winch, Dumville,
+Dougherty, Brigham, and all three of the Stanford investigations.
+
+The test is probably more subject to the influence of home environment
+than most of the other tests of the scale, and if the social status of
+the child is low, failure would not be especially significant until
+after the age of 6 years. On the whole it is an excellent test.
+
+
+V, 3. AESTHETIC COMPARISON
+
+Use the three pairs of faces supplied with the printed forms. It goes
+without saying that improvised drawings may not be substituted for
+Binet's until they have first been standardized.
+
+PROCEDURE. Show the pairs in order from top to bottom. Say: "_Which of
+these two pictures is the prettiest?_" Use both the comparative and the
+superlative forms of the adjective. Do not use the question, "Which face
+is the uglier (ugliest)?" unless there is some difficulty in getting the
+child to respond. It is not permitted, in case of an incorrect response,
+to give that part of the test again and to allow the child a chance to
+correct his answer; or, in case this is done, we must consider only the
+original response in scoring.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed only if all _three_ comparisons are made
+correctly. Any marked uncertainty is failure. Sometimes the child
+laughingly designates the ugly picture as the prettier, yet shows by his
+amused expression that he is probably conscious of its peculiarity or
+absurdity. In such cases "pretty" seems to be given the meaning of
+"funny" or "amusing." Nevertheless, we score this response as failure,
+since it betokens a rather infantile tolerance of ugliness.
+
+REMARKS. From the psychological point of view this is a most interesting
+test. One might suppose that aesthetic judgment would be relatively
+independent of intelligence. Certainly no one could have known in
+advance of experience that intellectual retardation would reveal itself
+in weakness of the aesthetic sense about as unmistakably as in memory,
+practical judgment, or the comprehension of language. But such is the
+case. The development of the aesthetic sense parallels general mental
+growth rather closely. The imbecile of 4-year intelligence, even though
+he may have lived forty years, has no more chance of passing this test
+than any other test in year V. It would be profitable to devise and
+standardize a set of pictures of the same general type which would
+measure a less primitive stage of aesthetic development.
+
+The present test was located by Binet in year VI and has been retained
+in that year in other revisions; but three separate Stanford
+investigations, as well as the statistics of Winch, Dumville, Brigham,
+Rowe, and Dougherty, warrant its location in year V.
+
+
+V, 4. GIVING DEFINITIONS IN TERMS OF USE
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the words: _Chair_, _horse_, _fork_, _doll_, _pencil_,
+and _table_. Say: "_You have seen a chair. You know what a chair is.
+Tell me, what is a chair?_" And so on with the other words, always in
+the order in which they are named above.
+
+Occasionally there is difficulty in getting a response, which is
+sometimes due merely to the child's unwillingness to express his
+thoughts in sentences. The earlier tests require only words and phrases.
+In other cases silence is due to the rather indefinite form of the
+question. The child could answer, but is not quite sure what is expected
+of him. Whatever the cause, a little tactful urging is nearly always
+sufficient to bring a response. In this test we have not found the
+difficulty of overcoming silence nearly as great as others have stated
+it to be. In consecutive tests of 150 5- and 6-year-old children we
+encountered unbreakable silence with 8 words out of the total 900
+(150 x 6). This is less than 1 per cent. But tactful encouragement is
+sometimes necessary, and it is best to take the precaution of not giving
+the test until _rapport_ has been well established.
+
+The urging should take the following form: "_I'm sure you know what a
+... is. You have seen a .... Now, tell me, what is a ... ?_" That is, we
+merely repeat the question with a word of encouragement and in a
+coaxing tone of voice. It would not at all do to introduce other
+questions, like, "_What does a ... look like?_" or, "_What is a ...
+for?_" "_What do people do with a ... ?_"
+
+Sometimes, instead of attempting a definition (of _doll_, for example),
+the child begins to talk in a more or less irrelevant way, as "I have a
+great big doll. Auntie gave it to me for Christmas," etc. In such cases
+we repeat the question and say, "_Yes, but tell me; what is a doll?_"
+This is usually sufficient to bring the little chatter-box back to the
+task.
+
+Unless it is absolutely necessary to give the child lavish
+encouragement, it is best to withhold approval or disapproval until the
+test has been finished. If the first response is a poor one and we
+pronounce it "fine" or "very good," we tempt the child to persist in his
+low-grade type of definition. By withholding comment until the last word
+has been defined, we give greater play to spontaneity and initiative.
+
+SCORING. As a rule, children of 5 and 6 years define an object in terms
+of use, stating what it does, what it is for, what people do with it,
+etc. Definitions by description, by telling what substance it is made
+of, and by giving the class to which it belongs are grouped together as
+"definitions superior to use." It is not before 8 years that two thirds
+of the children spontaneously give a large proportion of definitions in
+terms superior to use.
+
+The test is passed in year V if _four words out of the six_ are defined
+in terms of use (or better than use). The following are examples of
+satisfactory responses:--
+
+    _Chair_: "To sit on." "You sit on it." "It is made of wood and
+    has legs and back," etc.
+
+    _Horse_: "To drive." "To ride." "What people drive." "To pull
+    the wagon." "It is big and has four legs," etc.
+
+    _Fork_: "To eat with." "To stick meat with." "It is hard and has
+    three sharp things," etc.
+
+    _Doll_: "To play with." "What you dress and put to bed." "To
+    rock," etc.
+
+    _Pencil_: "To write with." "To draw." "They write with it." "It
+    is sharp and makes a black mark."
+
+    _Table_: "To eat on." "What you put the dinner on." "Where you
+    write." "It is made of wood and has legs."
+
+Examples of failure are such responses as the following: "A chair is a
+chair"; "There is a chair"; or simply, "There" (pointing to a chair). We
+record such responses without pressing for a further definition. About
+the only other type of failure is silence.
+
+REMARKS. It is not the purpose of this test to find out whether the
+child knows the meaning of the words he is asked to define. Words have
+purposely been chosen which are perfectly familiar to all normal
+children of 5 years. But with young children there is a difference
+between knowing a word and giving a definition of it. Besides, we desire
+to find out how the child apperceives the word, or rather the object for
+which it stands; whether the thing is thought of in terms of use,
+appearance (shape, size, color, etc.), material composing it, or class
+relationships.
+
+This test, because it throws such interesting light on the maturity of
+the child's apperceptive processes, is one of the most valuable of all.
+It is possible to differentiate at least a half-dozen degrees of
+excellence in definitions, according to the intellectual maturity of the
+subject. A volume, indeed, could be written on the development of word
+definitions and the growth of meanings; but we will postpone further
+discussion until VIII, 5. Our concern at present is to know that
+children of 5 years should at least be able to define four of these six
+words in terms of use.
+
+Binet placed the test in year VI, but our own figures and those of
+nearly all the other investigations indicate that it is better located
+in year V.
+
+
+V, 5. THE GAME OF PATIENCE
+
+MATERIAL. Prepare two rectangular cards, each 2 x 3 inches, and divide
+one of them into two triangles by cutting it along one of its diagonals.
+
+PROCEDURE. Place the uncut card on the table with one of its longer
+sides to the child. By the side of this card, a little nearer the child
+and a few inches apart, lay the two halves of the divided rectangle with
+their hypothenuses turned from each other as follows:
+
+[Illustration]
+
+Then say to the child: "_I want you to take these two pieces_ (touching
+the two triangles) _and put them together so they will look exactly like
+this_" (pointing to the uncut card). If the child hesitates, we repeat
+the instructions with a little urging. Say nothing about hurrying, as
+this is likely to cause confusion. Give three trials, of one minute
+each. If only one trial is given, success is too often a result of
+chance moves; but luck is not likely to bring two successes in three
+trials. If the first trial is a failure, move the cut halves back to
+their original position and say: "_No; put them together so they will
+look like this_" (pointing to the uncut card). Make no other comment of
+approval or disapproval. Disregard in silence the inquiring looks of the
+child who tries to read his success or failure in your face.
+
+If one of the pieces is turned over, the task becomes impossible, and it
+is then necessary to turn the piece back to its original position and
+begin over, not counting this trial. Have the under side of the pieces
+marked so as to avoid the risk of presenting one of them to the child
+wrong side up.
+
+SCORING. There must be _two successes in three trials_. About the only
+difficulty in scoring is that of deciding what constitutes a trial. We
+count it a trial when the child brings the pieces together and (after
+few or many changes) leaves them in some position. Whether he succeeds
+after many moves, or leaves the pieces with approval in some absurd
+position, or gives up and says he cannot do it, his effort counts as one
+trial. A single trial may involve a number of unsuccessful changes of
+position in the two cards, but these changes may not consume altogether
+more than one minute.
+
+REMARKS. As aptly described by Binet, the operation has the following
+elements: "(1) To keep in mind the end to be attained, that is to say,
+the figure to be formed. It is necessary to comprehend this end and not
+to lose sight of it. (2) To try different combinations under the
+influence of this directing idea, which guides the efforts of the child
+even though he be unconscious of the fact. (3) To judge the formed
+combination, compare it with the model, and decide whether it is the
+correct one."
+
+It may be classed, therefore, as one of the many forms of the
+"combination method." Elements must be combined into some kind of whole
+under the guidance of a directing idea. In this respect it has something
+in common with the form-board test, the Ebbinghaus test, and the test
+with dissected sentences (XII, 4). Binet designates it a "test of
+patience," because success in it depends upon a certain willingness to
+persist in a line of action under the control of an idea.
+
+Not all failures in this test are equally significant. A bright child of
+5 years sometimes fails, but usually not without many trial combinations
+which he rejects one after another as unsatisfactory. A dull child of
+the same age often stops after he has brought the pieces into any sort
+of juxtaposition, however absurd, and may be quite satisfied with his
+foolish effort. His mind is not fruitful and he lacks the power of
+auto-criticism.
+
+It would be well worth while to work out a new and somewhat more
+difficult "test of patience," but with special care to avoid the
+puzzling features of the usual games of anagrams. The one given us by
+Binet is rather easy for year V, though plainly somewhat too difficult
+for year IV.
+
+
+V, 6. THREE COMMISSIONS
+
+PROCEDURE. After getting up from the chair and moving with the child to
+the center of the room, say: "_Now, I want you to do something for me.
+Here's a key. I want you to put it on that chair over there; then I want
+you to shut (or open) that door, and then bring me the box which you see
+over there_ (pointing in turn to the objects designated). _Do you
+understand? Be sure to get it right. First, put the key on the chair,
+then shut_ (open) _the door, then bring me the box_ (again pointing).
+_Go ahead._" Stress the words _first_ and _then_ so as to emphasize the
+order in which the commissions are to be executed.
+
+Give the commissions always in the above order. Do not repeat the
+instructions again or give any further aid whatever, even by the
+direction of the gaze. If the child stops or hesitates it is never
+permissible to say: "_What next?_" Have the self-control to leave the
+child alone with his task.
+
+SCORING. _All three commissions must be executed and in the proper
+order._ Failure may result, therefore, either from leaving out one or
+more of the commands or from changing the order. The former is more
+often the case.
+
+REMARKS. Success depends first on the ability to comprehend the
+commands, and secondly, on the ability to hold them in mind. It is
+therefore a test of memory, though of a somewhat different kind from
+that involved in repeating digits or sentences. It is an excellent test,
+for it throws light on a kind of intelligence which is demanded in all
+occupations and in everyday life. A more difficult test of the same type
+ought to be worked out for a higher age level.
+
+Binet originally located this test in year VI, but in 1911 changed it to
+year VII. This is unfortunate, for the three Stanford investigations, as
+well as the statistics of all other investigators, show conclusively
+that it is easy enough for year V.
+
+
+V. ALTERNATIVE TEST: GIVING AGE
+
+PROCEDURE. The formula is simply, "_How old are you?_" The child of this
+age is, of course, not expected to know the date of his birthday, but
+merely how many years old he is.
+
+SCORING. About the only danger in scoring is in the failure to verify
+the child's response. Some children give an incorrect answer with
+perfect assurance, and it is therefore always necessary to verify.
+
+REMARKS. Inability to give the age may or may not be significant. If the
+child has arrived at the age of 7 or 8 years and has had anything like a
+normal social environment, failure in the test is an extremely
+unfavorable sign. But if the child is an orphan or has grown up in
+neglect, ignorance of age has little significance for intelligence.
+About all we can say is that if a child gives his age correctly, it is
+because he has had sufficient interest and intelligence to remember
+verbal statements which have been made concerning him in his presence.
+He may even pass the test without attaching any definite meaning to the
+word "year." On the other hand, if he has lived seven or eight years in
+a normal environment, it is safe to assume that he has heard his age
+given many times, and failure to remember it would then indicate either
+a weak memory or a grave inferiority of spontaneous interests, or both.
+Normal children have a natural interest in the things they hear said
+about themselves, while the middle-grade imbecile of even 40 years may
+fail to remember his age, however often he may have heard it stated.
+
+Binet placed the test in year VI of the 1908 series, but omitted it
+altogether in 1911. Kuhlmann and Goddard also omit it, perhaps wisely.
+Nevertheless, it is always interesting to give as a supplementary test.
+Children from good homes acquire the knowledge about a year earlier than
+those from less favorable surroundings. Unselected children of
+California ordinarily pass the test at 5 years.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VI
+
+
+VI, 1. DISTINGUISHING RIGHT AND LEFT
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the child: "_Show me your right hand._" After this is
+responded to, say: "_Show me your left ear._" Then: "_Show me your right
+eye._" Stress the words _left_ and _ear_ rather strongly and equally;
+also _right_ and _eye_. If there is one error, repeat the test, this
+time with left hand, right ear, and left eye. Carefully avoid giving any
+help by look of approval or disapproval, by glancing at the part of the
+body indicated, or by supplementary questions.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if all three questions are answered
+correctly, or if, in case of one error, the three additional questions
+are all answered correctly. The standard, therefore, _is three out of
+three, or five out of six_.
+
+The chief danger of variation among different examiners in scoring
+comes from double responses. For example, the child may point first to
+one ear and then to the other. In all cases of double response, the rule
+is to count the second response and disregard the first. This holds
+whether the first response was wrong and the second right, or _vice
+versa_.
+
+REMARKS. It is interesting to follow the child's acquisitions
+of language distinctions relating to spacial orientation. Other
+distinctions of this type are those between up and down, above and
+below, near and far, before and behind, etc. As Bobertag has pointed
+out, the child first masters such distinctions as up and down, above and
+below, before and behind, etc., and arrives at a knowledge of right and
+left rather tardily.
+
+How may we explain the late distinction of right and left as compared
+with up and down? At least four theories may be advanced: (1) Something
+depends on the frequency with which children have occasion to make the
+respective distinctions. (2) It may be explained on the supposition that
+kinaesthetic sensations are more prominently involved in distinctions of
+up and down than in distinctions of right and left. It is certainly true
+that, in distinguishing the two sides of a thing, less bodily movement
+is ordinarily required than in distinctions of its upper and lower
+aspects. The former demands only a shift of the eyes, the latter often
+requires an upward or downward movement of the head. (3) It may be due
+to the fact that the appearance of an object is more affected by
+differences in vertical orientation than by those of horizontal
+orientation. We see an object now from one side, now from the other, and
+the two aspects easily blend, while the two aspects corresponding to
+above and below are not viewed in such rapid succession and so remain
+much more distinct from one another in the child's mind. Or, (4), the
+difference may be mainly a matter of language. The child undoubtedly
+hears the words _up_ and _down_ much oftener than _right_ and _left_,
+and thus learns their meaning earlier. Horizontal distinctions are
+commonly made in such terms as _this side_ and _that side_, or merely by
+pointing, while in the case of vertical distinctions the words _up_ and
+_down_ are used constantly. This last explanation is a very plausible
+one, but it is very probable that other factors are also involved.
+
+The distinction between right and left has a certain inherent and more
+or less mysterious difficulty. To convince one's self of this it is only
+necessary to try a little experiment on the first fifty persons one
+chances to meet. The experiment is as follows. Say: "I am going to ask
+you a question and I want you to answer it as quickly as you can." Then
+ask: "Which is your right hand?" About forty persons out of fifty will
+answer correctly without a second's hesitation, several will require two
+or three seconds to respond, while a few, possibly four or five
+per cent, will grow confused and perhaps be unable to respond for five
+or ten seconds. Some very intelligent adults cannot possibly tell which
+is the right or left hand without first searching for a scar or some
+other distinguishing mark which is known to be on a particular hand.
+Others resort to incipient movements of writing, and since, of course,
+every one knows which hand he writes with, the writing movements
+automatically initiated give the desired clue. One bright little girl of
+8 years responded by trying to wink first one eye and then the other.
+Asked why she did this, she said she knew she could wink her left eye,
+but not her right! One who is resourceful enough to adopt such an
+ingenious method is surely not less intelligent than the one who is able
+to respond by a direct instead of an intermediate association.
+
+It seems that normal people never encounter a corresponding difficulty
+in distinguishing up and down. The writer has questioned several hundred
+without finding a single instance, whereas a great many have to employ
+some intermediate association in order to distinguish right and left. It
+is the "p's and q's" that children must be told to mind; not the "p's
+and b's." The former is a horizontal, the latter a vertical distinction.
+
+Considering the difficulty which normal adults sometimes have in
+distinguishing right and left, is it fair to use this test as a measure
+of intelligence? We may answer in the affirmative. It is fair because
+normal adults, notwithstanding momentary uncertainty, are invariably
+able to make the distinction, if not by direct association, then by an
+intermediate one. We overlook the momentary confusion and regard only
+the correctness of the response. Subjects who are below middle-grade
+imbecile, however long they have lived, seldom pass the test.
+
+This test found a place in year VI of Binet's 1908 scale, but was
+shifted to year VII in the 1911 revision. The Stanford statistics, and
+all other available data, with the exception of Bobertag's, justify its
+retention in year VI. It is possible that the children of different
+nations do not have equal opportunity and stimulus for learning the
+distinction between right and left, but the data show that as far as
+American and English children are concerned we have a right to expect
+this knowledge in children of 6 years.
+
+
+VI, 2. FINDING OMISSIONS IN PICTURES
+
+PROCEDURE. Show the pictures to the child one at a time in the order in
+which they are lettered, _a_, _b_, _c_, _d_. When the first picture is
+shown (that with the eye lacking), say: "_There is something wrong with
+this face. It is not all there. Part of it is left out. Look carefully
+and tell me what part of the face is not there._" Often the child gives
+an irrelevant answer; as, "The feet are gone," "The stomach is not
+there," etc. These statements are true, but they do not satisfy the
+requirements of the test, so we say: "_No; I am talking about the face.
+Look again and tell me what is left out of the face._" If the correct
+response does not follow, we point to the place where the eye should be
+and say: "_See, the eye is gone._" When picture _b_ is shown we say
+merely: "_What is left out of this face?_" Likewise with picture _c_.
+For picture _d_ we say: "_What is left out of this picture?_" No help of
+any kind is given unless (if necessary) with the first picture. With the
+others we confine ourselves to the single question, and the answer
+should be given promptly, say within twenty to twenty-five seconds.
+
+SCORING. Passed if the omission is correctly pointed out in _three out
+of four_ of the pictures. Certain minor errors we may overlook, such as
+"eyes" instead of "eye" for the first picture; "nose and one ear"
+instead of merely "nose" for the third; "hands" instead of "arms" for
+the fourth, etc. Errors like the following, however, count as failure:
+"The other eye," or "The other ear" for the first or third; "The ears"
+for the fourth, etc.
+
+REMARKS. The test is one of the two or three dozen forms of the
+so-called "completion test," all of which have it in common that from
+the given parts of a whole the missing parts are to be found. The whole
+to be completed may be a word, a sentence, a story, a picture, a group
+of pictures, an object, or in fact almost anything. Sometimes all the
+parts of the whole are given and only the arrangement or order is to be
+found, as in the test with dissected sentences.
+
+Further discussion of the completion test will be found in connection
+with test 4, year XII. For the present we will only observe that
+notwithstanding a certain similarity among the tests of this type, they
+do not all call into play the same mental processes. The factor most
+involved may be verbal language coherence, visual perception of form,
+the association of abstract ideas, etc. To pass Binet's test with
+mutilated pictures requires, (1) that the parts of the picture be
+perceived as constituting a whole; and (2) that the idea of a human face
+or form be so easily and so clearly reproducible that it may act, even
+before it comes fully into consciousness, as a model or pattern, for the
+criticism of the picture shown. The younger the child, the less
+adequate, in this sense, is his perceptual familiarity with common
+objects. In standardizing a series of "absurd pictures," the writer has
+found that normal children of 3 years often see nothing wrong in a
+picture which shows a cat with two legs or a hen with four legs. Such
+children would, of course, never mistake a cat for a hen. Their trouble
+lies in the inability to call up in clear form a "free idea" of a cat or
+a hen for comparison with the perceptual presentation offered by the
+picture. Middle-grade imbeciles of adult age have much the same
+difficulty as normal children of 4 years in recognizing mutilations or
+absurdities in pictures of familiar objects.
+
+Binet first placed this test in year VII, changing it to year VIII in
+the 1911 revision. In other revisions it has been retained in year VII,
+although all the available statistics except Bobertag's warrant its
+location in year VI.
+
+
+VI, 3. COUNTING THIRTEEN PENNIES
+
+PROCEDURE. The procedure is the same as in the test of counting four
+pennies (year IV, test 3). If the first response contains only a minor
+error, such as the omission of a number in counting, failure to tally
+with the finger, etc., a second trial is given.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if there is _one success in two trials_.
+Success requires that the counting should tally with the pointing. It is
+not sufficient merely to state the number of pennies without pointing,
+for unless the child points and counts aloud we cannot be sure that his
+correct answer may not be the joint result of two errors in opposite
+directions and equal; for example, if one penny were skipped and
+another were counted twice the total result would still be correct, but
+the performance would not satisfy the requirements.
+
+REMARKS. Does success in this test depend upon intelligence or upon
+schooling? The answer is, intelligence mainly. There are possibly a few
+normal 6-year-old children who could not pass the test for lack of
+instruction, but children of this age usually have enough spontaneous
+interest in numbers to acquire facility in counting as far as 13 without
+formal teaching. Certainly, inability to do so by the age of 7 years is
+a suspicious sign unless the child's environment has been extraordinarily
+unfavorable. On the other hand, feeble-minded adults of the 5-year level
+usually have to have a great deal of instruction before they acquire
+the ability to count 13, and many of them are hardly able to learn it at
+all. So much does our learning depend on original endowment.
+
+Binet originally placed this test in year VII, but moved it to year VI
+in 1911. All the statistics, without exception, show that this change
+was justified. Bobertag says that nearly all 7-year-olds who are not
+feeble-minded can pass it, a statement with which we can fully agree.
+
+
+VI, 4. COMPREHENSION, SECOND DEGREE
+
+PROCEDURE. The questions used in this year are:--
+
+  (a) "_What's the thing to do if it is raining when you start to
+      school?_"
+  (b) "_What's the thing to do if you find that your house is on
+      fire?_"
+  (c) "_What's the thing to do if you are going some place and
+      miss your train (car)?_"
+
+Note that the wording of the first part of the questions is slightly
+different from that in year IV, test 5.
+
+If there is no response, or if the child looks puzzled, the question may
+be repeated once or twice. The form of the question must not under any
+circumstances be altered. Question _b_, for example, would be materially
+changed if we should say: "_Suppose you were to come home from school
+and find that your house was burning up. What would you do?_" The
+expression "burning up" would probably be much less likely to suggest
+calling a fireman than would the words "on fire."
+
+SCORING. _Two out of three_ must be answered correctly. The harder the
+comprehension questions are, the greater the variety of answers and the
+greater the difficulty of scoring. Because of the difficulty many
+examiners find in scoring this test, we will list the most common
+satisfactory, unsatisfactory, and doubtful responses to each question.
+
+(a) _If it is raining when you start to school_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Take umbrella," "Bring a parasol," "Put on
+    rubbers," "Wear an overcoat," etc. This type of response
+    occurred 61 times out of 72 successes. "Have my father bring me"
+    also counts _plus_.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Go home," "Stay at home," "Stay in the
+    house," "Have the rainbow," "Stay in school," etc. "Stay at
+    home" is the most common failure and might at first seem to the
+    examiner to be a satisfactory response. As a matter of fact,
+    this answer rests on a slight misunderstanding of the question,
+    the import of which is that one is to go to school and it is
+    raining.
+
+    _Doubtful._ "Run" as an answer is a little more troublesome. It
+    may reasonably be scored _plus_ if it can be ascertained that
+    the child is accustomed to meet the situation in this way. It is
+    a common response with children in those regions of the
+    Southwest where rains are so infrequent that umbrellas are
+    rarely used. "Bring my lunch" may be considered a satisfactory
+    response in case the child is in the habit of so doing on rainy
+    days.
+
+(b) _If you find that your house is on fire_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Ring the fire alarm," "Call the firemen," "Call
+    for help," "Put water on it," etc.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ The most common failure, accounting for nearly
+    half of all, is to suggest finding other shelter; _e.g._, "Go to
+    the hotel," "Get another house," "Stay with your friends,"
+    "Build a new house," etc. Others are: "Tell them you are sorry
+    it burned down," "Be careful and not let it burn again," "Have
+    it insured," "Cry," "Call the policeman," etc.
+
+    _Doubtful._ Instead of suggesting measures to put out the fire,
+    a good many children suggest mere escape or the saving of
+    household articles. Responses of this type are: "Jump out of the
+    windows," "Save yourself," "Get out as fast as you can," "Save
+    the baby," "Get my dolls and jewelry and hurry and get out."
+    These answers are about one seventh as frequent as the perfectly
+    satisfactory ones, and the rule for scoring them is a matter of
+    some importance. Under certain circumstances the logical thing
+    to do would be to save one's self or valuables without wasting
+    time trying to call help. There may be no help in reach, or a
+    fire which the child imagines may be too far along for help to
+    be effective. In order to avoid the possibility of doing a
+    subject an injustice, it may be desirable to score such answers
+    _plus_. We must not be too arbitrary.
+
+(c) _If you miss your train_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ The answer we expect is, "Wait for another,"
+    "Take the next car," or something to that effect. This type of
+    answer includes about 85 per cent of the responses which do not
+    belong obviously in the unsatisfactory group. "Take a jitney" is
+    a modern variation of this response which must be counted as
+    satisfactory.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ These are endless. One continues to meet new
+    examples of absurdity, however many children one has tested. The
+    possibilities are literally inexhaustible, but the following are
+    among the most common: "Wait for it to come back," "Have to
+    walk," "Be mad," "Don't swear," "Run and try to catch it," "Try
+    to jump on," "Don't go to that place," "Go to the next station,"
+    etc.
+
+    _Doubtful._ The main doubtful response is, "Go home again,"
+    "Come back next day and catch another," etc. In small or
+    isolated towns having only one or two trains per day, this is
+    the logical thing to do, and in such cases the score is _plus_.
+    Fortunately, only about one answer in ten gives rise to any
+    difference of opinion among even partly trained examiners.
+
+REMARKS. The three comprehension questions of this group were all
+suggested by Binet in 1905. Only one of them, however, "What would you
+do if you were going some place and missed your train?" was incorporated
+in the 1908 or 1911 series, and this was used in year X with seven
+others much harder. The other two remained unstandardized previous to
+the Stanford investigation.[53]
+
+[53] For general discussion of the comprehension questions as a test,
+see p. 158.
+
+
+VI, 5. NAMING FOUR COINS
+
+PROCEDURE. Show a nickel, a penny, a quarter, and a dime, asking each
+time: "_What is that?_" If the child misunderstands and answers,
+"Money," or "A piece of money," we say: "_Yes, but what do you call that
+piece of money?_" Show the coins always in the order given above.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _three of the four_ questions are
+correctly answered. Any correct designation of a coin is satisfactory,
+including provincialisms like "two bits" for the 25-cent piece, etc. If
+the child changes his response for a coin, we count the second answer
+and ignore the first. No supplementary questions are permissible.
+
+REMARKS. Some of the critics of the Binet scale regard this test as of
+little value, because, they say, the ability to identify pieces of money
+depends entirely on instruction or other accidents of environment. The
+figures show, however, that it is not greatly influenced by differences
+of social environment, although children from poor homes do slightly
+better with it than those from homes of wealth and culture. The fact
+seems to be that practically all children by the age of 6 years have
+had opportunity to learn the names of the smaller coins, and if they
+have failed to learn them it betokens a lack of that spontaneity of
+interest in things which we have mentioned so often as a fundamental
+presupposition of intelligence. It is by no means a test of mere
+mechanical memory.
+
+This test was given a place in year VII of Binet's 1908 scale, the coins
+used being the 1-sou, 2-sous, 10-sous, and 5-franc pieces. It was
+omitted from the Binet 1911 revision and also from that of Goddard.
+Kuhlmann retains it in year VII. Others, however, have required all four
+coins to be correctly named, and when this standard is used the test is
+difficult enough for year VII. Germany has six coins up to and including
+the 1-mark piece, all of which could be named by 76 per cent of
+Bobertag's 7-year-olds. With the coins and the standard of scoring used
+in the Stanford revision the test belongs well in year VI.
+
+
+VI, 6. REPEATING SIXTEEN TO EIGHTEEN SYLLABLES
+
+The sentences are:--
+
+  (a) "_We are having a fine time. We found a little mouse in the
+      trap._"
+  (b) "_Walter had a fine time on his vacation. He went fishing
+      every day._"
+  (c) "_We will go out for a long walk. Please give me my pretty
+      straw hat._"
+
+PROCEDURE. The instructions should be given as follows: "_Now, listen. I
+am going to say something and after I am through I want you to say it
+over just like I do. Understand? Listen carefully and be sure to say
+exactly what I say._" Then read the first sentence rather slowly, in a
+distinct voice, and with expression. If the response is not too bad,
+praise the child's efforts. Then proceed with the second and third
+sentences, prefacing each with an exhortation to "say exactly what I
+say."
+
+In this year and in the memory-for-sentences test of later years it is
+not permissible to re-read even the first sentence. The only reason for
+allowing a repetition of one of the sentences in the earlier test of
+this kind was to overcome the child's timidity. With children of 6 years
+or upward we seldom encounter the timidity which sometimes makes it so
+hard to secure responses in some of the tests of the earlier years.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed _if at least one sentence out of three is
+repeated without error, or if two are repeated with not more than one
+error each_. A single omission, insertion, or transposition counts as an
+error. Faults of pronunciation are of course overlooked. It is not
+sufficient that the thought be reproduced intact; the exact language
+must be repeated. The responses should be recorded _verbatim_. This is
+easily done if record blanks used for scoring have the sentences printed
+in full.
+
+REMARKS. In this test and in later tests of memory for sentences, it is
+interesting to ask after each response: "_Did you get it right?_" As in
+the tests with digits, it is an unfavorable sign when the child is
+perfectly satisfied with a very poor response.
+
+It is evident that tests of this type give opportunity for different
+degrees of failure. To repeat only a half or a third of each sentence is
+much more serious than to make but one error in each sentence (one word
+omitted, inserted, or misplaced). It would be possible to use the same
+sentences at three or four different age levels, by setting the
+appropriate standard for success at each age. If the standard is one
+sentence out of three repeated with no more than two errors, the test
+belongs in year V. If we require two absolutely correct responses out of
+three, the test belongs at about year VII. The shifting standard is
+rendered unnecessary, however, by the use of other tests of the same
+kind, easier ones in the lower years and more difficult ones in the
+upper.
+
+Sentences of sixteen syllables found a place in Binet's 1908 scale and
+were correctly located in year VI, but later revisions, including that
+of Binet, have omitted the test.
+
+
+VI. ALTERNATIVE TEST: FORENOON AND AFTERNOON
+
+PROCEDURE. If it is morning, ask: "_Is it morning or afternoon?_" If it
+is afternoon, put the question in the reverse form, "_Is it afternoon or
+morning?_" This precaution is necessary because of the tendency of some
+children to choose always the latter of two alternatives. Do not
+cross-question the child or give any suggestion that might afford a clue
+as to the correct answer.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the correct response is given with
+apparent assurance. If the child says he is not sure but _thinks_ it
+forenoon (or afternoon, as the case may be), we score the response a
+failure even if the answer happens to be correct. However, this type of
+response is not often encountered.
+
+REMARKS. It is interesting to follow the child's development with regard
+to orientation in time. This development proceeds much more slowly than
+we are wont to assume. Certain distinctions with regard to space, as up
+and down, come much earlier. As Binet remarks, schools sometimes try to
+teach the events of national history to children whose time orientation
+is so rudimentary that they do not even know morning from afternoon!
+
+The test has two rather serious faults: (1) It gives too much play to
+chance, for since only two alternatives are offered, guesses alone would
+give about fifty per cent of correct responses. (2) We cannot be sure
+that the verbal distinction between forenoon and afternoon always
+corresponds the two divisions of the day. It is possible that the
+temporal discrimination precedes the formation of the correct verbal
+association.
+
+This test was included in the year VI group of the 1908 scale, but was
+omitted from the 1911 revision. Nearly all the data except Bobertag's
+show that it is rather easy for year VI, though too difficult for
+year V. Bobertag's figures would place the test in year VII. Possibly
+the corresponding German words are not as easy to learn as our _morning_
+and _afternoon_.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XIII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VII
+
+
+VII, 1. GIVING THE NUMBER OF FINGERS
+
+PROCEDURE. "_How many fingers have you on one hand?_" "_How many on the
+other hand?_" "_How many on both hands together?_" If the child begins
+to count in response to any of the questions, say: "_No, don't count.
+Tell me without counting._" Then repeat the question.
+
+SCORING. Passed _if all three questions are answered correctly and
+promptly_ without the necessity of counting. Some subjects do not
+understand the question to include the thumbs. We disregard this if the
+number of fingers exclusive of thumbs is given correctly.
+
+REMARKS. Like the two tests of counting pennies, this one, also, throws
+light on the child's spontaneous interest in numbers. However, the
+mental processes it calls into play are a little less simple than those
+required for mere counting. If the child is able to give the number of
+fingers, it is ordinarily because he has previously counted them and has
+remembered the result. The memory would hardly be retained but for a
+certain interest in numbers as such. Middle-grade imbeciles of even
+adult age seldom remember how many fingers they have, however often
+they may have been told. They are not able to form accurate concepts of
+other than the simplest number relationships, and numbers have little
+interest or meaning for them.
+
+Binet gave this test a place in year VII of the 1908 series, but omitted
+it in the 1911 revision. Goddard omits it, while Kuhlmann retains it in
+year VII, where, according to our own figures, it unmistakably belongs.
+Bobertag finds it rather easy for year VII, though too difficult for
+year VI.
+
+Our data prove that this test fulfills the requirements of a good test.
+It shows a rapid but even rise from year V to year VIII in the per cent
+passing, the agreement among the different testers is extraordinarily
+close, and it is relatively little influenced by training and social
+environment. For these reasons, and because it is so easy to give and
+score with uniformity, it well deserves a place in the scale.
+
+
+VII, 2. DESCRIPTION OF PICTURES
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the same pictures as in III, 3, presenting them always in
+the following order: Dutch Home, River Scene, Post-Office. The formula
+for the test in this year is somewhat different from that of year III.
+Say: "_What is this picture about? What is this a picture of?_" Use the
+double question, and follow the formula exactly. It would ruin the test
+to say: "_Tell me everything you see in this picture_," for this form of
+question tends to provoke the enumeration response even with intelligent
+children of this age.
+
+When there is no response, the question may be repeated as often as is
+necessary to break the silence.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _two of the three_ pictures are described
+or interpreted. Interpretation, however, is seldom encountered at this
+age. Often the response consists of a mixture of enumeration and
+description. The rule is that the reaction to a picture should not
+be scored _plus_ unless it is made up chiefly of description (or
+interpretation).
+
+Study of the following samples of satisfactory responses will give a
+fairly definite idea of the requirements for satisfactory description:--
+
+_Picture (a): satisfactory responses_
+
+    "The little girl is crying. The mother is looking at her and
+    there is a little kitten on the floor."
+
+    "The mother is watching the baby, and the cat is looking at a
+    hole in the floor, and there is a lamp and a table so I guess
+    it's a dining room."
+
+    "The little girl has wooden shoes. Her mother is sitting in a
+    chair and has a funny cap on her head. The cat is sitting on the
+    floor and there is a basket by the mother and a table with
+    something on it."
+
+    "It's about Holland. The little Dutch girl is crying and the
+    mother is sitting down."
+
+    "A little Dutch girl and her mother and that's a kitten, and the
+    little girl has her hand up as if she was doing something to her
+    forehead. She has shoes that curve up in front."
+
+    "Dutch lady, and the little baby doesn't want to come to her
+    mother and the cat is looking for some mice."
+
+    "The mother is sitting down and the little one has her hands up
+    over her eyes. There's a pail by the mother and a chair with
+    some clothes on it and a table with dishes. And here's a lamp
+    and here's some curtains."
+
+_Picture (b): satisfactory responses_
+
+    "Some people in a boat. The water is high and if they don't look
+    out the boat will tip over."
+
+    "Some Indians and a lady and man. They are in a boat on the
+    river and the boat is about to upset, and there are some dead
+    trees going to fall."
+
+    "There's a lot of water coming up to drown the people. There are
+    two people in the boat and the boat is sinking."
+
+    "There's some people sailing in a canoe and the woman is leaning
+    over on the man because she is afraid."
+
+    "There's an Indian and some white people in the boat. I suppose
+    they are out for a ride in a canoe."
+
+    "Picture about some man and lady in a canoe and going down to
+    the sea."
+
+    "They are taking a boat ride on the ocean and the water is up so
+    high that one of them is scared. Here are some trees and two of
+    them are going to fall down. Here's a little place or bridge you
+    can stand on. The man is touching this one's head and this one
+    has his hand on the cover."
+
+    "The water is splashing all over. There's trees on this bank and
+    there's a rock and some trees falling down. The people have a
+    blanket over them."
+
+_Picture (c): satisfactory responses_
+
+    "A man selling eggs and two men reading the paper together and
+    two men watching."
+
+    "A few men reading a newspaper and one has a basket of eggs and
+    this one has been fishing."
+
+    "There's a man with a basket of eggs and another is reading the
+    paper and a woman is hanging out clothes. There's a house near."
+
+    "There's a man trying to read the paper and the others want to
+    read it too. Here's a lady walking up to the barn. There are
+    houses over there and one man has a basket."
+
+    "There's a big brick house and five men by it and a man with a
+    basket of eggs and a post-office sign and a lady going home."
+
+    "They are all looking at the paper. He is looking over the other
+    man's shoulder and this one is looking at the back of the paper.
+    There's a woman cleaning up her back yard and some coops for
+    hens."
+
+    "A man reading a paper, a man with eggs, a woman and a tree and
+    another house. That man has an apron on. This is the
+    post-office."
+
+Unsatisfactory responses are those made up entirely or mainly of
+enumeration. A phrase or two of description intermingled with a larger
+amount of enumeration counts _minus_. Sometimes the description is
+satisfactory as far as it goes, but is exceedingly brief. In such cases
+a little tactful urging ("_Go ahead_," etc.) will extend the response
+sufficiently to reveal its true character.
+
+REMARKS. Description is better than enumeration because it involves
+putting the elements of a picture together in a simple way or noting
+their qualities. This requires a higher type of mental association
+(combinative power) than mere enumeration. An unusually complete
+description indicates relative wealth of mental content and facility of
+association.
+
+Binet placed this test in year VII, and it seems to have been retained
+in this location in all revisions except Bobertag's. However, the
+statistics of various workers show much disagreement. Lack of agreement
+is easily accounted for by the fact that different investigators have
+used different series of pictures and doubtless also different standards
+for success. The pictures used by Binet have little action or detail and
+are therefore rather difficult for description. On the other hand, the
+Jingleman-Jack pictures used by Kuhlmann represent such familiar
+situations and have so much action that even 5- or 6-year intelligence
+seldom fails with them. The pictures we employ belong without question
+in year VII.
+
+No better proof than the above could be found to show how ability of a
+given kind does not make its appearance suddenly. There is no one time
+in the life of even a single child when the power to describe pictures
+suddenly develops. On the contrary, pictures of a certain type will
+ordinarily provoke description, rather than enumeration, as early as
+5 or 6 years; others not before 7 or 8 years, or even later.
+
+
+VII, 3. REPEATING FIVE DIGITS
+
+PROCEDURE. Use: 3-1-7-5-9; 4-2-3-8-5; 9-8-1-7-6. Tell the child to
+listen and to say after you just what you say. Then read the first
+series of digits at a slightly faster rate than one per second, in a
+distinct voice, and with perfectly uniform emphasis. _Avoid rhythm._
+
+In previous tests with digits, it was permissible to re-read the first
+series if the child refused to respond. In this year, and in the digits
+tests of later years, this is not permissible. Warning is not given as
+to the number of digits to be repeated. Before reading each series, get
+the child's attention. Do not stare at the child during the response, as
+this is disconcerting. Look aside or at the record sheet.
+
+SCORING. Passed if the child repeats correctly, after a single reading,
+_one series out of the three_ series given. The order must be correct.
+
+REMARKS. Psychologically the repetition of digits differs from the
+repetition of sentences mainly in the fact that digits have less meaning
+(fewer associations) than the words of a sentence. It is because they
+are not as well knit together in meaning that three digits tax the
+memory as much as six syllables making up a sentence.
+
+Testing auditory memory for digits is one of the oldest of intelligence
+tests. It is easy to give and lends itself well to exact quantitative
+standardization. Its value has been questioned, however, on two grounds:
+(1) That it is not a test of pure memory, but depends largely on
+attention; and (2) that the results are too much influenced by the
+child's type of imagery. As to the first objection, it is true that more
+than one mental function is brought into play by the test. The same may
+be said of every other test in the Binet scale and for that matter of
+any test that could be devised. It is impossible to isolate any function
+for separate testing. In fact, the functions called memory, attention,
+perception, judgment, etc., never operate in isolation. There are no
+separate and special "faculties" corresponding to such terms, which are
+merely convenient names for characterizing mental processes of various
+types. In any test it is "general ability" which is operative, perhaps
+now _chiefly_ in remembering, at another time _chiefly_ in sensory
+discrimination, again in reasoning, etc.
+
+The second objection, that the test is largely invalidated by the
+existence of imagery types, is not borne out by the facts. Experiments
+have shown that pure imagery types are exceedingly rare, and that
+children, especially, are characterized by "mixed" imagery. There are
+probably few subjects so lacking in auditory imagery as to be placed at
+a serious disadvantage in this test.
+
+Lengthening a series by the addition of a single digit adds greatly to
+the difficulty. While four digits can usually be repeated by children of
+4 years, five digits belong in year VII and six in year X.
+
+It is always interesting to note the type of errors made. The most
+common error is to omit one or more of the digits, usually in the first
+part of the series. If the child's ability is decidedly below the test
+he may give only the last two or three out of the five or six heard.
+Substitutions are also quite frequent, and if so many substitutions are
+made as to give a series quite unlike that which the child has heard, it
+is an unfavorable sign, indicating weakness of the critical sense which
+is so often found with low-level intelligence. In case of extreme
+weakness of the power of auto-criticism, the child in response to the
+series 9-8-1-7-6-, may say 1-2-3-4-5-6, or perhaps merely a couple of
+digits like 8-6, and still express complete satisfaction with his absurd
+response. After each series, therefore, the examiner should say, "_Was
+it right?_"[54] Very young subjects, however, have a tendency to answer
+"yes" to any question of this type, and it is therefore best not to call
+for criticism of a performance below the age of 6 or 7 years.
+
+[54] "_Was it wrong?_" is not an equivalent question and should not be
+used.
+
+Digit series of a given length are not always of equal difficulty, and
+for this reason it is never wise to use series improvised at the moment
+of the experiment. We must avoid especially series of regularly
+ascending or descending value, the repetition at regular intervals of a
+particular digit, and all other peculiarities of arrangement which would
+favor the grouping of the digits for easier retention.
+
+It remains to mention two or three further cautions in regard to
+procedure. It is best to begin with a series about one digit below the
+child's expected ability. If the child has a probable intelligence of
+about 6 or 7 years, we should begin with four digits; in case of
+probable 10-year intelligence we begin with five digits, etc. On the
+other hand, we should avoid beginning too far down, because then the
+result is too much complicated by the effects of practice and fatigue.
+
+It is not necessary, and often it is not expedient, to give the digits
+tests of all the different years in succession; that is, without other
+tests intervening. While this may be permissible with older children, in
+young children the power of sustained attention is so weak that no
+single kind of test should occupy more than two or three minutes.
+Children below 6 or 7 years should ordinarily be given the tests in the
+order in which they are listed in the record booklet.
+
+In his 1911 revision of the scale Binet unfortunately shifted this test
+from year VII to year VIII. Goddard follows his example, but Kuhlmann
+retains it in year VII. The data from more than a dozen leading
+investigations in America, England, and Germany agree in showing that
+the test should remain in year VII.
+
+
+VII, 4. TYING A BOW-KNOT
+
+PROCEDURE. Prepare a shoestring tied in a bow-knot around a stick. The
+knot should be an ordinary "double bow," with wings not over three or
+four inches long. Make this ready in advance of the experiment and show
+the child only the completed knot.
+
+Place the model before the subject with the wings pointing to the right
+and left, and say: "_You know what kind of knot this is, don't you? It
+is a bow-knot. I want you to take this other piece of string and tie the
+same kind of knot around my finger._" At the same time give the child a
+piece of shoestring, of the same length as that which is tied around the
+stick, and hold out a finger pointed toward the child and in convenient
+position for the operation. It is better to have the subject tie the
+string around the examiner's finger than around a pencil or other object
+because the latter often falls out of the string and is otherwise
+awkward to handle.
+
+Some children who assert that they do not know how to tie a bow-knot are
+sometimes nevertheless successful when urged to try. It is always
+necessary, therefore, to secure an actual trial.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if a double bow-knot (both ends folded in)
+is made _in not more than a minute_. A single bow-knot (only one end
+folded in) counts half credit, because children are often accustomed to
+use the single bow altogether. The usual plain common knot, which
+precedes the bow-knot proper, must not be omitted if the response is to
+count as satisfactory, for without this preliminary plain knot a
+bow-knot will not hold and is of no value. To be satisfactory the knot
+should also be drawn up reasonably close, not left gaping.
+
+REMARKS. This test, which had not before been standardized, was
+suggested to the writer by the late Dr. Huey, who in a conversation
+once remarked upon the frequent inability of feeble-minded adults to
+perform the little motor tasks which are universally learned by normal
+persons in childhood. The test was therefore incorporated in the
+Stanford trial series of 1913-14 and tried with 370 non-selected
+children within two months of the 6th, 7th, 8th, or 9th birthday. It was
+expected that the test would probably be found to belong at about the
+8-year level, but it proved to be easy enough for year VII, where
+69 per cent of the children passed it. Only 35 per cent of the
+6-year-olds succeeded, but after that age the per cent passing increased
+rapidly to 94 per cent at 9 years.
+
+This little experiment, simple as it is, seems to fulfill reasonably
+well the requirements of a good test. The main objection which might be
+brought against it is that it is much subject to the influence of
+training. If this were true in any marked degree, the mentally retarded
+children of 7-year intelligence should be expected to succeed better
+with it than mentally advanced children of the same mental level, since
+the former would have had at least two or three years more in which to
+learn the task. A comparison of the two groups, however, shows no great
+difference. The factor of age, apart from mental age, affects the
+results so little that it is evident we have here a real test of
+intelligence.
+
+It would, of course, be easy to imagine a child of 7 years who had not
+had reasonable opportunity to make the acquaintance of bow-knots or to
+learn to tie them. But such children are seldom encountered in the ages
+above 6 or 7. Of 68 7-year-olds who were asked whether they had ever
+seen a bow-knot ("a knot like that") only two replied in the negative.
+It cannot be denied, however, that specific instruction and special
+stimulus to practice do play a certain part. This is suggested by the
+fact that girls excel the boys somewhat at each age, doubtless because
+bow-knots play a larger role in feminine apparel. Social status affects
+the results in only a moderate degree, though it might be supposed that
+poor ragamuffins, on the one hand, and children of the very rich, on the
+other, would both make a poor showing in this test; the former because
+of their scanty apparel, the latter because they sometimes have servants
+to dress them.
+
+The following are probably the chief factors determining success with
+this test: (1) Interest in common objective things; (2) ability to form
+permanent associative connections between successive motor cooerdinations
+(memory for a series of acts); and (3) skill in the acquisition of
+voluntary motor control. The last factor is probably much less important
+than the other two. Motor awkwardness often prolongs the time from the
+usual ten or fifteen seconds to thirty or forty seconds, but it is
+rarely a cause of a failure. The important thing is to be able to
+reproduce the appropriate succession of acts, acts which nearly all
+children of 7 years, under the joint stimulus of example and spontaneous
+interest, have before performed or tried to perform.
+
+
+VII, 5. GIVING DIFFERENCES FROM MEMORY
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_What is the difference between a fly and a
+butterfly?_" If the child does not seem to understand, say: "_You know
+flies, do you not? You have seen flies? And you know the butterflies!
+Now, tell me the difference between a fly and a butterfly._" Proceed in
+the same way with _stone and egg_, and _wood and glass_. A little
+coaxing is sometimes necessary to secure a response, but supplementary
+questions and suggestions of every kind are to be avoided. For example,
+it would not be permissible for the examiner to say: "_Which is larger,
+a fly or a butterfly?_" This would give the child his cue and he would
+immediately answer, "A butterfly." The child must be left to find a
+difference by himself. Sometimes a difference is given, but without any
+indication as to its direction, as, for example, "One is bigger than the
+other" (for fly and butterfly). It is then permissible to ask: "_Which
+is bigger?_"
+
+SCORING. Passed if a real difference is given in _two out of three
+comparisons_. It is not necessary, however, that an _essential_
+difference be given; the difference may be trivial, only it must be a
+real one. The following are samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory
+responses:--
+
+_Fly and butterfly_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Butterfly is larger." "Butterfly has bigger
+    wings." "Fly is black and a butterfly is not." "Butterfly is
+    yellow (or white, etc.) and fly is black." "Fly bites you and
+    butterfly don't." "Butterfly has powder on its wings, fly does
+    not." "Fly flies straighter." "Butterfly is outdoors and a fly
+    is in the house." "Flies are more dangerous to our health."
+    "Flies haven't anything to sip honey with." "Butterfly doesn't
+    live as long as a fly." "Butterfly comes from a caterpillar."
+
+    Sometimes a double contrast is meant, but not fully expressed;
+    as, "A fly is small and a butterfly is pretty." Here the thought
+    is probably correct, only the language is awkward.
+
+    Of 102 correct responses, 70 were in terms of size, or size plus
+    color or form; 12 were in terms of both form and color; 6 in
+    terms of color alone; and the rest scattered among such
+    responses as those mentioned above.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ These are mostly misstatements of facts; as:
+    "Fly is bigger." "Fly has legs and butterfly hasn't." "Butterfly
+    has no feet and fly has." "Butterfly makes butter." "Fly is a
+    fly and a butterfly is not." Failures due to misstatement of
+    fact are of endless variety. If an indefinite response is given,
+    like "The fly is different," or "They don't look alike," we ask,
+    "_How is it different?_" or, "_Why don't they look alike?_" It
+    is satisfactory if the child then gives a correct answer.
+
+_Stone and egg_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Stone is harder." "Egg is softer." "Egg breaks
+    easier." "Egg breaks and stone doesn't." "Stone is heavier."
+    "Egg is white and stone is not." "Egg has a shell and stone does
+    not." "Eggs have a white and a yellow in them." "You put eggs in
+    a pudding." "An egg is rounder than a stone." We may also accept
+    statements which are only qualifiedly true; as, "You can break
+    an egg, but not a stone." Likewise double but incomplete
+    comparisons are satisfactory; as, "An egg you fry and a stone
+    you throw," "A stone is tough and an egg you eat," etc.
+
+    A little over three fourths of the comparisons made by children
+    of 6, 7, and 8 years are in terms of hardness. The other
+    responses are widely scattered.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "A stone is bigger (or smaller) than an egg."
+    "A stone is square and an egg is round." "An egg is yellow and a
+    stone is white." "Stones are red (or black, etc.) and eggs are
+    white." "An egg is to eat and a stone is to plant." "An egg is
+    round and a stone is sometimes round."
+
+    It will be noted that the above responses are partly true and
+    partly false. The error they contain renders them unacceptable.
+    Most of the failures are due to misstatements as to size, shape,
+    or color, but occasionally one meets a bizarre answer.
+
+_Wood and glass_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Glass breaks easier than wood." "Glass breaks
+    and wood does not." "Wood is stronger than glass." "Glass you
+    can see through and wood you can't." "Glass cuts you and wood
+    doesn't." "You get splinters from wood and you don't from
+    glass." "Glass melts and wood doesn't." "Wood burns and glass
+    doesn't." "Wood has bark and glass hasn't." "Wood grows and
+    glass doesn't." "Glass is heavier than wood." "Glass glistens in
+    the sun and wood does not."
+
+    An incomplete double comparison is also counted satisfactory;
+    as, "Wood you can burn and glass you can see through."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Wood is black and glass is white." (Color
+    differences are always unsatisfactory in this comparison unless
+    transparency is also mentioned.) "Glass is square and wood is
+    round." "Glass is bigger than wood" (or _vice versa_). "Wood is
+    oblong and glass is square." "Glass is thin and wood is thick."
+    "Wood is made out of trees and glass out of windows." "There is
+    no glass in wood."
+
+    The two most frequent types of failures are misstatements
+    regarding color and thickness. The other failures are widely
+    scattered.
+
+REMARKS. The test is one which all the critics agree in commending,
+largely because it is so little influenced by ordinary school
+experience. Its excellence lies mainly, however, in the fact that it
+throws light upon the character of the child's higher thought processes,
+for thinking means essentially the association of ideas on the basis of
+differences or similarities. Nearly all thought processes, from the most
+complex to the very simplest, involve to a greater or less degree one or
+the other of these two types of association. They are involved in the
+simple judgments made by children, in the appreciation of puns, in
+mechanical inventions, in the creation of poetry, in the scientific
+classification of natural phenomena, and in the origination of the
+hypotheses of science or philosophy.
+
+The ability to note differences precedes somewhat the ability to note
+resemblances, though the contrary has sometimes been asserted by
+logician-psychologists. The difficulty of the test is greatly increased
+by the fact that the objects to be compared are not present to the
+senses, which means that the free ideas must be called up for comparison
+and contrast. Failure may result either from weakness in the power of
+ideational representation of objects, or from the inadequacy of the
+associations themselves, or from both. Probably both factors are usually
+involved.
+
+Intellectual development is especially evident in increased ability to
+note _essential_ differences and likenesses, as contrasted with those
+which are trivial, superficial, and accidental. To distinguish an egg
+from a stone on the basis of one being organic, the other inorganic
+matter requires far higher intelligence than to distinguish them on the
+basis of shape, color, fragibility, etc. It is not till well toward the
+adult stage that the ability to give very essential likenesses and
+differences becomes prominent, and when we get a comparison of this type
+from a child of 7 or 8 years it is a very favorable sign.
+
+It would be well worth while to standardize a new test of this kind for
+use in the upper years and especially adapted to display the ability to
+give essential likenesses and differences. At year VII we must accept as
+satisfactory any real difference.
+
+One point remains. In the tests of giving differences and similarities,
+it is well to make note of any tendency to _stereotypy_, by which is
+meant the mechanical reappearance of the same idea, or element, in
+successive responses. For example, the child begins by comparing fly and
+butterfly on the basis of size; as, "A butterfly is bigger than a fly."
+So far, this is quite satisfactory; but the child with a tendency to
+stereotypy finds himself unable to get away from the dominating idea of
+size and continues to make it the basis of the other comparisons: "A
+stone is larger than an egg," "Wood is larger than glass," etc. In case
+of stereotypy in all three responses, we should have to score the total
+response failure even though the idea employed happened to fit all three
+parts of the question. As a rule it is encountered only with very young
+children or with older children who are mentally retarded. It is
+therefore an unfavorable sign.
+
+Although this test has been universally used in year VIII, all the
+available statistics, with the exception of Bobertag's and Bloch's,
+indicate that it is decidedly too easy for that year. Binet himself says
+that nearly all 7-year-olds pass it. Goddard finds 97 per cent passing
+at year VIII, and Dougherty 90 per cent at year VI. With the standard of
+scoring given in the present revision, and with the substitution of
+_stone and egg_ instead of the more difficult _paper and cloth_, the
+test is unquestionably easy enough for year VII.
+
+
+VII, 6. COPYING A DIAMOND
+
+PROCEDURE. On a white cardboard draw in heavy black lines a diamond with
+the longer diagonal three inches and the shorter diagonal an inch and a
+half. The specially prepared record booklet contains the diamond as well
+as many other conveniences.
+
+Place the model before the child with the longer diagonal pointing
+directly toward him, and giving him _pen and ink_ and paper, say: "_I
+want you to draw one exactly like this._" Give three trials, saying each
+time: "_Make it exactly like this one._" In repeating the above formula,
+merely point to the model; do not pass the fingers around its edge.
+
+Unlike the test of copying a square in year IV, there is seldom any
+difficulty in getting the child to try this one. By the age of 7 the
+child has grown much less timid and has become more accustomed to the
+use of writing materials.
+
+Note whether the child draws each part carefully, looking at the model
+from time to time, or whether the strokes are made in a more or less
+haphazard manner with only an initial glance at the original.
+
+After each trial, say to the child: "_Is it good?_" And after the three
+copies have been made say: "_Which one is the best?_" Retarded children
+are sometimes entirely satisfied with the most nondescript drawings
+imaginable, but they are more likely correctly to pick out the best of
+three than to render a correct judgment about the worth of each drawing
+separately.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _two of the three_ drawings are at least
+as good as those marked satisfactory on the score card. The diamond
+should be drawn approximately in the correct position, and the diagonals
+must not be reversed. Disregard departures from the model with respect
+to size.
+
+REMARKS. The test is a good one. Age and training, apart from
+intelligence, affect it only moderately. There are few adult imbeciles
+of 6-year intelligence who are able to pass it, while but few subjects
+who have reached the 8-year level fail on it.[55]
+
+[55] For further discussion of drawing tests, see V, 1, and X, 3.
+
+This test was located in year VII of the 1908 scale, but was shifted to
+year VI in Binet's 1911 revision. The change was without justification,
+for Binet expressly states, both in 1908 and 1911, that only half of the
+6-year-olds succeed with it. The large majority of investigations have
+given too low a proportion of successes at 6 years to warrant its
+location at that age, particularly if pen is required instead of pencil.
+Location at year VI would be warranted only on the condition that the
+use of pencil be permitted and only one success required in three
+trials.
+
+
+VII, ALTERNATIVE TEST 1: NAMING THE DAYS OF THE WEEK
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_You know the days of the week, do you not? Name the
+days of the week for me._" Sometimes the child begins by naming various
+annual holidays, as Christmas, Fourth of July, etc. Perhaps he has not
+comprehended the task; at any rate, we give him one more trial by
+stopping him and saying: "_No; that is not what I mean. I want you to
+name the days of the week._" No supplementary questions are permissible,
+and we must be careful not to show approval or disapproval in our looks
+as the child is giving his response.
+
+If the days have been named in correct order, we check up the response
+to see whether the real order of days is known or whether the names have
+only been repeated mechanically. This is done by asking the following
+questions: "_What day comes before Tuesday?_" "_What day comes before
+Thursday?_" "_What day comes before Friday?_"
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if, within _fifteen seconds_, the days of
+the week are _all named in correct order_, and if the child succeeds in
+at least _two of the three check questions_. We disregard the point of
+beginning.
+
+REMARKS. The test has been criticized as too dependent on rote memory.
+Bobertag says a child may pass it without having any adequate conception
+of "week," "yesterday," "day before yesterday," etc. This criticism
+holds if the test is given according to the older procedure, but does
+not apply with the procedure above recommended. The "checking-up"
+questions enable us at once to distinguish responses that are given by
+rote from those which rest upon actual knowledge.
+
+The test has been shown to be much more influenced by age, apart from
+intelligence, than most other tests of the scale. Notwithstanding this
+fault, it seems desirable to keep the test, at least as an alternative,
+because it forms one of a group which may be designated as tests of time
+orientation. The others of this group are: "_Distinguishing forenoon and
+afternoon_" (VI), "_Giving the date_" and "_Naming the months_" (IX). It
+would be well if we had even more of this type, for interest in the
+passing of time and in the names of time divisions is closely correlated
+with intelligence. One reason for the inferiority of the dull and
+feeble-minded in tests of this type is that their mental associations
+are weaker and less numerous. The greater poverty of their associations
+brings it about that their remembered experiences are less definitely
+located in time with reference to other events.
+
+The test was located in year IX of the 1908 scale, but was omitted from
+the 1911 revision. Kuhlmann also omits it, while Goddard places it in
+year VIII. The statistics from every American investigation, however,
+warrant its location in year VII. It may be located in year VIII only on
+the condition that the child be required to name the days backwards, and
+that within a rather low time limit.
+
+
+VII, ALTERNATIVE TEST 2: REPEATING THREE DIGITS REVERSED
+
+PROCEDURE. The digits used are: 2-8-3; 4-2-7; 5-9-6. The test should be
+given after, but not immediately after, the tests of repeating digits
+forwards.
+
+Say to the child: "_Listen carefully. I am going to read some numbers
+again, but this time I want you to say them backwards. For example, if I
+should say 1-2-3, you would say 3-2-1. Do you understand?_" When it is
+evident that the child has grasped the instructions, say: "_Ready now;
+listen carefully, and be sure to say the numbers backwards._" Then read
+the series at the same rate and in the same manner as in the other
+digits tests. It is not permissible to re-read any of the series.
+
+If the first series is repeated forwards instead of backwards series
+exhort the child to listen carefully and to be sure to repeat the
+numbers backwards.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _one series out of three_ is repeated
+backwards without error.
+
+REMARKS. The test of repeating digits backwards was suggested by
+Bobertag in 1911, but appears not to have been used or standardized
+previous to the Stanford investigation.
+
+It is very much harder to repeat a series of digits backwards in the
+direct order at year VII, and six at year X. Reversing the order places
+three digits in year VII, four in year X, five in year XII, and six in
+"average adult." Even intelligent adults sometimes have difficulty in
+repeating six digits backwards, once in three trials.
+
+As a test of intelligence this test is better than that of repeating
+digits in the direct order. It is less mechanical and makes a much
+heavier demand on attention. The digits must be so firmly fixated in
+memory that they can be held there long enough to be told off, one by
+one, backwards.
+
+Feeble-minded children find this test especially difficult, perhaps
+mainly because of its element of novelty. School children are often
+asked to write numbers dictated by the teacher, and even the very dull
+acquire a certain proficiency in doing so; but the test of repeating
+digits backwards requires a certain facility in adjusting to a new task,
+exactly the sort of thing in which the feeble-minded are so markedly
+deficient.
+
+As a rule the response consumes much more time than in the other digits
+test. This is particularly true when the series to be repeated backwards
+contains four or more digits. The chance of success is greatly increased
+if the subject first thinks the series through two or three times in the
+direct order before attempting the reverse order. The subject who
+responds immediately is likely to begin correctly, but to give the first
+part of the original series in the direct order. For example, 6-5-2-8 is
+given 8-2-6-5.
+
+Sometimes the child gives one or two numbers and then stops, having
+completely lost the rest of the series in the stress of adjusting to the
+novel and relatively difficult task of beginning with the final digit.
+In such cases the feeble-minded are prone to fill in with any numbers
+they may happen to think of. A good method for the subject is to break
+the series up into groups and to give each group separately. Thus,
+6-5-2-8 is given 8-2 (pause) 5-6. As a rule only the more intelligent
+subjects adopt this method. One 12-year-old girl attending high school
+was able to repeat eight digits backwards by the aid of this device.
+
+It would be well worth while to investigate the relation of this test to
+imagery type. Such a study would have to make use of adult subjects
+trained in introspection. It would seem that success might be favored by
+the ability to translate the auditory impression into visual imagery, so
+that the remembered numbers could be read off as from a book; but this
+may or may not be the case. At any rate, success seems to depend largely
+upon the ability to manipulate mental imagery.
+
+The degree of certainty as to the correctness of the response is usually
+much less than in repeating digits forwards.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XIV
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR VIII
+
+
+VIII, 1. THE BALL-AND-FIELD TEST (SCORE 2, INFERIOR PLAN)
+
+PROCEDURE. Draw a circle about two and one half inches in diameter,
+leaving a small gap in the side next the child. Say: "_Let us suppose
+that your baseball has been lost in this round field. You have no idea
+what part of the field it is in. You don't know what direction it came
+from, how it got there, or with what force it came. All you know is
+that the ball is lost somewhere in the field. Now, take this pencil and
+mark out a path to show me how you would hunt for the ball so as to be
+sure not to miss it. Begin at the gate and show me what path you would
+take._"[56]
+
+[56] The Stanford record booklet contains the circle ready for use.
+
+Give the instructions always as worded above. Avoid using an expression
+like, "_Show me how you would walk around in the field_"; the word
+_around_ might suggest a circular path.
+
+Sometimes the child merely points or tells how he would go. It is then
+necessary to say: "_No; you must mark out your path with the pencil so I
+can see it plainly._" Other children trace a path only a little way and
+stop, saying: "Here it is." We then say: "_But suppose you have not
+found it yet. Which direction would you go next?_" In this way the child
+must be kept tracing a path until it is evident whether any plan governs
+his procedure.
+
+SCORING. The performances secured with this test are conveniently
+classified into four groups, representing progressively higher types.
+The first two types represent failures; the third is satisfactory at
+year VIII, the fourth at year XII. They may be described as follows:--
+
+    _Type a_ (failure). The child fails to comprehend the
+    instructions and either does nothing at all or else, perhaps,
+    takes the pencil and makes a few random strokes which could not
+    be said to constitute a search.
+
+    _Type b_ (also failure). The child comprehends the instructions
+    and carries out a search, but without any definite plan. Absence
+    of plan is evidenced by the crossing and re-crossing of paths,
+    or by "breaks." A break means that the pencil is lifted up and
+    set down in another part of the field. Sometimes only two or
+    three fragments of paths are drawn, but more usually the field
+    is pretty well filled up with random meanderings which cross
+    each other again and again. Other illustrations of type _b_ are:
+    A single straight or curved line going direct to the ball, short
+    haphazard dashes or curves, bare suggestion of a fan or spiral.
+
+    _Type c_ (satisfactory at year VIII). A successful performance
+    at year VIII is characterized by the presence of a plan, but one
+    ill-adapted to the purpose. That some forethought is exercised
+    is evidenced, (1) by fewer crossings, (2) by a tendency either
+    to make the lines more or less parallel or else to give them
+    some kind of symmetry, and (3) by fewer breaks. The
+    possibilities of type _c_ are almost unlimited, and one is
+    continually meeting new forms. We have distinguished more than
+    twenty of these, the most common of which may be described as
+    follows:--
+
+     1. Very rough or zigzag circles or similarly imperfect spirals.
+     2. Segments of curves joined in a more or less symmetrical fashion.
+     3. Lines going back and forth across the field, joined at the ends
+        and not intended to be parallel.
+     4. The "wheel plan," showing lines radiating from near the center
+        of the field toward the circumference.
+     5. The "fan plan," showing a number of lines radiating (usually)
+        from the gate and spreading out over the field.
+     6. "Fan ellipses" or "fan spirals" radiating from the gate like the
+        lines just described.
+     7. The "leaf plan," "rib plan," or "tree plan," with lines branching
+        off from a trunk line like ribs, veins of a leaf, or branches of
+        a tree.
+     8. Parallel lines which cross at right angles and mark off the field
+        like a checkerboard.
+     9. Paths making one or more fairly symmetrical geometrical figures,
+        like a square, a diamond, a star, a hexagon, etc.
+    10. A combination of two or more of the above plans.
+
+    _Type d_ (satisfactory at year XII). Performances of this type
+    meet perfectly, or almost perfectly, the logical requirements of
+    the problem. The paths are almost or quite parallel, and there
+    are no intersections or breaks. The possibilities of type _d_
+    are fewer and embrace chiefly the  following:--
+
+     1. A spiral, perfect or almost perfect, and beginning either at
+     the gate or at the center of the field. 2. Concentric circles.
+     3. Transverse lines, parallel or almost so, and joined at the
+     ends.
+
+Up to about 4 years most children failed entirely to comprehend the
+task. By the age of 6 years the task is usually understood, but the
+search is conducted without plan. Type _c_ is not attained by two
+thirds before the mental level of 8 years, and score 3 ordinarily not
+until 11 or 12 years.
+
+Grading presents some difficulties because of occasional border-line
+performances which have a value almost midway between the types _b_ and
+_c_ or between _c_ and _d_. Frequent reference to the scoring card will
+enable the examiner, after a little experience, to score nearly all the
+doubtful performances satisfactorily.
+
+REMARKS. The ball-and-field problem may be called a test of practical
+judgment. Unlike a majority of the other tests, it gives the subject a
+chance to show how well he can meet the demands of a real, rather
+than an imagined, situation. Tests like this, involving practical
+adjustments, are valuable in rounding out the scale, which, as left by
+Binet, placed rather excessive emphasis on abstract reasoning and the
+comprehension of language. The test requires little time and always
+arouses the child's interest.
+
+Our analysis of the responses of nearly 1500 subjects shows that
+improvement with increasing mental age is steady and fairly rapid.
+Occasionally, however, one meets a high-grade performance with children
+of 6 or 7 years, and a low-grade performance with adults of average
+intelligence. Like all the other tests of the scale, it is unreliable
+when used alone.
+
+
+VIII, 2. COUNTING BACKWARDS FROM 20 TO 1
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the child: "_You can count backwards, can you not? I
+want you to count backwards for me from 20 to 1. Go ahead._" In the
+great majority of cases this is sufficient; the child comprehends the
+task and begins. If he does not comprehend, and is silent, or starts in,
+perhaps, to count forwards from 1 or 20, say: "_No; I want you to count
+backwards from 20 to 1, like this: 20-19-18, and clear on down to 1.
+Now, go ahead._"
+
+Insist upon the child trying it even though he asserts he cannot do it.
+In many such cases an effort is crowned with success. Say nothing about
+hurrying, as this confuses some subjects. Prompting is not permissible.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the child counts from 20 to 1 _in not
+over forty seconds and with not more than a single error_ (one omission
+or one transposition). Errors which the child spontaneously corrects are
+not counted as errors.
+
+REMARKS. The statistics on this test agree remarkably well. It is
+plainly too easy for year IX, and no one has found it easy enough for
+year VII. The main lack of uniformity has been in the adherence to a
+time limit. Binet required that the task be completed in twenty seconds,
+and Goddard and most others adhere rather strictly to this rule.
+Kuhlmann, however, allows thirty seconds if there is no error and twenty
+seconds if one error is committed. We agree with Bobertag that owing to
+the nature of this test we should not be pedantic about the time. While
+a majority of children who are able to count backwards do the task in
+twenty seconds, there are some intelligent but deliberate subjects who
+require as much as thirty-five or forty seconds. If the counting is done
+with assurance and without stumbling, there is no reason why we should
+not allow even forty seconds. Beyond this, however, our generosity
+should not go, because of the chance it would give for the use of
+special devices such as counting forwards each time to the next number
+wanted.
+
+It may be said that counting backwards is a test of schooling, and to a
+certain extent this is true. It is reasonable to suppose that special
+training would enable the child to pass the test a little earlier than
+he would otherwise be able to do, though it is doubtful whether many
+children below 7 years of age have had enough of such training to
+influence the performance very materially. On the other hand, when the
+child has reached an intelligence level of 8 or at most 9 years, he is
+ordinarily able to count from 20 to 1 whether he has ever tried it
+before or not.
+
+What psychological factors are involved in this test? It presupposes, in
+the first place, the ability to count from 1 to 20. But this alone does
+not guarantee success in counting backwards. Something more is required
+than a mere rote memory for the number names in their order from 1 up to
+20. The quantitative relationships of the numbers must also be
+apprehended if the task is to be performed smoothly without a great deal
+of special training. In addition to being reasonably secure in his
+knowledge of the number relationships involved, the child must be able
+to give sustained attention until the task is completed. His mental
+processes must be dominated by the guiding idea, "count backwards."
+Associations which do not harmonize with this aim, or which fail to
+further it, must be inhibited. Even momentary relaxation of attention
+means a loss of directive force in the guiding idea and the dominance of
+better known associations which may be suggested by the task, but are
+out of harmony with it. Thus, if a child momentarily loses sight of the
+end after counting backwards successfully from 20 to 14, he is likely to
+be overpowered by the law of habit and begin counting forwards,
+14-15-16-17, etc. We may regard the test, therefore, as a test of
+attention, or prolonged thought control. The ability to exercise
+unbroken vigilance for a period of twenty or thirty seconds is rarely
+found below the level of 7- or 8-year intelligence.
+
+
+VIII, 3. COMPREHENSION, THIRD DEGREE
+
+The questions for this year are:--
+
+  (a) "_What's the thing for you to do when you have broken
+      something which belongs to some one else?_"
+  (b) "_What's the thing for you to do when you notice on your way
+      to school that you are in danger of being tardy?_"
+  (c) "_What's the thing for you to do if a playmate hits you
+      without meaning to do it?_"
+
+The procedure is the same as in previous comprehension questions.[57]
+Each question may be repeated once or twice, but its form must not be
+changed. No explanations are permissible.
+
+[57] See IV, 5, and VI, 4.
+
+SCORING:--
+
+_Question a (If you have broken something)_
+
+    _Satisfactory responses_ are those suggesting either restitution
+    or apology, or both. Confession is not satisfactory unless
+    accompanied by apology. The following are satisfactory: "Buy a
+    new one." "Pay for it." "Give them something instead of it."
+    "Have my father mend it." "Apologize." "Tell them I'm sorry,
+    that I did not mean to break it," etc. Of 92 correct answers, 76
+    suggested restitution, while 16 suggested apology, or apology
+    and restitution.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Tell them I did it." "Go tell my mother."
+    "Feel sorry." "Be ashamed." "Pick it up," etc. Mere confession
+    accounts for over 20 per cent of all failures.
+
+_Question b (In danger of being tardy)_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ The expected response is, "Hurry," "Walk
+    faster," or something to that effect. One bright city boy said
+    he would take a car. Of the answers not obviously incorrect,
+    nearly 95 per cent suggest hurrying. The rule ordinarily
+    recommended is to grade all other responses _minus_. But this
+    rule is too sweeping to be followed blindly. One who would use
+    intelligence tests must learn to discriminate. "I would go back
+    home and not go to school that day" is a good answer in those
+    cases (fortunately rare) in which children are forbidden by the
+    teacher to enter the schoolroom if tardy. "Go back home and get
+    mother to write an excuse" would be good policy if by so doing
+    the child might escape the danger of incurring an extreme
+    penalty. When teachers inflict absurd penalties for unexcused
+    tardiness, it is the part of wisdom for children to incur no
+    risks! When such a response is given, it is well to inquire into
+    the school's method of dealing with tardiness and to score the
+    response accordingly.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Go to the principal." "Tell the teacher I
+    couldn't help it." "Have to get an excuse." "Go to school
+    anyway." "Get punished." "Not do it again." "Not play hooky."
+    "Start earlier next time," etc.
+
+    Lack of success results oftenest from failure to get the exact
+    shade of meaning conveyed by the question. It is implied, of
+    course, that something is to be done at once to avoid tardiness;
+    but the subject of dull comprehension may suggest a suitable
+    thing to do in case tardiness has been incurred. Hence the
+    response, "I would go to the principal and explain." Answers of
+    this type are always unsatisfactory.
+
+_Question c (Playmate hits you)_
+
+    _Satisfactory responses_ are only those which suggest either
+    excusing or overlooking the act. These ideas are variously
+    expressed as follows: "I would excuse him" (about half of all
+    the correct answers). "I would say 'yes' if he asked my pardon."
+    "I would say it was all right." "I would take it for a joke." "I
+    would just be nice to him." "I would go right on playing." "I
+    would take it kind-hearted." "I would not fight or run and tell
+    on him." "I would not blame him for it." "Ask him to be more
+    careful," etc.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory responses_ are all those not of the above two
+    types; as: "I would hit them back." "I would not hit them back,
+    but I would get even some other way." "Tell them not to do it
+    again." "Tell them to 'cut it out.'" "Tell him it's a wrong
+    thing to do." "Make him excuse himself." "Make him say he's
+    sorry." "Would not play with him." "Tell my mamma." "I would ask
+    him why he did it." "He'd say 'excuse me' and I'd say 'thank
+    you.'" "He should excuse me." "He is supposed to say 'excuse
+    me.'"
+
+REMARKS. All three comprehension questions of this year were used by
+Binet, Goddard, Huey, and others in year X; two of them in the "easy
+series" and one in the "hard series." The Stanford data show that they
+belong at the 8-year level on the standard of scoring above set forth.
+The three differ little among themselves in difficulty, but all of them
+are decidedly easier than the other five used by Binet. It would be
+absurd to go on using the comprehension questions as Binet bunched them,
+eight together, ranging in difficulty from one which is easy enough for
+6-year intelligence ("What's the thing to do if you miss your train?")
+to one which is hard for the 12-year level ("Why is a bad act done when
+one is angry more excusable than the same act done when one is not
+angry?").
+
+
+VIII, 4. GIVING SIMILARITIES; TWO THINGS
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the child: "_I am going to name two things which are
+alike in some way, and I want you to tell me how they are alike. Wood
+and coal: in what way are they alike?_" Proceed in the same manner
+with:--
+
+    _An apple and a peach._
+    _Iron and silver._
+    _A ship and an automobile._
+
+After the first pair the formula may be abbreviated to "_In what way are
+... and ... alike?_" It is often necessary to insist a little if the
+child is silent or says he does not know, but in doing this we must
+avoid supplementary questions and suggestions. In giving the first pair,
+for example, it would not be permissible to ask such additional
+questions as, "_What do you use wood for? What do you use coal for? And
+now, how are wood and coal alike?_" This is really putting the answer in
+the child's mouth. It is only permissible to repeat the original
+question in a persuasive tone of voice, and perhaps to add: "_I'm sure
+you can tell me how ... and ... are alike_," or something to that
+effect.
+
+A very common mistake which the child makes is to give differences
+instead of similarities. This tendency is particularly strong if test 5,
+year VII (giving differences), has been given earlier in the sitting,
+but it happens often enough in other cases also to suggest that finding
+differences is, to a much greater extent than finding similarities, the
+child's preferred method of making a comparison. When a difference is
+given, instead of a similarity, we say: "_No, I want you to tell me how
+they are alike. In what way are ... and ... alike?_" Unless the child is
+of rather low intelligence level this is sufficient, but the mentally
+retarded sometimes continue to give differences persistently in spite
+of repeated admonitions, or if they cease to do so for one or two
+comparisons, they are likely to repeat the mistake in the latter part of
+the test.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if a likeness is given in _two out of four_
+comparisons. We accept as satisfactory any real likeness, whether
+fundamental or superficial, though, of course, the more essential the
+resemblance, the better indication it is of intelligence. The following
+are samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory answers:--[58]
+
+[58] For aid in classifying the responses in this and certain other
+tests the writer is indebted to Miss Grace Lyman.
+
+(a) _Wood and coal_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Both burn." "Both keep you warm." "Both are
+    used for fuel." "Both are vegetable matter." "Both come from the
+    ground." "Can use them both for running engines." "Both hard."
+    "Both heavy." "Both cost money."
+
+    Of 80 correct answers, 64, or 80 per cent, referred in one way
+    or another to combustibility.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ Most frequent is the persistent giving of a
+    difference instead of a similarity. This accounts for a little
+    over half of all the failures. About half of the remainder are
+    cases of inability to give any response. Incorrect statements
+    with regard to color are rather common. Sample failures of this
+    type are: "Both are black," or "Both the same color." Other
+    failures are: "Both are dirty on the outside;" "You can't break
+    them;" "Coal burns better;" "Wood is lighter than coal," etc.
+
+(b) _An apple and a peach_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Both are round." "Both the same shape." "They
+    are about the same color." "Both nearly always have some red on
+    them." "Both good to eat." "Can make pies of both of them."
+    "Both can be cooked." "Both mellow when they are ripe." "Both
+    have a stem" (or seeds, skin, etc.). "Both come from trees."
+    "Can be dried in the same way." "Both are fruits." "Both green
+    (in color) when they are not ripe."
+
+    Of 82 correct answers, 25 per cent mention color; 25 per cent,
+    form; 22 per cent, edibility; 20 per cent, having stem, seed, or
+    skin; and 5 per cent, that both grow on trees.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Both taste the same." "Both have a lot of
+    seeds." "Both have a fuzzy skin." "An apple is bigger than a
+    peach." "One is red and one is white," etc.
+
+    Again, over 50 per cent of the failures are due to giving
+    differences and about 18 per cent to silence.
+
+(c) _Iron and silver_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Both are metals" (or mineral). "Both come out
+    of the ground." "Both cost money." "Both are heavy." "Both are
+    hard." "Both can be melted." "Both can be bent." "Both used for
+    utensils." "You manufacture things out of both of them." "Both
+    can be polished."
+
+    These are named most frequently in the following order: (1)
+    hardness, (2) origin from the ground, (3) heaviness, (4) use in
+    making things.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Both thin" (or thick). "Sometimes they are
+    the same shape." "Both the same color." "A little silver and
+    lots of iron weigh the same." "Both made by the same company."
+    "They rust the same." "You can't eat them" (!)[59]
+
+    [59] One is here reminded of the puzzling conundrum, "Why is a
+    brick like an elephant?" The answer being, "Because neither can
+    climb a tree!" A response of this type states a fact, but because
+    of its bizarre nature should hardly be counted satisfactory.
+
+    Of 60 failures, 32 were due to giving differences and 14 to
+    silence or unwillingness to hazard a reply.
+
+(d) _A ship and an automobile_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Both means of travel." "Both go." "You ride in
+    them." "Both take you fast." "They both use fuel." "Both run by
+    machinery." "Both have a steering gear." "Both have engines in
+    them." "Both have wood in them." "Both can be wrecked." "Both
+    break if they hit a rock."
+
+    About 45 per cent of the answers are in terms of running or
+    travel, 37 per cent in terms of machinery or structure, the rest
+    scattered.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Both black" (or some other color). "Both very
+    big." "They are made alike." "Both run on wheels." "Ship is for
+    the water and automobile for the land." "Ship goes on water and
+    an automobile sometimes goes in water." "An auto can go faster."
+    "Ship is run by coal and automobile by gasoline."
+
+    Of 51 failures, 32 were due to giving differences and 14 to
+    failure to reply.
+
+REMARKS. The test of finding similarities was first used by Binet in
+1905. Our results show that it is fully as satisfactory as the test of
+giving differences. The test reveals in a most interesting way one of
+the fundamental weaknesses of the feeble mind. Young normal children,
+say of 7 or 8 years, often fail to pass, but it is the feeble-minded who
+give the greatest number of absurd answers and who also find greatest
+difficulty in resisting the tendency to give differences.[60]
+
+[60] For further discussion of the processes involved, see VII, 5.
+
+
+VIII, 5. GIVING DEFINITIONS SUPERIOR TO USE
+
+PROCEDURE. The words for this year are _balloon_, _tiger_, _football_,
+and _soldier_. Ask simply: "_What is a balloon?_" etc.
+
+If it appears that any of the words are not familiar to the child,
+substitution may be made from the following: _automobile_,
+_battle-ship_, _potato_, _store_.
+
+Make no comments on the responses until all the words have been given.
+In case of silence or hesitation in answering, the question may be
+repeated with a little encouragement; but supplementary questions are
+never in order. Ordinarily there is no difficulty in securing a response
+to the definition test of this year. The trouble comes in scoring the
+response.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if two of the four words are defined in
+terms superior to use. "Superior to use" includes chiefly: (a)
+Definitions which describe the object or tell something of its nature
+(form, size, color, appearance, etc.); (b) definitions which give the
+substance or the materials or parts composing it; and (c) those which
+tell what class the object belongs to or what relation it bears to
+other classes of objects.
+
+It is possible to distinguish different grades of definitions in each of
+the above classes. A definition by description (type _a_) may be brief
+and partial, mentioning only one or two qualities or characteristics, or
+it may be relatively rich and complete. Likewise with definitions of
+type _b_. Classificatory definitions (type _c_) are of particularly
+uneven value, the lowest order being those which subsume the object to
+be defined under a remote class and give few if any characteristics to
+distinguish it from other members of the same class; as, for example, "A
+football is a thing you can have fun with," or, "A soldier is a person."
+The best classificatory definitions are those which subsume the object
+under the next higher class and give the more essential traits (perhaps
+a number of them) which distinguish the object from others of the class
+named; as, for example, "A tiger is a large animal like a cat; it lives
+in the jungle and eats men and other animals," or, "A soldier is a man
+who goes to war." These shades of distinction give interesting and
+valuable clues to the maturity and richness of the apperceptive
+processes, but for purposes of scoring it is necessary merely to decide
+whether the definition is given in terms superior to use.
+
+The following are samples of satisfactory definitions, those for each
+word being arranged roughly in the order of their value from excellent
+to barely passing:--
+
+(a) _Balloon_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "A balloon is a means of traveling through the
+    air." "It is a kind of airship, made of cloth and filled with
+    air so it can go up." "It is big and made of cloth. It has gas
+    in it and carries people up in a basket that's fastened on to
+    the bottom." "It is a thing you hold by a string and it goes
+    up." "It is like a big bag with air in it." "It is a big thing
+    that goes up."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To go up in the air." "What you go up in."
+    "When you go up." "They go up in it." "It's full of gas." "To
+    carry you up." "A balloon is a balloon," etc. "It is big." "They
+    go up," etc.
+
+(b) _Tiger_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "It is a wild animal of the cat family." "It is
+    an animal that's a cousin to the lion." "It is an animal that
+    lives in the jungle." "It is a wild animal." "It looks like a
+    big cat." "It lives in the woods and eats flesh." "Something
+    that eats people."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To eat you up." "To kill people." "To travel
+    in the circus." "What eats people." "It is a tiger," etc. "You
+    run from it," etc.
+
+(c) _Football_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "It is a leather bag filled with air and made
+    for kicking." "It is a ball you kick." "It is a thing you play
+    with." "It is made of leather and is stuffed with air." "It is a
+    thing you kick." "It is brown and filled with air." "It is a
+    thing shaped like a watermelon."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To kick." "To play with." "What they play
+    with." "Boys play with it." "It's filled with air." "It is a
+    football." "It is a basket ball." "It is round." "You kick it."
+
+(d) _Soldier_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "A man who goes to war." "A brave man." "A man
+    that walks up and down and carries a gun." "It is a man who
+    minds his captain and stands still and walks straight." "It is a
+    man who goes to war and shoots." "It is a man who stands
+    straight and marches."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To shoot." "To go to war." "It is a soldier."
+    "A soldier that marches." "He fights." "He shoots." "What
+    fights," etc. "When you march and shoot."
+
+Silence accounts for only a small proportion of the failures with
+children of 8, 9, and 10 years.
+
+REMARKS. The "use definitions" sometimes given at this age are usually
+of slightly better quality than those given in year V. Younger children
+more often use the infinitive form, "to play with" (doll), "to drive"
+(horse), "to eat on" (table), etc. Use definitions of this year more
+often begin with "they," or "what"; as, "they go up in it" (balloon),
+"they kick it" (football), etc.
+
+Why, it may be asked, is the use definition regarded as inferior to the
+descriptive or the classificatory definition? Is not the use to which an
+object may be put the most essential thing about it, for the child at
+least? Is it not more important to know that a fork is to eat with than
+to be able to name the material it is made of? Is not the use primary
+and does it not determine most of the physical characteristics of the
+object?
+
+The above questions may sound reasonable, but they are based on poor
+psychology. We must rest our case upon the facts. The first lesson which
+the student of child psychology must learn is that it is unsafe to set
+up criteria of intelligence, of maturity, or of any other mental trait
+on the basis of theoretical considerations. Experiment teaches that
+normal children of 5 or 6 years, also older feeble-minded persons of the
+5-year intelligence level, define objects in terms of use; also that
+normal children of 8 or 9 years and older feeble-minded persons of this
+mental level have for the most part developed beyond the stage of use
+definitions into the descriptive or classificatory stage. An ounce of
+fact is worth a ton of theory.
+
+The test has usually been located in year IX, with the requirement of
+three successes out of five trials and with somewhat more rigid scoring
+of the individual definitions. When only two successes are required in
+four trials, and when scored leniently, the test belongs at the 8-year
+level.
+
+
+VIII, 6. VOCABULARY; TWENTY DEFINITIONS, 3600 WORDS
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the list of words given in the record booklet. Say to the
+child: "_I want to find out how many words you know. Listen; and when I
+say a word you tell me what it means._" If the child can read, give him
+a printed copy of the word list and let him look at each word as you
+pronounce it.
+
+The words are arranged approximately (though not exactly) in the order
+of their difficulty, and it is best to begin with the easier words and
+proceed to the harder. With children under 9 or 10 years, begin with the
+first. Apparently normal children of 10 years may safely be credited
+with the first ten words without being asked to define them. Apparently
+normal children of 12 may begin with word 16, and 15-year-olds with
+word 21. Except with subjects of almost adult intelligence there is no
+need to give the last ten or fifteen words, as these are almost never
+correctly defined by school children. A safe rule to follow is to
+continue until eight or ten successive words have been missed and to
+score the remainder _minus_ without giving them.
+
+The formula is as follows: "What is an _orange_?" "What is a _bonfire_?"
+"_Roar_; what does _roar_ mean?" "_Gown_; what is a _gown_?" "What does
+_tap_ mean?" "What does _scorch_ mean?" "What is a _puddle_?" etc.
+
+Some children at first show a little hesitation about answering,
+thinking that a strictly formal definition is expected. In such cases a
+little encouragement is necessary; as: "_You know what a bonfire is. You
+have seen a bonfire. Now, what is a bonfire?_" If the child still
+hesitates, say: "_Just tell me in your own words; say it any way you
+please. All I want is to find out whether you know what a bonfire is._"
+Do not torture the child, however, by undue insistence. If he persists
+in his refusal to define a word which he would ordinarily be expected to
+know, it is better to pass on to the next one and to return to the
+troublesome word later. Above all, avoid helping the child by
+illustrating the use of a word in a sentence. Adhere strictly to the
+formula given above. If the definition as given does not make it clear
+whether the child has the correct idea, say: "_Explain_," or, "_I don't
+understand; explain what you mean._"
+
+Encourage the child frequently by saying: "That's fine. You are doing
+beautifully. You know lots of words," etc. Never tell the child his
+definition is not correct, and never ask for a different definition.
+
+Avoid saying anything which would suggest a model form of definition, as
+the type of definition which the child spontaneously chooses throws
+interesting light on the degree of maturity of the apperceptive
+processes. Record all definitions _verbatim_ if possible, or at least
+those which are exceptionally good, poor, or doubtful.
+
+SCORING. Credit a response in full if it gives one correct meaning for
+the word, regardless of whether that meaning is the most common one, and
+regardless of whether it is the original or a derived meaning.
+Occasionally half credit may be given, but this should be avoided as far
+as possible.
+
+To find the entire vocabulary, multiply the number of words known by
+180. (This list is made up of 100 words selected by rule from a
+dictionary containing 18,000 words.) Thus, the child who defines
+20 words correctly has a vocabulary of 20 x 180 = 3600 words; 50 correct
+definitions would mean a vocabulary of 9000 words, etc. The following
+are the standards for different years, as determined by the vocabulary
+reached by 60 to 65 per cent of the subjects of the various mental
+levels:--
+
+     8 years          20 words    vocabulary  3,600
+    10 years          30 words    vocabulary  5,400
+    12 years          40 words    vocabulary  7,200
+    14 years          50 words    vocabulary  9,000
+    Average adult     65 words    vocabulary 11,700
+    Superior adult    75 words    vocabulary 13,500
+
+Although the form of the definition is significant, it is not taken into
+consideration in scoring. The test is intended to explore the range of
+ideas rather than the evolution of thought forms. When it is evident
+that the child has one fairly correct meaning for a word, he is given
+full credit for it, however poorly the definition may have been stated.
+
+While there is naturally some difficulty now and then in deciding
+whether a given definition is correct, this happens much less frequently
+than one would expect. In order to get a definite idea of the extent of
+error due to the individual differences among examiners, we have had the
+definitions of 25 subjects graded independently by 10 different persons.
+The result showed an average difference below 3 in the number of
+definitions scored _plus_. Since these subjects attempted on an average
+about 60 words, the average number of doubtful definitions per subject
+was below 5 per cent of the number attempted.
+
+An idea of the degree of leniency to be exercised may be had from the
+following examples of definitions, which are mostly of low grade, but
+acceptable unless otherwise indicated:--
+
+   1. _Orange._ "An orange is to eat." "It is yellow and grows on a
+      tree." (Both full credit.)
+
+   2. _Bonfire._ "You burn it outdoors." "You burn some leaves or
+      things." "It's a big fire." (All full credit.)
+
+   3. _Roar._ "A lion roars." "You holler loud." (Full credit.)
+
+   4. _Gown._ "To sleep in." "It's a nightie." "It's a nice gown that
+      ladies wear." (All full credit.)
+
+   7. _Puddle._ "You splash in it." "It's just a puddle of water."
+      (Both full credit.)
+
+   9. _Straw._ "It grows in the field." "It means wheat-straw." "The
+      horses eat it." (All full credit.)
+
+  10. _Rule._ "The teacher makes rules." "It means you can't do
+      something." "You make marks with it," i.e., a ruler, often
+      called a _rule_ by school children. (All full credit.)
+
+  11. _Afloat._ "To float on the water." "A ship floats." (Both full
+      credit.)
+
+  12. _Eyelash._ If the child says, "It's over the eye," tell him to
+      point to it, as often the word is confused with _eyebrow_.
+
+  14. _Copper._ "It's a penny." "It means some copper wire." (Both
+      full credit.)
+
+  15. _Health._ "It means good health or bad health." "It means
+      strong." (Both full credit.)
+
+  17. _Guitar._ "You play on it." (Full credit.)
+
+  18. _Mellow._ If the child says, "It means a mellow apple," ask
+      what kind of apple that would be. For full credit the answer
+      must be "soft," "mushy," etc.
+
+  19. _Pork._ If the answer is "meat," ask what animal it comes
+      from. Half credit if wrong animal is named.
+
+  21. _Plumbing._ "You fix pipes." (Full credit.)
+
+  25. _Southern._ If the answer is "Southern States," or
+      "Southern California," say: "_Yes; but what does 'southern'
+      mean?_" Do not credit unless explanation is forthcoming.
+
+  26. _Noticeable._ "You notice a thing." (Full credit.)
+
+  29. _Civil._ "Civil War." (Failure unless explained.) "It means to
+      be nice." (Full credit.)
+
+  30. _Treasury._ Give half credit for definitions like "Valuables,"
+      "Lots of money," etc.; i.e., if the word is confused with
+      _treasure._
+
+  32. _Ramble._ "To go about fast." (Half credit.)
+
+  38. _Nerve._ Half credit if the slang use is defined, "You've got
+      nerve," etc.
+
+  41. _Majesty._ "What you say to a king." (Full credit.)
+
+  45. _Sportive._ "To like sports." (Half credit.) "Playful" or
+      "happy." (Full credit.)
+
+  46. _Hysterics._ "You laugh and cry at the same time." "A kind of
+      sickness." "A kind of fit." (All full credit.)
+
+  48. _Repose._ "You pose again." (Failure.)
+
+  52. _Coinage._ "A place where they make money." (Half credit.)
+
+  56. _Dilapidated._ "Something that's very old." (Half credit.)
+
+  58. _Conscientious._ "You're careful how you do your work." (Full
+      credit.)
+
+  60. _Artless._ "No art." (Failure unless correctly explained.)
+
+  61. _Priceless._ "It has no price." (Failure.)
+
+  66. _Promontory._ "Something prominent." (Failure unless child can
+      explain what it refers to.)
+
+  68. _Milksop._ "You sop up milk." (Failure.)
+
+  73. _Harpy._ "A kind of bird." (Full credit.)
+
+  80. _Exaltation._ "You feel good." (Full credit.)
+
+  85. _Retroactive._ "Acting backward." (Full credit.)
+
+  92. _Theosophy._ "A religion." (Full credit.)
+
+It is seen from the above examples that a very liberal standard has been
+used. Leniency in judging definitions is necessary because the child's
+power of expression lags farther behind his understanding than is true
+of adults, and also because for the young subject the word has a
+relatively less unitary existence.
+
+REMARKS. Our vocabulary test was derived by selecting the last word
+of every sixth column in a dictionary containing approximately
+18,000 words, presumably the 18,000 most common words in the language.
+The test is based on the assumption that 100 words selected according to
+some arbitrary rule will be a large enough sampling to afford a fairly
+reliable index of a subject's entire vocabulary. Rather extensive
+experimentation with this list and others chosen in a similar manner
+has proved that the assumption is justified. Tests of the same
+75 individuals with five different vocabulary tests of this type showed
+that the average difference between two tests of the same person was
+less than 5 per cent. This means that any one of the five tests used is
+reliable enough for all practical purposes. It is of no special
+importance that a given child's vocabulary is 8000 rather than 7600; the
+significance lies in the fact that it is approximately 8000 and not
+4000, 12,000, or some other widely different number.
+
+It may seem to the reader almost incredible that so small a sampling of
+words would give a reliable index of an individual's vocabulary. That it
+does so is due to the operation of the ordinary laws of chance. It is
+analogous to predicting the results of an election when only a small
+proportion of the ballots have been counted. It is known that a ballot
+box contains 600 votes, and if when only 30 have been counted it is
+found that they are divided between two candidates in the proportion of
+20 and 10, it is safe to predict that a complete count will give the two
+candidates approximately 400 and 200 respectively.[61] In 1914 about
+1,000,000 votes were cast for governor in California, and when only
+10,000 votes had been counted, or a hundredth of all, it was announced
+and conceded that Governor Johnson had been reelected by the 150,000
+plurality. The completed count gave him 188,505 plurality. The error was
+less than 4 per cent of the total vote.
+
+[61] Supposing the ballots to have been shuffled.
+
+The vocabulary test has a far higher value than any other single test of
+the scale. Used with children of English-speaking parents (with children
+whose home language is not English it is of course unreliable), it
+probably has a higher value than any three other tests in the scale. Our
+statistics show that in a large majority of cases the vocabulary test
+alone will give us an intelligence quotient within 10 per cent of that
+secured by the entire scale. Out of hundreds of English-speaking
+children we have not found one testing significantly above age who had a
+significantly low vocabulary; and correspondingly, those who test much
+below age never have a high vocabulary.
+
+Occasionally, however, a subject tests somewhat higher or lower in
+vocabulary than the mental age would lead us to expect. This is often
+the case with dull children in cultured homes and with very intelligent
+children whose home environment has not stimulated language development.
+But even in these cases we are not seriously misled, for the dull child
+of fortunate home surroundings shows his dullness in the quality of his
+definitions if not in their quantity; while the bright child of
+illiterate parents shows his intelligence in the aptness and accuracy of
+his definitions.
+
+We have not worked out a satisfactory method of scoring the quality of
+definitions in our vocabulary test, but these differences will be
+readily observed by the trained examiner. Definitions in terms of use
+and definitions which are slightly inaccurate or hazy are quite
+characteristic of the lower mental ages. Children of the lower mental
+age have also a tendency to venture wild guesses at words they do not
+know. This is especially characteristic of retarded subjects and is
+another example of their weakness of auto-criticism. One feeble-minded
+boy of 12 years, with a mental age of 8 years, glibly and confidently
+gave definitions for every one of the hundred words. About 70 of the
+definitions were pure nonsense.
+
+This vocabulary test was arranged and partially standardized by Mr.
+H. G. Childs and the writer in 1911. Many experiments since then have
+proved its value as a test of intelligence.
+
+
+VIII, ALTERNATIVE TEST 1: NAMING SIX COINS
+
+PROCEDURE is exactly as in VI, 5 (naming four coins). The dollar should
+be shown before the half-dollar.
+
+SCORING. _All six coins must be correctly named._ If a response is
+changed the rule is to count the second answer and ignore the first.
+
+REMARKS. Binet used nine pieces and required knowledge of all at year X
+(1908), but at year IX in the 1911 revision. Most other workers have
+used the same method, with the test located in either year IX or year X.
+
+
+VIII, ALTERNATIVE TEST 2: WRITING FROM DICTATION
+
+PROCEDURE. Give the child pen, ink, and paper, place him in a
+comfortable position for writing, and say: "_I want you to write
+something for me as nicely as you can. Write these words: 'See the
+little boy.' Be sure to write it all: 'See the little boy.'_"
+
+Do not dictate the words separately, but give the sentence as a whole.
+Further repetition of the sentence is not permissible, as ability to
+remember what has been dictated is a part of the test. Copy, of course,
+must not be shown.
+
+SCORING. Passed if the sentence is written legibly enough to be easily
+recognized, and if no word has been omitted. Ordinary mistakes of
+spelling are disregarded. The rule is that the mistake in spelling must
+not mutilate the word beyond easy recognition. The performance may be
+graded by the use of Thorndike's handwriting scale. The handwriting of
+8-year-old children who have been in school not less than one year or
+more than two usually falls between quality 7 and quality 9 on this
+scale, but we shall, perhaps, not be too liberal if we consider a
+performance satisfactory which does not grade below quality 6, provided
+it is not seriously mutilated by errors, omissions, etc.[62]
+
+[62] See scoring card for samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory
+performances.
+
+REMARKS. This test found a place in year VIII of Binet's 1908 scale, but
+has been omitted from all the other revisions, including Binet's own.
+Bobertag did not even regard the test as worthy of a trial. The
+universal criticism has been that it is a test of schooling rather than
+of intelligence. That the performance depends, in a certain sense, upon
+special instruction is self-evident. Without such instruction no child
+of 8 years, however intelligent, would be able to pass the test. Nature
+does not give us a conventionalized language, either written or spoken.
+It must be acquired. It is also true that a high-grade feeble-minded
+child, say 8 years of age and of 6-year intelligence, is sometimes
+(though not always) able to pass the test after two years of
+school instruction. It is exceedingly improbable, however, that a
+feeble-minded subject with less than 6-year intelligence will ever be
+able to pass this test, however long he remains in school.
+
+The conclusions to be drawn from these facts are as follows: (1)
+Inability to pass the test should not be counted against the child
+unless it is known that he has had at least a full year of the usual
+school instruction. (2) Ability to pass the test after only two years of
+school instruction is almost certain proof that the child has reached a
+mental level of at least 6 years. (3) Failure to pass the test must be
+regarded as a grave symptom in the case of the child 9 or more years of
+age who is known to have attended school as much as two years. (4) For
+mental levels higher than 8 years the test has hardly any diagnostic
+value, since feeble-minded persons of 8- or 9-year intelligence can
+usually be taught to write quite legibly.
+
+If the limitations above set forth are kept in mind, the test is by no
+means without value, and is always worth giving as a supplementary test.
+Learning to write simple sentences from dictation is no mean
+accomplishment. It demands, in the first place, a fairly complete
+mastery of rather difficult muscular cooerdinations. Moreover, these
+cooerdinations must be firmly associated with the corresponding letters
+and words, for if the writing cooerdinations are not fairly automatic, so
+much attention will be required to carry them out that the child will
+not be able to remember what he has been told to write. The necessity of
+remembering the passage acts as a distraction, and writing from
+dictation is therefore a more difficult task than writing from copy.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XV
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR IX
+
+
+IX, 1. GIVING THE DATE
+
+PROCEDURE. Ask the following questions in order:--
+
+  (a) "_What day of the week is it to-day?_"
+  (b) "_What month is it?_"
+  (c) "_What day of the month is it?_"
+  (d) "_What year is it?_"
+
+If the child misunderstands and gives the day of the month for the day
+of the week, or _vice versa_, we merely repeat the question with
+suitable emphasis, but give no other help.
+
+SCORING. An error of three days in either direction is allowed for _c_,
+but _a_, _b_, and _d_ must all be given correctly. If the child makes an
+error and spontaneously corrects it, the change is allowed, but
+corrections must not be called for or suggested.
+
+REMARKS. Binet originally located this test in year IX, but
+unfortunately moved it to year VIII in the 1911 revision. Kuhlmann,
+Goddard, and Huey all retain it in year IX, where, according to our own
+data, it unquestionably belongs. With the exception of Binet's 1911
+results, the statistics for the test are in remarkably close agreement
+for children in France, Germany, England, and Eastern and Western United
+States. It seems that practically all children in civilized countries
+have ample opportunity to learn the divisions of the year, month, and
+week, and to become oriented with respect to these divisions. Special
+instruction is doubtless capable of hastening time orientation to a
+certain degree, but not greatly. Binet tells of a French _ecole
+maternelle_ attended by children 4 to 6 years of age, where instruction
+was given daily in regard to the date, and yet not a single one of the
+children was able to pass this test. This is a beautiful illustration of
+the futility of precocious teaching. In spite of well-meant instruction,
+it is not until the age of 8 or 9 years that children have enough
+comprehension of time periods, and sufficient interest in them, to keep
+very close track of the date. Failure to pass the test at the age of
+10 or 11 years is a decidedly unfavorable sign, unless the error is very
+slight.
+
+The fact that normal adults are occasionally unable to give the day of
+the month is no argument against the validity of the test, since the
+system of tests is so constructed as to allow for accidental failures on
+any particular test. As a matter of fact, very nearly 100 per cent of
+normal 12-year-old children pass this test.
+
+The unavoidable fault of the test is its lack of uniformity in
+difficulty at different dates. It is easier for school children to give
+the day of the week on Monday or Friday than on Tuesday, Wednesday, or
+Thursday. Mistakes in giving the day of the month are less likely to
+occur at the beginning or end of the month than at any other time, while
+mistakes in naming the month are most likely to occur then.
+
+It is interesting to compare the four parts of this test in regard to
+difficulty. Binet and Bobertag both state that ability to name the year
+comes last, but they give no figures. Our own data show that the four
+parts of the test are of almost exactly the same difficulty and that
+this is true at all ages.
+
+
+IX, 2. ARRANGING FIVE WEIGHTS
+
+Use the five weights, 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 grams. Be sure that the
+weights are identical in appearance. The weights may be made as
+described under V, 1, or they may be purchased of C. H. Stoelting & Co.,
+Chicago, Illinois. If no weights are at hand one of the alternative
+tests may be substituted.
+
+PROCEDURE. Place the five boxes on the table in an irregular group
+before the child and say: "_See the boxes. They all look alike, don't
+they? But they are not alike. Some of them are heavy, some are not quite
+so heavy, and some are still lighter. No two weigh the same. Now, I want
+you to find the heaviest one and place it here. Then find the one that
+is just a little lighter and put it here. Then put the next lighter one
+here, and the next lighter one here, and the lightest of all at this
+end_ (pointing each time at the appropriate spot). _Do you understand?_"
+Whatever the child answers, in order to make sure that he does
+understand, we repeat the instructions thus: "_Remember now, that no two
+weights are the same. Find the heaviest one and put it here, the next
+heaviest here, and lighter, lighter, until you have the very lightest
+here. Ready; go ahead._"
+
+It is best to follow very closely the formula here given, otherwise
+there is danger of stating the directions so abstractly that the subject
+could not comprehend them. A formula like "_I want you to arrange the
+blocks in a gradually decreasing series according to weight_" would be
+Greek to most children of 10 years.
+
+If the subject still seems at a loss to know what to do, the
+instructions may be again repeated. But no further help of any kind may
+be given. Do not tell the subject to take the blocks one at a time in
+the hand and try them, and do not illustrate by hefting the blocks
+yourself. It is a part of the test to let the subject find his own
+method.
+
+Give three trials, shuffling the boxes after each. Do not repeat the
+instructions before the second and third trials unless the subject has
+used an absurd procedure in the previous trial.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the blocks are arranged in the correct
+order _twice out of three trials_. Always record the order of
+arrangement and note the number and extent of displacement. Obviously an
+arrangement like 12-6-15-3-9 is very much more serious than one like
+15-12-6-9-3, but we require that two trials be absolutely without error.
+
+Scoring is facilitated if the blocks are marked on the bottom so that
+they may be easily identified. It is then necessary to exercise some
+care to see that the subject does not examine the bottom of the blocks
+for a clue as to the correct order.
+
+REMARKS. Binet originally located this test in year IX, but in his 1911
+revision changed it to year VIII. Other revisions have retained it in
+year IX. The correct location depends upon the weights used and upon the
+procedure and scoring. Kuhlmann uses weights of 3, 9, 18, 27, 36, and
+45 grams, and this probably makes the test easier. Bobertag tried two
+sets of boxes, one set being of larger dimensions than the other. The
+larger gave decidedly the more errors. If we require only one success in
+three trials the test could be located a year or two lower in the scale,
+while three successes as a standard would require that it be moved
+upward possibly as much as two years.
+
+Much depends also on whether the child is left to find his own method,
+and on this there has been much difference of procedure. Kuhlmann,
+Bobertag, and Wallin illustrate the correct method of making the
+comparison by first hefting and arranging the weights while the subject
+looks on. We prefer to keep the test in its original form, and with the
+procedure and scoring we have used it is well located in year IX.
+
+Wallin carries his assistance still further by saying, after the first
+block has been placed, "Now, find the heaviest of the four," and after
+the second has been placed, "Now, find the heaviest of the three," etc.
+Finally, when the arrangement has been made, he tells the subject to try
+them again to make sure the order is correct, allowing the subject to
+make whatever changes he thinks necessary. This procedure robs the test
+of its most valuable features. The experiment was not devised primarily
+as a test of sensory discrimination, for it has long been recognized
+that individuals who have developed as far as the 9- or 10-year level of
+intelligence are ordinarily but little below normal in sensory capacity.
+
+Psychologically, the test resembles that of comparing weights in V, 1.
+Success depends, in the first place, upon the correct comprehension of
+the task and the setting of a goal to be attained; secondly, upon the
+choice of a suitable method for realizing the goal; and finally, upon
+the ability to keep the end clearly in consciousness until all the steps
+necessary for its attainment have been gone through. Elementary as are
+the processes involved, they represent the prototype of all purposeful
+behavior. The statesman, the lawyer, the teacher, the physician, the
+carpenter, all in their own way and with their own materials, are
+continually engaged in setting goals, choosing means, and inhibiting the
+multitudinous appeals of irrelevant and distracting ideas.
+
+In this experiment the subject may fail in any one of the three
+requirements of the test or in all of them. (1) He may not comprehend
+the instructions and so be unable to set the goal. (2) Though
+understanding what is expected of him, he may adopt an absurd method of
+carrying out the task. Or (3) he may lose sight of the end and begin to
+play with the blocks, stacking them on top of one another, building
+trains, tossing them about, etc. Sometimes the guiding idea is not
+completely lost, but is weakened or rendered only partially operative.
+In such a case the subject may compare some of the blocks carefully,
+place others without trying them at all, but continue in his
+half-rational, half-irrational procedure until all the blocks have been
+arranged.
+
+It is essential, therefore, to supplement the mere record of success or
+failure by jotting down a brief but accurate description of the
+performance. Note any hesitation or inability to grasp the instructions.
+Note especially any absurd procedure, such as placing all the blocks
+without hefting any of them, comparing only some of them, holding them
+up and shaking them, hefting two at once in the same hand, etc. The
+ideal method, of course, is to try all the blocks carefully before
+placing any of them, then to make a tentative arrangement, and finally,
+to correct this tentative arrangement by means of individual
+comparisons. A slight departure from this method does not always bring
+failure, but it renders success less probable. As a rule it is only the
+very intelligent children of 10 years who think to test out their first
+arrangement by making a final and additional trial of each block in
+turn. Contrary to what might be supposed, success is slightly favored by
+hefting the blocks successively with one hand rather than by taking one
+in each hand for simultaneous comparison, but as the child cannot be
+expected to know this, we must regard the two methods as equally
+logical.
+
+The test of arranging weights has met universal praise. Its special
+advantage is that it tests the subject's intelligence in the
+manipulation of _things_ rather than his capacity for dealing with
+_abstractions_. It tests his ability to do something rather than his
+ability to express himself in language. It throws light upon certain
+factors of motor adaptation and practical judgment which play a great
+part in the everyday life of the average human being. It depends as
+little upon school, perhaps, as any other test of the scale, and it is
+readily usable with children of all nations without danger of being
+materially altered in translation Moreover, it is always an interesting
+test for the child. Bobertag goes so far as to say that any 8- or 9-year
+child who passes this test cannot possibly be feeble-minded. This may be
+true; but the converse is hardly the case; that is, the failure of older
+children is by no means certain proof of mental retardation. The same
+observation, however, applies equally well to many other of the Binet
+tests, some of which correlate more closely with true mental age than
+this one. A rather considerable fraction of normal 12-year-olds fail on
+it, and it is in fact somewhat less dependable than certain other tests
+if we wish to differentiate between 9-year and 11-year intelligence. But
+it is a test we could ill afford to eliminate.[63]
+
+[63] Compare with V, 1.
+
+
+IX, 3. MAKING CHANGE
+
+PROCEDURE. Ask the following questions in the order here given:--
+
+  (a) "_If I were to buy 4 cents worth of candy and should give
+      the storekeeper 10 cents, how much money would I get back?_"
+  (b) "_If I bought 13 cents worth and gave the storekeeper
+      15 cents, how much would I get back?_"
+  (c) "_If I bought 4 cents worth and gave the storekeeper
+      25 cents, how much would I get back?_"
+
+Coins are not used, and the subject is not allowed the help of pencil
+and paper. If the subject forgets the statement of the problem, it is
+permissible to repeat it once, but only once. The response should be
+made in ten or fifteen seconds for each problem.
+
+SCORING, The test is passed if _two out of three_ problems are answered
+correctly in the allotted time. In case two answers are given to a
+problem, we follow the usual rule of counting the second and ignoring
+the first.
+
+REMARKS. Problems of this nature, when thoroughly standardized, are
+extremely valuable as tests of intelligence. The difficulty of the test,
+as we have used it, does not lie in the subtraction of 4 from 10, 12
+from 15, etc. Such subtractions, when given as problems in subtraction,
+are readily solved by practically all normal 8-year-olds who have
+attended school as much as two years. The problems of the test have a
+twofold difficulty: (1) The statement of the problem must be
+comprehended and held in mind until the solution has been arrived at;
+(2) the problem is so stated that the subject must himself select the
+fundamental operation which applies. The latter difficulty is somewhat
+the greater of the two, addition sometimes being employed instead of
+subtraction.
+
+It is just such difficulties as this that prove so perplexing to the
+feeble-minded. High-grade defectives, although they require more than
+the usual amount of drill and are likely to make occasional errors, are
+nevertheless capable of learning to add, subtract, multiply, and divide
+fairly well. Their main trouble comes in deciding which of these
+operations a given problem calls for. They can master routine, but as
+regards initiative, judgment, and power to reason they are little
+educable. The psychology and pedagogy of mental deficiency is epitomized
+in this statement.
+
+There has been little disagreement as to the proper location of the test
+of making change, but various procedures have been employed. Coins have
+generally been employed, in which case the subject is actually allowed
+to make the change. Most other revisions have also given only a single
+problem, usually 4 cents out of 20 cents, or 4 out of 25, or 9 out of
+25. It is evident that these are not all of equal difficulty. There is
+general agreement, however, that normal children of 9 years should be
+able to make simple change.
+
+
+IX, 4. REPEATING FOUR DIGITS REVERSED
+
+The series are 6-5-2-8; 4-9-3-7; 3-6-2-9.
+
+PROCEDURE AND SCORING. Exactly as in VII, alternate test 2.[64]
+
+[64] See discussion, p. 207 _ff._
+
+
+IX, 5. USING THREE WORDS IN A SENTENCE
+
+PROCEDURE The words used are:--
+
+  (a) _Boy_, _ball_, _river_.
+  (b) _Work_, _money_, _men_.
+  (c) _Desert_, _rivers_, _lakes_.
+
+Say: "_You know what a sentence is, of course. A sentence is made up of
+some words which say something. Now, I am going to give you three words,
+and you must make up a sentence that has all three words in it. The
+three words are 'boy,' 'ball,' 'river.' Go ahead and make up a sentence
+that has all three words in it._" The others are given in the same way.
+
+Note that the subject is not shown the three words written down, and
+that the reply is to be given orally.
+
+If the subject does not understand what is wanted, the instruction may
+be repeated, but it is not permissible to illustrate what a sentence is
+by giving one. There must be no preliminary practice.
+
+A curious misunderstanding which is sometimes encountered comes from
+assuming that the sentence must be constructed entirely of the three
+words given. If it appears that the subject is stumbling over this
+difficulty, we explain: "_The three words must be put with some other
+words so that all of them together will make a sentence._"
+
+Nothing is said about hurrying, but if a sentence is not given within
+one minute the rule is to count that part of the test a failure and to
+proceed to the next trio of words.
+
+Give only one trial for each part of the test.
+
+Do not specially caution the child to avoid giving more than one
+sentence, as this is implied in the formula used and should be
+understood.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _two of the three_ sentences are
+satisfactory. In order to be satisfactory a sentence must fulfill the
+following requirements: (1) It must either be a simple sentence, or, if
+compound, must not contain more than two distinct ideas; and (2) it must
+not express an absurdity.
+
+Slight changes in one or more of the key words are disregarded, as
+_river_ for _rivers_, etc.
+
+The scoring is difficult enough to justify rather extensive
+illustration.
+
+(a) _Boy, ball, river_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ An analysis of 128 satisfactory responses gave
+    the following classification:--
+
+    (1) Simple sentence containing a simple subject and a simple
+    predicate; as: "The boy threw his ball into the river." "The boy
+    lost his ball in the river." "The boy's ball fell into the
+    river." "The boy swam into the river after his ball," etc. This
+    group contains 76 per cent of the correct responses.
+
+    (2) A sentence with a simple subject and a compound predicate;
+    as: "A boy went to the river and took his ball with him." About
+    8 per cent of all were of this type.
+
+    (3) A complex sentence containing a relative clause (2 per cent
+    only); as: "The boy ran after his ball which was rolling toward
+    the river."
+
+    (4) A compound sentence containing two independent clauses
+    (about 14 per cent); as: "The boy had a ball and he lost it in
+    the river."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ The failures fall into four chief groups:--
+
+    (1) Sentences with three clauses (or else three separate
+    sentences).
+
+    (2) Sentences containing an absurdity.
+
+    (3) Sentences which omit one of the key words.
+
+    (4) Silence, due ordinarily to inability to comprehend the task.
+
+    Group 1 includes 78 per cent of the failures; group 2, about
+    12 per cent; and group 3 and 4 about 5 per cent each. Samples of
+    group 1 are: "There was a boy, and he bought a ball, and it fell
+    into the river." "I saw a boy, and he had a ball, and he was
+    playing by the river." Illustration of an absurd sentence, "The
+    boy was swimming in the river and he was playing ball."
+
+(b) _Work, money, men_
+
+    _Satisfactory_:--
+
+    (1) Sentence with a simple subject and simple predicate
+    (including 75 per cent of 116 satisfactory responses); as: "Men
+    work for their money." "Men get money for their work," etc.
+
+    (2) A complex sentence with a relative clause (12 per cent of
+    correct answers); as: "Men who work earn much money." "It is
+    easy for men to earn money if they are willing to work," etc.
+
+    (3) A compound sentence with two independent, cooerdinate clauses
+    (13 per cent); as: "Men work and they earn money." "Some men
+    have money and they do not work."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory_:--
+
+    (1) Three clauses; as: "I know a man and he has money, and he
+    works at the store."
+
+    (2) Sentences which are absurd or meaningless; as: "Men work
+    with their money."
+
+    (3) Omission of one of the words.
+
+    (4) Inability to respond.
+
+(c) _Desert, rivers, lakes_
+
+    _Satisfactory_:--
+
+    (1) Sentences with a simple subject and a simple predicate
+    (including 84 per cent of 126 correct answers); as: "There are
+    no rivers or lakes in the desert." "The desert has one river and
+    one lake," etc.
+
+    (2) A complex sentence with a relative clause (only 2 per cent);
+    as: "In the desert there was a river which flowed into a lake."
+
+    (3) A compound sentence with two independent, cooerdinate clauses
+    (11 per cent); as: "We went to the desert, and it had no rivers
+    or lakes."
+
+    (4) A compound, complex sentence (3 per cent of all); as: "There
+    was a desert, and near by there was a river that emptied into a
+    lake."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory_:--
+
+    (1) Sentences with three clauses (40 per cent of all failures);
+    as: "A desert is dry, rivers are long, lakes are rough."
+
+    (2) Sentences containing an absurdity (12 per cent of the
+    failures): as: "a desert is dry, rivers are long, lakes are
+    filled with swimming boys." "The lake went through the desert
+    and the river." "There was a desert and rivers and lakes in the
+    forest." "The desert is full of rivers and lakes."
+
+    (3) Omission of one of the words (40 per cent of the failures).
+
+    (4) Inability to respond (8 per cent).
+
+REMARKS. The test of constructing a sentence containing given words was
+first used by Masselon and is known as "the Masselon experiment."
+Meumann, who used it in a rather extended experiment,[65] finds it a
+good test of intelligence and a reliable index as to the richness,
+definiteness, and maturity of the associative processes. As Meumann
+shows, it is instructive to study the qualitative differences between
+the responses of bright and dull children, apart from questions of
+sentence structure. These differences are especially discernible
+in (a) the logical qualities of the associations, and (b) the
+definiteness of statement. As regards (a), bright children are much
+more likely to use the given words as keystones in the construction of a
+sentence which would be logically suggested by them. For example,
+_donkey_, _blows_, suggest some such sentence as, "The donkey receives
+blows because he is lazy." In like manner we have found that the words
+_work_, _money_, _men_ usually suggest to the more intelligent children
+a sentence like "Men work for their money" (or "because they need
+money," etc.), while the dull child is more likely to give some such
+sentence as "The men have work and they don't have much money." That is,
+the sentence of the dull child, even though correct in structure and
+free enough from outright absurdity to satisfy the standard of scoring
+which we have set forth, is likely to express ideas which are more or
+less nondescript, ideas not logically suggested by the set of words
+given.
+
+[65] "Ueber eine neue Methode der Intelligenzpruefung und ueber den Wert
+der Kombinationsmethoden," in _Zeitschrift fuer Paedagogische Psychologie
+und Experimentelle Paedagogik_ (1912), pp. 145-63.
+
+The experiment is one of the many forms of the "completion test," or
+"the combination method." As we have already noted, the power to combine
+more or less separate and isolated elements into a logical whole is one
+of the most essential features of intelligence. The ability to do so in
+a given case depends, in the first place, upon the number and logical
+quality of the associations which have previously been made with each of
+the given elements separately, and in the second place, upon the
+readiness with which these ideational stores yield up the particular
+associations necessary for weaving the given words into some kind of
+unity. The child must pass from what is given to what is not given but
+merely suggested. This requires a certain amount of invention. Scattered
+fragments must be conceived as the skeleton of a thought, and this
+skeleton, or partial skeleton, must be assembled and made whole. The
+task is analogous to that which confronts the palaeontologist, who is
+able to reconstruct, with a high degree of certainty, the entire
+skeleton of an extinct animal from the evidence furnished by three or
+four fragments of bones. It is no wonder, therefore, that subjects whose
+ideational stores are scanty, and whose associations are based upon
+accidental rather than logical connections, find the test one of
+peculiar difficulty. Invention thrives in a different soil.
+
+Binet located this test in year X. Goddard and Kuhlmann assign it the
+same location, though their actual statistics agree closely with our
+own. Our procedure makes the test somewhat easier than that of Binet,
+who gave only one trial and used the somewhat more difficult words
+_Paris_, _river_, _fortune_. Others have generally followed the Binet
+procedure, merely substituting for Paris the name of a city better known
+to the subject. Binet's requirement of a written response also makes the
+test harder.
+
+Perhaps the greatest obstacle to uniformity in the use of the test comes
+from the difficulty of scoring, particularly in deciding whether the
+sentence contains enough absurdity to disqualify it, and whether it
+expresses three separate ideas or only two. It is hoped that the rather
+large variety of sample responses which we have given will reduce these
+difficulties to a minimum.
+
+An additional word is necessary in regard to what constitutes an
+absurdity in (b). A sentence like "There are some rivers and lakes in
+the desert" is not an absurdity in certain parts of Western United
+States. In Professor Ordahl's tests at Reno, Nevada, many children whose
+intelligence was altogether above suspicion gave this reply. The
+statement is, indeed, perfectly true for the semi-arid region in the
+vicinity of Reno known as "the desert." On the other hand, such
+sentences as "The desert is full of rivers and lakes," or "There are
+forty rivers and lakes in the desert," can hardly be considered
+satisfactory. Similar difficulties are presented by (c), though not so
+frequently. "Men who work do not have money" expresses, unfortunately,
+more truth than nonsense.
+
+
+IX, 6. FINDING RHYMES
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the child: "_You know what a rhyme is, of course. A
+rhyme is a word that sounds like another word. Two words rhyme if they
+end in the same sound. Understand?_" Whether the child says he
+understands or not, we proceed to illustrate what a rhyme is, as
+follows: "_Take the two words 'hat' and 'cat.' They sound alike and so
+they make a rhyme. 'Hat,' 'rat,' 'cat,' 'bat' all rhyme with one
+another._"
+
+That is, we first explain what a rhyme is and then we give an
+illustration. A large majority of American children who have reached the
+age of 9 years understand perfectly what a rhyme is, without any
+illustration. A few, however, think they understand, but do not; and in
+order to insure that all are given equal advantage it is necessary never
+to omit the illustration.
+
+After the illustration say: "_Now, I am going to give you a word and you
+will have one minute to find as many words as you can that rhyme with
+it. The word is 'day.' Name all the words you can think of that rhyme
+with 'day.'_"
+
+If the child fails with the first word, before giving the second we
+repeat the explanation and give sample rhymes for _day_; otherwise we
+proceed without further explanation to _mill_ and _spring_, saying,
+"_Now, you have another minute to name all the words you can think of
+that rhyme with 'mill,'_" etc. Apart from the mention of "one minute"
+say nothing to suggest hurrying, as this tends to throw some children
+into mental confusion.
+
+SCORING. Passed if in _two out of the three_ parts of the experiment the
+child finds _three words_ which rhyme with the word given, the time
+limit for each series being _one minute_. Note that in each case there
+must be three words in addition to the word given. These must be real
+words, not meaningless syllables or made-up words. However, we should be
+liberal enough to accept such words as _ding_ (from "ding-dong ") for
+_spring_, _Jill_ (see "Jack and Jill") for _mill_, _Fay_ (girl's name)
+for _day_, etc.
+
+REMARKS. At first thought it would seem that the demands made by this
+test upon intelligence could not be very great. Sound associations
+between words may be contrasted unfavorably with associations like those
+of cause and effect, part to whole, whole to part, opposites, etc. But
+when we pass from _a-priori_ considerations to an examination of the
+actual data, we find that the giving of rhymes is closely correlated
+with general intelligence.
+
+The 9-year-olds who test at or above 10 years nearly always do well in
+finding rhymes, while 9-year-olds who test as low as 8 years seldom
+pass. When a test thus shows high correlation with the scale as a whole,
+we must either accept the test as valid or reject the scale altogether.
+While the feeble-minded do not do as well in this test as normal
+children of corresponding mental age, the percentage successes for them
+rises rapidly between mental age 8 and mental age 10 or 11.
+
+Closer psychological analysis of the processes involved will show why
+this is true. To find rhymes for a given word means that one must hunt
+out verbal associations under the direction of a guiding idea. Every
+word has innumerable associations and many of these tend, in greater or
+less degree, to be aroused when the stimulus word is given. In order to
+succeed with the test, however, it is necessary to inhibit all
+associations which are not relevant to the desired end. The directing
+idea must be held so firmly in mind that it will really direct the
+thought associations. Besides acting to inhibit the irrelevant, it must
+create a sort of magnetic stress (to borrow a figure from physics) which
+will give dominance to those associative tendencies pointing in the
+right direction. Even the feeble-minded child of imbecile grade has in
+his vocabulary a great many words which rhyme with _day_, _mill_, and
+_spring_. He fails on the test because his verbal associations cannot be
+subjugated to the influence of a directing idea. The end to be attained
+does not dominate consciousness sufficiently to create more than a faint
+stress. Instead of a single magnetic pole there is a conflict of forces.
+The result is either chaos or partial success. _Mill_ may suggest
+_hill_, and then perhaps the directing idea becomes suddenly inoperative
+and the child gives _mountain_, _valley_, or some other irrelevant
+association. The lack of associations, however, is a more frequent cause
+of failure than inability to inhibit the irrelevant.
+
+If any one supposes that finding rhymes does not draw upon the higher
+mental powers, let him try the experiment upon himself in various stages
+of mental efficiency, say at 9 A.M., when mentally refreshed by a good
+night of sleep and again when fatigued and sleepy. Poets questioned by
+Galton on this point all testified to the greater difficulty of finding
+rhymes when mentally fatigued. In this and in many other respects the
+mental activities of the fatigued or sleepy individual approach the type
+of mentation which is normal to the feeble-minded.
+
+It is important to note that adults make a less favorable showing
+in this test than normal children of corresponding mental age,
+Mr. Knollin's "hoboes" of 12-year intelligence doing hardly as well as
+school children of 10-year intelligence. Those who are habitually
+employed in school exercises probably acquire an adeptness in verbal
+associations which is later gradually lost in the preoccupations of real
+life.
+
+There has been more disagreement as to the proper location of this test
+than of any other test of the Binet scale. Binet placed it in year XII
+of the 1908 scale, but shifted it to year XV in 1911. Kuhlmann retains
+it in year XII, while Goddard drops it down to year XI. However, when we
+examine the actual statistics for normal children we do not find very
+marked disagreement, and such disagreement as is present can be largely
+accounted for by variations in procedure and by differing conclusions
+drawn from identical data. In the first place, Binet gave but one trial.
+This, of course, makes the test much harder than when three trials are
+given and only two successes are required. To make one trial equal in
+difficulty to three trials we should perhaps need to demand only two
+rhymes, instead of three, in the one trial. In the second place, the
+word used by Binet (_obeissance_) is much harder than one-syllable words
+like _day_, _mill_, and _spring_. Finally, the wide shift of the test
+from year XII to year XV was not justified by the statistics of Binet
+himself, and the figures of Kuhlmann and Goddard are really in
+exceptionally close agreement with our own, notwithstanding the fact
+that Goddard required three successes instead of two. In four series of
+tests, considered together, we have found 62 per cent passing at
+year IX, 81 per cent at year X, 83 per cent at year XI, and 94 per cent
+at year XII.
+
+
+IX, ALTERNATIVE TEST 1: NAMING THE MONTHS
+
+PROCEDURE. Simply ask the subject to "_name all the months of the
+year_." Do not start him off by naming one month; give no look of
+approval or disapproval as the months are being named, and make no
+suggestions or comments of any kind.
+
+When the months have been named, we "check up" the performance by
+asking: "_What month comes before April?_" "_What month comes before
+July?_" "_What month comes before November?_"
+
+SCORING. Passed if the months are named in about _fifteen or twenty
+seconds with no more than one error_ of omission, repetition, or
+displacement, and if _two out of the three check questions_ are answered
+correctly. Disregard place of beginning.
+
+REMARKS. Some are inclined to consider this test of little value,
+because of its supposed dependence on accidental training. With this
+opinion we cannot fully agree. The arguments already given in favor of
+the retention of naming the days of the week (year VII), apply equally
+well in the present case. It has been shown, however, that age, apart
+from intelligence, does have some effect on the ability to name the
+months. Defective adults of 9-year intelligence do about as well with it
+as normal children of 10-year intelligence.
+
+The test appears in year X of Binet's 1908 scale and in year IX of the
+1911 revision. Goddard places it correctly in year IX, while Kuhlmann
+and Bobertag have omitted it.
+
+
+IX, ALTERNATIVE TEST 2: COUNTING THE VALUE OF STAMPS
+
+PROCEDURE. Place before the subject a cardboard on which are pasted
+three 1-cent and three 2-cent stamps arranged as follows: 111222. Be
+sure to lay the card so that the stamps will be right side up for the
+child. Say: "_You know, of course, how much a stamp like this costs_
+(pointing to a 1-cent stamp). _And you know how much one like this
+costs_ (pointing to a 2-cent stamp). _Now, how much money would it take
+to buy all these stamps?_"
+
+Do not tell the individual values of the stamps if these are not known,
+for it is a part of the test to ascertain whether the child's
+spontaneous curiosity has led him to find out and remember their values.
+If the individual values are known, but the first answer is wrong, a
+second trial may be given. In such cases, however, it is necessary to be
+on guard against guessing.
+
+If the child merely names an incorrect sum without saying anything to
+indicate how he arrived at his answer, it is well to tell him to figure
+it up aloud. "_Tell me how you got it._"
+
+SCORING. Passed if the correct value is given in not over fifteen
+seconds.
+
+REMARKS. The value of this test may be questioned on two grounds: (1)
+That it has an ambiguous significance, since failure to pass it may
+result either from incorrect addition or from lack of knowledge of the
+individual values of the stamps; (2) that familiarity with stamps and
+their values is so much a matter of accident and special instruction
+that the test is not fair.
+
+Both criticisms are in a measure valid. The first, however, applies
+equally well to a great many useful intelligence tests. In fact, it is
+only a minority in which success depends on but one factor. The other
+criticism has less weight than would at first appear. While it is, of
+course, not impossible for an intelligent child to arrive at the age of
+9 years without having had reasonable opportunity to learn the cost of
+the common postage stamps, the fact is that a large majority have had
+the opportunity and that most of those of normal intelligence have taken
+advantage of it. It is necessary once more to emphasize the fact that in
+its method of locating a test the Binet system makes ample allowance for
+"accidental" failures.
+
+Like the tests of naming coins, repeating the names of the days of the
+week or the months of the year, giving the date, tying a bow-knot,
+distinguishing right and left, naming the colors, etc., this one also
+throws light on the child's spontaneous interest in common objects. It
+is mainly the children of deficient intellectual curiosity who do not
+take the trouble to learn these things at somewhere near the expected
+age.
+
+The test was located in year VIII of the Binet scale. However, Binet
+used coins, three single and three double sous. Since we do not have
+either a half-cent or a 2-cent coin, it has been necessary to substitute
+postage stamps. This changes the nature of the test and makes it much
+harder. It becomes less a test of ability to do a simple sum, and more a
+test of knowledge as to the value of the stamps used. That the test is
+easy enough for year VIII when it can be given in the original form is
+indicated by all the French, German, and English statistics available,
+but four separate series of Stanford tests agree in finding it too hard
+for year VIII when stamps are substituted and the test is carried out
+according to the procedure described above.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XVI
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR X
+
+
+X, 1. VOCABULARY (THIRTY DEFINITIONS, 5400 WORDS)
+
+PROCEDURE AND SCORING AS IN VIII, 6. At year X, thirty words should be
+correctly defined.
+
+
+X, 2. DETECTING ABSURDITIES
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the child: "_I am going to read a sentence which has
+something foolish in it, some nonsense. I want you to listen carefully
+and tell me what is foolish about it._" Then read the sentences, rather
+slowly and in a matter-of-fact voice, saying after each: "_What is
+foolish about that?_" The sentences used are the following:--
+
+  (a) "_A man said: 'I know a road from my house to the city which
+      is downhill all the way to the city and downhill all the way
+      back home.'_"
+  (b) "_An engineer said that the more cars he had on his train the
+      faster he could go._"
+  (c) "_Yesterday the police found the body of a girl cut into
+      eighteen pieces. They believe that she killed herself._"
+  (d) "_There was a railroad accident yesterday, but it was not very
+      serious. Only forty-eight people were killed._"
+  (e) "_A bicycle rider, being thrown from his bicycle in an
+      accident, struck his head against a stone and was instantly
+      killed. They picked him up and carried him to the hospital,
+      and they do not think he will get well again._"
+
+Each should ordinarily be answered within thirty seconds. If the child
+is silent, the sentence should be repeated; but no other questions or
+suggestions of any kind are permissible. Such questions as "_Could the
+road be downhill both ways?_" or, "_Do you think the girl could have
+killed herself?_" would, of course, put the answer in the child's mouth.
+It is even best to avoid laughing as the sentence is read.
+
+Owing to the child's limited power of expression it is not always easy
+to judge from the answer given whether the absurdity has really been
+detected or not. In such cases ask him to explain himself, using some
+such formula as: "_I am not sure I know what you mean. Explain what you
+mean. Tell me what is foolish in the sentence I read._" This usually
+brings a reply the correctness or incorrectness of which is more
+apparent, while at the same time the formula is so general that it
+affords no hint as to the correct answer. Additional questions must be
+used with extreme caution.
+
+SCORING. Passed if the absurdity is detected in _four out of the five_
+statements. The following are samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory
+answers:--
+
+(a) _The road downhill_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "If it was downhill to the city it would be
+    uphill coming back." "It can't be downhill both directions."
+    "That could not be." "That is foolish. (Explain.) Because it
+    must be uphill one way or the other." "That would be a funny
+    road. (Explain.) No road can be like that. It can't be downhill
+    both ways."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Perhaps he took a little different road
+    coming back." "I guess it is a very crooked road." "Coming back
+    he goes around the hill." "The man lives down in a valley." "The
+    road was made that way so it would be easy." "Just a road. I
+    don't see anything foolish." "He should say, 'a road which
+    goes.'"
+
+(b) _What the engineer said_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "If he has more cars he will go slower." "It is
+    the other way. If he wants to go faster he mustn't have so many
+    cars." "The man didn't mean what he said, or else it was a slip
+    of the tongue." "That's the way it would be if he was going
+    downhill." "Foolish, because the cars don't help pull the
+    train." "He ought to say _slower_, not _faster_."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "A long train is nicer." "The engine pulls
+    harder if the train has lots of cars." "That's all right. I
+    suppose he likes a big train." "Nothing foolish; when I went to
+    the city I saw a train that had lots of cars and it was going
+    awfully fast." "He should have said, 'the faster I can _run_.'"
+
+(c) _The girl who was thought to have killed herself_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "She could not have cut herself into eighteen
+    pieces." "She would have been dead before that." "She might have
+    cut two or three pieces off, but she couldn't do the rest."
+    (Laughing) "Well, she may have killed herself; but if she did
+    it's a sure thing that some one else came along after and
+    chopped her up." "That policeman must have been a fool.
+    (Explain.) To think that she could chop herself into eighteen
+    pieces."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "_Think_ that she killed herself; they _know_
+    she did." "They can't be sure. Some one may have killed her."
+    "It was a foolish girl to kill herself." "How can they tell who
+    killed her?" "No girl would kill herself unless she was crazy."
+    "It ought to read: 'They think that she committed suicide.'"
+
+(d) _The railroad accident_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "That was very serious." "I should like to know
+    what you would call a serious accident!" "You could say it was
+    not serious if two or three people were killed, but
+    forty-eight,--that is serious."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "It was a foolish mistake that made the
+    accident." "They couldn't help it. It was an accident." "It
+    might have been worse." "Nothing foolish; it's just sad."
+
+(e) _The bicycle rider_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "How could he get well after he was already
+    killed?" "Why, he's already dead." "No use to take a dead man to
+    the hospital." "They ought to have taken him to a grave-yard!"
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Foolish to fall off of a bicycle. He should
+    have known how to ride." "They ought to have carried him home.
+    (Why?) So his folks could get a doctor." "He should have been
+    more careful." "Maybe they can cure him if he isn't hurt very
+    bad." "There's nothing foolish in that."
+
+REMARKS. The detection of absurdities is one of the most ingenious and
+serviceable tests of the entire scale. It is little influenced by
+schooling, and it comes nearer than any other to being a test of
+that species of mother-wit which we call common sense. Like the
+"comprehension questions," it may be called a test of judgment, using
+this term in the colloquial and not in the logical sense. The stupid
+person, whether depicted in literature, proverb, or the ephemeral joke
+column, is always (and justly, it would seem) characterized by a huge
+tolerance for absurd contradictions and by a blunt sensitivity for the
+fine points of a joke. Intellectual discrimination and judgment are
+inferior. The ideas do not cross-light each other, but remain relatively
+isolated. Hence, the most absurd contradictions are swallowed, so to
+speak, without arousing the protest of the critical faculty. The latter,
+indeed, is only a name for the tendency of intellectually irreconcilable
+elements to clash. If there is no clash, if the elements remain apart,
+it goes without saying that there will be no power of criticism.
+
+The critical faculty begins its development in the early years and
+strengthens _pari passu_ with the growing wealth of inter-associations
+among ideas; but in the average child it is not until the age of about
+10 years that it becomes equal to tasks like those presented in this
+test. Eight-year intelligence hardly ever scores more than two or three
+correct answers out of five. By 12, the critical ability has so far
+developed that the test is nearly always passed. It is an invaluable
+test for the higher grades of mental deficiency.
+
+As a test of the critical powers Binet first used "trap questions"; as,
+for example, "Is snow red or black?" The results were disappointing, for
+it was found that owing to timidity, deference, and suggestibility
+normal children often failed on such questions. Deference is more marked
+in normal than in feeble-minded children, and it is because of the
+influence of this trait that it is necessary always to forewarn the
+subject that the sentence to be given contains nonsense.
+
+Binet located the test in year XI of the 1908 scale, but changed it to
+year X in 1911. Goddard and Kuhlmann retain it in year XI. The large
+majority of the statistics, including those of Goddard and Kuhlmann,
+warrant the location of the test in year X. Not all have used the same
+absurdities, and these have not been worded uniformly. Most have
+required three successes out of five, but Bobertag and Kuhlmann require
+three out of four; Bobertag's procedure is also different in that he
+does not forewarn the child that an absurdity is to follow.
+
+The present form of the test is the result of three successive
+refinements. It will be noted that we have made two substitutions in
+Binet's list of absurdities. Those omitted from the original scale are:
+"_I have three brothers--Paul, Ernest, and myself_," and, "_If I were
+going to commit suicide I would not choose Friday, because Friday is an
+unlucky day and would bring me misfortune._" The last has a puzzling
+feature which makes it much too hard for year X, and the other is
+objectionable with children who are accustomed to hear a foreign
+language in which the form of expression used in the absurdity is
+idiomatically correct.
+
+The two we have substituted for these objectionable absurdities are,
+"The road downhill" and "What the engineer said." The five we have
+used, though of nearly equal difficulty, are here listed in the order
+from easiest to hardest. Our series as a whole is slightly easier than
+Binet's.
+
+
+X, 3. DRAWING DESIGNS FROM MEMORY
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the designs shown on the accompanying printed form. If
+copies are used they must be exact in size and shape. Before showing the
+card say: "_This card has two drawings on it. I am going to show them to
+you for ten seconds, then I will take the card away and let you draw
+from memory what you have seen. Examine both drawings carefully and
+remember that you have only ten seconds._"
+
+Provide pencil and paper and then show the card for ten seconds, holding
+it at right angles to the child's line of vision and with the designs in
+the position given in the plate. Have the child draw the designs
+immediately after they are removed from sight.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _one of the designs is reproduced
+correctly and the other about half correctly_. "Correctly" means that
+the _essential plan_ of the design has been grasped and reproduced.
+Ordinary irregularities due to lack of motor skill or to hasty execution
+are disregarded. "Half correctly" means that some essential part of the
+design has been omitted or misplaced, or that parts have been added.
+
+The sample reproductions shown on the scoring card will serve as a
+guide. It will be noted that an inverted design, or one whose right and
+left sides have been transposed, is counted only half correct, however
+perfect it many be in other respects; also that design _b_ is counted
+only half correct if the inner rectangle is not located off center.
+
+REMARKS. Binet states that the main factors involved in success are
+"attention, visual memory, and a little analysis." The power of rapid
+analysis would seem to be the most important, for if the designs are
+analyzed they may be reproduced from a verbal memory of the analysis.
+Without some analysis it would hardly be possible to remember the
+designs at all, as one of them contains thirteen lines and the other
+twelve. The memory span for unrelated objects is far too limited to
+permit us to grasp and retain that number of unrelated impressions.
+Success is possible only by grouping the lines according to their
+relationships, so that several of them are given a unitary value and
+remembered as one. In this manner, the design to the right, which is
+composed of twelve lines, may be reduced to four elements: (1) The outer
+rectangle; (2) the inner rectangle; (3) the off-center position of the
+inner rectangle; and (4) the joining of the angles. Of course the child
+does not ordinarily make an analysis as explicit as this; but analysis
+of some kind, even though it be unconscious, is necessary to success.
+
+Ability to pass the test indicates the presence, in a certain definite
+amount, of the tendency for the contents of consciousness to fuse into a
+meaningful whole. Failure indicates that the elements have maintained
+their unitary character or have fused inadequately. It is seen,
+therefore, that the test has a close kinship with the test of memory for
+sentences. The latter, also, permits the fusion or grouping of
+impressions according to meaning, with the result that five or six times
+as many meaningful syllables as nonsense syllables or digits can be
+retained.
+
+Binet had many more failures on design _a_ than on design _b_. This was
+probably due to the fact that he showed the designs with our _b_ to the
+left. A majority of subjects, probably because of the influence of
+reading habits, examine first the figure to the left, and because of the
+short time allowed for the inspection are unable to devote much time to
+the design at the right. We have placed the design of greater intrinsic
+difficulty at the left, with the result that the failures are almost
+equally divided between the two.
+
+Binet used this test in his unstandardized series of 1905, omitted it in
+1908, but included it in the 1911 revision, locating it in year X.
+Except for Goddard, who recommends year XI, there is rather general
+agreement that the test belongs at year X. Our own data show that it may
+be placed either at year X or year XI, according as the grading is rigid
+or lenient.
+
+
+X, 4. READING FOR EIGHT MEMORIES
+
+MATERIAL. We use Binet's selection, slightly adapted, as follows:--
+
+    _New York, September 5th. A fire last night burned three houses
+    near the center of the city. It took some time to put it out.
+    The loss was fifty thousand dollars, and seventeen families lost
+    their homes. In saving a girl, who was asleep in a bed, a
+    fireman was burned on the hands._
+
+The copy of the selection used by the subject should be printed in heavy
+type and should not contain the bars dividing it into memories. The
+Stanford record booklet contains the selection in two forms, one
+suitable for use in scoring, the other in heavy type to be read by the
+subject.
+
+PROCEDURE. Hand the selection to the subject, who should be seated
+comfortably in a good light, and say: "_I want you to read this for me
+as nicely as you can._" The subject must read aloud.
+
+Pronounce all the words which the subject is unable to make out, not
+allowing more than five seconds' hesitation in such a case.
+
+Record all errors made in reading the selection, and the exact time. By
+"error" is meant the omission, substitution, transposition, or
+mispronunciation of one word.
+
+The subject is not warned in advance that he will be asked to report
+what he has read, but as soon as he has finished reading, put the
+selection out of sight and say: "_Very well done. Now, I want you to
+tell me what you read. Begin at the first and tell everything you can
+remember._" After the subject has repeated everything he can recall and
+has stopped, say: "_And what else? Can you remember any more of it?_"
+Give no other aid of any kind. It is of course not permissible, when the
+child stops, to prompt him with such questions as, "_And what next?
+Where were the houses burned? What happened to the fireman?_" etc. The
+report must be spontaneous.
+
+Now and then, though not often, a subject hesitates or even refuses to
+try, saying he is unable to do it. Perhaps he has misunderstood the
+request and thinks he is expected to repeat the selection word for word,
+as in the tests of memory for sentences. We urge a little and repeat:
+"_Tell me in your own words all you can remember of it._" Others
+misunderstand in a different way, and thinking they are expected to tell
+merely what the story is about, they say: "It was about some houses that
+burned." In such cases we repeat the instructions with special emphasis
+on the words _all you can remember_.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed _if the selection is read in thirty-five
+seconds with not more than two errors, and if the report contains at
+least eight "memories."_ By underscoring the memories correctly
+reproduced, and by interlineations to show serious departures from the
+text, the record can be made complete with a minimum of trouble.
+
+The main difficulty in scoring is to decide whether a memory has been
+reproduced correctly enough to be counted. Absolutely literal
+reproduction is not expected. The rule is to count all memories whose
+thought is reproduced with only minor changes in the wording. "It took
+quite a while" instead of "it took some time" is satisfactory; likewise,
+"got burnt" for "was burned"; "who was sleeping" for "who was asleep";
+"are homeless" for "lost their homes"; "in the middle" for "near the
+center"; "a big fire" for "a fire," etc.
+
+Memories as badly mutilated as the following, however, are not counted:
+"A lot of buildings" for "three houses;" "a man" for "a fireman"; "who
+was sick" for "who was asleep"; etc. Occasionally we may give half
+credit, as in the case of "was seventeen thousand dollars" for "was
+fifty thousand dollars"; "and fifteen families" for "and seventeen
+families," etc.
+
+REMARKS. Are we warranted in using at all as a measure of intelligence a
+test which depends as much on instruction as this one does? Many are
+inclined to answer this question in the negative. The test has been
+omitted from the revisions of Goddard, Kuhlmann, and Binet himself. As
+regards Binet's earlier test of reading for two memories, in year VIII,
+there could hardly be any difference of opinion. The ability to read at
+that age depends so much on the accident of environment that the test is
+meaningless unless we know all about the conditions which have
+surrounded the child.
+
+The use of the test in year X, however, is a very different matter.
+There are comparatively few children of that age who will fail to pass
+it for lack of the requisite school instruction. Children of 10 years
+who have attended school with reasonable regularity for three years are
+practically always able to read the selection in thirty-five seconds and
+without over two mistakes unless they are retarded almost to the
+border-line of mental deficiency. Of our 10-year-olds who failed to meet
+the test, only a fourth did so because of inability to meet the reading
+requirements as regards time or mistakes. The remaining failures were
+caused by inadequate report, and most of these subjects were of the
+distinctly retarded group.
+
+We may conclude, therefore, that given anything approaching normal
+educational advantages, the test is really a measure of intelligence.
+Used with due caution, it is perhaps as valuable as any other test in
+the scale. It is only necessary, in case of failure, to ascertain the
+facts regarding the child's educational opportunities. Even this
+precaution is superfluous in case the subject tests as low as 8 years by
+the remainder of the scale. A safe rule is to omit the test from the
+calculation of mental age if the subject has not attended school the
+equivalent of two or three years.
+
+It has been contended by some that tests in which success depends upon
+language mastery cannot be real tests of intelligence. By such critics
+language tests have been set over against intelligence tests as
+contrasting opposites. It is easy to show, however, that this view is
+superficial and psychologically unsound. Every one who has an
+acquaintance with the facts of mental growth knows that language mastery
+of some degree is the _sine qua non_ of conceptual thinking. Language
+growth, in fact, mirrors the entire mental development. There are few
+more reliable indications of a subject's stage of intellectual maturity
+than his mastery of language.
+
+The rate of reading, for example, is a measure of the rate of
+association. Letters become associated together in certain combinations
+making words, words into word groups and sentences. Recognition is for
+the most part an associative process. Rapid and accurate association
+will mean ready recognition of the printed form. Since language units
+(whether letters, words, or word groups) have more or less preferred
+associations according to their habitual arrangement into larger units,
+it comes about that in the normal mind under normal conditions these
+preferred sequences arouse the apperceptive complex necessary to make a
+running recognition rapid and easy. It is reasonable to suppose that in
+the subnormal mind the habitual common associations are less firmly
+fixed, thus diminishing the effectiveness of the ever-changing
+apperceptive expectancy. Reading is, therefore, largely dependent on
+what James calls the "fringe of consciousness" and the "consciousness of
+meaning." In reading connected matter, every unit is big with a mass of
+tendencies. The smaller and more isolated the unit, the greater is the
+number of possibilities. Every added unit acts as a modifier limiting
+the number of tendencies, until we have finally, in case of a large
+mental unit, a fairly manageable whole. When the most logical and
+suitable of these associations arise easily from subconsciousness to
+consciousness, recognition is made easy, and their doing so will depend
+on whether the habitual relations of the elements have left permanent
+traces in the mind.
+
+The reading of the subnormal subject bears a close analogy to the
+reading of nonsense matter by the normal person. It has been ascertained
+by experiment that such reading requires about twice as much time as the
+reading of connected matter. This is true for the reason that out of
+thousands of associations possible with each word, no particular
+association is favored. The apperceptive expectancy, practically _nil_
+in the reading of nonsense material, must be decidedly deficient in all
+poor reading.
+
+Furthermore, in the case of the ordinary reader there is a feeling of
+rightness or wrongness about the thought sequences. That less
+intelligent subjects have this sense of fitness to a much less degree is
+evidenced by their passing over words so mutilated in pronunciation as
+to deprive them of all meaning. The transposition of letters and words,
+and the failure to observe marks of punctuation, point to the same
+thing. In other words, all the reading of the stupid subject is with
+material which to him is more or less nonsensical.[66]
+
+[66] See "Genius and Stupidity," by Lewis M. Terman, in _Pedagogical
+Seminary_, September, 1906, p. 340 _ff._
+
+A little observation will convince one that mentally retarded subjects,
+even when they possess a reasonable degree of fluency in recognizing
+printed words, do not sense shades of meaning. Their reading is by small
+units. Words and phrases do not fuse into one mental content, but remain
+relatively unconnected. The expression is monotonous and the voice has
+more of the unnatural "schoolroom" pitch. They read more slowly, more
+often misplace the emphasis, and miscall more words. In short, one who
+has psychological insight and is acquainted with reading standards can
+easily detect the symptoms of intellectual inferiority by hearing a dull
+subject read a brief selection.
+
+The giving of memories is also significant. Feeble-minded adults who
+have been well schooled are sometimes able to read the words of the text
+fairly fluently, but are usually unable to give more than a scanty
+report of what has been read. The scope of attention has been exhausted
+in the mere recognition and pronouncing of words. In general, the
+greater the mechanical difficulties which a subject encounters, the less
+adequate is his report of memories.
+
+The test has, however, one real fault. School children have a certain
+advantage in it over older persons _of the same mental age_ whose school
+experience is less recent. Adult subjects tend to give their report in
+less literal form. It is necessary, therefore, to give credit for the
+reproduction of the ideas of the passage rather than for strictly
+literal "memories."
+
+The selection we have used is, with minor changes, the same as Binet's.
+His selection was divided into nineteen memories. The one here given has
+twenty-one memories. Binet used the test both in year VIII and year IX,
+requiring two memories at year VIII and six memories at year IX. When we
+require eight memories, as we have done, the test becomes difficult
+enough for non-selected school children of 10 years. Location in year X
+seems preferable, because it insures that the child will almost
+certainly have had the schooling requisite for learning to read a
+selection of this difficulty, even if he has started to school at a
+later age than is customary. Naturally, placing the test higher in the
+scale makes it more a test of report and less a test of ability to
+recognize and pronounce printed words.
+
+
+X, 5. COMPREHENSION, FOURTH DEGREE
+
+The questions for this year are:--
+
+  (a) "_What ought you to say when some one asks your opinion
+      about a person you don't know very well?_"
+  (b) "_What ought you to do before undertaking (beginning)
+      something very important?_"
+  (c) "_Why should we judge a person more by his actions than by
+      his words?_"
+
+The PROCEDURE is the same as for the previous comprehension tests. Each
+question may be repeated, but its form must not be changed. It is not
+permissible to make any explanation whatever as to the meaning of the
+question, except to substitute _beginning_ for _undertaking_ when (b)
+seems not to be comprehended.
+
+SCORING. _Two out of the three_ questions must be answered
+satisfactorily. Study of the following classified responses should make
+scoring fairly easy in most cases:--
+
+(a) _When some one asks your opinion_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "I would say I don't know him very well"
+    (42 per cent of the correct answers). "Tell him what I know and
+    no more" (34 per cent of correct answers). "I would say that I'd
+    rather not express any opinion about him" (20 per cent of the
+    correct answers). "Tell him to ask some one else." "I would not
+    express any opinion."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ Unsatisfactory responses are due either to
+    failure to grasp the import of the question, or to inability to
+    suggest the appropriate action demanded by the situation.
+
+    The latter form of failure is the more common; e.g.: "I'd say
+    they are nice." "Say you like them." "Say what I think." "Say
+    it's none of their business." "Tell them I mind my own
+    business." "Say I would get acquainted with them." "Say that I
+    don't talk about people." "Say I didn't know how he looked."
+    "Tell them you ought not to say such things; you might get into
+    trouble." "I wouldn't say anything." "I would try to answer."
+    "Say I did not know his name," etc.
+
+    The following are samples of failure due to mistaking the import
+    of the question: "I'd say, 'How do you do?'" "Say,'I'm glad to
+    meet you.'"
+
+(b) _Before undertaking something important_
+
+    _Satisfactory responses_ fall into the following classes:--
+    (1) Brief statement of preliminary consideration; as: "Think
+        about it." "Look it over." "Plan it all out." "Make your
+        plans." "Stop and think," etc.
+    (2) Special emphasis on preliminary preparation and correct
+        procedure; as: "Find out the best way to do it." "Find out
+        what it is." "Get everything ready." "Do every little thing
+        that would help you." "Get all the details you can." "Take
+        your time and figure it out," etc.
+    (3) Asking help; as: "Ask some one to help you who knows all
+        about it." "Pray, if you are a Christian." "Ask advice,"
+        etc.
+    (4) Preliminary testing of ability, self-analysis, etc.; as:
+        "Try something easier first." "Practice and make sure I
+        could do it." "Learn how to do it," etc.
+    (5) Consider the wisdom or propriety of doing it: "Think whether
+        it would be best to do it." "See whether it would be
+        possible."
+
+    About 65 per cent of the correct responses belong either to
+    group (1) or (2), about 20 per cent to group (3), and most of
+    the remainder to group (4).
+
+    _Unsatisfactory responses_ are of the following types:--
+    (1) Due to mistaking the import of the question; e.g.: "Ask for
+        it." "Ought to say please." "Ask whose it is." Replies of
+        this kind can be nearly all eliminated by repeating the
+        question, using _beginning_ instead of _undertaking_.
+    (2) Replies more or less absurd or irrelevant; as: "Promise to
+        do your best." "Wash your face and hands." "Get a lot of
+        insurance." "Dress up and take a walk." "Tell your name."
+        "Know whether it's correct." "Begin at the beginning." "Say
+        you will do it." "See if it's a fake." "Go to school a long
+        time." "Pass an examination." "Do what is right." "Add up
+        and see how much it will cost." "Say I would do it." "Just
+        start doing it." "Go away." "Consult a doctor." "See if you
+        have time," etc.
+
+(c) _Why we should judge a person more by his actions than by his words_
+
+    _Satisfactory responses_ fall into the following classes:--
+    (1) Words and deeds both mentioned and contrasted in
+        reliability; as: "Actions speak louder than words" (this in
+        8 per cent of successes). "You can tell more by his actions
+        than by his words." "He might talk nice and do bad things."
+        "Sometimes people say things and don't do them." "It's not
+        what you say but what you do that counts." "Talk is cheap;
+        when he does a thing you can believe it." "People don't do
+        everything they say." "A man might steal but talk like a
+        nice man." Over 45 per cent of all correct responses belong
+        to group (1).
+    (2) Acts stressed without mention of words; as: "You can tell by
+        his actions whether he is good or not." "If he _acts_ nice
+        he _is_ nice." "Actions show for themselves." Group (2)
+        contains about 25 per cent of the correct responses.
+    (3) Emphasis on unreliability of words; as: "You can't tell by
+        his words, he might lie or boast." "Because you can't always
+        believe what people say." (Group (3) contains 15 per cent of
+        the correct responses.)
+    (4) Responses which state that a man's deeds are sometimes
+        better than his words; as: "He might talk ugly and still not
+        do bad things." "Some really kind-hearted people scold and
+        swear." "A man's words may be worse than his deeds," etc.
+        Group (4) contains over 10 per cent of the correct
+        responses.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory responses_ are usually due to inability to
+    comprehend the meaning of the question. If there is a complete
+    lack of comprehension the result is either silence or a totally
+    irrelevant response. If there is partial comprehension of the
+    question the response may be partially relevant, but fail to
+    make the expected distinction.
+
+    The following are sample failures: "You could tell by his words
+    that he was educated." "It shows he is polite if he acts nice."
+    "Sometimes people aren't polite." "Actions show who he might
+    be." "Acts may be foolish." "Words ain't right." "A man might be
+    dumb." "A fellow don't know what he says." "Some people can
+    talk, but don't have control of themselves." "You can tell by
+    his acts whether he goes with bad people." "If he doesn't act
+    right you know he won't talk right." "Actions show if he has
+    manners." "Might get embarrassed and not talk good." "He may not
+    know how to express his thoughts." "He might be a rich man but a
+    poor talker." "He might say the wrong thing and afterwards be
+    sorry for it," etc. (The last four are nearer correct than the
+    others, but they fall just short of expressing the essential
+    contrast.)
+
+REMARKS. For discussion of the comprehension questions as a test of
+intelligence, see page 158.
+
+Binet used eight questions, three "easy" and five "difficult," and
+required that five out of eight be answered correctly in year X. The
+eight were as follows:--
+
+  (1) What to do when you have missed your train.
+  (2) When you have been struck by a playmate, etc.
+  (3) When you have broken something, etc.
+  (4) When about to be late for school.
+  (5) When about to undertake something important.
+  (6) Why excuse a bad act committed in anger more readily than a bad
+      act committed without anger.
+  (7) What to do if some one asks your opinion, etc.
+  (8) Why can you judge a person better by his actions, etc.
+
+As we have shown, questions 1, 2, 3, and 4 are much too easy for year X.
+Question 6 is hard enough for year XII. We have omitted it because it
+was not needed and is not entirely satisfactory.
+
+
+X, 6. NAMING SIXTY WORDS
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_Now, I want to see how many different words you can
+name in three minutes. When I say ready, you must begin and name the
+words as fast as you can, and I will count them. Do you understand? Be
+sure to do your very best, and remember that just any words will do,
+like 'clouds,' 'dog,' 'chair,' 'happy'--Ready; go ahead!_"
+
+The instructions may be repeated if the subject does not understand what
+is wanted. As a rule the task is comprehended instantly and entered into
+with great zest.
+
+Do not stare at the child, and do not say anything as the test proceeds
+unless there is a pause of fifteen seconds. In this event say: "_Go
+ahead, as fast as you can. Any words will do._" Repeat this urging after
+every pause of fifteen seconds.
+
+Some subjects, usually rather intelligent ones, hit upon the device of
+counting or putting words together in sentences. We then break in with:
+"_Counting_ (or _sentences_, as the case may be) _not allowed. You must
+name separate words. Go ahead._"
+
+Record the individual words if possible, and mark the end of each
+half-minute. If the words are named so rapidly that they cannot be taken
+down, it is easy to keep the count by making a pencil stroke for each
+word. If the latter method is employed, repeated words may be indicated
+by making a cross instead of a single stroke. Always make record of
+repetitions.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _sixty_ words, exclusive of repetitions,
+are named in three minutes. It is not allowable to accept twenty words
+in one minute or forty words in two minutes as an equivalent of the
+expected score. Only real words are counted.
+
+REMARKS. Scoring, as we have seen, takes account only of the number of
+words. It is instructive, however, to note the kind of words given. Some
+subjects, more often those of the 8- or 9-year intelligence level, give
+mainly isolated, detached words. As well stated by Binet, "Little
+children exhaust an idea in naming it. They say, for example, _hat_, and
+then pass on to another word without noticing that hats differ in color,
+in form, have various parts, different uses and accessories, and that in
+enumerating all these they could find a large number of words."
+
+Others quickly take advantage of such relationships and name many parts
+of an object before leaving it, or name a number of other objects
+belonging to the same class. _Hat_, for example, suggests _cap_, _hood_,
+_coat_, _shirt_, _shoes_, _stockings_, etc. _Pencil_ suggests _book_,
+_slate_, _paper_, _desk_, _ink_, _map_, _school-yard_, _teacher_, etc.
+Responses of this type may be made up of ten or a dozen plainly distinct
+word groups.
+
+Another type of response consists in naming only objects present, or
+words which present objects immediately suggest. It is unfortunate that
+this occurs, since rooms in which testing is done vary so much with
+respect to furnishings. The subject who chooses this method is obviously
+handicapped if the room is relatively bare. One way to avoid this
+influence is to have all subjects name the words with eyes closed, but
+the distraction thus caused is sometimes rather disturbing. It is
+perhaps best for the present to adhere to the original procedure, and to
+follow the rule of making tests in a room containing few furnishings in
+addition to the necessary table and chairs.
+
+A fourth type of response is that including a large proportion of
+unusual or abstract words. This is the best of all, and is hardly ever
+found except with subjects who are above the 11-year intelligence level.
+
+It goes without saying that a response need not belong entirely to any
+one of the above types. Most responses, in fact, are characterized by a
+mixture of two or three of the types, one of them perhaps being
+dominant.
+
+Though not without its shortcomings, the test is interesting and
+valuable. Success in it does not, as one might suppose, depend solely
+upon the size of the vocabulary. Even 8-year-olds ordinarily know the
+meaning of more than 3000 words, and by 10 years the vocabulary usually
+exceeds 5000 words, or eighty times as many as the child is expected to
+name in three minutes. The main factors in success are two, (1) richness
+and variety of previously made associations with common words; and (2)
+the readiness of these associations to reinstate themselves. The young
+or the retarded subject fishes in the ocean of his vocabulary with a
+single hook, so to speak. He brings up each time only one word. The
+subject endowed with superior intelligence employs a net (the idea of a
+class, for example) and brings up a half-dozen words or more. The latter
+accomplishes a greater amount and with less effort; but it requires
+intelligence and will power to avoid wasting time with detached words.
+
+One is again and again astonished at the poverty of associations which
+this test discloses with retarded subjects. For twenty or thirty seconds
+such children may be unable to think of a single word. It would be
+interesting if at such periods we could get a glimpse into the subject's
+consciousness. There must be some kind of mental content, but it seems
+too vague to be crystallized in words. The ready association of thoughts
+with definite words connotes a relatively high degree of intellectual
+advancement. Language forms are the short-hand of thought; without
+facile command of language, thinking is vague, clumsy, and ineffective.
+Conversely, vague mental content entails language shortage.
+
+Occasionally a child of 11- or 12-year intelligence will make a poor
+showing in this test. When this happens it is usually due either to
+excessive embarrassment or to a strange persistence in running down all
+the words of a given class before launching out upon a new series.
+Occasionally, too, an intelligent subject wastes time in thinking up a
+beautiful list of big or unusual words. As stated by Bobertag, success
+is favored by a certain amount of "intellectual nonchalance," a
+willingness to ignore sense and a readiness to break away from a train
+of associations as soon as the "point of diminishing returns" has been
+reached. This doubtless explains why adults sometimes make such a
+surprisingly poor showing in the test. They have less "intellectual
+nonchalance" than children, are less willing to subordinate such
+considerations as completeness and logical connection to the demands of
+speed. Knollin's unemployed men of 12- to 13-year intelligence succeeded
+no better than school children of the 10-year level.
+
+We do not believe, however, that this fault is serious enough to warrant
+the elimination of the test. The fact is that in a large majority of
+cases the score which it yields agrees fairly closely with the result of
+the scale as a whole. Subjects more than a year or two below the mental
+age of 10 years seldom succeed. Those more than a year or two above the
+10-year level seldom fail.
+
+There is another reason why the test should be retained, it often has
+significance beyond that which appears in the mere number of words
+given. The naming of unusual and abstract words is an instance of this.
+An unusually large number of repetitions has symptomatic significance
+in the other direction. It indicates a tendency to mental stereotypy, so
+frequently encountered in testing the feeble-minded. The proportion of
+repetitions made by normal children of the 10- or 11-year intelligence
+level rarely exceeds 2 or 3 per cent of the total number of words named;
+those of older retarded children of the same level occasionally reach
+6 or 8 per cent.
+
+It is conceivable, of course, that a more satisfactory test of this
+general nature could be devised; such, for example, as having the
+subject name all the words he can of a given class (four-footed animals,
+things to eat, articles of household furniture, trees, birds, etc.). The
+main objection to this form of the test is that the performance would in
+all probability be more influenced by environment and formal instruction
+than is the case with the test of naming sixty words.
+
+One other matter remains to be mentioned; namely, the relative number of
+words named in the half-minute periods. As would be expected, the rate
+of naming words decreases as the test proceeds. In the case of the
+10-year-olds, we find the average number of words for the six successive
+half-minutes to be as follows:--
+
+    18, 121/2, 101/2, 9, 81/2, 7.
+
+Some subjects maintain an almost constant rate throughout the test,
+others rapidly exhaust themselves, while a very few make a bad beginning
+and improve as they go. As a rule it is only the very intelligent who
+improve after the first half-minute. On the other hand, mentally
+retarded subjects and very young normals exhaust themselves so quickly
+that only a few words are named in the last minute.
+
+Binet first located this test in year XI, but shifted it to year XII in
+1911. Goddard and Kuhlmann retain it in year XI, though Goddard's
+statistics suggest year X as the proper location, and Kuhlmann's even
+suggest year IX. Kuhlmann, however, accepts fifty words as satisfactory
+in case the response contains a considerable proportion of abstract or
+unusual words. All the American statistics except Rowe's agree in
+showing that the test is easy enough for year X.
+
+
+X, ALTERNATIVE TEST 1: REPEATING SIX DIGITS
+
+The digit series used are 3-7-4-8-5-9; and 5-2-1-7-4-6.
+
+The PROCEDURE and SCORING are the same as in VII, 3, except that only
+two trials are given, one of which must be correct. The test is somewhat
+too easy for year 10 when three trials are given.
+
+The test of repeating six digits did not appear in the Binet scale and
+seems not to have been standardized until inserted in the Stanford
+series.
+
+
+X, ALTERNATIVE TEST 2: REPEATING TWENTY TO TWENTY-TWO SYLLABLES
+
+The sentences for this year are:--
+
+  (a) "_The apple tree makes a cool, pleasant shade on the ground
+      where the children are playing._"
+  (b) "_It is nearly half-past one o'clock; the house is very
+      quiet and the cat has gone to sleep._"
+  (c) "_In summer the days are very warm and fine; in winter it
+      snows and I am cold._"
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING exactly as in VI, 6.
+
+REMARKS. It is interesting to note that five years of mental growth are
+required to pass from the ability to repeat sixteen or eighteen
+syllables (year VI) to the ability to repeat twenty or twenty-two
+syllables. Similarly in memory for digits. Five digits are almost as
+easy at year VII as six at year X. Two explanations are available: (1)
+The increased difficulty may be accounted for by a relatively slow
+growth of memory power after the age of 6 or 7 years; or (2) the
+increase in difficulty may be real, expressing an inner law as to the
+behavior of the memory span in dealing with material of increasing
+length. Both factors are probably involved.
+
+This is another of the Stanford additions to the scale. Average children
+of 10 years ordinarily pass it, but older, retarded children of 10-year
+mental age make a poorer showing. In the case of mentally retarded
+adults, especially, the verbal memory is less exact than that of school
+children of the same mental age.
+
+
+X, ALTERNATIVE TEST 3: CONSTRUCTION PUZZLE A (HEALY AND FERNALD)
+
+MATERIAL. Use the form-board pictured on page 279. This may be
+purchased of C. H. Stoelting & Co., Chicago, Illinois. A home-made one
+will do as well if care is taken to get the dimensions exact.
+Quarter-inch wood should be used. The inside of the frame should be
+3 x 4 inches, and the dimensions of the blocks should be as follows:
+1+3/16 x 3; 1 x 11/2; 1 x 23/4; 1 x 11/2; 11/4 x 2.
+
+PROCEDURE. Place the frame on the table before the subject, the short
+side nearest him. The blocks are placed in an irregular position on the
+side of the frame away from the subject. Take care that the board with
+the blocks in place is not exposed to view in advance of the experiment.
+
+Say: "_I want you to put these blocks in this frame so that all the
+space will be filled up. If you do it rightly they will all fit in and
+there will be no space left over. Go ahead._"
+
+Do not tell the subject to see how quickly he can do it. Say nothing
+that would even suggest hurrying, for this tends to call forth the
+trial-and-error procedure even with intelligent subjects.
+
+[Illustration]
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the child succeeds in fitting the blocks
+into place _three times in a total time of five minutes for the three
+trials_.
+
+The method of procedure is fully as important as the time, but is not so
+easily scored in quantitative terms. Nevertheless, the examiner should
+always take observations on the method employed, noting especially
+any tendency to make and to repeat moves which lead to obvious
+impossibilities; i.e., moves which leave a space obviously unfitted to
+any of the remaining pieces. Some subjects repeat an absurd move many
+times over; others make an absurd move, but promptly correct it; others,
+and these are usually the bright ones, look far enough ahead to avoid
+error altogether.
+
+REMARKS. This test was devised by Professor Freeman, was adapted
+slightly by Healy and Fernald, and was first standardized by
+Dr. Kuhlmann. Miss Gertrude Hall has also standardized it, but on a
+different procedure from that described above.[67]
+
+[67] _Eugenics and Social Welfare Bulletin_, No. 5, The State Board of
+Charities, Albany, New York.
+
+The test has a lower correlation with intelligence than most of the
+other tests of the scale. Many bright children of 10-year intelligence
+adopt the trial-and-error method and have little success, while retarded
+older children of only 8-year intelligence sometimes succeed. Age, apart
+from intelligence, seems to play an important part in determining the
+nature of the performance. A favorable feature of the test, however, is
+the fact that it makes no demand on language ability and that it brings
+into play an aspect of intelligence which is relatively neglected by the
+remainder of the scale. For this reason it is at least worth keeping as
+an alternative test.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XVII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR XII
+
+
+XII, 1. VOCABULARY (FORTY DEFINITIONS, 7200 WORDS)
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING as in previous vocabulary tests.[68] In this case
+forty words must be defined.
+
+[68] See VIII, 6.
+
+
+XII, 2. DEFINING ABSTRACT WORDS
+
+PROCEDURE. The words to be defined are _pity_, _revenge_, _charity_,
+_envy_, and _justice_. The formula is, "_What is pity? What do we mean
+by pity?_" and so on with the other words. If the meaning of the
+response is not clear, ask the subject to explain what he means. If the
+definition is in terms of the word itself, as "Pity means to pity
+someone," "Revenge is to take revenge," etc., it is then necessary to
+say: "_Yes, but what does it mean to pity some one?_" or, "_What does it
+mean to take revenge?_" etc. Only supplementary questions of this kind
+are permissible.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _three of the five_ words are
+satisfactorily defined. The definition need not be strictly logical nor
+the language elegant. It is sufficient if the definition shows that the
+meaning of the word is known. Definitions which define by means of an
+illustration are acceptable. The following are samples of satisfactory
+and unsatisfactory responses:--
+
+(a) _Pity_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "To be sorry for some one." "To feel
+    compassion." "To have sympathy for a person." "To feel bad for
+    some one." "It means you help a person out and don't like to
+    have him suffer." "To have a feeling for people when they are
+    treated wrong." "If anybody gets hurt real bad you pity them."
+    "It's when you feel sorry for a tramp and give him something to
+    eat." "If some one is in trouble and you know how it feels to be
+    in that condition, you pity him." "You see something that's
+    wrong and have your feeling aroused."
+
+    Of 130 correct responses, 85, or 65 per cent, defined _pity_ as
+    "to feel sorry for some one," or words to that effect. Less than
+    10 per cent defined by means of illustration.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To think of the poor." "To be good to
+    others." "To help." "It means sorrow." "Mercy." "To cheer people
+    up." "It means 'What a pity!'" "To be ashamed." "To be sick or
+    poor." "It's when you break something."
+
+    Apart from inability to reply, which accounts for nearly one
+    fourth of the failures, there is no predominant type of
+    unsatisfactory response.
+
+(b) _Revenge_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "To get even with some one." "To get back on
+    him." "To do something to the one who has done something to
+    you." "To hurt them back." "To pay it back," or "Do something
+    back." "To do something mean in return." "To square up with a
+    person." "When somebody slaps you, you slap back." "You kill a
+    person if he does something to you."
+
+    The expression "to get even" was found in 42 per cent of 120
+    correct answers; "to pay it back," or "To do something back," in
+    20 per cent; "To get back on him," in 17 per cent. About
+    8 per cent were illustrations.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To be mad." "You try to hurt them." "To
+    fight." "You hate a person." "To kill them." "It means hateful."
+    "To try again." "To think evil of some one." "To hate some one
+    who has done you wrong." "To let a person off." "To go away from
+    something."
+
+    Inability to reply accounts for a little over 40 per cent of the
+    failures.
+
+(c) _Charity_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "To give to the poor." "To help those who are
+    needy." "It is charity if you are poor and somebody helps you."
+    "To give to somebody without pay."
+
+    Of 110 correct replies, 72 per cent were worded substantially
+    like the first or second given above.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "A person who helps the poor." "A place where
+    poor people get food and things." "It is a good life." "To be
+    happy." "To be poor." "Charity is being treated good." "It is to
+    be charitable." "Charity is selling something that is not worth
+    much." "It means to be good" or "to be kind."
+
+    When the last named response is given, we should say: "_Explain
+    what you mean._" If this brings an amplification of the response
+    to "It means to do things for the poor," or the equivalent, the
+    score is _plus_. "Charity means love" is also _minus_ if the
+    statement cannot be further explained and is merely rote memory
+    of the passage in the 13th chapter of 1st Corinthians. Simply
+    "To help" or "To give" is unsatisfactory. Half of the failures
+    are due to inability to reply.
+
+(d) _Envy_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "You envy some one who has something you want."
+    "It's the way you feel when you see some one with something
+    nicer than you have." "It's when a poor girl sees a rich girl
+    with nice dresses and things." "You hate some one because
+    they've got something you want." "Jealousy" (satisfactory if
+    subject can explain what _jealousy_ means; otherwise it is
+    _minus_). "It's when you see a person better off than you are."
+
+    Nearly three fourths of the correct responses say in substance,
+    "You envy a person who has something you want." Most of the
+    others are concrete illustrations.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "To hate some one," or simply "To hate." "You
+    don't like 'em." "Bad feeling toward any one." "To be a great
+    man or woman." "Not to be nice to people." "What we do to our
+    enemies."
+
+    Inability to respond accounts for 55 per cent of the failures.
+
+(e) _Justice_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "To give people what they deserve." "It means
+    that everybody is treated the same way, whether he is rich or
+    poor." "It's what you get when you go to court." "If one does
+    something and gets punished, that's justice." "To do the square
+    thing." "To give everybody his dues." "Let every one have what's
+    coming to him." "To do the right thing by any one." "If two
+    people do the same thing and they let one go without punishing,
+    that is not justice."
+
+    Approximately 38 per cent of 102 correct responses referred to
+    treating everybody the same way; 25 per cent to "doing the
+    square thing", 12 per cent were concrete illustrations; and
+    4 per cent were definitions of what justice is not.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "It means to have peace." "It is where they
+    have court." "It's the Courthouse." "To be honest." "Where one
+    is just" (_minus_, unless further explained). "To do right"
+    (_minus_, unless in explaining _right_ the subject gives a
+    definition of _justice_).
+
+    It is very necessary, in case of such answers as "Justice is to
+    do right," "To be just," etc., that the subject be urged to
+    explain further what he means. "To do right" includes nearly
+    12 per cent of all answers, and is given by the very brightest
+    children. Most of these are able, when urged, to complete the
+    definition in a satisfactory manner.
+
+REMARKS. The reader may be surprised that the ability to define common
+abstract words should develop so late. Most children who have had
+anything like ordinary home or school environment have doubtless heard
+all of these words countless times before the age of 12 years.
+Nevertheless, the statistics from the test show unmistakably that before
+this age such words have but limited and vague meaning. Other vocabulary
+studies confirm this fact so completely that we may say there is hardly
+any trait in which 12- to 14-year intelligence more uniformly excels
+that of the 9- or 10-year level.
+
+This is readily understandable when we consider the nature of abstract
+meanings and the intellectual processes by which we arrive at them.
+Unlike such words as _tree_, _house_, etc., the ideas they contain are
+not the immediate result of perceptual processes, in which even childish
+intelligence is adept, but are a refined and secondary product of
+relationships between other ideas. They require the logical processes of
+comparison, abstraction, and generalization. One cannot see justice, for
+example, but one is often confronted with situations in which justice or
+injustice is an element; and given a certain degree of abstraction and
+generalization, out of such situations the idea of justice will
+gradually be evolved.
+
+The formation and use of abstract ideas, of one kind or another,
+represent, _par excellence_, the "higher thought processes." It is not
+without significance that delinquents who test near the border-line of
+mental deficiency show such inferior ability in arriving at correct
+generalizations regarding matters of social and moral relationships. We
+cannot expect a mind of defective generalizing ability to form very
+definite or correct notions about justice, law, fairness, ownership
+rights, etc.; and if the ideas themselves are not fairly clear, the
+rules of conduct based upon them cannot make a very powerful appeal.[69]
+
+[69] See also p. 298 _ff._
+
+Binet used the words _charity_, _justice_, and _kindness_, and required
+two successes. In the 1911 revision he shifted the test from year XI to
+year XII, where it more nearly belongs. Goddard also places it in
+year XII and uses Binet's words, translating _bonte_, however, as
+_goodness_ instead of _kindness_. Kuhlmann retains the test in year XI
+and adds _bravery_ and _revenge_, requiring three correct definitions
+out of five. Bobertag uses _pity_, _envy_, and _justice_, requires two
+correct definitions, and finds the test just hard enough for year XII.
+
+After using the words _goodness_ and _kindness_ in two series of tests,
+we have discarded them as objectionable in that they give rise to so
+many doubtful definitions. Even intelligent children often say:
+"Goodness means to do something good," "Kindness means to be kind to
+some one," etc. These definitions in a circle occur less than half as
+often with _pity_, _revenge_, and _envy_, which are also superior to
+_charity_ and _justice_ in this respect.
+
+The relative difficulty of our five words is indicated by the order in
+which we have listed them in the test (i.e., beginning with the easiest
+and ending with the hardest). On the standard of three correct
+definitions, these words fit very accurately in year XII.
+
+
+XII, 3. THE BALL-AND-FIELD TEST (SUPERIOR PLAN)
+
+PROCEDURE, as in year VIII, test 1.
+
+SCORING. Score 3 (or superior plan) is required for passing in
+year XII.[70]
+
+[70] See scoring card.
+
+
+XII, 4. DISSECTED SENTENCES
+
+The following disarranged sentences are used:--
+
+    FOR THE STARTED AN WE COUNTRY EARLY AT HOUR
+
+    TO ASKED PAPER MY TEACHER CORRECT I MY
+
+    A DEFENDS DOG GOOD HIS BRAVELY MASTER
+
+These should be printed in type like that used above. The Stanford
+record booklet contains the sentences in convenient form.
+
+It is not permissible to substitute written words or printed script, as
+that would make the test harder. All the words should be printed in caps
+in order that no clue shall be given as to the first word in a sentence.
+For a similar reason the period is omitted.
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_Here is a sentence that has the words all mixed up so
+that they don't make any sense. If the words were changed around in the
+right order they would make a good sentence. Look carefully and see if
+you can tell me how the sentence ought to read._"
+
+Give the sentences in the order in which they are listed in the record
+booklet. Do not tell the subject to see how quickly he can do it,
+because with this test any suggestion of hurrying is likely to produce a
+kind of mental paralysis. If the subject has no success with the first
+sentence in one minute, read it off correctly for him, somewhat slowly,
+and pointing to each word as it is spoken. Then proceed to the second
+and third, allowing one minute for each.
+
+Give no further help. It is not permissible, in case an incorrect
+response is given, to ask the subject to try again, or to say: "_Are you
+sure that is right?_" "_Are you sure you have not left out any words?_"
+etc. Instead, maintain absolute silence. However, the subject is
+permitted to make as many changes in his response as he sees fit,
+provided he makes them spontaneously and within the allotted time.
+Record the entire response.
+
+Once in a great while the subject misunderstands the task and thinks the
+only requirement is to use all the words given, and that it is permitted
+to add as many other words as he likes. It is then necessary to repeat
+the instructions and to allow a new trial.
+
+SCORING. _Two sentences out of three must be correctly given within the
+minute allotted to each._ It is understood, of course, that if the first
+sentence has to be read for the subject, both the other responses must
+be given correctly.
+
+A sentence is not counted correct if a single word is omitted, altered,
+or inserted, or if the order given fails to make perfect sense.
+
+Certain responses are not absolutely incorrect, but are objectionable as
+regards sentence structure, or else fail to give the exact meaning
+intended. These are given half credit. Full credit on one, and half
+credit on each of the other two, is satisfactory. The following are
+samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory responses:--
+
+(a)
+    _Satisfactory._
+       "We started for the country at an early hour."
+       "At an early hour we started for the country."
+       "We started at an early hour for the country."
+    _Unsatisfactory._
+       "We started early at an hour for the country."
+       "Early at an hour we started for the country."
+       "We started early for the country."
+    _Half credit._
+       "For the country at an early hour we started."
+       "For the country we started at an early hour."
+
+(b)
+    _Satisfactory._
+       "I asked my teacher to correct my paper."
+    _Unsatisfactory._
+       "My teacher asked to correct my paper."
+       "To correct my paper I asked my teacher."
+    _Half credit._
+       "My teacher I asked to correct my paper."
+
+(c)
+    _Satisfactory._
+       "A good dog defends his master bravely."
+       "A good dog bravely defends his master."
+    _Unsatisfactory._
+       "A dog defends his master bravely."
+       "A bravely dog defends his master."
+       "A good dog defends his bravely master."
+       "A good brave dog defends his master."
+    _Half credit._
+       "A dog defends his good master bravely."
+       "A dog bravely defends his good master."
+       "A good master bravely defends his dog."
+
+REMARKS. This is an excellent test. It involves no knowledge which may
+not be presupposed at the age in which it is given, and success
+therefore depends very little on experience. The worst that can be urged
+against it is that it may possibly be influenced to a certain extent by
+the amount of reading the subject has done. But this has not been
+demonstrated. At any rate, the test satisfies the most important
+requirement of a test of intelligence; namely, the percentage of
+successes increases rapidly and steadily from the lower to the higher
+levels of mental age.
+
+This experiment can be regarded as a variation of the completion test.
+Binet tells us, in fact, that it was directly suggested by the
+experiment of Ebbinghaus. As will readily be observed, however, it
+differs to a certain extent from the Ebbinghaus completion test.
+Ebbinghaus omits parts of a sentence and requires the subject to supply
+the omissions. In this test we give all the parts and require the
+formation of a sentence by rearrangement. The two experiments are
+psychologically similar in that they require the subject to relate given
+fragments into a meaningful whole. Success depends upon the ability of
+intelligence to utilize hints, or clues, and this in turn depends on the
+logical integrity of the associative processes. All but the highest
+grade of the feeble-minded fail with this test.
+
+This test is found in year XI of Binet's 1908 series and in year XII of
+his 1911 revision. Goddard and Kuhlmann retain it in the original
+location. That it is better placed in year XII is indicated by all the
+available statistics with normal children, except those of Goddard. With
+this exception, the results of various investigators for year XII are in
+remarkably close agreement, as the following figures will show:--
+
+    _Per cent passing at year XII_
+
+    Binet                           66
+    Kuhlmann                        68
+    Bobertag                        78
+    Dougherty                       64
+    Strong                          72
+    Leviste and Morle               70
+    Stanford series (1911)          62
+    Stanford series (1913)          57
+    Stanford series (1914)          62
+    Princeton data                  61
+
+This agreement is noteworthy considering that no two experiments seem to
+have used exactly the same arrangement of words, and that some have
+presented the words of a sentence in a single line, others in two or
+three lines. A single line would appear to be somewhat easier.
+
+
+XII, 5. INTERPRETATION OF FABLES (SCORE 4)
+
+The following fables are used:--
+
+(a) _Hercules and the Wagoner_
+
+    _A man was driving along a country road, when the wheels
+    suddenly sank in a deep rut. The man did nothing but look at the
+    wagon and call loudly to Hercules to come and help him. Hercules
+    came up, looked at the man, and said: "Put your shoulder to the
+    wheel, my man, and whip up your oxen." Then he went away and
+    left the driver._
+
+(b) _The Milkmaid and her Plans_
+
+    _A milkmaid was carrying her pail of milk on her head, and was
+    thinking to herself thus: "The money for this milk will buy
+    4 hens; the hens will lay at least 100 eggs; the eggs will
+    produce at least 75 chicks; and with the money which the chicks
+    will bring I can buy a new dress to wear instead of the ragged
+    one I have on." At this moment she looked down at herself,
+    trying to think how she would look in her new dress; but as she
+    did so the pail of milk slipped from her head and dashed upon
+    the ground. Thus all her imaginary schemes perished in a moment._
+
+(c) _The Fox and the Crow_
+
+    _A crow, having stolen a bit of meat, perched in a tree and held
+    it in her beak. A fox, seeing her, wished to secure the meat,
+    and spoke to the crow thus: "How handsome you are! and I have
+    heard that the beauty of your voice is equal to that of your
+    form and feathers. Will you not sing for me, so that I may judge
+    whether this is true?" The crow was so pleased that she opened
+    her mouth to sing and dropped the meat, which the fox
+    immediately ate._
+
+(d) _The Farmer and the Stork_
+
+    _A farmer set some traps to catch cranes which had been eating
+    his seed. With them he caught a stork. The stork, which had not
+    really been stealing, begged the farmer to spare his life,
+    saying that he was a bird of excellent character, that he was
+    not at all like the cranes, and that the farmer should have pity
+    on him. But the farmer said: "I have caught you with these
+    robbers, and you will have to die with them."_
+
+(e) _The Miller, His Son, and the Donkey_
+
+    _A miller and his son were driving their donkey to a neighboring
+    town to sell him. They had not gone far when a child saw them
+    and cried out: "What fools those fellows are to be trudging
+    along on foot when one of them might be riding." The old man,
+    hearing this, made his son get on the donkey, while he himself
+    walked. Soon, they came upon some men. "Look," said one of them,
+    "see that lazy boy riding while his old father has to walk." On
+    hearing this, the miller made his son get off, and he climbed on
+    the donkey himself. Farther on they met a company of women, who
+    shouted out: "Why, you lazy old fellow, to ride along so
+    comfortably while your poor boy there can hardly keep pace by
+    the side of you!" And so the good-natured miller took his boy up
+    behind him and both of them rode. As they came to the town a
+    citizen said to them, "Why, you cruel fellows! You two are
+    better able to carry the poor little donkey than he is to carry
+    you." "Very well," said the miller, "we will try." So both of
+    them jumped to the ground, got some ropes, tied the donkey's
+    legs to a pole and tried to carry him. But as they crossed the
+    bridge the donkey became frightened, kicked loose and fell into
+    the stream._
+
+PROCEDURE. Present the fables in the order in which they are given
+above. The method is to say to the subject:
+
+"_You know what a fable is? You have heard fables?_" Whatever the
+answer, proceed to explain a fable as follows: "_A fable, you know, is a
+little story, and is meant to teach us a lesson. Now, I am going to read
+a fable to you. Listen carefully, and when I am through I will ask you
+to tell me what lesson the fable teaches us. Ready; listen._" After
+reading the fable, say: "_What lesson does that teach us?_" Record the
+response _verbatim_ and proceed with the next as follows: "_Here is
+another. Listen again and tell me what lesson this fable teaches us_,"
+etc.
+
+As far as possible, avoid comment or commendation until all the fables
+have been given. If the first answer is of an inferior type and we
+express too much satisfaction with it, we thereby encourage the
+subject to continue in his error. On the other hand, never express
+dissatisfaction with a response, however absurd or _malapropos_ it may
+be. Many subjects are anxious to know how well they are doing and
+continually ask, "Did I get that one right?" It is sufficient to say,
+"You are getting along nicely," or something to that effect. Offer no
+comments, suggestions, or questions which might put the subject on the
+right track. This much self-control is necessary if we would make the
+conditions of the test uniform for all subjects.
+
+The only occasion when a supplementary question is permissible is in
+case of a response whose meaning is not clear. Even then we must be
+cautious and restrict ourselves to some such question as, "_What do you
+mean?_" or, "_Explain; I don't quite understand what you mean_." The
+scoring of fables is somewhat difficult at best, and this additional
+question is often sufficient to place the response very definitely in
+the right or wrong column.
+
+SCORING. Give score 2, i.e., 2 points, for a correct answer, and 1 for
+an answer which deserves half credit. The test is passed in year XII
+_if 4 points are earned_; that is, if two responses are correct or if
+one is correct and two deserve half credit.
+
+Score 2 means that the fable has been correctly interpreted and that the
+lesson it teaches has been stated in general terms.
+
+There are two types of response which may be given half credit. They
+include (1) the interpretations which are stated in general terms and
+are fairly plausible, but are not exactly correct; and (2) those which
+are perfectly correct as to substance, but are not generalized.
+
+We overlook ordinary faults of expression and regard merely the
+essential meaning of the response.
+
+The only way to explain the method is by giving copious illustrations.
+If the following sample responses are carefully studied, a reasonable
+degree of expertness in scoring fables may be acquired with only a
+limited amount of actual practice. The sampling may appear to the reader
+needlessly prolix, but experience has taught us that in giving
+directions for the scoring of tests error always lies on the side of
+taking too much for granted.
+
+(a) _Hercules and the Wagoner_
+
+    _Full credit; score 2._ "God helps those who help themselves."
+    "Do not depend on others." "Help yourself before calling for
+    help." "It teaches that we should rely upon ourselves."
+
+    The following are not quite so good, but are nevertheless
+    considered satisfactory. "We should always try, even if it looks
+    hard and we think we can't do it." "When in trouble try to get
+    out of it yourself." "We've got to do things without help." "Not
+    to be lazy."
+
+    _Half credit; score 1._ This is most often given for the
+    response which contains the correct idea, but states it in terms
+    of the concrete situation, e.g.: "The man ought to have tried
+    himself first." "Hercules wanted to teach the man to help
+    himself." "The driver was too much inclined to depend on
+    others." "The man was too lazy. He should not have called for
+    help until he had tried to get out by himself." "To get out and
+    try instead of watching."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory; score 0._ Failures are mainly of five
+    varieties: (1) generalized interpretations which entirely miss
+    the point; (2) crude interpretations which not only miss the
+    point, but are also stated in terms of the concrete situation;
+    (3) irrelevant or incoherent remarks; (4) efforts to repeat the
+    story; and (5) inability to respond.
+
+    Sample failures of type (1), entirely incorrect generalizations:
+    "Teaches us to look where we are going." "Not to ask for
+    anything when there is no one to help." "To help those who are
+    in trouble." "Teaches us to be polite." "How to help others."
+    "Not to be cruel to horses." "Always to do what people tell you"
+    (or "obey orders," etc.). "Not to be foolish" (or stupid, etc.).
+    "If you would have a thing well done, do it yourself."
+
+    Failures of type (2), crude interpretations stated in concrete
+    terms: "How to get out of the mud." "Not to get stuck in the
+    mud." "To carry a stick along to pry yourself out if you get
+    into a mud-hole." "To help any one who is stuck in the mud."
+    "Taught Hercules to help the horses along and not whip them too
+    hard." "Not to be mean like Hercules."
+
+    Failures of type (3), irrelevant responses: "It was foolish not
+    to thank him." "He should have helped the driver." "Hercules was
+    mean." "If any one helps himself the horses will try." "The
+    driver should have done what Hercules told him." "He wanted the
+    man to help the oxen."
+
+    Type (4): Efforts to repeat the story.
+
+    Type (5): Inability to respond.
+
+(b) _The Maid and the Eggs_
+
+    _Full credit; score 2._ "Teaches us not to build air-castles."
+    "Don't count your chickens before they are hatched." "Not to
+    plan too far ahead." Slightly inferior, but still acceptable:
+    "Never make too many plans." "Don't count on the second thing
+    till you have done the first."
+
+    _Half credit; score 1._ "It teaches us not to have our minds on
+    the future when we carry milk on the head." "She was building
+    air-castles and so lost her milk." "She was planning too far
+    ahead."
+
+    The responses just given are examples of fairly correct
+    interpretations in non-generalized terms. The following are
+    examples of generalized interpretations which fall below the
+    accuracy required for full credit: "Never make plans." "Not to
+    be too proud." "To keep our mind on what we are doing." "Don't
+    cross a bridge till you come to it." "Don't count your _eggs_
+    before they are hatched." "Not to be wanting things; learn to
+    wait." "Not to imagine; go ahead and do it."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory; score 0._ Type (1), entirely incorrect
+    generalization: "That money does not buy everything." "Not to be
+    greedy." "Not to be selfish." "Not to waste things." "Not to
+    take risks like that." "Not to think about clothes." "Count your
+    chickens before they are hatched."
+
+    Type (2), very crude interpretations stated in concrete terms:
+    "Not to carry milk on the head." "Teaches her to watch and not
+    throw down her head." "To carry her head straight." "Not to
+    spill milk." "To keep your chickens and you will make more
+    money."
+
+    Type (3), irrelevant responses: "She wanted the money." "Teaches
+    us to read and write" (18-year-old of 8-year intelligence).
+    "About a girl who was selling some milk."
+
+    Type (4), effort to repeat the story.
+
+    Type (5), inability to respond.
+
+(c) _The Fox and the Crow_
+
+    _Full credit; score 2._ "Teaches us not to listen to flattery."
+    "Don't let yourself be flattered." "It is not safe to believe
+    people who flatter us." "We had better look out for people who
+    brag on us."
+
+    _Half credit; score 1._ Correct idea in concrete terms: "The
+    crow was so proud of herself that she lost all she had." "The
+    crow listened to flattery and got left." "Not to be proud and
+    let people think you can sing when you can't." "If anybody
+    brags on you don't sing or do what he tells you."
+
+    Pertinent but somewhat inferior generalizations: "Not to be too
+    proud." "Pride goes before a fall." "To be on our guard against
+    people who are our enemies." "Not to do everything people tell
+    you." "Don't trust every slick fellow you meet."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory; score 0._ Type (1), incorrect generalization:
+    "Not to go with people you don't know." "Not to be selfish." "To
+    share your food." "Look before you leap." "Not to listen to
+    evil." "Not to steal." "Teaches honesty." "Not to covet." "Think
+    for yourself." "Teaches wisdom." "Never listen to advice."
+    "Never let any one get ahead of you." "To figure out what they
+    are going to do." "Never try to do two things at once." "How to
+    get what you want."
+
+    Type (2), very crude interpretation stated in terms of the
+    concrete situation: "Not to sing before you eat." "Not to hold a
+    thing in your mouth; eat it." "To eat a thing before you think
+    of your beauty." "To swallow it before you sing." "To be on your
+    watch when you have food in your mouth."
+
+    Type (3), irrelevant responses: "The fox was greedy." "The fox
+    was slicker than what the crow was." "The crow ought not to have
+    opened her mouth." "The crow should just have shaken her head."
+    "It served the crow right for stealing the meat." "The fox
+    wanted the meat and just told the crow that to get it."
+    "Foolishness." "Guess that's where the old fox got his
+    name--'Old Foxy'--Don't teach us anything."
+
+    Type (4), efforts to repeat the story.
+
+    Type (5), inability to respond.
+
+(d) _The Farmer and the Stork_
+
+    _Full credit; score 2._ "You are judged by the company you
+    keep." "Teaches us to keep out of bad company." "Birds of a
+    feather flock together." "If you go with bad people you are
+    counted like them." "We should choose our friends carefully."
+    "Don't go with bad people." "Teaches us to avoid the appearance
+    of evil."
+
+    _Half credit; score 1._ "The stork should not have been with the
+    cranes." "Teaches him not to go with robbers." "Don't go with
+    people who are not of your nation." "Not to follow others."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory; score 0._ Type (1), incorrect generalization:
+    "Not to steal." "Not to tell lies." "Not to give excuses." "A
+    poor excuse is better than none." "Not to trust what people
+    say." "Not to listen to excuses." "Not to harm animals that do
+    no harm." "To have pity on others." "Not to be cruel." "To be
+    kind to birds." "Not to blame people for what they don't do."
+    "Teaches that those who do good often suffer for those who do
+    evil." "To tend to your own business." "Not to meddle with other
+    people's things." "Not to trespass on people's property." "Not
+    to think you are so nice." "To keep out of mischief."
+
+    Type (2), very crude interpretations in concrete terms: "Taught
+    the stork to look where it stepped and not walk into a trap."
+    "Taught the stork to keep out of the man's field." "Not to take
+    the seeds."
+
+    Type (3), irrelevant responses: "The farmer was right; storks do
+    eat grain." "Served the stork right, he was stealing too." "He
+    should try to help the stork out of the field."
+
+    Type (4), efforts to repeat the story.
+
+    Type (5), inability to reply.
+
+(e) _The Miller, His Son, and the Donkey_
+
+    _Full credit; score 2._ "When you try to please everybody you
+    please nobody." "Don't listen to everybody; you can't please
+    them all." "Don't take every one's advice." "Don't try to do
+    what everybody tells you." "Use your own judgment." "Have a mind
+    of your own." "Make up your mind and stick to it." "Don't be
+    wishy-washy." "Have confidence in your own opinions."
+
+    _Half credit; score 1._ Interpretations which are generalized
+    but somewhat inferior: "Never take any one's advice" (too
+    sweeping a conclusion). "Don't take foolish advice." "Take your
+    own advice." "It teaches us that people don't always agree."
+
+    Correct idea but not generalized: "They were fools to listen to
+    everybody." "They should have walked or rode just as they
+    thought best, without listening to other people."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory; score 0._ Type (1), incorrect generalization:
+    "To do right." "To do what people tell you." "To be kind to old
+    people." "To be polite." "To serve others." "Not to be cruel to
+    animals." "To have sympathy for beasts of burden." "To be
+    good-natured." "Not to load things on animals that are small."
+    "That it is always better to leave things as they are." "That
+    men were not made for beasts of burden."
+
+    Type (2), very crude interpretations stated in concrete terms:
+    "Not to try to carry the donkey." "That walking is better than
+    riding." "The people should have been more polite to the old
+    man." "That the father should be allowed to ride."
+
+    Type (3), irrelevant responses: "The men were too heavy for the
+    donkey." "They ought to have stayed on and they would not have
+    fallen into the stream." "It teaches about a man and he lost his
+    donkey."
+
+    Type (4), efforts to repeat the story.
+
+    Type (5), inability to respond.
+
+REMARKS. The fable test, or the "test of generalization," as it may
+aptly be named, was used by the writer in a study of the intellectual
+processes of bright and dull boys in 1905,[71] and was further
+standardized by the writer and Mr. Childs in 1911.[72] It has proved its
+worth in a number of investigations. It has been necessary, however, to
+simplify the rather elaborate method of scoring which was proposed in
+1911, not because of any logical fault of the method, but because of the
+difficulty in teaching examiners to use the system correctly. The method
+explained above is somewhat coarser, but it has the advantage of being
+much easier to learn.
+
+[71] "Genius and Stupidity," in _Pedagogical Seminary_, vol. xiii,
+pp. 307-73.
+
+[72] "A Tentative Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Measuring
+Scale of Intelligence," _Journal of Educational Psychology_ (1912).
+
+The generalization test presents for interpretation situations which are
+closely paralleled in the everyday social experience of human beings. It
+tests the subject's ability to understand motives underlying acts or
+attitudes. It gives a clue to the status of the social consciousness.
+This is highly important in the diagnosis of the upper range of mental
+defectiveness. The criterion of the subnormal's fitness for life outside
+an institution is his ability to understand social relations and to
+adjust himself to them. Failure of a subnormal to meet this criterion
+may lead him to break common conventions, and to appear disrespectful,
+sulky, stubborn, or in some other way queer and exceptional. He is
+likely to be misunderstood, because he so easily misunderstands others.
+The skein of human motives is too complex for his limited intelligence
+to untangle.
+
+Ethnological studies have shown in an interesting way the social origin
+of the moral judgment. The rectitude of the moral life, therefore,
+depends on the accuracy of the social judgment. It would be interesting
+to know what proportion of offenders have transgressed moral codes
+because of continued failure to grasp the essential lessons presented
+by human situations.
+
+For the intelligent child even the common incidents of life carry an
+endless succession of lessons in right conduct. On the average school
+playground not an hour passes without some happening which is fraught
+with a moral hint to those who have intelligence enough to generalize
+the situation. A boy plays unfairly and is barred from the game. One
+bullies his weaker companion and arouses the anger and scorn of all his
+fellows. Another vents his braggadocio and feels at once the withering
+scorn of those who listen. Laziness, selfishness, meanness, dishonesty,
+ingratitude, inconstancy, inordinate pride, and the countless other
+faults all have their social penalties. The child of normal intelligence
+sees the point, draws the appropriate lesson and (provided emotions and
+will are also normal) applies it more or less effectively as a guide to
+his own conduct. To the feeble-minded child, all but lacking in the
+power of abstraction and generalization, the situation conveys no such
+lesson. It is but a muddle of concrete events without general
+significance; or even if its meaning is vaguely apprehended, the powers
+of inhibition are insufficient to guarantee that right action will
+follow.
+
+It is for this reason that the generalization test is so valuable in the
+mental examinations of delinquents. It presents a moral situation,
+imagined, to be sure, but none the less real to the individual of normal
+comprehension. It tells us quickly whether the subject tested is able to
+see beyond the incidents of the given situation and to grasp their wider
+relations--whether he is able to generalize the concrete.
+
+The following responses made by feeble-minded delinquents from
+16 to 21 years of age demonstrate sufficiently their inability to
+comprehend the moral situation:--
+
+    _Hercules and the Wagoner._ "Teaches you to look where you are
+    going." "Not to help any one who is stuck in the mud." "Not to
+    whip oxen." "Teaches that Hercules was mean." "Teaches us to
+    carry a stick along to pry the wheels out."
+
+    _The Fox and the Crow._ "Not to sing when eating." "To keep away
+    from strangers." "To swallow it before you sing." "Not to be
+    stingy." "Not to listen to evil." "The fox was wiser than the
+    crow." "Not to be selfish with food." "Not to do two things at
+    once." "To hang on to what you've got."
+
+    _The Farmer and the Stork._ "Teaches the stork to look where he
+    steps." "Not to be cruel like the farmer." "Not to tell lies."
+    "Not to butt into other people's things." "To be kind to birds."
+    "Teaches us how to get rid of troublesome people." "Never go
+    with anything else."
+
+The following are the responses of an 18-year-old delinquent
+(intelligence level 10 years) to the five fables:--
+
+    _Maid and Eggs._ "She was thinking about getting the dress and
+    spilled the milk. Teaches selfishness."
+
+    _Hercules and the Wagoner._ "He wanted to help the oxen out."
+
+    _Fox and Crow._ "Guess that's where the fox got his name--'Old
+    Foxy.' Don't teach us anything."
+
+    _Farmer and Stork._ "Try and help the stork out of the field."
+
+    _Miller, Son, and Donkey._ "They was all big fools and mean to
+    the donkey."
+
+One does not require very profound psychological insight to see that a
+person of this degree of comprehension is not promising material for
+moral education. His weakness in the ability to generalize a moral
+situation is not due to lack of instruction, but is inherent in the
+nature of his mental processes, all of which have the infantile quality
+of average 9- or 10-year intelligence. Well-instructed normal children
+of 10 years ordinarily succeed no better. The ability to draw the
+correct lesson from a social situation is little developed below the
+mental level of 12 or 13 years.
+
+The test is also valuable because it throws light on the subject's
+ability to appreciate the finer shades of meaning. The mentally retarded
+often show marked inferiority in this respect. They sense, perhaps, in a
+general way the trend of the story, but they fail to comprehend much
+that to us seems clearly expressed. They do not get what is left for the
+reader to infer, because they are insensible to the thought fringes. It
+is these which give meaning to the fable. The dull subject may be able
+to image the objects and activities described, but taken in the rough
+such imagery gets him nowhere.
+
+Finally, the test is almost free from the danger of coaching. The
+subject who has been given a number of fables along with twenty-five or
+thirty other tests can as a rule give only hazy and inaccurate testimony
+as to what he has been put through. Moreover, we have found that, even
+if a subject has previously heard a fable, that fact does not materially
+increase his chances of giving a correct interpretation. If the
+situation depicted in the fable is beyond the subject's power of
+comprehension even explicit instruction has little effect upon the
+quality of the response.
+
+Incidentally, this observation raises the question whether the use of
+proverbs, mottoes, fables, poetry, etc., in the moral instruction of
+children may not often be futile because the material is not fitted to
+the child's power of comprehension. Much of the school's instruction in
+history and literature has a moral purpose, but there is reason to
+suspect that in this field schools often make precocious attempts in
+"generalizing" exercises.
+
+
+XII, 6. REPEATING FIVE DIGITS REVERSED
+
+The series are 3-1-8-7-9; 6-9-4-8-2; 5-2-9-6-1.
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING. Exactly as in years VII and IX.[73]
+
+[73] See discussion, p. 207 _ff._
+
+
+XII, 7. INTERPRETATION OF PICTURES
+
+PROCEDURE. Use the same pictures as in III, 1, and VII, 2, and the
+additional picture _d_. Present in the same order. The formula to begin
+with is identical with that in VII, 2: "_Tell me what this picture is
+about. What is this a picture of?_" This formula is chosen because it
+does not suggest specifically either description or interpretation, and
+is therefore adapted to show the child's spontaneous or natural mode of
+apperception. However, in case, this formula fails to bring spontaneous
+interpretation for three of the four pictures, we then return to those
+pictures on which the subject has failed and give a second trial with
+the formula: "_Explain this picture_." A good many subjects who failed
+to interpret the pictures spontaneously do so without difficulty when
+the more specific formula is used.
+
+If the response is so brief as to be difficult to classify, the subject
+should be urged to amplify by some such injunction as "_Go ahead_," or
+"_Explain what you mean_."
+
+One more caution. It is necessary to refrain from voicing a single word
+of commendation or approval until all the pictures have been responded
+to. A moment's thought will reveal the absolute necessity of adhering to
+this rule. Often a subject will begin by giving an inferior type of
+response (description, say) to the first picture, but with the second
+picture adjusts better to the task and responds satisfactorily. If in
+such a case the first (unsatisfactory) response were greeted with an
+approving "That's fine, you are doing splendidly," the likelihood of any
+improvement taking place as the test proceeds would be greatly lessened.
+
+SCORING. _Three pictures out of four_ must be satisfactorily
+interpreted. "Satisfactorily" means that the interpretation given should
+be reasonably plausible; not necessarily the exact one the artist had in
+mind, yet not absurd. The following classified responses will serve as
+a fairly secure guide for scoring:--
+
+(a) _Dutch Home_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Child has spilled something and is getting a
+    scolding." "The baby has hurt herself and the mother is
+    comforting her." "The baby is crying because she is hungry and
+    the mother has nothing to give her." "The little girl has been
+    naughty and is about to be punished." "The baby is crying
+    because she does not like her dinner." "There's bread on the
+    table and the mother won't let the little girl have it and so
+    she is crying." "The baby is begging for something and is crying
+    because her mamma won't give it to her." "It's a poor family.
+    The father is dead and they don't have enough to eat."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "The baby is crying and the mother is looking
+    at her" (description). "It's in Holland, and there's a little
+    girl crying, and a mamma, and there's a dish on the table"
+    (mainly description). "The mother is teaching the child to walk"
+    (absurd interpretation).
+
+(b) _River Scene_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "Man and lady eloping to get married and an
+    Indian to row for them." "I think it represents a honeymoon
+    trip." "In frontier days and a man and his wife have been
+    captured by the Indians." "It's a perilous journey and they have
+    engaged the Indian to row for them."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "They are shooting the rapids." "An Indian
+    rowing a man and his wife down the river" (mainly description).
+    "A storm at sea" (absurd interpretation). "Indians have rescued
+    a couple from a shipwreck." "They have been up the river and
+    are riding down the rapids."
+
+    The following responses are somewhat doubtful, but should
+    probably be scored _minus_: "People going out hunting and have
+    Indian for a guide." "The man has rescued the woman from the
+    Indians." "It's a camping trip."
+
+(c) _Post-Office_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "It's a lot of old farmers. They have come to
+    the post-office to get the paper, which only comes once a week,
+    and they are all happy." "There's something funny in the paper
+    about one of the men and they are all laughing about it." "They
+    are reading about the price of eggs, and they look very happy so
+    I guess the price has gone up." "It's a bunch of country
+    politicians reading the election news."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "A man has just come out of the post-office
+    and is reading to his friends." "It's a little country town and
+    they are looking at the paper." "A man is reading the paper and
+    the others are looking on and laughing." "Some men are reading a
+    paper and laughing, and the other man has brought some eggs to
+    market, and it's in a little country town." (All the above are
+    mainly description.)
+
+    Responses like the following are somewhat better, but hardly
+    satisfactory: "They are reading something funny in the paper."
+    "They are reading the ads." "They are laughing about something
+    in the newspaper," etc.
+
+(d) _Colonial Home_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "They are lovers and have quarreled." "The man
+    has to go away for a long time, maybe to war, and she is afraid
+    he won't return." "He has proposed and she has rejected him, and
+    she is crying because she hated to disappoint him." "The woman
+    is crying because her husband is angry and leaving her." "The
+    man is a messenger and has brought the woman bad news."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "The husband is leaving and the dog is looking
+    at the lady." "It's a picture to show how people dressed in
+    colonial times." "The lady is crying and the man is trying to
+    comfort her." "The man is going away. The woman is angry because
+    he is going. The dog has a ball in its mouth and looks happy,
+    and the man looks sad."
+
+    Such responses as the following are doubtful, but rather _minus_
+    than _plus_: "A picture of George Washington's home." "They
+    have lost their money and they are sad" (gratuitous
+    interpretation). "The man has struck the woman."
+
+    Doubt sometimes arises as to the proper scoring of imaginative
+    or gratuitous interpretations. The following are samples of
+    such: (a) "The little girl is crying because she wants a new
+    dress and the mother is telling her she can have one when
+    Christmas comes if she will be good." (b) "The man and woman
+    have gone up the river to visit some friends and an Indian guide
+    is bringing them home." (c) "Some old Rubes are reading about
+    a circus that's going to come." (d) "Napoleon leaving his
+    wife."
+
+Sometimes these imaginative responses are given by very bright subjects,
+under the impression that they are asked to "make up" a story based on
+the picture. We may score them _plus_, provided they are not too much
+out of harmony with the situation and actions represented in the
+picture. Interpretations so gratuitous as to have little or no bearing
+upon the scene depicted should be scored _minus_.
+
+REMARKS. The test of picture interpretation has been variously located
+from 12 to 15 years. It cannot be too strongly emphasized that
+everything depends on the nature of the pictures used, the form in which
+the question is put, and the standard for scoring. The Jingleman-Jack
+pictures used by Kuhlmann are as easy to interpret at 10 years as the
+Stanford pictures at 12. Spontaneous interpretation ("What is this a
+picture of?" or "What do you see in this picture?") comes no more
+readily at 14 years than provoked interpretation ("Explain this
+picture") at 12. The standard of scoring is no less important. If with
+the Stanford pictures we require three satisfactory responses out of
+four, the test belongs at the 12-year level, but the standard of two
+correct out of four can be met a year or two earlier.
+
+Even after we have agreed upon a given series of pictures, the formula
+for giving the test, and upon the requisite number of passes, there
+remains still the question as to the proper degree of liberality in
+deciding what constitutes interpretation. There is no single point in
+mental development where the "ability to interpret pictures" sweeps in
+with a rush. Like the development of most other abilities, it comes by
+slow degrees, beginning even as early as 6 years.
+
+The question is, therefore, to decide whether a given response contains
+as much and as good interpretation as we have a right to expect at the
+age level where the test has been placed. It is imperative for any one
+who would use the scale correctly to acquaint himself thoroughly with
+the procedure and standards described above.
+
+
+XII, 8. GIVING SIMILARITIES, THREE THINGS
+
+PROCEDURE. The procedure is the same as in VIII, 4, but with the
+following words:--
+
+  (a) _Snake_, _cow_, _sparrow_.
+  (b) _Book_, _teacher_, _newspaper_.
+  (c) _Wool_, _cotton_, _leather_.
+  (d) _Knife-blade_, _penny_, _piece of wire_.
+  (e) _Rose_, _potato_, _tree_.
+
+As before, a little tactful urging is occasionally necessary in order to
+secure a response.
+
+SCORING. _Three satisfactory responses out of five_ are necessary for
+success. Any real similarity is acceptable, whether fundamental or
+superficial, although the giving of fundamental likenesses is especially
+symptomatic of good intelligence.
+
+Failures may be classified under four heads: (1) Leaving one of the
+words out of consideration; (2) giving a difference instead of a
+similarity; (3) giving a similarity that is not real or that is too
+bizarre or far-fetched; and (4) inability to respond. Types (1), (3),
+and (4) are almost equally numerous, while type (2) is not often
+encountered at this level of intelligence.
+
+This test provokes doubtful responses somewhat oftener than the earlier
+test of giving similarities. Those giving greatest difficulty are the
+indefinite statements like "All are useful," "All are made of the same
+material," etc. Fortunately, in most of these cases an additional
+question is sufficient to determine whether the subject has in mind a
+real similarity. Questions suitable for this purpose are: "Explain what
+you mean," "In what respect are they all useful?" "What material do
+you mean?" etc. Of course it is only permissible to make use of
+supplementary questions of this kind when they are necessary in order to
+clarify a response which has already been made.
+
+While the amateur examiner is likely to have more or less trouble in
+deciding upon scores, this difficulty rapidly disappears with
+experience. The following samples of satisfactory and unsatisfactory
+responses will serve as a fairly adequate guide in dealing with doubtful
+cases:--
+
+(a) _Snake_, _cow_, _sparrow_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "All are animals" (or creatures, etc.). "All
+    live on the land." "All have blood" (or flesh, bones, eyes,
+    skin, etc.). "All move about." "All breathe air." "All are
+    useful" (_plus_ only if subject can give a use which they have
+    in common). "All have a little intelligence" (or sense,
+    instinct, etc.).
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "All have legs." "All are dangerous." "All
+    feed on grain" (or grass, etc.). "All are much afraid of man."
+    "All frighten you." "All are warm-blooded." "All get about the
+    same way." "All walk on the ground." "All can bite." "All
+    holler." "All drink water." "A snake crawls, a cow walks, and a
+    sparrow flies" (or some other difference). "They are not alike."
+
+(b) _Book_, _teacher_, _newspaper_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "All teach." "You learn from all." "All give you
+    information." "All help you get an education." "All are your
+    good friends" (_plus_ if subject can explain how). "All are
+    useful" (_plus_ if subject can explain how).
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "All tell you the news." "A teacher writes,
+    and a book and newspaper have writing." "They are not alike."
+    "All read." "All use the alphabet."
+
+(c) _Wool_, _cotton_, _leather_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "All used for clothing." "We wear them all."
+    "All grow" (_plus_ if subject can explain). "All have to be sent
+    to the factory to be made into things." "All are useful" (_plus_
+    if subject can give a use which all have in common). "All are
+    valuable" (_plus_ if explained).
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "All come from plants." "All grow on animals."
+    "All came off the top of something." "All are things." "They are
+    pretty." "All spell alike." "All are furry" (or soft, hard,
+    etc.).
+
+(d) _Knife-blade_, _penny_, _piece of wire_
+
+    _Satisfactory_. "All are made from minerals" (or metals). "All
+    come from mines." "All are hard material."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "All are made of steel" (or copper, iron,
+    etc.). "All are made of the same metal." "All cut." "All bend
+    easily." "All are used in building a house." "All are
+    worthless." "All are useful in fixing things." "All have an
+    end." "They are small." "All weigh the same." "Can get them all
+    at a hardware store." "You can buy things with all of them."
+    "You buy them with money." "One is sharp, one is round, and one
+    is long" (or some other difference).
+
+    Such answers as "All are found in a boy's pocket," or "Boys like
+    them," are not altogether bad, but hardly deserve to be called
+    satisfactory. "All are useful" is _minus_ unless the subject can
+    give a use which they have in common, which in this case he is
+    not likely to do. Bizarre uses are also _minus_; as, "All are
+    good for a watch fob," "Can use all for paper weights," etc.
+
+(e) _Rose_, _potato_, _tree_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "All are plants." "All grow from the ground."
+    "All have leaves" (or roots, etc.). "All have to be planted."
+    "All are parts of nature." "All have colors."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "All are pretty." "All bear fruit." "All have
+    pretty flowers." "All grow on bushes." "All are valuable" (or
+    useful). "They grow close to a house." "All are ornamental."
+    "All are shrubbery."
+
+REMARKS. The words of each series lend themselves readily to
+classification into a next higher class. This is the best type of
+response, but with most of the series it accounts for less than two
+thirds of the successes among subjects of 12-year intelligence. The
+proportion is less than one third for subjects of 10-year intelligence
+and nearly three fourths at the 14-year level. It would be possible and
+very desirable to devise and standardize an additional test of this
+kind, but requiring the giving of an essential resemblance or
+classificatory similarity.
+
+For discussion of the psychological factors involved in the similarities
+test, see VII, 5.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XVIII
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR YEAR XIV.
+
+
+XIV, 1. VOCABULARY (FIFTY DEFINITIONS, 9000 WORDS)
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING, as in VIII, X, and XII. At year XIV fifty words
+must be correctly defined.
+
+
+XIV, 2. INDUCTION TEST: FINDING A RULE
+
+PROCEDURE. Provide six sheets of thin blank paper, say 81/2 x 11 inches.
+Take the first sheet, and telling the subject to watch what you do, fold
+it once, and in the middle of the folded edge tear out or cut out a
+small notch; then ask the subject to tell you _how many holes there will
+be in the paper when it is unfolded_. The correct answer, _one_, is
+nearly always given without hesitation. But whatever the answer, unfold
+the paper and hold it up broadside for the subject's inspection. Next,
+take another sheet, fold it once as before and say: "_Now, when we
+folded it this way and tore out a piece, you remember it made one hole
+in the paper. This time we will give the paper another fold and see how
+many holes we shall have._" Then proceed to fold the paper again, this
+time in the other direction, and tear out a piece from the folded side
+and ask how many holes there will be when the paper is unfolded. After
+recording the answer, unfold the paper, hold it up before the subject so
+as to let him see the result. The answer is often incorrect and the
+unfolded sheet is greeted with an exclamation of surprise. The governing
+principle is seldom made out at this stage of the experiment. But
+regardless of the correctness or incorrectness of the first and second
+answers, proceed with the third sheet. Fold it once and say: "_When we
+folded it this way there was one hole._" Then fold it again and say:
+"_And when we folded it this way there were two holes._" At this point
+fold the paper a third time and say: "_Now, I am folding it again. How
+many holes will it have this time when I unfold it?_" Record the answer
+and again unfold the paper while the subject looks on.
+
+Continue in the same manner with sheets four, five, and six, adding one
+fold each time. In folding each sheet recapitulate the results with the
+previous sheets, saying (with the sixth, for example): "_When we folded
+it this way there was one hole, when we folded it again there were two,
+when we folded it again there were four, when we folded it again there
+were eight, when we folded it again there were sixteen; now, tell me
+how many holes there will be if we fold it once more._" In the
+recapitulation avoid the expression "_When we folded it once, twice,
+three times_," etc., as this often leads the subject to double the
+numeral heard instead of doubling the number of holes in the previously
+folded sheet. After the answer is given, do not fail to unfold the paper
+and let the subject view the result.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed _if the rule is grasped by the time the
+sixth sheet is reached_; that is, the subject may pass after five
+incorrect responses, provided the sixth is correct and the governing
+rule can then be given. It is not permissible to ask for the rule until
+all six parts of the experiment have been given. Nothing must be said
+which could even suggest the operation of a rule. Often, however, the
+subject grasps the principle after two or three steps and gives it
+spontaneously. In this case it is unnecessary to proceed with the
+remaining steps.
+
+REMARKS. This test was first used by the writer in a comparative study
+of the intellectual processes of bright and dull boys in 1905, but it
+was not standardized until 1914. Rather extensive data indicate that it
+is a genuine test of intelligence. Of 14-year-old school children
+testing between 96 and 105 I Q, 59 per cent passed this test; of
+14-year-olds testing below 96 I Q, 41 per cent passed; of those testing
+above 105, 71 per cent passed. That is, the test agrees well with the
+results obtained by the scale as a whole. Of "average adults" only
+10 per cent fail; and of "superior adults," fewer than 5 per cent. As a
+rule, the higher the grade of intelligence, the fewer the steps
+necessary for grasping the rule. Of the superior adults, only
+35 per cent fail to get the rule as early as the end of the fourth step.
+
+The test is little affected by schooling, and apart from differences in
+intelligence it is little influenced by age. Other advantages of the
+test are the keen interest it always arouses and its independence of
+language ability. It has been used successfully with immigrant subjects
+who had been in this country but a few months.
+
+We have named the experiment an "induction test." It might be supposed
+that the solution would ordinarily be arrived at by deduction, or by an
+_a-priori_ logical analysis of the principle involved. This, however, is
+rarely the case. Not one average adult out of ten reasons out the
+situation in this purely logical manner. It is ordinarily only after one
+or more mistakes have been made and have been exposed by the examiner
+holding up the unfolded paper to view that the correct principle is
+grasped. In the absence of deductive reasoning the subject must note
+that each unfolded sheet contains twice as many holes as the previous
+one, and must infer that folding the paper again will again double the
+number. The ability tested is the ability to generalize from
+particulars where the common element of the particulars can be discerned
+only by the selective action of attention, in this case attention to the
+fact that each number is the double of its predecessor.
+
+
+XIV, 3. GIVING DIFFERENCES BETWEEN A PRESIDENT AND A KING
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_There are three main differences between a president
+and a king; what are they?_" If the subject stops after one difference
+is given, we urge him on, if possible, until three are given.
+
+SCORING. The three differences relate to power, tenure, and manner of
+accession. Only these differences are considered correct, and the
+successful response must include at least two of the three. We disregard
+crudities of expression and note merely whether the subject has the
+essential idea. As regards power, for example, any of the following
+responses are satisfactory: "The king is absolute and the president is
+not." "The king rules by himself, but the president rules with the help
+of the people." "Kings can have things their own way more than
+presidents can," etc.
+
+It may be objected that the reverse of this is sometimes true, that the
+king of to-day often has less power than the average president.
+Sometimes subjects mention this fact, and when they do we credit them
+with this part of the test. As a matter of fact, however, this answer is
+seldom given.
+
+Sometimes the subject does not stop until he has given a half-dozen or
+more differences, and in such cases the first three differences may be
+trivial and some of the later ones essential. The question then arises
+whether we should disregard the errors and pass the subject on his later
+correct responses. The rule in such cases is to ask the subject to pick
+out the "three main differences."
+
+Sometimes accession and tenure are given in the form of a single
+contrast, as: "The president is elected, but the king inherits his
+throne and rules for life." This answer entitles the subject to credit
+for both accession and tenure, the contrast as regards tenure being
+plainly implied.
+
+Unsatisfactory contrasts are of many kinds and are often amusing. Some
+of the most common are the following:--
+
+    "A king wears a crown." "A king has jewels." "A king sits on a
+    throne." ("A king sets on a thorn" as one feeble-minded boy put
+    it!) "A king lives in a palace." "A king has courtiers." "A king
+    is very dignified." "A king dresses up more." "A president has
+    less pomp and ceremony." "A president is more ready to receive
+    the people." "A king sits on a chair all the time and a
+    president does not." "No differences; it's just names." "A
+    president does not give titles." "A king has a larger salary."
+    "A king has royal blood." "A king is in more danger." "They have
+    a different title." "A king is more cruel." "Kings have people
+    beheaded." "A king rules in a monarchy and a president in a
+    republic." "A king rules in a foreign country." "A president is
+    elected and a king fights for his office." "A president appoints
+    governors and a king does not." "A president lets the lawyers
+    make the laws." "Everybody works for a king."
+
+It is surprising to see how often trivial differences like the above are
+given. About thirty "average adults" out of a hundred, including
+high-school students, give at least one unsatisfactory contrast.
+
+The test has been criticized as depending too much on schooling. The
+criticism is to a certain extent valid when the test is used with young
+subjects, say of 10 or 12 years. It is not valid, however, if the use of
+the test is confined to older subjects. With the latter, it is not a
+test of knowledge, but of the discriminative capacity to deal with
+knowledge already in the possession of the subject. It would be
+difficult to find an adult, not actually feeble-minded, who is ignorant
+of the facts called for: That the king inherits his throne, while the
+president is elected; that the tenure of the king is for life, and that
+of the president for a term of years; that kings ordinarily have, or are
+supposed to have, more power. Even the relatively stupid adult knows
+this; but he also knows that kings are different from presidents in
+having crowns, thrones, palaces, robes, courtiers, larger pay, etc., and
+he makes no discrimination as regards the relative importance of these
+differences.
+
+The test is psychologically related to that of giving differences in
+year VII and to the two tests of finding similarities; but it differs
+from these in requiring a comparison based on fundamental rather than
+accidental distinctions. The idea is good and should be worked out in
+additional tests of the same type.
+
+The test first appeared in the Binet revised scale of 1911. Kuhlmann
+omits it, and besides our own there are few statistics bearing on it.
+Our results show that if two essential differences are required, the
+test belongs where we have placed it, but that if only one essential
+difference is required, the test is easy enough for year XII.
+
+
+XIV, 4. PROBLEM QUESTIONS
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the subject: "_Listen, and see if you can understand
+what I read._" Then read the following three problems, rather slowly and
+with expression, pausing after each long enough for the subject to find
+an answer:--
+
+  (a) "_A man who was walking in the woods near a city stopped
+      suddenly, very much frightened, and then ran to the nearest
+      policeman, saying that he had just seen hanging from the limb
+      of a tree a ... a what?_"
+  (b) "_My neighbor has been having queer visitors. First a doctor
+      came to his house, then a lawyer, then a minister (preacher or
+      priest). What do you think happened there?_"
+  (c) "_An Indian who had come to town for the first time in his
+      life saw a white man riding along the street. As the white man
+      rode by, the Indian said--'The white man is lazy; he walks
+      sitting down.' What was the white man riding on that caused
+      the Indian to say, 'He walks sitting down'?_"
+
+Do not ask questions calculated to draw out the correct response, but
+wait in silence for the subject's spontaneous answer. It is permissible,
+however, to re-read the passage if the subject requests it.
+
+SCORING. _Two responses out of three must be satisfactory._ The
+following explanations and examples will make clear the requirements of
+the test:--
+
+(a) _What the man saw hanging_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ The only correct answer for the first is "A man
+    who had hung himself" (or who had committed suicide, been
+    hanged, etc.). We may also pass the following answer: "Dead
+    branches that looked like a man hanging."
+
+    A good many subjects answer simply, "A man." This answer cannot
+    be scored because of the impossibility of knowing what is in the
+    subject's mind, and in such cases it is always necessary to say:
+    "_Explain what you mean._" The answer to this interrogation
+    always enables us to score the response.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ There is an endless variety of failures: "A
+    snake," "A monkey," "A robber," or "A tramp" being the most
+    common. Others include such answers as "A bear," "A tiger," "A
+    wild cat," "A cat," "A bird," "An eagle," "A bird's nest," "A
+    hornet's nest," "A leaf," "A swing," "A boy in a swing," "A
+    basket of flowers," "An egg," "A ghost," "A white sheet,"
+    "Clothes," "A purse," etc.
+
+(b) _My neighbor_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ The expected answer is "A death," "Some one has
+    died," etc. We must always check up this response, however, by
+    asking what the lawyer came for, and this must also be answered
+    correctly.
+
+    While it is expected that the subject will understand that the
+    doctor came to attend a sick person, the lawyer to make his
+    will, and the minister to preach the funeral, there are a few
+    other ingenious interpretations which pass as satisfactory. For
+    example, "A man got hurt in an accident; the doctor came to make
+    him well, the lawyer to see about damages, and then he died and
+    the preacher came for the funeral." Or, "A man died, the lawyer
+    came to help the widow settle the estate and the preacher came
+    for the funeral." We can hardly expect the 14-year-old child to
+    know that it is not the custom to settle an estate until after
+    the funeral.
+
+    The following excellent response was given by an enlightened
+    young eugenist: "A marriage; the doctor came to examine them and
+    see if they were fit to marry, the lawyer to arrange the
+    marriage settlement, and the minister to marry them." The
+    following logical responses occurred once each: "A murder. The
+    doctor came to examine the body, the lawyer to get evidence, and
+    the preacher to preach the funeral." "An unmarried girl has
+    given birth to a child. The lawyer was employed to get the man
+    to marry her and then the preacher came to perform the wedding
+    ceremony." Perhaps some will consider this interpretation too
+    far-fetched to pass. But it is perfectly logical and,
+    unfortunately, represents an occurrence which is not so very
+    rare.
+
+    If an incorrect answer is first given and then corrected, the
+    correction is accepted.
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ The failures again are quite varied, but are
+    most frequently due to failure to understand the lawyer's
+    mission. Of 66 tabulated failures, 26 are accounted for in this
+    way, while only 6 are due to inability to state the part played
+    by the minister. The most common incorrect responses are: "A
+    baby born" (accounting for 5 out of 66 failures); "A divorce"
+    (very common with the children tested by Dr. Ordahl, at Reno,
+    Nevada!); "A marriage"; "A divorce and a remarriage"; "A
+    dinner"; "An entertainment"; "Some friends came to chat," etc.
+    In 20 failures out of 66, marriage was incorrectly connected
+    with a will, a divorce, the death of a child, etc.
+
+    The following are not bad, but hardly deserve to pass: "Sickness
+    and trouble; the lawyer and minister came to help him out of
+    trouble." Or, "Somebody was sick; the lawyer wanted his money
+    and the minister came to see how he was." A few present a still
+    more logical interpretation, but so far-fetched that it is
+    doubtful whether they should count as passes; for example: "A
+    man and his wife had a fight. One got hurt and had to have the
+    doctor, then they had a lawyer to get them divorced, then the
+    minister came to marry one of them." Again, "Some one is dying
+    and is getting married and making his will before he dies."
+
+(c) _What the man was riding on_
+
+    The only correct response is "Bicycle." The most common error is
+    _horse_ (or _donkey_), accounting for 48 out of 71 tabulated
+    failures. Vehicles, like _wagon_, _buggy_, _automobile_, or
+    _street car_, were mentioned in 14 out of 71 failures. Bizarre
+    replies are: "A cripple in a wheel chair"; "A person riding on
+    some one's back," etc.
+
+REMARKS. The experiment is a form of the completion test. Elements of a
+situation are given, out of which the entire situation is to be
+constructed. This phase of intelligence has already been discussed.[74]
+
+[74] See IX, 5, and XII, 4.
+
+While it is generally admitted that the underlying idea of this test is
+good, some have criticized Binet's selection of problems. Meumann thinks
+the lawyer element of the second is so unfamiliar to children as to
+render that part of the test unfair. Several "armchair" critics have
+mentioned the danger of nervous shock from the first problem. Bobertag
+throws out the test entirely and substitutes a completion test modeled
+after that of Ebbinghaus. Our own results are altogether favorable to
+the test. If it is used in year XIV, Meumann's objection hardly holds,
+for American children of that age do ordinarily know something about
+making wills. As for the danger of shock from the first problem, we have
+never once found the slightest evidence of this much-feared result. The
+subject always understands that the situation depicted is hypothetical,
+and so answers either in a matter-of-fact manner or with a laugh.
+
+The bicycle problem is our own invention. Binet used the other two and
+required both to be answered correctly. The test was located in year XII
+of the 1908 scale, and in year XV of the 1911 revision. Goddard and
+Kuhlmann retain it in the original location. The Stanford results of
+1911, 1912, 1914, and 1915 agree in showing the test too difficult for
+year XII, even when only two out of three correct responses are
+required. If the original form of the experiment is used, it is
+exceedingly difficult for year XV. As here given it fits well at
+year XIV.
+
+
+XIV, 5. ARITHMETICAL REASONING
+
+PROCEDURE. The following problems, printed in clear type, are shown one
+at a time to the subject, who reads each problem aloud and (with the
+printed problem still before him) finds the answer without the use of
+pencil or paper.
+
+  (a) _If a man's salary is $20 a week and he spends $14 a week,
+      how long will it take him to save $300?_
+  (b) _If 2 pencils cost 5 cents, how many pencils can you buy for
+      50 cents?_
+  (c) _At 15 cents a yard, how much will 7 feet of cloth cost?_
+
+Only one minute is allowed for each problem, but nothing is said about
+hurrying. While one problem is being solved, the others should be hidden
+from view. It is not permissible, if the subject gives an incorrect
+answer, to ask him to solve the problem again. The following exception,
+however, is made to this rule: If the answer given to the third problem
+indicates that the word _yard_ has been read as _feet_, the subject is
+asked to read the problem through again carefully (aloud) and to tell
+how he solved it. No further help of any kind may be given.
+
+SCORING. _Two of the three_ problems must be solved correctly within the
+minute allotted to each. No credit is allowed for correct method if the
+answer is wrong.
+
+REMARKS. We have selected these problems from the list used by Bonser in
+his _Study of the Reasoning Ability of Children in the Fourth, Fifth,
+and Sixth School Grades_.[75]
+
+[75] Columbia University Contributions to Education, no. 37, 1910.
+
+Our tests of 279 "at age" children between 12 and 15 years reveal the
+surprising fact that the test as here used and scored is not passed by
+much over half of the children of any age in the grades below the
+high-school age. Of the high-school pupils 19 per cent failed to pass,
+21 per cent of ordinarily successful business men (!), and 27 per cent
+of Knollin's unemployed men testing up to the "average adult" level. To
+find average intelligence cutting such a sorry figure raises the
+question whether the ancient definition of man as "the rational animal"
+is justified by the facts. The truth is, _average_ intelligence does not
+do a great deal of abstract, logical reasoning, and the little it does
+is done usually under the whip of necessity.
+
+At first thought these problems will doubtless appear to the reader to
+be mere tests of schooling. It is true, of course, that in solving them
+the subject makes use of knowledge which is ordinarily obtained in
+school; but this knowledge (that is, knowledge of reading and of
+addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division) is possessed by
+practically all adults who are not feeble-minded, and by many who are.
+Success, therefore, depends upon the ability to apply this knowledge
+readily and accurately to the problems given--precisely the kind of
+ability in which a deficiency cannot be made good by school training. We
+can teach even morons how to read problems and how to add, subtract,
+multiply, and divide with a fair degree of accuracy; the trouble comes
+when they try to decide which of these processes the problem calls for.
+This may require intelligence of high or low order, according to the
+difficulty of the problem. As for the present test, we have shown that
+almost totally unschooled men of "average adult" intelligence pass this
+test as frequently as high-school seniors of the same mental level.
+
+
+XIV, 6. REVERSING HANDS OF CLOCK
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the subject: "_Suppose it is six twenty-two o'clock,
+that is, twenty-two minutes after six; can you see in your mind where
+the large hand would be, and where the small hand would be?_" Subjects
+of 12- to 14-year intelligence practically always answer this in the
+affirmative. Then continue: "_Now, suppose the two hands of the clock
+were to trade places, so that the large hand takes the place where the
+small hand was, and the small hand takes the place where the large hand
+was. What time would it then be?_"
+
+Repeat the test with the hands at 8.10 (10 minutes after 8), and again
+with the hands at 2.46 (14 minutes before 3).
+
+The subject is not allowed to look at a clock or watch, or to aid
+himself by drawing, but must work out the problem mentally. As a rule
+the answer is given within a few seconds or not at all. If an answer is
+not forthcoming within two minutes the score is failure.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if _two of the three_ problems are solved
+within the following range of accuracy: the first solution is considered
+correct if the answer falls between 4.30 and 4.35, inclusive; the second
+if the answer falls between 1.40 and 1.45, and the third if the answer
+falls between 9.10 and 9.15.
+
+REMARKS. It appears that success in the test chiefly depends upon
+voluntary control over constructive visual imagery. Weakness of visual
+imagery may account for the failure of a considerable percentage of
+adults to pass the test. Visual imagery, however, is not absolutely
+necessary to success. One 8-year-old prodigy, who had 12-year
+intelligence, arrived in forty seconds at a strictly mathematical
+solution for the second problem, as follows: "If it is 2.46, and the
+hands trade places, then the little hand has gone about one fourth of
+the distance from 9 o'clock to 10 o'clock. One fourth of 60 minutes is
+15 minutes, and so the time would be 15 minutes after 9 o'clock." Such a
+solution is certainly possible by the use of verbal imagery of any type.
+
+The test shows a high correlation with mental age, but more than most
+others it is subject to the influence of cribbing. For this reason,
+other positions of the clock hands should be tried out for the purpose
+of finding substitute experiments of equal difficulty. Until such
+experiments have been made, it will be necessary to confine the
+experiment to the three positions here presented.
+
+Schooling seems to have no influence whatever on the percentage of
+passes.
+
+This test was first used by Binet in 1905, but was not included in
+either the 1908 or 1911 series. Goddard and Kuhlmann both include the
+test in their revisions, placing it in year XV. They give only two
+problems (our _a_ and _c_) and require that both be answered correctly.
+Neither Goddard nor Kuhlmann, however, indicates the degree of error
+permitted.
+
+Something depends upon original position of the hands. Binet used 6.20
+and 2.46. For some reason the 2.46 arrangement is much more difficult
+than either 8.10 or 6.22, yielding almost twice as many failures as
+either of the other positions.
+
+
+XIV, ALTERNATIVE TESTS: REPEATING SEVEN DIGITS
+
+This time, as in year X, only two series are given, one of which must be
+repeated without error. The two series are: 2-1-8-3-4-3-9 and
+9-7-2-8-4-7-5. Note that in none of the tests of repeating digits is it
+permissible to warn the subject of the number to be given.
+
+REMARKS. Binet originally placed this test in year XII, giving three
+trials, but later moved it to year XV. Goddard and Kuhlmann retain it in
+year XII. Our data show that when three trials are given the test is too
+easy for year XIV, but that it fits this age when only two trials are
+allowed; that after the age of 12 or 14 years memory for relatively
+meaningless material, like digits or nonsense syllables, improves but
+little; and that above this level it does not correlate very closely
+with intelligence.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XIX
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR "AVERAGE ADULT"
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, 1: VOCABULARY (SIXTY-FIVE DEFINITIONS, 11,700 WORDS)
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING, as in previous vocabulary tests.[76] At the
+average adult level sixty-five words should be correctly defined.
+
+[76] See VIII, 6.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, 2: INTERPRETATION OF FABLES (SCORE 8)
+
+PROCEDURE. As in year XII, test 6. Use the same fables.
+
+SCORING. The method of scoring is the same as for XII, but the total
+score must be 8 points to satisfy the requirements at this level.
+
+REMARKS. For discussion of test, see XII, 5.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, 3: DIFFERENCES BETWEEN ABSTRACT TERMS
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: _What is the difference between_:--
+
+  (a) _Laziness and idleness?_
+  (b) _Evolution and revolution?_
+  (c) _Poverty and misery?_
+  (d) _Character and reputation?_
+
+SCORING. _Three correct contrasting definitions out of four_ are
+necessary for a pass. It is not sufficient merely to give a correct
+meaning for each word of a pair; the subject must point out a difference
+between the two words so as to make a real contrast. For example, if the
+subject defines _evolution_ as a "growth" or "gradual change," and
+_revolution_ as the turning of a wheel on its axis, the experimenter
+should say: "_Yes, but I want you to tell me the difference between
+evolution and revolution._" If the contrast is not then forthcoming the
+response is marked _minus_.
+
+The following are sample definitions which may be considered
+acceptable:--
+
+    (a) _Laziness and idleness._ "It is laziness if you won't
+    work, and idleness if you are willing to work but haven't any
+    job." "Lots of men are idle who are not lazy and would like to
+    work if they had something to do." "Laziness means you don't
+    want to work; idleness means you are not doing anything just
+    now." "Idle people may be lazy, or they may just happen to be
+    out of a job." "It is laziness when you don't like to work, and
+    idleness when you are not working." "An idle person might be
+    willing to work; a lazy man won't work." "Laziness comes from
+    within; idleness may be forced upon one." "Laziness is aversion
+    to activity; idleness is simply the state of inactivity."
+    "Laziness is idleness from choice or preference; idleness means
+    doing nothing."
+
+    The essential contrast, accordingly, is that _laziness refers to
+    unwillingness to work; idleness to the mere fact of inactivity_.
+    This contrast must be expressed, however clumsily.
+
+    (b) _Evolution and revolution._ "Evolution is a gradual
+    change; revolution is a sudden change." "Evolution is natural
+    development; revolution is sudden upheaval." "Evolution means an
+    unfolding or development; revolution means a complete upsetting
+    of everything." "Evolution is the gradual development of a
+    country or government; revolution is a quick change of
+    government." "Evolution takes place by natural force; a
+    revolution is caused by an outside force." "Evolution is growth;
+    revolution is a quick change from existing conditions."
+    "Evolution is a natural change; revolution is a violent
+    change." "Evolution is growth step by step; revolution is more
+    sudden and radical in its action." "Evolution is a change
+    brought about by peaceful development, while revolution is
+    brought about by an uprising."
+
+    The essential distinction, accordingly, is that _evolution means
+    a gradual, natural, or slow change, while revolution means a
+    sudden, forced, or violent change_. Non-contrasting definitions,
+    even when the individual terms are defined correctly, are not
+    satisfactory.
+
+    (c) _Poverty and misery._ "Poverty is when you are poor;
+    misery means suffering." "Only the poor are in poverty, but
+    everybody can be miserable." "Poverty is the lowest stage of
+    poorness; misery means pain." "The poor are not always
+    miserable, and the rich are miserable sometimes." "Poverty means
+    to be in want; misery comes from any kind of suffering or
+    anguish." "The poor are in poverty; the sick are in misery."
+    "Poverty is the condition of being very poor financially; misery
+    is a feeling which any class of people can have." "One who is
+    poor is in poverty; one who is wretched or doesn't enjoy life is
+    in misery." "Poverty comes from lack of money; misery, from lack
+    of happiness or comfort." "Misery means distress. It can come
+    from poverty or many other things."
+
+    (d) _Character and reputation._ "Character is what you are;
+    reputation is what people say about you." "You have character if
+    you are honest; but you might be honest and still have a bad
+    reputation among people who misjudge you." "Character is your
+    real self; reputation is the opinion people have about you."
+    "Your character depends upon yourself; reputation depends on
+    what others think of you." "Character means your real morals;
+    reputation is the way you are known in the world." "A man has a
+    good character if he would not do evil; but a man may have a
+    good reputation and still have a bad character."
+
+A little practice and a good deal of discrimination are necessary for
+the correct grading of responses to this test. Subjects are often so
+clumsy in expression that their responses are anything but clear. It is
+then necessary to ask them to explain what they mean. Further
+questioning, however, is not permissible. For uniformity in scoring it
+is necessary to bear in mind that the definitions given must, in order
+to be satisfactory, express the essential distinction between the two
+words.
+
+REMARKS. What we have said regarding the psychological significance of
+test 2, year XII, applies equally well here. The test on the whole is a
+valuable one. Our statistics show that it is not, as some critics have
+thought, mainly a test of schooling.
+
+The main criticism to be made is that it imposes a somewhat difficult
+task upon the power of language expression. For this reason it is
+necessary in scoring to disregard clumsiness of expression and to look
+only to the essential correctness or incorrectness of the thought.
+
+This test first appeared in year XIII of Binet's 1908 scale. The terms
+used were "happiness and honor"; "evolution and revolution"; "event and
+advent"; "poverty and misery"; "pride and pretension." In the 1911
+revision, "happiness and honor" and "pride and pretension" were dropped,
+and the other three pairs were moved up to the adult group, two out of
+three successes being required for a pass. Kuhlmann places it in
+year XV, using "happiness and honor" instead of our "character and
+reputation," and requires three successes out of five.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, 4: PROBLEM OF THE ENCLOSED BOXES
+
+PROCEDURE. Show the subject a cardboard box about one inch on a side.
+Say: "_You see this box; it has two smaller boxes inside of it, and each
+one of the smaller boxes contains a little tiny box. How many boxes are
+there altogether, counting the big one?_" To be sure that the subject
+understands repeat the statement of the problem: "_First the large box,
+then two smaller ones, and each of the smaller ones contains a little
+tiny box._"
+
+Record the response, and, showing another box, say: "_This box has two
+smaller boxes inside, and each of the smaller boxes contains two tiny
+boxes. How many altogether? Remember, first the large box, then two
+smaller ones, and each smaller one contains two tiny boxes._"
+
+The third problem, which is given in the same way, states that there are
+_three_ smaller boxes, each of which contains _three_ tiny boxes.
+
+In the fourth problem there are _four_ smaller boxes, each containing
+_four_ tiny boxes.
+
+The problem must be given orally, and the solution must be found without
+the aid of pencil or paper. Only one half-minute is allowed for each
+problem. Note that each problem is stated twice.
+
+A correction is permitted, provided it is offered spontaneously and does
+not seem to be the result of guessing. Guessing can be checked up by
+asking the subject to explain the solution.
+
+SCORING. _Three of the four_ problems must be solved correctly within
+the half-minute allotted to each.
+
+REMARKS. Success depends, in the first place, upon ability to comprehend
+the statement of the problem and to hold its conditions in mind.
+Subjects much below the 12-year level of intelligence are often unable
+to do this.
+
+Granting that the problem has been comprehended, success seems to depend
+chiefly upon the facility with which the constructive imagination
+manipulates concrete visual imagery. In this respect it resembles the
+problem of reversing the hands of a clock. With some subjects, however,
+verbal imagery alone is operative. Tactual imagery would, of course,
+serve the purpose as well.
+
+This is as good a place as any to emphasize the fact that the
+introspective study of mental imagery has little to contribute to the
+measurement of intelligence. Intelligence tests are concerned with the
+total result of a thought process, rather than with the imagery supports
+of that process. Thought may be carried on almost equally well by
+various kinds of imagery. As Galton showed, a person can be taught to
+carry on arithmetical processes by the use of smell imagery. The kind of
+imagery employed is the product of slight, innate preferences
+complicated by the more or less accidental effects of habit.
+
+We may say that imagery is to thinking what scaffolding is to
+architecture. The important thing is the completed building rather than
+the nature of the scaffolding employed in erecting it. No one thinks of
+blaming the ill construction of a building upon the kind of scaffolding
+used, for if the architect and builder are competent satisfactory
+scaffolding will be found. Just as little are deficiencies or
+peculiarities of imagery the real cause of low-order intelligence. We
+cannot increase intelligence by formal drill in the use of supposedly
+important kinds of mental imagery, any more than we can transform a
+plain carpenter into a Michael Angelo by instructing him in the use of
+scaffolding materials such as were employed in the construction of St.
+Peter's Cathedral.
+
+This test is of our own invention and has been brought to its present
+form only after a good deal of preliminary experimentation. It
+correlates fairly well with mental age as determined by the scale as a
+whole. It was passed by 55 per cent of high-school pupils and by
+65 per cent of unschooled business men. Success in it is thus seen not
+to depend upon schooling.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, 5: REPEATING SIX DIGITS REVERSED
+
+The series used are: 4-7-1-9-5-2; 5-8-3-2-9-4; and 7-5-2-6-3-8.
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING, as in year VII, alternative 2.
+
+REMARKS. The test is passed by approximately half of "average adults"
+and by three fourths of "superior adults." It shows no effect of
+schooling, the uneducated business men even surpassing our high-school
+students.
+
+For the higher levels of intelligence, especially, the test is superior
+to that of repeating digits in the direct order. It is less mechanical
+and makes heavier demands upon higher intelligence.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, 6: USING A CODE
+
+PROCEDURE. Show the subject the code given on the accompanying form.
+Say: "_See these diagrams here. Look and you will see that they contain
+all the letters of the alphabet. Now, examine the arrangement of the
+letters. They go_ (pointing) _a b c, d e f, g h i, j k l, m n o, p q r,
+s t u v, w x y z. You see the letters in the first two diagrams are
+arranged in the up-and-down order_ (pointing again), _and the letters in
+the other two diagrams run in just the opposite way from the hands of a
+clock_ (pointing). _Look again and you will see that the second diagram
+is drawn just like the first, except that each letter has a dot with it,
+and that the last diagram is like the third except that here, also, each
+letter has a dot. Now, all of this represents a code; that is, a secret
+language. It is a real code, one that was used in the Civil War for
+sending secret messages. This is the way it works: we draw the lines
+which hold a letter, but leave out the letter. Here, for example, is the
+way we would write 'spy?'_" Then write the word _spy_, pointing out
+carefully where each letter comes from, and emphasizing the fact that
+the dot must be used in addition to the lines in writing any letter in
+the second or the fourth diagram. Illustrate also with _war_.
+
+Then add: "_I am going to have you write something for me; remember now,
+how the letters go, first_ (pointing, as before) _a b c, d e f, g h i,
+then j k l, m n o, p q r, then s t u v, then w x y z. And don't forget
+the dots for the letters in this diagram and this one_" (pointing). At
+this point, take away the diagrams and tell the subject to write the
+words _come quickly_. Say nothing about hurrying.
+
+The subject is given a pencil, but is allowed to draw only the symbols
+for the words _come quickly_. He is not permitted to reproduce the
+entire code and then to copy the code letters from his reproduction.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the words are written in _six minutes and
+without more than two errors_. Omission of a dot counts as only a half
+error.
+
+REMARKS. It is not easy to analyze the mental functions which contribute
+to success in the code test. Contrary to what might be supposed, success
+does not necessarily depend upon getting and retaining a visual picture
+of the diagrams. Kinaesthetic imagery will answer the purpose just as
+well, or the original visual impression may even be translated at once
+into auditory-verbal imagery and remembered as such. The significance of
+the test must be expressed in other terms than the kind of imagery it
+may happen to bring into play.
+
+Healy and Fernald describe the task of writing a code sentence without
+copy as one which requires "close attention and steadiness of purpose."
+They also emphasize the fact that the attention must be directed inward,
+since there is no object of interest before the senses and since no
+special stimulus to attention is offered by the experimenter.
+Observations we have made on subjects during the test confirm this view
+as to the factors involved.
+
+That inability to remember the code as a whole is not a common cause of
+failure is shown by the fact that subjects above 12-year intelligence
+who have failed on the test are nearly always able to reproduce the
+diagrams and insert the letters in their proper places. To give the code
+form of a given letter without copy, however, makes a much heavier
+demand on attention. Nearly all subjects find it necessary to trace the
+code form, in imagination, from the beginning up to each letter whose
+code form is sought. Subjects of superior intelligence, however,
+sometimes hit upon the device of remembering the position of the
+individual key letters e.g. (the first letter of each figure) from
+which, as a base, any desired letter form may be quickly sought out.
+
+The test correlates well with mental age, but for some reason not
+apparent it is passed by a larger percentage of high-school pupils than
+unschooled adults of the same mental level.
+
+The code test was first described by Healy and Fernald in their "Tests
+for Practical Mental Classification."[77] The authors gave no data,
+however, which would indicate the mental level to which the test
+belongs. Dr. Goddard incorporated it in year XV of his revision of the
+Binet scale, but also fails to give statistics. The location given
+the test in the Stanford revision is based on tests of nearly
+500 individuals ranging from a mental level of 12 years to that of
+"superior adult." It appears that the test is considerably more
+difficult than most had thought it to be.
+
+[77] _Psychological Review Monographs_ (1911), vol. XIII, no. 2, p. 51.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, ALTERNATIVE TEST 1: REPEATING TWENTY-EIGHT SYLLABLES
+
+The sentences for this test are:--
+
+  (a) _Walter likes very much to go on visits to his grandmother,
+      because she always tells him many funny stories._
+  (b) _Yesterday I saw a pretty little dog in the street. It had
+      curly brown hair, short legs, and a long tail._
+
+PROCEDURE. Exactly as in VI, 6. Emphasize that the sentence must be
+repeated without a single change of any sort. Get attention before
+giving each sentence.
+
+SCORING. Passed _if one sentence is repeated without a single error_. In
+VI and X we scored the response as satisfactory if one sentence was
+repeated without error, or if two were repeated with not more than one
+error each.
+
+REMARKS. The test of repeating sentences is not as satisfactory in the
+higher intelligence levels as in the lower. It is too mechanical to tax
+very heavily the higher thought processes. It does, however, have a
+certain correlation with intelligence. Contrary to what one would have
+expected, uneducated adults of "average adult" intelligence surpassed
+our high-school students of the same mental level.
+
+Binet located this test in year XII of the 1908 series, but shifted it
+to year XV in 1911. The American versions of the Binet scale have
+usually retained it in year XII, though Goddard admits that the
+sentences are somewhat too difficult for that year. Kuhlmann puts the
+test in year XII, but reduces the sentences to twenty-four syllables and
+permits one re-reading. We give only two trials and our sentences are
+considerably more difficult. With the procedure and scoring we have
+used, the test is rather easy for the "average adult" group, but a
+little too hard for year XIV.
+
+
+AVERAGE ADULT, ALTERNATIVE TEST 2: COMPREHENSION OF PHYSICAL RELATIONS
+
+
+(a) _Problem regarding the path of a cannon ball_
+
+PROCEDURE. Draw on a piece of paper a horizontal line six or eight
+inches long. Above it, an inch or two, draw a short horizontal line
+about an inch long and parallel to the first. Tell the subject that the
+long line represents the perfectly level ground of a field, and that the
+short line represents a cannon. Explain that the cannon is "_pointed
+horizontally (on a level) and is fired across this perfectly level
+field_." After it is clear that these conditions of the problem are
+comprehended, we add: "_Now, suppose that this cannon is fired off and
+that the ball comes to the ground at this point here_ (pointing to the
+farther end of the line which represents the field). _Take this pencil
+and draw a line which will show what path the cannon ball will take from
+the time it leaves the mouth of the cannon till it strikes the ground._"
+
+SCORING. There are four types of response: (1) A straight diagonal line
+is drawn from the cannon's mouth to the point where the ball strikes.
+(2) A straight line is drawn from the cannon's mouth running
+horizontally until almost directly over the goal, at which point the
+line drops almost or quite vertically. (3) The path from the cannon's
+mouth first rises considerably from the horizontal, at an angle perhaps
+of between ten to forty-five degrees, and finally describes a gradual
+curve downward to the goal. (4) The line begins almost on a level and
+drops more rapidly toward the end of its course.
+
+Only the last is satisfactory. Of course, nothing like a mathematically
+accurate solution of the problem is expected. It is sufficient if the
+response belongs to the fourth type above instead of being absurd, as
+the other types described are. Any one who has ever thrown stones should
+have the data for such an approximate solution. Not a day of schooling
+is necessary.
+
+
+(b) _Problem as to the weight of a fish in water_
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the subject: "_You know, of course, that water holds
+up a fish that is placed in it. Well, here is a problem. Suppose we have
+a bucket which is partly full of water. We place the bucket on the
+scales and find that with the water in it it weighs exactly 45 pounds.
+Then we put a 5-pound fish into the bucket of water. Now, what will the
+whole thing weigh?_"
+
+SCORING. Many subjects even as low as 9- or 10-year intelligence will
+answer promptly, "Why, 45 pounds and 5 pounds makes 50 pounds, of
+course." But this is not sufficient. We proceed to ask, with serious
+demeanor: "_How can this be correct, since the water itself holds up the
+fish?_" The young subject who has answered so glibly now laughs
+sheepishly and apologizes for his error, saying that he answered without
+thinking, etc. This response is scored failure without further
+questioning.
+
+Other subjects, mostly above the 14-year level, adhere to the answer
+"50 pounds," however strongly we urge the argument about the water
+holding up the fish. In response to our question, "_How can that be the
+case?_" it is sufficient if the subject replies that "The weight is
+there just the same; the scales have to hold up the bucket and the
+bucket has to hold up the water," or words to that effect. Only some
+such response as this is satisfactory. If the subject keeps changing his
+answer or says that he _thinks_ the weight would be 50 pounds, but is
+not certain, the score is failure.
+
+
+(c) _Difficulty of hitting a distant mark_
+
+PROCEDURE. Say to the subject: "_You know, do you not, what it means
+when they say a gun 'carries 100 yards'? It means that the bullet goes
+that far before it drops to amount to anything._" All boys and most
+girls more than a dozen years old understand this readily. If the
+subject does not understand, we explain again what it means for a gun
+"to carry" a given distance. When this part is clear, we proceed as
+follows: "_Now, suppose a man is shooting at a mark about the size of a
+quart can. His rifle carries perfectly more than 100 yards. With such a
+gun is it any harder to hit the mark at 100 yards than it is at
+50 yards?_" After the response is given, we ask the subject to explain.
+
+SCORING. Simply to say that it would be easier at 50 yards is not
+sufficient, nor can we pass the response which merely states that it is
+"easier to aim" at 50 yards. The correct principle must be given, one
+which shows the subject has appreciated the fact that a small deviation
+from the "bull's-eye" at 50 yards, due to incorrect aim, becomes a
+larger deviation at 100 yards. However, the subject is not required to
+know that the deviation at 100 yards is exactly twice as great as at
+50 yards. A certain amount of questioning is often necessary before we
+can decide whether the subject has the correct principle in mind.
+
+SCORING THE ENTIRE TEST. _Two of the three problems_ must be solved in
+such a way as to satisfy the requirements above set forth.
+
+REMARKS. These problems were devised by the writer. They yield
+interesting results, when properly given, but are not without their
+faults. Sometimes a very superior subject fails, while occasionally an
+inferior subject unexpectedly succeeds. On the whole, however the test
+correlates fairly well with mental age. At the 14-year level less than
+50 per cent pass; of "average adults," from 60 to 75 per cent are
+successful. Few "superior adults" fail.
+
+The test as here given is little influenced by the formal instruction
+given in the grades or the high school. In fact, 80 per cent of our
+uneducated business men, as contrasted with 65 per cent of high-school
+juniors and seniors, passed the test. Success probably depends in the
+main upon previous interest in physical relationships and upon the
+ability to understand phenomena of this kind which the subject has had
+opportunity to observe.
+
+It would be interesting to standardize a longer series of problems
+designed to test a subject's comprehension of common physical
+relationships. In the first few months of life a normal child learns
+that objects unsupported fall to the ground. Later he learns that fire
+burns; that birds fly in the air; that fish do not sink in the water;
+that water does not run uphill; that it is easy to lift a leg or arm as
+one lies prone in the water; that mud is thrown from a rotating wheel
+(and always in the same direction); that a stone which is flying
+through the air swiftly is more dangerous than one which is moving
+slowly; that it is more dangerous to be run over by a train than by a
+buggy; that it is hard to run against a strong wind; that cyclones blow
+down trees and houses; that a rapidly moving train creates a stronger
+wind than a slower train; that a feather falls through the air with less
+speed than a stone; that a falling object gains momentum; that a heavy
+moving object is harder to stop than a light object moving at the same
+rate; that freezing water bursts pipes; that sounds sometimes give
+echoes; that rainbows cannot be approached; that a lamp seems dim by
+daylight; that by day the stars are not visible and the moon only barely
+visible; that the headlights of an approaching automobile or train are
+blinding; that if the room in which we are reading is badly lighted we
+must hold the book nearer to the eyes; that running makes the heart beat
+faster and increases the rate of breathing; that if we are cold we can
+get warm by running; that whirling rapidly makes us dizzy; that heat or
+exercise will cause perspiration, etc.
+
+Although the causes of some of these phenomena are not understood even
+by intelligent adults without some instruction, the facts themselves are
+learned by the normal individual from his own experience. The higher the
+mental level and the greater the curiosity, the more observant one is
+about such matters and the more one learns. Many items of knowledge such
+as we have mentioned could and should be standardized for various mental
+levels. In devising tests of this kind we should, of course, have to
+look out for the influences of formal instruction.
+
+
+
+
+CHAPTER XX
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR "SUPERIOR ADULT"
+
+
+SUPERIOR ADULT, 1: VOCABULARY (SEVENTY-FIVE DEFINITIONS, 13,500 WORDS)
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING, as in previous vocabulary tests. At the "superior
+adult" level seventy-five words should be known.
+
+The test is passed by only one third of those at the "average adult"
+level, but by about 90 per cent of "superior adults." Ability to pass
+the test is relatively independent of the number of years the subject
+has attended school, our business men showing even a higher percentage
+of passes than high-school pupils.
+
+
+SUPERIOR ADULT, 2: BINET'S PAPER-CUTTING TEST
+
+PROCEDURE. Take a piece of paper about six inches square and say:
+"_Watch carefully what I do. See, I fold the paper this way_ (folding it
+once over in the middle), _then I fold it this way_ (folding it again in
+the middle, but at right angles to the first fold). _Now, I will cut out
+a notch right here_" (indicating). At this point take scissors and cut
+out a small notch from the middle of the side which presents but one
+edge. Throw the fragment which has been cut out into the waste-basket or
+under the table. Leave the folded paper exposed to view, but pressed
+flat against the table. Then give the subject a pencil and a second
+sheet of paper like the one already used and say: "_Take this piece of
+paper and make a drawing to show how the other sheet of paper would look
+if it were unfolded. Draw lines to show the creases in the paper and
+show what results from the cutting._"
+
+The subject is not permitted to fold the second sheet, but must solve
+the problem by the imagination unaided.
+
+Note that we do not say, "_Draw the holes_," as this would inform the
+subject that more than one hole is expected.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed _if the creases in the paper are properly
+represented, if the holes are drawn in the correct number, and if they
+are located correctly_, that is, both on the same crease and each about
+halfway between the center of the paper and the side. The shape of the
+holes is disregarded.
+
+Failure may be due to error as regards the creases or the number and
+location of the holes, or it may involve any combination of the above
+errors.
+
+REMARKS. Success seems to depend upon constructive visual imagination.
+The subject must first be able to construct in imagination the creases
+which result from the folding, and secondly, to picture the effects of
+the cutting as regards number of holes and their location. It appears
+that a solution is seldom arrived at, even in the case of college
+students, by logical mathematical thinking. Our unschooled subjects even
+succeeded somewhat better than high-school and college students of the
+same mental level.
+
+Binet placed this test in year XIII of the 1908 scale, but shifted it to
+the adult group in the 1911 revision. Goddard retains it in the adult
+group, while Kuhlmann places it in year XV. There have also been certain
+variations in the procedure employed. As given in the Stanford revision
+the test is passed by hardly any subjects below the 14-year level, but
+by about one third of "average adults" and by the large majority of
+"superior adults."
+
+
+SUPERIOR ADULT, 3: REPEATING EIGHT DIGITS
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING, the same as in previous tests with digits
+reversed. The series used are: 7-2-5-3-4-8-9-6; 4-9-8-5-3-7-6-2; and
+8-3-7-9-5-4-8-2.
+
+Guard against rhythm and grouping in reading the digits and do not give
+warning as to the number to be given.
+
+The test is passed by about one third of "average adults" and by over
+two thirds of "superior adults." The test shows no marked difference
+between educated and uneducated subjects of the same mental level.
+
+
+SUPERIOR ADULT, 4: REPEATING THOUGHT OF PASSAGE
+
+PROCEDURE. Say: "_I am going to read a little selection of about six or
+eight lines. When I am through I will ask you to repeat as much of it as
+you can. It doesn't make any difference whether you remember the exact
+words or not, but you must listen carefully so that you can tell me
+everything it says._" Then read the following selections, pausing after
+each for the subject's report, which should be recorded _verbatim_:--
+
+  (a) "_Tests such as we are now making are of value both for the
+      advancement of science and for the information of the person
+      who is tested. It is important for science to learn how people
+      differ and on what factors these differences depend. If we can
+      separate the influence of heredity from the influence of
+      environment, we may be able to apply our knowledge so as to
+      guide human development. We may thus in some cases correct
+      defects and develop abilities which we might otherwise
+      neglect._"
+  (b) "_Many opinions have been given on the value of life. Some
+      call it good, others call it bad. It would be nearer correct
+      to say that it is mediocre; for on the one hand, our
+      happiness is never as great as we should like, and on the
+      other hand, our misfortunes are never as great as our enemies
+      would wish for us. It is this mediocrity of life which
+      prevents it from being radically unjust._"
+
+Sometimes the subject hesitates to begin, thinking, in spite of our
+wording of the instructions, that a perfect reproduction is expected.
+Others fall into the opposite misunderstanding and think that they are
+prohibited from using the words of the text and must give the thought
+entirely in their own language. In cases of hesitation we should urge
+the subject a little and remind him that he is to express the thought of
+the selection in whatever way he prefers; that the main thing is to tell
+what the selection says.
+
+SCORING. The test is passed if the subject is able to repeat in
+reasonably consecutive order the main thoughts of at least one of the
+selections. Neither elegance of expression nor _verbatim_ repetition is
+expected. We merely want to know whether the leading thoughts in the
+selection have been grasped and remembered.
+
+All grades of accuracy are found, both in the comprehension of the
+selection and in the recall, and it is not always easy to draw the line
+between satisfactory and unsatisfactory responses. The following sample
+performances will serve as a guide:--
+
+_Selection (a)_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "The tests which we are making are given for the
+    advancement of science and for the information of the person
+    tested. By scientific means we will be able to separate
+    characteristics derived from heredity and environment and to
+    treat each class separately. By doing so we can more accurately
+    correct defects."
+
+    "Tests like these are for two purposes. First to develop a
+    science, and second to apply it to the person to help him. The
+    tests are to find out how you differ from another and to measure
+    the difference between your heredity and environment."
+
+    "These tests are given to see if we can separate heredity and
+    environment and to see if we can find out how one person differs
+    from another. We can then correct these differences and teach
+    people more effectively."
+
+    "The tests that we are now making are valuable along both
+    scientific and personal lines. By using them it can be found out
+    where a person is weak and where he is strong. We can then
+    strengthen his weak points and remedy some things that would
+    otherwise be neglected. They are of great benefit to science and
+    to the person concerned."
+
+    "Tests such as we are now making are of great importance because
+    they aim to show in what respects we differ from others and why,
+    and if they do this they will be able to guide us into the right
+    channel and bring success instead of failure."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Tests such as we are now making are of value
+    both for the advancement of science and for the information of
+    the person interested. It is necessary to know this."
+
+    "Such tests as we are now making show about the human mind and
+    show in what channels we are fitted. It is the testing of each
+    individual between his effects of inheritancy and environment."
+
+    "It is very interesting for us to study science for two reasons;
+    first, to test our mental ability, and second for the further
+    development of science."
+
+    "Tests such as we are now making help in two ways; it helps the
+    scientists and it gives information to the people."
+
+    "Tests are being given to pupils to-day to better them and to
+    aid science for generations to come. If each person knows
+    exactly his own beliefs and ideas and faults he can find out
+    exactly what kind of work he is fitted for by heredity. The
+    tests show that environment doesn't count, for if you are all
+    right you will get along anyway." (Note invention.)
+
+_Selection (b)_
+
+    _Satisfactory._ "There are different opinions about life. Some
+    call it good and some bad. It would be more correct to say that
+    it is middling, because we are never as happy as we would like
+    to be and we are never as sad as our enemies want us to be."
+
+    "One hears many judgments about life. Some say it is good, while
+    others say it is bad. But it is really neither of the extremes.
+    Life is mediocre. We do not have as much good as we desire, nor
+    do we have as much misfortune as others want us to have.
+    Nevertheless, we have enough good to keep life from being
+    unjust."
+
+    "Some people have different views of life from others. Some say
+    it is bad, others say it is good. It is better to class life as
+    mediocre, as it is never as good as we wish it, and on the other
+    hand, it might be worse."
+
+    "Some people think differently of life. Some think it good, some
+    bad, others mediocre, which is nearest correct. It brings
+    unhappiness to us, but not as much as our enemies want us to
+    have."
+
+    _Unsatisfactory._ "Some say life is good, some say it is
+    mediocre. Even though some say it is mediocre they say it is
+    right."
+
+    "There are two sides of life. Some say it is good while others
+    say it is bad. To some, life is happy and they get all they can
+    out of life. For others life is not happy and therefore they
+    fail to get all there is in life."
+
+    "One hears many different judgments of life. Some call it good,
+    some call it bad. It brings unhappiness and it does not have
+    enough pleasure. It should be better distributed."
+
+    "There are different opinions of the value of life. Some say it
+    is good and some say it is bad. Some say it is mediocrity. Some
+    think it brings happiness while others do not."
+
+    "Nowadays there is much said about the value of life. Some say
+    it is good, while others say it is bad. A person should not have
+    an ill feeling toward the value of life, and he should not be
+    unjust to any one. Honesty is the best policy. People who are
+    unjust are more likely to be injured by their enemies." (Note
+    invention.)
+
+REMARKS. Contrary to what the subject is led to expect, the test is less
+a test of memory than of ability to comprehend the drift of an abstract
+passage. A subject who fully grasps the meaning of the selection as it
+is read is not likely to fail because of poor memory. Mere verbal memory
+improves but little after the age of 14 or 15 years, as is shown by the
+fact that our adults do little better than eighth-grade children in
+repeating sentences of twenty-eight syllables. On the other hand, adult
+intelligence is vastly superior in the comprehension and retention of a
+logically presented group of abstract ideas.
+
+There is nothing in which stupid persons cut a poorer figure than in
+grappling with the abstract. Their thinking clings tenaciously to the
+concrete; their concepts are vague or inaccurate; the interrelations
+among their concepts are scanty in the extreme; and such poor mental
+stores as they have are little available for ready use.
+
+A few critics have objected to the use of tests demanding abstract
+thinking, on the ground that abstract thought is a very special aspect
+of intelligence and that facility in it depends almost entirely on
+occupational habits and the accidents of education. Some have even gone
+so far as to say that we are not justified, on the basis of any number
+of such tests, in pronouncing a subject backward or defective. It is
+supposed that a subject who has no capacity in the use of abstract ideas
+may nevertheless have excellent intelligence "along other lines." In
+such cases, it is said, we should not penalize the subject for his
+failures in handling abstractions, but substitute, instead, tests
+requiring motor cooerdination and the manipulation of things, tests in
+which the supposedly dull child often succeeds fairly well.
+
+From the psychological point of view, such a proposal is naively
+unpsychological. It is in the very essence of the higher thought
+processes to be conceptual and abstract. What the above proposal amounts
+to is, that if the subject is not capable of the more complex and
+strictly human type of thinking, we should ignore this fact and estimate
+his intelligence entirely on the ability he displays to carry on mental
+operations of a more simple and primitive kind. This would be like
+asking the physician to ignore the diseased parts of his patient's body
+and to base his diagnosis on an examination of the organs which are
+sound!
+
+The present test throws light in an interesting way on the integrity of
+the critical faculty. Some subjects are unwilling to extend the report
+in the least beyond what they know to be approximately correct, while
+others with defective powers of auto-criticism manufacture a report
+which draws heavily on the imagination, perhaps continuing in garrulous
+fashion as long as they can think of anything having the remotest
+connection with any thought in the selection. We have included, for each
+selection, one illustration of this type in the sample failures given
+above.
+
+The worst fault of the test is its susceptibility to the influence of
+schooling. Our uneducated adults of even "superior adult" intelligence
+often fail, while about two thirds of high-school pupils succeed. The
+unschooled adults have a marked tendency either to give a summary which
+is inadequate because of its extreme brevity, or else to give a
+criticism of the thought which the passage contains.
+
+This test first appeared in Binet's 1911 revision, in the adult group.
+Binet used only selection (b), and in a slightly more difficult form
+than we have given above. Goddard gives the test like Binet and retains
+it in the adult group. Kuhlmann locates it in year XV, using only
+selection (a). On the basis of over 300 tests of adults we find the
+test too difficult for the "average adult" level, even on the basis of
+only one success in two trials and when scored on the rather liberal
+standard above set forth.
+
+
+SUPERIOR ADULT, 5: REPEATING SEVEN DIGITS REVERSED
+
+PROCEDURE and SCORING, the same as in previous tests of this kind. The
+series are: 4-1-6-2-5-9-3; 3-8-2-6-4-7-5; and 9-4-5-2-8-3-7.
+
+We have collected fewer data on this test than on any of the others, as
+it was added later to the test series. As far as we have used it we have
+found few "average adults" who pass, while about half the "superior
+adults" do so.
+
+
+SUPERIOR ADULT, 6: INGENUITY TEST
+
+PROCEDURE. Problem _a_ is stated as follows:--
+
+    _A mother sent her boy to the river and told him to bring back
+    exactly 7 pints of water. She gave him a 3-pint vessel and a
+    5-pint vessel. Show me how the boy can measure out exactly
+    7 pints of water, using nothing but these two vessels and not
+    guessing at the amount. You should begin by filling the 5-pint
+    vessel first. Remember, you have a 3-pint vessel and a 5-pint
+    vessel and you must bring back exactly 7 pints._
+
+The problem is given orally, but may be repeated if necessary.
+
+The subject is not allowed pencil or paper and is requested to give his
+solution orally as he works it out. It is then possible to make a
+complete record of the method employed.
+
+The subject is likely to resort to some such method as to "fill the
+3-pint vessel two thirds full," or, "I would mark the inside of the
+5-pint vessel so as to show where 4 pints come to," etc. We inform the
+subject that such a method is not allowable; that this would be
+guessing, since he could not be sure when the 3-pint vessel was two
+thirds full (or whether he had marked off his 5-pint vessel accurately).
+Tell him he must _measure_ out the water without any guesswork. Explain
+also, that it is a fair problem, not a "catch."
+
+Say nothing about pouring from one vessel to another, but if the subject
+asks whether this is permissible the answer is "yes."
+
+The time limit for each problem is 5 minutes. If the subject fails on
+the first problem, we explain the solution in full and then proceed to
+the next.
+
+The second problem is like the first, except that a 5-pint vessel and a
+7-pint vessel are given, to get 8 pints, the subject being told to begin
+by filling the 5-pint vessel.
+
+In the third problem 4 and 9 are given, to get 7, the instruction being
+to "begin by filling the 4-pint vessel."
+
+Note that in each problem we instruct the subject how to begin. This is
+necessary in order to secure uniformity of conditions. It is possible to
+solve all of the problems by beginning with either of the two vessels,
+but the solution is made very much more difficult if we begin in the
+direction opposite from that recommended.
+
+Give no further aid. It is necessary to refrain from comment of every
+kind.
+
+SCORING. _Two of the three_ problems must be solved correctly within the
+5 minutes allotted to each.
+
+REMARKS. We have called this a test of ingenuity. The subject who is
+given the problem finds himself involved in a difficulty from which he
+must extricate himself. Means must be found to overcome an obstacle.
+This requires practical judgement and a certain amount of inventive
+ingenuity. Various possibilities must be explored and either accepted
+for trial or rejected. If the amount of invention called for seems to
+the reader inconsiderable, let it be remembered that the important
+inventions of history have not as a rule had a Minerva birth, but
+instead have developed by successive stages, each involving but a small
+step in advance.
+
+It is unnecessary to emphasize at length the function of invention in
+the higher thought processes. In one form or another it is present in
+all intellectual activity; in the creation and use of language, in art,
+in social adjustments, in religion, and in philosophy, as truly as in
+the domains of science and practical affairs. Certainly this is true if
+we accept Mason's broad definition of invention as including "every
+change in human activity made designedly and systematically."[78] From
+the psychological point of view, perhaps, Mason is justified in looking
+upon the great inventor as "an epitome of the genius of the world." To
+develop a Krag-Joergensen from a bow and arrow, a "velvet-tipped"
+lucifer match from the primitive fire-stick, or a modern piano from the
+first crude, stringed, musical instrument has involved much the same
+intellectual processes as have been operative in transforming fetishism
+and magic into religion and philosophy, or scattered fragments of
+knowledge into science.
+
+[78] Otis T. Mason: _The Origins of Inventions_. (London, 1902.)
+
+Psychologically, invention depends upon the constructive imagination;
+that is, upon the ability to abstract from what is immediately present
+to the senses and to picture new situations with their possibilities and
+consequences. Images are united in order to form new combinations.
+
+As we have several times emphasized, the decisive intellectual
+differences among human beings are not greatly dependent upon mere sense
+discrimination or native retentiveness. Far more important than the raw
+mass of sense data is the correct shooting together of the sense
+elements in memory and imagination. This is but another name for
+invention. It is the synthetic, or apperceptive, activity of the mind
+that gives the "seven-league boots" to genius. It is, however, a kind of
+ability which is possessed by all minds to a greater or less degree. Any
+test has its value which gives a clue, as this test does, to the
+subject's ability in this direction.
+
+The test was devised by the writer and used in 1905 in a study of the
+intellectual processes of bright and dull boys, but it was not at that
+time standardized. It has been found to belong at a much higher mental
+level than was at first supposed. Only an insignificant number pass the
+test below the mental age of 14 years, and about two thirds of "average
+adults" fail. Of our "superior adults" somewhat more than 75 per cent
+succeed. Formal education influences the test little or not at all, the
+unschooled business men making a somewhat better showing than the
+high-school students.
+
+
+
+
+SELECTED REFERENCES
+
+
+The following classified lists include only the most important
+references under each topic. So many investigations have been made with
+the Binet-Simon tests in the last few years, and so many articles have
+been written in evaluation of the method, that a complete bibliography
+of the subject would require thirty or forty pages. Those who desire to
+make a more thorough study of the literature are referred to the
+admirable annotated bibliography compiled by Samuel C. Kohs, and
+published by Warwick & York, Baltimore. Kohs's Bibliography contains
+254 references, and is complete to January 1, 1914.
+
+
+BINET-SIMON TESTS OF NORMAL CHILDREN
+
+   1. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Le developpement de l'intelligence
+      chez les enfants"; in _Annee psychologique_ (1908), vol. 14,
+      pp. 1-94.
+
+      Exposition of the original 1908 scale with results.
+
+   2. Binet, A. "Nouvelles recherches sur la mesure du niveau
+      intellectuel chez les enfants d'ecole"; in _Annee
+      psychologique_ (1911), vol. 17, pp. 145-201.
+
+      Presents the 1911 revision.
+
+   3. Bobertag, O. "Ueber Intelligenzpruefungen (nach der Methode von
+      Binet und Simon)"; in _Zeitschrift fuer angewande Psychologie_
+      (1911), vol. 5, pp. 105-203; and (1912), vol. 6, pp. 495-537.
+
+      Analysis of 400 cases and criticism of method and results.
+
+   4. Dougherty, M. L. "Report on the Binet-Simon Tests given to Four
+      Hundred and Eighty-three Children in the Public Schools of
+      Kansas City, Kansas"; in _Journal of Educational Psychology_
+      (1913), vol. 4, pp. 338-52.
+
+   5. Goddard, H. H. "The Binet-Simon Measuring Scale for
+      Intelligence, Revised"; in _Training School Bulletin_ (1911),
+      vol. 8, pp. 56-62.
+
+   6. Hoffman, A. "Vergleichende Intelligenzpruefungen an Vorschuelern
+      und Volksschuelern"; in _Zeitschrift fuer angewande Psychologie_
+      (1913), vol. 8, pp. 102-20.
+
+      One hundred and fifty-six subjects. Ages seven, nine, and ten.
+
+   7. Johnston, Katherine L. "Binet's Method for the Measurement of
+      Intelligence; Some Results"; in _Journal of Experimental
+      Pedagogy_ (1911), vol. 1, pp. 24-31.
+
+      Results of 200 tests of school children.
+
+   8. Kuhlmann, F. "Some Results of Examining 1000 Public-School
+      Children with a Revision of the Binet-Simon Tests of
+      Intelligence by Untrained Teachers"; in _Journal of
+      Psycho-Asthenics_ (1914), vol. 18, pp. 150-79, and 233-69.
+
+   9. Phillips, Byron A. "The Binet Tests applied to Colored
+      Children"; in _Psychological Clinic_ (1914), pp. 190-96.
+
+      A comparison of 86 colored and 137 white children.
+
+  10. Rogers, Agnes L., _and_ McIntyre, J. L. "The Measurement of
+      Intelligence in Children by the Binet-Simon Scale"; in
+      _British Journal of Psychology_ (1914), vol. 7, pp. 265-300.
+
+  11. Rowe, E. C. "Five Hundred Forty-Seven White and Two Hundred
+      Sixty-Eight Indian Children tested by the Binet-Simon Tests";
+      in _Pedagogical Seminary_ (1914), vol. 21, pp. 454-69.
+
+  12. Strong, Alice C. "Three Hundred Fifty White and Colored
+      Children measured by the Binet-Simon Measuring Scale of
+      Intelligence"; in _Pedagogical Seminary_ (1913), vol. 20,
+      pp. 485-515.
+
+  13. Terman, L. M., _and_ Childs, H. G. "A Tentative Revision and
+      Extension of the Binet-Simon Measuring Scale of Intelligence"; in
+      _Journal of Educational Psychology_ (1912), vol. 3, pp. 61-74,
+      133-43, 198-208, and 277-89.
+
+      Results of 396 tests of California school-children.
+
+  14. Terman, Lyman, Ordahl, Galbreath, _and_ Talbert. _The Stanford
+      Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Measuring Scale of
+      Intelligence._ (1916.)
+
+      Detailed analysis of the results secured by testing 1000
+      unselected school-children within two months of a birthday.
+
+  15. Weintrob, J. _and_ R. "The Influence of Environment on Mental
+      Ability as shown by the Binet Tests"; in _Journal of
+      Educational Psychology_ (1912), pp. 577-86.
+
+  16. Winch, W. H. "Binet's Mental Tests: What They Are, and What We
+      Can Do with Them"; in _Child Study_ (London), 1913, 1914,
+      1915, and 1916.
+
+      An extended series of articles setting forth results of tests with
+      normal children, and giving valuable criticisms and suggestions.
+
+
+BINET-SIMON TESTS OF THE FEEBLE-MINDED
+
+  17. Chotzen, F. "Die Intelligenzpruefungsmethode von Binet-Simon
+      bei schwachsinnigen Kindern"; in _Zeitschrift fuer angewande
+      Psychologie_ (1912), vol. 6, pp. 411-94.
+
+      A critical study of the results of 280 tests.
+
+  18. Goddard, H. H. "Four Hundred Feeble-Minded Children classified
+      by the Binet Method"; in _Pedagogical Seminary_ (1910),
+      vol. 17, pp. 387-97; also in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_
+      (1910), vol. 15, pp. 17-30.
+
+      Offers important evidence of the value of the Binet-Simon method.
+
+  19. Kuhlmann, F. "The Binet and Simon Tests of Intelligence in
+      Grading Feeble-Minded Children"; in _Journal of
+      Psycho-Asthenics_ (1912), vol. 16, pp. 173-93.
+
+      Analysis of results from 1300 cases.
+
+
+BINET-SIMON TESTS OF DELINQUENTS
+
+  20. Bluemel, C. S. "Binet Tests on Two Hundred Juvenile
+      Delinquents"; in _Training School Bulletin_ (1915),
+      pp. 187-93.
+
+  21. Goddard, H. H. _The Criminal Imbecile._ The Macmillan Company.
+      (1915.) 157 pages.
+
+      An analysis of the mentality of three murderers of moron or
+      borderline intelligence.
+
+  22. Goddard, H. H. "The Responsibility of Children in the Juvenile
+      Court"; in _Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology_
+      (September, 1912).
+
+      Analysis of 100 tests of juvenile delinquents.
+
+  23. Healy, William. _The Individual Delinquent._ Little, Brown &
+      Co. (1915.) 830 pages.
+
+      A textbook on delinquents. Gives results of many Binet-Simon
+      tests.
+
+  24. Spaulding, Edith R. "The Results of Mental and Physical
+      Examination of Four Hundred Women Offenders"; in _Journal of
+      Criminal Law and Criminology_ (1915), pp. 704-17.
+
+  25. Sullivan, W. C. "La mesure du developpement intellectuel chez
+      les jeunes delinquantes"; in _Annee psychologique_ (1912),
+      vol. 18, pp. 341-61.
+
+  26. Williams, J. Harold. _A Study of 150 Delinquent Boys._
+      Bulletin no. 1, Research Laboratory of the Buckel Foundation.
+      (1915.) 15 pages.
+
+      The Stanford revision used. Report of over 400 cases to follow.
+
+
+BINET-SIMON TESTS OF SUPERIOR CHILDREN
+
+  27. Jeronutti, A. "Ricerche psicologiche sperimentali sugli alunni
+      molto intelligenti"; in _Lab. di Psicol. Sperim. della Reg.
+      Univ. Roma_. (1912)
+
+      Out of fifteen hundred school and kindergarten children, ages five
+      to twelve, fourteen were selected by the teachers as the
+      brightest. The Binet test showed them to be from one to three
+      years in advance of their chronological ages.
+
+  28. Terman, L. M. "The Mental Hygiene of Exceptional Children"; in
+      _Pedagogical Seminary_ (1915), vol. 22, pp. 529-37.
+
+      Data on 31 children testing above 120 I. Q.
+
+
+INSTRUCTIONS FOR GIVING THE BINET-SIMON TESTS
+
+  29. Binet, A., _and_ Simon, Th. _A Method of Measuring the
+      Development of Intelligence in Young Children._ Chicago
+      Medical Book Company. (1915.) 82 pages.
+
+      Authorized translation of Binet's final instructions for giving
+      the tests.
+
+  30. Goddard, H. H. "A Measuring Scale of Intelligence"; in
+      _Training School Bulletin_ (1910), vol. 6, pp. 146-55.
+
+      Condensed translation of Binet's 1908 _Measuring Scale of
+      Intelligence_.
+
+  31. Goddard, H. H. "The Binet-Simon Measuring Scale for
+      Intelligence, Revised"; in _Training School Bulletin_ (1911),
+      vol. 8, pp. 56-62.
+
+  32. Goddard, H. H. "Standard Method for Giving the Binet Test"; in
+      _Training School Bulletin_ (1913), vol. 10, pp. 23-30.
+
+  33. Kuhlmann, F. "A Revision of the Binet-Simon System for
+      Measuring the Intelligence of Children"; Monograph Supplement
+      of _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_ (September, 1912), 41 pages.
+
+  34. Wallin, J. E. W. "A Practical Guide for the Administration of
+      the Binet-Simon Scale for Measuring Intelligence"; in _The
+      Psychological Clinic_ (1911), vol. 5, pp. 217-38.
+
+
+CRITICISMS AND EVALUATIONS OF THE BINET-SIMON METHOD
+
+  35. Berry, C. S. "A Comparison of the Binet Tests of 1908 and
+      1911"; in _Journal of Educational Psychology_ (1912), vol. 3,
+      pp. 444-51.
+
+  36. Bobertag, O. "Ueber Intelligenzpruefungen (nach der Methode von
+      Binet und Simon)"; in _Zeitschrift fuer angewande Psychologie_.
+      (A, 1911), vol. 5, pp. 105-203; (B, 1912), vol. 6,
+      pp. 495-537.
+
+      Accepts the method and gives valuable suggestions for improvement.
+
+  37. Brigham, Carl C. "An Experimental Critique of the Binet-Simon
+      Scale"; in _Journal of Educational Psychology_ (1914),
+      pp. 439-48.
+
+      Finds the scale 96% efficient.
+
+  38. Goddard, H. H. "The Reliability of the Binet-Simon Measuring
+      Scale of Intelligence"; in _Proceedings of the Fourth
+      International Congress of School Hygiene_ (1913), vol. 5,
+      pp. 693-99.
+
+      Application of the theory of probability to the results proves the
+      extremely small liability of error.
+
+  39. Kohs, Samuel C. "The Practicability of the Binet Scale and the
+      Question of the Borderline Case"; in _Training School
+      Bulletin_ (1916), pp. 211-23.
+
+      Analysis of cases showing the reliability of the scale.
+
+  40. Kuhlmann, F. "Binet and Simon's System for Measuring the
+      Intelligence of Children"; in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_
+      (1911), vol. 15, pp. 79-92.
+
+      Finds the method of the greatest value.
+
+  41. Kuhlmann, F. "A Reply to Dr. L. P. Ayres's Criticism of the
+      Binet and Simon System for Measuring the Intelligence of
+      Children"; in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_ (1911), vol. 16,
+      pp. 58-67.
+
+      Many of the Ayres criticisms are shown to be unfounded.
+
+  42. Meumann, E. _Vorlesungen zur Einfuehrung in die Experimentelle
+      Paedagogik_ (1913), vol. 2, pp. 130-300.
+
+      Summary of the literature on Binet tests up to 1913. Accepts the
+      method but gives suggestions for improvement. This summary and
+      other writings of Meumann on the psychology of endowment are
+      reviewed by Lewis M. Terman in a series of four articles in
+      the _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_ for 1915.
+
+  43. Otis, A. S. "Some Logical and Mathematical Aspects of the
+      Measurement of Intelligence by the Binet-Simon Method"; in
+      _The Psychological Review_ (April and June, 1916).
+
+      Considers the Binet-Simon method imperfect from the mathematical
+      point of view.
+
+  44. Schmitt, Clara. _Standardization of Tests for Defective
+      Children._ Psychological Monographs (1915), no. 83, 181 pages.
+
+      Contains (pp. 52-67) a discussion of the "Fallacies and
+      Inadequacies of the Binet-Simon Series." Most of the
+      criticisms here given are either superficial or unfair, some
+      of them apparently being due to a lack of acquaintance with
+      Binet's writings.
+
+  45. Stern, W. _The Psychological Methods of Measuring
+      Intelligence._ Translated by G. M. Whipple. (1913.) 160 pages.
+
+      A splendid critical discussion of the Binet-Simon method. Should
+      be read by every one who would use the scale.
+
+  46. Terman, L. M. "Suggestions for Revising, Extending, and
+      Supplementing the Binet Intelligence Tests"; in _Journal of
+      Psycho-Asthenics_ (1913), vol. 18, pp. 20-33.
+
+  47. Terman, L. M. "Psychological Principles Underlying the
+      Binet-Simon Scale and Some Practical Considerations for its
+      Correct Use"; in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_ (1913),
+      vol. 18, pp. 93-104.
+
+  48. Terman, L. M. "A Report of the Buffalo Conference on the
+      Binet-Simon Tests of Intelligence"; in _Pedagogical Seminary_
+      (1913), vol. 20, pp. 549-54.
+
+      Abstracts of papers presented at the above conference.
+
+  49. Terman, Lyman, Ordahl, Galbreath, _and_ Talbert. _The Stanford
+      Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Scale for Measuring
+      Intelligence._ (1916.)
+
+      Contains a chapter on the validity of the individual tests and on
+      considerations relating to the formation of an intelligence
+      scale.
+
+  50. Terman _and_ Knollin. "The Detection of Borderline Deficiency
+      by the Binet-Simon Method"; in _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_
+      (June, 1916).
+
+      A comparison of the accuracy of the Stanford and other revisions
+      with borderline cases.
+
+  51. Treves _and_ Saffiotti. "L'echelle metrique de l'intelligence
+      modifiee selon la methode Treves-Saffiotti"; in _Annee
+      Psychologique_ (1912), pp. 327-40.
+
+      Criticize the age-grade method of measuring intelligence and
+      propose a substitute.
+
+  52. Wallin, J. E. W. _Experimental Studies of Mental Defectives. A
+      Critique of the Binet-Simon Tests._ Warwick & York. (1912.)
+
+      Criticism based on the use of the scale with epileptics.
+
+  53. Yerkes _and_ Bridges. _A Point Scale for Measuring Mental
+      Ability._ Warwick & York.
+
+      Authors think the point scale preferable to the Binet-Simon
+      method.
+
+
+BOOKS ON MENTAL DEFICIENCY
+
+  54. Binet, A., _and_ Simon, Th. _Mentally Defective Children._
+      Translated from the French by W. B. Drummond. Longmans, Green
+      & Co. (1914.) 171 pages.
+
+      Discusses the psychology, pedagogy, and medical examination of
+      defectives.
+
+  55. Goddard, H. H. _Feeble-Mindedness; Its Causes and
+      Consequences._ The Macmillan Company. (1913.) 599 pages.
+
+      The most important single volume on the subject. Extensive data on
+      the causes of feeble-mindedness and excellent clinical  pictures
+      of all grades of mental defects.
+
+  56. Goddard, H. H. _The Kallikak Family._ The Macmillan Company.
+      (1914.) 121 pages.
+
+      An epoch-making study of the hereditary transmission of mental
+      deficiency in a degenerate family.
+
+  57. Holmes, Arthur. _The Conservation of the Child._ J. B.
+      Lippincott Company. (1912.) 345 pages.
+
+      Methods of examination and treatment of defective children.
+
+  58. Holmes, Arthur. _The Backward Child._ Bobbs-Merrill Company.
+      (1915.)
+
+      A popular treatment of the handling of backward children.
+
+  59. Huey, E. B. _Backward and Feeble-Minded Children._ Warwick &
+      York. (1912.) 221 pages.
+
+      Devoted mainly to clinical accounts of borderline cases.
+
+  60. Lapage, C. P. _Feeble-Mindedness in Children of School Age._
+      The University Press, Manchester, England. (1911.) 359 pages.
+
+  61. Sherlock, E. B. _The Feeble-Minded; A Guide to Study and
+      Practice._ The Macmillan Company. (1911.) 327 pages.
+
+  62. Tredgold, A. F. _Mental Deficiency (Amentia)._ Bailliere,
+      Tindall, and Cox. London, England. (2d ed. 1914.) 491 pages.
+
+      The best medical treatment of the subject.
+
+
+STUDIES OF THE PROGRESS OF CHILDREN THROUGH THE GRADES
+
+  63. Ayres, Leonard P. _Laggards in our Schools._ The Russell Sage
+      Foundation. (1909.) 236 pages.
+
+      Interesting and instructive discussion of school retardation and
+      its causes.
+
+  64. Blan, Louis B. _A Special Study of the Incidence of
+      Retardation._ Teachers College, Columbia University,
+      Contributions to Education, no. 40. (1911.) 111 pages.
+
+      Review of the literature and a statistical study of the progress
+      of 4579 children.
+
+  65. Keyes, C. H. _Progress Through the Grades of City Schools._
+      Teachers College, Columbia University, Contributions to
+      Education, no. 42. (1911.) 79 pages.
+
+      Important study of the progress of several thousand children.
+
+  66. Strayer, George D. _Age and Grade Census of Schools and
+      Colleges._ Bulletin no. 451, U.S. Bureau of Education. (1911.)
+      144 pages.
+
+      Statistics of the age-grade status of the children in 318 cities.
+
+  67. See also the _Reports_ of leading school surveys, such as
+      those of New York, Salt Lake City, Butte, Springfield (Mass.),
+      Denver, Cleveland, etc.
+
+
+REFERENCES ON THE SPECIAL CLASS FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
+
+  68. Huey, E. B. "The Education of Defectives and the Training of
+      Teachers for Special Classes"; in _Journal of Educational
+      Psychology_ (1913), pp. 545-50.
+
+  69. Goddard, H. H. _School Training of Defective Children._ World
+      Book Company. (1914.) 97 pages.
+
+      Based on his survey of the treatment of backward children in the
+      schools of New York City.
+
+  70. Holmes, W. H. _School Organization and the Individual Child._
+      The Davis Press, Worcester, Massachusetts. (1912.) 211 pages.
+
+      A comprehensive account of the efforts which have been made to
+      adjust the school to the capacities of individual children.
+
+  71. Maennel, B. _Auxiliary Education._ Translated from the German
+      by Emma Sylvester. Doubleday, Page & Co. (1909.) 267 pages.
+
+  72. Van Sickle, J. H., Witmer, L., _and_ Ayres, L. P. _Provision
+      for Exceptional Children in Public Schools._ Bulletin no. 461,
+      U.S. Bureau of Education. (1911.) 92 pages.
+
+  73. Shaer, I. "Special Classes for Bright Children in an English
+      Elementary School"; in _Journal of Educational Psychology_
+      (1913), pp. 209-22.
+
+  74. Stern, W. "The Supernormal Child"; in _Journal of Educational
+      Psychology_ (1911), pp. 143-48 and 181-90.
+
+      A strong plea for special classes for superior children.
+
+  75. Vaney, V. _Les classes pour enfants arrieres._ Bulletin de la
+      Societe libre pour l'etude psychologique de l'enfant (1911),
+      pp. 53-152.
+
+      Report of the French National Commission appointed to investigate
+      methods of treatment and training.
+
+  76. Witmer, L. _The Special Class for Backward Children._ The
+      Psychological Clinic Press, Philadelphia. (1911.) 275 pages.
+
+      An account of the special class conducted in connection with the
+      University of Pennsylvania Summer School.
+
+
+LIST OF BINET'S MOST IMPORTANT CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE MEASUREMENT OF
+INTELLIGENCE
+
+  77. Binet, A. _L'Etude experimentale de l'intelligence._ Paris:
+      Schleicher freres. (1903.)
+
+  78. Binet, A. "A Propos de la mesure de l'intelligence"; in _Annee
+      psychologique_ (1905), vol. 11, pp. 69-82.
+
+  79. Binet, A. _Les enfants anormaux; guide pour l'admission des
+      enfants anormaux dans les classes de perfectionnement._ Paris:
+      Colin (1907.)
+
+  80. Binet, A. _Comment les instituteurs jugent-ils l'intelligence
+      d'un ecolier?_ Bulletin de la Societe libre pour l'etude
+      psychologique de l'enfant (1910), no. 10, pp. 172-82.
+
+  81. Binet, A. "Nouvelles recherches sur la mesure du niveau
+      intellectuel chez les enfants d'ecole"; in _Annee
+      psychologique_ (1911), vol. 17, pp. 145-201.
+
+  82. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Sur la necessite d'etablir un
+      diagnostique scientifique des etats inferieurs de
+      l'intelligence"; in _Annee psychologique_ (1905), vol. 11,
+      pp. 163-90.
+
+  83. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Methodes nouvelles pour le
+      diagnostique du niveau intellectuel des anormaux"; in _Annee
+      psychologique_ (1905), vol. 11, pp. 191-244.
+
+  84. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Application des Methodes nouvelles
+      au diagnostique du niveau intellectuel chez des enfants
+      normaux et anormaux d'hospice et d'ecole primaire"; in _Annee
+      psychologique_ (1905), vol. 11, pp. 245-336.
+
+  85. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Le developpement de l'intelligence
+      chez les enfants"; in _Annee psychologique_ (1908), vol. 14,
+      pp. 1-94.
+
+  86. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Langage et pensee"; in _Annee
+      psychologique_ (1908), vol. 14, pp. 284-339.
+
+  87. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "L'intelligence des imbeciles"; in
+      _Annee psychologique_ (1909), vol. 15, pp. 1-147.
+
+  88. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. "Nouvelle theorie psychologique et
+      clinique de la demence"; in _Annee psychologique_ (1909),
+      vol. 15, pp. 168-272.
+
+  89. Binet, A., _et_ Simon, Th. _La mesure du developpement de
+      l'intelligence chez les jeunes enfants._ Bulletin de la
+      Societe libre pour l'etude psychologique de l'enfant (1911),
+      no. 11, pp. 187-256.
+
+
+
+
+SUGGESTIONS FOR A TEACHER'S PRIVATE LIBRARY
+
+
+ON EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN
+
+  Ayres, L. P. _Laggards in our Schools._ The Russell Sage
+      Foundation. (1909.) 236 pages.
+
+      Treats the amount and causes of school retardation.
+
+  Binet, A., _and_ Simon, Th. _Mentally Defective Children._
+      Translated from the French by W. B. Drummond. Longmans, Green
+      & Co. (1914.) 171 pages.
+
+      Discusses the psychology, pedagogy and medical examination of
+      defectives.
+
+  Binet, A., _and_ Simon, Th. _A Method of Measuring the Development
+      of Intelligence in Young Children._ Chicago Medical Book
+      Company. (1915.) 82 pages.
+
+      Authorized translation of Binet's final instructions for giving
+      the tests.
+
+  Goddard, H. H. _Feeble-Mindedness; Its Causes and Consequences._
+      The Macmillan Company. (1913.) 599 pages.
+
+      The most important single volume on the subject.
+
+  Goddard, H. H. _The Kallikak Family._ The Macmillan Company.
+      (1914.) 121 pages.
+
+      A study of the hereditary transmission of mental deficiency in one
+      family.
+
+  Goddard, H. H. _School Training of Defective Children._ World Book
+      Company. (1914.) 97 pages.
+
+      Admirable treatment of the entire subject.
+
+  Goddard, H. H. _The Criminal Imbecile._ The Macmillan Company.
+      (1915.) 157 pages.
+
+      An analysis of three murderers of borderline intelligence.
+
+  Holmes, Arthur. _The Conservation of the Child._ J. B. Lippincott
+      Company. (1912.) 345 pages.
+
+      Methods of examination and treatment of defective children.
+
+  Holmes, Arthur. _The Backward Child._ The Bobbs-Merrill Co.
+      (1915.)
+
+      A popular treatment of the subject.
+
+  Holmes, W. H. _School Organization and the Individual Child._ The
+      Davis Press, Worcester, Massachusetts. (1912) 211 pages.
+
+      A comprehensive account of methods of adjusting school work to the
+      capacity of the individual child.
+
+  Huey, E. B. _Backward and Feeble-Minded Children._ Warwick & York.
+      (1912.) 221 pages.
+
+      Clinical studies of borderline cases.
+
+  Kelynack, T. N. (_Editor_). _Defective Children._ John Bale, Sons,
+      and Daniellson, London. (1915.) 447 pages.
+
+      Written by many authors and devoted to all kinds of physical and
+      mental defects.
+
+  Kuhlmann, F. "A Revision of the Binet-Simon System for Measuring
+      the Intelligence of Children." Monograph Supplement of
+      _Journal of Psycho-Asthenics_. (1912.) 41 pages.
+
+      Contains instructions for use of the Kuhlmann revision.
+
+  Stern, W. _The Psychological Method of Measuring Intelligence._
+      Translated from the German by G. M. Whipple. Warwick & York.
+      (1913.) 160 pages.
+
+  Terman, Lyman, Ordahl, Galbreath, _and_ Talbert. _The Stanford
+      Revision and Extension of the Binet-Simon Scale for Measuring
+      Intelligence._ (1916.)
+
+      Extended analysis of 1000 tests. Data on the relation of
+      intelligence to school success, social status, etc.
+
+  Terman, Lewis M. _The Hygiene of the School Child._ Houghton
+      Mifflin Company. (1914.) 417 pages.
+
+      Devoted to the physical defects of school children.
+
+  Tredgold, A. F. _Mental Deficiency (Amentia)._ Bailliere, Tindall
+      & Cox, London. (1914.) 491 pages.
+
+      The best medical treatment of the subject.
+
+  Whipple, G. M. _Manual of Mental and Physical Tests._ Warwick &
+      York. Vol. I (1914), 365 pages; vol. II (1915), 336 pages.
+
+      The best treatment of mental tests other than those of the Binet
+      system.
+
+  Witmer, L. _The Special Class for Backward Children._ The
+      Psychological Clinic Press, Philadelphia. (1911.) 275 pages.
+
+      Problems encountered in connection with the special class.
+
+
+MAGAZINES
+
+  _The Training School Bulletin._ Published monthly by the Training
+      School, Vineland, New Jersey. Edited by H. H. Goddard and
+      E. R. Johnstone.
+
+  _The Psychological Clinic._ Published monthly by the Psychological
+      Clinic Press, Philadelphia. Edited by Lightner Witmer.
+
+  _The Journal of Delinquency._ Published bi-monthly by the Whittier
+      State School, Whittier, California. Edited by Williams,
+      Goddard, Terman, and others.
+
+  _The Journal of Psycho-Asthenics._ Published quarterly at
+      Faribault, Minnesota. Organ of the American Association for
+      the Study of the Feeble-Minded. Edited by A. C. Rogers and F.
+      Kuhlmann.
+
+  _The Journal of Educational Psychology._ Published by Warwick &
+      York, Baltimore. Edited by J. Carleton Bell.
+
+
+
+
+INDEX
+
+
+  Abstract thought, tests of, 344.
+
+  Absurdities, 255 _ff._
+
+  Adolescence, and variability in intelligence, 67.
+
+  Adult intelligence, 54.
+
+  Adults, how to find I Q of adults, 140.
+
+  AEsthetic comparison, 165 _ff._
+
+  Age, test of giving age, 173 _ff._
+
+  Age standards, 40.
+
+  Alternative tests, 136.
+
+  Amateur testing, 107 _ff._
+
+  Apperception, 169.
+
+  Arithmetical reasoning, 319 _ff._
+
+  Association processes, 274.
+
+  Attention, during the test, 121.
+
+  Attitude of the subject, 109.
+
+  Auto-criticism, 156, 171, 195.
+
+  Average intelligence, 94 _ff._
+
+
+  Ball and field test, 210 _ff._, 286.
+
+  Berry, C. S., 114.
+
+  Binet,
+    on how teachers judge intelligence, 28 _ff._;
+    Binet's conception of intelligence, 44 _ff._, 123, 149, 151, 154,
+      156, 159, 165, 171, 173, 180, 181, 183, 185, 186, 190, 196, 203,
+      205, 217, 231, 232, 234, 247, 251, 252, 254, 258, 260, 261, 264,
+      276, 285, 289, 315, 322, 327, 333, 339, 345.
+
+  Binet-Simon method,
+    nature and derivation of the scale, 36 _ff._, 47 _ff._;
+    limitations of, 48 _ff._
+
+  Bloch, 203.
+
+  Bluemel, C. S., 107.
+
+  Bobertag, Otto, 106, 113, 176, 178, 180, 181, 185, 188, 190, 203, 206,
+    232, 237, 240, 252, 275, 285, 318.
+
+  Borderline intelligence, 79, 87 _ff._
+
+  Bow-knot, test of tying, 196 _ff._
+
+  Brigham, 165, 166.
+
+
+  Change, test of making change, 240 _ff._
+
+  Childs, H. G., 231, 298.
+
+  Coaching, 110 _ff._
+
+  Code test, 330 _ff._
+
+  Color naming, 163 _ff._
+
+  Combination method, 171. _See also_ Completion test.
+
+  Commissions, 172 _ff._
+
+  Comparison of lines, 151 _ff._
+
+  Completion test, 179, 246, 289.
+
+  Comprehension questions, 157 _ff._, 181 _ff._, 215 _ff._, 268 _ff._
+
+  Conditions favorable to testing, 121 _ff._
+
+  Counting,
+    four pennies, 154;
+    thirteen pennies, 180;
+    counting backwards, 213.
+
+  Crime,
+    relation to feeble-mindedness, 8 _ff._;
+    cost of, 12.
+
+  Cuneo, Irene, 51.
+
+
+  Davenport, C. B., 10.
+
+  Definitions,
+    in terms of use, 167;
+    superior to use, 221;
+    of abstract words, 281 _ff._, and 324 _ff._
+    _See also_ Vocabulary tests.
+
+  "Degenerate" families, 9 _ff._
+
+  Delinquency, relation to feeble-mindedness, 7 _ff._
+
+  Diamond, test of copying diamond, 204.
+
+  Differences, test of finding, 199, 313 _ff._
+
+  Digits. _See_ Memory for digits.
+
+  Discrimination of forms, 152 _ff._
+
+  Dissected sentences, 286 _ff._
+
+  Distribution of intelligence, 65 _ff._, 78 _ff._
+
+  Dougherty, 165, 166, 203.
+
+  Drawing, 156, 204, 260.
+
+  Dull normals, 92 _ff._
+
+  Dumville, 165, 166.
+
+
+  Ebbinghaus, 289, 318.
+
+  Emotion, 49.
+
+  Enclosed boxes, 327 _ff._
+
+  Endowment, 4, 19 _ff._
+
+  Environment, influence on test, 114 _ff._
+
+  Eugenics, 9 _ff._
+
+  Examination, duration of, 127 _ff._
+
+  Examiner, qualifications of, 124 _ff._
+
+
+  Fables, interpretation of, 290 _ff._
+
+  Fatigue, influence of, on test, 126 _ff._
+
+  Feeble-minded, proportion of school-children feeble-minded, 6.
+
+  Feeble-mindedness,
+    value of tests for, 5 _ff._;
+    psychological analysis, 23;
+    definition, 80;
+    examples, 82 _ff._
+
+  Fernald, G. G., 8.
+
+  Fernald, Grace, 56, 278, 280, 332.
+
+  Fingers, test of giving number of, 189 _ff._
+
+  Freeman, Frank N., 280.
+
+  Functions, tested by Binet scale, 42 _ff._
+
+
+  Galbreath, Neva, 51.
+
+  Galton, 328.
+
+  General intelligence, 42 _ff._
+
+  Generalization, tests of, 298.
+
+  Genius. _See_ Superior intelligence.
+
+  Goddard, H. H., 8, 106, 112, 154, 156, 165, 173, 185, 190, 196, 203,
+    206, 213, 234, 245, 251, 252, 259, 264, 276, 285, 289, 319, 322,
+    323, 332, 333, 339, 345.
+
+  Grading, value of intelligence tests in, 16.
+
+
+  Hall, Gertrude, 280.
+
+  Healy-Fernald, 56, 278, 280, 332.
+
+  Heredity, use of tests in the study of, 19.
+
+  Hill folk, 10.
+
+  Hollingworth, Leta S., 71.
+
+  Huey, E. B., 197, 217, 234.
+
+
+  Imagery, 195, 209, 321, 339.
+
+  Induction test, 310 _ff._
+
+  Ingenuity test, 346.
+
+  Intelligence,
+    analysis of, _see_ remarks under instructions for each test;
+    superior, 12 _ff._, 95 _ff._,
+    teachers' estimates of, 13, 24, 26, 28, 75;
+    general, 42 _ff._;
+    definitions of, 44 _ff._
+
+  Intelligence quotient, 53, 55, 63, 65 _ff._;
+    validity of, 68;
+    classification and significance, 79 _ff._, 140 _ff._
+
+
+  Jukes family, 10.
+
+
+  Kallikak family, 9.
+
+  Knollin, H. E., 18, 51, 54, 63.
+
+  Kohs, S. C., 107 _ff._
+
+  Kuhlmann, F., 56, 105, 153, 154, 156, 165, 173, 185, 190, 193, 196,
+    206, 214, 217, 234, 247, 251, 252, 259, 264, 276, 280, 285, 289,
+    315, 319, 322, 323, 327, 333, 339, 345.
+
+
+  Language comprehension, 143, 144.
+
+  Limitations of the Binet scale, 48 _ff._
+
+  Lombroso, 7.
+
+  Lyman, Grace, 51.
+
+
+  Mason, Otis, 347.
+
+  Masselon, 245.
+
+  Material used in the tests, 141.
+
+  Memory,
+    for sentences, 149 _ff._, 160, 185, 332;
+    for passages, 340;
+    for designs, 260;
+    for digits, 150, 159, 193, 207, 242, 277, 301, 322, 329, 340, 345.
+
+  Mental age, 39 _ff._;
+    effect of Stanford revision on, 62;
+    how to calculate, 137 _ff._
+
+  Mental deficiency. _See_ Feeble-mindedness.
+
+  Meumann, Ernst, 46, 106, 245, 318.
+
+  Moral development, dependence of, on intelligence, 11 _ff._
+
+
+  Nam family, 10.
+
+  Name, test of giving name, 147 _ff._
+
+  Naming coins, 184 _ff._, 231.
+
+  Naming familiar objects, 143 _ff._
+
+  Normals, dull, 92 _ff._
+
+
+  Ordahl, Dr. George, 8.
+
+  Ordahl, Louise Ellison, 8.
+
+
+  Paper-cutting test, 338.
+
+  Physical defects, effects of, on intelligence, 19.
+
+  Physical relations, comprehension of, 333 _ff._
+
+  Physicians, as Binet testers, 34.
+
+  Pictures,
+    enumeration of objects in, 145;
+    description of, 190 _ff._;
+    interpretation of, 302;
+    finding omissions in, 178.
+
+  Pointing to parts of body, 142 _ff._
+
+  Practical judgment, 212.
+
+  President and king, giving differences between, 313.
+
+  Problem questions, 315 _ff._
+
+  Procedure, necessity of uniformity in, 32 _ff._, 131 _ff._
+
+  Promotions, on basis of intelligence tests, 16 _ff._
+
+
+  Race differences, 91.
+
+  Range of testing, 129.
+
+  Rapport, 124 _ff._
+
+  Reading, test of reading for memories, 262.
+
+  Record booklet, 128.
+
+  Recording responses, 133 _ff._
+
+  Reliability of the scale, 76 _ff._, 105 _ff._
+
+  Repeated tests, 112 _ff._
+
+  Retardation,
+    cost of, 1, 13 _ff._;
+    training of retarded children, 4 _ff._, 24 _ff._, 73 _ff._
+
+  Reversing hands of clock, 321 _ff._
+
+  Rhymes, test of finding, 248.
+
+  Right and left, 175 _ff._
+
+  Rowe, E. P., 165, 166, 277.
+
+  Rowland, Eleanor, 18.
+
+
+  Scattering of successes, 134 _ff._
+
+  School success and intelligence, 73 _ff._
+
+  Scoring, 132. _See also_ instructions for scoring each test.
+
+  Seclusion during test, 122.
+
+  Sex, test of giving, 146 _ff._
+
+  Sex differences in intelligence, 68 _ff._
+
+  Similarities, test of finding, 217 _ff._, 306 _ff._
+
+  Sixty words, 272 _ff._
+
+  Social class and intelligence, 72 _ff._, 114 _ff._
+
+  Spearman, C., definition of intelligence, 46.
+
+  Special classes, 5.
+
+  Square, test of copying, 155 _ff._
+
+  Stamps, test of counting value of, 252.
+
+  Standardization, value of, 30.
+
+  Stanford revision of the Binet scale, 51 _ff._
+
+  Stereotypy, 203.
+
+  Stern, W., 46, 106, 118.
+
+  Stigmata, 7.
+
+  Structural psychology, 43.
+
+  Superior intelligence, tests of superior children, 12 _ff._, 95 _ff._
+
+  Supplementary information, 135.
+
+
+  Teachers' estimates of intelligence, 13, 24, 26, 28, 75.
+
+  Terman, Lewis M., 63, 267, 298.
+
+  Three words, test of using, in a sentence, 242 _ff._
+
+  Time orientation,
+    forenoon and afternoon, 187 _ff._;
+    days of the week, 205 _ff._;
+    giving date, 234 _ff._;
+    naming months, 251 _ff._
+
+
+  Unemployment, relation of, to intelligence, 18.
+
+
+  Validity of the tests, 76 _ff._
+
+  Vocabulary tests, 224, 255, 281, 310, 324, 338.
+
+  Vocational guidance, use of intelligence tests in, 17, 49.
+
+  Volition, 49.
+
+
+  Waddle, Charles, 52.
+
+  Wallin, 237.
+
+  Weights, comparison of, 161, 236 _ff._
+
+  Williams, Dr. J. Harold, 9, 54.
+
+  Winch, W. H., 165, 166.
+
+  Writing from dictation, 231 _ff._
+
+
+  Yerkes, R. M., 70.
+
+
+
+
+
+End of the Project Gutenberg EBook of The Measurement of Intelligence, by
+Lewis Madison Terman
+
+*** END OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK THE MEASUREMENT OF INTELLIGENCE ***
+
+***** This file should be named 20662.txt or 20662.zip *****
+This and all associated files of various formats will be found in:
+        https://www.gutenberg.org/2/0/6/6/20662/
+
+Produced by Audrey Longhurst, Laura Wisewell and the Online
+Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net
+
+
+Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions
+will be renamed.
+
+Creating the works from public domain print editions means that no
+one owns a United States copyright in these works, so the Foundation
+(and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United States without
+permission and without paying copyright royalties.  Special rules,
+set forth in the General Terms of Use part of this license, apply to
+copying and distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works to
+protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm concept and trademark.  Project
+Gutenberg is a registered trademark, and may not be used if you
+charge for the eBooks, unless you receive specific permission.  If you
+do not charge anything for copies of this eBook, complying with the
+rules is very easy.  You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose
+such as creation of derivative works, reports, performances and
+research.  They may be modified and printed and given away--you may do
+practically ANYTHING with public domain eBooks.  Redistribution is
+subject to the trademark license, especially commercial
+redistribution.
+
+
+
+*** START: FULL LICENSE ***
+
+THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
+PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
+
+To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
+distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
+(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License (available with this file or online at
+https://gutenberg.org/license).
+
+
+Section 1.  General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic works
+
+1.A.  By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
+and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
+(trademark/copyright) agreement.  If you do not agree to abide by all
+the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or destroy
+all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your possession.
+If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound by the
+terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person or
+entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
+
+1.B.  "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark.  It may only be
+used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
+agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement.  There are a few
+things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
+even without complying with the full terms of this agreement.  See
+paragraph 1.C below.  There are a lot of things you can do with Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this agreement
+and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.  See paragraph 1.E below.
+
+1.C.  The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the Foundation"
+or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection of Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic works.  Nearly all the individual works in the
+collection are in the public domain in the United States.  If an
+individual work is in the public domain in the United States and you are
+located in the United States, we do not claim a right to prevent you from
+copying, distributing, performing, displaying or creating derivative
+works based on the work as long as all references to Project Gutenberg
+are removed.  Of course, we hope that you will support the Project
+Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting free access to electronic works by
+freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm works in compliance with the terms of
+this agreement for keeping the Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with
+the work.  You can easily comply with the terms of this agreement by
+keeping this work in the same format with its attached full Project
+Gutenberg-tm License when you share it without charge with others.
+
+1.D.  The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
+what you can do with this work.  Copyright laws in most countries are in
+a constant state of change.  If you are outside the United States, check
+the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this agreement
+before downloading, copying, displaying, performing, distributing or
+creating derivative works based on this work or any other Project
+Gutenberg-tm work.  The Foundation makes no representations concerning
+the copyright status of any work in any country outside the United
+States.
+
+1.E.  Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
+
+1.E.1.  The following sentence, with active links to, or other immediate
+access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear prominently
+whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work on which the
+phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the phrase "Project
+Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed, performed, viewed,
+copied or distributed:
+
+This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with
+almost no restrictions whatsoever.  You may copy it, give it away or
+re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included
+with this eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org
+
+1.E.2.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is derived
+from the public domain (does not contain a notice indicating that it is
+posted with permission of the copyright holder), the work can be copied
+and distributed to anyone in the United States without paying any fees
+or charges.  If you are redistributing or providing access to a work
+with the phrase "Project Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the
+work, you must comply either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1
+through 1.E.7 or obtain permission for the use of the work and the
+Project Gutenberg-tm trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or
+1.E.9.
+
+1.E.3.  If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
+with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
+must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any additional
+terms imposed by the copyright holder.  Additional terms will be linked
+to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works posted with the
+permission of the copyright holder found at the beginning of this work.
+
+1.E.4.  Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
+work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
+
+1.E.5.  Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
+electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
+prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
+active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm License.
+
+1.E.6.  You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
+compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including any
+word processing or hypertext form.  However, if you provide access to or
+distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format other than
+"Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official version
+posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm web site (www.gutenberg.org),
+you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense to the user, provide a
+copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means of obtaining a copy upon
+request, of the work in its original "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other
+form.  Any alternate format must include the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
+
+1.E.7.  Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
+performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
+unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
+
+1.E.8.  You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
+access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works provided
+that
+
+- You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
+     the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
+     you already use to calculate your applicable taxes.  The fee is
+     owed to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he
+     has agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the
+     Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation.  Royalty payments
+     must be paid within 60 days following each date on which you
+     prepare (or are legally required to prepare) your periodic tax
+     returns.  Royalty payments should be clearly marked as such and
+     sent to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the
+     address specified in Section 4, "Information about donations to
+     the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation."
+
+- You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
+     you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
+     does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
+     License.  You must require such a user to return or
+     destroy all copies of the works possessed in a physical medium
+     and discontinue all use of and all access to other copies of
+     Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+- You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of any
+     money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
+     electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days
+     of receipt of the work.
+
+- You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
+     distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
+
+1.E.9.  If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project Gutenberg-tm
+electronic work or group of works on different terms than are set
+forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing from
+both the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation and Michael
+Hart, the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark.  Contact the
+Foundation as set forth in Section 3 below.
+
+1.F.
+
+1.F.1.  Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
+effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
+public domain works in creating the Project Gutenberg-tm
+collection.  Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may contain
+"Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate or
+corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other intellectual
+property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or other medium, a
+computer virus, or computer codes that damage or cannot be read by
+your equipment.
+
+1.F.2.  LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
+of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
+Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
+Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
+liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
+fees.  YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
+LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
+PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH F3.  YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
+TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
+LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
+INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
+DAMAGE.
+
+1.F.3.  LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
+defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
+receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
+written explanation to the person you received the work from.  If you
+received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium with
+your written explanation.  The person or entity that provided you with
+the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in lieu of a
+refund.  If you received the work electronically, the person or entity
+providing it to you may choose to give you a second opportunity to
+receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund.  If the second copy
+is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing without further
+opportunities to fix the problem.
+
+1.F.4.  Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
+in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS' WITH NO OTHER
+WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO
+WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTIBILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
+
+1.F.5.  Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
+warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of damages.
+If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement violates the
+law of the state applicable to this agreement, the agreement shall be
+interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or limitation permitted by
+the applicable state law.  The invalidity or unenforceability of any
+provision of this agreement shall not void the remaining provisions.
+
+1.F.6.  INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
+trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
+providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in accordance
+with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the production,
+promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works,
+harmless from all liability, costs and expenses, including legal fees,
+that arise directly or indirectly from any of the following which you do
+or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this or any Project Gutenberg-tm
+work, (b) alteration, modification, or additions or deletions to any
+Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any Defect you cause.
+
+
+Section  2.  Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
+electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of computers
+including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers.  It exists
+because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations from
+people in all walks of life.
+
+Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
+assistance they need, is critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
+goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
+remain freely available for generations to come.  In 2001, the Project
+Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
+and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future generations.
+To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
+and how your efforts and donations can help, see Sections 3 and 4
+and the Foundation web page at https://www.pglaf.org.
+
+
+Section 3.  Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive
+Foundation
+
+The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non profit
+501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
+state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
+Revenue Service.  The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
+number is 64-6221541.  Its 501(c)(3) letter is posted at
+https://pglaf.org/fundraising.  Contributions to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent
+permitted by U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
+
+The Foundation's principal office is located at 4557 Melan Dr. S.
+Fairbanks, AK, 99712., but its volunteers and employees are scattered
+throughout numerous locations.  Its business office is located at
+809 North 1500 West, Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887, email
+business@pglaf.org.  Email contact links and up to date contact
+information can be found at the Foundation's web site and official
+page at https://pglaf.org
+
+For additional contact information:
+     Dr. Gregory B. Newby
+     Chief Executive and Director
+     gbnewby@pglaf.org
+
+
+Section 4.  Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
+Literary Archive Foundation
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without wide
+spread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
+increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
+freely distributed in machine readable form accessible by the widest
+array of equipment including outdated equipment.  Many small donations
+($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
+status with the IRS.
+
+The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
+charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
+States.  Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
+considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
+with these requirements.  We do not solicit donations in locations
+where we have not received written confirmation of compliance.  To
+SEND DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any
+particular state visit https://pglaf.org
+
+While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
+have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
+against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
+approach us with offers to donate.
+
+International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
+any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
+outside the United States.  U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
+
+Please check the Project Gutenberg Web pages for current donation
+methods and addresses.  Donations are accepted in a number of other
+ways including including checks, online payments and credit card
+donations.  To donate, please visit: https://pglaf.org/donate
+
+
+Section 5.  General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic
+works.
+
+Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project Gutenberg-tm
+concept of a library of electronic works that could be freely shared
+with anyone.  For thirty years, he produced and distributed Project
+Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of volunteer support.
+
+
+Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
+editions, all of which are confirmed as Public Domain in the U.S.
+unless a copyright notice is included.  Thus, we do not necessarily
+keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper edition.
+
+
+Most people start at our Web site which has the main PG search facility:
+
+     https://www.gutenberg.org
+
+This Web site includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
+including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
+Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
+subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
diff --git a/old/20662.zip b/old/20662.zip
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..c04bc27
--- /dev/null
+++ b/old/20662.zip