diff options
| author | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 01:24:46 -0700 |
|---|---|---|
| committer | Roger Frank <rfrank@pglaf.org> | 2025-10-15 01:24:46 -0700 |
| commit | ce296b2ea7029b355f611e8d3b8fcfc434c2b94f (patch) | |
| tree | 3e6728e5e530f781f4f81737f8ea33ac805d9bb9 /old | |
Diffstat (limited to 'old')
| -rw-r--r-- | old/20662-8.txt | 13921 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/20662-8.zip | bin | 0 -> 248072 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/20662-page-images.zip | bin | 0 -> 22794251 bytes | |||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/20662.txt | 13921 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | old/20662.zip | bin | 0 -> 247476 bytes |
5 files changed, 27842 insertions, 0 deletions
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 Binary files differnew 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 Binary files differnew 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 Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..c04bc27 --- /dev/null +++ b/old/20662.zip |