Sixteen Experimental Investigations from the Harvard Psychological Laboratory by Hugo Münsterberg (good novels to read in english TXT) 📖

get a pleasing

effect, were pointed at both ends. They were of the usual size, 80×10

mm., but 1 mm. broader to allow for the effect of length given by the

points. F. was fixed at 45°, as in III. (a), on the points 40, 80,

120 and 160; V. moved also on fixed points, 60, 100, 140, 180, for

each position of F., but on each point was adjusted at a pleasing

angle. Thus, there were four positions of V. to each of F., each with

one or two angular positions; V. was always in the first quadrant.

 

The numbers of the table give the angular degrees of V.

 

F. 40, V. 60:—(1) 10 12 38 44, (2) 50 57* 60, (3) 70.

V. 100:—(1) 15 15 30 30, (2) 50 55 50, (3) 69 70*.

V. 140:—(1) 12* 14 18 18, (2) 60 60 49, (3) 72.

V. 180:—(1) 12 10 38, (2) 60 50, (3) 75.

[Many refusals at 140 and 180.]

 

F. 80, V. 60:—(1) 11, (2) 25 35 36*, (3) 45 48 55 58 60, (4) 69.

V. 100:—(1) 16 15, (2) 24 27 35 40, (3) 52, (4) 62 74*.

V. 140:—(1) 10 15 16, (2) 22 28, (3) 40 40 59 59, (4) 70.

V. 180:—(1) 14 8, (2) 28, (3) 41 46, (4) 68 79.

 

F. 120, V. 60: (1) 28, (2) 42 44 35, (3) 52 58 62 65 65.

V. 100:—(1) 9, (2) 23 25, (3) 38 40 40 42 58, (4) 68 70.

V. 140:—(1) 10, (2) 20 26 21* 24 29, (3) 34 42 42 44 55*, (4) 75.

V. 180:—(1) 17 26, (2) 40 42 46, (3) 62 64 70 70*.

 

F. 160, V. 60:—(1) 20 39, (2) 18, (3) 58 60 64 68 70.

V. 100:—(1) 23 25 30 38, (2) 44 44 49, (3) 55 58 65.

V. 140:—(1) 5, (2) 31 35 40 40 32, (3) 54 55 68.

V. 180:—(1) 50 50 58 60, (2) 75.

 

The tendency to mechanical balance would, according to our previous

analysis, lead the variable to take a direction which, in its

suggestion of motion inward, should be more or less strong according

as it were farther from or nearer to the center than the fixed line.

Such motion inward would, of course, be more strongly suggested by an

angle less than 45° than by an angle greater than 45°, and it seems

that the angles chosen are in general in harmony with this

expectation. For the positions where F. is nearer the center than V.

there is a preponderance of the angles less than 45° (cf. F. 40 and F.

80, V. 100 and 140; F. 120, V. 140, 180). When V. passes over to a

position farther from the center than F. (e.g., from F. 80, V. 60,

to F. 80, V. 100 and from F. 120, V. 60, to F. 120, V. 140) the change

is marked. In every case where F. is farther from the center than V.

(i.e., F. 80, V. 60; F. 120, V. 60 and V. 100; F. 160, V. 60, V.

100 and V. 140), there are to be noticed a lack of the very small

angles and a preponderance of the middle and larger angles. F. 160, V.

140 and 180 seem to be the only exceptions, which are easily

explainable by a dislike of the extremely small angle near the edge;

for it appears from the remarks of the subjects that there is always a

subconsciousness of the direction suggested by the lower pointed end

of the line. For the outer positions of both lines, a large angle

would leave the center empty, and a small one would be disagreeable

for the reason just given; and so we find, indeed, for F. 160, V. 100,

140, 160, the middle position the favorite one.

 

The representation of action may be translated into experimental terms

by expressing it as a line which changes its direction, thus seeming

to be animated by some internal energy. The forms chosen were three

curves ‘bulging’ from a straight line in differing degrees, and two

straight lines with projections. C and O were the subjects. The

results are given in outline.

 

Exp. V. Curve I. See Fig. 12, I

 

(1) Curve out (turned away from center).

 

(a) F. (80×10), V. Curve.

 

About half the positions of V. are farther from the center

than F. O at first refuses to choose, then up to F. 120 puts

V. farther from the center than F. C has a set of positions

of V. nearer the center and several second choices farther

than F.

 

(b) F. Curve, V. (80×10).

 

No position of V. nearer center than F. O puts line farther

out up to F. 160, then nearer than F. C has a set of nearly

symmetrical choices and another where V. is much farther out

than F.

 

(2) Curve in (turned toward center).

 

(a) F. (80×10), V. Curve.

 

C is absolutely constant in putting V. farther from center

than F. O, after F. 100, brings it slightly nearer.

 

(b) F. Curve, V. (80×10).

 

C, except for F. 40, invariably puts V. nearer center than

F. O moves between 90 and 135, putting V. farther to F.

100, nearly symmetrical at F. 100 and 120, and after F. 120,

from 100 to 135.

 

[Illustration: FIG. 12]

 

Exp. V. Curve II. See Fig. 12, II.

 

(1) Curve out.

 

(a) F. (80×10), V. Curve.

 

In every case but one V. is nearer center than F.

 

(b) F. Curve, V. (80×10).

 

C puts V. farther from center than F. O puts V. farther or

symmetrical up to F. 120, then nearer than F.

 

(2) Curve in.

 

(a) F. 80×10, V. Curve.

 

C has V. always farther from center than F., but a second

parallel set, omitting F. 40 (all second choices), of

symmetrical positions. O begins with V. farther from center,

but from F. 120 has V. always nearer, though gradually

receding from the center.

 

(b) F. Curve. V. (80×10).

 

C, refusing for F. 40, continues his parallel sets, one with

V. always nearer than F., another with symmetrical positions.

O begins with V. nearer, changes at F. 120, and continues

with V. farther.

 

Recapitulating these results, grouping together the outward and inward

positions of the curves, and indicating the distance of the line from

the center by C.-L., and of the curve from the center by C.-Cv., we

have:

 

Out.

 

Cv. I. (a) Indeterminate.

(b) C.-Cv. < C.-L. (except where large gap would be left).

 

Cv. II. (a) C.-Cv. < C.-L. (all cases but one).

(b) C.-Cv. < C.-L. (except where large gap would be left).

 

In.

 

Cv. I. (a) C.-Cv. > C.-L. (except a few cases to avoid gap).

(b) C.-Cv. > C.-L. (more than half of cases).

 

Cv. II. (a) C.-Cv. > C.-L. (except a few cases to avoid gap).

(b) C.-Cv. > C.-L. (except a few cases to avoid gap).

 

It is evident that in the great majority of cases when the curve turns

out it is placed nearer the center, when it turns in, farther from the

center, than the straight line. The numerical differences for choices

of the same type for the two curves are slight, but regular, and the

general tendencies are more sharply marked for the line of greater

curvature. When Curve II. is ‘out,’ it is usually nearer the center

than Curve I. for the corresponding positions of the straight line;

when ‘in’ it is always farther from the center than Curve I. The

greater curvature of II. has clearly produced this difference, and the

effect of the curvature in general is evidently to make its side

‘lighter’ when turned toward the center, and ‘heavier’ when turned

away. Thus, all but the exceptions already noted seem to belong to the

mechanically balanced arrangement, in which the suggestion of force

working in the direction of the curve has the same effect as, in Exp.

IV., the direction of the line. The exceptions noted, especially

numerous choices of O, seem governed by some fixed law. The evidence

would seem to be overwhelming that the reversals of the mechanical

balance occur only where the lines would be crowded together in the

center or would leave an empty gap there. The remaining

exceptions—the symmetrical choices mentioned, made by C—are

explained by him as follows. He says there are two ways of regarding

the curve, (1) as a striving in the direction of the ‘bulge,’ and (2)

as the expression of a power that presses together; and that the usual

choices are the result of the first point of view, the symmetrical

choices of the second. Naturally, a pressure bending down the line

would be conceived as working in a vertical direction, and the line

would be treated as another (80×10)—giving, as is the case,

symmetrical positions. Thus, we may consider the principle of the

suggestion of movement by a curve, as giving the same effect as if the

movement suggested had actually taken place, to have been established,

the positive evidence being strong, and the exceptions accounted for.

It is worth noting that the curve-out series are always more

irregular—the subject repeating that it is always harder to choose

for that position. Probably the demands of space-filling come into

sharper conflict with the tendency to mechanical balance, which for

the outward curve would always widely separate the two lines.

 

Exp. V. Curve III. See Fig. 12, III.

 

A series with the upper end turned out from the center was unanimously

pronounced as ugly. The inward position only appears in the results,

which are given in full.

 

(a) F. (80×10), V. CURVE.

 

F. V.

O. C.

 

40 106 126 68 73

80 106 128 109 102

120 140 88 156 110* 154 72*

160 104 66 182 80 136* 130*

200 X 52 178 220* 162

 

(b) F. CURVE, V. (80×10)

 

F. V.

O. C.

 

40 126 122 73 80

80 122 128 66 112* 40

120 90 116 97 156* 55 105

160 65 43 120 182* 87 134

200 70 50 148 66

 

This curve exemplifies the same principles as the preceding. O takes

the natural mechanical choice from (a) F. 40 to F. 120, and from

(b) F. 120 to F. 200. A mechanical choice, however, for (a) F. 120

ff., and for (b) F. 40 to F. 120, would have brought the lines too

far apart in (a), and too near together in (b), hence the

reversal. C inclines always to the mechanical choice, but recognizes

the other point of view in his second choices.

 

Exp. V. Curve IV. See Fig. 12, IV.

 

Curve in.

 

(a) F. (80×10), V. Curve.

 

C puts V. always further than F. and, even for F. 200, has

V. 230, X. O puts V. farther up to F. 120, then puts it

nearer than F., and always refuses to choose for F. 200.

 

(b) F. Curve, V. (80×10).

 

C always puts V. nearer than F. O puts V. farther for F.

40 and F. 80, beyond that, nearer than F.; but refuses to

choose once each for F. 40, and F. 200.

 

The same principles of choice appear. C maintains the

mechanical choice, and O reverses it only beyond (a) F.

120, and up to (