| 4 | 3.2 | 2.1 | 3 | 7 | 3 | 7 | 1:2.33
11 | 291-300 | 1 | 3 | 2 | 4 | 2 | 3 | 1 | 4 | 2 | 1 |10 | 0 |10 | 0 | 1:0.00
--------+-----------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+---+---+---+---+--------
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | 1.2.3 | 8.9 | 3.4.5.6.7 | 7.8.9 | 2.3.4.5.6 | 6.7.8 | 5.6.7 | 4.5.6.7.8 | 7.8.9 | 1.2.3 | | | | |
--------+-----------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+--------------+---+---+---+---+--------
12 | 301-310 | 1 | 8 | 3 | 7 | 2 | 6 | 5 | 4 | 7 | 1 |10 | 0 |10 | 0 | 1:0.00
========+===========+==============+==============+==============+==============+==============+==============+==============+==============+==============+==============+===+===+===+===+========

A series of correct first choices was obtained on May 11, greatly to the
surprise of the experimenter, for no indication had previously appeared
of this approaching solution of the problem. It seemed possible,
however, that the successes were accidental, and it was anticipated that
in a control series Julius would again make mistakes. But on the
following day, May 12, the presentation of the original series of ten
settings, which, of course, differed radically from the settings used
from May 4 to May 11 was responded to promptly, readily, and without a
single mistake. Julius had solved his problem suddenly and, in all
probability, ideationally.

Only three reactive tendencies or methods appeared during Julius's work
on this problem: (a) choice of the open door nearest to the starting
point (sometimes the adjacent boxes were entered); (b) a tendency to
avoid the "nearest" door and select instead one further toward the left
end of the group; (c) direct choice of the first door on the left.

The curve of learning plotted from the d