FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75  
76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   >>   >|  
ovement whatever throughout our experimentation. We need scarcely add that with the voluntary control of the giving of the signs, in the case at least of such small numbers as are here discussed, no errors, whatever, occurred. We have discussed the influence of the experimenter, i. e., the one who asked the horse to tap; now let us consider the influence of others present upon the horse. As a general rule, other persons had no effect upon the horse's responses. This appears from the failure of nearly all tests in which all of those present--with the exception of the questioner himself--knew the number which the horse was to tap. Even when the others concentrated their whole attention upon the number, it profited little as a close analysis of the 136 cases, which belong under this head in our records, go to prove. Thus, in the presence of a group of twenty interested persons--during the absence of Mr. von Osten--twenty-one problems were given to the horse, the solutions of which were known to everyone but myself, the questioner. Result: only two correct responses. Only when there was among the spectators someone to whom the horse was accustomed to respond or one from whom he regularly received his food, would such an influence be effective.[L] But such cases were few. The most important were the following: I at one time whispered a number to Hans (on the occasion of the tests mentioned on page 37), and Mr. von Osten asked for it the moment I stepped aside. Hans answered incorrectly even though I stood close beside Mr. von Osten; I did not, however, think intently of the number. As soon as I concentrated my attention upon the number he promptly responded correctly. Further cases are those mentioned on page 38, in which the keeper of the horse unintentionally aided in giving four dates which were unknown to all others present, including the questioner. This single instance shows the necessity of the rule that during tests in which the method is that of procedure without knowledge the solutions should be known to no one of those present. Finally the tests made by the September-Commission and reported in Supplement III (page 255) may possibly belong under this head. Since they were not followed out any further, I am unable to render a definite judgment upon them. In most of these tests the question itself, as put by Mr. von Osten, was not adequately answered, but curiously enough, however, the number which had been given
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72   73   74   75  
76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

number

 

present

 

influence

 
questioner
 

concentrated

 
giving
 

attention

 

twenty

 

belong

 
discussed

solutions

 

responses

 

answered

 

mentioned

 

persons

 

Further

 

adequately

 
curiously
 
occasion
 
moment

incorrectly

 

intently

 
responded
 

stepped

 

promptly

 

correctly

 

instance

 
judgment
 

Supplement

 

September


Commission

 

reported

 

possibly

 

definite

 

unable

 

render

 

Finally

 
including
 

single

 
unknown

unintentionally

 

necessity

 

method

 

question

 

whispered

 

knowledge

 

procedure

 

keeper

 

general

 

effect