230 Animal Intelligence 



80, and 10 times) in two cases (QQ (chute) and RR (wood 

 plug). The act was unlike the one taught him in the former 

 case. 



In only one case (bolt at top) out of eight was there pos- 

 sibly any attempt at the act after he had been put through 

 which had not been made before. The 'yes or ?' in the 

 table with RR was a case occurring after the imitation of me 

 but before the putting No. i through. 



Out of 6 cases where he had himself failed, No. 3 suc- 

 ceeded (after being put through 113, 23, 20, 10, 10, 20 and 10 

 times) in 3 cases (chute bar, push down and bar inside). 

 The act was dissimilar in all three cases, bearing absolutely 

 no resemblance in one case. There was no unsuccessful 

 attempt at the act taught him in any of the cases. With 

 the chute he did finger the bar after tuition where he had 

 not done so before, but it was probably an accidental result 

 of his holding his hand out toward it for me to take as he had 

 formed the habit of doing. In the case of box Epsilon 

 (push down), with which he succeeded by pushing his hand 

 in above the lever (an act which though unlike that taught 

 him might be by some considered to be due to an idea 

 gained from the tuition), he failed entirely after further 

 tuition (15 times). 



Like the dogs and cats, then, the monkeys seemed unable 

 to learn to do things from being put through them. We 

 may now examine those which they did do of themselves be- 

 fore tuition and ask whether they learned the more rapidly 

 thereby or modified their behavior in ways which might be 

 due to the tuition. There are too few cases and no chance 

 for comparison on the first point ; on the second the records 

 are unanimous in showing no change in the method of oper- 

 ating the mechanisms due to the tuition. 



As in Table 9, figures followed by F mean that in that 



