Experimental Study of Associative Processes 131 



them together in comparison, this long and tedious process 

 would have been unnecessary. 



It might be stated here that the animals also acquired 

 associations of moderate delicacy in discriminating between 

 the different boxes. No cat tried to get out of A or B by 

 licking herself, for instance. 



The question may naturally be raised that if naturally 

 associations are thus vague, the common phenomenon of a 

 dog obeying his master's commands, and no one else's, is 

 inexplicable. The difference between one man and another, 

 one voice and another, it may be said, is not much of a dif- 

 ference, yet is here uniformly discriminated, although we 

 cannot suppose any such systematic training to reject the 

 other slightly differing commands. My cats did not so 

 discriminate. If any one else sat in my chair and called 

 out, " I must feed the cats," they reacted, and probably very 

 many animals would, if untroubled by emotions of curiosity 

 or fear at the new individual, go through their tricks as well 

 at another's voice as at that of their master. The other 

 cases exemplify the influence of attention. Repeated 

 attention to these sense-impressions has rendered them 

 clear-cut and detailed, and the new impression consequently 

 does not equal them in calling forth the reaction. 



The main thing to carry away from this discussion is 

 the assurance that the delicacy of the animal in associating 

 acts with impressions is nothing like the delicacy of the man 

 who feels that a certain tone is higher, or weight is heavier, 

 than another, but is like the delicacy of the man who runs 

 to a certain spot to hit one tennis ball and to a different spot 

 to hit one coming with a slightly different speed. 



