PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINING IN THE UNITED STATES AEMY. 



Part I.— HISTORY AND ORGANIZATION OF PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINING 

 AND THE MATERIALS OF EXAMINATION. 



HISTORY AND ORGANIZATION OF PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINING. 



CHAPTER I. 



PREOFFICIAL PERIOD OF PREPARATION FOR NATIONAL SERVICE. 



On April 6, 1917, in connection with a meeting of a group of experimental psychologists 

 which was at that time being held in Emerson Hall, Cambridge, Mass., a session was arranged 

 by Messrs. Langfeld and Yerkes, with the approval of the chairman of the meeting, Mr. Tit- 

 chener, for discussion of the relations of psychology to national defense. Capt. W. S. Bowen, 

 instructor in military science and tactics, Harvard University, attended this meeting and made 

 valuable suggestions concerning the possible role of psychology. At the conclusion of the 

 discussion it was moved by Mr. Warren that a committee, consisting of Messrs. Yerkes, Bingham, 

 and Dodge, be appointed to gather information concerning the possible relations of psychology 

 to military affairs and to further the application of psychological methods to mditary problems. 



On the evening of the same day at an informal conference of the members of this committee 

 (Mr. Bingham's place was taken by Mr. Ogden) it was decided that the matter should be placed 

 before the councd of the American Psychological Association, so that the national organization 

 rather than any restricted or local group might take action. Following this conference the 

 president of the American Psychological Association prepared the following letter, which, on 

 Aprd 7, was dispatched to the members of the council of the association: 



Emerson Hall, 

 Cambridge, Mass., April 6, 1917. 

 To the Council of the American Psychological Association. 



Gentlemen: In the present perilous situation it is obviously desirable that the psychologists of the country- act 

 unitedly in the interests of defense. Our knowledge and our methods are of importance to the military service of our 

 country, and it is our duty to cooperate to the fullest extent and immediately toward the increased efficiency of our 

 Army and Navy. Formalities are not in order. We should act at once as a professional group as well as individually. 



As president of the American Psychological Association I apparently have choice of two lines of action: Either 

 I may recommend to the council that a special meeting of the association be called at once to consider the general 

 situation, or I may, instead, ask the council to authorize the appointment by the president of such committee or com- 

 mittees from the association membership as seem desirable. 



After consultation with a number of members of the association, I have chosen the second alternative, and I hereby 

 request the council's authorization to appoint such necessary and desirable committee or committees. 



The duties of any group or groups of members appointed to represent and act for us would evidently consist, first, 

 in gathering all useful information concerning the varied aspects of the actual and possible practical relations of psy- 

 chology to military affairs; second, to cooperate, as circumstances dictate with governmental agencies, with the National 

 Council of Defense, with local psychological groups or individuals, and with such other agencies as may develop; 

 third, to further the development and application of methods to the immediate problems of military selection. 



Already many of us are working for national defense in our respective communities. It is my thought that this 

 action by our council should, far from interfering with individual initiative, tend to unite us as a professional group 

 in a nation-wide effort to render our professional training serviceable. 



