no. 2.] PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINING IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY. 309 



perceptual. Reaction to pictures (Biiiet): too difficult to score. Fable interpretation (Ter- 

 man) : time consuming and difficult to score. Multiple choice (Yerkes) : not easy to devise 

 enough alternates or to prevent coaching. Absurd pictures (Rossolimo, Terman, Lough): 

 time not available for devising and drawing the necessary number of pictures. Proverbs 

 (used by Keller, Winch, Whipple, Otis, Terman, and others) : too difficult for all but highest 

 levels of intelligence. Number ranking (Wells), arranging numbers in order, putting largest 

 at top: reason for rejection not recorded. Knowledge about familiar things (Terman), "Where 

 does tar come from?" etc.: reasons for rejection not recorded. Sequential picture test (used 

 by Bowler, Whipple, and others) : not included because of lack of time to secure suitable alter- 

 native series of pictures. Punched holes (Thurstone): not easy to secure enough alternatives 

 or to prevent coaching. Literary interpretation: too time consuming and "schoolish." Num- 

 ber completion (Rogers); two forms proposed: (1) sign missing, (2) number missing: too 

 "schoolish." Picture completion (Heilbronner, Binet, Pintner, Kelley): time not available 

 for devising and drawing suitable pictures. Hand and flag tests (Thurstone) : too easy ; hand 

 test probably correlates with dextrality. Match board test (Kemble): reasons for rejection 

 not recorded. Memory for sentences (Binet) : digits backward considered a more suitable test 

 of memory span and only one needed. Naming opposites: reasons for rejection not recorded. 

 Finding reasons (Terman) : rendered umiecessary by inclusion of the comprehension test, which 

 is easier to score. Sentence completion (Trabue): probably much influenced by schooling. 

 Healy form boards: rejected because of low value as a measure of intelligence. Naming words 

 (Binet) : adults often fail to enter into the spirit of this test. 



The methods which the committee devised for individual examining are appraised more 

 fully elsewhere (pp. 397ff., 477-480). It may be noted, however, that in the mam the nine criteria 

 which had been laid down as essential were reasonably well satisfied. (1) The large majority 

 of the tests chosen were mental measures whose validity had been sufficiently demonstrated. 

 (2) Coaching was rendered difficult by the formation of five alternative series for nearly all 

 the tests. (3) Few, if any, of the tests could be regarded as more than ordinarily subject to 

 vitiation by practice. (4) The question of susceptibility to malingering played little or no 

 part in the choice of tests, as it was early realized by the committee that this danger would 

 have to be guarded against by the psychological insight of the examiner rather than by the 

 inherent nature of the tests. (5) Most of the tests were of types known to appeal to the interests 

 of subjects who are likely to be given an individual examination. (6) One of the weakest 

 features of several of the tests was the probability of ambiguity of response. It can not be 

 denied that the personal equation is likely to enter in the scoring of responses to such tests 

 as designs, logical memory, vocabulary, comprehension, likenesses, and differences. As for the 

 avoidance of the verbal element in response, this was eliminated altogether in six of the tests 

 and reduced to an insignificant amount in several others. (7) It could hardly be maintained 

 that many of the tests selected are to any great extent tests of schooling rather than intelligence. 

 The vocabulary and arithmetical reasoning tests, the two which would come most naturally 

 under suspicion, are known not to be unduly vitiated by this factor. Non-English speaking 

 subjects were, of course, provided for by the performance tests A, C, D, E, and P. (8) The 

 time allowance, except for the cube construction, the Dearborn form board, and the ingenuity 

 test, are reasonably low (chiefly from 3 to 5 minutes maximum working time). Since the 

 plan of examination provides for giving only six or eight of the tests to a subject, the time 

 required for an individual examination would ordinarily range from 30 to 50 minutes. (9) Only 

 tests A , B, C, and E require material — material which is simple, convenient, and inexpensive. 



As we shall see later, notwithstanding the excellent features of many of the individual tests, 

 the methods of individual examination devised by the committee were in general abandoned 

 after brief use in the Army in favor of the Yerkes-Bridges and Stanford-Binet scales. This 

 was not due to unsatisfactoriness of the tests, considered individually, but to the fact that they 

 were not welded into a systematic scale or group of standardized scales which could be used con- 



