no. 2.] PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINING IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY. 383 



Table 50. — Percentage distributions in beta of men who either made E in alpha or were eliminated from alpha, classified on 



basis of probable language handicap and schooling. 



Two interpretations of these facts seem possible: Either (1) this non-English speaking 

 group, making up two-thirds of all non-English cases appearing in the regular run of a draft 

 group, is appreciably inferior to the English-speaking group with which it is compared, and 

 which constitutes 13 per cent — presumably very nearly the lowest 13 per cent — of the general 

 run of English-speaking cases, or (2) the non-English-speaking individual is penalized to some 

 extent in beta, even though not to the same degree as he is in alpha. 1 Adequate data were never 

 obtained for solving the problem here presented, the obvious difficulty being the lack of other 

 satisfactory measures for this group with which to compare their beta scores. If the second of 

 the above assumptions were accepted, the natural implication would be that a more lenient scale 

 of grades should be drawn up for use with non-English cases. In the absence of satisfactory 

 information regarding the status of the non-English group no such scale was attempted. The 

 further point might be urged that these men are probably handicapped for army purposes by 

 the same factors which influence their scores in beta. An attempt to size up, with a high degree 

 of fairness, the real native ability of these cases becomes therefore a more or less academic 

 problem for this situation, though it may become a matter of importance under other conditions. 



Of interest also in this connection is the comparison of English-speaking cases of fifth- 

 grade schooling or more with those of fourth-grade schooling or less in cases where both groups 

 have failed to make a grade above E in alpha. These data are also shown in Table 50. Again 

 it appears that, whether we consider the distributions or the central tendencies, the evidence 

 runs counter to the assumption that the group supposedly most handicapped by external 

 circumstances makes the most extensive gain in beta. For this problem, as for the preceding, 

 further analysis was not possible. Alternative interpretations, similar to those, offered for 

 the preceding problem, are evidently in place. 



It has been stated that results obtained with these data from Camp Custer were valuable 

 chiefly as suggestive and as pointing the need of further information. This was especially 

 true in so far as their bearing on the establishment of letter grades for beta was concerned. 

 The Custer data, as well as reports from other camps, had given the impression that beta was 



1 No assumption is made in the above statement that language difficulty is the main factor of importance in this comparison. There is some 

 evidence that groups characterized by complete illiteracy based on entire lack of educational opportunity show similar results. This factor may 

 obviously operate in conjunction with language handicap. 



