400 MEMOIRS NATIONAL ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. [Vol.xv, 



Section 3. — The performance scale.. 



The tests which had been included in the original individual examination series for testing 

 non-English-speaking subjects (tests A, B, C, D, and E) did not give satisfaction. Each had 

 shown reasonably high correlations with other measures, but norms were lacking and the list 

 did not seem to be sufficiently representative of the types of performance tests. Various sub- 

 stitutes had been used in the first four camps, particularly at Camp Lee, where large numbers 

 were given the Pintner-Paterson tests. Some of these proved extremely useful, but it was 

 decided to make a new secletion of performance tests and to standardize them on Army subjects. 



The choice of tests was made chiefly by Dr. J. W. Bridges and was based upon the following 

 considerations: (1) That tests should be selected which require a minimum of language on 

 the part of both examiner and subject; (2) that the scale should be composed chiefly of tests 

 which had already been found satisfactory with soldiers; (3) that the scale should test a 

 variety of mental functions; and (4) that the tests' should be economical of time. Following 

 are some of the reasons for the selections made: 



1. The ship test. — This test proved valuable in pre-war work at Ellis Island. 1 It is in the 

 Pintner-Paterson scale 2 and was used and recommended by Camp Lee examiners. The 

 instructions were changed so as to allow the subject to see the completed picture for 10 seconds 

 before the actual test. This was done in order to equalize the test for subjects who had pre- 

 viously seen a ship and those who had not; and also because the principle of demonstrating 

 each test in some way was adopted throughout. 



2. The manikin and feature profile. — (The manikin was devised by Pintner, the feature 

 profile by Knox) 3 . These tests are also in the Pintner-Paterson scale 4 and were recommended 

 by Camp Lee examiners. They were used together because they presumably test similar func- 

 tions, the former at about the five-year level, the latter at about eight. No demonstration of 

 these tests was necessary, because everyone has seen a man and a profile. 



3. Cube imitation (Knox) 5 . — The form and the problems now extensively tried out in the 

 Army were used rather than the Pintner standardization 8 ; but only one trial of each problem 

 was allowed, instead of two. The scores on this test gave a satisfactory distribution and corre- 

 lated well with the scores on the total individual examination in the first four camps. This 

 correlation (Pearson) was almost as high for one trial as for two — e. g., 0.71 as compared with 

 0.S0 in the case of 70 unselected men at Camp Devens. 



4.. Cube construction (Goadard) 7 '. — This test, which was test A of the old series, was highly 

 recommended by examiners in all four camps. It gave a good distribution of scores and a fair 

 correlation with the total of the old individual examination series. Parts (d) and (e) proved 

 too difficult for inferior subjects and were dropped. Instructions were also modified to adapt 

 the test to non-English speaking subjects. 



5. Form board (Dearborn) 8 . — This was test E of the old series. It had shown only fair 

 correlations with total score of the old series, but it gave a satisfactory range of scores and 

 was favored by a majority of examiners. For the present series it was modified by dropping 

 part (d) and adapting the instructions to non-English speaking subjects. An attempt was also 

 made to define more accurately what constitutes "a move." 



6. Memory for desigyis. — This was test Q of the old series (Terman designs). It had yielded 

 high correlations with total score of the individual examination series and had given general 



1 Knox, H. A. A Scale Based on the Work at Ellis Island for Estimating Mental Delect, J. of the Amer. Med. Assoc, vol. 62, 1914, pp. 741-747. 

 s Pintner, R., and Paterson, D. G. A Scale of Performance Tests, pp. 58-61. 

 • Op. cit.,p. 744. 

 < Op. cit., pp. 53-58. 

 » Op. cit., p. 742. 

 « Op. Cit., pp. 67-69. 



' Goddard, H. H. J. of Educ. Psychol., 1917, pp. 176-178. 



8 Dearborn, W. P., Anderson, J. E. and Christiansen, A. O. Form Board and Construction Tests of Mental Ability. J. of Educ. PsychoL 

 vol. 7, No. 8, pp. 448-449. 



