no. 2.] PSYCHOLOGICAL EXAMINING IN THE UNITED STATES ARMY. 419 



Table 78 shows the per cent of the individuals making any particular score (single time) 

 who gain in the second half of the double period. If all tests were "speed" tests, then these 

 percentages should all be high — i. e., all individuals at all levels should gain with additional 

 time. If any test were entirely a "power" test, then the percentages should be uniformly 

 low; the individuals should have reached their limit within the initial period and be unable 

 to better themselves. Inspection of the table shows that, in general, the percentages tend to 

 increase as the level of intelligence increases. This condition can certainly be said to obtain 

 for tests 2, 4, 5, 6, and possibly 7. We might say, therefore, in the case of these tests that they 

 are neither principally "speed" tests nor "power" tests, but tend to show the characteristics 

 of a "power" test more at the low levels than they do at the high levels. The high frequencies 

 of persons gaining at the upper levels (often 100 per cent) indicate that for the people making 

 high scores on single time the "speed" element is predominant. In the middle and lower 

 ranges the "power" element is more important. Many persons do not gain in the additional 

 time. It can hardly be said, however, that at these levels the "power" factor is ever so impor- 

 tant as is "speed." Very small percentages do not occur with the frequency of high percent- 

 ages. The falling off of percentages of test 5 and 7 at the upper end must not be taken to 

 mean that the "power" factor, in any legitimate sense of the term, comes in at this point. 

 Men of maximum intelligence are unable to increase their performance here because they 

 complete the test in considerably less than double time. 



Tests 3 and 8 differ from the other tests in not showing any dependence of the relative 

 importance of "speed" and "power" upon the level of intelligence. The series of percentages 

 seem to show no particular change (except at the very lower end of test 3 where there seems to 

 be some limitation of "power" and at the very upper end where double time ceases to be useful). 



It would be possible to give in all the cases of table 78 the median amount gained. These 

 values are, however, meaningless because the various items from one test to another, and even 

 within the same test, do not represent equal differences of difficulty. It is of interest to dis- 

 cover, however, to what extent individuals are prevented from doing themselves justice by 

 virtue of the fact that the times are too long; that is to say, to what extent the quick, alert 

 individual is handicapped in alpha. Table 79 shows the percentage of those attempting all 

 items and at least all but two items on each of the tests. The third column of the table shows 

 that only negligible percentages finish the test in single time, whereas a considerable number 

 finish in double time. In all tests but test 2 more than 16 per cent are through in double 

 time and are, therefore, scored too low. The rule upon which the time limits of alpha were 

 originally based was that not more than 5 per cent of an unselected group should complete all 

 items on any test. Double time, it will be seen, violates this rule in all tests. In view of these 

 results it is improbable that anyone would argue for an increase to double time, much less for 

 an increase greater than double time. The last column of table 79 indicates that even very 

 much greater percentages would accrue to the various tests were the time extended beyond 

 double time. 



Table 79. — Percentages attempting all items, and at least all but two items in double and single time. 



