RECORDS. 183 



Mr. William Harper Davis's paper dealt with some twenty- 

 physical and mental measurements made upon one hundred pro- 

 fessional men of science, under the auspices of the Committee on 

 Anthropology of the American Association for the Advancement 

 of Science. No significant correlations were found between any 

 of the tests and the several departments of scientific activity, 

 although the cases were too few to warrant an expectation 

 of decided results. (The superiority of psychologists in "log- 

 ical memory" was attributed to the accident that the pas- 

 sage used in the tests was psychological in content.) Vivid 

 mental imagery was less common among the older than 

 among the younger men. Two cases of color-blindness were 

 detected. 



Comparison with Columbia College students, upon whom 

 the same measurements have been made, revealed no significant 

 difference between the two groups, except such as would 

 naturally arise from their disparity in age. 



Critical comments were made on some of the tests and on 

 the method of administering them. It is expected that these 

 measurements will be continued under the direction of Pro- 

 fessor J. McK. Cattell, who is engaged upon a comparative 

 study of scientific men. 



Mr. S. C. Parker presented a paper upon " Correlation of 

 School Abilities." Several investigations in Teachers College 

 have had for their subject "The Correlation of School Marks." 

 The method and results of these researches are set forth in Vol. 

 XI, No. 2, of the " Columbia University Contributions to 

 Philosophy, Psychology and Education." This paper reports 

 the results of some new calculations based on the marks of 245 

 boys in a New York City high school. 



It must be borne in mind that we do not know exactly what 

 school marks represent ; they may represent real ability in the 

 school subjects or merely the ability to get marks. 



In performing the statistical work, it is important to trans- 

 mute each teacher's marks separately. This point is mentioned 

 because the neglect of it by one investigator lays his results 

 open to question. 



