8 HARRY H. WYLIE 



that the response is a " generalized " one, but one belonging 

 to the first type mentioned above. We have no definite 

 ground for believing that the stimuli mentioned — all be- 

 longing to the group called noises — -were in any way actually 

 different stimuli for the animals tested, so we can not 

 maintain that this furnishes an illustration of transfer 

 between " different " stimuli, the second type mentioned 

 above. 



Better illustrations, perhaps, can be found among cases 

 which are said to illustrate " substitution." Here one 

 feature of the situation being the dominant one in arousing 

 the response to the situation comes to be replaced by an- 

 other as the dominant element. Watson(ll) in his book on 

 Behavior defines substitution as follows: " By substitution" 

 we mean that a stimulus which originally did not call out 

 a given response comes later to call it out." He cites two 

 examples. One is from the Pawlow type of experiment on 

 dogs, in which a green light came to call out the salivary 

 secretion in large amounts when the sight of the food had 

 been the dominant stimulus for that reaction. The other 

 is the experiment with cats which Thorndike(12) offered as 

 a tentative proof of the presence of ideas in animals. Here 

 the clapping of hands came to be the dominant stimulus 

 in calling out the desired reaction, although the laying of 

 fish on the top of the cage had been the dominant stimulus. 

 Further examples might be taken from experiments with 

 rats learning the maze. In the work of Bogardus and 

 Henke(13) it was shown that rats make considerable use of 

 tactual stimuli in learning the maze, although when once 

 thoroughly learned the response was largely in kinaesthetic 

 and organic terms, as Watson contended. It is evident 

 then that here we have a substitution of kinaesthetic and 

 organic stimuli for tactual as dominant in securing the 

 required response. In the later work of Vincent(14) we have 

 admirable illustrations of the same sort of thing. She has 

 showed that the maze is probably learned in tactual, visual, 

 and olfactory terms, when the maze is so constructed as to 

 call these into play. Later the kinaesthetic and organic 

 come to be substituted for them. Yet the kinaesthetic 

 never becomes accurate enough to maintain correctness but 

 needs almost constantly some sort of cutaneous guidance. 



