DELAYED REACTION 67 



— ^and probably the rats also, although he does not say — were 

 hesitant about entering the boxes even with a difference of 

 25° C. These data make it exceedingly improbable that the 

 animals in the present tests were influenced by temperature. 



4. The animals did not derive cues from the doors at the 

 exits of the light boxes. Numerous control tests were made 

 in which all of the doors — and they were of large wire mesh, 

 and hence hard to see — were open. Under these conditions, 

 the animals reacted as though only one door had been open, 

 as was usually the case. 



B. Substitutes Derived from within the Subject's Body. — The dis- 

 cussion of these intraorganic substitutes will be divided into two 

 parts: (i) What were the internal cues used by the various 

 reagents?; and (2), how did these internal cues operate in order 

 to guide behavior? 



(a) The type of internal cue used. — i. Did the subject antici- 

 pate the order of presentation of the lights, i.e., were the cues 

 to the reactions the individual responses of an habitual series? 

 The evidence is perfectly unambiguous in support of the fact 

 that the reagents did not rely upon the presentation order of 

 the boxes in making their reactions. The order for each group 

 of animals (not children) followed a series of 30 presentations 

 so arranged that each box recun-ed an equal number of times. 

 A new series was given whenever one box was eliminated from 

 the experiments. Control tests in which the regular order of 

 presentation was varied were introduced practically once every 

 two weeks with all the animals. Controls were also made in 

 which the lights were not used. 



2. Did the reagents guide their reactions by after-images of 

 the light? Although the existence of after-images in animals 

 has not been demonstrated, we shall, for the sake of the argument, 

 disregard this fact and admit of their possibility. In order to 

 lead to correct reactions in our experiment, these after-images 

 must appear in the proper direction for each response. Their 

 directional position is a function of the orientation of the head 

 and eyes, and as a consequence the hypothesis can not explain 

 those correct reactions resulting from faulty orientations. After- 

 images can possess a possible function only in conjunction with 

 the maintenance of a constant orientation, and the hypothesis 

 would need to assume that these overt motor attitudes are but 



