DELAYED REACTION 53 



a method, when properly checked by careful observation of the 

 subject so that the task is changed in constant sympathy with 

 the subject's apparent needs, is excellently fitted to bring out 

 what the subject can do naturally as opposed to what it can 

 be trained to do. Of course the effects of training cannot, and 

 need not, be eliminated. However, they are not so great in 

 the method outlined above as they would be were many trials 

 given at each stage. The difficulty here is the same as that 

 mentioned when discussing the records for the raccoons viz., 

 where only a few trials are given, the critic has a better chance 

 to claim that the results are due to chance. Our conclusions 

 will seek to avoid this criticism. But in the last analysis, the 

 themselves must be their own justification. 



B. Are the Results Obtained froiu Animals and Children Com- 

 parable? — In the light of the foregoing method and of careful 

 obser^-ation of the children, the following points suggest them- 

 selves as the essential considerations in a relative estimate of 

 the conditions under which the children and the other animals 

 worked: (i) Fear. — This was overcome in the animals by the 

 preliminary training; in the children, by kindliness and cheer- 

 fulness on the part of the experimenter and by the child's ex- 

 amination of the apparatus as described above. (2) Motive. — 

 Hunger and punishment insured a maximum of effort on the 

 part of the animals. Candy, words of praise from the experi- 

 menter and a desire to excel its companions incited the child 

 to do its best. (3) Knowledge of the reaction desired. — The 

 rats, dogs and raccoons had to learn everything by themselves. 



(a) The preliminary series acquainted them with the fact that 

 there were three exits to the problem box and possibly also 

 with the fact that only one of these would be open at a time. 



(b) In the regular learning tests, these animals had to associate 

 the light and the open box in such a manner that the light 

 became the sign of the open box. (c) In the delayed reaction 

 tests, again, they had to learn that the open exit was always 

 in the box which had been most recently lighted. If we turn 

 now to the children, we find the following situation: (a) They 

 were told of the push buttons which for their problem corres- 

 ponded to the exits of the other experiment boxes. Where the 

 animals had had to learn the fact of only one open exit by 

 trial and error, the children were at least aided by being told 



