232 yonrnal of Comparative Neurology and Psychology. 



appeared. The cards were not shown simultaneously, but in suc- 

 cession. Thus, remembrance of the card just shown was required 

 for a successful response. On presenting the larger card the ani- 

 mal was fed, if he climbed to the top of the large box. 



No. 2. 

 Large. Small. 



Right. Wrong. Right. Wrong. 



Experiments were made to test whether the raccoons imitate 

 one another and whether they would come to perform an act from 

 seeing the experimenter do it. Briefly, I found that the animals 

 not only do not imitate one another, but that they do not pay the 

 slightest attention to one another except when playing, or fighting, 

 or when biting each other gently for the sake of mutual scratching. 

 I give an example of the experiments for the sake of criticism. 

 The method may be inadequate. Experiments arranged so as 

 to attract the animal's attention to the thing to be learned may 

 still reveal imitation. 



The raccoons did, in two forms of experiment, seem to acquire 

 an impulse to do an act from seeing me do it. In one, the act was 

 so easy that the evidence is almost worthless, but in the other the 

 act was so difficult that it would seem to be evidence for either 

 imitation or the presence of ideas or both. In other cases, how- 

 ever, the anmials failed to learn from seeing me operate a mechan- 

 ism. 



No. I had learned to open Box 16, whose door was fastened 

 by two horizontal wooden bolts, primitive barn-door latches. 

 Throwing both of these to the right released the door; throwing 

 one or both to the left fastened the door. The box was a diffi- 

 cult one to open, for having once thrown a latch to the right the 

 chances were that the raccoon's next movement would throw it 

 to the left. 



