Haggerty, Imitation in Monkeys. 353 



late the meclianism in a series of preliminary trials. These trials 

 were nsually on successive clays, rarely twice in one day. In all 

 experiments, except the Chute Experiment A, which was made in 

 the old cage in Cambridge, the animal was given five of these pre- 

 liminary trials, each fifteen minutes in length. In almost every 

 case the animal had either solved the problem or had become in- 

 dift'erent to the mechanism by the end of this time. 



At the close of these preliminary trials, imitation tests were begun 

 with the animals that had failed to learn of their own accord. 

 In these tests, the trained animal was allowed to perform in the 

 presence of the imitator ; after this, the latter was given an oppor- 

 tunity to get the food himself. He was permitted to work ten min- 

 utes, and longer, if he seemed about to solve the problem. If imita- 

 tion did not occur in the first test, the test was repeated. An animal 

 was not counted to have failed until he had seen the performance 

 a hundred times, and yet was not able to repeat it. 



Wherever the experiments varied from this schedule the fact is 

 stated in the account of the experiments. 



In some of the tests, the two animals were together in the cage ; 

 in other tests the imitator was confined in an observation-box within 

 the experiment cage while the imitatee got food by manijjulating 

 the device. This observation-box was approximatel}^ 40, by 60, by 

 80 cm. and was covered on five sides with woven wire of half-inch 

 mesh. 



4. Observation and Description of Behavior. — My first aim in 

 this investigation has been to record the facts of behavior. Just 

 what names to apply to the types of behavior manifested has been 

 a secondary consideration. The question of imitation in animals 

 bears, at present, a somewhat controversial aspect and I have felt 

 that I could best contribute to a clearing away of difficulties by 

 making a full and accurate record of exactly what I saw my animals 

 do under experimental conditions. This I have faithfully tried 

 to do, with the result that I have a paper full of details. However, 

 I am convinced that this is really the way of progress in this matter. 

 Mere forensic insistence on a certain point of view regarding the 

 problem of imitation in animals, may, in the absence of the real 



