628 
Experimental Psychology. — “Some further Experiments on 
Inhibition Proceeding from a False Recognition.” By Dr. 
F. Rorers. (Communicated by Prof. C. WINKLER). 
(Communicated in the meeting of September 30, 1916). 
In our previous paper “On Inhibition Proceeding from a False 
Recognition” (These Proceedings Vol. XVIII, p. 1412) we pointed 
out that a memory-image of a stimulus, either entirely or 
partially inaccurate, exerts on its recognition at some later time an 
inhibition revealing itself in a complete or partial sensation of novel 
experience for the primary stimulus, whereas there is no inhibition 
in the ease of an inaccurate image of imagination. We also presumed 
that the absence of a distinct inhibition to the recognition of stimuli, 
that had been altered objectively at their second presentation, was 
to be ascribed to the absence of a false recognition in the interval. 
(Cf. Ibid. p. 1222). 
This has been confirmed by a new series of experiments in so 
far as it appeared that false recognitions of objectively altered stimuli 
could only rarely be evoked experimentally, but also that, when 
we did succeed, the false recognition of the objectively altered 
stimulus exerted an inhibition similar to that of the inaccurate 
memory-image. The course of our researches was, on the whole, 
regulated as before, viz. the stimuli were coloured, meaningless, 
more or less complex figures on cardboard dises, 10 >< 10 em. During 
the sitting intended for the impression of the stimuli, a dozen of 
such figures were, in succession, presented to the observer in a 
tachistoscope of our own making, the exposure of each figure lasting 
about 7506. Each set was shown five times to two of our observers 
— W. and D. —. With M. we had to confine ourselves to three 
presentations as a larger number appeared to inhibit false recognitions. 
At a second sitting, 24 hrs. after the first, 7 or 8 stimuli were 
given under the same conditions. They resembled more or less some 
of the first set in form and colour. Our aim was to arouse false 
recognitions of the objectively altered stimuli in order to establish 
any possible action upon the subsequent recognition of the primary 
stimuli. In order to prevent the observer from expecting exclusively 
the exhibition of altered figures a number of primary figures, — together 
with some entirely new ones — were again exposed to view. 
At the third sitting again 24 hrs later — the primary figures 
were again shown, together with some new ones, so that the observer 
