1415 
TABLE II. 
| Accurate Fairly Inaccurate Inaccurate 
reproduction accurate memorv-image image of 
| reproduction | 5 Ss imagination 
| 
Sensation of novel M 3,85 20 80 15,8 
experience for the 
entire figure P — 
Sensation of novel | M 3,85 | 40 | - 10,5 
experience for a 
fragment Ip ML 60 
Recognition of the \ M 923 =! | 20 | 73,1 
entire figure 1 P 889 | 40 | 
cases: once a “conscience de nouveau venu” for the entire figure, 
and another time there was a sensation of novel experience for a 
special fragment). 
In addition we must observe that in M’s case all accurate 
reproductions depend upon memory. 
b. Fairly accurate reproductions. In this group the figure evokes 
far oftener a sensation of novel experience and in far the most case 
s 
observed, this occurs especially with those fragments, whose imaging 
and drawing at the second sitting had been inaccurate; recognition 
exists for the fragments that had been represented accurately. With 
M as well as with P recognition resulted from an inaccurate 
reproduction of a fragment in */, of the cases; however, it relates 
rather to the “Gestaltsqualitat” of the entire figure than to this 
particular fragment. 
c. Inaccurate reproductions. It is of the utmost importance to 
distinguish between the influence of reproductions that are to be 
considered as the outcome of the imagination and the influence of such 
as originate from the memory. M reported this differentiation almost 
from the outset; what is said about the results, therefore, refers 
to this observer only. 
a. Inaccurate images of imagination. In comparatively few cases 
the subject reports a sensation of novel experience, persisting, whole 
or part, in new imaginal formations. Only 5 out of 19 cases. Most 
times the entire figure is recognized at once (in 13 out of 14 cases). 
8. Inaccurate memory-images. They are few and far between, 
only 3 having been reported. The process of recollection differs 
essentially from the process following upon an image of imagination 
in that a sensation of novel experience is the rule here, whereas 
recognition is the exception (‘/, of the cases). 
The cases here reported, do not comprise two in which the 
