UTILIZATION OF BRAIN POWER IN ARMY 205 



equally divided among- "best," "average/' and "poorest." 

 After the officers' ratings had been made, the men were 

 given the usual psychological test. Comparison of test 

 results with officers' ratings showed: 



(a) That the average score of the "best" group was 

 approximately twice as high as the average score of 

 the "poorest" group. 



(&) That of men testing below C , 70 per cent, were 

 classed as "poorest" and only 4.4 per cent, as "best." 



(c) That of men testing above C +, 15 per cent, were 

 classed as "poorest" and 55.5 per cent, as "best." 



(d) That the man who tests above C -f- is about four- 

 teen times as likely to be classed "best" as the man 

 who tests below C . 



(e) That the per cent, classed as "best" in the various 

 groups increased steadily from o per cent, in D to 

 57.7 per cent, in A, while the per cent, classed as 

 "poorest" decreased steadily from 80 per cent, in 

 D to 11.5 per cent, in A. 



In an infantry regiment of another camp were 765 

 men (regulars) who had been with their officers for sev- 

 eral months. The company commanders were asked to 

 rate these men as I, 2, 3, 4 or 5 according to "practical 

 soldier value," i being highest and 5 lowest. The men 

 were then tested, with the following results : 



(a) Of 76 men who earned the grade A or B, none 



was rated "5" and only 9 were rated "3" or "4." 

 (&) Of 238 "D" and "D- " men, only one received 

 the rating "i," and only 7 received a rating of "2." 

 (c) Psychological ratings and ratings of company com- 

 manders were identical in 49.5 per cent, of all cases. 

 There was agreement within one step in 88.4 per cent, 

 of ca'ses, and disagreement of more than two steps 

 in only .7 per cent, of cases. 



Fig. 6 exhibits a striking contrast in the intelligence 

 status and distribution of "best" and "poorest" privates. 

 The personal judgment data for this figure were obtained 



