ni:LL. SO] 



PSINCHATON — PSYCHOLOGY 



311 



Mallery, the pictured rocks of Monhegan 

 (Me.), the mica plates of Sandusky, etc. 

 Mallery also observes (p. 759): "With 

 regard to more familiar and portable arti- 

 cles, such as engraved pipes, painted 

 robes, and like curios, it is now well 

 known that the fancy prices paid for 

 them by amateurs have stimulated their 

 unlimited manufacture by Indians at 

 agencies, who make a practice of sketch- 

 ing upon ordinary robes or plain pipes 

 the characters in common use by them, 

 without regard to any real event or per- 

 son, and selling them as significant rec- 

 ords." The wood and stone arts of the 

 Haida have also suffered from forgery and 

 imitation. 



There is even a pseudo-American lan- 

 guage, the so-called Taensa of Parisot, of 

 which an alleged grammar and vocabu- 

 lary were published in Paris in 1882. 

 The evidence seems to prove this docu- 

 ment an entire fabrication (see Brinton, 

 Essays Am., 452, 1890; S wanton in Am. 

 Anthrop., x, no. 1, 1908). See Popular 

 fallacies. (a. f. c.) 



Psinchaton ('village of red wild rice'). 

 An unidentified Dakota tribe or band in 

 Minnesota, one of the divisions of the 

 so-called Sioux of the West. — Le Sueur 

 (1700) in Margry, Dec, vi, 87, 1886. 



Psinoumanitons ( ' village or gatherers of 

 wild rice'). A Dakota tribe or band, 

 probably in Wisconsin, one of the divi- 

 sions of the Sioux of the East. — Le Sueur 

 (1700) in Margry, Dec, vi, 86, 1886. 



PsinoutanhinMntons ('the great wild- 

 rice village'). A Dakota tril)e or band 

 in Minnesota, a division of the so-called 

 Sioux of the West. 



Psinontanhinhintons. — Shea, Early Voy., Ill, 1861. 

 Psinoutanhhintons.— Neill, Hist. Minn., 170, 1858. 

 Psinoutanhinhintons.— Le Sueur (1700) in Margry, 

 Dc'C, VI, 87, 1886. 



Psiseva. See Pipsissewa. 



Psychology. The psychological differ- 

 ences between the various divisions of 

 mankind have always been objects of 

 speculation and ingenious inference, but 

 out of it all has come little that can be 

 considered definite or satisfactory. Di- 

 rect positive data are scarcely to be had, 

 and the indirectdataavailable are far from 

 sufficient fordefiniteconclusions. Hence, 

 the specific question of psychological dif- 

 ferences between Indians and other races 

 is still an unsolved prolilem. There are, 

 however, certain points of view and some 

 suggestive data that may be discussed 

 under three heads: 



A. Observation by psychologists. 



B. Observations by teachers and other 

 officials. 



C. Evidences of differences, observ- 

 able in culture. 



A. Modern psychology has developed 

 'experimental methods for the study of 

 .differences in mental life, practically all 



of which can be successfully applied to 

 representatives of the various races. The 

 probability that differences will l)e found 

 among them has been greatly increased 

 by the work of Myers, Rivers, and Mc 

 Dougall, members of the Cambridge An- 

 thropological Expedition to Torres straits, 

 since the Papuans as tested for visual 

 acuity, color vision, visual sjmtial per- 

 ception, auditory acuity, upper limit of 

 hearing, smallest perceptible tone-differ- 

 ence, olfactory acuity, discrimination of 

 odor-strengths, memory and discrimina- 

 tion of odors, delicacy of tactile discrimi- 

 nation, localization of points touched, 

 temperature spots, sensibility to pain, 

 discrimination of small differences of 

 weight, degree of size-weight illusion, re- 

 action times, showed differences in most 

 cases from Whites. Unfortunately, we 

 have on record but one successful attempt 

 to apply the methods of psychology to 

 American natives. This is the work of 

 Prof. R. S. Woodworth and Dr F. G. 

 Bruner, upon such representatives of the 

 less civilized races as were on exhibition 

 at the Louisiana Exposition at St Louis 

 in 1904. A full and comprehensive report 

 on the tests for hearing has been made 

 by Dr Bruner. He tested Indians, 

 Whites, Filipinos, Ainu, and Congo na- 

 tives as to the upper limit of hearing and 

 auditory acuity. The results for the right 

 ear in the test for the upper limit were as 

 follows: 



Congo natives . 



Wliites 



Cocopa 



School Indians 



Tehuelche 



Filipinos 



Ainu 



Kwakiutl 



Average 



6 



156 



10 



63 



3 

 97 



7 



7 



33,223 D. V. 2468 



32,285 

 32, 123 

 31,975 

 30,240 

 29, 916 

 28, 846 

 28,296 



2344 

 977 

 2663 

 3551 

 2180 

 1873 

 1413 



The results for the left ear vary slightly 

 from the above; but not sufficiently to 

 make any material changes in the order 

 as given above. Though the differences 

 are small, the table, as a whole, indicates 

 that, while Indians are inferior to Whites 

 and Congo natives, they differ greatly 

 among themselves. In the tests for 

 acuity, the rank for the right ear wa.s: 

 Whites, Cocopa, School Indians, Congo 

 natives, Tehuelche, Kwakiutl, Ainu, 

 Filipinos; for the left ear, Whites, Congo 

 natives, School Indians, Cocopa, Kwa- 

 kiutl, Ainu, Tehuelche, Filipinos. While 

 there is some shifting of position for the 

 left ear, the relative positions of Whites, 

 School Indians, and Filipinos remains the 

 same throughout. As due allowance has 

 been made for accidental variations in 

 making these tests, the results may be 



