352 SECTIONAL TRANSACTIONS.—J. 
SECTION J.—PSYCHOLOGY. 
(For references to the publication elsewhere of communications entered in the 
following list of transactions, see page 392.) 
Thursday, August 27. 
MornincG. 
1. Presidential Address by Prof. C. Spearman, F.R.S., on Some Issues 
in the Theory of ‘G,’ including the Law of Diminishing Returns. 
(See page 174.) 
2. Miss V. Hazuirr.—sSpecial Abilities in Arts and Science. 
Note on the Use of Terms.—The term ‘ special ability’ is not meant to imply an 
innate endowment, or any kind of special psychological process, but a facility developed 
through special environmental influences and individual interests, acting over a 
number of years. The terms ‘arts’ and ‘science’ stand for the work involved in 
preparing for first degrees in the corresponding faculties of the university. The writer 
makes no assumptions as to any ultimate differences that there may be between 
science and arts subjects. 
Tests for the Guidance (as distinct from Selection) of University Students—An 
account of an experiment to discover tests for the special abilities involved in the 
work of the arts and the science courses respectively. 
The experiment was carried out on all students entering Bedford College (Uni- 
versity of London) in the years 1921-3, and repeated on the first and second group in 
the subsequent years of the period. 
Choice of Tests.—This was based on evidence with regard to disabilities of individual 
students. 
Description of Tests.—Three for Arts, four for Science, two for ‘ General Ability.’ 
Results.—The Arts tests are better than the ‘ General’ as a gauge of the students’ 
success in the Arts Faculty by approximately 25 per cent. The Science tests are 
better than the “ General’ as a gauge of the students’ success in the Science Faculty 
by approximately 100 per cent. 
AFTERNOON. 
3. Dr. C. R. McRar.—Some Testing of Physically Defective and of 
Mentally Defective Children. 
A.—Mental Tests and Spearman’s Principles of Cognition. 
Prior to the time of Binet, theory endeavoured to enlighten practice in the field 
of mental tests and failed. 
Binet effected an almost complete divorce between practice and current theory, 
and achieved a phenomenal success. 
Since then psychologists have been endeavouring, with but little success, to bring 
about a reconciliation. 
A possible solution of the problem would appear to be offered in Spearman’s 
Principles of Cognition, particularly the second and third of the noegenetic principles, 
as formulated in his book ‘ The Nature of ‘‘ Intelligence ” and the Principles of Cogni- 
tion,’ pages 63 and 91. 
For the first time the analysis given herein seems to be sufficiently ultimate. 
It seems likely, for example, that Ebbinghaus’s Completion Test is a satisfactory 
mental test not because ‘ intelligence ’ consists in ‘ combination-activity,’ but because 
the performance of the test is mainly a matter of educing novel correlates. 
On the basis of these noegenetic principles an a priori analysis was made of the 
component tests of the Stanford Revision. On these purely theoretical grounds the 
tests were marked as ‘ satisfactory ’ or as ‘ unsatisfactory.’ 
A practical measure of the relative value of the tests was then obtained by testing 
mentally defective and physically defective children. 
The coefficient of association between the a priori decision and the practical 
measure was found to be .89. 
