SECTIONAL TRANSACTIONS.—J. 547 
is concerned. QO may be regarded as a generalisation of 1—R?, where R is 
the multiple correlation coefficient between one variate and several others. 
The use of 1—R? as a criterion to test the significance of the independence 
of one variate and a group of several others is well known. Ina similar 
manner O may be used to test the significance of the mutual independence 
of several groups of variates. 
Dr. J. O. IRwin. 
It is possible that coefficients of association have been used too much in 
psychology. They should only be used after the most careful consideration 
of the assumptions on which they are based, and should in any case be supple- 
mented by statistical methods having a more direct meaning. An example 
of their careful use is given from some of the work done for the Industrial 
Health Research Board on ‘‘ Tests for Accident Proneness,” by Messrs. 
Farmer, Chambers and Kirk. 
Prof. H. T. H. Praccio. 
How far is g determinate? Analysis of tests by Murdoch, Brown, and 
Stephenson. No appreciable increase in determinateness possible by 
further increase in the number of tests. New tests with greater g-saturation 
needed. 
AFTERNOON. 
(Section meeting in two divisions.) 
Division 1. 
Prof. C. SpEARMAN, F.R.S.—The international plan for determining an 
individual’s unitary traits (2.0). 
Unprogressiveness of psychology ; revolution and evolution. 
Scheme to determine unitary traits; Thorndike’s plan; formation of 
committee ; extension of plan. 
International aid up to the present ; fundamental objections ; constructive 
suggestions. 
Experimental investigations already in progress: London; New York ; 
Nashville ; Washington ; Chicago. 
Mathematical advances made in theory of factorisation. 
Collaboration for the future: criticism; corroboration; supplementation ; 
interpretation ; special controversies ; final general conference. 
Dr. G. G. N. Wricut.—Personal relations and the small group (2.45). 
Two minds come into relation with one another when each seeks expres- 
sion in a frame of external circumstances of which the other is a part. 
A sociological view of such an event must apprehend the points of view of 
both persons as equally parts of one sociological situation which com- 
prehends the relevant mental states and behaviour of both. When these 
are in concord, and a common programme of activity follows, the dispositions 
in both minds which determine it may be regarded as constituting a single 
functional system or common mental frame. ‘The general lines of the more 
primitive common mental frames are innately determined; but (a) they 
undergo modifications specific to particular personal relations, and (0b) co- 
operative relations may rest upon common mental frames which have 
little or no innate basis but arise out of: (i) similar responses to a common 
situation ; (ii) complementary responses to a common situation ; (iii) the 
