H. Waite 
451 
of Table 16 &, the values being rather larger probably on account of the slightly- 
finer grouping. 
10. Comparison with Results of Previous Work. It would be well to compare 
briefly some of my results with those of the two works mentioned on p. 421. 
Whiteley and Pearson arrived at the following conclusions : — 
(i) The hand is a very highly correlated organ, far more highly correlated 
than the skull and even somewhat more so than the long bones. 
(ii) The parts of the left hand are distinctly more closely correlated than 
those of the right. 
(iii) The order of correlation of the first finger joints is identical for both 
hands. This order is as follows : — 
(a) The external fingers have the least correlation and the little finger always 
less than the index. 
(6) A finger has always more correlation with a second than with any other 
finger from which it is separated by the second. 
(iv) With corresponding members on both sides the extreme pairs show least 
correlation, and the pair of middle fingers higher correlation than the pair of ring 
fingers. 
In the paper of Miss Lewenz and Miss Whiteley the chief results which are 
comparable with those for the finger-prints are the following : — 
(v) There is a slight, but we cannot say definitely significant, preponderance 
in the correlations of the right hand bones over those of the left. 
(vi) Dividing the hand into marginal members, i.e. thumb, index and little 
fingers, and central members, i.e. middle and ring fingers, and the bones into 
"lower bones," i.e. distal and middle phalanges, and "upper bones," i.e. metacarpal 
bones and proximal phalanges, the correlations roughly speaking are highest for 
the upper bones of the central members and become less as we move out from this 
upper centre towards the lower and marginal parts of the hand. This is true 
whether we take pairs in lateral or in longitudinal series. 
(vii) The highest correlations occur between corresponding bones of the right 
and left hands. 
(viii) Generally there is a " rule of neighbourhood," i.e. any bone is more 
closely correlated with a second of the same series than with any other from which 
it is separated by that second. 
The above conclusions are to a certain extent mutually corroborative : e.g. (vi) 
and (iv) are in agreement, and (viii) agrees in substance with (iii h). Again (vii) 
agrees with Table IV, p. 130, of the " First Study," while (iii a) is in general sup- 
ported by Table XXII of the " Second Study." On the other hand (ii) and (v) do 
not agree. It should be noted, however, that the " First Study " was based on the 
measurements of the first finger joint only of both hands of 551 women, while for 
the " Second Study," in which all the finger bones were measured, only 37 to 44 
Biometrika x 58 
