Various - Harvard Psychological Studies, Volume 1

V >> Various >> Harvard Psychological Studies, Volume 1

Pages:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55

II. (a) F. 2 LINES 80x10. V. SINGLE LINK 80x10.

F. V.
C. O. P.

40- 60 58, 114* 138, 20 96, 84 166
60- 80 48 40, 138* 100, 56 150
80-100 64 70, 162* 47, 87 128
100-120 70 to 80 60 53, 53 X
120-140 58 82 50, 48 35
140-160 74 95 to 100 22, 32 37
160-180 72 102 X, X 42
180-200 90 X X, X 50

Here the variable should supposedly be the farther out; but we have V.
58, 20 for F. 40-60; V. 48, 40, 56 for F. 60; V. 64, 70, 87 for F. 80;
no larger choice for F. 100-120; indeed, from this point on everything
nearer, and very much nearer. We can trace in these cases, more
clearly perhaps than in the preceding, the presence of definite
tendencies. _O_ and _P_, from positions in accord with the mechanical
theory, approach the center rapidly; while _C_ is seldom 'mechanical,'
but very slowly recedes from the center. The large number of refusals
to choose assures us that the subjects demand a definitely pleasant
arrangement--in other words, that every choice is the expression of a
deliberate judgment.

Taking again the experiments 1. (a) and 1. (b), and grouping the
results for nine subjects, _C_, _O_, _A_, _S_, _H_, _G_, _D_, and _P_,
we obtain the following general types of choice. The experiments were
repeated by each subject, so that we have eighteen records for each
position. I should note here that preliminary experiments showed that
near the frame the threshold of difference of position was 10 mm., or
more, while near the center it was 4 or 5 mm.; that is, arrangements
were often judged symmetrically equal which really differed by from 4
to 10 mm., according as they were near to or far from the center. In
grouping types of choice, therefore, choices lying within these limits
will be taken as belonging to the same type.

EXP. 1. (a) F.(80 X 10). V.(160 X 10).

1. F. 40. V. 40.¹

Types of Choice for V.
(1) 24 24 25 28
(2) 40 42 45 45 40 40 40
(3) 62 65
(4) 100 105 1O9 120 130 136 120
(5) 166 180 200 200 200 200 160 160

¹This table is obtained by taking from the full list, not given
here, of 1. (b) F. (l60 X 10), V. (80 X 10), those positions of
160 X 10 where the variable 80 X 10 has been placed at or near
40, thus giving the same arrangement as for 1. (a).

It might be objected that a group 40-65 (2-3) would not be larger than
one of 100-136 (4), but the break between 45 and 62 shows the zones
not continuous. Moreover, as said above, the positions far from the
center have a very large difference threshold.

I. (a) 2. F. 80:--(1) 24, (2) 50, (3) 68 70, (4) 80 85 94 95
85, (5) 102 104 110 120 124 126 125* 132, (6) 187; also V.
80:--(2) 40 40, (4) 80, (5) 120 120, (6) 160 160.

I. (a) 3. F. 120:--(1) 44 46, (2) 64 48 70 70, (3) 85 95 97
91, (4) 113 113 118, (5) 168 169 178;--44, X; also V.
120:--(1) 40 40, (3) 80 80 80, (4) 120 120, (5) 160 160.

I. (a) 4. F. 160:--(1) 25 26, (2) 40 50 57, (3) 82 85 95 100*,
(4) 114 115 130, (5) 145 145 156 162, (6) 196,
(7)--88*--150*--105.

I. (a) 5. F. 200:--(1) 20 23 28 36, (2) 55, (3) 108 124 130*,
(4) 171 189 199 195, (5) 220 230*, (6)--46--90--110*.

On comparing the different groups, we find that in 1 and 2 there is a
decided preference for a position somewhat less than half way between
center and frame--more sharply marked for 1 than for 2. From 3 onward
there is a decided preference for the mechanical arrangement, which
would bring the larger strip nearer. Besides this, however, there are
groups of variations, some very near the center, others approaching to
symmetry. The maintenance of geometrical symmetry at a pretty constant
ratio is to be noted; as also the presence of positions on the same
side of the center as the fixed line. Before discussing the
significance of these groups we may consider the results of Experiment
II. (F. double line 80x10, V. single line 80x10) without giving
complete lists.

We notice therein, first of all, the practical disappearance of the
symmetrical choice; for F. 40-60, 60-80, 80-100, a tendency,
decreasing, however, with distance from the center, to the mechanical
arrangement; for F. 100-120, and all the rest, not one mechanical
choice, and the positions confined almost entirely to the region
35-75. In some cases, however, the mechanical choice for (1) 40-80,
(2) 60-80, was one of two, _e.g._, we have for (1) 20 and 138, for (3)
70 and 162; in the last two cases the mechanical being the second
choice.

Now the reversals of the mechanical choice occur for Exp. I. in 1 and
2 (F. 40 and F. 80); that is, when the small fixed line is near the
center, the larger variable is distant. For Exp. II. the reversals,
which are much more marked, occur in all cases _beyond_ F. 40, F. 60
and F. 80; that is, when the double constant line is far from the
center, the single variable approaches. If the mechanical theory
prevailed, we should have in Exp. I. the lines together in the center,
and in Exp. II. both near the fringe.

From the individual testimony, based both on I. (_a_) and I. (_b_), it
appears that subject _M_ is perfectly uniform in mechanical choice
when the fixed line is the small line--_i.e._ when it moves out, the
larger is placed near the center; but when the conditions of
mechanical choice would demand that, as the larger fixed line moves
out, the small variable one should move out farther, he regularly
chooses the reverse. Nevertheless, he insists that in just these
cases he has a feeling of equilibrium.

_A_ also takes the mechanical choice as the small fixed line goes
farther from the center; but when the fixed line is large and leaves
the center, he reverses the mechanical choice--evidently because it
would take the small line too far out. As he says, 'he is always
disturbed by too large a black space in the center.'

_G_ almost always takes the mechanical choice;--in one whole set of
experiments, in which the fixed line is the large line, he reverses
regularly.

_H_ takes for F. (80x10) the mechanical choice only for the positions
F. 160 and F. 200--_i.e._, only when F. is very far from the center
and he wishes V. (160x10) nearer. For F. (160x10) he makes six such
choices out of ten, but for positions F. 160 and F. 200 he has V. 44,
65 and 20.

_S_ takes for F. (160x10) at F. 120, V. 185 and-70; says of V. 185,
which is also his choice for F. (160x10) at F. 80, 'I cannot go out
further, because it is so hard to take in the whole field.' For F.
(160x10) at F. 200, he has V. 130 and 60; says of V. 60, 'Very
agreeable elements in connection with the relation of the two lines.'

_C_ takes for F. (80x10) only one mechanical choice until it is at F.
120. Then always mechanical, _i.e._, nearer center; for F. (160x10)
makes after the position F. 40 no mechanical choice, _i.e._, V. is
nearer center.

It is evident from the above tables and individual cases that the
reversals from the mechanical choice occur only when the mechanical
choice would bring both lines in the center, or both near the edges,
and the subjective testimony shows from what point of view this
appears desirable. The subjects wish 'to take in the whole field,'
they wish 'not to be disturbed by too large a black space in the
center'; and when, in order to cover in some way the whole space, the
small line is drawn in or the large one pushed out, they have,
nevertheless, a feeling of equilibrium in spite of the reversal of
mechanical balance.

Accepting for the present, without seeking a further psychological
explanation, the type of 'mechanical balance,' in which amount of
space is a substitute for weight, as the one most often observed, we
have to seek some point of view from which this entire reversal is
intelligible. For even the feeling that 'the whole field must be
covered' would hardly account for an exact interchanging of positions.
If size gives 'weight,' why does it not always do so? A simple answer
would seem to be given by the consideration that we tend to give most
attention to the center of a circumscribed space, and that any object
in that center will get proportionately more attention than on the
outskirts. The small line near the center, therefore, would attract
attention by virtue of its centrality, and thus balance the large
line, intrinsically more noticeable but farther away. Moreover, all
the other moments of aesthetic pleasure, derived from the even filling
of the space, would work in favor of this arrangement and against the
mechanical arrangement, which would leave a large black space in the
middle.

The hypothesis, then, that the demand for the filling of the whole
space without large gaps anywhere enters into competition with the
tendency to mechanical balance, and that this tendency is,
nevertheless, reconciled with that demand through the power of a
central position to confer importance, would seem to fit the facts. It
is, of course, clear that neither 'mechanical balance' nor the balance
of 'central' with 'intrinsic' importance have been yet accounted for
on psychological grounds; it is sufficient at this point to have
established the fact of some kind of balance between elements of
different qualities, and to have demonstrated that this balance is at
least not always to be translated into the 'mechanical' metaphor.

_C. Experiments on Movement._

In the preceding experiments the element of size was isolated, and it
was sought to discover, in pleasing combinations of objects of
different sizes, the presence of some kind of balance and the meaning
of different tendencies of arrangement. The relative value of the two
objects was taken as determined on the assumption, supported by common
sense, that under like conditions a large object is given more
attention than a small one. If the unequal objects seem to balance
each other, then the only other condition in which they differ, their
distance from the center, must be the cause of their balancing. Thus
the influence of relative position, being the only unknown quantity in
this balance-equation, is easily made out.

The following experiments will deal with the as yet quite undetermined
elements of suggested movement, perspective and intrinsic interest. By
combining objects expressing them, each with another simple object of
the same size, another equation will be obtained in which there is
only one unknown quantity, the sizes of the objects being equal and
the influence of relative position being at least clearly indicated.

1. Movement.

The experiments on suggestion of movement were made by _C_, _O_ and
_P_. Suggestions of movement in pictures are of two kinds--given by
lines pointing in a direction which the eye of the spectator tends to
follow, and by movement represented as about to take place and
therefore interpreted as the product of internal energy. Thus, the
tapering of a pyramid would give the first kind of suggestion, the
picture of a runner the second kind. Translated into terms of
experiment, this distinction would give two classes dealing with (A)
the direction of a straight line as a whole, and (B) the expression of
internal energy by a curve or part of a line. In order to be able to
change the direction of a straight line at a given point, a strip of
tin two inches long was fastened by a pivot to the usual clasp which
slipped up and down on the vertical black strip. The tin strip could
be moved about the pivot by black threads fastened to its perforated
ends. A strip of cardboard glued upon it would then take its
direction. The first experiments, made with the usual 80x10 strip,
proved very disagreeable. The subject was much disturbed by the blunt
ends of the strip. The variable (pivoted) line was then slightly
pointed at the upper end, and in the final experiments, in which both
are oblique, both strips were pointed at each end. In Exp. III. a line
pointing at an angle from the perpendicular was set over against a
line of the same dimensions in the ordinary position.

Exp. III. (_a_) F. (80x10) pointed up toward center at 145 deg.,
V. (80x10).

F. 40:--(1) 39 48 48, (2) 60 66 68, (3) 97 97, (4) 156* 168*.

F. 60:--(1) 45, (2) 60 62 65 68 90, (3) 90 94, (4) 117 128 152
155.

F. 80:--(1) 50 44*, (2) 74 76 77, (3) 94 100 106 113 115 116,
(4) 123 124* 140 165* 169*.

F. 100:--(1) 36 58 60 65* 65 74 77 80 87, (2) 98 108 118, (3)
114* 168 186* 170 136*.

F. 120:--(1) 40 46 54 60 63 76 96 97 111, (2) 115 120 126*
137*, (3) 170 170*.

F. 140:--(1) 45 52 65 65 76 76 86 90, (2) 109 111, (3) 125
140*, (4) 168*.

F. 160:--(1) 38 50 50 60, (2) 80 90 96 98 98, (3) 176*.

F. 180:--(1) 21 23, (2) 54 70 84 90, (3) 100 100 108 114 120,
(4) 130 145*.

F. 200:--(1) -2, (2) 33 37 50, (3) 106 110 to 120 115 120 130
132 138 142.

The most striking point about these groups is the frequency of
positions far from the center when F. also is far out. At F. 120, a
position at which the mechanical choice usually prevails if F. is
smaller, a very marked preference indeed appears for positions of V.
nearer the center--in fact, there is only one opposing (first) choice.
Now, if it is not the wide space otherwise left which pulls the
variable in,--and we see from a note that the subjects have no feeling
of a large empty space in the center,--it must be that F. has the same
effect as if it were really smaller than V., that is, mechanically
'light.' We see, in fact, that the moment F. has passed the point,
between 80 and 100, at which both lines close together in the center
would be disagreeable, the preference is marked for inner positions of
V., and I repeat that this cannot be for space-filling reasons, from
the testimony of F. 200 (3).

And this 'lightness' of the line pointed in at 45 deg. is indeed what we
should have expected _a priori_ since we found that objective
heaviness is balanced by a movement out from the center on the
mechanical principle. If movement out and objective heaviness are in
general alike in effect, then movement in and objective lightness
should be alike in effect, as we have found to be the case from the
preceding experiments. The inward-pointed line does not actually move
in, it is true, but it strongly suggests the completion of the
movement. It enters into the 'mechanical' equation--it appears to
balance--as if it had moved.

The point, however, in which this 'lightness' of the inward-pointed
line differs from that of the small or short line is its space-filling
quality. It suggests movement in a certain direction, and, while
giving the mechanical effect of that movement as completed, seems also
in a sense to cover that space. We see from F. 180 (3), (4), and 200
(3), that the subject does not shrink from large spaces between the
lines, and does not, as in Exp. I. (_a_), 4 and 5, bring the variable,
which in both cases is evidently 'heavier,' to the center. This must
be from the fact that the empty space does not in this experiment feel
empty--it is filled with energy of the suggested movement. This view
is confirmed by the dislike which the subjects show to the position F.
40; F., being 'lighter,' but the object of attention as close to the
center, might well balance V. far out. But as if the whole variable
field would be in that case 'overfilled,' the records show 50 per
cent. of refusals to choose for this position.

In brief, then, a straight line suggesting movements in a certain
direction has the effect, in the general scheme of mechanical balance,
of a static position in which this movement has been carried out, with
the added suggestion of the filling of the space over which such
movement is suggested.

A few additional experiments were made with a point on the upper end
of V. The groups of III. (_a_) are maintained almost exactly: F. 120
is again strikingly 'mechanical'; after F. 120 there are only two
mechanical choices out of nineteen; while for F. 40, as in Exp. III.
(_a_), out of six choices, four are either refusals or question-marked.

Exp. IV. Both lines took oblique directions, and, to get a pleasing
effect, were pointed at both ends. They were of the usual size, 80x10
mm., but 1 mm. broader to allow for the effect of length given by the
points. F. was fixed at 45 deg., as in III. (_a_), on the points 40, 80,
120 and 160; V. moved also on fixed points, 60, 100, 140, 180, for
each position of F., but on each point was adjusted at a pleasing
angle. Thus, there were four positions of V. to each of F., each with
one or two angular positions; V. was always in the first quadrant.

The numbers of the table give the angular degrees of V.

F. 40, V. 60:--(1) 10 12 38 44, (2) 50 57* 60, (3) 70.
V. 100:--(1) 15 15 30 30, (2) 50 55 50, (3) 69 70*.
V. 140:--(1) 12* 14 18 18, (2) 60 60 49, (3) 72.
V. 180:--(1) 12 10 38, (2) 60 50, (3) 75.
[Many refusals at 140 and 180.]

F. 80, V. 60:--(1) 11, (2) 25 35 36*, (3) 45 48 55 58 60, (4) 69.
V. 100:--(1) 16 15, (2) 24 27 35 40, (3) 52, (4) 62 74*.
V. 140:--(1) 10 15 16, (2) 22 28, (3) 40 40 59 59, (4) 70.
V. 180:--(1) 14 8, (2) 28, (3) 41 46, (4) 68 79.

F. 120, V. 60: (1) 28, (2) 42 44 35, (3) 52 58 62 65 65.
V. 100:--(1) 9, (2) 23 25, (3) 38 40 40 42 58, (4) 68 70.
V. 140:--(1) 10, (2) 20 26 21* 24 29, (3) 34 42 42 44 55*, (4) 75.
V. 180:--(1) 17 26, (2) 40 42 46, (3) 62 64 70 70*.

F. 160, V. 60:--(1) 20 39, (2) 18, (3) 58 60 64 68 70.
V. 100:--(1) 23 25 30 38, (2) 44 44 49, (3) 55 58 65.
V. 140:--(1) 5, (2) 31 35 40 40 32, (3) 54 55 68.
V. 180:--(1) 50 50 58 60, (2) 75.

The tendency to mechanical balance would, according to our previous
analysis, lead the variable to take a direction which, in its
suggestion of motion inward, should be more or less strong according
as it were farther from or nearer to the center than the fixed line.
Such motion inward would, of course, be more strongly suggested by an
angle less than 45 deg. than by an angle greater than 45 deg., and it seems
that the angles chosen are in general in harmony with this
expectation. For the positions where F. is nearer the center than V.
there is a preponderance of the angles less than 45 deg. (cf. F. 40 and F.
80, V. 100 and 140; F. 120, V. 140, 180). When V. passes over to a
position farther from the center than F. (_e.g._, from F. 80, V. 60,
to F. 80, V. 100 and from F. 120, V. 60, to F. 120, V. 140) the change
is marked. In every case where F. is farther from the center than V.
(_i.e._, F. 80, V. 60; F. 120, V. 60 and V. 100; F. 160, V. 60, V.
100 and V. 140), there are to be noticed a lack of the very small
angles and a preponderance of the middle and larger angles. F. 160, V.
140 and 180 seem to be the only exceptions, which are easily
explainable by a dislike of the extremely small angle near the edge;
for it appears from the remarks of the subjects that there is always a
subconsciousness of the direction suggested by the lower pointed end
of the line. For the outer positions of both lines, a large angle
would leave the center empty, and a small one would be disagreeable
for the reason just given; and so we find, indeed, for F. 160, V. 100,
140, 160, the middle position the favorite one.

The representation of action may be translated into experimental terms
by expressing it as a line which changes its direction, thus seeming
to be animated by some internal energy. The forms chosen were three
curves 'bulging' from a straight line in differing degrees, and two
straight lines with projections. _C_ and _O_ were the subjects. The
results are given in outline.

Exp. V. Curve I. See Fig. 12, I

(1) Curve out (turned away from center).

(_a_) F. (80x10), V. Curve.

About half the positions of V. are farther from the center
than F. _O_ at first refuses to choose, then up to F. 120 puts
V. farther from the center than F. _C_ has a set of positions
of V. nearer the center and several second choices farther
than F.

(_b_) F. Curve, V. (80x10).

No position of V. nearer center than F. _O_ puts line farther
out up to F. 160, then nearer than F. _C_ has a set of nearly
symmetrical choices and another where V. is much farther out
than F.

(2) Curve in (turned toward center).

(_a_) F. (80x10), V. Curve.

_C_ is absolutely constant in putting V. farther from center
than F. _O_, after F. 100, brings it slightly nearer.

(_b_) F. Curve, V. (80x10).

_C_, except for F. 40, invariably puts V. nearer center than
F. _O_ moves between 90 and 135, putting V. farther to F.
100, nearly symmetrical at F. 100 and 120, and after F. 120,
from 100 to 135.

[Illustration: FIG. 12]

Exp. V. Curve II. See Fig. 12, II.

(1) Curve out.

(_a_) F. (80x10), V. Curve.

In every case but one V. is nearer center than F.

(_b_) F. Curve, V. (80x10).

_C_ puts V. farther from center than F. _O_ puts V. farther or
symmetrical up to F. 120, then nearer than F.

(2) Curve in.

(_a_) F. 80x10, V. Curve.

_C_ has V. always farther from center than F., but a second
parallel set, omitting F. 40 (all second choices), of
symmetrical positions. _O_ begins with V. farther from center,
but from F. 120 has V. always nearer, though gradually
receding from the center.

(_b_) F. Curve. V. (80x10).

_C_, refusing for F. 40, continues his parallel sets, one with
V. always nearer than F., another with symmetrical positions.
_O_ begins with V. nearer, changes at F. 120, and continues
with V. farther.

Recapitulating these results, grouping together the outward and inward
positions of the curves, and indicating the distance of the line from
the center by C.-L., and of the curve from the center by C.-Cv., we
have:

_Out_.

Cv. I. (_a_) Indeterminate.
(_b_) C.-Cv. < C.-L. (except where large gap would be left).

Cv. II. (_a_) C.-Cv. < C.-L. (all cases but one).
(_b_) C.-Cv. < C.-L. (except where large gap would be left).

_In._

Cv. I. (_a_) C.-Cv. > C.-L. (except a few cases to avoid gap).
(_b_) C.-Cv. > C.-L. (more than half of cases).

Cv. II. (_a_) C.-Cv. > C.-L. (except a few cases to avoid gap).
(_b_) C.-Cv. > C.-L. (except a few cases to avoid gap).

It is evident that in the great majority of cases when the curve turns
out it is placed nearer the center, when it turns in, farther from the
center, than the straight line. The numerical differences for choices
of the same type for the two curves are slight, but regular, and the
general tendencies are more sharply marked for the line of greater
curvature. When Curve II. is 'out,' it is usually nearer the center
than Curve I. for the corresponding positions of the straight line;
when 'in' it is always farther from the center than Curve I. The
greater curvature of II. has clearly produced this difference, and the
effect of the curvature in general is evidently to make its side
'lighter' when turned toward the center, and 'heavier' when turned
away. Thus, all but the exceptions already noted seem to belong to the
mechanically balanced arrangement, in which the suggestion of force
working in the direction of the curve has the same effect as, in Exp.
IV., the direction of the line. The exceptions noted, especially
numerous choices of _O_, seem governed by some fixed law. The evidence
would seem to be overwhelming that the reversals of the mechanical
balance occur only where the lines would be crowded together in the
center or would leave an empty gap there. The remaining
exceptions--the symmetrical choices mentioned, made by _C_--are
explained by him as follows. He says there are two ways of regarding
the curve, (1) as a striving in the direction of the 'bulge,' and (2)
as the expression of a power that presses together; and that the usual
choices are the result of the first point of view, the symmetrical
choices of the second. Naturally, a pressure bending down the line
would be conceived as working in a vertical direction, and the line
would be treated as another (80x10)--giving, as is the case,
symmetrical positions. Thus, we may consider the principle of the
suggestion of movement by a curve, as giving the same effect as if the
movement suggested had actually taken place, to have been established,
the positive evidence being strong, and the exceptions accounted for.
It is worth noting that the curve-out series are always more
irregular--the subject repeating that it is always harder to choose
for that position. Probably the demands of space-filling come into
sharper conflict with the tendency to mechanical balance, which for
the outward curve would always widely separate the two lines.