I Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2007 with funding from Microsoft Corporation http://www.archive.org/details/developmentofintOObinerich ^" yi~6?u^-^A. (1857-1911) PUBLICATIONS OF THE TRAINING SCHOOL AT VINELAND NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF RESEARCH THE DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE IN CHILDREN (THE BINEX-SIMON SCALE) BY ALFRED BINET, Sc.D and TH. SIMON, M.D. TRANSLATED BY ELIZABETH S. KITE Diplome d'TnstrUction Primaire Superieure Paris le 23 juillet, 1905 Member of the Staff of the Vineland Research Laboratory j:^^ '^px ^&/ OEVOTCO ''76% 0^:' TO THE \0% ^3*; INTERESTS OF t^ ^ ^>: THOSE WHOSE 1*2 %^: MINDS MAVr NOT *^*^ NO. 11, MAY, 1916 ^t^ Copyright, 1916 BY Henry H. Goddard 1916 WILLIAMS & WILKINS COMPANY BALTIMORE CONTENTS CHAPTERS PAQH Editor's Introduction 5 I. Upon the Necessity of Establishing a Scientific Diagnosis of In- ferior States of Intelligence. {L'Annee Psych., 1905, pp. 163-191) 9 II. New Methods for the Diagnosis of the Intellectual Level of Subnormals. (UAnnee Psych., 1905, pp. 191-244) 37 "^ III. Application of the New Methods to the Diagnosis of the In- tellectual Level among Normal and Subnormal Children in Institutions and in the Primary Schools. {L'Annee Psych., 1905, pp. 245-336) 91 ,f^«' IV. The Development of Intelligence in the Child. {UAnnSe "^ Psych., 1908, pp. 1-90) 182 V. New Investigations upon the Measure of the Intellectual Level among School Children. {V Annie Psych., 1911, pp. 145-201) 274 87/ INTRODUCTION The first contribution of Drs. Binet and Simon to the problem of measuring intelligence appeared in L'Ann^e Psychologique for 1905. This volume reached America early in 1906. The Vine- land Research Laboratory for the psychological study of feeble- mindedness was opened in September of the same year. My first work as director of this Laboratory was to search the literature for anything that bore upon the problem. The above article had attracted so little attention from the American psychologists that in spite of dilligent search in bibliographies, reviews, original sources and by appeals to personal friends, Binet 's work in this line was never brought to my attention. It was not until the Spring of 1908 when I made a visit to Europe in the inter- ests of the work that I learned of the tests. On that trip a visit was made to Dr. Decroly in Brussels. Dr. Decroly and Mile. Degand had just completed a try-out of tests by Drs. Binet and Simon of Paris. Upon my return home I began at once to use the tests on the children of the Training School, employing Decroly's article as the source of information. Later I obtained Binet's article. These were the **1905'* tests, not the scale. In December 1908 I published a six-page account of these tests. In 1909 appeared L'Annee Psychologique giving the ''Scale,'* with the grading by years. Probably no critic of the scale dur- ing the past six years has reacted against it more positively than did I at that first reading. | It seemed impossible to grade intel- ligence in that way. It was too easy, too simple. 1 The article was laid aside for some weeks. One day while using the old tests, whose inadequacy was great, the new Scale came to mind and I decided to give it a fair trial. In January 1910 we pub- lished the first abstract of the scale — being a brief summary of the 1908 Binet-Simon article. i Our use of the scale was a surprise and a gratification. It met our needs. A classification of our children based on the Scale agreed with the Institution experience. Soon others be- gan to use the scale. Then came the critics. Their criticisms showed such a thorough misunderstanding of the plan, purpose 5 358871 6 INTRODUCTION and spirit of the authors of the Scale that we reaUzed what an injustice had been done by pubHshing our condensed outline — 16 pages out of 90. We at once resolved to publish a complete translation. Permission was obtained from Dr. Simon and the work was begun. It had to be crowded in with other work of the Laboratory, and, hence, there have been many delays. At last, however, the book is presented to the public. We regret the delay, but perhaps the present is the best time for presentation. Certainly it was never more needed than now. It will seem an exaggeration to some to say that the world is talking of the Binet-Simon Scale; but consider that the Vine- land Laboratory alone, has without effort or advertisement dis- tributed to date 22,000 copies of the pamphlet describing the tests, and 88,000 record blanks.* This in spite of the fact that the same matter has been freely published in numerous other places. The Scale is used in Canada, England, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, Russia, China, and has recently, been translated into Japanese and Turkish. The literature on the Scale has increased enormously; in 1914 there was already a bibliography of 254 titles; yet in all this time no complete translation of Binet's work on the Scale has appeared. A number of criticisms have appeared, many of which could not have been written if Binet's complete discussion of his Scale had been available, to the critics. It is little less than marvelous that the tests have had such a remarkable acceptance even in the mutilated form of our con- densed abstract. That the Scale was so eminently useful in this abbreviated form shows the masterly work of the authors. By many persons the Measuring Scale of Intelligence is sup- posed to be a mere incidental chapter in Binet's work. Scarcely anyone in America realizes to what an extent it was his magnum opus. That his writings on this subject fill a book of this size will be a great surprise. And yet this is only the half. Another volume the size of this (already translated and which we hope soon to publish) is devoted to the appHcation of the Scale. More- over, many other writings of Binet show how large a place it occupied in his thinking. *{Note: This pamphlet is a 16-page condensation of Chapter IV of this book, with such revisions as our experience with the tests on American children seemed to justify.) INTRODUCTION 7 This book as a whole constitutes a complete history and ex- position of the Measuring Scale as Binet left it. In Chapter I the authors show the origin of the Scale and their first methods of attacking the problem. ^-"-^ Chapter II describes the first results — a series of test questions arranged in order of difiiculty but not yet assigned to definite years. An immense amount of work had been done on this series, and the authors may have been justly proud of what they had accomplished, though it was soon to be largely discarded for a much more useful plan. This was the so called ''1905 Tests.'' /^ Chapter III shows the laborious and painstaking methods of standardization. Nowhere does Binet more clearly show his genius. It is here that he has taught us the method which must be used in all extensions or revisions of the Scale, that lay any claim to scientific value. / _ JiL Chapter J V he gives us the Measuring Scale for IntelU- gence — the so called 1908 Scale. It is the most complete state- ment of the Scale. Chapter V gives some of his later 1911 corrections and revisions — his last word on the subject.^ In making up this book we have attempted to include everything Binet and Simon wrote explanatory of the Scale. The reader will find many repetitions and some contradictions, and the date of each article should be taken into account in deciding which is the authoritative state- ment. It has been thought best to include all of these repetitions and contradictions, in order to show the development of Binet's own thought in regard to his Scale. Only in this way does the marvelous work that he did on this subject become fully appreciated. The translation has given rise to the usual translator's difficul- ties. Binet at times uses not only highly technical terms but also terms of his own invention. The usual ''untranslatable expressions" are found. Moreover, it is clear that typographical errors occasionally crept in. Where this was certain and it was clear what the correct form should have been, we have taken the liberty of making the correction. Where we have been unable 1 In this year he also prepared a final statement of the Scale for the "Bulletin de la Soci^te libre pour TEtude psychologique de I'Enfant." This has been translated by Dr. Clara Harrison Town, Lincoln, Illinois, 1913. « 8 INTRODUCTION to correct, we have kept the error, leaving the reader of this book the same problem that faces the reader of the original. Cases of this sort will be discovered in some of the tables that do not "total" as they should. In the question of free or literal translation, we have held more closely to the literal, especially with the test questions. This literalness seemed necessary in order to show as exactly as possible Binet's plan. But naturally it renders the questions, in many cases, inapplicable to American children. In regard to the translation, the editor feels that the skill and ability of Miss Kite have given a most readable book. Miss IQte is eminently fitted for the task. She holds a ''Diplome d'Instruction Primaire Sup^rieure, Paris le 23 juillet 1905." But more than that she is skilled in the use of the tests and is a close student of the writings of Binet and Simon. Many persons from this Laboratory have taken part in this work, in the way of reading and suggesting revisions; notably. Miss Eleanor A. Gray, and Miss Flora Otis, Librarian, also Mr. E. A. Doll, Assistant Psychologist, and Miss Florence Mateer. We are also indebted to Rev. Ernest Monge of Faribault, Minn., for the original translation of a part of the fourth chapter. Henry H. Gqddard, Editor, Vineland, N. J., 1916. \ o^ UPON THE NECESSITY OF ESTABLISHING A SCIENTIFIC DIAGNOSIS OF INFERIOR STATES OF INTELLIGENCE VAnnee Psychologique 1905 pp. 163-191 We here present the first rough sketch of a work which was directly inspired by the desire to serve the interesting cause of the education of subnormals. " In October, 1904, the Minister of PubUc Instruction named a commission which was charged with the study of measures to be taken for insuring the benefits of instruction to defective children. After a number of sittings, this commission regulated all that pertained to the type of establishment to be created, the conditions of admission into the school, the teaching force, and the pedagogical methods to be employed. They decided that no child suspected of retardation should be eliminated from the ordinary school and admitted into a special class, without first being subjected to a pedagogical and medical examination from which it could be certified that because of the state of his intelligence, he was unable to profit, in an average measure, from the instruction given in the ordinary schools. But how the examination of each child should be made, what methods should be followed, what observations taken, what questions asked, what tests devised, how the child should be compared with normal children, the commission felt under no obligation to decide. It was formed to do a work of administra- tion, not a work of science. It has seemed to us extremely useful to furnish a guide for future Commissions' examination. Such Commissions should understand from the beginning how to get their bearings. It must be made impossible for those who belong to the Commission to fall into the habit of making haphazard decisions according to impressions which are subjective, and consequently uncontrolled. Such impressions are sometimes good, sometimes bad, and have at all times too much the nature of the arbitrary, of caprice, of indifference. Such a condition is quite unfortunate because the 9 10 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE interests of the child demand a more careful method. To be a member of a special class can never be a mark of distinction, and such as do not merit it, must be spared the record. Some errors are excusable in the beginning, but if they become too frequent, they may ruin the reputation of these new institutions. Furthermore, in principle, we are convinced, and we shall not cease to repeat, that the precision and exactness of science should be introduced into our practice whenever possible, and in the great majority of cases it is possible. The problem which we have to solve presents many difficulties both theoretical and practical. It is a hackneyed remark that the definitions, thus far proposed, for the different states of subnormal intelligence, lack - precision. These inferior states are indefinite in number, being composed of a series of degrees which mount from the lowest depths of idiocy, to a condition easily confounded with normal intelligence. Alienists have frequently come to an agreement concerning the terminology to be employed for designating the difference of these degrees; at least, in spite of certain individual divergence of ideas to be found in all questions, there has been an agreement to accept idiot as applied to the lowest state, imhecile to the intermediate, and moron (debile)* to the state nearest normality. Still among the numerous alienists, under this common and apparently pre- cise terminology, different ideas are concealed, variable and at the same time confused. The distinction between idiot, imbecile, and moron is not understood in the same way by all practitioners. We have abundant proof of this in the strikingly divergent medi- cal diagnoses made only a few days apart by different alienists upon the same patient. Dr. Blin, physician of the Vaucluse Asylum, recently drew the attention of his fellow physicians to these regrettable con- tradictions. He states that the children who are sent to the *The French word dSbile (weak) is used by Binet to designate the highest grade of mental defectives, called in England feeble-minded. In America the term feeble-minded has been used in the same sense, but unfortunately it is also applied generically to the entire group of mental defectives. To obviate this ambiguity, we coined the word MORON (Greek Moros, foolish) to designate the highest grade of mental defect. We have accordingly translated debile by moron, except in a few instances where the context requires a different term. — Editor. ^ NECESSITY FOR SCIENTIFIC DIAGNOSIS 11 colony come provided with several dissimilar certificates. "One child, called imbecile in the first certificate, is marked idiot in the second, feeble-minded (debile) in the third, and degenerate in the fourth."^ M. Damaye, former house surgeon of Dr. Blin, adds this observation: ''One would have only to look through several folders of records belonging to children of the colony, in order to collect almost the same number of different diagnoses. ^'^ Perhaps this last affirmation is a little exaggerated, but a statis- tical study would show the exact truth on this point. We cannot sufficiently deplore the consequence of this state of uncertainty recognized today by all alienists. The simple fact, that specialists do not agree in the use of the technical terms of their science, throws suspicion upon their diagnoses, and prevents all work of comparison. We ourselves have made simi- lar observations. In synthesizing the diagnoses made by M. Bourneville upon patients leaving the Bicetre, we found that in the space of four years only two feeble-minded individuals have left his institution although during that time the Bureau of Ad- mission has sent him more than thirty. Nothing could show more clearly than this change of label, the confusion of our nomen- clature. What importance can be attached to public statistics of differ- ent countries concerning the percentage of backward children if the definition for backward children is not the same in all coun- tries? How will it be possible to keep a record of the intelligence of pupils who are treated and instructed in a school, if the terms applied to them, feeble-minded, retarded, imbecile, idiot, vary in meaning according to the doctor who examines them? The absence of a common measure prevents comparison of statistics, and makes one lose all interest in investigations which may have been very laborious. But a still more serious fact is that, be- cause of lack of methods, it is impossible to solve those essential questions concerning the aflfllicted, whose solution' presents the greatest interest; for example, the real results gained by the treatment of inferior states of intelHgence by doctor and educa- tor; the educative value of one pedagogical method compared with another; the degree of curability of incomplete idiocy, etc. ^ Blin, Les d^bilites mentales, Revue de psychiatrie. A6ut, 1902. ' Damaye. Essai de diagnostic entre les Stats de dibilite mentale. Th^se de Paris, Steinheil, 1903. 12 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE It is not by means of a priori reasonings, of vague considera- tions, of oratorical displays, that these questions can be solved; but by minute investigation, entering into the details of fact, and considering the effects of the treatment for each particular child. There is but one means of knowing if a child, who has passed six years in a hospital or in a special class, has profited from that stay, and to what degree he has profited; and that is to compare his certificate of entrance with his certificate of dis- missal, and by that means ascertain if he shows a special ameliora- tion of his condition beyond that which might be credited simply to the considerations of growth. But experience has shown how imprudent it would be to place confidence in this comparison, when the two certificates come from different doctors, who do not judge in exactly the same way, or who use different words to characterize the mental status of patients. It might happen that a child, who had really improved in school, had received in the beginning the diagnosis of moron (debile), and on leaving, the prejudicial diagnosis of imbecile, simply because the second doctor spoke a different language from the first. If one took these certificates literally, this case would be considered a failure. On the contrary, the appear- ance of amelioration would be produced if the physician who delivered the certificate of dismissal had the habit of using higher terms than the one who furnished the certificate of entrance. One can even go further. The errors which we note, do not necessarily emanate from the disagreement of different physicians. It would suffice for the same physician to deliver the two certifi- cates, if he did not employ for each one the same criterion; and it would certainly be possible for him to vary unconsciously after an interval of several years if he had nothing to guide him but his own subjective impressions. Might not the same thing also happen if his good faith as a physician happened to be in conflict with the interests of the institution which he directed? Might he not unconsciously as it were, have a tendency to lower the mental status of patients on entering and to raise it on dismissal, in order to emphasize the advantages of the methods which he had applied? We are not incriminating anyone, but simply calling attention to methods actually in use which, by their lack of precision, favor the involuntary illusions of physicians and relatives, in a word, of all those who, having an interest in NECESSITY FOR SCIENTIFIC DIAGNOSIS 13 the amelioration of the condition of the defective child, would have a tendency to confound their desires with the reality. Perhaps someone will raise an objection and say this uncer- tainty, has no special appH cation to diagnosis of the degrees of mental debility; it is also to be found in mental pathology and, in a general way, in the diagnosis of all maladies; it is the result of the empirical nature which is characteristic of clinical studies. It might be added, that, if anyone took the trouble to make a statistical study of the divergence in the diagnosis of different physicians upon the same patient, it would probably be found that the percentage of disagreement is very great in all branches of medicine. We believe it worth while to examine their objection because it permits us to enter more deeply into the analysis of the question. The disagreements of practitioners might come from three very different classes of causes: 1. Ignorance, that is, the lack of aptitude of certain physicians. This is an individual failure, for which abstract science is not responsible. It is certain that, even when the symptoms of a disease are absolutely clear, such a physician might fail to recog- nize them through incapacity. There are many accountants who make mistakes in calculation, but these errors do not dis- credit mathematics. A physician might not be able to recog- nize a ^'p. g." if he is himself a '^p. g.'' 2. The variable meaning of terms. Since the same expression has a different sense according to the person who uses it, it is possible that the disagreement of diagnosis may be simply a disagreement of words, due to the use of different nomenclature. 3. Lack of precision in the description of the symptoms which reveal or which constitute a certain particular malady; different physicians do not examine the same patient in the same manner and do not give the symptoms the same importance; or, it may be they make no effort to find out the precise symptoms, and no effort to analyze carefully in order to distinguish and interpret them. Of these three kinds of error, which is the one that actually appears in the diagnosis of inferior states of intelligence? Let us set aside the first. There remain the faults of nomenclature, and the insufficiency of methods of examination. The general belief seems to be that the confusion arises wholly 14 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE from an absence of a uniform nomenclature. There is some truth in this opinion. It can be proved by a comparison of terms used by authors belonging to the different countries. Even in France the terms differ somewhat according to the physician, the order of the admitted subdivisions not being rigorously fol- lowed. The classification of Magnan is not that of Voisin, and his, in turn, differs from that of Bourneville. Undoubtedly it would be a good work to bring about a unification of this nomen- clature as has been done for the standard of measurements and for electric units. But this reform in itself is not sufficient and we are very sure that they deceive themselves who think that at bottom this is only a question of terminology. It is very much more serious. We find physicians who, though using the same terminology, constantly disagree in their diagnosis of the same child. The examples cited from M. Blin prove this. There the doctors had recourse to the terminology of Morel, who classi- fies those of inferior intelligence as idiots, imbeciles and "debiles.^^ Notwithstanding this use of the same terms, they do not agree in the manner of applying them. Each one according to his own fancy, fixes the boundary line separating these states. It is in regard to the facts that the doctors disagree. In looking closely one can see that the confusion comes princi- pally front a fault in the method of examination. When an alienist finds himself in the presence of a child of inferior intelligence, he does not examine him by bringing out each one of the symp- toms which the child manifests and by interpreting all symptoms and classifying them; he contents himself with taking a subjective impression, an impression as a whole, of his subject, and of mak- ing his diagnosis by instinct. We do not think that we are going too far in saying that at the present time very few physicians would be able to cite with absolute precision the objective and invariable sign, or signs, by which they distinguish the degrees of inferior mentality. A study of the historical side of the question shows us very clearly that what is lacking is a precifie basis for differential diagnosis. NECESSITY FOR SCIENTIFIC DIAGNOSIS 15 A Few Historical Notes PINEL, ESQUIROL, SEGUIN, MOREL, BOURNEVILLE, SOLLIER, BLIN It is perfectly useless to enumerate all the authors who have attempted to classify idiocy. In medicine as in other sciences there are a number of writers of secondary rank who repeat the work of those who have gone before, making but insignificant alterations. We shall note only those who have brought new ideas and changed the direction of study. Pinel devoted a chapter of his medico-philosophical treatise on Mental Derangement, to * 'Idiocy, or the Obliteration of the Intellectual and Affective Faculties." But he confounds the states of stupor and dementia with actual idiocy, ''that which is so from the beginning," regarding which he makes one observa- tion; one paragraph is reserved for the "Cretins of Switzerland." Esquirol was the first to differentiate idiocy; he develops this fact in great detail and certainly understood its importance. Ordinarily when anyone cites the names of Esquirol in a history of idiocy it is to bring out the fact that we owe to him a classi- fication of idiocy founded upon the power of speech. It is true that Esquirol has made this classification. We give the passage in its entirety. Speech, that essential attribute of man, which has been given him that he may express his thought, speech, being the sign most constantly associa- ated in idiots with the intellectual capacity, gives the character to the prin- ciple varieties of idiocy. In the first degree of imbecility, speech is free and easy. In the second degrefe it is less easy, the vocabulary more limited. In the first degree of idiocy proper, the idiot uses only words, with short sentences. Idiots of the second degree articulate only monosyllables or some cries. Finally idiots of the third degree have neither speech, phrase, word, nor monosyllables.^ That is all. E^^quirol relates a number of interesting observa- tions reg9' Jing imbeciles and idiots, which form perhaps the most suggestive part of his study; but nowhere does he under- take to introduce his classification by speech; but, on the con- trary, by a total of the symptoms. Moreover, if he had attempted an application, he would have seen that the condition of speech *Des Maladies mentaleSf II, p. 340. 16 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE is not always sufficient to characterize the degree of mental in- feriority. We are therefore disposed to see in the so-called classi- fication only one of those accessory ideas which germinate in the mind of an author and to which he attaches only relative importance. The talent of Esquirol did not develop in this line. His real work consists in having definitely separated idiocy from other conditions which seem to resemble it, by a lack or by an equivalent diminution of exterior signs of intelligence. Condi- tions which simulate idiocy are stupor and different demential states. It is incontestable that Esquirol, by the insistence with which he developed these different points, shows the importance which they had for him. We purpose allowing the reader to be his own judge by making extensive extracts. Notice in the first place how Esquirol defines idiocy. It is he who first used the term idiocy as a substitute for idiotism, the word employed before his time, which has since been reserved for grammatical use. He says Idiocy is not a malady, it is a state in which the faculties are never manifested, or have never developed sufficiently for the idiot to acquire the knowledge which other individuals of his age receive when placed in the same environment. Idiocy begins either with life, or during that / period which precedes the complete development of the affective and in- ^/ tellectual faculties; idiots are what they must remain during the entire course of their lives. Everything in the idiot reveals an organism either of arrested or of imperfect development. It is not possible to conceive of changing this condition. Nothing can give to these unhappy beings, even for a moment, more reason or more intelligence. They do not attain to an advanced age, seldom living to be over thirty. When the brain is examined, defects of structure are nearly always found. Immediately following this is a passage in which Esquirol dis- tinguishes idiocy from insanity. This distinction is extremely important. It is worth while to quote his own words. Insanity and idiocy differ essentially, or else the principles of all classi- j&cation are illusions. Insanity, like mania or mono-mania does not com- mence before puberty; it has a period of growth more or less rapid. In- sanity, such as senile dementia, increases from year to year by the wear- ing away of the organs or by the successive loss of different faculties. All the symptoms show physical weakness; all the features are drawn, the eyes dull, depressed; and if the insane man wishes to act, he is moved by a fixed idea which has survived the general loss of intelligence. Insanity may be cured; one can conceive the possibility of suspending the symptoms; there is a diminution, or privation of the forces necessary to exercise the NECESSITY FOR SCIENTIFIC DIAGNOSIS 17 faculties, but the faculties still exist. A shock of the moral nature, medi- cines, might awaken him or arouse sufficient force to produce the mani- festation of some ideas, of some affection; other means, too, might remove the obstacles which suspend ^their manifestation. If a man having become insane does not succumb rapidly, he may run through a long course and arrive at a very advanced age. When an autopsy is performed, one sometimes finds organic lesions but they are accidental, because the thickening of the bones of the skull, or the spreading of the cranial plates ("recartement de leur tables,") coin- cident with senile dementia, do not in the least constitute defects of con- formation. It is the same with the alterations and changes in the sub- stance of the brain caused by the progress of age. The insane man is deprived of possessions which he formerly enjoyed; he is a rich man become poor; the idiot has always been in misery and want. The state of the insane may Vary, that of the idiot remains always the same. The one conserves much of the appearance of the complete man, the other retains many traits of infancy. In one case as in the other, there are no sensations or practically none; but the insane man shows in his organization and also in his intelligence something of his past per- fection; the idot is such as he has always been, he is all that he can ever be relative to his primitive organization. A few lines farther on, Esquirol makes another distinction be- tween idiocy and other mental states which resemble it only in appearance. It seems useful to reproduce this passage also. But there are individuals who seem to be void of sensibility and in- telligence, who are without ideas, without speech, without movement, and who remain where they are placed, who must be dressed and fed. Are they not idiots? No, surely not. These are not the diagnostic symp- toms. A single epoch in a malady cannot give an abstract idea of it; on the contrary one must see and study this malady in all its states, each one of which should furnish some factor to the diagnosis. I have pre- viously given the history of a girl who offered all the symptoms which one takes ordinarily for the signs of idiocy. That girl was terrified, and it was fear that chained the exercise of all her faculties. I cared for a young man 27 years of age, who, deceived by a woman and failing to se- cure the place he wanted, after an attack of insanity, fell into a state of apparent idiocy. The face of the invalid was highly colored, his eyes fixed and uncertain, his countenance without expression; it was neces- sary to dress and undress him and to put him to bed; he did not eat unless the food was put into his mouth; his arms hung at his sides and his hands were swollen; he always stood but never walked unless someone forced him to do so; he seemed to have neither feeling nor thought. Leeches applied to the temples, tepid baths, cold douches on the head, and above all a general eruption of the skin cured him. This young man told me, after his restoration to health, that a voice within him kept repeating, "Don't move, or you are lost." Fear made him immovable. Intelligence, 18 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE sensitiveness are therefore not lost, but the manifestation of these faculties is hindered by different motives of which the patients are conscious when they are cured. During my clinical lessons of 1822, we had at the Sal- pdtriere a young woman, B., who seemed to be in the most profound stu- por and in a state of absolute insensibility; she remained sitting by her bed and never spoke. Many times I pinched and struck her without her showing signs of pain. I had a seton placed on her neck and several blis- ters applied to different parts of the skin, always with the same apparent lack of sensation; the same obstinate silence, the same refusal to walk. One day this young woman did not appear at the clinic, and after that nothing could induce her to return. When she was cured, she told me that one of the pupils had pinched her. This impertinence angered her. What was permissable for me was not for the others and she resolved never again to appear. Certain monomaniacs, dominated by ideas of love or of religion, show the same symptoms. Certainly in all of these cases, the sensuous and intellectual faculties exercise themselves with energy; ap- pearances are deceptive; these are by no means cases of idiocy. Following Esquirol, there are a great number of authors who, one after the other, have attempted to define idiocy and other inferior states of intelligence, and who have presented a subdivi- sion and sometimes a classification of the different degrees of in- feriority of inteUigence. To make a complete history it would be necessary to study the attempts of Belhomme, Seguin, FeUx Voisin, Morel, Marce, Griesinger, Luys, Schule, Chambard, Ball, Dagonet, Ireland, Jules Voisin, Magnan, Sollier, Bourneville. Two principal types of classification have been given; the classi- fication according to symptoms and the anatomo-pathological or etiological classification. The latter are the less frequent, the less usual. We can cite two examples, one from Ireland, the other from Bourneville. Ireland,^ while recognizing that it would be of great interest to take account of the exact intellectual symptoms of idiots, be- heves that from the point of view of the treatment, and especially for prognosis, the generating cause of idiocy must be taken into account. In his book, he makes a separate study of the follow- ing etiological classes: 1. Genetous Idiocy. 2. Microcephalic Idiocy. 3. Hydrocephalic Idiocy. 4. Eclampsic Idiocy. * W. W. Ireland, The mental affections of children, idocy, imbecility and insanity, London, 1900, p. 39. NECESSITY FOR SCIENTIFIC DIAGNOSIS 19 5. Epileptic Idiocy. 6. Paralytic Idiocy. 7. Traumatic Idiocy. 8. Inflammatory Idiocy (the result of Encephalitis). 9. Sclerotic Idiocy. 10. Syphilitic Idiocy. 11. Cretinism (including the Endemic and Sporadic or Myxoedematous Forms). 12. Idiocy by Deprivation. In spite of the great interest of these distinctions, we cannot find any hght for us in this classification, especially from a peda- gogic point of view, because the form of inferior mentality with which we most often have to do is what Ireland calls congenital idiocy; it is necessary to know the degrees of this, and Ireland does not furnish us the means of distinguishing them. We would make the same remark in regard to the pathological classification of Bourneville which differs but little from the pre- ceding. Here it is : 1. Hydrocephalic Idiocy. 2. Microcephalic Idiocy. 3. Idiocy, symptomatic of arrest of development of the convolutions. 4. Idiocy, symptomatic of a congenital malformation of the brain (porencephaly, absence of corpus callosum, etc.). 5. Idiocy, symptomatic of atrophic sclerosis; sclerosis of one hemisphere, or of two hemispheres, sclerosis of one lobe of the brain, sclerosis of iso- lated convolutions, sclerosis of the brain. 6. Idiocy, due to hypertrophic or tumorous sclerosis. 7. Idiocy, symptomatic of meningitis or chronic meningo-encephalitis. 8. Idiocy, with pachydermic cachexia, myxoedematous idiocy. Bourneville was the first to study several of the preceding forms, porencephalous and myxedematous idiocy. In spite of the interest of this classification, it cannot serve as a faithful guide for study during the life of the patient, in whom the nature of the lesions is often very obscure. We shall therefore set aside the etiologic and anatomo-patho- logic, restricting ourselves to symptomatic classifications. After having carefully examined several of the latter we are now convinced that it will not be necessary to analyze all because all are conceived along the same lines. It is of Uttle import to know that for a certain clinician, there are two orders of inferior intelli- gence, while for another there are three or four; that is, one uses the terms complete idiocy and incomplete idiocy; that a second 20 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE proposes the new terms imbecile, feeble-minded, backward; that a third distinguishes the non-social from the non-teachable; or again that one has established the difference between the intel- lectual idiot and the moral idiot. All this is merely terminology. Questions of terminology are doubtless very important, but only on condition that there be unity of acceptance of the facts and the ideas which the terms indicate. But it seems to us that all the classifications of the authors cited above have the same lack of precision, a fault which consists essentially in this : the symptoms characterizing the different degrees of mental inferiority are not described in such a way that they can be practically recognized and distinguished. In order to justify our remarks it will suffice to cite some of the best known of these classifications. Dr. Jules Voisin, in his Lessons on Idiocy, proposes a classifica- tion which places under the title of idiots all degrees of intellec- tual weakness; it is one of the simplest and best that has been formulated: I. Complete idiocy, absolute, congenital or acquired, composed of two degrees. (a) The anencephalics, and those who have not even the instinct of self-preservation. (6) These who have the instinct of self-preservation and certain char- acteristics. These two degrees are 'incurable. II. Incomplete idiocy, congenital or acquired, which also includes sev- eral degrees, according to the presence, the absence, and the development of certain intellectual faculties, sensory or motor. It is susceptible of amelioration. III. Imbecility, congenital or acquired: the presence in rudimentary form of all the intellectual, instinctive and moral faculties; perversion or instability of these faculties. IV. Mental debility, characterized by the weakness or by the lack of balance of the faculties. It is now the motor centers, now the centers of sensation, now the emotional centers which have the supremacy in the excitation. When one of these centers predominates without being coun- terbalanced by the others, the result is either a "moteur" or a "sensoriel," or a "sensitif." We also give the classification of Dr. Bourneville, one of the last that has been published. It appeared in the Treatise on Medicine by Brouardel and Gilbert. I. Idiocy, complete, absolute, or of the first degree: comprises purely vege- tative beings without control over excretory organs. and without any in- tellectual manifestations. NECESSITY FOR SCIENTIFIC DIAGNOSIS 21 II. Profound idiocy, or idiocy of the second degree. Life here is essentially vegetative, and the ideas of relationships very limited. There is a gleam of intelligence, a fugitive attention. Motility, locomotion and prehen- sion exist to a limited extent. Appetite is exaggerated. Inability to retain secretions still absolute. III. Imbecility proper; the intellectual faculties are very incomplete. Attention fleeting ("fugace")- Perversion of instincts. Defective speech, limited language. Will without energy. These creatures are victims of every influence. IV. Slight imbecility or intellectual retardation. The intellectual facul- ties are retarded, and noticeably below the faculties of children of the same age. The attention may remain fixed, at least for a certain time. Movements, locomotion, prehension, and sensitiveness are generally in- tact. The stigmata of degeneracy are generally less numerous, and less pronounced than with imbeciles arid especially with idiots. V. Mental instability. Sometimes simple, but more often approach- ing imbecility, intellectual backwardness. Exuberant physical mobility, and intellectual mobility. Sudden impulses. VI. Moral imbecility. Nightmares, tempers, instability and perver- sion of instincts. Excessive credulity toward those to whom these chil- dren abandon themselves, and who dominate them. Egotism. A sexual development beyond their age, or sexual impulses which render them dangerous. Their intellectual faculties may be absolutely intact; intel- lectual defect is only a secondary characteristic. Stigmata of physical degeneracy are sometimes quite absent. Let us see some of the principal observations that can be made relative to these classifications; they will bear upon the enumera- tion of the symptoms and their definition. Enumeration of symptoms. The authors incorporate into their definitions a great number of motor troubles and disorders of every sort, belonging to the digestive and secretive apparatus, growth, etc. This enumeration would be in place in a clinical record, where all the observable symptoms of a patient are col- lected; but it has this disadvantage that it misleads the mind, when one attempts a definition where only the essential should be noted. Thus we see the authors laying great stress upon motility, locomotion, prehension and speech in distinguishing the different degrees of idiocy. We admit, that one frequently observes motor troubles with idiots, and that in a general way, the intensity of these troubles is greater in the most profound cases of idiocy. This is not surprising. From the moment that idiocy is admitted to be the result of a number of very different diseases of the brain, it is logical to infer that the diseases which produce an arrested 22 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE or perverted development in the intellectual functions should also provoke divers disorders in the sphere of motility; as for instance in the respiratory, circulatory, secretory functions, since all the functions of the living being are directly or indirectly under the influence of the nervous system. But it is no less necessary to establish in the definition of idiocy, a distinction between it and troubles of a different nature. Idiocy, as Esquirol was the first to recognize, consists in a weakness of the intelligence. If the physician gives a child the diagnosis of profound idiocy or of im- becility, it is not because the child does not walk, nor talk, has no control over secretions, is microcephalic, has the ears badly formed, or the palate keeled. The child is judged to be an idiot because he is affected in his intellectual development. This is so strikingly true that if we suppose a case presented to us where speech, loco- motion, prehension were all nil, but which gave evidence of an intact intelligence, no one would consider that patient an idiot. It results from these observations that the directing principle of ^ the preceding classifications does not seem to us correct. The view is lost that here it is a question of inferior states of intelli- gence, and that it is only by taking into account this inferiority ^ that a classification can be established. In other words a classi- fication of idiocy is a clinical classification to he made by means of psychology. Our conception would be badly understood if it were supposed that we intend to eliminate from the definition of idiocy all the purely somatic disorders so frequently observed in these unhappy cases. On the contrary it is very useful to take note of these symptoms, 'especially in cases where by their nature or their mechanism they reveal to us a mental weakness or insufficiency. They have less value in themselves than in what they imply. Hence the necessity for their analysis. Take for example a child of five years who does not walk. The retardation in locomotion is not in itself a sign of idiocy, since it might come from a great number of anatomical or pathological causes which are quite inde- pendent of the functioning of the intelligence, for example. Little's disease, or infantile paralysis. The motihty of the lower mem- bers must first be examined to see if it is normal and if the mem- bers are strong enough to bear the weight of the child and if that which is lacking is only the psychical factor of locomotion, that is to say the desire, the will to walk and the intelligent coordination of NECESSITY FOR SCIENTIFIC DIAGNOSIS 23 the movements of the two limbs. The same analysis must be made in relation to the inability to retain secretions, and in a general manner to all troubles belonging to the sphere of motility, hold- ing firmly in mind the idea that the physical disorders of idiocy have no value except as signs which reveal the intelligence. The second criticism to the preceding classifications, which is more serious than the first, has to do with the gradation of the symptoms. After one has perused the formulas which the alien- ists employ, he perceives that very little has been learned, because of their extreme vagueness. They are merely differences of more or less which are pointed out, and these differences, which are de- dared sufficient to establish the degrees, and consequently diag- nostic differences, are not defined at all. We are told for profound idiocy: '' There is here a fugitive atten- tion.^' What is that — a fugitive attention? In what does it consist? '^Motility exists hut a little." What does ''little'^ sig- nify? We are assured that imbecility differs from idiocy in this: in idiocy ^' there is a gleam of intelligence;" in imbecility ''the in- tellectual faculties exist in a very incomplete degree." We should like to know what difference must be established between ''a, gleam" of intelligence and ''very incomplete degree" of the intel- lectual faculties. We are again informed that in profound idiocy ''the attention is fugitive" while in imbecihty, "the attention is fleeting." We are unable to grasp the distinctive shade of mean- ing. We are also ignorant of the value of the following symptoms which are noted in the definition of imbecility, "defective speech" "limited language." We admit that we have no idea what pre- cise defect of articulation corresponds to ''defective speech." There are people who stammer slightly, and others whose speech is scarcely intelligible. All have defective speech. The same remark is true for "limited language." Very many peasants have a limited language. What extent of vocabulary must one possess in order to have a "limited language?" Again we are told for the diagnosis of imbecility "Will without energy." These are still the same kind of expressions so vague that they might be apphed even to normals. What shall we say of the formula for "slight im- becility" — with which we shall close. ". . . . the intellectual faculties .... are noticeably below the faculties of children of the same age." "Noticeably" is the word which forms the best resume of the essential character of these classifications. 24 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE Even Esquirol himself merits the same criticism when he dis- tinguishes idiocy from imbecihty, in writing extraordinary phrases like the following: ''with imbeciles the organization is more or less perfect," ''with idiots the senses are scarcely outlined — the organiza- tion is incomplete, etc.'' Evidently Esquirol has set a bad example and everyone has followed him. We were therefore right in saying as we did, that it is a fixed basis of differential diagnosis which is lacking with the alienists. The vagueness of their formulas reveals the vagueness of their ideas. They cling to characteristics which are by "more or less," and they permit themselves to be guided by a subjective impres- sion which they do not seem to think necessary to analyze, and which therefore would be impossible to justify. We shall never be able to emphasize sufficiently how far removed from scientific methods are such empirical processes. Quantitative differences, such as we have noted, are of no value unless they are measured, even if measured but crudely. In spite of these objections we wilhngly recognize that alienists, because of their practice and their medical insight, arrive very quickly at judging and classifying a child. But these judgments and these classifications are made by subjective processes, and no ahenist would be able to tell with precision, for example, how many years a certain backward child was behind a normal one of the same age. The distinction between slight mental defect and normality, which is so difficult to trace and yet so interesting, re- mains therefore completely inaccessible. Following the symptomatic classifications, we find another type, that of psychological classifications. In these, less attention is paid to somatic symptoms, while the interest is concentrated on the degree of intelligence. The idea is quite recent. Nevertheless it would seem that it already existed in Seguin's book. In that singular work, so remarkable as a practitioner's, so weak as a theorist's, we find the extraordinary idea that idiocy depends on a weakness of the will. The idiot would not be an idiot, if he did not wish to be one. It is useless to stop to discuss this absurd statement, to which several authors — those at least who have had the patience to read the work of Seguin^ — have given due justice. We have pointed out this error, * E. Seguin, Traitement moral, hygihne et Education des idiots et des autres enfants arri6res, Paris, J.-B. Bailli^re, 1846, p. 170. NECESSITY FOR SCIENTIFIC DIAGNOSIS 25 because Seguin seemed to grasp, very vaguely it is true, that it is by psychological study that idiots must be classified. We shall not lay stress upon this. P. SolUer^ was the first to propose a psychological classification, the fir st7 in reality, who attempted to establish a classification of the degrees of idiocy based on a single psychological characteristic. That characteristic is the state of the attention. The author, having formulated this principle, deduces schematically the fol- lowing division: Absolute idiocy, characterized by the absolute and complete absence of attention. Simple idiocy, in which there is weakness or difficulty of attention. Imbecility, in which there is instability of attention. This curious attempt seems to us to be rightly directed because it is essentially psychological. It is by a mental quality alone that Sollier attempts to distinguish idiots. Perhaps, however, he did not himself reaUze the value of the principle which directed him, because he continued to reproduce the definition of his prede- cessors according to whom idiocy is ''an affection of the brain . . . . characterized by trouble with the intellectual, sen- sory and motor functions." The expression "motor" which he uses seems to prove that, in his thought, idiocy is not exclusively a mental infirmity. As to the intellectual faculty by which SoUier chose to distinguish different kinds of idiots, he has made an un- happy selection. Why should he have chosen attention before memory, or imagination, or comprehension, or judgment? This has very truly the appearance of the a priori system. A distinc- tion of this nature ought to be made only from observations taken from life. The intellectual functions which are the first to de- velop should be sought out, how they arrange themselves, in what order they appear, how they coordinate. This is the true, the only method. To be sure this is laborious enough; very many patients must be examined, and when one is willing to analyze concrete facts, he seldom arrives at conclusions that can be ele- gantly expressed in so brief a formula. These brief formulas be- long to hterature. The classification of Sollier is more hterary than clinical. * Psychologic de Vidiot et de I'imbicile, Paris, Alcan, p. 36. 26 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE We see very easily, nevertheless, how the idea came to him of making attention the key to idiocy. Ribot, who recently pub- lished an important monograph entitled, ''Psychology of Atten- tion,'' obeyed that quite natural tendency among authors of mon- ographs, to exaggerate the importance of his subject; he insisted especially on the comparison between spontaneous and voluntary attention, concluding that the spontaneous form, which is the primitive, is more important than the other. SolHer, impressed with this argument, which is true only in general psychology, transported it to the cUnic, that is to say, into individual psychol- ogy, where it is probably false, because individuals seem to differ, not so much by the degree of spontaneous attention, as by the degree of voluntary or dehberate attention. And Sollier has once more followed this preconceived idea, when he supposes that at- tention, because it is the most important of the faculties of mind (which, by the way, is subject to question), presents necessarily a development parallel to that of all the intellectual faculties, and that its measure will, therefore, serve as the measure of the intel- ligence. Different observers, Voisin^ for example, have cited interesting facts which go to prove the contrary. And now a last objection, Sollier does not indicate by what signs one can recognize the weakness, the difficulty, the instability of the attention, nor how one can measure this so as to make a diag- nosis. He contents himself in his chapter on attention with a general and rather vague description in which he makes numerous citations from Ribot, but in which one searches in vain for precise observations upon idiots or imbeciles. The author remains in the realm of general ideas for which his mind has an evident predilec- tion; he never touches ground, never cites a fact. A character- istic sign of this manner is to speak of "the idiot" and "the im- becile," and to describe the states of attention of these abstract entities. We think it worth while to cite several passages which illustrate how the author has grasped his subject. Here is a passage in which he describes the attention of an idiot: With the absolute idiot the attention is reduced to its simplest mani- festation, one can almost say it does not exist. At times only the sight of nourishment can make him lose his indifference. Sometimes by surpris- ing him, one may catch a gleam of passing attention, which vanishes even ' Legons sur Vdiotiey p. 80. NECESSITY FOR SCIENTIFIC DIAGNOSIS 27 more quickly than it appeared. ^ On hearing a loud harsh noise for in- stance, the idiot turns about or simply turns his eyes, then falls into the habitual impassiveness from which nothing can arouse him. He has no ideas, no perception, scarcely any sensations. With the simple idiot it is often difficult to arouse the attention of which the subject is capable, and it is necessary to resort to every expedient which pedagogy can fur- nish — such as for instance, pictures and colors. Idiots seem to be especi- ally visualists. The attention of the imbecile is primarily, wandering. With the greatest facility, it passes from one subject to another, with no connection between the statements. While still young, when questioned, he will let his gaze wander, will handle objects about him, and make no reply until after you have repeated the same question many times. Scarcely has he replied by a few words uttered without thought, before he recommences his manoeuvres or ^ets to babbling or to singing. He will keep repeating that which is said to him of serious matters which in pass- ing have caught his voluntary attention. These few instances show that the author has observed many idiots, and that he has famiharized himself with their physiognomy their gestures, their manners. There are very many interesting facts in these rather vague descriptions. But the practitioner who would take such descriptions as a final guide in classifying idiots, would be very much hampered. That which he would need and which SoUier does not give, is a technique capable of measuring the degrees of attention and of recording the quanti- tative variations. We cannot, however, reproach SolUer for having made this important omission in his book. Methods of measuring attention are still scarcely known; this is one of the least advanced branches of experimental psychology. It is unnecessary to add that in spite of these criticisms, the work of Sollier^ presents the greatest interest. We would note as very curious, the distinction which he majies between ''distraction dissipated'^ and ''distraction absorbed." We shall return to this point at another time when we study the attention of the feeble-minded. In closing this history we wish to speak of a recent experiment, scarcely a year old, due to the efforts of Dr. Blin and his pupil, 8 Let us emphasize in passing that interesting expression, whose end is only verbalism; verbalism is the peril of generalizers. ^ This author proposes another distinction, limited to idiocy and im- becility. Idiocy would be due to certain lesions, while in imbecility there would be no lesions. Although scarcely practical, this distinction would be very curious, if it could be demonstrated to be true. Unfortunately, the author does not insist upon the demonstration. 28 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE Dr. Damaye. It has been explained by Dr. Blin, in a short article upon mental weaknesses. Dr. Damaye has shown in detail in a thesis how the method of examination, conceived by his master, can be appHed to patients; this thesis contains an account, un- fortunately rather brief, but very interesting, of the attempt to apply it to 250 idiots, imbeciles, and morons of the Vaucluse Colony. We have not therefore to judge of a purely theoretical idea, but of a method which has really been applied. Before entering on its exposition, let us say that in precision Dr. Blin's study seems to us superior to anything previously ac- comphshed. The criticisms which we shall make will not cause us to forget that we have here a first attempt to apply a scientific method to the diagnosis of mental debility. The method consists of a pre-arranged list of questions which are given to all in such a way that, if repeated by different per- sons on the same individual, constantly identical results will be obtained. The examination is composed of a series of twenty topics. A certain number of questions, graded in several of the series according to their difficulty, are prepared upon each of these topics. The enumeration of these topics will sufficiently indicate the variety that has been attempted in order to explore in a short time a field of knowledge as vast as possible. We reproduce here not only the list of these twenty topics but also the different ques- tions which are asked apropos of each. I. Personal Habits Bearing. Appearance. Cleanliness of body and clothing. (Vest unbuttoned, cravat untied, etc.) II. Speech Possibility of emitting sounds. Articulation of sounds. Rudimentary language. Fluent language. As a standard one might cause to be pro- nounced the words, artillery, artilleryman, polytechnic, constitutional, unconstitutionally. III. Name What is your name? Where do you live? How old are you? Date of birth. What are your given names? Place of birth. In what year were you born? The department. NECESSITY FOR SCIENTIFIC DIAGNOSIS 29 IV. Parents Are your parents living? What do they do? Have you brothers? How many? Have you sisters? How many? What are your brothers' names? And your sisters'? Are your brothers older than you? Are your sisters older than you? How old are they? What is your father's first name? What is your mother's? Where does your father work? And your mother? Where was your father born? Where was your mother born? V. Ideas of Age Are you young or old? When will you be a man? At what age is one a man? At what age is one a soldier? Are your father and mother old or young? How old are they? How do you know when one is old? VI. Knowledge of the Body Show me your hands. Put out your tongue. What do you call the place that I am touching (cheek)? Where is your foot? Where is your leg? Your thigh? Your shoulder? Where are your lips? Close your eyes. Put your finger on your right ear. Your gums? , Your eyelids? Your eyebrows? Your forearm? Where is your stomach? Where is your brain? Close your right eyelid. VII. Movements Sit down. Turn around. Go to the wall and return. Raise your arms. Put you finger on your right ear. Cross your arms. Turn up your pantaloons. Take off your jacket as quickly as possible and put it on as quickly as possible. Thread a needle with a woolen thread. Try to make some little stitches. Sit on the floor, cross your arms, and rise with arms crossed. Turn down your pantaloons with- out sitting down. 30 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE VIII. Ideas About Objects The child is shown different objects which he should name. Key. Pin. Pencil. Book. Photograph. Compass. Cross-ruled paper. Table cloth. Sponge. Of what use is a pin? Of what color is this pencil? Of what color is mine? Of what can a book cover be made? What is a photograph? What can it represent? IX. Internal Sensations Did you enjoy your breakfast this morning? Did you sleep well? Are you thirsty? Is your appetite ordinarily good? What time of the day are you hun- griest? Are you often thirsty? Are you less thirsty in summer than in winter? Are you less thirsty when it is hot than when it is cold? You are never thirsty, are you? You are never hungry? What did you dream last night? What is a dream? Do you often dream? X. Ideas of Time Have you been here long? What time is it? Is a day longer than a week? Is a week longer than a month? How many hours are there in a day? How many days are there in a month? How many months are there in a year? Is a month longer than a year? When you get up tomorrow will it be morning or evening? What day is this? How many days ago did you come? How many days is it since you saw your parents? That makes how many days that you have been going to school? And day after tomorrow? And yesterday? At what hour do you rise in the morning? How many days are there in a year? How many weeks are there in a year? What season is this? When is it winter? And summer? Where are you now? Where were you before coming here? Are we far from Paris? Where in Paris do you live? Is it far from the Seine? (One might ask the child at this point if his house is far from such or such a street or monument in XI. Ideas of Place order thoroughly to explore his ideas of place.) In what ward of the city do your parents live? In what department are we? What is the principal city of this department. NECESSITY FOR SCIENTIFIC DIAGNOSIS 31 XII. Patriotic Ideas From what country are you? Are you French? Were your father and mother born in France? Are there other countries than France? What are they? Would you rather belong to another country than to France? Why do you prefer to be French? Do you know what it is that one calls his country? Why should one love his country? Is Brittany in France? And Normandy? XIII. Military Service Would you like to be a soldier? Was your father a soldier? Did he ride a horse? What do soldiers wear on their heads? What do you call the soldiers who have the cannon? What soldiers ride horses? If you were a soldier would you like better to fight on foot or on horse-back? What is an officer? What has the officer on his sleeves? What officer has the highest rank? XIV. Reading XV. Writing Mistakes in spelling of course make the score less according to their gravity and the age of the child. XVI. Calculation The child is questioned upon the four operations of arithmetic. XVII. Drawing We have adopted the following models — a square, and three varieties of rectangular parallelograms — which the child must reproduce with the pen, to which we have added three lines of varying lengths. XVIII. Trades What trade does your father follow? What are they? Is it a good trade? . What is the difference between What is a trade? the Catholic religion and Prot- What does the baker do? estant religion? Are there other religions than Between the Catholic religion and yours? Jewish religion? Here, as an example, is part of the examination of a child. I. The boy F of nine years, comes to us with his hands in his pockets, face and hands not very clean, nails bitten, countenance of little intelligence. = 2 32 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE II. Language rudimentary and voice slightly nasal, sometimes unin- telligible. He pronounces the standard words badly. = 2 III. What is your name? — Edmond. (Then after a pause he gives his family name.) How old are you? — Nine years. What are your given names? — Emile, Adolphe, Edmond. In what year were you born? — In 1802. What month? — In January or February. What date?— The 9th. You do not know if it was in January or February? — No. In what country were you born? — Paris. Where do your parents live? (He gave the name of the street.) What number? — No. 9. In which ward? — Ninth (correct). In which department of France is it? (Unintelligible reply). = 3 IV. Your father and mother are living? — Yes. What does your father do? — He is employed in the gas company. (The child then begins to cry). What does your mother do? — She sews. At home? — Yes. Have you brothers? — Yes. I have four. What are their names? — Jacques, Yvonne, and Henriette.' You have only three then? — Yes. Have you sisters? — Two; Marie, Am^lie and then my Aunt Petit. How old are your brothers? — Nine years. And your sisters, how old are they? — I never asked them; I was not there. What is your mother's name? — (He gives the family name of his mother.) But her given name. Is it Henrietta, Jane? — No. (He repeats the family name of his mother.) My father, his name is ... . (the child gives his name correctly). In what country was your father born? — At .... (unintelligible word). Where was your mother born? — In Paris. = 3 V. Are you young or old? — ^Young. When is one old? — When one is old. At what age? — At nine years. My mother is old. My grandfather is dead. At what age is one a man? — A man is always at least four years old. At what age does one become a soldier? — Papa, he was a soldier, he was a military man. Yes, but at what age? .... You do not know? — No. Is your father young or old? — Young. How old is he? — Five years old. And your mother? — She is nine years old. NECESSITY FOR SCIENTIFIC DIAGNOSIS 33 What is the color of old people's hair? — Red. How is the face of an old person? — Wrinkled. My mother always has pain in her hands. How does one walk when one is old? — Like everybody else. Can old people run? — No. VI. Put out your tongue. 1 ^ , Close your eyes. j Put your fingers on your right ear. (He puts his finger on his left ear.) What do you call the place (cheek) that I am touching? — Cheek. Where is your heart?! ^ , And your stomach? j And your brain? (He points to his neck.) Your head? \q a Your shoulder?/ Your forearm? (He points to his arm.) Your lips? 1 p , Your gums? j Your eyelids? (He points to his teeth.) Close your right eyelid. (He shuts his eyes.) Where is your foot? (He shows his leg.) Show me your leg?l ^ , Your thigh. j Take off your jacket as quickly as possible.) ^i i i T5 , - , . 1 , -ui r Passable. . Put it on as quickly as possible. J =3 VII. Sit down here.l ^ , ^ . > Good. Raise your arm. J Put your hands on your head. (He places but one.) Both of them. > Good. Cross your arms. Stand up. Sit down on the ground. Cross your arms and get up with your arms crossed. (He cannot do it.) He threads the needle and turns up the lower edge of his pantaloons satisfactorily. = 4 VIII. The child recognizes the inkwell, the apron, the pencil, the sponge, the pin, and table cloth. What is the color of this pencil? — Yellow. (It is red.) What color does it write? — Black. (Correct.) What is this? (cross-ruled paper) — A page. What is the color of the table cloth? — White. What do you do with a key? — Open the door. What do you do with a pin? — Stick. What do you stick? — Straws to hold them together. Do you know what a compass is? — No. You never saw one? — No. Do you know what a photograph is? — Yes. 34 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE What is it? — It is a photograph that one puts little babies in. What is that a picture of? — That is a picture of a little baby. Can a photograph represent anything one wishes? — No. = 3 IX. Did you breakfast well this morning? — Yes. Did you sleep well? — Yes sir. Is your appetite ordinarily good? — Yes. What time of the day are you the hungriest? — At 11 o'clock. At what hour are you the thirstiest? — At four o'clock. Are you often thirsty? — Yes. In summer, are you less thirsty than in winter? — Less thirsty. When it is hot you are not so thirsty as when it is cold? — Yes. Do you dream when you sleep? — No sir. Do you know what a dream is? — Yes. What is it? — It is to waken in the night. Of whom did you dream last night? — Of mamma (the child begins to cry). Did you not have a good breakfast this morning? — Yes sir. You did not sleep well? — No sir. We shall not insist upon minute criticism of details. There are questions that seem superfluous, or of mere erudition (what is the chief town of such and such a department) . In some th e form is unfortunate; for example those which can be answered by yes or nO; because such repHes do not sufficiently prove whether the question has been thoroughly understood. It would be better to turn the question so as to oblige the child to somewhat develop his thought if he has one. But these are trifles. That which ap- pears to us in most need of criticism is the method employed for grading the repUes . The marking is from to 5. How is it given? It is given by the total of the replies to a topic, that is to say according to the bearing of at least 4 rephes. There is no special mark for each question. The examiner ji^dges and esti- mates as a whole: estimation is subjectively made. The first note is of the more or less intelligent appearance of the face.^^ It seems that for the others, what is considered especially is the more or less intelligent nature of the replies. It is again a synthetic impression. It seems to us that such an estimate is rather too arbitrary. By this means, there enters into the exam- ination that variable element which one so justly wishes to elimi- nate. When a questioner marks 5 for the total of replies, he is not certain but that another examiner would mark 4. M. Blin ' ^° The last, of the attitude during the entire examination. NECESSITY FOR SCIENTIFIC DIAGNOSIS 35 and M. Damaye could have made some control experiments by- asking their colleagues to suggest markings according to the writ- ten replies submitted to them. This same arbitrary spirit is found also in the choice of topics. For each topic the same mark is given, thus making them all of equal rank. One assumes therefore that all the topics present the same amount of difficulty , and that there would be the same reward for a child to answer all the questions about names as to answer all those about religion. Again, in each topic the gradation of difficulty seems to have been made equally arbitrarily; that is to say, it would appear that the author has been guided by his own estimation. Moreover, one has -ihe proof in the fact, that the three series of questions, graded according to their difficulty, (1) for children of 10 years, (2) from 10 to 13 years, and (3) for those above 13 years, are nevertheless answered with the maximum of points by children of from 7 to 8 years. It is the same error that we encounter throughout. Consequently, the whole system con- stitutes a scale established a priori. It is possible, and we very willingly believe that in attempting the application it has been found necessary to mend the system, to correct it in certain points, so that it may harmonize better with practice. But whatever may be the importance of these corrections of detail, they do not in the least take away the schematic character of the plan which seems to us to have sprung fully armed from the brain of a theorist. Here then is what seems to us the chief defect of this method of examination. Notwithstanding this defect, in practice it must necessarily render a real service, because it creates difficulties which all pupils cannot successfully master, and consequently permits us to make a selection among them. Therefore it is small matter that other tests of intelligence might bring about the same result. Small matter that the themes of others give a result on the whole nearly the same. When one has given examinations he sees that. And the method of M. Blin, fundamentally, is only an examination for scholarship, a new bachelor's degree, or a new certificate of studies, with this advantage we admit, of being a test, whose questions, fixed in advance, do not suffer from the bad humor or the bad digestion of the examiner. Consequently there is no room for surprise, if we do not find in this collection of questions, any idea upon the gradation of intel- 36 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE ligence. The child who has passed through this roUing mill comes before us with a certain total of marks, 36 for instance, or 70. We understand that 70 is nearer normal than 36 and that is all. We have no precise notion of the mental level of these candidates, no notion of what they can or cannot do. Did the one who obtained 36 have any comprehension of abstract ideas? We do not know, and cannot divine. How much is he behind normal children of the same age? We know this no better. This brings us very naturally to an exposition of the plan of our work. It will be seen that our directing idea is different from that of M. Blin although our system of measurement, hke his, is essentially psychological. A. BiNET AND Th. Simon. NEW METHODS FOR THE DIAGNOSIS OF THE INTELLECTUAL LEVEL OF SUBNORMALS UAnnee Psychologique, 1905, Vol. XII, pp. 191-244 Before explaining these methods let us recall exactly the condi- tions of the problem which we are attempting to solve. Our pur- pose is to be able to measure the intellectual capacity of a child who is brought to us in order to know whether he is normal or retarded. We should therefore, study his condition at the time and that only, ^f We have nothing to do either with his past history or with his future; consequently we shall neglect his etiology, and we shall make no attempt to distinguish between acquired and congenital idiocy; for a stronger reason we shall set aside all consid- eration of pathological anatomy which might explain his intel- lectual deficiency. So much for his past. As to that which con- cerns his future, we shall exercise the same abstinence; we do not attempt to establish or prepare a prognosis and we leave unan- swered the question of whether this retardation is curable, or even improvable. We shall limit ourselves to ascertaining the truth in regard to his present mental state. , Furthermore, in the definition of this state, we should make some restrictions. Most subnormal children, especially those in the schools, are habitually grouped in two categories, those of backward intelhgence, and those who are unstable. This latter class, which certain aUenists call moral imbeciles, do not neces- sarily manifest inferiority of intelligence; they are turbulent, vicious, rebellious to all discipline; they lack sequence of ideas, and probably power of attention. It is a matter of great delicacy to make the distinction between children who are unstable, and those who have rebellious dispositions. Elsewhere we have in- sisted upon the necessity of instructors not treating as unstable, that is as pathological cases, those children whose character is not S3niipathetic with their own. It would necessitate a long study, and probably a very difficult one, to establish the distinctive signs which separate the unstable from the undisciplined. For the 37 .'^ 38 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE present we shall not take up this study. We shall set the unstable aside, and shall consider only that which bears upon those who are backward in intelligence. This is not, however, to be the only limitation of our subject because backward states of intelligence present several different types. There is the insane type — or the type of intellectual de- cay — which consists in a progressive loss of former acquired intel- ligence. Many epileptics, who suffer from frequent attacks, prog- ress toward insanity. It would \>e possible and probably very important, to be able to make the distinction between those with decajdng intelligence on the one hand, and those of inferior intel- ligence on the other. But as we have determined to limit on this side also, the domain of our study, we shall rigorously exclude all forms of insanity and decay. Moreover we beheve that these are rarely present in the schools, and need not be taken into considera- tion in the operation of new classes for subnormals. Another distinction is made between those of inferior intelli- gence and degenerates. The latter are subjects in whom occur clearly defined, episodical phenomena, such as impulsions, obses- sions, deliriums. We shall eliminate the degenerates as well as the insane. Lastly, we should say a word upon our manner of studying those whom most alienists call idiots but whom we here call of inferior intelligence. The exact nature of this inferiority is not known; and today without other proof, one very prudently re- fuses to liken this state to that of an arrest of normal development. It certainly seems that the intelHgence of these beings has under- gone a certain arrest; but it does not follow that the dispropor- tion between the degree of intelligence and the age is the only characteristic of their condition. There is also in many cases, most probably a deviation in the development, a perversion. The idiot of fifteen years, who, like a baby of three, is making his first verbal attempts, can not be completely likened to a three- year old child, because the latter is normal, but the idiot is not. There exists therefore between them, necessarily, differences either apparent or hidden. The careful study of idiots shows, among some of them at least, that whereas certain faculties are almost wanting, others are better developed. They have therefore cer- tain aptitudes. Some have a good auditory or musical memory, and a whole repertoire of songs; others have mechanical ability. NEW METHODS FOR DIAGNOSIS 39 If all were carefully examined, many examples of these partial V aptitudes would probably be found. Our purpose is in no wise to study, analyze, or set forth the aptitudes of those of inferior intelligence. That will be the object of a later work. Here we shall limit ourselves to the measuring of their general intelHgence. We shall determine their intellectual level, and, in order the better to appreciate this level, we shall compare it with that of normal children of the same age or of an analogous level. The reservations previously made as to the true conception of arrested development, will not prevent our finding great advantage in a methodical comparison between those of inferior and those of normal intelligence. To what method should we have recourse in making our diag- nosis of the intellectual level? No one method exists, but there are a number of different ones which should be used cumulatively, because the question is a very difficult one to solve, and demands rather a collaboration of methods. It is important that the prac- titioner be equipped in such a manner that he shall use, only as accessory, the information given by the parents of the child, so that he may always be able to verify this information, or, when necessary, dispense with it. In actual practice quite the oppo- site occurs. When the child is taken to the chnic the physi- cian listens a great deal to the parents and questions the child very little, in fact scarcely looks at him, allowing himself to be influenced by a very strong presumption that the child is intel- lectually inferior. If, by a chance not likely to occur, but which ^ould be most interesting some time to bring about, the physician were submitted to the test of selecting the subnormals from a mixed group of children, he would certainly find himself in the midst of grave difficulties, and would commit many errors espe- cially in cases of slight defect. The organization of methods is especially important because, as soon as the schools for subnormals are in operation, one must be on his guard against the attitude of the parents. Their sincer- ity will be worth very Httle when it is in conflict with their inter- ests. If the parents wish the child to remain in the regular school, they will not be silent concerning his intelligence. "My child understands everything," they will say, and they will be very careful not to give any significant information in regard to him. If, on the contrary, they wish him to be admitted into an institu- ) V 40 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE tion where gratuitous board and lodging are furnished, they will change completely. They will be capable even of teaching him how to simulate mental debility. One should, therefore, be on his guard against all possible frauds. /^ Y In order to recognize the inferior states of intelligence we be- lieve that three different methods should be employed. We have arrived at this synthetic view only after many years of research, but we are now certain that each of these methods renders some service. These methods are : 1. The medical method, which aims to appreciate the anatomical, physiological, and pathological signs of inferior intelligence. 2. The pedagogical method, which aims to judge of the intelli- gence according to the sum of acquired knowledge. 3. The psychological method, which makes direct observations and measurements of the degree of intelligence. From what has gone before it is easy to see the value of each of these methods. The medical method is indirect because it con- jectures the mental from the physical. The pedagogical method is more direct; but the psychological is the most direct of all be- cause it aims to measure the state of the intelligence as it is at the present moment. It does this by experiments which oblige the subject to make an effort which shows his capability in the way of comprehension, judgment, reasoning, and invention. I. The Psychological Method / The fundamental idea of this method is the establishment of what we shall call a measuring scale of intelligence. This scale is composed of a series of tests of increasing difficulty, starting from the lowest intellectual level that can be observed, and ending with that of average normal intelligence. Each group in the series corresponds to a different mental level. This scale properly speaking does not permit the measure of the intelhgence,^ because intellectual qualities are not super- posable, and therefore cannot be measured as linear surfaces are measured, but are on the contrary, a classification, a hierarchy among diverse intelligences; and for the necessities of practice * One of us (Binet) has elsewhere insisted that a distinction be made between the measure and the classification. See ''Suggestibilite," p. 103, J^oL.,11, UAnnee Psychologique. THE PSYCHOLOGICAL METHOD / \J 41 this classification is equivalent to a measure. /We shall therefore be able to know, after studying two individuals, if one rises above the other and to how many degrees, if one rises above the average level of other individuals considered as normal, or if he remains be- low. Understanding the normal progress of intellectual develop- ment among normals, we shall be able to determine how many years such an individual is advanced or retarded. In a word we shall be able to determine to what degrees of the scale idiocy, im- becility, and moronity^ correspond. ^ The scale that we shall describe is not a theoretical work; it '^^^J^T/ the result of long investigations, first at the Salpetriere, and after- ^E^ wards in the primary schools of Paris, with both normal and sub- normal children. These short psychological questions have been given the name of tests. The use of tests is today very common, and there are even contemporary authors who have made a spe- cialty of organizing new tests according to theoretical views, but who have made no effort to patiently try them out in the schools. Theirs is an amusing occupation, comparable to a person's making a colonizing expedition into Algeria, advancing always only upon the map, without taking off his dressing gown. We place but slight confidence in the tests invented by these authors and we have borrowed nothing from them. All the tests which we pro- pose have been repeatedly tried, and have been retained from among many, which after trial have been discarded. We can cer- tify that those which are here presented have proved themselves valuable. We have aimed to make all our tests simple, rapid, convenient, y precise, heterogeneous, holding the subject in continued contact ^ with the experimenter, and bearing principally upon the faculty of judgment. Rapidity is necessary for this sort of examination. It is impossible to prolong it beyond twenty minutes without fatiguing the subject. During this maximum of twenty minutes, it must be turned and turned about in every sense, and at least ten tests must be executed, so that not more than about two minutes can be given to each. In spite of their interest, we were obhged to proscribe long exercises. For example, it would be ^Editor's note: Binet's classification of defectives is idiot, imbecile, and "d^bile." This seems to correspond closely to our American ter- minology of idiot, imbecile, and moron. We have accordingly translated "debile" as moron and ''debility" as moronity. 42 DEVELOPMEN*T OF INTELLIGENCE very instructive to know how a subject learns by heart a series of sentences. We have often tested the advantage of leaving a per- son by himself with a lesson of prose or verse after having said to him, ''Try to learn as much as you can of this in five minutes." Five minutes is too long for our test, because during that time the subject escapes us; it may be that he becomes distracted or thinks of other things; the test loses its clinical char^icter and becomes too scholastic. We have therefore reluctantly been obliged to re- nounce testing the rapidity and extent of the memory by this method. Several other equivalent examples of elimination could be cited. In order to cover rapidly a wide field of observation, it goes without saying that the tests should be heterogeneous. Another consideration. Our purpose is to evaluate a level of intelligence. It is understood that we here separate natural intel- ligence and instruction. It is the intelHgence alone that we seek to measure, by disregarding in so far as possible, the degree of instruction which the subject possesses. He should, indeed,' be considered by the examiner as a complete ignoramus knowing neither how to read nor write. This necessity forces us to forego a great many exercises having a verbal, literary or scholastic char- acter. These belong to a pedagogical examination. We believe that we have succeeded in completely disregarding the acquired information of the subject. We give him nothing to read, noth- ing to write, and submit him to no test in which he might succeed by means of rote learning. In fact we do not even notice his in- ability to read if a case occurs. It is simply the level of his nat- ural intelligence that is taken into account. But here we must come to an understanding of what meaning to give to that word so vague and so comprehensive, 'Hhe intelli- gence." Nearly all the phenomena with which psychology con- cerns itself are phenomena of intelligence; sensation, perception, are intellectual manifestations as much as reasoning. Should we therefore bring into our examination the measure of sensation after the manner of the psycho-physicists? Should we put to the test all of his psychological processes? A slight reflection has shown us that this would indeed be wasted time. f It seems to us that in intelligence there is a fundamental faculty, j/the alteration or the lack of which, is of the utmost importance for practical life. This faculty is judgment, otherwise called good sense, practical sense, initiative, the faculty of adapting one's self THE PSYCHOLOGICAL METHOD 43 to circumstances. To judge well, to comprehend well, to reason well, these are the essential activities of intelligence. A person may be a moron or an imbecile if he is lacking in judgment; but with good judgment he can never be either. Indeed the rest of the intellectual faculties seem of little importance in comparison with judgment, j What does it matter, for example, whether the organs of sense function normally? Of what import that certain ones are hyperesthetic, or that others are anesthetic or are weak- ened? Laura Bridgman, Helen Keller and their fellow-unfortu- nates were blind as well as deaf, but this did not prevent them from being very intelligent. Certainly this is demonstrative proof that the total or even partial integrity of the senses does not form a mental factor equal to judgment. We may measure the acute- ness of the sensibility of subjects; nothing could be easier. But we should do this, not so much to find out the state of their sen- sibility as to learn the exactitude of their judgment. The same remark holds good for the study of the memory. At first glance, memory being a psychological phenomenon of capital importance, one would be tempted to give it a very conspicuous part in an examination of intelligence. But memory is distinct from and independent of judgment. One may have good sense and lack memory. The reverse is also common. Just at the present time we are observing a backward girl who is developing before our astonished eyes a memory very much greater than our own. We have measured that memory and we are not deceived regarding it. Nevertheless that girl presents a most beautifully classic type of imbecility. As a result of all this investigation, in the scale which we present we accord the first place to judgment; that which is of importance J ; to us is not certain errors which the subject commits, but absurd errors, which prove that he lacks judgment. We have even made special provision to encourage people to make absurd replies. In spite of the accuracy of this directing idea, it will be easily under- stood that it has been impossible to permit of its regulating exclu- sively our examinations. For example, one can not make tests of judgment on children of less than two years when one begins to watch their first gleams of intelligence. Much is gained when one can discern in them traces of coordination, the first deHneation of attention and memory. We shall therefore bring out in our lists some tests of memory; but so far as we are able, we shall give these 44 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE tests such a turn as to invite the subject to make absurd repUes, and thus under cover of a test of memory, we shall have an appre- ciation of their judgment. MEASURING SCALE OF INTELLIGENCE General recommendations. The examination should take place in a quiet room, quite isolated, and the child should be called in alone without other children. It is important that when a child sees the experimenter for the first time, he should be reassured by the presence of someone he knows, a relative, an attendant, or a school superintendent. The witness should be instructed to re- main passive and mute, and not to intervene in the examination either by word or gesture. The experimenter should receive each child with a friendly familiarity to dispel the timidity of early years. Greet him the moment he enters, shake hands with him and seat him comfort- ably. If he is intelHgent enough to understand certain words, awaken his curiosity, his pride. If he refuses to reply to a test, pass to the next one, or perhaps offer him a piece of candy; if his silence continues, send him away until another time. These are little incidents that frequently occur in an examination of the mental state, because in its last analysis, an examination of this kind is based upon the good will of the subject. We here give the technique of each question. It will not suffice simply to read what we have written in order to be able to conduct examinations. A good experimenter can be produced only by example and imitation, and nothing equals the lesson gained from the thing itself. Every person who wishes to famiharize himself with our method of examination should come to our school. Theoretical instruction is valuable only when it merges into prac- tical experience. Having made these reservations, let us point out the principal errors likely to be committed by inexperienced persons. There are two: the first consists in recording the gross results without making psychological observations, without notic- ing such little facts as permit one to give to the gross results their true value. The second error, equally frequent, is that of making suggestions. An inexperienced examiner has no idea of the influ- ence of words; he talks too much, he aids his subject, he puts him on the track, unconscious of the help he is thus giving. He plays SERIES OF TESTS — 1905 45 the part of pedagogue, when he should remain psychologist. Thus his examination is vitiated. It is a difficult art to be able to encourage a subject, to hold his attention, to make him do his best without giving aid in any form by an unskillful suggestion.' THE SERIES OF TESTS , (^ - ia^ 1. "Le Regard''' ' t.'*^ \r^/^ In this test the examiner seeks to discover if there exists that coordination in the movement of the head and the eyes which is associated with the act of vision. If such coordination does exist it proves that the subject not only sees but more than that he "regards" (that is he is able to follow with his eyes a moving object). Procedure. A lighted match is slowly moved before the eyes of the subject in such a way as to provoke a movement of the head or of the eyes to follow the flame. If a first attempt does not suc- ceed the experiment should be tried again after a httle while. It is preferable to operate in a quiet place where no kind of distrac- tion is likely to occur. It is not important that the subject follow the movements of the match constantly for any length of time or persistently. The least sign of coordination of the movements of vision is sufficient, if it leaves no doubt in the mind of the exam- iner. Additional remarks. The observation of a few spontaneous phenomena may well be noted. Thus it is possible sometimes for the examiner, by fixing his gaze steadily upon the child, to satisfy himself that the child really coordinates for a moment. If the subject is afflicted with or suspected of blindness, the visual stim- ulus may be replaced by an auditory stimulus. For example, call him loudly, or better, ring a little bell behind his head and notice 3 One of us (Binet) has been for some years the president of "Soci6t6 libre pour I'^tude de Tenfant," and he has striven to spread among his colleagues, mostly teachers, the taste for scientific research. He has found that the two errors mentioned in the text are those which appear most frequently among beginners. ^ Editor's note: We have here retained the word used by Binet, because in the English there is no one word exactly synonymous with it. The word literally translated means "the ability to follow with the eyes a moving object." 46 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE if he turns his head toward the sound, or if he has any pecuhar facial expression which would indicate that he hears. The re- action of attention to sound seems to develop later than the re- action to light. We have observed children who, when a bell was rung behind the head, would not make a single movement in order to hear better, and yet would follow with their eyes the lighted match. It is scarcely necessary to add that the child who hides his face behind his hand when questioned, or who repHes to your smile by a smile, or who walks about the room without knocking against obstacles, stove, chairs, wall, table, proves by his behavior that he coordinates the movements of vision, and thus he has passed the first test. 2. Prehension Provoked by a Tactile Stimulus Here the purpose is to discover whether the coordination exists between a tactile stimulus of the hand, and the movement of seizing and carrying to the mouth. Procedure. A small object, easily handled, for example a piece of wood, is placed in contact with the hand of the child in order to determine if he succeeds in seizing the object, holding it in his hand without letting it fall, and carrying it to his mouth. It is well to stimulate the contact either on the back of the hand or on the palm, and note the results. It is possible that the subject, after having taken the little object, loosens his fingers and lets it fall. It is necessary in that case to try again with a little patience, in order to learn if the letting go came of a chance distraction, or if the subject is not capable of performing the muscular act which would consist in carrying it to his mouth. 3. Prehension Provoked by a Visual Perception Here the purpose is to find whether coordination exists between the sight of an object and its prehension, when the object is not placed in contact with the hand of the subject. Procedure. The object is presented to his view and within reach of his hand, in a manner to provoke an intentional movement of his hand to take it. Thisj^ird test is passed when the subject, following a visual perception of the object, makes a movement of the hand towards the object, reaches, seizes and carries it to his mouth. A small cube of white wood, easy to handle is used. In SERIES OF TESTS — 1905 47 these presentations it is not forbidden to speak and hence the ob- ject is offered to the child as follows: "Here is a httle object, take it, it is for you — Come now, pay attention, etc." If the subject understands, so much the better for him; if he does not under- stand the sound of these words has the advantage of attracting his attention. Moreover the examiner makes gestures and makes them more naturally if he talks at the same time. 4. Recognition of Food Here the purpose is to discover whether the subject can make the distinction by sight between familiar food and what can not be eaten. Procedure. A piece of chocolate (half a bar) and a little cube of white wood of similar dimensions are successively presented. The test is to see if the subject, by sight alone, makes the distinc- tion between the two objects before carrying them to his mouth. Does he carry only the chocolate to his mouth and begin to eat it? Does he refuse to take the piece of wood, or having taken it does he push it away, or again does he hold it in his hand without put- ting it to his mouth? Tests 3 and 4 can be made rapidly as a single experiment. A piece of chocolate is first shown to the child and his attention is drawn to it. Note whether he tries to take it or not. If he makes no effort to attain it, and is not distracted by anything, place the chocolate in the palm of his hand, and note what happens. If on the contrary he takes the chocolate which is shown him and carries it to his mouth, the chocolate is taken from him, and the piece of wood put in its place, to see if he carries this new object also to his mouth. Although these tests succeed with very many children by ap- pealing to their greediness, it often happens that a willful child, or one frightened by the sight of the examiner whom he does not know, turns away from him and refuses to look at what is shown him. These movements of defense indicate already a mentaUty that corresponds most likely to the fourth degree. The experi- menter must be armed with patience an^yjj^ntleness. He may have a relative, an attendant, or any other person who knows the child, present the chocolate, but he must carefully note the behavior of the child throughout the operation. If the attack of anger, or 48 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE tears, or fear lasts too long, the examination is necessarily sus- pended to be taken up at a more favorable time. These are the disappointments to which alienists are accustomed. 5. Quest of Food Complicated by a Slight Mechanical Difficulty This test is designed to bring into play a rudiment of memory, an effort of will, and a coordination of movements. Procedure. First be sure that the child recognizes the candy or bonbon to be used in this experiment. Then while he is watching you, wrap the bonbon in a piece of paper. Present it to him and carefully note his movements. Does he remember that the paper contains a bonbon? Does he reject it as a useless object, or does he try to pull it apart? Does he carry the covered morsel to his mouth? Does he eat the paper or does he make feome effort to unfold it? Does he completely succeed in unfolding it, or does he seem satisfied with one attempt? Does he present the covered morsel to some one else as if to ask his aid? 6. Execution of Simple Commands and Imitation of Simple Gestures This test involves various motor coordinations, and associa- tions between certain movements, and the understanding of the significance of certain gestures. In these tests the subject enters for the first time into social relations with the experimenter and it is therefore necessary that he understand the will and desires of the latter. It is the beginning of inter-psychology. Procedure. As soon as the subject enters the room say good' morning to him with expression, give him your hand with accen- tuated gesture to see if he understands the salutation and if he knows how to shake hands. In cases where the subject walks in, ask him to be seated; this permits one to see whether he under- stands the meaning of the invitation and if he knows the use of a chair. Throw some object on the floor and request him by ges- tures as well as by speech to pick it up and give it back. Make him get up, shut the door, send him away, call him back. So much for commands. Imitation of simple gestures is accom- plished by fixing his attention by repeating several times, ''Look at me carefully," and when his attention is gained, by saying "Do as I do." The examiner then claps his hands together, puts them in the air, on the shoulders, behind the back; he turns the SERIES OF TESTS 1905 49 thumbs one about the other, raises the foot, etc. All this mimi- cry must be conducted gaily with the air of play. It is sufficient if a single well marked imitation is provoked; the rest is unneces- sary. Do not confound the inaptitude for imitation, with bad humor, ill-will, or timidity. 7. Verbal Knowledge of Objects The object of this test is to discover if associations exist be- tween things and their names. Comprehension and the first pos- sibilities of language are here studied. This test is a continuation of the previous one and represents the second degree of communi- cation between individuals; the first degree is made through imi- tation, the second through words. Procedure. This test is composed of two parts. In the first place the examiner names a part of the body and asks the child to point to it. The questions may relate to the head, the hair, the eyes, the feet, the hands, the nose, the ears, the mouth. Ask the child with a smile ''Where is your head?" If he seems embar- rassed or timid, encourage him by aiding him a little. ''There is your head,'' pointing it out and touching it if the child does not seem to understand what is wanted of him. On the other hand if he replies by a correct designation to the first question go no further, because if he knows where his head is he should know equally well where are his ears and his mouth. Give him there- fore some more difiicult questions, for example, his cheek, his eye- brow, his heart. The second part of the experiment consists in making him desig- nate familiar objects, a string, a cup, a key. Bring the child to the table and by means of gestures indicate the objects and turn his attention to them. When his attention is fixed upon the ob- jects tell him to give you the one you name. "Give me the cup. Give me the key, etc.'' The cup, the key, the string are the three objects asked for. It is of little importance that he shows awk- wardness in taking and presenting them. The essential is that by the play of the countenance and gestures, he indicates clearly that he distinguishes these objects by their names. It is preferable to keep these three objects, others less familiar should be rejected, as for instance a box of matches, a cork, etc. The test is made with three objects in order to avoid the right designation by simple 50 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE chance. With backward children the following facts may present themselves. They do not know the name of the object presented to them, but having understood that they are to designate an object, they point to anything that is on the table. This is a man- ner of reacting very common among idiots and imbeciles. They make mistakes but they do not reahze it, being in fact very well satisfied with their achievements. Here is another source of error to be avoided. In consequence of their extreme docility, many backward children may be bewildered by the least contra- diction. When they have handed you a cup, if you ask them "Isn't this a key?'' some might make a sign of acquiescence. This is a test of suggestibility of which more will be said further on. To a blind child, give objects to be recognized by the sense of touch. 8, Verbal Knowledge of Pictures This exercise is the same as the preceding one with this differ- ence only, that the objects are replaced by pictures which, in con- sequence of the diminished size and the reduction to a plane sur- face, are a little more difficult to recognize than in nature, and more than this in a picture the objects must be sought for. Procedure. We make use of a print borrowed from the picture- book of Inspector Lacabe and Mile. Goergin. This print in colors represents a complex family scene. We show the print to tn ^hild and ask him to designate successively the following ob- jf r. the window, mamma, big sister, little sister, little girl, cat, broom, basket, bouquet, duster, coffee-mill. The questions are asked in this way: ''Where is the window?" or ''Tell me where the window is." or "Show me the window," or "Put your finger on the window." The last suggestion is generally unnecessary because the child has a tendency to place his forefinger, generally a dirty one, upon the detail which is named for him. If he makes an error in designa- tion be careful not to correct it, but make a note of it. In a psychological examination of this kind, one must never point out to a child the errors which he makes. The examiner is not a pedagogue. It is rare that those who take an interest in the pic- ture can not designate the principal details named to them. The incapable ones give no attention to the picture and do not seem to comprehend what is wanted of them. It is interesting to study SERIES OF TESTS — 1905 51 the attitude of a child during this test. There are two acts to be accomphshed, one a search for the object, the other the recogni- tion of the object. At once in the search the aptitudes or inapti- tudes betray themselves. Many defective persons show an ex- cess of eagerness to designate the object, which in itself is a sign of faulty attention. They point out at once without waiting to comprehend. They sometimes point out before one has finished the sentence. ''Where is the — ," said with a suspension in the voice, and already their finger is placed haphazard upon the pic- ture. Such as these do not hunt with care and are incapable of suspending their judgment. This is, it seems to us, a striking characteristic of a weak mind. The child must be closely studied in order to find if, in spite of this special manner, he really knows the names of the objects. A reprimand gently given will some- times put him on his guard, ''No, no, pay attention, you go too fast," and if the question is repeated he will often give a correct answer. In other cases, errors are sometimes made through suggestibil- ity. The subject seems to imagine that he will commit a fault if he does not designate some object when the question is asked, and out of compliance or of timidity, he makes an erroneous desig- nation for an object whose name he does not know, or which he does not succeed in finding. Notice again, the more reasonable attitude of those who, not knowing the name of the obj er-t, re- frain from pointing it out but continue the search or repl^ ^i& tinctly, "I do not know." It is rare that an imbecile uses that little phrase. The avowal of ignorance is a proof of judgment and is always a good indication. 9. Naming of Designated Objects This test is the opposite of the preceding one. It shows the passing from the thing to the word. It also is executed by the use of pictures. Procedure. Here we make use of another colored print borrowed from the same collection as the preceding. We place it before the eyes of the child and designate with a pencil different objects while asking each time, "What is this?" The objects upon which we place the pencil are the little girl, the dog, the boy, the father, the lamp-lighter, the sky, the advertisement. For the lamp- 52 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE lighter we ask what he does. Here as elsewhere it is unnecessary to exhaust the complete series of questions unless the subject fails. One or two positive repHes are sufficient to satisfy the require- ments of the test. This test permits us to know the vocabulary and the pronunciation of the child. Defects of pronunciation, so frequent in the young, are a serious source of embarrassment. It often requires a very indulgent ear to recognize the right word in an indistinct and very brief murmur, and in a case of this sort the examiner will do well to use an interrogation point. Added to the difficulties which proceed from faulty pronunciation, are those brought about by a special vocabulary. Many little children though normal use a vocabulary invented or deformed by them, which is understood only by themselves and their parents. Additional remarks. Tests 7, 8, and 9 do not constitute dif- fering degrees in the rigorous sense of the word, that is to say they are not tests corresponding to different levels of intelligence. We have ascertained that generally with subnormals those who can pass test 7, pass 8 and also 9. These would therefore be tests of equal rank. We have kept them, however, because these tests occupy an important place in our measuring scale of intelligence, as they constitute a borderline test between imbecility and idiocy. It is useful to have this borderline solidly placed and all these tests will serve as buttresses. Observations, such as one may make every day on those afflicted with general paralysis, aphasia, or simply people very much fatigued, show that it is much more difficult to pass from the ob- ject to the word than it is to pass from the word to the object, or we may say, that one recognizes a word more easily than one finds it. It does not seem clear up to the present that this observation is also applicable to inferior states of intelligence. 10. Immediate Comparison of Two Lines of Unequal Lengths^ As we enter the field of what may properly be called psychologi- cal experimentation, we shall find it difficult to define which men- tal functions are being exercised because they are very numerous. Here the child must understand that it is a question of compari- son, that the comparison is between two lines that are shown to him; he must understand the meaning of the words, ''Show me " Cf. p. 196. r SERIES OF TESTS 1905 53 the longer." He must be capable of comparing, that is of bring- ing together a conception and an image, and of turning his mind in the direction of searching for a difference. We often have illusions as to the simplicity of psychical processes, because we judge them in relation to others, still more complex. In fact here is a test which will seem to show but little mentality in those who are able to execute it; nevertheless when analyzed it reveals a great complexity. Procedure. The subject is presented successively with three pieces of paper upon each of which two lines, drawn in ink, are to be compared. Each piece of paper measures 15 by 20 cm.; the lines are drawn lengthwise of the paper, on the same level, and separated by a space of 5 mm. The lines are respectively 4 and 3 cm. in length and one-half of a millimeter in width. On the first sheet the longer line is at the right and on the other two at the left. Each sheet is shown to the subject while saying to him, "Which is the longer line?" Note if his reply is correct but do not tell him. In order to eliminate haphazard replies, it is well to repeat the whole series at least twice. The end is not to discover just how far the accuracy of the child's glance may go, but simply to find if he is capable of making a correct comparison between two lines. Many subnormals are incapable of this; but they act as though they were capable; they seem to understand what is said to them and each time put the finger upon one of the lines saying, ''This one." It is necessary to recognize those sub- jects whose errors are not, strictly speaking, faults of comparison but absence of comparison. It often happens that the subject constantly chooses the line on the same side for the longer, for example always the one on the right side. This manner of react- ing would be a sign of defect were it not that one encounters the same thing with some normals. 11. Repetition of Three Figured This is a test of immediate memory and voluntary attention. Procedure. Looking the subject squarely in the eye to be sure his attention is fixed, one pronounces three figures, after having told him to repeat them. Choose figures that do not follow each other, as for instance 3, 0, 8, or 5, 9, 7, Pronounce the three fig- « Cf. p. 187. 54 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE ures in the same voice without accentuating one more than the others and without rhjrthm, but with a certain energy. The rapidity to be observed is two figures per second. Listen carefully and record the repetition which is made. Often the first attempt is unsuccessful because the subject has not clearly understood and commences to repeat the first figure the moment he hears it; he must be made to be quiet, renew the explanation and commence the pronunciation of another series of figures. There are certain subjects who can not repeat a single figure; in general these are the ones whose mental condition is such that they have not under- stood anything at all of what is asked of them. Others repeat only a single figure, the first or the last; others pronounce more than three. Special attention must be given to those whose error consists in pronouncing a greater number of figures than that which is said, or in pronouncing a series of figures in their natural order. An individual who, when asked to repeat 3, 0, 8, replies 2, 3, 4, 5, commits a serious error, which would cause one to sus- pect mental debility. But on the other hand it is true that all feeble-minded and all imbeciles do not commit this error, and that many young normals may commit it. Be careful to notice also if the subject seems satisfied with his reply when this is obviously and grossly false; this indicates an absence of judgment which constitutes an aggravated condition. Let us say, apropos of this test, that it is important to make a distinction between errors of attention and of adaptation on the one hand, and errors of judgment on the other. When a failure is produced by distraction it is not very important. Thus it may happen that a subject does not repeat the three figures the first time. Begin again and if he succeeds the second time in retain- ing them he should be considered as having passed the test. A little farther on we shall have to deal with tests of judgment properly so-called, and three or four difficulties will be presented for solu- tion. In this last case, failure will be much more serious, be- cause it can not be due to inattention and the test cannot be considered as passed unless the solutions are given complete. SEBIES OF TESTS — 1905 55 12. Comparison of Two Weights^ This is a test of attention, of comparison and of the muscular sense. Procedure. Place side by side on the table before the subject two small cubical boxes having the same dimensions, (23 mm. on a side) and the same color, but of different weights. The boxes, weighted by grains of lead rolled in cotton and not perceptible by shaking, weigh 3 grams and 12 grams respectively. The subject is asked to find out which is the heavier. The operation termi- nated, two other cubes of 6 and 15 grams respectively are given him to compare, and again 3 grams and 15 grams. If the subject hesitates or seems to be going haphazard, start over again mixing the cubes in order to be sure that he really compares the weights. At the injunction, ^'See the two boxes, now tell me which is the heavier," many young subjects designate haphazard one of the two boxes without testing the weights. This error, all the more naive since the two are exactly alike in appearance, does not prove that the subject is incapable of weighing them in his hand and of judging of the weights while exercising muscular sense. One must then order him to take the boxes in his hand and weigh them. Some are very awkward, and put the two boxes into one hand at the same time to weigh them. One must again interfere and teach him how to put a box in each hand and weigh the two simultan- eously. Additional remarks. Following this weighing of two boxes of different weight and equal volume, one can propose to weigh two boxes of equal weight but different volume. The illusion which is produced under these circumstances is well known. With the weights equal, the larger box will appear lighter; and the apparent difference of weight increases with the difference of volume. Investigations have been made to determine whether this illusion takes place with backward children, and it has been observed by Demoor that there are certain ones who are not affected by it, something which we ourselves have recently verified. We put before the defective children long boxes of white wood, of the same weight, the largest one 24 x 4 x 4 cm., the smallest 12 x 2 x 2 cm., the medium one 18 x 3 x 3 cm. Like many normal children our subnormals, when given two for comparison and asked "Which 7 Cf . p. 186. 56 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE is the heavier/' pointed out the larger. The first naive response has but httle significance. If one insists, if one tells the subject to weigh them in his hand, it sometimes happens that subnormals either cUng to their first designation, or abandon it altogether and find the smaller one the heavier; in the latter case they are sensi- tive to the illusion. It seems to us that before declaring that a subnormal is not sensitive, one must first find if he can compare two weights, and whether he is able to judge which is the heavier of two weights having the same volume. Having made this pre- Hminary test, one will perceive that very many subnormals are insensible to the illusion because they are incapable of comparing weights. What they lack therefore is a more elementary aptitude. 13. Suggestibility Suggestibihty is by no means a test of intelligence, because very many persons of superior intelligence are susceptible to suggestion, through distraction, timidity, fear of doing wrong, or some pre- •conceived idea. Suggestion produces effects which from certain points of view closely resemble the natural manifestations of feeble-mindedness; in fact suggestion disturbs the judgment, paralyzes the critical sense, and forces us to attempt unreason- able or unfitting acts worthy of a defective. It is therefore neces- sary, when examining a child suspected of retardation, not to give a suggestion unconsciously, for thus artificial debility is produced which might make the diagnosis deceptive. If a per- son is forced to give an absurd reply by making use of an alter- native pronounced in an authoritative voice, it does not in the least prove that he is lacking in judgment. But this source of error being once recognized and set aside, it is none the less inter- esting to bring into the examination a precise attempt at sugges- tion, and note what happens. It is a means of testing the force ■of judgment of a subject and his power of resistance.^ Procedure. The proof of suggestibility which we have devised does not give rise to a special experiment: it complicates by a .slight addition other exercises which we have already described. (a) Designation of objects named by the experimenter. When we s,&k the child (test 7) to show us the thread, the cup, the thimble, 8 In a book specially devoted to Suggestibility (Paris, Schleicher, 1900) one of us (Binet) has described several methods of testing for suggesti- bility which are valuable for application in the schools. SERIES OF TESTS 1905 57 we add, ''Show me the button." On the empty table there is no button, there are only the three preceding objects and yet by gesture and look we invite the subject to search for the button on the table. It is a suggestion by personal action, developing obedi- ence. Certain ones obey quickly and easily, presenting to us again the cup or no matter what other objects. Their suggestibility is complete. Others resist a httle, pout, while feigning to hunt for it on the table, or in the cup; they do not reply, but cover their embarrassment by a search which they continue indefinitely if not interrupted. One should consider this attitude as a sufficient expression of resistance, and go no further. It would be unneces- sary as we are not seeking a victory over them. Lastly, those least affected by suggestion, reply clearly, ''I do not know," or "There is no button." Some laugh. (6) Designation of parts of a picture named by the experimenter. When the child has looked at the picture and we have asked him to point out the window, etc., at the very last say, ''Where is the patapoum?" and then "Where is the nitchevo?" words that have no sense for him. These demands are made in the same manner as the preceding ones. Here again we find the three types, chil- dren who docilely designate any object whatever, others who search indefinitely without finding anjrthing, and again others who declare, "There is none." (c) Snare of lines. Following the three pairs of unequal lines, which serve to show the correctness of comparison, we place be- fore the subject three other similar sheets each containing two equal lines. We present them saying, "And here?" Led on by the former replies he has a tendency, an acquired force, for again finding one line longer than the other. Some succumb to the snare completely. Others stop at the first pair and declare, "They are equal," but at the second and third they say one of the fines is longer than the other. Others find them all equal but hesitate. Others again fall into the snare without a shadow of hesitation. 14' Verbal Definition of Known Objects Vocabulary, some general notions, ability to put a simple idea into words, are all brought to light by means of this test. Procedure. Ask the child what is a house, a horse, a fork, a mamma. This is the conversation that takes place: "Do you 58 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE know what a is?" If the child answers yes then ask him: "Very well, then tell me what it is." Try to overcome his silence a little and his timidity. Aid him, only when necessary, by giv- ing him an example: '*A dog, it barks," and then see if the child understands and approves that definition. Very young normal children of two or three years, reply to questions of this kind with enthusiasm. They ordinarily reply in terms of use, *'A fork is to eat with." This is typical. Record the answer verbatim. Some will keep silent, some give absurd, incomprehensible replies, or again will repeat the word, "A house, it is a house." 15, Repetition of Sentences of Fifteen Words^ This is a test of immediate memory, so far as it concerns the recollection of words; a proof of voluntary attention, naturally because voluntary attention must accompany all psychological experiments; lastly it is a test of language. Procedure. First be sure that the child is hstening carefully, then, after having warned him that he will have to repeat what is said to him, pronounce slowly, intelligibly, the following sentence: / get up in the morning, I dine at noon, I go to bed at night. Then make a sign for him to repeat. Often the child, still not very well adapted, has not fully understood. Never repeat a sentence but go on to another. When the subject repeats it write down ver- batim what he says. Many even among normals make absurd repetitions, for example: **I go to bed at noon." Often the child replaces the cultured expression **I dine" for a more familiar form, "I eat." The fact of being able to repeat the sentence cor- rectly after the first hearing is a good sign. The second sentence is easier than the first. In the summer the weather is beautiful; in winter snow falls. Here is the third, Germaine has been bad, she has not worked, she will be scolded. Now we give five sentences quite difficult to understand: The horse-chestnut tree in the garden throws upon the ground the faint shade of its new young leaves. ' Editor's note: Binet's sentences vary in length from thirteen to eighteen words. He has corrected this discrepancy in the 1908 edition by counting the number of syllables given in this and kindred tests. A literal trans- lation of his sentences obviously may not contain the same number of words in English as in French. SERIES OF TESTS — 1905 59 The horse draws the carriage, the road is steep and the carriage is heavy. It is one o^ clock in the afternoon, the house is silent, the cat sleeps in the shade. One should not say all that he thinks, hut he must think all that he says. The spirit of criticism must not be confounded with the spirit of contradiction. 16. Comparison of Known Objects from Memory This is an exercise in ideation, in the notion of differences, and somewhat in powers of observation. Procedure. One asks what difference there is between paper and cardboard, between a fly and a butterfly, between a piece of wood and a piece of glass. First be sure that the subject knows these objects. Ask him, " Have you seen paper?' ' ** Do you know what cardboard is?'' Thus ask him about all the objects be- fore drawing his attention to the difference between them. It may happen that little Parisians, even though normal, and eight or nine years old, have never seen a butterfly. These are exam- ples of astounding ignorance, but we have found, what is still more extraordinary, Parisians of ten years who have never seen the Seine. After being assured that the two objects to be compared are known, demand their difference. If the word is not understood, take notice and afterward choose more familiar language. "In what are they not alike? How are they not alike?" Three classes of replies may be expected. First, that of the children who have no comprehension of what is desired of them. When asked the difference between cardboard and paper, they reply, "The cardboard." When one has provoked replies of this kind, the explanation must be renewed with patience to see if there is not some means of making oneself understood. Second, the absurd repHes, such as, "The fly is larger than the butterfly." "The wood is thicker than the glass," or "The butterfly flies and so does the fly." Third, the correct reply. 60 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE 17. Exercise of Memory on Pictures This is a test of attention and visual memory. Procedure. The subject is told that several pictures will be shown to him, which he will be allowed to look at for thirty seconds, and that he must then repeat the names of the objects seen, from memory. There are thirteen pictures, each 6 by 6 centimeters, rep- presenting the following objects: clock, key, nail, omnibus, barrel, bed, cherry, rose, mouth of a beast, nose, head of a child, eggs, landscape. These pictures are pasted on two cardboards and are shown simultaneously. Measure the time of exposure with the second hand of the watch. In order that the subject shall not become absorbed in one picture, say to him, "Make haste. Look at all." The thirty seconds passed, the examiner writes from dic- tation the names of the pictures the subject. recalls. This test does indeed give an idea of the memory of a person, but two subjects may have very unequal memories of the same picture; one of them may recall only one detail while another re- calls the whole. Moreover there is a weak point in this test in that it may be affected by failure of attention. It is sufficient that a fly should alight, a door should open, a cock should crow, or for the subject to have a desire to use his handkerchief during the thirty seconds, to disturb the work of memorizing. If the result is altogether lacking, the test should be repeated with an- other collection of pictures to find whether the first error was the result of distraction. 18. Drawing a Design from Memory This is a test of attention, visual memory, and a little analysis. Procedure. The subject is told that two designs will be shown to him, which he will be allowed to look at for ten seconds, and which DESIGN TO BE DRAWN FROM MEMORY AFTER BEING STUDIED 10 SECONDS he must then draw from memory. Excite his emulation. The two designs which we reproduce here, are shown to him and left SERIES OF TESTS — 1905 61 exposed for ten seconds. (Regulate the time by the second hand of a watch; the time must be exact within one or two seconds.) Then see that the subject commences the reproduction of the de- sign without loss of time. Marking the results of this test, that is the errors committed, is a delicate operation. Simply note if the reproduction is a^bso- lutely correct; or if without being correct it resembles the model; or if, on the contrary, it bears no resemblance whatever to it. 19. Immediate Repetition of Figures This is a test of immediate memory and immediate attenti on Procedure. This is the same asJor the three figures, see abo ve Here the errors noted for the three figures take on greater propor- tions. One must be on the watch for errors of judgment. A normal may fail but the manner is different. 20. Resemblances of Several Known Objects Given from Memory This is a test of memory, conscious recognition of resemblances, power of observation. Procedure. This test closely resembles test 16, except that here resemblances are to be indicated instead of differences. It may be surprising to learn that children have a good deal of trouble noting resemblances; they much more wilUngly find differences in the objects given them to compare. One must insist a good deal and show them that although unlike two objects may be somewhat similar. Here are the questions to be asked : In what are a poppy and blood alike? How are a fly, an ant, a butterfly, a flea alike? In what way are a newspaper, a label, a picture alike? Under test 16 we have indicated the precautions that must be taken, notably that of assuring oneself that the child knows the objects to be compared. There are little Parisians who have never seen poppies or ants. ( 21. Comparison of Lengths This is a test in exactness of glance ifi rs^pid comparison. Procedure. In this test one presents a series of pairs of fines. One line of each pair is 30 mm. long and the other varies from 31 to 35 mm. J'hese lines are drawn on the pages of a blank book, 62 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE 15 by 30 cm. ; there are only two lines on a page. They extend in the same direction, end to end, separated by 5 mm. The longer occupies first the right then the left of the page. There are fif- teen pairs. After placing them in order one begins by showing the pair where the difference is greatest. The subject is asked to point out the longer of the two lines. We then present, in another blank book, a series of pairs of Unes very much more difficult to estimate. The pages of this book are 20 by 30 cm. ; the constant line is 100 mm. long, the vari- able ranging from 101 to 103 mm. The exact comparison of such long lines is beyond the ability of many adults. The number of pairs is twelve. 22. Five Weights to he Placed in Order^^ This test requires a direct concentration of attention, an appre- ciation of weight, and the memory of judgment. Procedure. Five little boxes of the same color and volume are placed in a group on the table. They weigh respectively 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 grams. They are shown to the subject while saying to him: ''Look at these little boxes, they have not the same weight; you are going to arrange them here in their right order. Here to the left first the heaviest weight; next, the one a little less heavy; here one a httle less heavy; here one a little less heavy, and here the lightest one.'' This explanation is difficult to give in childish terms. It must be attempted, however, and repeated if one perceives that it is not understood. The explanation terminated, one must observe with attention the attitude of the child. One child does not understand, puts nothing in order; another arranges the weights very well but does not compare them; he takes one at random and puts it at the left as the heaviest, without comparing it with the others, and places those remaining without weighing them. A third tries them a little, but noticeably goes at it blindly. The reading of the weights which is inscribed on each, shows us the errors. There are three classes to distinguish. First, the subject who goes at random without comparing, often committing a serious error, four degrees for example. Second, the subject who com- pares, but makes a slight error of one or two degrees. Third, the 1° Cf. p. 220. SEKIES OF TESTS — 1905 63 one who has the order exact. We propose to estimate the errors in this test by taking account of the displacement that must be made to re-establish the correct order. Thus in the following example: 12, 9, 6, 3, 15, — 15 is not in its place, and the error is of four degrees because it must make four moves to find the place where it belongs. All the others must be changed one degree. The sum of the changes indicates the total error which is of eight degrees. It is necessary to make a distinction between those who commit slight errors of inattention, and those who by the enor- mity of an error of 6 or 8 prove that they act at random. 23. Gap in Weights As soon as the subject has correctly arranged the weights and only then, tell him that one of the weights is to be taken away while he closes his eyes, and that he is to discover which has been taken away by weighing them in his hand. The operation de- manded of him is dehcate. One must note that he does not cheat by reading the marking on the box. If there is any fear of this, wrap the boxes in paper. 24. Exercise upon Rhymes^^ This exercise requires an ample vocabulary, suppleness of mind, spontaneity, intellectual activity. Procedure. Begin by asking the subject if he knows what a rhyme is. Then explain by means of examples: ''Rhymes are words that end in the same way. Thus 'grenouille' rhymes with 'citrouille,' because it is the same sound 'ouille.' 'Compote' rhymes with 'carotte,' they both end with 'ote.' 'Baton' rhymes with 'macaron,' and with 'citron.' Here the rhyme is on 'on. '12 £)q yQu nQ^ understand what a rhyme is? Very well, you must find all the rhymes you can. The word with which you must find rhymes is 'obeissance.'^^ Come, begin, find " Cf . p. 232. ^^ Editor's note: We have -here retained the French words because it is obvious that the English equivalents would not rhyme. In using the test one must of course use suitable English rhymes. 1' Editor's note: There are many words in the French which rhyme with "obeissance" and which are perfectly familiar to a French child. This is not true of its English equivalent. One would not think of asking a child to make rhymes with ''obedience." 64 ' DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE some." In order to accomplish this test, the subject must not only find rhymes, which is partly a matter of imagination, but he must understand the preceding explanation, which is a matter of judgment. There are subjects who remain silent who either have not understood or are unable to find rhymes. Others are more loquacious but the false rhymes they cite prove that they have not comprehended. The minute having elapsed, renew the ex- planation and try the test again. 25. Verbal Gaps to he Filled This test thought out and proposed by Professor Ebbinghaus of Berlin, varies in significance according to its mode of use. It consists essentially in this: a word of a text is omitted and the subject is asked to replace it. The nature of the intellectual work by which the gap is filled, varies according to the case. This may be a test of memory, a test of style, or a test of judgment. In the sentence: "Louis IX was born in " the gap is filled by mem- ory. "The crow his feathers with his beak;" in this the idea of the suppressed word is not at all obscure, and the task con- sists in finding the proper word. We may say in passing, that according to the opinion of several teachers before whom we have tried it, this kind of exercise furnishes excellent scholastic train- ing. Lastly, in sentences of the nature of those we have chosen, the filling of the gaps requires an attentive examination and an appreciation of the facts set forth by the sentence. It is there- fore an exercise of judgment. Procedure. We have simplified it by suppressing all explana- tions. The words forming the gap are intentionally placed at the end of the sentence. It is sufficient to read the text with expression, then suspend the voice with the tone of interrogation when one arrives at the gap. The subject naturally fills in the gap. If he does not do so spontaneously, urge him a little by saying, "Finish. What must one say?" Once the operation is set going it continues easily. The operator knows the true words of the text which have been suppressed. He should not yield to the temptation of consider- ing those the only correct ones. He must examine and weigh with care all the words that are given him. Some are good, others altogether bad, nonsensical or absurd. There will be all degrees. SERIES OF TESTS — 1905 65 Here is the text with the gaps. The words to be suppressed are in itaHcs. The weather is clear, the sky is (1) blue. The sun has quickly dried the linen which the women have spread on the line. The cloth, white as snow, dazzles the (2) eyes. The women gather up the large sheets which are as stiff as though they had been (3) starched. They shake them and hold them by the four (4) corners. Then they snap the sheets with a (5) noise. Meanwhile the housewife irons the fine linen. She takes the irons one after the other and places them on the (6) stove. Little Mary who is dressing her doll would like to do some (7) ironing, but she has not had permission to touch the (8) irons. 26. Synthesis of Three Words in One Sentence^* This exercise is a test in spontaneity, faciHty of invention and combination, aptitude to construct sentences. Procedure. Three words are proposed: Paris, river, fortune. Ask that a sentence be made using those three words. It is neces- sary to be very clear, and to explain to those who may not chance to know what a sentence is. Many subjects remain powerless be- fore this difficulty, which is beyond their capacity. Others can make a sentence with a given word but they can not attain to the putting of three words in a single sentence. 27. Reply to an Abstract Question^^ This test is one of the most important of all, for the diagnosis of mental debility. It is rapid, easily given, sufficiently precise. It consists in placing the subject in a situation presenting a difficulty of an abstract nature. Any mind which is not apt in abstraction succumbs here. Procedure. This consists in reading the beginning of a sentence and suspending the voice when one arrives at the point, and re- peating, "What ought one to do?" The sentences are constructed in such a manner that the slight difficulty of comprehension which they present, comes from the ideas rather than from the words. The child who does not understand, is hindered less by his ignor- ance of the language than by his lack of ability to seize an ab- stract idea. There are twenty-five questions. The first are very easy and tend to put the subject at his ease. We do not repro- duce them here as they will be found farther on with the results. 1^ Cf. p. 222. 16 Cf. p. 224. 66 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE Here are only four of the sentences. They are among those of medium difficulty. 1. When one has need of good advice — what must one do? 2. Before making a decision about a very important affair — what must one do? 3. When anyone has offended you and asks you to excuse him — what ought you to do? 4. When one asks your opinion of someone whom you know only a little — what ought you to say? It is often a delicate matter to estimate the value of a reply. Sometimes the subject does not gather all the shades of the ques- tion and the reply is too simple, not absolutely adequate to the demand. Nevertheless one must be satisfied if it expresses sense, if it proves that the general bearing of the question has been grasped. In other cases the reply is equivocal; it would be excellent if it came from a dilletante, or a decadent, because of the double meaning which is ironically evoked. It is of no value in the mouth of a school child. Thus to the first question, ''When one has need of good advice — " a child rephed, ''one says nothing." We sup- pose he has not understood but if this had been an ironical reply, one might have found in it a curious meaning. As a matter of fact, these uncertainties, which are truly matters of conscience with the examiner, present themselves but rarely, fordinarily the interpretation is easy because one knows already about what to expect from his subject^ 28. Reversal of the Hands of a Clock This is a test of reasoning, attention, visual imagery. Procedure. First ask the subject if he knows how to tell time. In case his answer is in the affirmative, put him to the test because it is not best to trust his word. There are imbeciles who say they know how to tell time and give extravagant answers when a watch is given them to read. It is important to note this error in judg- ment. Having found that the subject knows how to tell time, remind him that the long hand indicates the minutes and the short hand the hours. Then say to him, "Suppose that it is a quarter of three, do you clearly see where the long hand is, and the short hand? Very well, now suppose the long hand is changed SERIES OF TESTS 1905 67 to the place where the short hand is, and the short hand to the place of the long, what time is it?" Reverse the hands for the following hours: twenty minutes past six; four minutes of three. The correct solutions are, half past four, and a quarter past eleven. The subject must not see the face of a watch, nor make the design upon paper, or his cuff or his nail to aid his imagination. As the experiment is made individually, supervision is easy. When the subject gives the two solutions correctly, one can push him a little further, imposing a question much more difficult. Say to him, 'Tor each of the hours that you have indicated, the reversal of the hands brings about the result that you have found; nevertheless this result is not altogether correct. The transposi- tion indicated is not altogether possible. By analyzing the case with care, tell me why.'' This test permits of varying degrees of accuracy in the repUes. First, certain ones are not able to make any transposition; they give no solution, or else it is absolutely incorrect. Others who come nearer the truth give a solution which is partially correct; for example, only one of the hands is rightly placed, or perhaps an error of symmetry has been committed, one has put to the right what ought to have been at the left or inversely. The third category is that of subjects who give correct solutions. Finally the fourth is composed of those who give a correct solution and are capable of criticizing the slight inaccuracies. 29. Paper Cutting^^ This exercise calls for voluntary attention, reasoning, visual imagery, but not for vocabulary. Procedure. Take two sheets of white paper of the same dimen- sions. Call the attention of the subject to their equality. ''You see they are alike." Lay the first one on the table, fold the other into two equal parts slowly before the subject, then fold again into two equal parts at right angles to the first fold. The sheet is now folded in four equal divisions. On the edge that presents a single fold, cut out with the scissors, a triangle. Take away the triangular piece of paper without allowing the subject to study it, but show him the folded paper, and say to him: "The sheet of " Cf. p. 234. bo DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE paper is now cut. If I were to open it, it would no longer resem- ble the first sheet of paper here on the table; there will be a hole in it. Draw on this first sheet of paper what I shall see when I un- fold this one." It is important that the experimenter say neither more nor less than our text, and that he compel himself to employ the words chosen by us although scarcely exact and accurate. The subject now draws upon the first sheet the result of the cut- ting which he has just witnessed. He should not be allowed to handle the perforated sheet. Some subjects look a Uttle at the perforation, others rely upon their imagination and begin at once to draw. The less intelHgent simply draw an angle placed no matter where on the white page, or perhaps a triangle whose form and dimensions are not those of the cut. A little closer observa- tion causes some to consider the form and dimensions. Some- what better is the triangle replaced by a diamond drawn in the center of the page. Although better, it is still not the correct result, for to be correct two diamonds must be drawn, one in the center of each half of the paper. This test interests everybody. It requires no development of style. It has nothing literary, and rests upon entirely different faculties than those required by pre- ceding tests. Moreover the correctness of the result is easy to grstde. 30. Definitions of Ahstradt Terms^"^ This test resembles closely those which consist in repl5ring to an abstract question. It differs especially in that it requires a knowl- edge of vocabulary. Procedure. Without preliminaries, one asks of the subject, ''What difference is there between esteem and affection? What difference is there between weariness and sadness?'' Often the subject does not reply. He sometimes gives an absurd or non- sensical answer. We conclude here the list of tests we have used. It would have been easy to continue them by rendering them more complicated, if one had wished to form a hierarchy among normal children. One could even extend the scale up to the adult normal, the average intelligent, the very intelligent, the hyper-intelligent and measure, or try to measure, talent and genius. We shall postpone for another time this difficult study. ^^ Cf. p. 230. SERIES OF TESTS — 1905 69 When a subnormal, or a child suspected of being such, is ques- tioned, it is not necessary to follow the exact order of tests. A little practice enables one to cut short, and put the finger upon the decisive test. The solutions given by the subjects can be put into four categories : 1. Absence of solution. This is either a case of mutism, or re- fraining from making an attempt, or an error so great that there is nothing satisfactory in the result. We indicate the absence of result by the algebraic sign minus ( — ). 2. Partial solutions. A part of the truth has been discovered. The reply is passable. This is indicated by a fraction; the frac- tion in use is J. When the test permits several degrees one can have i, or J, etc. 3. Complete solution. This does not admit of definition. It is indicated by the algebraic sign plus (+). 4. Absurdities. We have cited a great number of examples and insist upon their importance; they are indicated by the ex- clamation sign (!). The cause for certain defective repUes can sometimes be grasped with sufficient clearness to admit of classification. Besides the failure to comprehend the tests as a whole, we encounter: 1. Ignorance; the subject does not know the sense of a word or has never seen the object of which one speaks. Thus a child does not know a poppy. We write an I. 2. Resistance to the examination because of bad humor, un- wilhngness, state of nerves, etc. We write an R. 3. Accentuated timidity. We write a T. 4. The failure of attention, distraction. We write a D. The distraction may be of different kinds. There is an accidental dis- traction, produced by an exterior excitant or an occasional cause. For example, the case of a normal who spoils a memory test be- cause he must use his handkerchief. There is constitutional dis- traction frequent among subnormals. We have ascertained among them the following types: Distraction from scattered per- ceptions. Distraction from preoccupation. Distraction from inability to fix the attention. 7U DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE II. Pedagogical Method The pedagogical method consists in making an inventory of the total knowledge of a subject, in comparing this total with that of a normal subject, in measuring the difference, and in find- ing if the difference in the knowledge of a subject is explained by the insufficiency of scholastic training. The first idea of this method was suggested to us by reading the pamphlets in which Dr. Demoor and his colleagues explain the function of the special school at Brussels. To this school are ad- mitted all children ''pedagogically retarded." The pedagogically retarded are those whose instruction puts them two years behind normal children of the same age. In France, our ministerial commission estimated that these pedagogically retarded, or to speak more accurately, these chil- dren lacking education, do not need to be sent to a special class; being normal they ought to remain in the ordinary schools, there to make up their instruction. We have thought that since it is of practical value to make a distinction between the normal who is lacking in school training and the subnormals, this distinction could be made in the type of scholastic knowledge beneficial to each of these classes. The normal retarded child is one who is not at the level of his comrades of the same age, for causes that have no relation to his intelligence; he has missed school, or he has not attended regularly, or he has had mediocre teachers, who have made him lose time, etc. The subnormal ignoramus is one whose ignorance comes from a personal cause; he does not learn as quickly as his comrades, he comprehends less clearly, in a word, he is more or less imper- vious to the usual methods of instruction. We now have a method of recognizing subnormal ignoramuses; this consists in estimating at the same time their degree of instruction and their knowledge. Thus the idea of the pedagogical method originated. Having acknowledged what we owe to Dr. Demoor and to his colleagues, we must nevertheless add that these authors do not seem to appreciate the need of precise methods of evaluating even among normals the amount of retardation in instruction. It is probable that in their practice the amount of this retardation is taken into account. Teachers do not hesitate, however, to make estimates of this nature. They will say without hesitation that THE PEDAGOGICAL METHOD 71 such a child is two years or three years retarded. The value of these estimates is as yet undetermined. We have found the following direction of great value to teachers who are attempting to designate the subnormals in their school. ''Any child is subnormal who, in spite of regular or sufficient schooling, is two years behind children of the same age.'^ This criterion fixes the ideas and evades some uncertainties. But even though it constitutes a great improvement over subjective appre- ciation, which has no guide, it has still the fault of lacking pre- cision. It remains to be seen what is acquired from school in- struction by normal children of different ages; one must to some extent make a barometer of instruction. On the other hand there remains to be organized rapid methods which permit one to tell with precision the degree of instruction which a candidate has at- 1 tained. These two lines of research can scarcely be followed out I except by persons belonging to the teaching profession. We have succeeded in interesting different distinguished persons. M. Lacabe, primary inspector in Paris, has consented to confide to the instructors of his staff the preparation of a work designed to measure the knowledge of his pupils in grammar. M. Behr, pri- mary inspector of Fontainebleau, has undertaken to determine the scholastic attainments of the average child, ideally average, of neither over nor under intelligence, of average health, and who has had professors of average merit. The idea is original, the at- tempt promises to be interesting; it will be laborious. Another work,^^ entirely different in idea, is due to M. Vaney, school director of Paris. It is devoted to the measuring of proficiency acquired in mathematics. In considering the question as a whole, it is clear that the peda- gogical or instruction method, divides into two very distinct categories : 1. The methods permitting one to evaluate scholastic knowl- edge including arithmetic, grammar, history, geography — ^in a word, all that figures in the curriculums and can be easily measured. 2. The investigation of knowledge acquired outside the schools. It is upon this last point that we invite the attention of our colleagues, the teachers. There is a mass of information that a child acquires outside of school, which figures on no program. It 18 See U Annie Psychologique, Vol. II, p. 146-162. ^w 72 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE is acquired by conversation, reading the paper, observation of all that goes on in the street, in the house, everywhere. It is pre-emi- nently practical knowledge, part of it is useless, much is very im- portant, quite as important surely as that which has a scholastic character. We have ourselves recently begun a quest upon this side of the question. We have made collective tests in the school, asking the children to reply in writing to certain questions concerning practical life. More than this, we have asked teachers to put questions individually to the children upon points that we have designated to them. Here is a little sample of the nature of the information which every child is to furnish of himself without the aid of anyone. 1. What is your name? What is your first name? 2. What is your age? 3. What is the exact date of your birth? 4. How long have you attended school? 5. What day is today? 6. What month is it? 7. What year is it? 8. What day of the month is it? 9. What hour is it? 10. Is it morning or afternoon? 11. What is the address of your parents (street, number, apart- ment)? 12. What is your father's trade, your mother's trade? 13. What are the names of your mother, brothers and sisters if you have any? 14. Which are younger, which are older than you? 15. Count this money. How much is it? (Show 12 sous in 2-sou pieces — 1 fr. 80 centimes, one piece of 1 franc; 1 piece of 50 centimes, and the remainder four single sous and a 2-sou piece). 16. Name the colors. (Squares of colored paper, vivid red, pink, light yellow, deep yellow, orange, green, light blue, deep blue, violet, white, grey, black.) 17. Do you read the paper? Which one? 18. Have you learned to ride a bicycle? 19. What is a " correspondance d'omnibus" and what is its use?^® ^' Editor's note: "Correspendance d' omnibus" cannot be translated into English because the system has no counterpart in this country. But experience would soon teach a resident of Paris the use of this term. THE PEDAGOGICAL METHOD 73 20. What stamps must one put .on a letter sent from Paris to Geneva? 21. How much does a loaf of bread cost? 22. Describe how to fry an egg. 23. How much does a sack of charcoal cost? 24. What do you think is the age of your principal? 25. Did you ever see a cow milked? 26. How much does a street car conductor get a day? 27. Have you ever seen a goat? a frog? a rat? an elephant? 28. Did you ever light a fire? 29. Do you ever do several errands at a time? 30. What is a janitor? 31. What is meant by "le term?" (Obscure for an American but not so for a French child.) Sommer, the German alienist, well known for his work of path- ological psychology, has indicated in a special book the utility of these investigations in determining what he calls orientation in time and space. We do not know what advantages he has been able to draw from them; we are also ignorant of whether or not he has taken the elementary precaution, nearly always neglected, of first estabhshing how a normal child replies. Here are several examples of the information which we have gathered in the pri- mary schools, upon the extra-scholastic knowledge of normals. "Correspondance d^ Omnibus. ^^ In the first class (from 11 to 15 years) there were 16 boys who repHed correctly — 11 did not know, and 2 repHed ambiguously. In the third class (from 9 to 14 years) 4 boys knew, 28 did not know. In the fifth class (from 7 to 12 years) 1 boy knew, 41 did not know. In the sixth class (6 to 9 years) 42 boys did not know. Here is a test that is good for the higher grade because the number of correct replies is proportional to the age. Frying an egg. In the first class, 15 children described very well the manner, and 15 did not know. In the sixth class 10 de- scribed it well, 28 did not know, and 4 had doubtful replies. Price of a sack of charcoal. In the first class 22 gave a reason- able price (2 fr. 50 to 5 fr.) ; 3 gave unreasonable prices (25 fr., 50 fr., etc.); 4 did not know. In the sixth class, 7 gave a reasonable price (2 fr., to 5 fr.); 5 gave prices too high (10 fr., 50 fr., 70 fr., etc.) ; 11 gave too low a price (10 centimes, 1 fr. 80) and 18 did not know. 74 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE Know how to ride a bicycle. ' In the first class 15 knew and 15 did not know. In the sixth class 13 knew, and 29 did not know. Have you ever seen a goat? a frogf a rat? an elephant? In the first class, all had seen the animals. In the sixth class of 42 pupils, 2 had not seen a goat, 9 had never seen a frog, 8 had never seen a rat and 3 had never seen an elephant. It is curious that the frog should be less known than the elephant. What is meant by "le termeV^ In the first class, 14 knew, and 16 gave ambiguous rephes. In the sixth class 3 knew, 3 gave doubt- ful answers, and 36 did not know. We hope soon to be able to make out a complete list of items of extra-scholastic knowledge. This is only a sample. It will be necessary to give by ages the percentage of correct rephes. The question is still open as to what extent extra-scholastic knowledge is foreign to subnormals. We can at present only make conjectures on this point. It is probable that the shghtly sub- normal possess many of these notions of practical life; perhaps their defect manifests itself especially in an inability to assimilate that which is properly scholastic, and on the other hand these may be quite apt in the more concrete facts of every-day life. The ab- sence of this knowledge characterizes especially true imbeciles, those who are more seriously affected. Not to know either the number or names of one's brother or sisters, to be unable to dis- tinguish one's given name and one's family name, ignorance of the address of one's parents, would constitute then a sufficiently serious sign of intellectual inferiority, if this manner of looking at the matter is right, and if there are not extenuating circumstances connected with this ignorance. To sum up, the pedagogical method is two fold. It consists in estabhshing as it were the balance sheet of the scholastic knowl- edge acquired by the child; on the other hand it consists in estab- hshing the balance sheet of extra-scholastic knowledge. The general result will be found, not by a complete inventory — that would take too long — but by tests bearing upon a small number of questions judged to be representative of the whole. The pedagogical method is somewhat indirect in its manner of arriving at the state and degree of the intelligence; it grasps the intelligence through the memory only. One who is rich in memory may be poor in judgment. One even finds imbeciles who have an amazing memory. It is right to add that in spite of this, these THE MEDICAL METHOD 75 imbeciles are but little instructed, which proves to us that in- struction, although it depends principally upon memory, demands also other intellectual faculties, especially judgment. One must not therefore exaggerate the bearing of this theoretic criticism which we here make upon the pedagogical method. The disadvantages which our use of the method permits us already to suspect, are the following: in the first place it cannot be appHed to very young children, of from 3 to 6 years, and it is especially important to point out mental debihty at that age; in the second place it requires that one should know the scholastic attainments of each child. It is not always easy to see clearly into the past life of a child. Did he miss his class three years ago? If he followed the class, had he in his temperament, his state of health, his habits, special reasons for relaxation? Was his master a poor one, did he fail to understand the child? The quest may find itself face to face with facts, which from their remoteness and their nature, are very diificult to evaluate. These doubtful cases will not be in the majority, let us hope; but they will present them- selves in abundance. M. Vaney has noted several in a statistical study, which is restricted, however. Dr. Demoor^o finds 50 doubtful in a total of 246 retarded and subnormal children; that is approximately one-fifth doubtful. These facts show that the pedagogical method has its imperfections. It should not be em- ployed exclusively. III. Medical Method We speak here of the medical method considered in its narrow- est sense; we make the improbable hypothesis of a physician who would judge an idiot simply from medical signs, and without attempting, even in the most empirical form, a psychological appre- ciation of the intelligence of the patient. We make the suppo- sition in order to better understand the proper field for each method. What are then the somatic symptoms which the physician can utilize for making a diagnosis of inferior mentality? There is, we believe, a distinction to be made between two studies, that of the causes and that of the actual condition. When the actual state has been determined, after one has estabHshed in 20 "Les enfants anormaux k Bruxelles," L'Annee Psychologique, VII, p. 305. 76 DEVELOPMEN'T OF INTELLIGEN'CE a summary manner or by a searching method that a subject has an inferior degree of inteUigence, the physician plays an important role, owing to his special knowledge; it is he, who above everyone else can throw light upon the etiology of each case, can determine, for example, that the child suffers from mal comitial or is afflicted with myxoedema or that his respiration is disturbed by adenoids, that his nutrition is weakened, etc., and that a relation of cause and effect exists between these diverse maladies and his inferior intelligence. The etiology, once determined, serves to guide the prognosis and the treatment. It is not a matter of indifference to know the ill from which the child suffers; if his imbecility is due to epileptic causes, or rather consists in a state of decadence brought about by frequent attacks, the prognosis is less hopeful than if his intellectual weakness is the result of traumatism; in the latter case, one can hope that the lesion is made once for all and has not a progressive tendency. But these considerations upon the etiology, the prognosis and the treatment, remain subordinate to the study of the actual state of the intelligence; and as it is the actual state that we wish to study here we shall set aside every other question no matter how interesting it may be. It is very evident that for a diagnosis of the actual state of the intelligence the physician who would rigorously ignore all psychol- ogy, would very much diminish his resources. Nevertheless he would still have some resources left. There are many somatic symptoms that can be considered as indirect and possible signs of inferior intelligence. What are these signs? Here, we must first of all dissipate many illusions. The subnormal does not of necessity constantly an- nounce itself by evident anatomical defects. The physical de- scriptions of the idiot and the imbecile that one finds in classic treatises are not always correct; and even if they were, they would not apply in the least to morons. But the morons constitute the majority. It is the morons that must be recognized in the schools, where they are confounded with normals; it is they who offer the greatest obstacle to the work of education. The diagnosis of moronity is at the same time the most important and the most difficult of all. Let us look therefore into the methods to be em- ployed, to facilitate this diagnosis, from the simple examination of the body. Medical Hterature contains actually a great number of observa- THE MEDICAL METHOD 77 tions which may be helpful if they are first submitted to organiza- tion. A great many anomalies of different orders have been noted among the subnormals; anatomical anomalies, physiological anomalies and the anomalies of heredity and of growth. In a recent book, Dr. Ley^^ has made an excellent resum^ of what is known of the diagnostic signs of abnormality, to which he has added personal observations of his own. We shall present to the reader in a rapid survey all that scientists have ever thought to look for, to examine, to analyze and to weigh among subnormals. We shall take account only of clinical signs, that is to say of verifiable symptoms upon the living individual; and as we have already stated, we shall occupy ourselves mainly with the recog- nition of moronity. A complete examination should cover the following points. Hereditary antecedents. Development. Anatomical examination. ■P^ceholegieal/ examination. ^ ^ HEREDITARY INFLUENCES 1. Age of parents at the hirth of the child. Nothing special for the backward. (Ley.) 2. Alcoholism of the parents. 42 per cent of the fathers have manifested in different ways symptoms of drunkenness and 5.2 per cent of the mothers (Ley). The proportion is strong, but it is not known what is the proportion for the parents of normals. 3. Tuberculosis. 13.3 per cent of the fathers; 8.1 per cent of the mothers; 19.7 per cent among the grandparents; 18 per cent among collaterals (Ley). The proportion is unknown among normals of analogous social condition. 4- Neuropathic affections. (Especially nervousness, tics, trem- blings, peculiarities of character, epilepsy, hysteria, migraine, and accentuated neuralgia). 18 per cent of the fathers; 25 per cent of the mothers; 11 per cent of the grandparents; 4.5 per cent of the collaterals (Ley). Nothing is known of the proportion among normals of the same social conditions. The heredity of normals is so little known ! 6. Consanguinity of the parents. Nothing has been observed. 21 U arrUration intellecluelle, Bruxelles, 1904. 78 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE 6. The order of the child in the family. Of only children, 8.1 per cent; first born, 15.6 per cent; last born of large families of five children or more, 7.5 per cent; among the last three of families of six and more, 15.6 per cent (Ley). Comparison among normals is also here lacking. The director of a primary school in Paris, M. Guilbert, at our request consented to measure the height of the children in his school while keeping count of the order of the child in the family. Here is the table: Height in Meters for Children Classed by Order of Birth in a Family AGE ONLY CHILD FIKST SECOND THIRD FOURTH FIFTH SIXTH SEVENTH 13 1.50 1.49 1.34 1.70 1.44 1.51 1.38 1.70 12 1.44 1.40 1.41 1.40 1.42 1.39 1.53 1.23 11 1.36 1.36 1.38 1.39 1.31 1.35 1.38 1.42 10 1.35 1.33 1.33 1.29 1.29 1.31 1.31 1.30 9 1.30 1.27 1.29 1.30 1.31 1.30 1.22 8 1.25 1.24 1.23 1.24 1.21 1.26 1.21 7 1.19 1.19 1.18 1.21 1.21 1.24 6 1.14 1.16 1.12 1.12 1.10 There are many irregularities in the figures of this table, which come from the fact that the averages are based upon a rather small number of children. For children higher than the third of the family, the averages bear upon less than ten children. In spite of the resulting incoherencies, one sees vaguely that an only child and those of the third order of birth are the largest children. We have had the same calculation made for the intelligence, taking for a standard the class to which the pupil belongs, and from this standpoint comparing the pupils of the same age but belonging to a different order in the family. It appears there- from, clearly enough, that the oldest are the most precocious. To comprehend the following tables, we must understand that the figures express the average of the classes. Thus a child belong- ing to the first class, a second to the second class, the average of the class for the two is 1.50. The smaller the figure the more pre- cocious the child. THE MEDICAL METHOD 79 Precocity of Children Relative to their Order in the Family AGE ONLY CHILD FIRST SECOND THIRD FOURTH FIFTH SIXTH 2 14 1.25 1.50 1.50 1.25 2 2 1 13 1.50 2.40 2.21 3.14 1.80 3.50 2 6 6 12 2.50 3.33 3.14 3.66 5.14 4.66 2.50 2 11 5.45 5.52 4.82 4.36 5.50 5 5 4 10 6.16 6.92 6.52 5.75 7 6.50 7.50 9 8.14 7 7.95 7.88 8.4 8.75 10 . 8 9.16 9.28 9.30 9.23 8.75 8 7 9.50 9.87 9.80 9.80 ^ 10 It can be seen that the precocity of the child, (used as the sign of his inteUigence) diminishes very sHghtly as his order rises. It remains to be found if the inferiority of inteUigence of the later born does not come partly from social influences such as the pov-, erty and misery of too numerous families; poverty produces poor nourishment, lack of supervision, etc. However that may be, if one does not enter into secondary causes, it seems probable, that, among normal children, being the last of birth is in itself an un- favorable factor. 7. Mortality of brothers and sisters. 33.4 per cent among sub- normals (Ley) . The proportion is unknown among normals. 8. Unnatural labor. 14.5 among subnormals (Ley). Nothing known among normals. DEVELOPMENT 1. Pathological history. Convulsions among 28.4 per cent of defectives. Infectious diseases having had an influence over the intelUgence, 9.8 per cent of defectives (Ley). The proportion is not known among normals. ^. Retardation of dentition. First tooth appearing after one year, 23.2 per cent (Ley). 3. Retardation of walking. After fifteen months, 50.5 per cent (Ley). 4. Retardation of speech. After fifteen months, 66.4 per cent (Ley). 5. Urinary inferiority. Child wetting the bed at four years and after, 22.6 per cent (Ley). 80 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE For all this the proportion is unknown among normal children. The proportion of 50 per cent and of 67 per cent is so strong among defectives, that we ask ourselves whether the speech and the walk not appearing until fifteen months, does not constitute a veritable retardation. The study of normals, unfortunately neglected, would suffice to dissipate all doubt. ANATOMICAL EXAMINATION This examination comprises two parts. First, that which can be measured, as the weight, the height, dimensions of the head, the spread of the arms, the biacromial diameter, circumference of the thorax, the vital capacity. Second, that which can be appre- ciated without measurement: pathological blemishes that are more often called stigmata of degeneracy. A few words only upon the height, the measure of the head and the stigmata. Height. Innumerable works have been published upon the height of normal subjects, of all countries, of both sexes, and of all ages;22 certain measurements have been made upon the height of school children of lesser intelligence and these compared with the measurements of the more intelligent children (Porter-Gilbert); some studies have also been made upon the height of subnormal children.23 22 For a view of the whole consult the article "Croissance," of Varigny in the Dictionnaire de physiologie of Richet. Several important articles upon normals will be found there. Quetelet, AnthropomStrie, Brussels, 1871. See also Mimoires de V Acad, de Belgique, Vol. VII. Burk, "Growth of Children in Height and Weight," Amer. Journ. of Psychol., August, 1898. Vitale Vitali, Studi anthropologic! in servizio della pedagogia, Turin. Gilbert, Researches upon School Children, Iowa University, 1897. Porter, The Growth of St. Louis School Children, Academy of St. Louis, 1894, VI, p. 325. 23 Quetelet, op.cit., Mesures Jaite dans la maison penitentiaire de Ruysselede. Berthold, in Year Book, New York State Reformatory at Elmira, 1898. Etudes dans une ecole de reforme. Tarbell, On the Height and Weight and Relative Rate of Growth of Normal and Feehle-Minded Children, Proc. of the Assoc, of Medic. Off. of Amer. Inst, for Idiot and Feehle-Minded Persons, Frankfort, 1881. Simon, Recherches Anthropolo- gique sur 223 gargons anormaux, Annee Psychologique, 1900, Vol. VI. (See also Goddard, Height and Weight of Feehle-Minded Children in American Institutions, Journal of Nervous and Mental Diseases, April, 1912. — Editor.) THE MEDICAL METHOD 81 All these documents go to show that less intelligent children do not differ constantly from the most intelligent in their height and bodily development. Gilbert, among others, presents statistics, which prove that there is very httle difference between the two categories of children. On the other hand, it has been established in the clearest manner by the investigations of Quetelet, Tarbell, Berthold and one of us (Simon), that there exists a considerable inferiority in height among subnormals when compared with nor- mals of the same age. The average difference of height shown by the figures published by Simon, is sometimes more than three centimeters. It is well understood that one must take the ele- mentary precaution of comparing x)nly children of the same age, of the same race, and of the same social condition. It remains to be shown how one can utilize these differences for an individual diagnosis. They are average differences, obtained from calculations upon a great number of measures; they are there- fore necessary in order to know what modifications must be ap- plied to render them true for the individual. One of us (Binet) has presented an idea in regard to this subject, ^^ which it seems ought to take an important place in our medical method; it is the idea of limits. An analysis of the measures shows that there exists j i ? ^ . ^ , > alimltoT height below which normals are less numerous than sub- ^^ \{ normals, and above which normals are more numerous than sub- normals. This consideration of limits gives place to conclusions more precise than the consideration of the average. Let lis cite an example, taking for a standard, the measures which M. Boyer at our request was kind enough to make at the Bicetre upon the idiots, imbeciles and morons under Dr. Bourneville. For school children of 14 years, the normal height is 1.5 meters; the height of idiots of the same age is found to be 1.37 meters. This is the average obtained. But if one runs over the individual values, he sees that only 5 per cent of normals are to be found below the height of 1.40 meters, while on the contrary, there are 60 per cent of idiots, imbeciles and morons. This is the limit, not impass- able but rarely passed, and which in an individual examination, as we shall explain further on, gives a prejudicial presumption. But we can treat this subject at the same time with that of the measurement of the head. It is much more simple. 24 Bulletin de la Soci6t6 libre pour I'fitude de I'Enfant, p. 430. 82 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE Head measurements. During recent years, a great number of measurements have been undertaken, upon the dimensions and form of the head among normal children of diverse intelligence and among subnormals. Our UAnnee Psychologique has already published many documents upon this interesting question. A his- tory will there be found (Vol. V, p. 245), a sketch of the technique (Binet, VII, p. 314) and comparative measures upon children of unequal intelligence, (Binet, VII, pp. 369, 375, 403, 412) and upon subnormals (Simon, VII, p. 430), children of different ages, (Binet, VIII, p. 345), upon deaf-mutes (Binet, VIII, p. 385), and the blind (Biiiet, 368). The learned annual reviews of anthro- pology of Deniker (UAnnee Psych., X, p. 296 and IX) contain the review of several recent articles. From all these investigations it is seen that the dimensions of the head are on an average, a very little greater among the intelligent than among the less intelli- gent in the schools, and that the more intelligent are grouped more closely around this average than the less intelligent. Among sub- normals, the preceding facts are again found with a slight accen- tuation; the average values of their cephalic development are a little less than among normals; and besides, they do not hold so closely to the average. Certain ones, the microcephalic, separate themselves far below, while others, the macrocephalic are above the average. In presence of these results, one finds the same difficulty in utilizing them for an individual diagnosis, as in the figures con- cerning height. The method which we advise is the same: that is to establish a limit. To be below the limit becomes a prejudicial characteristic, or more exactly, an anatomical stigma. Here are the provisional limits which we propose for subnormals (boys). We have fixed them for the height, the anterior-pos- terior and the transverse diameters of the head, and the sum of these two diameters. It can be seen that more must be done to make the work complete. One must fix the limit for the other cephalic measurements, their totals, their differences, and repeat this for both sexes. ...^.^^Ilere is the method of utilizing this table: of 120 primary school ^ wuld^en one finds 3.2 per cent whose height is below the limit; there are 16.3 per cent whose anterior-posterior diameter is below, and 7.5 per cent whose transverse diameter is below; this makes a total of 27 per cent but it must be noted that not one is inferior for two measures at a time. THE MEDICAL METHOD 83 For a group of 100 subnormals (idiots, imbeciles and morons, children at the Bicetre, all low types) 34 per cent were found be- low for height, 40 per cent for anterior-posterior diameter, 27 per cent for transverse diameter; 22 per cent are below for one meas- ure and 33 per cent for more than one measure. It would seem, therefore, that it would be this inferiority considered in relation to two limits, which constitutes the characteristic of subnormals. We have had the curiosity to apply the same method to the measurement of defectives (probably only morons, and a few ignoramuses) published by Ley. There are 51 out of 187 who are Limits for Suhiiormals (Boys) AGE HEIGHT DIAMETER ANT.-POST. CEPHALIC DIAMETER TRANSVERSE CEPHALIC SUM OF THE TWO DIAMETERS cm. mm. mm. mm. 6 100.0 164 133.0 300 7 105.0 166 135.0 8 110.0 169 136.0 306 9 115.0 171 137 10 120.0 172 138 312 11 125.0 173 139 12 130.0 174 140.0 318 13 135.0 175 141.0 14 140.0 178 142.0 322 15 142.5 179 143.5 16 145.0 180 145.0 328 17 147.5 181 146.0 18 150.0 182 147.0 330 inferior to our limit for anterior-posterior, and 46 for transverse diameter; out of these numbers there are 20 who combine the two stigmata. These results would be significant if M.Ley meas- ures the heads in the way that we do. It would be interesting to know the height of these subjects but it was not given. It has been for other subnormals. The difference is not great; there are 20 per cent of subnormals below the limit for height, and only 17 per cent of normals. The limit is therefore, it would seem, an anatomic stigma less important for morons than for idiots. Finally, among backward children of the primary schools of Paris (mostly morons), measured at our request by Mile. Sirugue,^^ who used our 2= We desire here to tender to Mile. Sirugue our sincere thanks for the zeal and intelligence which she showed in the execution of this work. 84 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE technique, we find 11 boys out of 38 who are below the limit for the anterior-posterior diameter, only 4 for the transverse diameter, and among these children, 4 combine the two stigmata. The 7 normal cases are all above the limit. As for the morons of Ley, we find that very few are below the limit for height, only 4 boys out of 38. We emphasize these last results because of their exceptional importance. It is here a question of subnormals actually found in the schools of Paris. They constitute exactly the category of children that the Commission, charged with the recruiting of the schools for backward children, will have to examine. Therefore by this topical illustration, it may be seen what help may be derived from investigating the height and the cephalic dimensions of these children. STIGMATA Great account is made of these stigmata, when anthropometry is practiced in the same office with medicine. If one takes the pains to search systematically for stigmata among defectives, one does not find many more than among normals. Here is a list of those which are most frequently observed : Adenoidal condition. 15 per cent of subnormals (Ley). Tubercular. Thorax paralytic among 60 per cent (Ley) . Rachitis. 6.5 per cent (Ley). Syphilis. 3 per cent (Ley). Defective nutrition. 60 per cent (Ley). This high figure needs explanation. Malformations of the cranium. 5 per cent (Ley). One sees that they are rare. High narrow palate. 60 per cent. Reservation should be made upon such a high figure; it would be necessary to examine the condition of normals in this regard, and above all, to measure the deformity. Teeth. Absence of incisors, 10 per cent (Ley). Hutchinson teeth 2 per cent. Ears. The auricle like a handle, 12 per cent. Tubercle of Darwin, 5 per cent. Adherent lobe, 11 per cent. Great simplicity in the folds of the auricle, 18 per cent. Observations lacking among normals. Hair. Abnormal masses, 1 per cent (Ley). THE MEDICAL METHOD 85 For the study of these different pathological blemishes, one should : first, measure them, which is possible for at least certain ones; second, find out the frequency of their occurrence among normals, without knowing whether the subjects are normal or not, in order to be free from auto-suggestion. Until these two points are elucidated, nothing can be drawn from observation of the stigmata; exact measurement is the only check against the arbi- trary, the fantastic and the a priori methods of experimenters. One could never have advanced the theory regarding the physical type of criminals, if one had measured the stigmata. PHYSIOLOGICAL EXAMINATION It must bear upon the following points : Vision. Touch. Other senses. Sensitivity to pain. Respiration and circulatory functions Respiration. Quickness of the pulse. ^ Blood analysis. Coloration of the skin. Tempefature. Motor functions General gait. Walking forward and backward, etc. Expression of the physiognomy. Strength. Motor ability. Tics. Quickness of movements. Speech. Defective articulation. We shall simply say a few words about temperature, the analy- sis of the blood, and the expression of the physiognomy, regretting that space is lacking to speak of strength and the quickness of movements. 86 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE TEMPERATURE It is known that subnormals have a slackening of the circulation, a less rapid pulse, hands cold and often blue. That would be an interesting sign for the diagnosis, because the taking of the axil- lary temperature, in tenths of a degree, among normals and sub- normals, the same day, at the same hour, and in the same local- ity, proves that with the slightly subnormals, morons, the ther- mometric inferiority is about 0.4 of a degree. (Ley, op. cit., p. 77.) There would be opportunity here to establish, just as for height, a limit — the thermometric limit. Care must be taken to avoid causes of error which are numerous, because the circulation is influenced by many slight causes; the hour of the day, the temperature of the place, the state of physical exercise, etc. EXAMINATION OF THE BLOOD This test so often made, should probably be rejected. Recent investigation has shown that the number of corpuscles contained in a drop of blood varies with the action of the superficial vaso- motor system, with the constriction or the relaxation of the capil- laries affected by pricking; therefore a slight local condition causes variation in the number of corpuscles and from what can be found in a small drop of blood, it is not possible to draw a general conclu- sion as to the richness in corpuscles for the blood altogether. Let us make a comparison. A permission;^ a discharge, a holiday, any sort of an order, will cause a variable number of soldiers to leave the barracks; a statistician would commit a great error, if he counted, on any day whatever, or at any hour whatever, the soldiers who passed through the streets, and from that estimated the military force of the country. It is an analogous error which is committed by the counters of corpuscles. In order to render the examination of real value it would seemingly be necessary to provoke a well defined condition of peripheral circulation. EXPRESSION OF THE PHYSIOGNOMY Few experimenters can boast of being able to escape the purely instinctive judgment which a physiognomy provokes; we are deeply impressed by fine traits, mobile expressions and intelH- gent appearances; a vacant look, an open mouth, an immovable THE MEDICAL METHOD 87 countenance, give us an unfavorable impression. It remains to be discovered what is the real value of the expression of the physiognomy, if it is possible to properly estimate it, and in case this is so, if it would be possible to apply it to individual diagnosis. What do authors think of it ? Alienists, who have had to do with the gravest forms of mental deficiency, do not hesitate to affirm that the expression of the countenance is deceiving. Here is what Shuttleworth says:^^ The diagnosis and the prognosis of the different cases of mental defect are so intimately united that they should be examined together. If we consider the great division of congenital and non-congenital cases, we shall be able to note that contrary to the current idea, the prognosis for the former, as a general rule is better ^than that for the latter. In reality, with the one there is a simple defect of development; with the other, there are lesions more or less irremediable. The superficial appearances are in favor of the non-congenital cases, while the others are judged from their deformed and often repugnant countenances; nevertheless our experience is altogether in accord with that of Dr. Langdon Down (Obstet. Trans., Vol. XVIII) who says that the prognosis — contrary to what one often thinks — is unfavorable if the child is pretty, beautiful to look at, and of seductive aspect. M. Voisin is of the same opinion. He observes that the con- genitally affected are uglier, more deformed than the acquired, and he repeats several times that the latter may have expressions of physiognomy indicating a character of intelligence which is deceptive, because they are the relics of a former period — when the subject had not yet lost his intelligence. ^^ M. Boumeville makes the same remark in regard to epileptics, whose numerous attacks put them on the road to decay. Truly, in generalizing this opinion, one would almost say that the more intelligent idiot children appear, the less they are so. The question would therefore seem to be settled if other scien- tists had not voiced an opinion diametrically opposite. Dr. Ee- moor attaches great importance to the study of the play of the countenance in defectives; he believes the expression is very significant and he does not hesitate to say that the diagnosis will have there a much surer support, than in cephalometry. We shall not discuss his opinion regarding cephalometry, since the facts that we have above presented are of a nature to show 2^ Les enfants anormaux au point de vue mental, p. 78, Brussels, 1904. 27 Legons sur Vidiotie, pp. 82 and 83. 88 DEjVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE whether he was self-deceived. But we believe it is interesting to retain what he has said upon the countenance. Does it seem to disagree with Shuttleworth, Voisin, and Bourneville? In the letter, yes; as to fundamentals, no. It seems possible for us to reconcile all these views as follows. These observers were famil- iar with different types of subjects. As regards the idiot un- doubtedly it is Voisin who is right; the countenance is deceptive. As regards the moron, who forms the majority of the children in the school of Brussels, to which Demoor is attached, it is very probable that the contrary is true; the physiognomy reveals the degree of intelligence. We do not propose this conciliatory solution, in consequence of a priori reasoning. It has been inspired in us by the results of an investigation which we have recently confided to Mme. Rous- son, pubhc school teacher in Paris. At our request, M. Bertillon has been good enough to photograph for us some hundred sub- normals, of the primary school taken at random, along with some fifty normals. ^^ It was with this collection that Mme. Rousson experimented; she had some seventy persons make the diagnosis, as to whether judged by his photograph the child was normal or subnormal. The teachers gave 80 per cent of correct replies, thus showing in the clearest manner, that the countenance is scarcely deceptive for those who are used to reading it; 20 per cent of errors is a very insignificant proportion, being about the same that Crepieux-Jamin obtains when he searches for intelli- gence by means of the hand-writing. These results which we give here en gros, and which confirm the opinion of Demoor, show of how great utility would be the precise analysis of physiognomy. There is here a technique to be created. We hope sincerely that we shall be able to bring the question to a conclusion with the collaboration of Mme. Rousson, who is deeply interested in these studies. In terminating this brief sketch of the medical examination, let us insist upon the method to be followed in such an exami- nation. We have not yet sufficiently developed our ideas on the subject. It is understood that one must force oneself to support 28 This was a great undertaking, full of all sorts of difficulties; it was successful, thanks to the energy and tact of Inspector Belot, and to the zeal of a great number of instructors. THE MEDICAL METHOD 89 one's reasoning by objective facts, that can be verified by all and are often measurable. One must guard carefully against intuition, subjectivism, gross empiricism, decorated by the name of medical tact, and behind which ignorance, carelessness, and presumption, hide themselves. Every medical diagnosis which cannot be proved as one proves a sum in addition, is to be rejected. The diagnosis must rest upon the utiHzation of different signs, several types of which we have enumerated in the preceding pages. We must in the first place come to an agreement upon the value of these signs; which must be fixed, without any pre- conceived idea; and the only means of fixing this value is to make a comparative study of the normal state. It is a guiding princi- ple which is too often forgotten in medicine. It is nevertheless so important, so fertile in consequences, that an alienist would certainly distinguish himself, if he did no more than force into the minds of his contemporaries, the idea that the study of the subnormal is not possible except by a comparison with the normal. Here, in our studies upon children, it is not simply a comparison that is necessary, it is a physiological, anatomical and anthro- pological barometer to which one must return every time with each new subject to find out in what measure this subject is in- ferior to the normal. In the second place, there must be estabhshed in the series of measurable signs, certain limits, which will demarcate the stig- mata. We have already described the stigmata of height, of the head, of the temperature, etc. We shall not repeat our- selves. In the third place, judging from the comparative frequency of the stigmata among normals and subnormals, a calculation must be devised which will express the presumable amount of retardation which each stigma contains. In other words, we must be able to attach a coefficient of importance to each one of these stigmata. What is the meaning of a height below the limit? What must be inferred from an arched palate? What count must be made of an axillary temperature 0.8 of a degree below normal? What importance is to be given to an alcoholic father and a tuberculous mother? This is the principle of calculation which we propose. Suppose that a certain stigma, is to be found always with the subnormal, never with the normal. It would have the value of 90 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE 100 per cent. Suppose that a second stigma is to be found with all subnormals and with 50 per cent of normals, it will be twice as common with the first, and it would have then the value of 50 per cent. Suppose a third is to be found with 12 subnormals and 6 normals, it will again have the value of 50 per cent although its absolute frequency should be much less. If 100 convention- ally represents the certainty, the smaller numbers measure inferior degrees of certainty, down to which represents the cornplete absence of the indication, and to the negative quantities which represent the indication of the opposite sense. To sum up, we can utilize three methods for the diagnosis of the intellectual level among subnormals. 1. The psychological method which is almost always applicable and which is almost certain to reveal the signs of defect; the diffi- culty being in the execution of the tests which demand in the experimenter a great facihty in experimental psychology. 2. The pedagogical method which is very frequently applicable, and which reveals probable signs of defect. 3. The medical method which is applicable only in a restricted number of cases, and which reveals possible signs of defect. A. BiNET AND Th. Simon. APPLICATION OF THE NEW METHODS TO THE DIAGNOSIS OF THfi INTELLECTUAL LEVEL AMONG NORMAL AND SUBNORMAL CHILDREN IN INSTITU- TIONS AND IN THE PRIMARY SCHOOLS The preceding article contains a strictly theoretical exposition of the methods of diagnosis which we have devised for recognizing and measuring intellectual inferiority. It remains to complete the preliminary work, to standardize it, to show how far these methods work out when applied to real facts. After the theory must come the proof. It will not be a question here of anything but the psychological method. It is the only one which is ripe for complete practical purposes. Other methods can only give accessory indications; but these already permit determinations of intellectual inferior- ity. This is our conviction; we are now going to give the pal- pable denionstration. The psychological examination of a subject lasts on an average 40 minutes. We made in the beginning many useless tests with each child, because we were doing a work of investigation; we were groping; now that one knows what to look for, one can pro- ceed more rapidly, and we believe that a half-hour will suffice to fix the state of the intellectual development of each child. We shall study successively with our measuring scale of intelli- gence: 1. Normals. 2. Subnormals in institutions. 3. Subnormals in primary schools. I. Normal Development of the Intelligence with Children FROM Three to Twelve Years Old Normals figure here as terms of comparison. We have been obliged to make these lengthy studies, because, up to the present, nothing of the kind existed. So far as we know, there is no work that contains the precise and detailed history of the development of the intelligence of a child. The most complete monographs 91 92 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE like those of Allen Gilbert^ present a series of practical tests, especially upon sensation and the organs of sense, but they almost always leave the intelligence out of the question; there are, never- theless, very suggestive observations which have been published here and there, ^ but we have not been able to utilize them, pre- ferring to erect a new structure borrowing material from no one. When the work, which is here only begun, shall have taken its definite character, it will doubtless permit the solution of many pending questions, since we are aiming at nothing less than the measure of the intelligence; one will thus know how to com- pare the different intellectual levels not only according to age, but according to sex, the social condition, and to race; applications of our method will be found useful to normal anthropology, and also to criminal anthropology, which touches closely upon the study of the subnormal, and will receive the principal conclusion of our study. These investigations have been made by ourselves personally; in spite of their statistical appearance, they are the results of experiments pursued during long periods upon isolated children. We felt that we could not trust this matter to anyone; and we vouch for all that we report, having been ourselves the constant observers. We did not know a single child; they appeared to us for the first when they came to the examination. We knew, however, that all were normal. The masters were asked to designate only children of average intelligence, who were neither in advance of nor behind children of their own age, and who attended the grade correct for their years. This prescription was carefully followed in the Primary school; evidently it was less easy to con- form to this rule in the Maternal school, because of the tender age of the children; finally, we required that the subjects chosen should have an exact number of years in order that the develop- ment should be typical of each age. ^ Allen Gilbert, Researches upon School Children and College Students, University of Iowa, studies in Psychology, edited by G. T. W. Patrick, pp. 1-39. 2 We know of nothing general, outside the books often cited, of Preyer, Perex, Sully, Shinn, etc., which are either monographs, or collections of anecdotes; there are also scattered notes in special collections like the Pedagogical Seminary of Stanley Hall. NORMAL CHILDREN OF THREE YEARS 93 The tests took place in the office of the Director or Directress of the school, and in their presence. We have chosen those schools where the office was sufficiently removed from the classes, to enjoy a silence undisturbed by the melodious chants of the children learning to spell. Let us add That we have chosen our Directors and Directresses from among those who best understood that it was a question of making scientific observations, and that it was not wise to intervene during a test to whisper a reply to the pupil. In our first attempt we were satisfied to make observations upon ten children of the Maternal school, and fifteen of the Primary school, in order to fix the mental. capacity of each age. These restricted numbers gave a first estimate. Later we made more numerous observations, which are still being continued. To illustrate our method, we shall simply describe the results ob- tained from some fifty c hildren. But it must be understood that these results have their special significance which we shall justify in a later publication. NORMAL CHILDREN OF THREE YEARS The questionings and the presentation of the tests offered many difficulties. We seated the children beside us at a table. We said good morning to them, making them welcome. Many children of this age remain silent and will not reply, even to a question which they understand. This mutism is partly caused by timidity, the proof of which is that certain children during the examination pull their fingers and roll up their aprons with a rapid motion; the silence of others is partly caused by ill-will, stubbornness or malice. One of this latter class persisted for several minutes in incorrect replies; we showed him a string and asked ''Is this string?" He shook his head in sign of negation; and when we asked him regarding other objects, a cup, a button, a thimble, ''Is that string?'' he nodded affirmation. In spite of these difficulties of psychological examination, it is still possible to accomplish it on condition that one does not offend the chil- dren and is willing to wait a little. If the child does not wish to reply to one test we present another; we have always succeeded finally in loosening their tongues. When necessary, if the timid- ity or bad humor of the child continues, one could put off the 94 DEVELOPMEN'T OF INTELLIGENCE examination to another time; we have not, however, as yet had to resort to this extreme measure. Our subjects have never been loquacious, they showed no spontaneity. We felt they could have done better than they did. The examination makes them in a certain way seem less intelligent than they are; and this is cer- tainly a general rule. The simple fact of being put upon the witness stand, so to speak, in school, by a gentleman who has the age and appearance of a professor, would naturally inspire an attitude of reserve, and change very much the apparent attitude of a child; a fine little fellow of twelve, who sits decently upon his stool, with tranquil countenance, brows knit, and exchanges politely his smile with ours, will become, an hour later, a street urchin making sport of the passers by. Each one takes, during the examination, a scholastic attitude, which is slightly artificial; the moral character, the sentiments of the child are very much changed, his intellectual capacity is probably less affected except that he loses much of his spontaneity. We omit the first tests for normal children of three years. Since they bring their lunch to the Maternal school, and do not have to be fed, it is needless to investigate their knowledge of food. They also understand gestures, simple sentences, since they reply to our greeting, enter and seat themselves in order. Let us mention at once a characteristic of the intellectual development of a child of three years: it is that he has a verbal knowledge of things. First, of the body; all show, when asked, nose, eye, mouth, ear, foot, forehead. There is a slight hesitation, at times, for the eyebrow; and sometimes an abdominal locahzation for the heart is given. Naturally the three objects: cup, string, and thimble are correctly designated when we call them by their name. The test of pictures is the one which interests the children most; this works equally well, when we name the object and the child must find it, or when, on the contrary, we point out the object and the child gives the name. In the latter case there is a slight difficulty of interpretation, because one cannot always understand the word which the child pronounces, either because it is badly pronounced, err because he uses a special pronunciation of which we have no key. Setting this slight difficulty aside, the test shows clearly that a child of three years passes without difl&culty from the perception of the picture to the name; or from the name to the picture. NORMAL CHILDREN" OF THREE YEARS 95 The objects found in the picture, when we name them to the child, are the window, the mother, the Httle girl, the broom, the feather duster, the pot of flowers, the basket, the coffee pot. When the child names by himself, he designates the little girl, the dog, the boy, the man, the other man; he sometimes names them in his own way; the little girl is called a baby; one child said "Lucy" — the dog is called a 'Houtou;'^ the man an "old fellow;" the street lamplighter is recognized as a "gas lighter;" sometimes through error of perspective he is called "a baby" because he is very small. The sky is called "house," and the advertisement a box or a thing ''machin." It is worth remarking that children of this age are often eager to name or designate something, no matter what. These errors of designation which are frequent enough, because no one child correctly names or designates all of the series of objects, are due partly to the fact that he is ignorant of the names of certain things, like the coffee pot, for instance, but still more frequently they are due to a lack of attention. Children of this age show a tendency to point at random. One must at times chide them a little to bring out a correct desig- nation, which proves that they know very well, but are careless. It will not therefore be surprising to find that they are very susceptible to suggestion. If one asks for the button (which is not on the table) they will indicate another object, book, box, or a distant object which they vaguely point out with the finger. If one asks, when they are looking at the picture, for the "pata- poum" or the "nitchevo," none of them say distinctly "I don't know." They always point out something, preferably a small object, like a cup, a candle, a coffee mill, but never a person. ^ To summarize : the equipment of a child of three years is verbal knowledge of objects, and particularly parts of the body, familiar objects, and objects represented in pictures; correct designation and naming of the majority of objects in a series, but never all; frequent errors through distraction, and a tendency to point at random; finally extreme suggestibility, which manifests itself in the act of pointing out something when one names an object . known but absent, or when one pronounces a strange word. For the other tests, the results are not so good; in exceptional cases certain precocious children succeed but the majority fail. At three years, they do not repeat three figures. We never 96 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE obtain but one or two figures correctly repeated — occasionally three, but so badly pronounced, so muttered that it requires a very indulgent ear to recognize anything. In no case do they invent a series of figures. The comparison of two unequal lines presents the same difficulty. With the exception of an occasional child, the others do not understand the sense of the experiment, and perhaps not of the words; what they understand is that they must point out a line, and bravely they put their index finger upon one of them; generally they put their finger always to the same side. The comparison of two weights succeeds no better. To the question, ''Which is the heavier weight?" they comprehend vaguely, as for the lines, that they must designate something; but they cannot weigh them in their hand, even when shown how. We are no more successful for the definition of common objects, as horse, fork, etc. Without doubt, these children know the objects, but they are prevented by the difficulty of expressing their thought in a sentence. With the exception of a precocious child, — who cannot represent the normal level — they are silent, or else repeat the question, ''What is a fork?" "It is a fork." These first gropings, these mistakes, these infantile forms of reaction, present for psychology the interest of curiosity; all this is similar to what is given by defectives who are older. But so far as our measuring scale is concerned, it is a negligible quantity. All that should be kept in mind is this: f The child of three years, although inattentive and very suggestible, names, or recognizes from the name, the majority of the things that figure in our series of objects and pictures. At three years a child has then the faculty of naming objects. CHILDREN OF FIVE YEARS These children presented fewer difficulties in examination than those of three years. There was one, however, the young R., who began to pout in the midst of the examination and was un- willing to reply to a series of questions. The reflections which we made upon the difficulty of questioning children of three years, can be repeated here, with slight modification. Between three and five years an enormous distance has been traversed. Need- less to say that at five years the objects and pictures of the series NORMAL CHILDREN OF FIVE YEARS 97 are correctly named. Nevertheless several errors remain possible. The child may take the street lighter for a small boy, through error of perspective; several cannot name the advertisement. Suggestibility is still great, so that when we name the "patapoum" and the "nitchevo/' they are shown to us; on the other hand when we ask for the button, no other object is pointed out, they satisfy themselves with hunting, without designating the object. The characteristic of a child of five years is that it executes the four following experiments: repeats three figures, compares two unequal lines, compares two weights, defines ordinary ob- jects. These are the four characteristic tests of a child of five years because all succeed. From the first attempt they repeat three figures. For the comparison of lines, their attention must be somewhat stimulated by repeating at each new presentation, ^' Which is the longer?" a useless precaution for children of seven. For the comparison of weights there is a little awkwardness at first. Naively, the children reply to the question, ''Which is the heavier?" by showing a box without weighing it in the hand. It is necessary to tell them that they must weigh the boxes by taking one in each hand; certain ones weigh only one of them, and others take both in the same hand. We therefore say that in order that the comparison may be correct this lesson must be given; but this done, five year old children make no more mistakes but give correct replies. The fourth test which they success- fully pass is that of the definition of objects. They reply to the questions, mostly in terms of use; a fork, it is to eat with; a handkerchief, it is to blow one's nose; occasionally they reply by the composition of things; a house, it is of stone, a horse, it is meat. One child of five years, evidently precocious, gave us the following series, worthy of a child of nine years: "A horse is an animal; a house is of wood; a fork is of iron; a handkerchief is of linen." This then is the equipment of a child of five. They almost all fail when given higher tests. None repeat exactly the three simple sentences of fifteen words each, and certain ones make, doubtless through inattention, absurd transformations, as: "In sunamer snow falls." They frequently shorten a sentence or repeat the beginning of it, or remain silent. W^hat they give is generally grammatically correct. Example: One says "I get up in the morning, I go to bed at noon," another says, "Germaine has y» DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE been bad, she will be scolded.'' We have never found that sentences are given devoid of all grammatical construction, neither do they give words void of sense. In the test of reasoned comparisons, they make complete failure. These children cannot understand in what way different things are unlike. We give below a bit of dialogue which we exchanged : Q. You know what paper is? A. Yes. Q. You know what cardboard is? A. Yes. Q. Are they alike? A. No, they are not alike. Q. In what are they not alike? Silence. Q. Why isn't paper like cardboard? Silence. Q. Then how do you know that a thing is paper or that it is cardboard? Silence. • , - Q. Do you know a fly? A. Yes. Q. And a butterfly. Do you know that? A. Yes. Q. Are they alike? A. No, they are not alike. Q. Well then in what way are they not alike? A. It is paper. The final answer clearly shows that the child does not under- stand what is asked of him. Another child replies, ''The card- board is not like paper because it is something else." For the butterfly he gave a curious reply, ''Because the butterfly has two wings and no head, and because flies have heads and besides a tail." This verbiage is the only verbal manifestation in any sense spontaneous that we have been able to collect from children of five years. Putting aside the tests which are beyond their capabilities, we have the following conclusion : At five years, a normal child repeats three figures, compares two lines; after being shown how, he compares two weights; he can also define ordinary objects. NORMAL CHILDREN OF SEVEN TO ELEVEN YEARS We now leave the Maternal school, and enter the Primary grades. We examined individually 45 children. For the ages of seven, nine and eleven years, we shall not note here all the results, of which several have been obtained by groupings; we shall simply show what we obtained from 10 children at each age, chosen not for the quality of their results, but in consequence of an absolute adjustment of the tests. NORMAL CHILDREN OF SEVEN TO ELEVEN YEARS 99 We must first trace the boundary line which separates children of five years from those of seven. It is furnished by the series of reasoned comparisons. Because of its importance, let us de- vote some space to it. The comparison of two lines, from the point of view of length, is very much easier than the comparison of two objects made from memory. In the first place, the two lines are there under their eyes, while the others must be called to mind; besides when one compares the lines one knows from what point of view to compare them; while in the other test, one does not know and must there- fore search for some difference to note. It is a little work of invention, which presents a certain difl&culty. We shall indicate numerically the results of this test, in the table which follows; to render the question clearer we give the results obtained with children of nine years. Here is the manner of procedure for this test. We first ask concerning each object to be compared, if the child has seen and knows it. All, so far as that goes, know the six objects (fiy, butterfly, wood, glass, cardboard, paper), with the exception of one who had never seen a butterfly. Poor child! The first step taken, the question is put : What is the difference between paper and cardboard? This question is not always understood; one can even say that the majority of children do not reply, do not understand, remain silent, or make absurd statements through a desire to please; for example by repeating "the cardboard." This is what we call the ''first time" in our table. We must therefore insist by changing our words and say: "Cardboard and paper are not alike, in what are they not alike?" In this way of asking, the majority of children of seven years, almost all (8 out of 9), could give at least one correct comparison. This test is therefore truly a boundary which they pass, and is an excellent means of distinguishing them, in regard to intellectual level, from the children of five years. Still they do not all al- ways make the three comparisons, and out of 9 children examined, we counted 7 silences out of 27 attempts, therefore about one- fourth. The analysis of the details would show very clearly the infantile character of the repHes, and, for instance, the great monotony of repetitions. The child having found a certain difference in the first comparison, reproduces it for the others even when it ceases to be correct by the transfer thus, having 100 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE found that cardboard is thicker than paper, and that the butter- fly is larger^ than the fly, they tell us that wood is thicker than glass. Besides these there are absurd comparisons, as for in- stance, to say that the paper is whiter than the cardboard or smaller than cardboard, or that glass is less hard than wood, or that paper is white and cardboard white also. The points of view of comparison are also rudimentary: it is the hardness, size (large or small, this is very frequent), strength, soHdity, fineness, property of being able to be broken or cut, and finally, less often, the color. Here are several fragments of replies: The most awkward of all, Larche does not reply at all. He agrees with us that paper and cardboard are not alike, but he can indicate no difference. He remains equally helpless with the other two comparisons. Let us note in this connection an important point. Children who cannot succeed in this test of comparison do not for that reason alone prove themselves ignorant of the difference of the two objects. Most frequently they do know the difference, but they cannot find or formulate it; one must show it to them. If we ask them, ''Which is larger, the butterfly or the fly?" these ignoramuses, these apparent mutes, reply in chorus, ''the butter- fly." But this is no longer the test, it is something much easier. A degree higher than Larche is that of Bari . When asked the difference between paper and cardboard he replies, "The cardboard." It is then explained to him that they are not alike, and he replies, "Because one is paper, and the other is cardboard." For the second comparison, he says, "The fly is not like the butterfly." Q. In what? A. Because the fly is not made like the butterfly. Here is a child who appreciates the difference but cannot formulate it. He, however, finds the formula for the last comparison, "Because glass breaks but wood if it falls does not break." He crosses the boundary, but with difficulty. Pist succeeds with the comparison. He does not under- stand in the beginning and it must be explained to him the fact 3 Thick and large are the same word in French — gros. NOKMAL CHILDREN OF SEVEN TO ELEVEN YEARS lOl that they are not aHke. His first reply is "the paper." Then when it is explained to him, he says, "Because it is white. Q. Which is white? A. The paper. Q. And the cardboard? A, There is cardboard which is white." It is evident that this cannot be counted as a correct reply. Pist succeeds better with the other comparisons, "The fly is smaller and the butterfly is larger" — "Because the glass breaks and wood does not break. " Let us cite the reply by Vagni he does not reply to the ques- tions of difference and when it is explained to him he says: "The cardboard is harder than the paper." He finds nothing for the comparison of the fly and the butterfly. For the third compari- son he says: "The wood is harder and the glass is not hard." We do not know the basis of his thought but his sentence is un- fortunate. We have dwelt upon the less clever answers because they are the most interesting. Here is one of the best rephes; it is that of Giraud "Because paper is finer and much whiter." "Because the butterfly is much larger than the fly." "Because with a piece of glass you can cut yourself, and with a piece of wood you can't cut yourself." One could make diffuse accessory remarks which are not with- out interest for pedagogy. Thus a certain child says that a fly has two wings less than a butterfly. This is admirable as erudi- tion; nevertheless this learned child could not tell the difference between wood and glass. Her memory had been stored, but she had not been given the spirit of observation. We give below the replies arranged in a series. We shall distinguish between responses according to whether the subject repHes to the question: "What difference is there?" or to the supplementary question: "Why are they not alike?" We note the number of successful comparisons, the number of rep- etitions of the same type of reply, and lastly, the number of absurdities. It will be seen that at 7 years a single child Larche did not pass the test. By this method it can be seen how easy it will be to classify any child whatever. 102 CETELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE Experiment of Reasoned Comparisons Boys of Nine Years Altmaye. Lamarq. Valent. . Guillerm Baz Bonj — Dumo... Brie Larche. . Barr Pist Vagn Dast Leho Vala Girau — Ab Dugues.. A4 J P H fc a Bo M DO ^1 "o H O g « w 2 h CO + Boys of Seven Years + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 4- + Although the test of reasoned comparisons is truly the boundary of seven years, we have tried it with eight subjects nine years old. Even with them, half do not yet understand what is meant by searching for a difference, and their grasp of the situation must be emphasized by asking, ''In what are the two objects not alike?" Out of 24 comparisons (8 subjects made 3 each) there were only two who failed, and the number of repetitions of the same type of reply is not more than 3, while with children of seven years there were 8 repetitions, which shows a noticeable improvement. From all this it results that: At seven years children make the proposed comparison sometimes in response to the first question, oftener to the supplementary question. Mostly they succeed twice out of three times, and often they repeat the same type of reply. The progress between seven and nine years NORMAL CHILDREN OF SEVEN TO ELEVEN YEARS 103 exists but seems too subtle to serve as a line of demarcation; it might be made more apparent by an increase of the difficulty. But our aim is not to employ this test for that distinction. It simply constitutes a boundary between five and seven years; an important boundary, because it is, as we shall see later, the boundary of imbecility and moronity, for those subjects who are twelve years of age. Before leaving this question of reasoned comparisons, we shall note a curious fact. To some fifteen children of seven, nine and eleven years, we have proposed comparisons, having for their purpose the perception not of the differences of many objects, but of their resemblances, for instance, the resemblance of blood and the poppy, a fly and an ant, a flea and a butterfly, and lastly between a newspaper, a label and a picture. We have been amazed at the difficulty which the child finds in seeing a similarity in two objects which they know to be different. ''In what are they alike!" we ask, and the almost constant reply is, "They are not alike?" The child is dominated by a spirit of differentiation. Perhaps the needs of practical life turn their attention more towards the perception of differences than of resemblances, which only become apparent in scientific studies. It would be worth while to investigate in this direction.* After having thus marked the limits between five and seven years, that is to say between the Maternal and Primary schools, we shall show the tests which mark the limits between the ages above seven years, and which will consequently permit us to distinguish between the different children of the Primary schools. The tests upon which we shall depend seem to fall into three distinct categories. 1. Tests of memory. 2. Tests of intelligence which are partly made by the help of language. 3. Tests of sensorial intelligence. Although there is no clear demarcation between the three categories of tests and though all require the intervention of the senses, of memory and of language, it is by the proportion and the importance of these elements that we characterize them. * Since these lines have been written we have methodically made use of the comparison of similar objects as a test of mental debility. 104 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE MEMORY We shall study three forms of memory: verbal memory of sentences, memory of pictures, memory of figures. Verbal memory of sentences. Between twelve and seven years there is not only a difference of four years, but there is an acquisi- tion of scholastic culture which may be considered enormous. Still, in spite of this increase of instruction, in spite of the develop- ment of the faculty of acquiring knowledge which this presupposes, children of nine years and even those of eleven years have not a power of memory very much greater than their younger com- panions of seven. We had 15 children of seven years repeat individually the^ sentences which we indicated in a preceding chapter, and which we reproduce here to save the trouble of look- ing back. First sentence. I get up in the morning, I dine at noon, and I go to bed at night. Second sentence. In summer the weather is beautiful. In winter it snows. Third sentence. Germaine was naughty, she would not work; she will be scolded. Fourth sentence. The chestnut tree in the garden, throws upon the ground the shadow still faint, of its new leaves. Fifth sentence. One must not say all that one thinks, but one must think all that one says. Sixth sentence. It is one o'clock in the afternoon, the house is silent, the cat sleeps in the shade. Seventh sentence. One must not confound the critical spirit with the spirit of contradiction. Eighth sentence. The horse draws the carriage, the road ascends, and the carriage is heavy. Each sentence is slowly and energetically pronounced with the required intonation, in the silence of the examination room. Nothing distracts the child; and when he repeats we note all the words he pronounces, his time of hesitation, his self corrections, his remarks, and the play of his countenance which sometimes shows that he is not satisfied with his effort; this last is what we call the mimique de jugement. Besides when we ask him if he is satisfied with his repetition, he should say, "Yes," if the repeti- tion seems to him correct, ''No," if it seems to him incorrect.^ ^ We now keep a systematic count of the grading which the child makes by his answer. This aids us to classify him. NORMAL CHILDREN OF SEVEN TO ELEVEN YEARS 105 If he repeats nothing, or if he only repeats the first words of the sentence, we say "Well now? " but without urging. We avoid too great a suggestion which would force the memory of the child and lead him to reply by an absurdity. This example shows, let it be said in passing, how delicate a psychological experiment is. We should never finish if we enumerated all the precautions that should be taken. Averages Obtained in an Experiment of Verbal Memory of Immediate Repeti- tion with Ten Children Each, of Seven, Nine and Eleven Years NUMBER OF INCOMPLETE REPETITIONS SENTENCES TO REPEAT EXACJ REPETITIONS More than half Less than half Absurdities and obscurities 7 yrs. 9 yrs. 11 yrs. 7 yrs. 9 yrs. 11 yrs. 7 yrs. 9 yrs. 11 yrs. 7 yrs. 9 yrs. 1 1 4 5 11 yrs. "I get up 8 8 8 3 4 9 10 10 7 1 3 5 9 10 8 5 3 9 6 2 2 2 6 4 5 2 2 2 5 4 3 3 1 2 5 4 5 1 4 6 10 1 8 1 4 10 2 4 3 5 2 2 2 5 2 3 8 1 "In summer ''Germaine "The horse "It is one "The chestnut tree 1 "One must not say 1 "One must not' confound 2 Total 31 46 50 23 16 25 25 21 8 24 11 5 In the above table, we write the results in figures which we analyze in the following manner: first, in the columns 1, 2, 3, we note how many children at the different ages made an exact repetition. It is a gross result, but one of the most important; the six following columns contain details upon the quantity of incorrect repetitions; they are noted under three heads according as the child had repeated less than half or the half and more, of the original sentence. Finally the last three columns show in detail the quality of the incorrect replies. These may contain either another sense, though reasonable, or an absurd sense, or finally verbal obscurities, that is to say, sounds that are not known words. It seems to us interesting to make this distinction, because the first nine columns, on the one hand, and the last three on the other, express results which correspond to different faculties; 106 DEVELOPMElsrT OF INTELLIGENCE not to repeat the whole is a lack of memory; to make absurd changes is an error of judgment. Out of 8 sentences which were given them, the children of seven years made a total of 31 correct repUes, that is about three for each child. In examining the number of errors according to the nature of the sentences, one sees that these errors are readily explained. They are least for the first three sentences, whose sense and vocabulary are within reach of the children of seven years ; in the two sentences "One must not say" "The horse draws" the sense still is clear, so that nearly half of the chil- dren succeed. On the contrary, the 3 other sentences, "The chestnut tree ", "It is one o'clock " and, "One must not confound " offer by their style and subtle meaning a difficulty which these young intelligences have not been able to master; to the task of memory is added the task of comprehension. We evaluate in the same way the results for the nine year old children. Obviously, it is a little better; their exact reproductions are 46 instead of 31, but the progress has been in the more difficult sentences, as "The horse" and "One must not confound." If one notes that these children of nine years certainly add to the advantage of better comprehension that of greater control over their voluntary attention, one recognizes that the slight superiority of the results which they here furnish can scarcely be imputed to the growth of memory. For children of eleven years, there is again a slight improvement ; the exact reproduction of the children of this age is 50; but there again the §tudy of detail shows that the gain operates almost exclusively upon the more difficult sentences, "One must not confound, etc. " The three simple sentences, given first, have the same number of errors as at nine years. We do not wish to force the significance of these results, which do not astonish us especially, because we had foreseen them elsewhere;^ nor shall we go so far as to say that verbal memory does not increase with age, from seven to nine years. We main- tain simply that this growth seems slight when completely iso- lated from certain factors which complicate it, such as control of voluntary attention, power of comprehension, the force of habit, etc. • Experimental Study of the Intelligence, Paris, 1903, p. 260. NORMAL CHILDREN OF SEVEN TO ELEVEN YEARS 107 If now we examine the data in the last three columns of our table, that which is due to errors of judgment, we find a consider- able difference between children of the three different ages indi- cated. The number of absurd errors (such as, "I go to bed at noon," '^In summer snow falls," ''One must think all that one thinks," etc.) is considerable among the youngest children; there being 14. The number of times they mutilated a word or uttered unintelligible sounds was 10, which makes a total of 24 errors of judgment; there are only 11 at nine years and only 5 at eleven years. One can thus clearly see that this test classifies the chil- dren as to age, better by the absurdities of their replies than by what they forget, properly speaking, which proves once more that if the memory increases little from seven to eleven years, the judgment on the contrary increases greatly. One gets an im- pression of this fact without the aid of any calculation, when one has examined the attitude of the children during tests of memory. The child of seven years seems to give himself little trouble. He is less attentive, because he regards the experimenter less when he pronounces the sentence; he makes visibly less effort to repeat, renounces more easily the pursuit of a fleeting memory; and above all when he makes a mistake in repeating he has less often that semblance of judgment which signifies *' I realize that I am wrong." For the individual diagnosis the following conclusions should be borne in mind : v At seven years, a child repeats an average of 3 sentences out of 8 given him, and he commits an average of 3 errors through absurdities and obscurities. At nine years, a child repeats an average of 4 sentences, and commits only 1 error through absurdities or obscurities. At eleven years, a child repeats an average of 5 sentences and commits but a half error through absurdities or obscurities. To utilize these solutions in an individual diagnosis we must use a seriation. Here is the one that these results give us. ' 108 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE Seriation of Results Obtained by the Immediate Repetition of Sentences of 14 to 15 Words Each Children of Seven Years NAMES NUMBER OF SENTENCES FX A CTLY REPEATED NUMBER OF THE SENTENCE EXACTLY REPEATED IN WHICH SENTENCE THE ABSURDITY MANIFESTS ITSELF Leho 1 2 2 3 3 3 3 4 5 5 2 1,3 2,5 1, 2, 3, 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,3,8 1, 2, 3, 5 1, 2, 3, 5, 8 1, 2, 3, 5, 8 1, 5, 7 Vala 2, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 1, 7, 8 Dugiies Dast 5, 6 Ab 7 Larch 7 Pist 2, 4, 6 Barr . . . 7 Girau 6, 7 Vagni 6, 7 Children of Nine Years Bonj Dum Altma Valent . . . Guillerm, Brie Berque.. Lamar. . . Bazi Gros 2,3 1,5,7 1, 2, 3, 8 5, 7 1, 2, 3, 8 7 1, 2, 3, 8 5,7 1, 2, 3, 8 7 1, 2, 3, 6, 7 5 1, 2, 3, 5, 7 1, 2, 3, 7, 8 6 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7,8 Children of Eleven Years Corn. . Lecle . . Taudi. Bertra. Calif.., Lev Gorgi . . Leno... Barr. . . Vign. . . 1,2,3 5,7 1, 2, 5 4,7 2, 3, 5, 7 1 1, 2, 3, 5 1, 2, 3, 5, 8 1, 2, 5, 6, 7 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 8 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 8 NORMAL CHILDBEN OF SEVEN TO ELEVEN YEARS 109 Memory for pictures. This is a test which we describe while giving the technique. Let us see in a very brief way the number of pictures which a child of seven can retain, compared to a child of nine or eleven years. Apparently the memory for pictures grows rapidly with years. We admit that it grows, but it must be less rapid than the pre- ceding numbers would lead us to believe; because the child has need of a certain power to direct his attention, to distribute it equally among the pictures, and it is this which naturally gives a great superiority to the older ones, who know better how to look than the younger ones. Seriation of the results obtained by the Memory for IS Pictures CHILDREN OP 7 TEARS CHILDREN OF 9 YEARS CHILDREN OP 11 YEARS Number of pictures Number of pictures Number of pictures Leho — Vala.... Dugues . Larch. . . Dast. . . . Barri . . . Vagn.... Abt Pist Gira .... 3^ 3 3 3 4 4 5 6 6 6. Aver- age, 4.3 Bergue . . Altma. . . Bonfi. . . . Lamar. . . Dumo . . . Valen. .. Guillerm Brie Gros Bazi 2 4 5 5 6 6 8 8 8 10 Average,... ^6.2 Lecle Lev Taudi . . . Barri. . . . Bertra... Debr.. Gorgi.... Calif.... Vign Ga 4 5 6 6 7 7 8 9 10 10 Average, '7.2 We remark in relation to this last seriation that which would be applicable to every series which we publish; it is that the very great difference, which is noticeable between the first and last terms of each series, comes from the fact that the series is the result of a first test. If one repeated it two or three times, it would disclose the following fact which we have often observed in psychology; each pupil would present a slight gain as a result of practice from the re-examination, with an equal improvement for all, but proportionately larger for those whose results were poorest in the first trial; it would result from this that the seriation at each repetition would condense itself; there would be less indi- vidual difference, and the change would be especially marked among the weakest terms. It is therefore the lowest which gain 110 DEVELOPMEN'T OF INTELLIGEN'CE most by the repetition; this seems paradoxical, because one thinks of the ability to adapt oneself as a sign of intelligence; and here it would rather be a sign of mediocrity. But it is easy to understand the reason; the intelligent adapt themselves quickly from the start, and they are thus almost immediately at their limit of adapt ibility; on the contrary the mediocre children adapt themselves less quickly, and consequently their progress is more visible. Memory for figures. This is an exercise which tests a partic- ular sort of memory, the immediate auditive memory for figures, and at the same time the force of voluntary attention. Every subject was asked to repeat a series of figures of increas- ing lengths, commencing with three figures. Three attempts were made for the series of 3 figures, then three for the series of 4 figures and so on, until one arrived at a series, for which after three attempts, he obtained no correct reproduction. The figures were written beforehand, and read by the experimenter without the subject seeing them. We make the seriation by making use of the highest series which had been well retained. In spite of the brevity of this indication, it merits complete confidence, having been obtained as the result of many attempts. Experience has shown that in connection with the maximum series, one must note the number of times that the subject invents figures which have not been pronounced, as well as the giving of figures in their natural order (as 1, 2, 3, 4, etc.), and finally by the false appreci- ation of the subject as indicated by his manner of replying. Certain ones believe that they have replied correctly, when they have really committed errors; if one overlooks a slight inversion, let it pass, but if one slips 2 or 3 new figures into a series without perceiving it, that is a much graver fault. It is therefore impor- tant to ask each time for the judgment of the subject upon his repetition. A slight difficulty arises in asking him for a judgment of himself; the least imprudent word forms a suggestion. If one asks: "Have you repeated that correctly?" the subjects often reply ''yes'^ or ''no" according to the very slight intonation or scepticism which one puts into the voice. The best procedure is to make in advance this arrangement ; as soon as a series has been repeated, the subject shall say, according to the case: ''It is correct" or "It is not correct" — or more simply "That's right" or "That's not right." We regret not to have thought in time NOKMAL CHILDREN OF SEVEN TO ELEVEN YEARS 111 to have made this arrangement w^ith all our pupils; it is an omis- sion to be corrected another time. Seriation obtained from the memory for figures^ CHILDREN OF 7 YEARS CHILDREN OF 9 TEARS CHILDREN OF 11 YEARS Names Maximum series Names Maximum series Names Maximum series Pist Leho — Dugues . Girau. . . Larch... Vagni . . . Alt Barri.... Vala.... Dast.... 3^ 4 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 7 Average, 5.3 Dumo . . . Bonfi. . . . Altma. . . Guillerm Valen . . . Berque . . Bazi Lamar. . . Gross — Brie 4' 5 5 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 Average, 6.0 Bertra... Calif.... Lecle Levy Vign .... Gorgi Gano.... Taudi . . . Debre.... 5 5 6 6 6 6 6 7 7. • Average, 6.0 These three series seem to us good because the weakest subjects have not had very different results from those of the average. There is scarcely an exception, save only Pist seven years, and Dumo in the nine year group. This group of tests upon memory was rapidly made; it took scarcely more than 4 or 5 minutes. In general we interrupted it by other tests of a slightly different character, in order to rest the child. Our tests of memory, notwithstanding their number, must not be considered as covering all the forms of memory; they concern more particularly the memory for im- mediate • repetition which is essentially a sensorial memory. The memory for ideas is ignored almost entirely. This is an omission which we note is passing, and which it would be easy to fill. One of us indicated long ago^ the best means of stud5dng the memory for ideas; it does not consist in the repetition of sentences difficult of comprehension, because those who have a good memory can repeat quickly and exactly that which they have not even understood; it consists in causing a delay between the hearing and the repetition, and obliging the subject to think of other things during that interval; then all that is sensorial, the echo ' Binet and Henri, Treatise upon Sensation and Memory of Ideas, Ann^e Psychologique, I, 1894, p. 1. 112 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE of auditive memory, disappears and scarcely anything but the idea remains. We therefore propose to make again the immediate repetition of the 8 sentences, by a general repetition. It is probable that the work which we announce will be completed by the time ^he present article is printed. TESTS OF SENSORIAL INTELLIGENCE These are made independently of the development of language, of the abstract idea, and have an extra-scholastic character. They are important from many points of view. The manifes- tations of sensorial intelligence are frequent among defectives, who cannot adapt themselves to the teaching in the schools, and these facts are interesting for the pedagogy of subnormals; they prove that one would succeed better in their education if, instead of obstinately imposing upon them scholastic knowl- edge, which is not made for them, one taught them other things. We divide our tests of sensorial intelligence into 2 groups. 1. Those which appeal almost wholly to the elementary proc- esses of sensation, perception, and sensorial attention. These are the comparison of lines. 2. Those which require a particular intervention of judgment and reflection; these are putting weights in order, and paper cut- ting. Comparison of Lines. It will be recalled that the booklet of short lines to be compared, contains lines one of which measures constantly 30 mm. and the other varies between 31 and 35 mm. There are 15 comparisons. Children, even when very young, have shown the accuracy of their glance. The number of tests was 15, chance might have produced rather more than 7 errors. No subject gave replies due to chance, that is to inattention pure and simple, because the incorrect replies are, without a single exception, comprised between the numbers 9 and 15; that is to say, it is for the lines where the difficulty of perception of differ- ence is the greatest, that the mistakes are made. Where the pupils failed therefore was before the difficulty of comparison. They are generally very rapid in their designations; and the test lasts scarcely a minute for the designation of the ,15' lines. We did not find among them that automatic tendency {oes-dig- nate constantly the same side. The automatism could easily NORMAL CHILDREN OF SEVEN TO ELEVEN YEARS 113 be seen from the figures which we give. Thus the longest line in the series which we give is constantly to the right for the numbers 1, 3, 4, 6, 9, 10, 11, 13, 15 and to the left for the other numbers, 2, 5, 7, 8, 12, 14. Consequently a person, who by autom- atism would always designate the right side, would make errors exclusively of the second series, and on the contrary, a person who designated always the left side, would make exclusively errors of the first series. There is to be noted in the case of Larch the rudiment of automatism, starting with the 11th line, and in the case of Barri starting with the 12th, but this is not very significant. Test of the Short Lines. Seriation of the Number of Errors CHILDREN OF 7 TEARS CHILDREN OP 9 TEARS CHILDREN OP 11 YEARS Names 6 © Number of the hne where the error is made Names "o 2 Number of the line where the error is made Names •si Number of the line where the error is made Vala.... 4 10, 13, 14, 15 Berqu . . 2 12, 14 L6vy... 2 9,12 Dast.... 3 9, 13, 15 GuiU... 2 11, 15 Taudi . . Larch... 3 11, 13, 15 Dumo . . 15 Barri . . . Barri. . . 2 12, 14 Lamar. . 11 Lecle. . . Abt 14 Bazi... 15 Calif... Leho . . . 11 Altma. . 9 Debr... Girau... 13 Bonfi. . . 14 Ganon. . Vagni... 15 Valent.. 14 Bertra. . Dugues 13 Brie. . . . Vign.... Pist .... Bazi.... Gros.... Gorgi... The booklet of the long lines offers sufficiently great difficulties which are apparently of a different order; the lines are long and it is not easy to include both at a single glance; one must pass from one to the other, consequently the attention is directed from one to the other in succession ; perhaps even memory must inter- vene. It is an operation which requires a little art. It will be useful to us if it enables us to select the children according to age; but in interpreting it, one must remember that it does not measure simply the sensorial faculty of perception, but something more refined. ^ There are a tiozen pairs of lines to compare. The series of comparison is rapidly made; it takes little more than a minute. 114 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE Comparison of Long Lines. Seriation of Number of Errors Children of Seven Years NAMES NUMBER OF ERRORS NUMBER OF LINE WHERE ERROR OCCURRED Barri. 7' 6 6 6 5 5 4 4 4 3, 5.0 3, 5, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 Vala 3, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11 Dugues 2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11 Leho 2, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11 Dast 1, 4, 5, 9, 12 Larch 3, 4, 7, 8, 11 Pist 6, 8, 9, 12 Abt 3, 6, 10, 11 Vagn 1, 5, 9, 12 Girau ... 6, 7, 10 Children of Nine Years Valent 6 6 6 5 5 3 3 3 2 2 1 ■4.2 1, 2, 3, 5, 7, 10 Dumo 4, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11 Altma. . . 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 11 Gross 3, 6, 8, 10, 11 Berqu 2, 3, 6, 9, 12 Bonfi 7, 8, 12 Guillerm 5, 8, 12 Lamar 4, 7, 9 Berqu 3, 11 Bazi 5, 12 Brie 9 Children of Eleven Years Bertra. L6vy. . Vign. . . Barri. . Gorgi.. Taudi. Lecle. . Calif. . , Gano. . Debra. 7 3, 7, 8,9, 10,11,12 6 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 10 5 4 2, 6, 7, 8, 10 3, 6, 8, 12 3 3 > 3.5 2, 6, 10 6, 10, 11 2 7, 11 2 7,10 2 2,3 ij 3 If one examines what underlies these figures, it will be found very interesting. These children of eleven years have a remark- ably accurate glance; certain ones who make only 2 or 3 errors NORMAL CHILDREN OF SEVEN TO ELEVEN YEARS 115 are more clever than some intelligent adults. It is rare to jfind a test which will show the superiority of a child of eleven over an adult. ^ This comes from the fact that the glance is a natural quality which cannot be cultivated at school; probably it is one of those aptitudes which makes part of the psychology of the savage, and it would be interesting to know how much it is worth with the defective. The consideration of the nature of the errors permits us to elimi- nate the element of chance. To judge hastily, one might say that if chance gives 6 correct replies out of 12, every child whose cor- rect replies number 6 has a glance no more accurate than blind chance. But in reality, the systematic distribution of the errors in the second part, from 7 to 12, shows that they are due to the difficulty of comparison. The errors from 1 to 6 are those which should be ascribed to inattention, especially in the case of chil- dren, who like Debra and Gano have committed no error with the pairs of lines from 7 to 12. A word, in passing, upon automatism. The longest line is to the right, for the numbers 1, 4, 5, 9, 12 and to the left for the numbers 2, 3, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11. This points out Dast immedi- ately as an automaton to the left, and also Vagni; the automatisms to the right are more numerous, which is quite natural as one employs the right hand for making the designation; it is to be found in the case of Vala , Bertra, Leho , Abt , Dumo , Altma , Gross , Levy , Vign , etc. For almost all there is a slight inclination to point to the right; that is easily understood; when there is a doubt, automatism triumphs. By actual count there are found among the youngest children 33 errors to the right and 16 to the left, that is to say, less than half. Those of nine years commit 27 errors by desig- nating to the right and 14 errors by designating to the left; lastly, at eleven years there are 31 errors of the first class and 4 of the second; it seems in the last case that the right-handedness which develops with age, influences the automatism to the right. There would be reason then to think that if the automatism is a sign of the lack of intelligence, the right-handed form of automatism is a sign of the development of voluntary motor power. 8 We give some examples of results obtained with adults. A school director commits two errors with the long lines; a lady, two errors, also. An adult (Binet), 3 errors. A teacher, 5 errors. Young ladies of twenty, 4, 5 and 6 errors. ^l 116 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGEKCE Seriation of the Results Furnished by the Arrangement of Weights Children of Seven Years Vagni. Valad. Dast. Larch. Dugue. Pist. Leho. Abt. Barri, Girau. TOTAL NUMBER OF ERRORS 22 20 20 14 13 10 ORDER GIVEN TO THE WEIGHTS 15, 6, 3, 9, 12 15, 9, 6, 3, 12 15, 3, 6, 9, 12 15, 3, 12, 9, 6 12, 15, 6, 3, 9 3, 15, 9, 6, 12 15, 3, 6, 9, 12 15, 6, 12, 9, 3 15, 3, 6, 9, 12 15, 12, 9, 3, 6 15, 9, 3, 6, 12 15, 6, 12, 3, 9 15, 9, 12, 6, 3 12, 15, 9, 3, 6 .9, 12, 6, 15, 3 15, 9, 12, 3, 6 15, 6, 12, 9, 3 15, 12, 9, 3, 6 15, 9, 12, 6, 3 15, 9, 12, 6, 3 15, 12, 6, 9, 3 2 2 2 12, 15, 9, 6, 3 12, 15, 9, 6, 3 15, 9, 12, 6, 3 2 2 2. 15, 12, 9, 3, 6 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 2^ oj 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 ERRORS BT TEST 6^22 6 [20 4^20 8j 6[l4 6j 4h3 h NORMAL CHILDREN OF SEVEN TO ELEVEN YEARS 117 Children of Nine Years NAMES TOTAL NUMBER OF ERBOBS OBDBR GIVEN TO THE WEIGHTS KRBOR8 BT TEST Altma 12 [15, 12, 6, 9, 3 \ 15, 3, 9, 6, 12 [15, 9, 6, 12, 3 2 6^ 12 4. ■ Lamar 10 [15, 12, 9, 6, 3 ] 15, 12, 3, 6, 9 [15, 9, 6, 3, 12 4[ 10 6. Guillerm 6. [15, 12, 9, 3, 6 ] 12, 15, 6, 9, 3 [15, 12, 9, 6, 3 '1 4[ 6 0. Grapi 4 [12, 15, 9, 6, 3 ] 15, 9, 12, 6, 3 [15, 12, 9, 6, 3 2 2 0. • 4 Berqui 2 [15, 12, 9, 6, 3 ] 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 [15, 12, 6, 9, 3 '1 0> 2 2} Dumo 2 [15, 12, 9, 6, 3 ] 15, 12, 6, 9, 3 [15, 12, 9, 6, 3 2\ 2 0. Bazi 2 15, 12, 9, 3, 6 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 .15, 12, 9, 6, 3 0^ 2 0. Brie 2 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 .12, 15, 9, 6, 3 '1 0^ 2 2J Valent 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 ,15, 12, 9, 6, 3 Of" 0, Bonfi 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 ,15, 12, 9, 6, 3 o[ oj Gros 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 .15, 12, 9, 6, 3 0^ 0^ n oJ 118 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE Children of Eleven Years Debra. Lecler. Barri. L6vy. Vign. Gorgi . Gan. Tandi. Bertra. Calif. TOTAL NUMBER OF ERRORS 10 ORDER GIVEN TO THE WEIGHTS 9, 6, 12, 15, 3 12, 15, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 12, 15, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 3, 6 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 [15, 12, 9, 3, 6 15, 12, 9, 3, 6 [15, 12, 9, 6, 3 Cl5, 12, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 [l2, 15, 9, 6, 3 [15, 9, 12, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 [15, 12, 9, 6, 3 [15, 12, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 [12, 15, 9, 6, 3 [15, 12, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 ,15, 12, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 .15, 12, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 15, 12, 9, 6, 3 ERRORS BY TEST 2 MO oj 0[ 2 2j 0[ 2 2 2j 0] o[ OJ 0] o[ oJ 0] oJ 0] NOKMAL CHILDREN OF SEVEN TO ELEVEN YEARS 119 Arrangement of 5 weights. This test may be analyzed in two ways, in watching the child do the test, and in noting the order in which he places the weights. These are two phases of the experiment which have about the same results, and have the advantage of the one confirming the other; they must therefore be separately analyzed to see if they conflict. An observation of the reaction of the child often shows whether he arranges the weights haphazard, or whether he compares them. When a child puts aside the first weight which comes to his hand without comparing it with the others, one is immedi- ately warned; one should note also those who use only one hand, and those who use two, weighing the different weights at the same time with both hands. It will be noticed that the youngest children committed very serious mistakes, so serious that one questions if they have under- stood very much; the maximum error would have been 30 and the mean error near 20. There are 3 that are no better than mere chance. The children rarely corrected themselves; the third attempt is no better as an average than the second; (36 errors for all in the first, 34 in the second and 43 in the third), experi- ence taught them nothing. Children of nine commit infinitely fewer mistakes; all make an arrangement that is better than by chance, but they do not correct themselves any better than the seven year old children (8 mistakes in the first, 18 in the second and 14 in the third). Children of eleven years — ^leaving out the first, Debra , who must have had a curious lack of attention — made fewer mistakes by far (6 for the first, 4 for the second and 4 for the third). We note again that it is the heaviest weight which is the most frequently put in its place. The children of seven years put it 24 times in its place; children of nine 30 times, and of eleven 25 times. It can be seen by the following statistical study how the different children distributed their attention. Here are the details of the exactness of position. Number of Times Each Weight Was Put in Correct Position WEIGHT 15 12 9 6 3 For 10 children of 11 years 25 29 24 24 24 10 28 23 12 26 24 12 27 For 11 children of 9 years 26 For 10 children of 7 years 15 120 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE While the children of nine and eleven years busy themselves with all the weights, those of seven years fix their attention principally upon the heaviest. The rest are neglected. They therefore do only a part of their work, that which especially appeals to them. Is it because in the explanation which is given them they are told to put the heaviest aside first? It is possible if they were told to put the lightest aside first, that they would make the opposite error. It would be worth investigating. In any case the interesting thing is that their attention remains local, partial, it does not synthesize the whole; and this is a proof of the weakness of attention, or of the weakness of comprehension. Omission of weights. This test is made immediately following the preceding. Here are the results: At seven years, the mistakes on the average are so many as to be incalculable. At nine years, there is an average of 2 errors with a maximum of 5. At eleven years, there is an average of 2 errors with a maximum of 5. Paper cutting. This is a very difficult exercise. We have not had time to try it at length. We have ascertained only that at twelve years, few normal children draw a central diamond. These tests of sensorial intelligence require further development, for they will certainly be a very useful aid in analysing the apti- tudes of defectives. It will be advantageous to maintain the distinction which we have proposed between the faculties of sensation and of sensorial perception (comparison of lines), and that of judgment and sensorial reasoning (the arranging of weights and paper cutting). SUGGESTIBILITY We do not beheve that the study of the manifestations of sug- gestibility will permit the evaluation of the intellectual level. Without doubt we may lay down the principle that suggestibility in its extreme form requires a suspension of critical sense. But daily observation shows us persons of very keen intelligence who are however not lacking in credulity. On the other hand, when attempting to bring out the suggestibility of a school child, one does not have to take into account simply his judgment; different feelings of reserve, discretion, or propriety enter into the experi- NORMAL CHILDREN OF SEVEN TO ELEVEN YEARS 121 ment which would make an mtelligent adult simulate suggesti- bility, in order not to offend the experimenter; or even to become really suggestible through a feeling of timidity, which has a certain social value. One of us has shown that defectives are rendered less suggestible, simply through an absence of the feeling of timidity, and this absence is in them a lack of social sense. These reservations once made, we give the results obtained from the Suggestion Test. We designate with the absence of resistance; H indicates hesitation before the suggestion, and 1-h, 2-h, 3-h, so many hesitations; av. indicates that the suggestion has been avoided and 1 av., 2 av., 3 av., that a corresponding number of the suggestions have Jbeen avoided. (See p. 57, for the explanation). CHILDttEN OF 7 TEABS CHILDBEN OP 9 TEAKS CHILDREN OF 11 TEAB8 Leho Mont Bertra .... Ih Daste Briet Vign^ .... Ih Barri Valent 1 h Barri .... Ih Larch Dumo 1 h Taud .... 2h Abl Ih Gross 1 h Lecler .... 3h Dugues.... Ih Lamar 2 h L6vy .... 3h Girau 2h Grap 2h Debr .... 2 av Vala 3h Altma 2 h Gorgi 2 av Vagna 3h.. Bazi 3 av Gano .... 3 av Pist 3 av Berquin 3 av INTELLIGENCE WITH DEVELOPMENT OF LANGUAGE The study of the aptitudes is most important, because it is by their lack, as we shall see later, that mental defect betrays itself the most strikingly; it is the difficulty of comprehending an ab- stract question, or of replying in such a way as to give proof of judgment, of spontaneity, and of invention. We have used many experiments; there is one that is of chief importance, that of abstract questions; others, of secondary importance, are those of incomplete sentences, concrete and abstract definitions, rhymes, synthesis of three words in a sentence. Abstract questions. We have already given several examples of abstract questions. We shall give later (p. 124) a complete list in the form of a table with the results obtained. 122 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE Our series of questions presents an order of increasing difficulty. When the child is brought in to be examined, it is useless to waste time in preliminary explanations; the first question is so easy that it is sufficient to pronounce it in a tone of interrogation, for the child even the one of seven years to understand what is wished of him and to reply. The bait is taken and the sequence of questions elicits naturally the replies. These are written down exactly as given without correction. The hesitancy of the child is noted, his embarrassment, his slowness to speak. If one encounters mutism, one excites the emulation of the child persuad- ing him that he can reply, repeating the question with proper tone and inflection. One should avoid such insinuation as, *'You do not know?'^ or "You do not understand?" Because this encourages indolence and carelessness, and there are very few embarrassed children who would not quickly seize such a subter- fuge. The best way is always to encourage in order that every one may do his best. We have here an examination approaching a clinical examination, and one must show much patience and gentleness. There are two errors to be avoided, one of procedure at the moment of the test; the other of interpretation, when later one studies the replies. The error of procedure consists in going too rapidly and not being sufficiently patient in awaiting the reply. ^Mutism evidently has an enigmatical character; it may signify,' "I understand nothing " or else it may come from the fact that the child has a/ slow mind and does not at once find a suitable answer; or'k.gain the child has considerable reflection and judgment, and cannot content himself with the first answer that comes into his mind, but is searching for a better; it is evi- dent that those who reply haphazard are the more alert but not necessarily the more intelligent. One of us has elsewhere^ in- sisted upon the necessity of choosing between several interpre- tations of the slowness of intellect. In questioning school children, one arrives at a true interpre- tation by taking into account all of the replies; one can soon de- termine whether it is a question of the slowness of a judicial mind or of one that does not comprehend; but this work of interpretation upon the sum total of the replies cannot conveniently be made ^ ^tude experimentale de V intelligence, Paris, Schleicher, 1902, p. 45 and ff. IsTORMAL CHILDEEN OF SEVEN TO ELEVEN YEARS 123 except when all of them are brought together. Durmg the exami' nation one does not yet know. One must therefore be prudent in selecting the right moment when it is safe to pass to another question. The matter is a very delicate one. It is far better to waste a little time than to throw a slow subject into confusion. We formally call the attention of the experimenter to this source of error. With a little experience one soon sees whether or not the child is hunting for a reply or if he has given up; the expression of his countenance may be a valuable indication. It remains to interpret the data. We should have wished to eliminate from this interpretation all that is arbitrary, and certainly we are not entirely satisfied with our results. Nevertheless one principle has guided us; we are not forced to search for absolute accuracy in the replies; we take the sentences of the children of 1 1 as forming the standard by which we compare those of younger children. There is therefore a personal part in our selection; but this personal part consists in selecting from replies which have been really thought out and given, in estimating these replies, and not in making out of whole cloth an ideal form for the correct reply. We have, moreover, attempted to take into consideration the mentality of children. Certain replies might be considered appropriate in a dilettante, and with a grain of irony they might even seem to be witty retorts. To how many diffi- culties could not one reply, as did a certain child; ''One should go to bed," or ''One must consult the doctor." Frequently we have encountered these unexpected ideas, which amused us great- ly. Certain expressions, by the way, such as, "Ah! Madame!" of Shakespeare, would be appropriate for every possible situation. We have nevertheless concluded that what would be wit in a skeptic of thirty, would be incoherence of thought in a child of 7. Here again, if one is in doubt, a glance at the sum total of the replies of a subject enlightens us. Notwithstanding this there remain replies which are frankly enigmatical, as for example the affirmation "Nothing" which in extreme cases might have a meaning but which again might only be a verbal reflex. We regret having sometimes accepted their replies without explan- ation. One is always learning. When the reply is ambiguous, one should insist and almost force the child to develop differently his idea. This is not always easy; it should at least be tried. We give below the series of questions, and 'the replies with our 124 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE if I « I « es o o S o i"i « 1=5 2 o 2 a So ao a J II 1 4 a § g § a-s .r; .j-i .A ^ fl ■»* c8 a HO a a-o- „ o « fl .rt +a +» O If « K i -§ 00 s H t »J H a H o a O 8 I. ® 2 a OS ^-^ 2 2 "S ft I ^^^ " (3 3 ^ ® d § s s 2 a OS ja fl OS ft T ^ a ^ § l s a i i §1 all § 2 __o ^o >> *- 6^1 2 *^ S O o 9 « oa o eS til a ^ £ O ^ ^ fl H ;J , o ft ^ i fi fe 2 5 3 ^ a >> 2 I?, lit ■3 S 2 2 « 3 fl o o a So oa ? CD O T § § a o -3^8-2 i £ § * as ■ ! O ^ I I o 000 S .13 s s •« a g 3 *» 2 ° 2 *• 2 i a KA ^ O B o ?? 3 >» I. 73 a ^ ft _ 3 « J3 2 M ft fl fl) p a £-^ 3 S -§ 1 .-s ^ o » 3 II §•2 § -« ® a _ M 05 .2 A if - O S ^ i 2 jQ M oa O 2 3 §•5 M 3 3 O ■3 -^> .2 a O 3 _ 3 *" 00 ill i 3 .2 a 3 <]) O S -a S J3 ® M "S "^ S fl c s "S -S -g g a 60 3 ^ S.2 a NORMAL CHILDREN OF SEVEN TO ELEVEN YEARS 125 Ho on to . o c o -JS 11 1! •^ •- -2 ^ i 5 s 8 5:2 . -o '2 'C c .S o « £ «« o I « "^ -^ M bl I S •♦J a § § a o 9 g g -J ° - I -2 I ^ "^ ^ .2 § a I "d m §2 — 'J 1 s ^ - ^ I •§ ^ a ^ ^e :3 H g g ^ - :s « I Q O t d -2 ^•53 = OQ V J -It! .^? ^? ^ '3 '. ^ -3 I S ^ '^ ^?^ §*ll «I-S 3 « ^ -c O O .£! fl 2| J. ft 1^ 2i o 3 8. a 3 a i o C8 "5 s I o a> O B M Q s I a :g ^ (3 w - w f? ft .a ^ a " g- H §TJ 1.3 3 i ° i -c 2 i ** S "^ ft^ < O _'«b0oQ<8w|aP « ^ - .fl ^ s •? I I 3 § - I2II ■Saia^TaajZfl ^oS^§£2 •- -^ «^ a ,ti .2 2 T B on o M ' P ^.^ "^ 2 o^ e © § fl I S >. O 03 £ ^ d ^ -^ a p "d . j3 O §-"13 ° «3 § ^ ^ a a o is -si §:s li g ° 4rf « O >> © .2 a "d S " O d -S ■5 "« a " d 126 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE g S S I ^ -2 ^ > ^Mi S g I S S g ^ i § £ i >H O H O §5 g^ ? b1 a a .ti s "" I T3 a « « ft s I: s| § s i § I lilfS 3 a a a M 5 3 r.t |-?l :3 S s 0) 0) g s -d a ^ a S >i ^ -fj O ^ II 1 1 •« ° g ^ I ,^ "s I. i I I 9a^:l>.^4'2^^ ; a ^1^1 1 m » 2 ■** -S m "^ "^ "" ' rS a> "3 -^ "S * « Ip^fill-^S^; I ^ ml §a^^-5S3Sga.t3t?§i § SfiTo o o o o o "^ ,^ i g i s 5 i I g 1 5 § a i 5 s a ^ a ^ ^ a » >. « ^ a ^ | - g s^-? I §1 sas §lll§l§^ls3?.s^ o o o o o ^ g § 3 § » i-^ a i°^!l liUi S S § § S « S a-S 3 5 NORMAL CHILDREN OF SEVEN TO ELEVEN YEARS 127 3 O 69 I 'i 11 o PQ O OJ M .2 3 9 ^ ^ S :S o- oj « 3 i5 3 -s f:^ " ^ $ a I •'3 M O © S 2 -M bB -13 fl C ^ OS . i I S •§ I .§ J « « 2 •S *^ 2 m rj O C +^ « o S -' I u •+J S ® OQ 2 3 -^ g I "$3 on i ^ .2 -d ^ S ^ 1 i 1 ^ I. -§ ^ 8 §1 » C fl .^ 0) i >> i fl .2 >. > O I ^ ?» © p 3 ^ •-3 ^ § :2 a fl 3 " " 'i 03 M .2 ? 3 ^ >> 2 ^ J3 '5 i § - i|3i§ 3 «i:^ 3^3 ® M-O es a s ^ a a 128 DEVELOPMENT OF INTELLIGENCE o K ° 00 '^ as -