Der Tatbestand, dass die Reproduktion bei konstantem Zeitabstand von Lernvorgang und Prüfung desto höher ausfällt, je unmittelbarer sich die Störungsreihe (SR) an die Hauptreihe (HR) schliesst, scheint die Auswirkung einer besonderen Reproduktionshemmung (Filterhemmung…FH) nahezulegen. Diese von allen Ergebnissen der bisherigen Untersuchungen abweichende Tatsache dürfte sich durch drei Erklärungsmögli-chkeiten aufklären laseen, nämlich, 1) durch nur FH, 2) durch die sogenannte reversible rückwirkende Hemmung (RH) und 3) durch Zusammenwirken von FH mit der echten RH. Aus unsren Versuchsergebnissen hat sich herausgestellt, dass nur die dritte Möglichkeit das Ergebnis aller Versuchsanordnungen verständlich macht. Über das Wesen dieses Zusammenwirkens könnte man sich vorstellen, dass die Weite und die Intensität der beiden Hemmungen auf jeder Zeitstrecke des gegebenen Zeitabstandes nicht gleichwertig sein würde. Diese Vorstellung lässt sich von zwei Annahmen ableiten. Die erste lautet, dass die funkionelle Kommunikation zwischen den Spuren um so leichter zustande kommen würde, je kleiner das betreffende Zwischenfeld ist. Anders ausgedrückt würde die Häufungswirkung zwischen HR und SR unter sonst gleichen Umständen im umgekehrten Verhältnis zum Zeitabstand von HR und Prüfung stehen. Und nach der zweiten sollten die Spuren in recht kurzer Zeit direkt nach ihrer Ausbildung ein rasches Dekrement erfahren, also im Zusammenhang dieser Untersuchung darauf hindeuten, dass die Spuren voh SR ihre beschirmende Wirkung mit wachsendem Alter, also in der Regel mit zunehmendem Zeitabstand von SR und Prüfung recht schnell verlieren. Diese beiden Funktionen der Spuren sind, jede für sich allein betrachtet, gar keine neue Charakterisierung der Spuren überhaupt, sondern an vielen Befunden früherer Untersungen schon verifiziert. Aber mit Verbindung der beideh Funktionen kann man hier ein ganz neues Bild vom Hemmungs-mechanismus im Spurenfeld entwerfen. Danach liegt nahe, an die Möglichkeit zu denken, dass, Verschiebung des störenden Vorganges von HR fort und auf die Prüfung zu, RH in abstufendem Masse abnimmt, während FH zugleich etwa in sprunghafter Weise erhöht wird. Es wäre durchaus denkbar, dass die Tragweite von RH auf gegebener Zeitstreckemit allmählichem Abklingen ihrer Hemmungswirkung auf der Tragweite von FH über einanderliegt, während bei der letzteren dasselbe nicht der Fall ist. Möglicherweise verläuft der Abschwächungsprozess der beiden Hemmungen nicht in gleichem Masse. Es handelt sich hier also um den Unterschied des Abnahmekoeffizients von RH und FH. Wenn dem wirklich so wäre, geht die Fragestellung darauf, ob die beiden Hemmungsbereiche durch Anwendung eines grösseren Zeitintervalls voneinander getrennt werden können, und dann, ob die Reproduktionsziffern. am niedrigsten ausfallen an den beiden Endpolen, namlich unmittelbar nach HR und direkt vor der Prüfung. Dabei ist zu erwarten, dass die Reproduktionsleistung in der Mitte der Zeitlage deshalb am höchsten ist, weil dieser Zeitort von beiden Hemmungsbereichen, Wenn auch nicht ganz, so doch ziemlich befreit geblieben ist. Diese Annahme wurde einer experimeptellen Prüfung (Versuch 7) unterworfen und scheint sich als stichhaltig erwiesen zu haben: das Ergebnis spricht in gebührendem Masse für das Getrenntsein der Bereiche und die Überlegenheit der Reproduktion in der Mitte der Zeitlage. Das Erklärungsprinzip an das wir uns in der vorliegenden Arbeit halten, hat den Vorteil, dass man damit fast allen scheinbar sich widersprechenden Versuchser-gebnissen früherer Untersuchungen über RH einen theoretisch einheitlichen Aufechluss geben kann.
Problem: Gestalt psychologists, as known well, emphasize the dynamic process of memory traces. According to the theory any learning which has suffered retroactive inhibition (RI) must more or less undergo some change in the retention process. On the other hand the current functionalists' theories of RI, e.g. competition theory, two-factor theory etc., are indifferent to retention process. There is, however, one exception. Recently Underwood contended that there was ‘spontaneous recovery’ from unlearning of original learning. His two experiments (22, 23), together with the experiment of Maeda (16), show the decrease of RI in retention. Newman's experiment (19) also indicates the same tendency, although it does not take any ordinary paradigm of RI experiments. On the contrary, we are able to find some suggestions as to the increase of RI in retention in the studies of McGeoch and McKinney (14), wulf (25), Isihara (9), etc. If RI shows increase in retention, the two-factor theory will have to be revised. On the other hand, if the increase is denied, the trace theory will have to be amended Our study aims to clarify the nature of the process of RI in retention, a problem unfairly neglected so far. Experiments and their results: Exp. I. Learning materials were two poems which resemb'e to each other closely. Ss reproduced the original learning material immediately after, or 12min., 24 hours and 7 days after the interpolated learning. RI increased for the first 12min. But the processes of RI for 24 hours and 7 days were not different from the retention of the control group. Exp. II, III. In these experiments two lists which consisted of 15 four-syllable nouns were learned, and reproduced immediately, 12min., 24 hours or 7 days later. We could not find any change in RI throughout. Exp. IV. Two sets of six pairs of nonsense syllables in Japanese letters were learned by anticipation method, and relearned immediately, 12min. or 5 hours later. Percentage of RI was found to decrease between 12min., and 5 hours after the interpolated learning. Thus. RI seems to increase, remain constant or decrease according as the conditions vary. In order to give a consistent explanation to these inconsistent results we assume a new factor “interference” which competes with “spontaneus recovery” from unlearning. The process of RI in retention is supposed to be determined by the relative strengths of these two antagonistic forces.
In the figure-ground pereception, when the brightness-difference between the figure and the ground is reduced to zero, the figure disappears. Only when a certain amount of brightness-difference is retained, can we perceive a figure against the ground. For convenience sake, we call this critical difference in brightness the “visual-perception-threshold” (V-P-T). The following account is the summary of the results of an experiment conducted in an attempt to determine the effeet of form upon the V-P-T. 1. The V-P-T decreases with the increase in the size (area) of the figure. This means that an additional quality, area, in the object of perception plays an important rôle in the perception of form. 2. The V-P-T of a rectangle is dependent upon its length. Here, also, the effect of area is pvedominant. 3. With respect to the perception of circles, triangles and other forms, we find that the V-P-T's of triangles and rectangles are small as compared with those of circles. This indicates, so we think, that circle is not a dominant form as so frequently stated by psychologists to the contrary. 4. When an inducing stimulus is introduced in the neighborhood of the object of observation in such a way as to form a Gestalt with the latter, the effeet produced is the same as in the case of 4: The effect of area is greater than that of the Gestalt.
Inomata (6) has proved that the time errors in the estimation of visual length and in that of auditory intensity appeared different, and proposed a hypothesis that this might be explained by the difference of “the mode of phrasing” The purpose of our present investigation is to test this idea in a different kind of comparison, i.e. the estimation of time-duration. At first, we compared two durations which were represented by the whole space lighted (Gs:Gs) or sounded (Gh:Gh) by means of five small electric lamps or four buzzers which were placed unseen far from Os.. The durations were three in kind: short (1sec.), middle (3sec.) & long (6sec.); the intervals were two: short (1sec.) & long (3sec.). In the visual experiment (see Table 1), the time errors were negative, except in the short duration of the short interval, and in the auditory experiment (see Table 3), the time errors were negative solely in two long duration values. Next, we placed one light (a circle of 2cm in diameter) (Ks:Ks) orone buzzer 120cm before Os. (Ks:Ks). The results (see Table 1, 3) were similar to those of the first experiment. Only the absolute values were here somewhat higher. The positive values in these results may be explained by the hypothesis proposed by Inomata, that they appear inthe cases where the stimulus constellations are easy to fuse in a single “phrasing”. For, firstly, any stimulus given ina short duration may fuse easier in one Gestalt, and secondly, the visual stimuli are more independent and more difficult to fuse each other than the auditory ones. In the other experiment, i.e. whole space vs. part space (Gs:Ks, Gh:Kh; see Table 9, 10); strong part stimulus vs. weak part stimulus (see Table 12, 14), the results were similar to those of the foregoing experiments, and may be explained by the same hypothesis of “the mode of phrasing”. Then, we reversed the stimulus-interval relationship of the first “whole space experiment”; in other words, the vacant time durations were compared (see Table 5, 7). The results were different, especially in the visual experiment, where all values were proved to be positive. This means, perhaps, that the vacant times were perceived as accessory components of one larger time Gestalt, and furthermore, that the first stimuli were overestimated. It is noticeable, however, that in this experiment some Os. gave results similar to those in the first experiment, when they were expressly required to observe the vacant intervals as “figures”. Now, we turn to the effects caused by the difference of two stimuli as the “carriers” of the time durations compared. As mentioned above we compared the whole space stimulus with the part space stimuius. In the auditory experiment (see Table 19), it seems that there are no meaningful effects of the different stimuli, while in the visual experiment (see Table 16), it is manifest that the small stimuli are more greatly overestimated. This may be explained by its high “figuredness.” In the results of the other experiments concerning the difference of the intensity of stimuli (ca. 1:3), we find a paradoxical result, that in the visual experiment (see Table 17), there appears an effect of overestimation of the strong stimuli, while in the auditory experiment (see Table 21), an antagonistic effect of overestimation of the weak stimuli. It is probable that the strong visual stimuli carry higher figuredness, and the weak auditory stimuli likewise. But this is of course a mere hypothesis which must be proved by further investigation.
It is a well-known fact that reproduction is easier when it proceeds along the lines of original learning than when it reversely regresses the line. So we reproduce “d, être” easier from “raison” h than “raison” from “d'être” (1). But that is not exclusively due to the direction which accords with the line of habit, as ordinarily presumed. An example will show how reverse is also true: In our first experiment, 2 series of 10 pairs of alphabet nonsense word type materials were offered to 10 student subjects, under the condition of an “anticipating right associates method.” The repetitions were 4, at a speed of 2sec. per item. Half of the subjects reproduced the first series progrssively, and then the second series in the reverse order. The other half worked vice versa. The average number of pairs reproduced were 5.3 for progression, and 6.5 for regression, with a reliability of difference expressed in Student's t=4.47, . 01>p>.001. Now let us analyse this experimental situation. We found there were 2 conditions which determine the facility of reproduction. One is the alleged “direction” or status of the items in the S→R sequence, the other is the facility grade inherent in the material. Concerning this material factor, Kuraisi (2) has shown that reproduction was easier when it started from a member of poorly organized knowledge region, than from a member of a well organized one. So we may infer that this factor was stronger than the direction factor in our example mentioned above, for alphabet letters can be considered easier to memorize than nonsense words. But how about the role which these 2 factors share with each other? In several experiments excecuted by Kuraisi only 2 types of series, such as A→B and B→A type, were compared. In this constellation, however, both conditions direction and material change at the same time. Hence the problem is insoluble. To be able to determine the role of these conditions, there must be a third medium. For this reason we resorted to the follwing experimental device: Four series of 10 pairs in different mateial construction were prepared. I. nonsense word→word (difficult→middle) II. alphabet→word (easy→middle) III. word→nonsense word (middle→difficult) IV. word→alphabet (middle→easy) Ten subjects learned these 4 series in different order. The conditions were equal to thoseof the above experiment, except that they learned up to complete anticipation, of which the number of repetitions was computed. The table 6 shows this value. From the table we see clearly that the difference of easy and difficult materials is more markedly accentuated in the response status (III/IV) than in the stimulus status (I/II) of items. So it is to be concluded that the status of response is far more important to the reproduction of the materails learned by method of righr associates. But it might be suspected that the oral responses made by Ss in the course of the original anticipating learning was the cause of the better reproduction rate of response items. To answer this question, we presented to Ss the paired two items simultaneously. Nonetheless, we found here also that the effect of response items was greater than that of stimulus items.
Problems. Taking account of the exprimental results of J. D. Frank, R. Gould and L. B. Heathers, we consider that one of the important factors determining the values of correlation of goal discrepancy scores (G. D. scores) between many different experimental situations is the similarity grade of experimental situations. We may generally explain this problem of situational differences by the differences of the degree of reality of experimental situations. It will be related to the fact that goals selected in the behavior lelated to level of aspiration have different meanings and the dynamics of aspiration level also is different respectively. Heve we attempt to clarify the different meanings of aspiration level by setting up several experimental situations consisted of different instructions, different condisions, different characters and structures of tasks. Moreover, in relation to the situational variations, we intend to study the mechanism of success and failure stated by subjects. This is a new method of studying success and failure in level of aspiration. Experimental method and procedure. Subjects: six boys and six girls in the 4th and 5th year classes of the primrry school. Tasks: 1. Addition. 25 items in Kraepelin's successive addition paper. Scaled in secnd. The quecker the better. 2. Isolation-play. (Solitaer-Spiel). A task used in Hoppe's experiment. Scaled in number. The fewer the better. 3. Block-building. building up a gate of blocks by copying a model. Scaled in second. The quicker the better. 4. Quoits. Throwing ten rings in two meters distance. Scaled in number. The more the better. The character of the former two tasks was serious and the latter two were the playful tasks Experimental conditions. Experimental conditions were changed from one to another mainly by changing the instructions. Condition A. The first situation. Instruction: “What will you expect to get next time?” Condition B. The second situation. Instruction was the same as in A. But this time subjects became more familiar to the tasks and the experimenter than in A. Condition C. The third situation. Instruction: “What will you hope to get next time?” This instruction was apt to evoke the ideal or hope level. Condition D. The fourth situation. Instruction: “What will you really get next time?” This expects the real level. The experimenter and the experimental room were the same through the above four conditions. Condition E. The fifth situation. Instruction was the same as in A and B. But this time the experimenter and the experimental room were different from the before and unfamiliar to the subjects in order to add the social prersure. Subjects were tested individually. A two-week interval was inserted between each situation. Experimental results 1. From the viewpoint of J. F. Brown's theory which hypothesizes that the life space of irreality grade has more fluid medium than of reality grade, we may assume that in the irreal situations the number of spontaneous speaking of subjects will be increased than in real situations. The number of times of spontaneous speaking was as follows. (1) C<A, B, D<E. (2) Quoits, block-building>addition, isolation-play. (The sign of unequality shows the significant difference between the means at 5% level of significance.) We can conclude that condition C, quoits and block-building are the situations of higher irreality grade. 2. The value of G. D. score is as follows. (1) In the task of addition: C>A, B, D>E. (2) In isolation-play: C>A, B, D, E. A>E. (3) In block-building: C>A, B, D>E. (4) In quoits: C>A, B, D, E. We can verify that these results are independent ftom the factors concerning the performance sccre and so we may conclude that these results are explained in conection with the reality grade of experimental situations. 3. Shifts values of aspiration level were
(I) Problem. The general purpose of this investigation was to study the competition of preschool children. Although many studies of competition were already made, some of them, we found, were lacking in sufficient conditional analysis of competitive situation, others made no comparison with control groups, still others neglected statistical validation. Trying to correct these deficiencies, we made extensive studies on preschool children by studying them from genetic point of view on the one hand, and by investigating crosssectionally the relative dynamics of competitive situation on the other. Our studies were divided into three experiments (Exp. A, Exp. B, and Exp. C). The object of Exp. A was to study whether, in a given situation, competition exisited in all ages, and, if not, from which age the competitve tendencies appeared, and in what form of behavior they were materialized. In Exp. B, the group effects of 2 members were compared with those of 4 members and in Exp. C, the cooperation of members in non-competitive and competitive situations was studied. (II) Procedure and Method. These experiments were carried out in two kinder-gartens in Kyoto through 80 days during 1949 and 1950. As subjects, 343 boys and girls of the age 2-7 were used. The materials were Froebel's building blocks (20 blocks in Exp. A and 40 in B and C). Each experiment was divided into two parts, i.e. sub-experiment a (non-competitive situation) and sub-experiment b (competitive situation). In the former we gave no instructions of competition to children, forming the free building play situation, whereas in the latter we gave it in a following way: Now we wish to see who can build better. Children (one group of 2 in Exp. A one group of 4 in separate work in Exp. B and two groups of 2 each in Exp. C) were taken into the experimental room, where there was a pile of building blocks on the center of a table, and then they were invited to play with blocks. All kinds of children's behavior in these situations were recorded in the protocol sheets by two observers. (III) Results. (Exp. A) exp. a: Non-competitive situation. (1) All children aged 2 years did not build at all, most of 3 year old played with building blocks solitarily, but after 4 years they became more and more able to build intentionably. (2) Manual operation shifted from one hand type to both hands type with increasing age. (3) Such forms of behavior as grabbing, giving, or exchanging blocks were found in children from 3 to 6 years inclusive. (4) When children were asked by the instructor to estimate their achievement, most of 3 and 4 year old children answered that their own was the better, but in 5 or 6 years they answered increasingly that other's was the better. exp. b: Cometitive situation. (1) Instructions of competition could be understood neither by children of all ages nor by all children of any one age, but most of the children after 4 years could understand it and took attitude of competition. (2) Children who built blocks with both hands increased as compared with exp. a and in children after 4 years, all physical functions seemed to be mobilized in order to win. (3) In the estimation of their achievement, self-praises increased and uncertain answers decreased compared with exp. a. (4) The time spent in building in this experiment was much shorter compared with exp. a (3yr, t=1.884; 4yr, t=4.002; 5yr, t=4.1313; 6yr, t=6.1924). We suppose, therefore, that children seemed to take competition of quality for that of speed. (5) Chi-square tests on the results of exp. a and b showed, in many respects, very significant differences in 5 and 6 year old children. (Exp. B) exp. a: Ton-Competitive situation. (1) Five and six year old children who built blocks with only one hand increased, compared with Exp. A, but in 4 year old there were no difference between Exp. A