| By Author | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Title | [ A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z | Other Symbols ] |
| By Language |
|
Download this book: [ ASCII ] Look for this book on Amazon Tweet |
Title: Measure Your Mind - The Mentimeter and How to Use It
Author: Stockbridge, Frank Parker, Trabue, Marion Rex
Language: English
As this book started as an ASCII text book there are no pictures available.
*** Start of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Measure Your Mind - The Mentimeter and How to Use It" ***
produced from images generously made available by The
Internet Archive)
MEASURE YOUR MIND
_The Mentimeter and How to Use It_
BY
M. R. TRABUE, PH. D.
AND
FRANK PARKER STOCKBRIDGE
[Illustration]
WITH ILLUSTRATIONS
IN TEXT
GARDEN CITY, NEW YORK, TORONTO
DOUBLEDAY, PAGE & COMPANY
1922
COPYRIGHT, 1920, BY
DOUBLEDAY, PAGE & COMPANY
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED, INCLUDING THAT OF
TRANSLATION INTO FOREIGN LANGUAGES,
INCLUDING THE SCANDINAVIAN
PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES
AT
THE COUNTRY LIFE PRESS, GARDEN CITY, N. Y.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
PREFACE
The publishers offer this book primarily as a popular treatise on the
measurement of intelligence by scientific methods.
Every effort has been made to conform to the soundest scientific
principles, both in the preparation of the Mentimeter tests, around
which the volume is largely written, and in the introductory and
explanatory chapters, in which the principles of applied psychology, as
they bear upon mental tests, are stated in popular language.
The Mentimeters are based upon Doctor Trabue’s experience (1) as
Assistant in Educational Psychology at Teachers College, Columbia
University, (2) as psychological investigator of the intellectual status
of inmates of charitable institutions and of pupils in the public
schools, (3) as author of various intellectual and educational scales,
widely used by psychologists and educators, (4) as Chief Psychological
Examiner in two of the largest Army camps, directing the intellectual
examination of more than a hundred thousand soldiers, (5) as Captain in
the Adjutant General’s Department, U. S. Army, measuring the
intellectual abilities of men in the Aviation Service, and (6) as
Assistant Professor in Columbia University, giving instruction in the
theory and practice of intellectual measurements and directing the
application of such measurements to tens of thousands of school pupils.
Frank Parker Stockbridge, Doctor Trabue’s collaborator, is an author and
journalist of a high order. As managing editor of _Popular Mechanics_
and contributor to the _World’s Work_, _Harper’s_, _Popular Science
Monthly_, etc., he has been thrown into contact with important affairs
in the world of science so that he is especially equipped to work with
Doctor Trabue in presenting this interesting subject. As director of the
publicity campaign of the American Library Association War Fund his
contact with the Army and the results of the biggest experiment in the
way of psychological tests that the world has ever seen was invaluable
to him in this work. The publishers feel that the collaboration is a
particularly happy one.
The success of the scientific method of testing intelligence among both
officers and men in the Army has directed widespread attention to the
general subject. The Mentimeter is the first comprehensive system of
tests, applicable to the whole range of educational and industrial
requirements, to be offered for general use.
To employers and those in charge of the selection, grading, and
promotion of workers of every class, in factories, offices, and stores;
to teachers of all grades, from kindergarten to university; to parents
who are interested in ascertaining, and watching the growth of their
children’s mental development and to young men and young women striving
for self-improvement and advancement and desirous of learning something
of their own mental capacities and limitations as a guide to the
intelligent choice of vocations or professions, the publishers offer
this book in the confident belief that it will be found of real service.
CONTENTS
CHAPTER PAGE
I SCIENCE VERSUS GUESSWORK 3
II THE APPLICATIONS OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS 16
III WHAT THESE TESTS MEASURE 23
IV STANDARDS FOR MENTAL TESTS 33
V DIFFERENT TYPES OF MENTAL TESTS 44
VI MENTAL TESTS IN THE ARMY 53
VII PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS IN EDUCATION 63
VIII MENTAL TESTS IN INDUSTRY 76
IX HOW TO USE THE MENTIMETER TESTS 88
X THE MENTIMETER TESTS 109
XI TRADE TESTS OR TESTS OF SKILL 274
APPENDICES 287
MEASURE YOUR MIND
CHAPTER I
SCIENCE _VERSUS_ GUESSWORK
There are two ways, and only two, in which we can find out what a
machine is capable of doing. One of these is to try it out, to “put it
through its paces” by using it for every sort of work which it is
expected to perform and observing whether or not it does what we want it
to do. The other way is to measure it (or to take the measurements of it
as supplied by its responsible manufacturer) and compare these with the
measurements of the essential parts of machines with the performance of
which we are already familiar.
Unless it is a brand-new type of machine, designed to do something that
has never before been done by machinery, or to do it by a different
mechanical method, there is obviously a great saving of time and money
in buying a machine from specifications that insure the correct
performance of its expected duty over the other plan of first buying the
machine and then trying it out in practice to see whether it will do
what we want done.
The manufacturer or business man who would purchase machinery of any
sort without first making certain that its dimensions, speeds, weight,
power-consumption, controls, and the materials used in its construction
were such as to adapt it precisely to the work he expected to do with it
would speedily bankrupt his business. It takes but a moment’s thought
for the reader to prove this to himself.
On the other hand, however, we find business men constantly employing
men and women to perform specific duties without applying any tests or
measurements, other than the most rudimentary ones, to determine in
advance whether the person so employed is fitted for the work he or she
is expected to do. And as every employer knows, one of the most costly
wastes in almost every business or manufacturing establishment is the
expense of constantly “breaking in” new employees to take the places of
those who have left or have been dismissed because they were found,
after trial, not to be fitted for the duties to be done.
Because the installation of machinery of any kind involves an initial
outlay of money, it long ago became apparent to everybody that the
“trial and error” method of buying machines or other commodities was
wasteful and ruinous. It was not until recent years, however, that the
closer study of operating costs disclosed the fact that the expense of
“labour turnover,” that is to say the proportion of employees in any
given business whose places have to be filled annually, is one of the
heaviest avoidable drains on income. This was long overlooked because no
capital investment is involved in the initial employment of labour. The
cost of training new employees is much larger, it is now learned, in
most businesses, than is generally understood, not only in the direct
outlay in salary or wages before the new employee has mastered the
duties of the new position as well as he or she is able, but in loss
through spoiled materials, reduced individual output, and often in the
slowing down of an entire chain of manufacturing operations through the
inability of the inexperienced worker to maintain the pace of the rest
of the links in the chain.
If, then, as so often happens, it is found after experiment that the new
employee is not capable of performing the work efficiently, the whole
process must be repeated. The employee who has failed leaves, is
dismissed, or is transferred to another department, and a new and
equally inexperienced worker employed to fill the vacancy, with the
whole cost of training to be incurred over again. Even though the new
worker may be experienced in the particular class of work to be done,
there is an appreciable loss due to the unavoidable frictions and
hesitations that occur whenever a worker is being fitted into a new
environment.
There is, moreover, no guarantee that even an experienced person in a
special sort of work is fitted to do that particular work as well as it
can be done or should be done. He or she may have got into that sort of
work by accident. That is usually the way in which a boy or girl begins
a business or industrial career. He or she may have continued in it
merely because the experience gained in the first job enables its
possessor to pass the superficial scrutiny of foremen, managers, or
others who employ “help” in the first instance. But just as all the
experience and training in the world will not make a Paderewski out of a
person who was not born with the precise combination of sensory and
nervous qualities that the master musician possesses, though almost any
one with ten fingers and an ear for harmony can be taught to play the
piano after a fashion, so it is true that while in the all-important
business of earning a living almost anybody can be trained to do most of
the ordinary manufacturing and business operations, after a fashion, it
is only those who were born with certain combinations of nerve endings
and sensory apparatus who can be trained into first-rate salesmen, or
expert tool-makers. And this holds true all the way down the line, to
the simplest and most automatic operations necessary in business
industry.
Individuals themselves are seldom aware of their own capacities; even
less generally of their own limitations. Occasionally, by accident, a
man or a woman finds at the right time the opportunity to do precisely
the things he or she is best fitted to do. Often the individual’s strong
personal instincts or inclinations lead him or her to seek opportunity
to do certain kinds of work without any clear understanding why that
sort of work appeals while other kinds do not. Few human beings analyze
their inclinations closely. Yet it may be and frequently is the case
that the work one most strongly desires to undertake is not that in
which he or she is best fitted to succeed. The inclination may be
counterbalanced by inhibitions of which neither the possessor nor his or
her employer becomes aware until repeated failure has demonstrated the
lack of adaptability, sometimes after it is, or seems to be, too late to
take up another occupation. Then the worker usually drifts into the
ranks of “casuals,” constantly moving from job to job, chronically “out
of work”; the ready dupe of agitators and the prophets of social unrest
and revolution; disheartened, anti-social, and perennially unhappy; the
most expensive sort of an employee in any position, no matter how small
the wage—yet a human being, and, as such, entitled to liberty and the
pursuit of happiness!
That is an extreme picture. Yet if such tragedies occur (as every reader
knows from his own observation and experience they _do_ occur too often)
among those who have voluntarily chosen their own lines of work, how
much more frequently must they occur among those whose daily occupations
have been determined for them, not through any voluntary choice or
intelligent guidance but solely through the accident of having been
“thrown into” certain jobs when they were young?
That is the way in which the vast majority of individuals have their
careers shaped for them. The world of business and industry and of the
professions is full of blacksmiths who ought to be carpenters,
indifferent lawyers who would have made good dentists, teachers who are
failures because they should have been trained as stenographers, good
cooks who have been spoiled to make mediocre shop attendants, and so on
through the list of possible occupations. Within every business
organization, moreover, there are grades and degrees of requirements and
responsibilities into which some employees may fit perfectly, others
less perfectly and others not at all, though all be drawn from the same
group or from those performing the same general class of service. Here,
as in the matter of original employment, the general custom of dealing
with the human element in industry is the wasteful “hire-and-fire”
system, analogous to the purchasing of machinery or equipment without
first ascertaining whether it will do the work, and scrapping it when it
fails.
We found out long ago that we couldn’t afford to do that sort of thing
with machinery. We are just beginning to find out that it is even more
expensive to do it with the human element in industry.
It would perhaps be going too far to claim that the whole problem of the
“labour turnover” arises from the effort to fit square pegs into round
holes, but it is certain that a very large share of all human troubles,
industrial unrest, discontent, inefficiency and unhappiness is traceable
to the lack of proper adjustment between the man and the job, and this
in turn is due in large part to the failure to determine in advance the
fitness of the particular individual for the particular task.
What is needed, obviously, is a measure of human capacities, just as we
have means of measuring every phase of the machine’s capacities.
Just as we measure a machine by the most precise gauges and tests
available, why not measure the human individual by the most precise
means we are able to apply?
The word “measure” in the preceding paragraph does not mean, either in
the case of the machine or of the man, the gross dimensions of length,
breadth, and thickness; these are equally immaterial, in most cases,
whether the subject of measurement be a man or a machine. One measures a
machine to determine its _capacity_ for certain work, and is little
concerned about its characteristics that have no bearing upon those
qualities that fit it for those particular duties. So the measurements
of a human being whose capacity for certain duties is to be determined
must be of those qualities which enable him or her to perform according
to a certain pre-determined requirement.
These qualities, in man, woman, or child, can be measured; not with the
precision with which an engineer measures the parts of a machine that
must fit within a thousandth of an inch, but with sufficient accuracy to
determine quickly, inexpensively, and simply whether a given individual
has the capacity to learn and perform any given task or class of work.
To explain how these tests can be made, how science can be and is being
substituted for guesswork in the selection of human beings for jobs and
of jobs for human beings, just as science has displaced guesswork in the
selection of material commodities, is the purpose of this book.
Let us first point out clearly the difference between science and
guesswork. The vast majority of jobs are filled by guesswork. The farmer
who hires a field hand, the housewife who employs a cook, the foreman
who takes on a new “hand” in the factory, and even employers hiring
persons for more responsible positions, all do it, to a greater degree
than they imagine, by guesswork. They may make inquiries, more or less
thorough depending upon the compensation and responsibility involved, of
persons who are reputed to know by observation something of the
candidate’s qualifications. Unless the individual under consideration be
flagrantly and patently unfit the reports thus obtained are almost
always favourable. In many cases no effort is made even to obtain such
reports.
Many persons who regard themselves as intelligent employ men and women
for all sorts of delicate operations and confidential and responsible
relations as a result of observation alone; yet observation alone will
tell no more about a man or a woman than it will about an automobile—the
shape and the colouring.
When you observe a human being you can determine certain physical
characteristics, such as size, complexion, colour of eyes and hair,
soundness of teeth, shape of body and head, contour of face, features,
and expression. You make up your mind that you like the person or you do
not. But as for determining by means of anything your unaided
observation discloses whether or not the person under examination is
qualified either to perform or to learn how to perform efficiently a
given task or set of tasks, you might as well expect to discover the
hillclimbing power of an automobile by merely looking at it.
Yet that is precisely the way in which, in the vast majority of cases,
the supremely important work of fitting individuals and jobs together is
done in the world of business and industry.
True, the prospective employer usually asks a few questions, but the
applicant’s manner and tone of voice have usually as much to do with the
final decision as the actual replies.
Men and women are usually hired, in short, on their looks and on the
impressions made at a single short interview. That it is too much to
expect persons so selected to fit into even the simplest sort of a
business or industrial organization should be obvious to every
intelligent person; that sometimes they do fit should be no less
obviously recognized as largely accidental.
We do not recognize the absurdity of this method of selecting persons
for particular positions, partly because this is the only way most of us
have ever known and partly because there is in almost every human being
a secret or subconscious belief in his own peculiar powers of judging
others by means of surface indications.
The fallacy of the belief that one may arrive at accurate conclusions as
to individual capacity and characteristics by merely looking at the
individuals concerned has been well set forth by Prof. L. M. Terman of
Stanford University. Much of the popular belief in the efficacy of this
method, Doctor Terman believes, is due to the fact that the public does
not know that the pretensions of the pseudo-science of “phrenology” were
long ago shown to be unwarranted. According to phrenology, definite and
constant relations are believed to exist between certain mental traits
and the contour of the head. Phrenologists teach, for example, that
one’s endowment in such traits as intelligence, combativeness, sympathy,
tenderness, honesty, religious fervour, and courage may be judged by the
prominence of various parts of the skull. While the sincerity of Gall,
the French physiologist of a century ago who invented the so-called
science, and of his followers, is not to be questioned, the pretensions
of phrenology itself have been thoroughly exploded. It has been
demonstrated that traits like those above mentioned do not have separate
and well-defined seats in the brain and that skull contour is not a
reliable index of the brain development beneath.
“In the underworld of pseudo-science, however,” says Professor Terman,
“phrenology and kindred fakes survive. Hundreds of men and women still
earn their living by ‘feeling bumps on the head,’ reading character from
the lines of the hand, etc.
“But if the rating of men by pseudo-science is misleading, perhaps
science is still unnecessary. It may be argued that mental traits can be
rated accurately enough for all practical purposes on the basis of
ordinary observation of one’s behaviour, speech, and appearance. We are
constantly judging people by this offhand method, because we are
compelled to do so. Consequently we all acquire a certain facility in
handling the method. For ordinary purposes it is infinitely better than
nothing. A skilful observer can estimate roughly the height of an
airplane; but if we would know its real height we must use the methods
of science and perform a mathematical computation.
“The trouble with the observational method is its lack of a universal
standard of judgment. One observer may use a high, another a low
standard of comparison. A four-story building in the midst of New York’s
‘sky-scrapers’ looks very low; placed in the midst of a wide expanse of
one-story structures it would look very tall.
“Moreover, we are easily misled by appearances. The writer knows a young
man who looks so foolish that he is often mistaken by casual
acquaintances for a mental defective. In reality he is one of the half
dozen brightest students in a large university. Another man who in
reality has the mentality of a ten-year-old child is so intelligent
looking that he was able to secure employment as a city policeman.
“Language is a great deceiver. The fluent talker is likely to be
overrated, the person of stumbling or monosyllabic speech to be
underrated. Similar errors are made in judging the intelligence of the
sprightly and the stolid, the aggressive and the timid, etc. Our
tendency is also to overestimate the intellectual quality of our friends
and to underestimate that of persons we do not like.
“If the method of offhand judgment were reliable, different judges would
agree in their ratings of the same individual. When the judges disagree
it is evident that not all can be correct. When intelligence is rated in
this way wide differences of opinion invariably appear. Twenty-five
members of a university class who had worked together intimately for a
year were asked to rate the individuals of the class from 1 to 25 in
order of intelligence. The result was surprising. Almost every member of
the class was rated among the brightest by someone, and almost every
member of the class among the dullest by someone. Doubtless the judges
were misled by all sorts of irrelevant matters, such as personal
appearance, fluency of speech, positiveness of manner, personal likes
and dislikes, etc.
“The method of personal estimate is much better than the method of
external signs (phrenology), but to be reliable it must be supplemented
by a method which is _objective_, that is, a method which is not
influenced by the personal bias of the judge or by such irrelevant
factors as the appearance, speech, or bearing of the one to be rated.
Such is the method of intelligence tests.”
It would, of course, as Professor Terman points out, be absurd to
contend that it is impossible to arrive at a rough estimate of an
individual’s capacities and character by observation, as it is absurd to
pretend that accurate measurements of an individual’s capacities can be
made by the same method. There are men who have by long experience
learned to judge on very brief contacts the possibilities of applicants
for positions. Actually, what such employers do is to apply, though
crudely and unscientifically, a limited number of tests which might
fairly be classed as psychological. Out of a long experience they have
accumulated an accurate knowledge of the work to be done and of the
general type of individual who has been found best qualified to perform
that work. This sort of ability, however, is acquired solely through
long experience, and even then it can only be acquired by men or women
who themselves possess certain mental qualities, which might easily be
gauged and classified, the possession of which enables them to
accumulate and utilize experience in this manner.
This sort of ability can by no means be transferred from one individual
to another by description or by mere training. It is precisely like the
ability which an experienced automobile repair man possesses, that
enables him to tell by a quick inspection and after only a few minutes
of observation what are the principal things the matter with a car and
what service it is probably able to perform. But a repair man cannot
tell anybody else how to size up an automobile at a glance, because the
only way any one can learn to do it is by going through the same process
of taking automobiles apart and putting them together again for a period
of years. And as everyone who has ever had occasion to deal with
automobile repairs is aware, the most experienced repair men are seldom
positive that they know just what is wrong and all that is wrong without
applying precise measurements and painstaking tests.
It is easy enough to determine that a delicate, small-boned, slender
person is not the best type to employ for digging coal, loading freight
cars, or other arduous manual labour. There are, of course, many classes
of occupations the fitness or unfitness for which of a particular
individual must be determined in the first place by that individual’s
physical characteristics. So far the observation method suffices. But
the very fact that every industry and business is full of misfits and
that it is a matter of common knowledge that the most difficult problem
the employer has to face is that of finding the right person for each
particular job that calls for anything more than mere physical strength,
is the best evidence that even the most experienced and accurate
observers are far from infallible in their judgments of individual
capacities.
For that matter, there is no infallible test. No true scientist claims
infallibility. The possibility of error is always present wherever the
human element is involved. It is a safe assumption that any method or
estimate that purports to be infallible is fraudulent. There is in
almost every human mind a lurking, subconscious belief in the
possibility of perfection. It is this which makes humanity credulous
when claims of infallibility are plausibly presented.
It is extremely difficult to satisfy by logic and reason the type of
mind that is strongly influenced by glittering generalities and
emphatic, though unsupported, assertions. It is equally difficult to
convince the skeptic whose mind is closed to the introduction of new
thoughts and who, in his self-satisfaction with his own mental
limitations, rejects every fact that does not tally with his
preconceived ideas.
This book is written neither for the super-skeptical nor the
ultra-credulous. It makes no pretension to infallibility, nor does any
scientifically trained psychologist pretend that there has yet been
evolved a method of measuring every dimension and capacity of the human
mind beyond the possibility of error. The methods described in this book
are the fruit of years of experiment, research, and practical
application of the results of experiment and research, and are designed
to reflect the development of the science of psychology in its
application to mental measurements as closely as it is possible to do so
within the limits of a single volume written primarily for the reader
who has no special scientific training along psychological lines.
The reader who is not prepared and willing to examine facts and at least
to take all the ascertainable facts into consideration before forming
his conclusions is not likely to be interested. The scientific method of
character analysis or mental measurement is based upon the comparison of
the largest possible collection of ascertained facts. Guess work has no
place in it. Psychology has small dealings with intuition and instinct
nor is it in any way derived from magic or concerned with the occult.
There are no unfathomable mysteries. There is no fact about the
operation of the human mind which cannot be subjected to scientific
investigation and measurement by any intelligent person. The scientific
method requires that every conclusion must square with the results
obtained by the experimental application of all related facts or be
discredited as worthless. Theories have no place in science, except as
something to be disproved if possible, and a single fact which does not
square with any theory disproves the theory.
The scientific method of mental measurement has passed the theoretical
stage. It has squared with the facts wherever it has been intelligently
applied. It has been demonstrated in a wide range of business and
industrial applications, in education and in its use in determining the
qualities and fitness of officers and men in the Army and Navy. What it
offers is the shortest, simplest, and most accurate means available of
determining human capacities and qualities.
Professor Terman has admirably summarized the advantages of the
scientific method of testing intelligence, as follows:
“1. It gives us a universal standard of comparison. The result is
absolutely uninfluenced by the general intellectual level of the group
with which the subject to be rated happens to be associated. It is like
measuring the height of a house instead of estimating it by comparison
with the height of surrounding buildings.
“2. It multiplies enormously the significance of mental performance. It
does this by making fine distinctions which would be overlooked by the
method of offhand judgment. It is like placing a smeared glass under a
microscope and discovering that the smear is a complicated network of
organic matter.
“3. The test method is objective; that is, free from the influence of
personal bias. It gives approximately the same verdict to-day, next
week, or next year. It does not change its opinion. More important
still, the verdict will be approximately the same whoever makes the
test, whether a relative, a stranger, a friend, or an enemy, provided
only that the rules of procedure be rigidly followed.
“4. The test result is little influenced by the subject’s educational
advantages. In this it differs greatly from offhand judgment, which so
easily mistakes the results of schooling for real intelligence. The test
method probes beneath the veneer of education and gives an index of raw
‘brain power.’ For example, a young woman who had been stolen in early
childhood by gypsies and had spent her life with them was given the
Binet-Simon intelligence test. She had never attended school a day in
her life and had only learned to read by bribing a little school girl to
teach her the alphabet; yet she made a higher score than the average
found for two hundred high school pupils who were given the same test.
“No wonder,” Professor Terman concludes, “mentality tests have acquired
such a wide vogue in the ten years since Binet gave to the world the
first successful intelligence scale. In that time they have demonstrated
their usefulness in the study of the feeble-minded, in the grading of
school children, in determining the mental responsibility of offenders,
and in the selection of employees. Their largest and most useful
applications have been in the mental classification of men in the United
States Army.”
CHAPTER II
THE APPLICATIONS OF PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS
The intelligent reader has by this time begun to see for himself some of
the possibilities opened up by the use of scientific mental tests, and
to perceive their applicability in a wide diversity of fields. In later
chapters specific examples of such applications are given in detail, and
suggestions offered for still other uses of the tests which are
contained in this book.
The usefulness of all mental tests, whether those which are offered in
this volume under the general title of “The Mentimeter,” or others that
may be set up with equal scientific precision, depends upon, or at least
is greatly enhanced by, the most complete understanding of the
underlying principles on the part of the person who undertakes to apply
them. The purpose of this and the next three succeeding chapters is to
make these principles so plain that by the time the reader has reached
the tests themselves he will have a perfectly clear understanding, not
only of _what_ the Mentimeter tests are but of _why_ they have been put
into the form in which he finds them, and of _how_ their use will enable
him to gauge human intelligence and capacity with a greater degree of
accuracy than he has found possible by other means. If, perchance,
psychologists find in this volume much that is to them elementary, it
should be kept in mind that it is only through the widest possible
spread of sound understanding of psychological principles that the wider
application of them in the ordinary walks of life can be brought about.
That, the authors take it, is the great end toward which scientific
psychologists are aiming, and that is the aim of this book.
The general purpose of psychological tests is to determine how
individuals compare with one another in mental capacity, or with
standards based upon the capacities of individuals known to possess
certain qualities. Thus, it may be desirable, as it frequently is, to
determine the relative abilities of the individuals of a certain group,
like a school or college class, clerks employed in a similar form of
work, a number of applicants for a certain position for which only the
most capable among the candidates is desired, or the soldiers of a
particular company or regiment. What is required here is a method of
grading these individuals with reference to one another, by means of
tests which need not necessarily have any relation to any external
standard of mental perfection.
The process here is as if one were to be told to pick out of all the
automobiles in a garage the best one, the next best, and so on,
classifying these particular cars and no others _with relation to one
another_ and not with respect to any standards of automobile perfection
introduced from outside. None of the cars might be perfect; perhaps the
best one of the lot has leaky piston-rings and none of them will climb a
10 per cent. grade on high gear. It is a comparatively easy matter,
however, to devise a few simple tests that will grade a dozen or fifty
automobiles in regard to their relative ability to climb hills, carry
loads, and perform the other services expected of an automobile. The one
that will climb hills the best may not also be the one that will carry
the heaviest load or travel the most miles on a gallon of gasolene, but
out of such a series of group tests any one interested can readily
determine which of all the automobiles in the group is the best general
purpose car, which the poorest, and about where the others grade with
reference to these two extremes.
That is about the process that a man engaged in the automobile trucking
business would use in determining which one of the cars he has available
is best adapted for a particular piece of hauling that is to be done. He
wants to know which of his cars he can rely upon for any one of many
different sorts of service, but he particularly wants to know all the
time which of them are worth spending money on for repairs and
improvements and general overhauling and which are either so poorly
constructed in the first place or so hopelessly out of repair that it is
cheaper to scrap them than to spend any more money on trying to make
them fit for service.
_In other words, the automobile owner needs to know which of his cars,
however poor its present ability, has such inherent qualities as to
justify the belief that it can be made more efficient by proper
attention and reasonable expenditure of money._
Now, that is precisely what the employer of workers, the commander of
soldiers, the teacher of a class or any one else charged with
responsibility for the performance of any sort of tasks by any group of
human beings, wants to know about the individuals under his direction.
He should know or be able to determine readily not alone what each of
the individuals can actually do and which ones can do particular tasks
better than the others, but it is important for him to know the relative
_capacities_ of the entire group, so that he can determine, as in the
case of the automobiles which have been used as an illustration, which
of them are most worth spending time and effort upon in the expectation
that they will learn to do even more difficult tasks, and which of them
are so hopelessly incapable that nothing is to be expected of them
except the simplest routine performances.
Now, the man who operates a fleet of automobile trucks does not stop
when he has made a comparison of the vehicles in his garage with one
another, but is constantly comparing the performance of each with
standards established by other cars, machines of different makes, and
with new machines. There exists, and he is constantly conscious of its
existence, an ideal standard of performance for automobiles to which his
cars must conform as nearly as possible if their service is to be
satisfactory.
So, in measuring human capacity, it is not enough to compare the
individuals of a group with one another, though this is essential and
for some purposes temporarily sufficient; there are available standards
based upon the actual achievements of individuals of known capacity by
which the mental powers of any and all individuals may be gauged. It
will readily be seen that the employer of a number of persons—engaged,
let us say, in some specific mechanical or clerical operation—needs to
know not only whether some of these are capable of being trained to do
better work and some so incapable of further training that it would be
cheaper to discharge them and fill their places with more intelligent
persons, but also to know how any particular group of employees compares
in average intelligence and how each one of the group compares in
individual intelligence with the average or higher-than-average capacity
of those outside of his own particular business establishment who are
engaged in similar work.
This is a matter of dollars and cents to the employer. If he can obtain
a standard that is universal or nearly so, that tells him, in fact, what
all of the employers in his line of business have found to be the
average or the limits of mental capacity possessed by workers of a
particular class, then he is in a position to determine whether he is
getting equally good service for the wages which he pays as is obtained
by other employers requiring similar service.
To illustrate concretely: in an office employing twenty stenographers on
correspondence, it is not only necessary for the employer to know which
of these stenographers is the most competent and which the least and
whether the less competent are incapable merely because they are
beginners or because they lack the necessary mental capacity ever to
become competent. He should also be able to measure the mental capacity
of the entire group by some standard based upon the performance of
thousands and tens of thousands of stenographers of known degrees of
ability. He may discover that the most competent of his entire staff is
only as capable as the average of good stenographers everywhere.
Obviously, his business is handicapped by having a stenographic force
which is inferior in capacity and, consequently, in accuracy, speed, and
other essential requirements, to the average of stenographic office
staffs in business generally. Once this has been determined, the
intelligent employer will proceed to replace the stenographers who are
incapable of improvement, as indicated by the tests applied, with
stenographers who respond to the standard tests with a score well above
the average.
So, too, with the teacher. It is comparatively easy for the teacher to
classify his or her pupils into bright, stupid, and mediocre, through
observation alone. What is more important, however, is to determine
several things about each pupil which observation alone does not tell.
Are the stupid ones really stupid or merely inattentive? Have they the
necessary mental capacity to perform the assigned work of the class or
are they simply lazy? Few teachers can answer this question; none with
any degree of accuracy without the application of scientific tests of
mental capacity. Are the bright children really bright by comparison
with other children of the same age and school grade or do they merely
shine by contrast with the dull members of the class? This question can
by no means be answered accurately except by the application of mental
capacity tests. In another chapter some of the concrete applications of
mental tests in education are described at length. The point to be
emphasized here is that the measurement of the mental capacities of any
group should be based upon standards that will not only determine the
relative capacities of the members of the group but will, at the same
time, compare them all with standards that reflect the known average and
maximum capacities of all others of similar age and environment.
The purpose of these tests might be summed up somewhat as follows:
_To measure, by comparison with the group average or with very carefully
determined standards, some of the infinite number of qualities and
abilities, the possession of which by the individual renders him more or
less susceptible to education and training or more or less capable of
successfully performing certain actions requiring conscious direction
from the mind._
It requires no special argument to point out how a general application
of tests that disclose actual mental capacities might profoundly affect
our judgment of men of all classes and walks of life. Were it possible
to ticket and catalogue the whole human race in accordance with the
capacity of each individual as disclosed under properly devised
psychological tests, we would no longer permit the superficial absence
of polish and taste to blind us to the inherent powers and capacities of
the self-made man, nor, on the other hand, would we be so ready to
assume that the well-dressed, fluent talker, no matter how prepossessing
in appearance and manner, was necessarily able and worthy of confidence.
Likewise, once such a classification became universal, it is conceivable
that many business men and others who are prone to criticize the
universities and their products would be more tolerant of the recent
graduate, whose mental capacity is in no wise reflected by the
particular variety of contents with which his mind has been filled in
college.
Besides the application of scientific mental tests as already indicated,
in business and industry and in education, by the employer or the
teacher, there is another and important use to which standardized tests,
based upon determined capacities of groups and individuals of known
ability, may be put. This is the use of such tests by the individual
upon himself for the purpose of determining his own mental capacity in a
particular direction or of a particular kind as compared with the mental
capacity of others. The man or woman bent on self-improvement or
advancement may thus, within certain limits, assess by the application
of standardized tests his or her own mental quality and capacity.
Again it is unnecessary to point out the advantage to the young man or
young woman endeavouring to decide upon a career or to determine what
particular course of study to pursue or line of business to enter, in
being enabled to obtain an accurate gauge of his or her own qualities,
powers, and limitations. Taste and inclination are no safe guides to
life unless there is coupled with them inherent capacity for the
competent exercise of the faculties which make the gratification of
one’s individual tastes and inclinations possible. Thus it may be that
the individual’s inclinations and tastes run strongly toward music,
toward art in any of its various forms, but that physical and mental
inhibitions, the presence or absence of which may be readily determined,
make it impossible for the possessor of such tastes to hope to be able
to perform creditably the acts which a successful artist or musician
must perform.
Properly devised and applied psychological tests may conceivably
disclose the existence of mental powers and capacities unsuspected or
neglected because overshadowed by strong inclinations in other
directions; early knowledge of the possession of such capacities may
easily direct their possessors into fields in which they can thrive and
prosper and achieve far greater happiness and contentment than would
ever be possible through a lifetime of striving to do that for which
they are not fitted by inheritance.
CHAPTER III
WHAT THESE TESTS MEASURE
The most natural question and one that is frequently asked is:
“What, precisely, do psychological tests measure?”
It is a question that is easier to ask than to answer.
It is simple enough to say that mental tests are designed to measure the
natural or inherent mental capacity of the individual, but in order to
approach a clear understanding of just what this means we must first
define what is meant by the term “mental capacity.”
As a matter of scientific fact, the term “mental capacity” can hardly be
regarded as accurate, although it is the best term we have to describe
the qualities which determine the individual’s ability to perform acts
requiring conscious thought. Psychological and biological science no
longer regard the human mind as something different from or in any way
apart from the human body. The idea that there is such an entity as a
mind that operates even in the slightest degree without reference to and
independent of the physical body must be dismissed, if we are to grasp
clearly the principles and methods of mental tests.
To the psychologist the mind is merely a specialized organ of the
physical body. The intangible something, which is what is usually meant
when persons speak of the human mind, is merely the sum of all the
sensations, feelings, and judgments resulting from the delicate
adjustment of an almost infinite number of nerve fibres which in
themselves are a part of the physical body. One may have at birth a
plentiful supply or a poor supply of potential nerve endings which are
ready to be organized and coördinated by experience and training, but
unless one has the opportunity to learn from study and experience, the
desirable connections may never be developed.
The maximum capacity of the mind in any particular field is, therefore,
practically determined by physical inheritance of an abundant supply of
nerve endings. Thus, it may be that one individual is born with two or
three times as many nerve terminals connecting at the point at the back
of the eyeball where the optic nerve—which is simply a bundle or rope of
nerve fibres—is attached to the mechanical apparatus upon which the
reflection of objects passing before the field of vision is registered.
Such an individual’s powers of observation are normally greater than
those of the person of less fortunate heredity in this respect, whose
lesser number of terminals of the optic nerve fibres limit his powers of
optical perception and observation. Thus, one person may see at a glance
a hundred details, all of which register sharply upon his consciousness,
while another sees only the gross outlines and shadows, and in between
is the average person who sees some details but not all.
It is well known to psychologists and biologists, although not generally
understood by those who have not made a special study of these sciences,
that mental _capacity_ does not change or increase materially after the
individual has reached maturity. It may be diminished through accident
or disease, but the chief increase in adult life is in the volume and
variety of stored-up impressions. The average girl of eighteen or boy of
twenty has reached the approximate limit of his or her mental capacity.
The mental tank will never grow much larger. It may be half empty or
almost entirely vacant, but unless at the average age of university
sophomores scientific mental tests prove the individual to be possessed
of average or better than average mental capacity, it is futile to
expect any great intellectual development to take place in later life.
But while the maximum capacity of the mind depends upon physical
inheritance, the actual ability which is necessarily reflected in the
scores made by a person subjected to mental tests is determined by the
number and variety of nerve connections that have actually been made by
environment or training. Inheritance sets the maximum limit, but as a
matter of practice this maximum is never reached, or at least is so
seldom reached by any individual that it can hardly be said of any human
being that he has developed his mind in any direction to the utmost
limit of its capacity. What we actually measure in scientific mental
tests is a complex of natural or inherent abilities plus the results of
education and training; because, while it is possible to a considerable
extent to eliminate by properly devised tests a record of the
individual’s acquired knowledge, it is practically impossible to
distinguish between acquired and inherent mental ability.
Note carefully the distinction between mental _ability_ and mental
_capacity_. Mental ability in any individual is always less than his
mental capacity. If, therefore, the mental ability as determined by
scientific tests reaches the highest point on the scale of measurement,
whatever that may be, it follows that the mental capacity of the
individual making a perfect score is even greater than the scale is
designed to measure, and how much greater can only be determined by
setting up new tests based upon higher standards.
The result of any scientific test simply indicates the wealth of nerve
connections that are ready to be made when the stimulus necessary to
their establishment is applied. It must be understood that no one having
a sound claim to the possession of scientific knowledge can contend that
there are tests in existence that actually measure with complete
precision the inherited as distinguished from the acquired mental
characteristics. It is not conceded, however, that such precise
measurements cannot be made if at any time it becomes necessary or
desirable to do so. For all practical present-day purposes it is
sufficient that psychological tests shall measure mental qualities which
are manifested by the individual’s ability to express them by action or
speech. The classification of individuals relative to one another and
with reference to the possession of a particular mental ability or group
of abilities is, therefore, necessarily based upon their relative
ability to express in some intelligible and unmistakable fashion their
mental power and qualities.
Back of this power of expression may lie hidden and undreamed-of
capacities of which the individual himself may be vaguely conscious but
of which he can give no outward manifestation. It may be, for example,
that an individual is gifted with unusual powers of perception through
the eyes, ears, and the senses of touch, smell, and taste but that he is
deficient in nerve fibres and connections controlling the voluntary
muscles by which human beings translate sensations into action and
speech. This is hardly likely, as a physiological fact, to occur; the
individual born with rich nerve endings in one part of the physical body
is more likely to have a proportionate supply of nerve endings in all
other parts of the body than to be deficient in one part and amply
supplied in another. As rare exceptions, however, there are individuals
who in infancy have, through accident or disease, lost certain groups of
nerve connections while retaining unusually rich groups in other parts
of the body. There is, of course, the most famous case in modern
history, that of Helen Keller, whose auditory and optical nerve
connections were lost through disease in early infancy, but whose
unusual inherent mental capacity has been able to demonstrate itself
through other and extraordinary means as a result of training and
education.
But in ordinary life, if a man or a woman has some mental quality which
does not express itself in an action which other persons can see or hear
and know about, then it is not socially important. It is of consequence
only to the individual and it is of little social service to undertake
to measure these obscure and unexpressed and inexpressible capacities,
as they can never, until they find means of expression, affect the
individual’s ability or efficiency in any occupation. It is not that
these things cannot be measured. The case of Helen Keller is one
demonstration that they can be measured. Anything whatever that makes a
difference in the way different individuals act is conceivably
measurable, although it may not at the present time be capable of exact
calculation because it has not been worth anybody’s time and effort to
undertake to measure it.
To repeat, and possibly to make the preceding paragraphs more clear, let
us recapitulate the different mental qualities to which reference has
been made.
First, mental _capacity_. This is what the individual has inherited. It
is the size of the tank into which sensations, perceptions, all that
makes up the sum of knowledge, are poured throughout his life, by his
education and his experience. While this capacity in the case of any
individual can doubtless be measured, it is not necessary to measure it
precisely but merely to determine whether it is large enough for the
purposes in view.
Second, mental _ability_. This is the sum of experience and education
within the limits of the individual’s mental capacity. It is represented
by the individual’s ability to express himself in speech or action in
the performance of any one of a number of specific acts. This mental
ability can be quite definitely measured, and the possession of a
certain degree of mental ability demonstrates the possession of a mental
capacity greater than the ability which the individual has already
reached.
Third, _acquired knowledge_. It is not the purpose of tests of mental
capacity to measure acquired knowledge, although for many purposes it is
desirable to measure the individual’s acquired knowledge _in addition_
to his inherent ability, and in a still larger number of instances the
most practical way of arriving at a fairly accurate estimate of an
individual’s ability involves, among other tests, an examination into
the extent of the knowledge which he has acquired through observation or
training along lines definitely related to his particular occupation or
pursuit in life.
The ordinary and standardized school and university examinations,
civil-service examinations, etc., which have long been the accepted test
of the individual’s ability, do not, and do not purport to, measure
anything more than this last item, that of acquired knowledge. But while
certain gross dimensions of individual capacity may be roughly estimated
from the results of a written or an oral examination based entirely upon
the subject’s stored-up knowledge, it is a matter of common knowledge,
and almost every reader will be able to furnish examples out of his own
experience, that such tests are frequently totally misleading. Professor
Terman has reported on a comparison of the results of civil-service
examinations for policemen and firemen in a California city with
scientific tests applied to the individuals who successfully passed the
civil-service examinations. The results were in many instances
astounding. Men of such low mental capacity that they might almost be
classed as feeble-minded were found to have passed with a fair degree of
satisfaction the simple knowledge and physical tests set up by the city
and to have obtained appointments to these responsible posts as
guardians of the city’s property and lives.
While it is, therefore, the object of scientific mental tests to exclude
as far as possible the acquired abilities resulting from education and
environment and the knowledge that has been stored up through
observation and training, it is found in practice that for all ordinary
purposes it is sufficient to measure a complex of native and acquired
abilities. The purpose of these tests is, in short, to discover what the
individual is actually able to do, regardless of the source of that
ability, provided, however, that the test of ability is so devised as to
make a clear distinction between mere feats of memory and the actual
exercise of original thought.
Now, it must be obvious that for the measurement of anything so complex
and multi-dimensioned as the human mind, no single test or scale can be
established. One cannot measure the power of visual perception, for
example, by the same scale that is used to measure attentiveness or
initiative. As a matter of fact, psychologists no longer attempt to
classify human abilities as narrowly as was once the popular practice.
It is almost impossible for even an expert psychologist to be sure he
knows just what qualities and all the qualities any particular test
measures. This is because modern psychologists no longer group reactions
into general functions such as memory, attention, reason, etc., but
simply describe accurately the stimulus given and the conditions under
which it was given and then describe just as accurately what the
reaction is. The test may be built up, for example, to measure ability
to recognize and classify words, but it will also depend upon ability to
read the directions, ability to attend closely to horizontal and
vertical lines and upon many other correlated abilities. Any test may
measure primarily a particular mental dimension or ability but it is
quite certain that the resulting score will be influenced by numberless
other factors than the one that the examiner is most interested in
measuring.
But since one of the very best tests of intelligence is, of course, the
degree to which one is able to profit by social contacts and the breadth
and variety of the individual’s stored-up impressions, these extraneous
or collateral qualities, which every test also more or less successfully
measures in addition to the particular quality or mental dimension under
direct examination, furnish useful data in arriving at a conclusion
which is, after all, the main purpose sought, as to the individual’s
actual abilities and potential powers.
In order, however, to get at a really useful record of the mental
capacity of an individual, we must apply a variety of tests and out of
the sum total of the results of these tests we are able much more
accurately to gauge the degree of possession of the qualities for which
we are seeking than could possibly be done by any single test, no matter
how skilfully constructed. Here again science confronts the popular
human demand for a panacea. But just as in medicine only the quack
offers a cure-all, so, in other fields, science has no single standard
to offer by which all results in a given field may be accomplished, and
psychology cannot now or at any time in the future pretend that by a
single method or a single measurement mental capacity can be gauged.
To come back to an analogy used in a previous chapter, you cannot
measure all the qualities of an automobile with a ten-foot rod. Your
ten-foot rod will tell you whether the wheel base is 120 inches or more
or less than that. It will not tell you how much above or below 120
inches. If it be necessary for you to know that, you must provide
yourself with a longer or more minutely graded measuring implement; but
because the ten-foot rod does not at a glance disclose to you all that
you wish to know about a particular automobile, you do not, therefore,
either discredit the ten-foot rod as a measuring implement or declare
that the automobile cannot be measured except by the unaided human eye.
The limitations of the ten-foot rod are perfectly obvious to you; and
so, too, are the complexities of the automobile, which require a variety
of instruments and tests for their proper gauging and measurement. So
before you undertake to form a judgment as to the ability of a
particular automobile, you either measure it yourself or, as a matter of
practice, you have it measured for you by a competent engineer. You do
not necessarily inquire, if you have confidence in the engineer, as to
precisely what dimensions and what materials he found in every part of
the car, but you respect his conclusions, knowing that they are based
upon the most precise and accurate measurements possible with the aid of
such instruments as science has been able to devise, and you are
satisfied that the conclusions form an accurate estimate of the
machine’s qualities.
The engineer who sets out to measure an automobile in all of its
capacities and powers must provide himself with tachometers for
measuring the engine’s revolutions, dynamometers for testing its
tractive force, micrometer calipers for gauging the bore and the stroke,
thermometers for measuring its temperature, galvanometers for testing
its magneto and battery, and hundreds of other instruments, the readings
of which must be assembled and studied by means of complex, comparative
mathematical formulas before he can tell you what a particular
automobile will do.
The human mind, it must be apparent to every reader, is not less complex
than the automobile. On the contrary, it is infinitely more complex and
subject to an infinitely wider range of variations. As has been pointed
out above, it is not necessary for practical, every-day purposes to
measure every possible variation and every one of the infinite number of
dimensions of any human mind in order to ascertain the individual’s
ability to succeed in the ordinary pursuits of life. But even in our
ordinary, every-day affairs and contacts, in the simplest forms of
employment, there are called into play such a number of different sorts
of ability and mental power that there must be applied, if one is really
to know of what a particular individual is capable, a large variety of
tests of different kinds for measuring different powers. And for the
mental measurement of individuals whose work calls for the highest
development and capacity, a still larger variety of tests must be
applied.
It is not always possible—in fact, it is extremely difficult—to devise
tests that do not to some degree measure the mental content resulting
from education and experience, in the effort to measure the mental
capacity which limits and controls one’s education and experience. The
qualities that determine capacity are inherent in the individual. One is
born with them or is not born with them. In their whole infinite variety
they are not all possessed by any one individual, and the particular
grouping of mental qualities which any one person inherits is probably
not possessed by any other person living or who has ever lived. Yet
while individuals differ so completely that it can truthfully be said
that Nature never cast two persons in the same mold, yet there are
qualities possessed by all intelligent persons, the simpler and more
elemental expressions of which are absolutely essential to intelligent
life and existence, and these can be so grouped, classified, measured,
and standardized as to provide a scale whereby the inherent capacity
with respect to these important and essential qualities may be
determined equally in the case of the totally illiterate, untrained
labourer or artisan and the highly trained, educated product of a
university postgraduate course.
As a matter of practical, every-day common sense, one does not expect to
find, nor does one find, except as a rare exception, an individual
engaged in menial or purely physical labour who is endowed with inherent
mental capacity comparable to that of the university graduate. A person
possessing such capacities moves out from the ranks of labour in spite
of educational handicaps; the history of American business and industry
is full of the romantic stories of men who have achieved success as
organizers and administrators, though in many cases absolutely
illiterate. Properly applied psychological tests would pass over all or
nearly all of the acquired knowledge of such individuals about their
particular business and related matters, and neglect also, the bulk, at
least, of the acquired knowledge of the university man, and so compare
merely what might be called two naked brains, the native intelligence of
each being the only thing to be measured. As has been pointed out, it is
difficult or almost impossible to devise tests that entirely strip the
layers of acquired knowledge from the raw mental powers beneath them,
but for the practical purposes of the application of psychology and
psychological tests in the affairs of every-day life, this can be done
within a reasonable percentage of error.
CHAPTER IV
STANDARDS FOR MENTAL TESTS
To test or measure mental capacity or any of the dimensions and powers
of the human mind, two preliminary steps are necessary.
First, it must be determined what particular powers or qualities of the
mind it is desired to measure.
Second, there must be prepared a standard or scale that is, primarily at
least, adapted to the measurement of those particular qualities.
While it is, in practice, as has been heretofore pointed out, impossible
entirely to segregate a particular mental quality or power from all the
other abilities and capacities possessed by a particular individual, it
is possible to select certain characteristics or abilities which, by the
degree of their presence or absence, give a fair index of certain mental
dimensions or capacities, and to devise tests that, when taken together,
will measure these “key-abilities” and so reflect the general ability
and capacity of the subject. The standards by which the results of such
tests are gauged must necessarily, therefore, be such as have been
shown, by experiment and experience, to give the closest possible
measurement of the individual’s ability in these particular directions,
by enabling the examiner to compare each subject’s performance under the
test, or series of tests, with the records made under precisely similar
tests by individuals and groups of known ability.
Mental capacity tests may be devised that will measure certain mental
qualities of an infant who has not yet learned to talk, and by thus
providing a comparison between this particular child’s capacities and
the average of children of the same age, enable parents and physicians
to determine in what direction efforts looking toward its mental
development may most helpfully be undertaken. Thus we may test the
infant’s power of observation and perception of shapes, of colours, of
sounds and familiar objects before it is able to talk, measuring these
by standards derived from experience with similar tests applied to a
large number of healthy, normal infants, and by this means determining
whether the subject is above or below the normal average for its age and
if so in what respects.
At the other end of the scale of mental development, let us assume, is
the possessor of the degree of Doctor of Philosophy from any of the
great universities, since this is the principal degree the possession of
which tends to show the possession of unusual mental powers, if not
necessarily of wisdom. By applying to a large number of Ph.D.’s tests
which are designed to require for their successful performance the
utmost use of all their inherent mental abilities, and arriving at an
average of performance by tabulating and comparing the degrees or
percentages of perfection achieved by all of the individuals so tested,
a standard is set up by which to measure the mental capacity of any
individual or group of individuals of superior, or presumably superior,
intelligence. By such a standard there may be measured also the mental
capacity of men and women who have never seen the inside of a
university, but whose education has been acquired in the course of their
business and professional activities. This is so because _what is
measured is not acquired knowledge, but the ability to acquire
knowledge_, which is quite a different thing.
The simplest way to measure the capacity of a circular tank is to pump
it full of water and then measure the water as it is drawn off. But it
would be absurd to contend that because there has never been any water
pumped into the tank it is therefore impossible to determine how much
water it would hold. And what the Doctor of Philosophy has got out of
his university course is comparable to the water in the tank. The
university may have assisted, and if its faculty were competent
undoubtedly did assist him, in discovering earlier in life than he
otherwise would have discovered the actual capacity of his mental tank.
But there are probably as many men of equal mental capacity whose mental
tanks have never been filled with the particular kind of intellectual
fluid that the Ph.D. carries about with him, whose capacity there is no
other means of measuring than by the application of mental tests based
upon the known capacities of Doctors of Philosophy.
The process of measuring the human mind is, indeed, precisely like the
process of measuring an automobile by an engineer, as was pointed out in
the preceding chapter. Back of the tests that are applied to the
automobile to determine its abilities and capacities there must lie a
mass of very definite, exact knowledge of all automobiles or all types
of automobiles already in existence and whose capacities and limitations
are already definitely known. It is of no service to ascertain that the
engine cylinders are of four-inch bore and that the piston has a
six-inch stroke, unless it is well known what the possession of a given
number of cylinders of that particular bore and stroke signifies as to
the ability or capacity of an automobile engine. That knowledge has been
acquired by the observation and measurement over a period of years of
the performance of many automobiles of varying cylinder sizes and number
of cylinders, and the comparison of each size and type with all the
others.
Similarly, it is of no service to apply a test of any kind to a human
being unless we have, in the first place, determined just what
particular abilities or capacities we want to measure, and, in the
second place, possessed ourselves of knowledge as to the significance of
these capacities, after they have been measured.
Here, again, the reader should keep constantly in mind the warnings set
forth in the preceding chapter and try to think of mental abilities and
qualities not as detached, separate, sharply defined parts of a mental
whole (as the engine, transmission and bearings of the wheels of an
automobile are detachable, separate entities) but rather as qualities so
intermingled and connected by an infinite number of attachments to all
the other mental qualities and abilities that no one particular ability
can be measured separately or even positively delimited by any sort of
test. Even if this could be done in the case of one individual, the
process would have to be repeated in each separate, individual case, as
in no two human beings is there found exactly the same combination and
correlation of the manifold manifestations of conscious sensation and
thought that together make up the human intelligence.
But having determined just what qualities and abilities it is desired to
measure, we must set up a standard of measurement by which to compare
the indicated ability of each individual examined, or we shall have
nothing as a result of our test but a mass of information, of the
significance of which we cannot possibly be aware. This standard, for
some purposes, may be merely a composite record of the performances of a
particular group or class examined simultaneously and under the same
conditions. That is to say, if all that is required is to determine
which individual of a group has the greatest ability in certain
directions (and by inference the greatest capacity for further
development along similar lines) then all that is necessary is to apply
a test that will give a comparative measurement of the intelligence of
this particular group. But if the purpose is to ascertain how a
particular individual, or the average of a group of individuals,
compares in particular kinds of capacity with the average or the most
highly developed persons of the same status, education, occupation, or
age, then the standard by which the subject must be measured must be one
derived from the observation and measurement of the mental capacities of
as large a number as possible of individuals engaged in all sorts of
occupations and of all degrees and grades of educational attainment. And
even where the purpose is merely to determine the relative
qualifications and capacities of a particular limited group, it is as a
matter of practice desirable, it might almost be said necessary, to
compare the performance of each individual of the group with a standard
previously fixed and determined as a result of a much broader series of
observations and experiments than can be made within the limits of any
group to which it is practicable to apply any given set of tests as a
whole.
This is true for two reasons. First, without such an outside standard of
comparison all that is determined by the application of even the most
carefully devised tests to any group is that certain individuals are
more and certain others are less able in particular ways than the
average of the group. The net result is of service, but of nowhere near
the service of a record of the same individuals’ performances graded in
accordance with their approach to conformity with a universal standard.
For example, one might take two, three, or a dozen automobiles on a
speedway and quite readily determine which was the fastest and which the
slowest, but unless one were possessed of certain standards of
measurements that in themselves have no relation whatever to
automobiles, the net result would be of little consequence and of no
value whatever in comparing any one of these cars with another
automobile that had not taken part in the particular test. In this case,
two standards are requisite, namely, distance and time. The length of
the course must be definitely ascertained. The time required for each
automobile under test to cover the course must be accurately recorded.
Now we have a record of performance that compares at all times with
universal standards. If we add another automobile to the group we do not
need again to run all the cars, including the new one, along the
speedway to determine where the added member of the group ranks with
reference to the others; we can apply to it alone a test based upon the
universal standards of time and distance with which we have already
compared the others, and the new one falls instantly into its proper
rank among its fellows. So, too, we are enabled by this means to compare
any member of the group with any automobile anywhere in the world, the
performance of which has been gauged by these same universal standards
of time and space, and we are thus able to tell, not only how each
particular car ranks with reference to the limited group of cars, but
how it ranks with reference to all cars of all kinds or of a particular
type so far as these have been tested by the universal standard.
So in testing groups of individuals as to their intelligence or mental
capacity, the use of universal standards of comparison makes the
relative grading of the members of the group with reference to each
other just as easy and simple as though the only standard were that of
the group’s collective performance, and at the same time furnishes a
record of the performance of each individual member of the group by
which he or she may be readily compared with the members of any new
group to which he or she may be at some subsequent time attached, and at
all times with the general run of men or women of the same or differing
social, economic, vocational, or educational status.
It is in the determination of these universal standards and the
preparation of tests, the results of which indicate the individual’s
relative approximation to these standards, that the scientific training
of the psychologist comes principally into play. Rough standards for
testing the more obvious mental capacities might be set up by any
intelligent person who would take the pains to collect the essential
data. These standards would not, however, be universal unless they were
based upon research and experimentation covering as broad a field as
that in which the psychologists have been working for many years. Nor
would they, except by accident, be as simple and as accurate as the
universal standards compiled by scientifically trained persons. For just
as the average untrained individual cannot form an accurate or even an
approximately accurate estimate of another person’s character and
abilities by observation alone, so persons untrained in the study of the
human mind are prone to be misled by the obvious and to lay undue
emphasis upon external indications which do not, as a matter of
scientific fact, actually signify what they are popularly believed to
indicate. The scientific psychologist’s training enables him to
eliminate to a large extent the non-essentials and to include, in the
establishment of standards of mental measurement and the preparation of
tests or methods of applying these standards, many facts which, to the
untrained mind, do not at once present themselves as important elements.
Even in the simplest of mechanical operations every workman knows that
it is not safe to trust to the accuracy of homemade measuring
implements. In the absence of a try-square made by a responsible
manufacturer in conformity with the universal standard right angle, even
the most expert carpenter will refuse to run the risk of error until he
has either obtained a new standard from the hardware store or by the
application of geometrical science and the exercise of careful and
painstaking technical skill constructed for himself a new try-square
that conforms, without the variation of a hair’s-breadth, to the
universal standard to which he must work. Still less would a good
machinist undertake to gauge the close tolerances of an automobile
bearing with a homemade micrometer. He knows it is not sufficient merely
to have a perfect fit of this particular bearing, which might be worked
out by rule of thumb, but that it is essential that the dimensions of
the bearing, down to within a thousandth of an inch, must conform to the
universal standards for automobile bearings, and that the best implement
with which to test the degree of conformity to the universal standard is
the standardized micrometer, prepared by specialized methods and
produced only by the exercise of highly trained technical skill. Once
given such implements of precision, any good workman can readily apply
all the scientific intelligence that went into the devising of the
standards and the preparation of the methods of applying them.
So, once there are at hand scientifically devised standards with which
the mental qualities of any individual may be gauged and compared, and
tests have been prepared for the scientific measurement of these
qualities with reference to the established standards, the application
of these tests to individuals may be made by anybody sufficiently
intelligent to grasp their purport and follow directions exactly. It is
not necessary, in other words, even for the testing of the most complex
and highly developed mental powers, that the actual application of the
test be made by the scientific psychologist. It is possible, and it has
been the purpose in the preparation of the tests which are presented in
this book, to devise mental tests which, if applied precisely as
indicated in the instructions accompanying them, will yield the same
results in the hands of the wholly untrained examiner as though the
actual administration of the tests had been made by the scientist who
devised them.
It must not be thought that the result of any test is always 100 per
cent. accurate. Even good workmen sometimes make errors in the use of
the most precise scientific instruments. Even though constructed with
the most painstaking care, according to the truest scientific formulas
and by men of the highest technical training and skill, the mechanical
instruments of precision are occasionally found to be inaccurate. If
this is the case with material implements and dimensions which are
finite, concrete, and tangible, how much greater is the liability to
error in dealing with the intangible, infinite, and more or less
abstract qualities of the human mind. The scientific psychologist is,
after all, merely another human being, and as such equally liable with
all other human beings to human error. Of no man or woman can it be said
that he or she is infallible, and as every one who applies a
psychological test is human, and so liable to error either in its
application or the reading of its result, conclusions drawn from the
results of any particular test should be accepted as accurate only when
they have been checked by the results of other tests applied to the same
subject, and substantial conformity of the results of one to those of
the others has been obtained. For this reason, among others, no single
test can be expected to yield definite and complete information as to
any particular individual’s mental capacity or ability, whether gauged
by the universal standard or by group comparison. It has, therefore,
been necessary to establish, as preliminary to the preparation of the
Mentimeter tests, a variety of standards, and to prepare a considerable
number of tests under each of these standards, all or most of which must
be used in each instance if anything approaching scientific accuracy is
to be reflected in the resulting scores.
As has previously been pointed out, however, the scientific method is
incomparably freer from the liability to error than any method of
determining human ability and capacity that depends upon unaided
personal observation. How completely this has been demonstrated in
practice in a wide range of fields is set forth in subsequent chapters.
To yield results of maximum accuracy, however, scientific mental tests
must be used only with reference to the standards on which they are
based.
Lest it has not been made clear already to the reader how the method of
establishing mental standards of comparison operates, let us again
briefly try to point out just what is meant by a universal standard of
mental capacity.
It is a comparatively simple matter, involving merely a considerable
amount of painstaking search and the expenditure of a good deal of time
to find, let us say, a thousand engineers, each of whom has demonstrated
in the course of his professional practice that he possesses unusual
ability to project and design bridges and viaducts. Let us suppose that
we wish to take the average capacity of these thousand engineers as the
standard by which to measure every budding engineer in the technical
schools with reference to the capacity of each to become a planner and
designer of bridges and viaducts.
The scientific psychologist must first familiarize himself with the
essentials of that combination of artistic, technical, and mathematical
skill which makes a great engineer. This is not a simple or easy task to
begin with, and to accomplish it calls for the exercise of highly
trained mental powers on the part of the investigator as well as a
thorough understanding of the operation of the various processes of the
human mind. Then there must be devised methods by which, as simply and
yet as precisely as possible, each of these thousand engineers of known
capacity may be tested as to the degree in which he possesses the
various abilities, the sum total of which is the measure of his capacity
as an engineer. It may be necessary to make these tests over a period of
years, and the tests themselves may and probably will require frequent
revision and amendment as it is found in the course of their application
that some of them are unnecessary and others inadequate. If it is found
that any of the tests so applied is readily fulfilled by every subject
examined, the effort is made to increase the difficulty of the test,
until it has reached a stage where the perfect performance of all its
requirements is barely within the reach of the ablest and most competent
of all the engineers under examination. Indeed, some of the tests may be
so difficult that none of those examined may conform precisely to the
set requirements. In respect of some classes of tests this is, in fact,
desirable, as what is being sought is an average of group capacity, and
if any considerable percentage exhibit a capacity greater than can be
measured by the tests set there arises an element of doubt as to the
accuracy of the average combined score, since some of those contributing
to it have obviously greater mental ability than can be measured by the
particular scale used.
Once, however, tests have been applied to the supposititious thousand
expert engineers, and the performance of each of them in each test has
been given its proper place in the scale, and an average struck, there
has come into existence a preliminary standard; which, however, before
being offered for general use in the testing of engineering students and
others, must first be tried out by experimental application on as many
individuals and groups as are available, and their performance with
reference to the standard checked up by all other means available. It
may be, and quite frequently is, the case that this preliminary try-out
of a standard results in the elimination of some of its elements, the
modification of others, and the necessary preparation of a new series of
tests based upon the altered standards. But in this fashion, in the
course of time and as the result of the combined effort of many trained
minds, there is at last set up a standard which is substantially
universal in its application, and by which it may readily be determined
whether or not any particular individual possesses the mental capacity
and particular abilities that have been found to be necessary if he is
to develop into a competent engineer.
As psychological tests are more and more widely applied and there is
consequently accumulated an increasing volume of data which can be
collected, classified, and compared, standards become either more firmly
established as a result of experience or subject to modification in the
light of the wider range of knowledge. In science nothing is final. What
psychology offers to-day is a method of mental tests, the soundness of
which in principle is unchallenged, though the application in detail of
these principles is subject to constant improvement and refinement.
CHAPTER V
DIFFERENT TYPES OF MENTAL TESTS
The character of any mental test or series of tests is determined
primarily, of course, by the purpose for which the test is applied, and,
secondarily, by the known or obvious mental limitations of the
individual under examination.
Mental tests thus classify themselves, in the first instance, into as
many different classes as there are specific purposes to be served by
their use, particular kinds or classes of mental ability and capacity to
be ascertained, or degrees of previously known mental limitations. Each
one of these classifications cuts across all other classifications at
some point, so that it is, as a matter of practice, impossible to
tabulate or catalogue mental tests in such a way as to separate them
into sharply defined or permanently detached groups or classes.
Broadly, all mental tests subdivide at first into tests devised for use
with persons of normal mental capacity and development and tests for
intelligences that are not fully developed. This is, perhaps, the chief
permanent and fixed classification of intelligence tests that can be
made, for in a group of tests for the sub-normal mind would be included
the entire series of tests adapted for the examination of the mental
powers of children of all ages, from earliest infancy to maturity. In
fact, the standard method of rating or grading adults of undeveloped or
sub-normal intelligence is to classify them by their mental age as
compared with the performance of normal children of the same age.
Thus, a man or woman of twenty-five who is able to make a high score in
tests which are passed successfully by normal children of eight, but who
fails when subjected to tests which a normal child of ten should pass
easily, is rated approximately as of mental age nine.
Cutting across this classification is the arbitrary classification of
tests adopted in the psychological work of the United States Army, in
which every officer and enlisted man is classified as to his relative
intelligence by means of scientific mental tests. The Army tests are of
three principal kinds. There is a series of tests, known as the Alpha,
designed to measure the intelligence of individuals who can read and
write the English language. For those who are either illiterate or whose
ability to read or write is confined to some language other than
English, there is the Beta series of tests. These may register as high a
degree of intelligence as the Alpha tests; the results are merely not
expressed in terms of the English language. The third classification in
the Army is the individual tests, applied to those who fail to make a
satisfactory score under either the Alpha or the Beta tests. This is, in
its Army application, a system of tests for the sub-normal adult
intelligence. Thus the broad classification first set forth above, in
substance actually holds in the classification of the Army tests.
Under each of these two broad classifications, and particularly under
the first (since in general, every-day practice it is of little service
to undertake to analyze minutely the capacities and limitations of the
sub-normal mind except in the application of these tests to growing
children) there are many possible subdivisions of mental tests, based
upon the particular mental qualities which it is desired to measure.
First and most useful generally are general intelligence tests, which
must usually be subdivided into a series of related tests. Then, for
varying purposes, such as the examination of candidates for particular
classes of employment requiring special ability or capacity, there may
be applied speed tests, accuracy tests, perception tests, coördination
tests, memory tests, mathematical tests, and a wide variety of others.
These are tests which primarily measure the subject’s ability to perform
certain specific acts under pre-determined conditions, the determination
of capacity in excess of that actually demonstrated under test depending
upon the facility and accuracy with which the subject responds to the
conditions of these tests. Of course, every scientific mental test is
based upon the performance of certain acts, since it is only through
action of some sort, whether by speech, writing, or the performance of a
manual operation, that any one is able to express his mental ability at
any time.
But while it is relatively a simple matter to devise tests that
satisfactorily indicate the subject’s possession of the more obvious
mental powers indicated by such tests as those last listed above, there
is another class of mental tests, designed primarily to indicate or
determine the possession of the more abstract qualities, the
manifestation of which through the individual’s simple and ordinary
actions is less obvious to the untrained observer. This is the class of
tests that are designed to measure the degree in which an individual
possesses such qualities as moral sense, form perception, the power to
reason from cause to effect, poetic discrimination, ability to
understand complicated instructions, judgment, sense of the right
relationship of things and ideas. It is as important, if one is to
arrive at a true measure of any individual’s mental capacity, that he be
tested as to his possession of these more or less abstract qualities, as
it is to determine his possession of concrete abilities. In other words,
the normal mind of an intelligent adult is capable of dealing
intelligently with ideas and abstractions. The mentality that does not
respond with a certain degree of readiness to ideal conceptions is to
that extent sub-normal. The only possible way of determining the
possession of unusual or super-normal mental capacity is by means of the
demonstration that its possessor grasps readily and responds
unhesitatingly to the presentation of abstract concepts.
The demonstration itself must, of course, be concrete. Unless the
individual possessing extraordinary mental power is able, as Kipling
phrases it, to
. . . . press the logic of a fact
To its ultimate conclusion in unmitigated act.
it is of no social consequence whatever that he may possess the mental
catholicity of a Shakespeare. There is no place in the modern world for
“mute, inglorious Miltons.”
Indeed, it may be questioned whether a “mute, inglorious Milton” ever
existed. The world is full of people who regard themselves as
“unappreciated.” Everyone is familiar with the unfortunate type that is
forever seeking sympathy, constantly on the lookout for friendly
shoulders on which to sob out the sad tale of the world’s harshness.
Under psychological tests the preponderant majority of this type of
individual is clearly demonstrated to be mentally deficient or
sub-normal in some important respect. The occasional individual of
normal mental capacity who fails to demonstrate that capacity by the
performance of specific acts is merely mentally lazy. In other words, it
may be set forth as a sound conclusion, capable of scientific proof,
that mental capacity in the healthy, normal individual always finds
means of expressing itself in concrete and socially useful ways,
whenever its possessor actually desires so to utilize his mental powers.
In the devising and preparation of tests intended to measure the less
obvious of the mental powers, a considerable degree of ingenuity and the
greatest amount of scientific care and technical skill is required. To
the person untrained in psychology tests designed to measure the
possession of the more abstract powers frequently look childish, if not
positively silly. Since it is essential, in the case of Army officers
and men, to determine as nearly as it may be done by simple and easily
applied tests their possession of a wide variety of mental qualities,
some of the elements of the Army Alpha test appear to the concrete type
of mind to be futile, if not absurd. But any comprehensive system of
mental tests must include, as there have been included in the Mentimeter
tests presented in this volume, a considerable proportion which do not
on their face appear to be directed toward the disclosure of the
ordinary and useful mental capacities. It is of vital importance, if the
results of any given series are to give an adequate picture of the
actual abilities and possibilities of the subject examined, that tests
of this character be included among them.
Each of the possible classes of mental tests may be set to any one of an
infinite number of standards. General intelligence tests, for example,
may be set to the standard of the average university graduate, so that
the result when applied to any individual gives a fair estimate of the
subject’s intelligence as compared with that of those who have
demonstrated the possession of mental capacity sufficient to complete
satisfactorily a university course. Or the standard may be that of the
average lawyer, the average high school pupil, the average normal child
of any age or school grade, the average skilled mechanic, the average
labourer, or the average child below the age of speech. And, in
practice, what is measured is, after all, general intelligence.
Intelligence, as has been frequently pointed out, while it does not
depend upon the individual’s ability to read and write, is so generally
accompanied by the definite and intimate knowledge of the symbols which
we call letters, words, and figures, and of their meaning, that in the
great majority of cases in which it is desired to apply the test of
intelligence this can best be done, or at least most readily be done, by
the use of these familiar symbols; in other words, by tests which
involve only the acts of reading and writing. If intelligence may be
defined as the intellectual power of adaptation to environment, a
complete test of intelligence determines the individual’s ability to
recognize the situation in which he finds himself, perceive his own
relation to the situation, analyze it, and arrive at a conclusion as to
what he should do next; then put that conclusion into effect by means of
a concrete act. Thus one may learn a great deal about an individual’s
mental capacity by observing his conduct when he misses a train. But
since it is not practicable to apply this method of inquiry in every
case, the next best thing is to ask the question, “What would you do if
you missed your train?” To ask this question of a subject is next best
to seeing him in such a situation. He must exercise his sense of reality
upon it, size it up and plan his reaction.
Since all life is made up of situations in which the individual places
or finds himself and from which he must extricate himself, and since the
broader the mental capacity, the more easily will the individual meet
situations as they arise, the ideal mental test is one that presents a
situation such as does or might occur in real life, and requires the
subject to extricate himself, or at least to indicate his first and
immediate impulse toward action should such a situation arise.
Since the purpose of mental tests is primarily to determine intelligence
rather than the possession of physical qualities, it is conceivable
that, in many situations, properly devised questions may give a fairer
view of the subject’s mental capacity than would observation of the same
individual in action in a real situation. Thus a person of the highest
intelligence and mental capacity might be deficient in physical courage,
so that if we could observe him in action on unexpectedly meeting a
highway robber armed with a revolver we might be able to deduce from his
actions absolutely no criteria upon which to form a sound judgment as to
his mental powers; the same subject, asked the question, “What would you
do if held up by a footpad?” might exhibit in his answer unusual ability
to perceive quickly and reason soundly to an intelligent conclusion—in
other words, to demonstrate his possession of considerable mental
capacity.
All properly constructed mental tests are, therefore, in effect,
attempts to reproduce or project upon a laboratory scale situations such
as the subject is or may be called upon to meet in actual life. It is
obvious that ability to analyze quickly and propound immediately the
correct course of action when the situation presented is unusual and
outside the range of every-day experience indicates clearly the
possession of mental ability greater than is required to meet only
ordinary and familiar situations. The theory of the mental test as a
reproduction in miniature of actual situations is thus commented on by
Daniel W. La Rue:
“It is useless to ask a savage what he would do if he missed his train,
or an old bachelor what he would do when the baby cried, or a green
soldier how he will behave when a shell bursts near him. Further, just
which of many millions of situations are so important, or so typical, or
so closely correlated with a web of others, similar or dissimilar, that
they should be admitted among the select few that form a test? The
answer is coming as a slow deposit from the stream of experience and
experiment.”
Doctor La Rue, pursuing the same theme, points out with sound philosophy
the necessity for grading mental tests to fit the apparent or previously
known mental level of the subject.
“We must beware how we use a high-level test to measure low-level
intelligence. If our scales are set to weigh nothing less than a hundred
pounds or upward, we cannot tell accurately the weight of an
eighty-pound man. In particular, since devisers of tests are usually
expert in the use of literary symbols, and since ordinary test
conditions limit seriously the possible variety of responses open to the
subject, we slide easily into the belief that a dextrous manipulation of
symbols is the prime display of intelligence. No doubt it is true that
in an ideally developed brain the language centres (tracts) are well
webbed up with every other trait-tract. Ideally, to experience anything
is to be able to utter it. But the stammering lover is matched by the
stammering thinker, and there certainly may be intelligent action
without the power to put it adequately into words. Probably Cæsar is the
only great general who could describe a battle as finely as he could
plan it or fight it. Words without deeds, deeds without words: we must
be prepared for both. Our old test question, ‘Why should we judge a
person by what he does rather than by what he says?’ applies to the test
itself.”
Because of the fact that there is a percentage of persons who, either
through unfamiliarity with the English language or lack of skill in
expressing themselves through word and number symbols, do not respond to
tests based on the use of words, any comprehensive scheme of mental
tests must contain a proportion of tests the response to which may be
made without the use of written, printed, or spoken words. Of such a
nature were the Army Beta tests, already referred to, and there will be
found in the Mentimeter tests presented in this volume a considerable
number of forms that fall into this class of tests. To the person
accustomed to dealing chiefly with words and ideas, it is not always
readily apparent that proof of a high degree of intelligence can be
obtained by means of tests which do not employ these familiar symbols.
As a matter of practical fact, however, results which check up very
closely with every other means of determining the subject’s intelligence
were quite uniformly obtained through the use of the Beta tests in the
Army, and similar success has been achieved through the application of
tests of the same general character in industry and education.
There is another general class of tests to which only passing reference
need be made here. This is the class of trade tests, in which by a
combination of oral examination and specific performance the precise
ability or degree of skill of the subject in a given occupation or trade
is determined. Although frequently confused with psychological tests,
this class of tests does not properly come within the scope of mental
tests in the sense of being chiefly measurements of intelligence. It has
been found, however, in practice that the individual’s native
intelligence or inherent mental capacity has, in most occupations, a
very decided bearing upon the degree of skill which he or she can
attain, even in the simpler mechanical operations. Because of this fact,
as well as because the value of trade tests in industry is of increasing
importance, some of the principles underlying the construction of trade
tests and their application are discussed briefly in a later chapter.
CHAPTER VI
MENTAL TESTS IN THE ARMY
The United States of America entered the World War under conditions of
emergency which demanded the maximum of efficiency in the work of
military preparation, with the minimum of effort. France was virtually
broken; England was tired; Russia was demoralized and disrupted, and
Italy was doing very little more than holding her own. The mere drilling
and conditioning of the nearly three millions of men which the Nation
had called to arms were not sufficient to meet the requirements of the
task assumed. America was expected to develop, almost overnight, a
fighting force capable of meeting and defeating a Teutonic military
machine which had come to be known as the most powerful and skillful in
the world.
The gravity of the situation forbade experiments with hit-or-miss
methods. It was imperative that no round pegs be placed in square holes.
Each one of those nearly three million American soldiers had to be
placed where he would be of greatest service. Some simple, quick method
of distribution was needed. It was perfectly obvious that these men
could not be equally good material for soldiers or officers. Out of so
great a number it was reasonably certain that men could be found
especially qualified to perform each one of the particular tasks which
the infinitely complex scheme of organization of a modern army requires.
It was in accordance with the law of probabilities that there would be
contained in this mass of soldier material men highly skilled in every
one of the more than seven hundred distinct and specific trades and
handicrafts in which artisans were needed for the successful maintenance
of the fighting forces in the field. The drag-net of the selective
service system was certain to gather in its meshes men who were natural
leaders and many more men who could only follow. From every city block,
every crossroads hamlet, every village street would come those who could
teach and those who could only learn. It was inevitable, moreover, that
in this huge aggregation of human beings there would be a percentage of
the wholly unteachable, the mentally stunted, fit only to be hewers of
wood and drawers of water and sure to be a detriment and handicap to any
military organization whatsoever.
In a lesser degree the same generalizations applied to the human raw
material admitted to the various officers’ training courses; even though
a fairly high minimum of educational attainment was required of all
candidates, there was bound to be a wide range of military value between
the best and the poorest of this officer material.
Psychology, the science that deals with the human mind, offered the only
possible short-cut to the ultimate goal of the placement of every
individual in the Army at the point where his efficiency would be
greatest. The processes of the selective draft had weeded out the larger
portion of the physically unfit. The draft questionnaire, as finally
revised, provided for a rough preliminary classification of men
according to their own estimates of themselves. But something more was
needed—some system for passing the entire Army, officers and men,
through a series of graduated sieves, as it were, so cunningly devised,
and operated with such scientific precision as to tag, label, and index
each and every one so exactly that as little as possible would be left
for experience to disclose as to his qualifications for his particular
part of the Army’s job.
On April 6, 1917, the United States Congress declared the existence of a
state of war with Germany. On that same date there was being held in
Boston a meeting of a group of psychologists known as the
“Experimentalists,” among whom was Dr. Robert M. Yerkes, president of
the American Psychological Association. On receipt of news that America
was at last at war, all regular business of the meeting was suspended
and those present resolved themselves into an informal committee to
consider ways and means by which the psychologists of America could best
serve their country.
On the evening of that day, as the result of many conferences, the
president of the association asked the council to authorize him to
appoint committees on various phases of applied psychology for the
purpose: first, of enlisting the coöperation of every trained
psychologist in America, including the entire membership of the American
Psychological Association; and, second, of determining precisely what
service the psychologists could best perform. The proposal met with an
immediate response and Doctor Yerkes and his committee went to work.
The Army General Staff was skeptical at first, but Doctor Yerkes and his
associates overcame this skepticism and by midsummer of 1917 the
Division of Psychology of the Medical Department of the United States
Army, with Doctor Yerkes at its head with the rank of major, was
actively functioning, and the Committee on Classification of Personnel
in the Army had been established and was demonstrating, to the surprise
of the General Staff and the War Department, the possibility of
determining by scientific means the relative military value and proper
military assignment of the officers and men of the Army. By the end of
1917 psychology, as applied to war, had so far justified itself that the
Surgeon General reported complete success in achieving the desired
results, which he stated, concisely, to be: (a) to aid in segregating
the mentally incompetent, (b) to classify men according to their mental
ability, and (c) to assist in selecting competent men for responsible
positions.
The programme of the Division of Psychology of the Medical Department
included mental tests for all recruits during a two-weeks detention
period. These intelligence ratings, as they were officially termed,
aimed to aid:
(1) In the discovery of men whose superior intelligence suggested their
consideration for advancement;
(2) In the prompt selection and assignment to development battalions of
men who were so inferior mentally that they were suited only for special
assignments;
(3) In forming organizations of uniform mental strength where such
uniformity was desired;
(4) In forming organizations of superior mental strength where such
superiority was demanded by the nature of the work to be performed;
(5) In selecting suitable men for various army duties or for special
training in colleges or technical schools;
(6) In the early formation of training groups within a company in order
that each man might receive instruction and drill according to his
ability to profit thereby;
(7) In the early recognition of slow-thinking minds which might
otherwise be mistaken for stubborn or disobedient characters;
(8) In eliminating from the army those men whose low-grade intelligence
rendered them either a burden or a menace to the service.
In three systems of tests in use between May 1 and October 1, 1918, in
the United States Army, approximately one million three hundred thousand
men were tested.
The test first applied to all, men and officers, who could read English,
was known as the “Alpha.” This was a group test. It required only fifty
minutes and could be given to groups as large as 500. The test material
was so arranged that each of its 212 questions might be answered without
writing, merely by underlining, crossing out or checking. The papers
later were scored by means of stencils, so that nothing was left to the
personal judgment of those who did the scoring. The mental rating which
resulted therefore was wholly objective.
The “Beta” test was used for foreigners and illiterates. It could be
given to groups of from 75 to 200 and required approximately fifty
minutes. Success in the Beta test did not depend upon knowledge of
English, as the instructions were given entirely by pantomime and
demonstration. It measured general intelligence through the use of
concrete or picture material instead of the printed language. It also
was scored by stencils and yielded an objective rating.
Both the Alpha and the Beta tests were known as Group tests because of
the large number of men to whom they could be given simultaneously.
Those men who failed in the Group tests were given Individual tests in
which the instructions were given by a trained psychologist working with
one soldier at a time in a quiet private office. These Individual tests
were of two sorts: one for men who understood English, and the other for
men without education and frequently without knowledge of the English
language. The Individual tests served as a check upon the Group tests
which had preceded them. No man was recommended for discharge or for
labour battalions until after he had been individually examined by a
psychologist who spent from a half hour to an hour and a half with him,
attempting to determine whether or not the results of the Group tests
could be relied upon.
To determine the relative intelligence of five hundred men in fifty
minutes by a method so completely objective that no part of the
resulting classification is based on the individual judgment or opinion
of either the examiner or any of the men themselves is certainly a
practical application of psychological science. Simple as the Alpha test
was, its practical working out and reduction to an exact scientific
formula was the work of hundreds of highly trained minds for many
months. In its concrete application it looks like a children’s game, but
the results are so reliable as to be almost uncanny in the precision
with which they tally with the conclusions reached in the same cases as
a result of long and intimate observation.
(For full details of the Alpha test the reader is referred to Appendix B
to this volume.)
The highest score a man could make in the Alpha test was 212. This is an
absolutely perfect score, a correct answer or response to every one of
the 212 questions or examples; but any man who made a score above 135
was given the highest possible rating, Grade A, in the mental schedule.
There were seven ratings in all: A, above 135; B, which included those
making 104 to 135; C, _plus_, which took in those down to a score of 75;
C, for those scoring from 45 to 74; C, _minus_, for those with scores of
25 to 44; D, for the ones who gave from 15 to 24 correct answers; and D,
_minus_, for those who were unable to answer correctly more than 14 out
of the 212 questions.
Now for the proof! Here is an official report of one of many comparisons
made between the results of the psychological tests and the actual
observations and personal knowledge of men by their officers.
The commanding officers of ten different organizations, representing
various arms of service in one camp, were asked to designate (a) the
most efficient men in their organizations, (b) the men of average value
and (c) the men so inferior that they were barely able to perform their
duties. The officers had been with these men from six to twelve months
and knew them exceptionally well. The total number of men rated was 965,
about equally divided between the three classifications.
After the officers’ ratings had been made, the men were given the Alpha
test, and the comparison of results showed that the average score
recorded in this test by those men the officers had graded as “best” was
approximately twice as high as those the officers termed their poorest
men. Of men scoring C, _minus_, in the Alpha test, 70 per cent. were
those classed by the officers as their poorest men and only 4.4 per
cent. of those ranked with the ones whom the officers regarded as best.
Of all the men whose scores were above C, _plus_, 55.5 per cent. had
been graded by their officers as their best men and only 15 per cent. as
among their poorest soldiers.
In another camp 765 men of a regular infantry regiment, who had been
with their officers for several months, were graded by their officers in
five classes, according to their practical military value. Seventy-six
of these men were rated either A or B by the Alpha test; all but nine of
these had been graded “one” and “two” by their officers, and none of
them had been placed in the lowest grade.
Out of 238 of these soldiers who scored D or D, _minus_, in the
psychological test, all but eight had been placed in the three lowest
grades by their officers. The psychological ratings and the ratings of
the company commanders were identical in 49.5 per cent. of all cases. In
88.4 per cent. of the cases the agreement was within one step, and in
only seven tenths of 1 per cent. was there a disagreement between the
psychological test results and the officers’ ratings of more than two
steps.
Here is another comparison. Sixty company commanders each named his ten
best and ten poorest privates. Without any knowledge on the part of the
psychological examiners in this or in any other of the comparative tests
as to the ratings the officers had given the men, the Alpha gave the
grade of D or D, _minus_, to 57.5 per cent. of those picked as the
poorest and placed all but a fractional percentage of 1,118 men in the
same classes in which they had been placed by their officers on the
basis of observation and experience.
Those who failed in the Group tests were given individual attention by
the clinical psychologist. The examination here was frequently by the
Stanford Revision of the Binet test or by the Yerkes-Bridges Point
Scale. For men who could not understand the instructions and the
language necessary for taking these two tests a series of specially
devised performance tests, consisting chiefly of picture puzzles, cubes,
squares, crescents, and other forms cut from wood, were provided. The
assumption was that a man who has not intelligence enough to place a
triangular block in a perfectly obvious triangular hole, or to piece
together the six or seven parts which, when properly assembled, make up
the figure of a man or a ship is so hopelessly deficient mentally as to
be not only of no value, but a positive detriment to the Army. In many
instances fully grown men with the mentality of children seven or eight
years old were thus weeded out from among the recruits who had
successfully passed the physical tests and been inducted into the
service. Men making the D, _minus_, or E score in either the Alpha or
the Beta tests were graded as of very inferior intelligence; D, _minus_,
men were held to be fit for regular service but the E men were
recommended for service in the development battalions or for discharge.
About 15 per cent. of all the soldiers examined were scored in the D
class. They were ranked as of inferior intelligence, likely to be fairly
good soldiers but slow in learning, short on initiative, requiring more
than the usual amount of supervision, and unable to rise above the grade
of private. Most D, _minus_, and E men were below the mental age of ten
years; few men making a psychological score of D had the intelligence of
the average normal fourteen-year-old boy. About 20 per cent. of the
1,500,000 soldiers examined by the psychological method made the score
of C, _minus_, which indicated low average intelligence. These men were
good soldiers, however, and did satisfactory work in routine matters.
The C men, those of average intelligence, included about 25 per cent. of
the drafted men and furnished a fair proportion of non-commissioned
material.
Those in the C, _plus_, rating, which indicated high average
intelligence, included from about 15 to 18 per cent. of all the soldiers
examined. This group provided not only a large amount of
non-commissioned officer material, but an occasional soldier whose
qualities of leadership and power to command fitted him for a
commission.
A man who made a score of B in the Alpha test was graded as of superior
intelligence. Between 8 and 10 per cent. of all soldiers examined made
the B score. This group included a large proportion of men of the
commissioned officer type and a very large proportion of men fit for the
higher non-commissioned officers’ details.
Only 4 to 5 per cent. of the men in the Army made the score of A in the
Alpha test, which means that they were able to answer in the given time,
correctly, more than 135 of the 212 questions in the test. These were
men of very superior intelligence—indeed, of marked intellectuality. Men
of this mental type who had any leadership ability whatsoever made the
various grades of commissioned officers.
The practical application of the psychological tests covered a very wide
range. The highest intelligence among enlisted men was required in the
Field Artillery, Machine-Gun Battalions, and Signal Corps. Men of the
lowest grade of intelligence served as labourers, teamsters, and in
other non-combatant service, while men only slightly below the average
performed the duties of an infantryman satisfactorily.
By the application of the mental tests it was found possible to bring up
the average of particular companies, regiments, and detachments, by
exchanging men of high mentality from one regiment for an equal number
of men of the lower mental grade from another regiment in which the
average of ability was low. A great saving of time and energy was made
possible by being able to determine that a particular soldier, on the
strength of his psychological score, was qualified to become a good
artilleryman, machine gunner, or signal-corps man, or what not. If only
in preventing the loading up of combatant divisions with men qualified
only for the service of supply, the work of the psychologists made
possible the elimination of incalculable delay in getting our overseas
contingent ready to fight.
The intelligence tests used in the Army were admittedly imperfect at
many points. They were especially designed for and adapted to the
testing of a very much larger group than is ever likely again to be
subjected to any single test or series of tests, and so, for most
civilian purposes, these Alpha and Beta tests cannot be taken as a fair
or complete system of ascertaining all the facts which mental tests
ought to disclose. But at the time and for their particular purpose they
functioned admirably, as all persons familiar with the result obtained
will concede.
CHAPTER VII
PSYCHOLOGICAL TESTS IN EDUCATION
Just as intelligence tests in the Army have developed a new appreciation
of the significance of analyses of intelligence as a means of selecting
the right man for the right place in the military machine, so have
scientifically devised mental tests emphasized the possibilities of more
rapid and satisfactory progress in our educational activities.
The application of psychology to the measurement of teaching methods in
institutions of learning is of comparatively recent origin. Up to ten
years ago we had been able to make very little use of tests for the
measurement of intelligence in schools, colleges, and universities. We
were fighting blindly, as it were, to overcome the problems which faced
us at every turn. We had no concrete guide, for instance, in our efforts
to select proper courses of study for children and adults of various
mental capacities, nor could we decide upon uniform efforts toward the
disposal of such questions as vocational guidance, schoolroom procedure,
juvenile delinquency, promotional schemes, retardation of children, and
the proper treatment of sub-normal and gifted pupils.
The retardation problem, for example, has become serious. Statistics
indicate that from one third to one half of the children in the public
schools of the United States fail to advance with the speed expected of
them. Ten to 15 per cent. are retarded two years or more. Five to 8 per
cent. do not come within three years of the state of development set as
a standard. More than 10 per cent. of the $500,000,000 spent every year
in this country for school instruction purposes is used for reteaching
children what they already have been “taught” but have failed to learn.
Many efforts toward reform have been fruitful but disappointing. The
supposition that evils in existing systems could be completely cured by
adopting new methods of instruction, altering promotion methods, giving
increased attention to children’s health, and adoption of other
innovations, was less effective, experiments have shown, than was
generally anticipated by educators who put these theories into
operation. These reforms were less successful than their authors
expected they would be, for the reason that the reformers fell into the
error of assuming that, under the right conditions, all children would
be equally, or almost equally capable of making satisfactory progress.
They failed to take into account the fact that there are more than two
classes of school children and that they cannot be graded merely as
“feeble-minded” and “normal.” There are all degrees of intelligence,
ranging from idiocy on the one hand to genius on the other, and any
efforts toward improvement of conditions must be applied with full
recognition of such differences.
There are wide differences among normal human beings in mental
inheritance and these differences affect to a marked degree the capacity
of men, women, and children to profit from instruction. Just as the Army
had to allow for differences in mental capacity, so must the schools
differentiate courses of study in such a way that each pupil will be
allowed to study in a manner that is easy for him, whether that manner
be rapid or slow.
Dr. Lewis M. Terman, Professor of Education at Stanford University, in
California, who writes with more authority than any other author on the
application of psychological tests in schools, emphasizes the fact that
little progress can be made toward the correction of present evils until
we acquire a more scientific knowledge of the material with which we
deal. This phase of the problem perhaps suggests the only practical way
toward solution.
Intelligence tests in schools and higher institutions have been given a
wide range of application, but in virtually every instance the results
have justified the claim of superiority for these tests over other
methods of classifying students. In some instances positively startling
developments have been noted.
Of particular interest, from the viewpoint of educators who already are
convinced of the value of intelligence rating in educational
institutions, is the report of experiments at Public School No. 64, New
York City. The object was to select, group, and train a number of
children of very superior intelligence, in an attempt toward the
solution of the grading problem.
The experiment was suggested by a survey made several years ago by a
psychologist employed by the Public Education Association. Among a
number of so-called _average_ children was W. H., a boy. W. H.’s mental
age measured about two years ahead of his age in years. His physical
development was superior to the average child of his grade, consequently
he became an interesting subject to study. He was promoted as soon as he
acquired the essential features of the work in each grade, and, without
any conscious effort on his part, he accomplished the work of nine
grades in two years. W. H. was especially fond of athletics and outdoor
sports. He took his school work as a matter of course and showed no
indication of special interest in books or study. By the time he had
reached the fifth-grade several other boys of approximately the same
ability had been discovered.
One day the psychologist, the principal, and one of the assistants
discussed the possibility of forming a class composed of children
similarly gifted. Special classes for defective children, with a course
of study adapted to their needs, had been in existence for some time.
Why not organize special classes for children at the other end of the
scale, composed of those showing the highest grade of intelligence?
Surely these children, society’s greatest assets, were entitled to
progress at the speed that was desirable and normal to them. If
defective children of ungraded classes were worthy of a course of study
peculiarly adapted to their limitations, certainly an enriched
curriculum must be provided to meet the needs of children whose
capabilities extended to the highest degree of attainment.
The initial selection of children was made from the 5A class of W. H.’s
associates, from other fifth- and sixth-grade classes in the school, and
from similar grades of Public School No. 15, a neighbouring school for
girls. The aim was to choose an equal number of boys and girls from four
or five grades. The selection was limited to grades 4B through 6B. The
basis of selection was determined by the following factors:
1—The age-grade standard was considered. Those children were selected
who were below the normal age for the grade and whose school records
showed a standing of general excellence for successive terms.
2—The evidence of superior ability as displayed in oral recitation
during visits made by the psychologist and the assistant to the
principal.
3—An analytical inspection of school record cards.
4—Two boys, H. R. and R. P., had received prizes in Wanamaker’s drawing
competitions. Both of these boys passed the required intelligence tests.
5—A few interesting incidents were the means of discovering some other
eligible candidates.
One Sunday evening, while the teacher who later became the instructor of
this new special class was visiting the Christodora House, a
neighbouring settlement, the leader of the evening hour asked the
children the difference between God and guard. A boy, E. R., defined the
words in such concise and perfect English that the attention of the
visitors became centred on him. Later he was promoted from a school he
was attending to Public School No. 64 and was admitted to the class of
children of superior intelligence.
E. R. was a fatalist. He told an interested visitor, who questioned him
as to how he came to be admitted to the class, that it was fate that he
was chosen. He said he had been indifferent about attending the
“Children’s Hour” at which his ability had been noticed, but that his
brother had urged him to go. “You see,” said E. R., “if I hadn’t gone I
might never have been chosen for this class.”
A bright, aggressive-looking boy entered the principal’s office one
afternoon and asked the principal if he had room in his class for a
“bright 6A boy.” He said he lived in the district of School No. 64 and
had heard there were classes for children of excellent record. His
report card showed an A-A record and he was admitted. The final issue
was determined by the showing of the pupils in intelligence tests
devised by Dr. Lewis M. Terman, and by their social traits. Two children
who had the necessary qualifications otherwise were not considered
because of several unfavourable traits of character.
The foregoing instances are cited to indicate some of the ways in which
children were selected for the class. The next factor considered was the
choice of a teacher. It was necessary that she show high intelligence or
she would not be able to attack the problems which such a class would
present. The principal had no standardized test by which to measure her
ability but he was guided by many of the principles of general
excellence that marked the selection of the pupils.
From a group of eighty-four he tried to select a teacher who showed
initiative, ability to meet new situations, both intellectually and
socially, one who sympathized with and understood the orthodox training
of these children, and who would lead them to follow high standards of
American ideals and customs, and whose scholarship was superior,
especially in language. All these virtues, in addition to a zest and
zeal for the experiment, were embodied in Miss G.
The next important step was to devise a curriculum for the class, which
became known as the Terman Class, because the tests used in selecting it
had been suggested by Doctor Terman. The grades that represented the
first term were 4B through 6B; the second term 6A through 7B; and the
third term, 7A through 8B. Formal grammar and arithmetic were assigned
sequentially as outlined in the city syllabus. The class in general
studied contemporary history, based upon the World War, from newspapers
and periodicals, and, whenever possible, these events were related to or
associated with past history. Geography was studied in relation to
history and then extended until the world geography as outlined in the
course of study was acquired.
An extended amount of reading was assigned. The supplementary lists
issued by Professors Baker and Abbott, of Teachers College, Columbia
University; the reading list of the Ethical Culture School; and the list
issued by Doctor Leland, Director of Libraries, were used as guides.
Music, drawing, and physical training were taken by the class as general
exercises. These covered the grade requirements. The composition of
plays, songs, and dances for special programmes also was undertaken. The
privilege of observing plants and live animals, their care, habits, and
manner of reproduction, was provided in the nature-study room of the
school. Some of the boys were given manual training in the shops of the
prevocational school after the regular session of the academic
department. The class attended the senior assemblies of the school at
least once a week and as many more times as the educational activities
of the school permitted. The privileges enjoyed outside the classroom
educated these children socially in ways that few pupils of large and
congested schools may experience.
One period a week was spent in the reading and study of assigned
subjects in the Tompkins Square Public Library. Children were made
acquainted with all departments of the library and its facilities.
Reference books, magazines, and newspapers were at their service. The
children were permitted to use a club room in the Christodora House once
a week for musical and social exercises. A gymnasium was at their
disposal in this institution two periods a week, and one of the
Christodora House’s workers was assigned to teach the cooking club of
the class. Another social worker taught a quartette of the class how to
play the violin. Two boys who showed aptitude in art were given
additional instruction after school at the “Boys’ Club,” a neighbouring
institution. The class was taken on excursions to the Metropolitan
Museum of Art, the New York Public Library, the Jumel Mansion, and
Dyckman House—to study colonial furnishings and historical material—the
Museum of Natural History, a sight-seeing yacht trip around Manhattan
Island, theatre parties, campfire parties, and flower shows.
During the first term of six months the _progress ranged from one to
four grades_. No pressure of any kind was brought to bear. The children
were allowed to advance as soon as they acquired the work of each grade.
The younger children reaped the advantage of the experience of
associating with those a trifle older. This privilege perhaps accounted
for the greater rate of progress by the younger pupils. During the first
term the average progress was two and two thirds grades and during the
subsequent terms _two grades were accomplished each term_.
The suggestion, of course, is obvious, that the general application of
psychological tests of intelligence to school children everywhere would
reveal similar exceptional mentalities in many schools and classes, and
that we have at last, in tests of this character, an accurate method of
distinguishing between mere parrot-like ability to memorize and repeat
lessons and actual mental capacity. That there must result, from the
wider application of the scientific method of mental measurement, a
general regrading of school pupils, if not indeed a general
reorganization of existing schemes and systems of education, goes almost
without saying.
The use of intelligence tests for college entrance has shown
satisfactory results in several institutions. In one in particular, the
Carnegie Institute of Technology of Pittsburgh, a group of the freshman
girls in the Margaret Morrison Carnegie School for Girls, was
experimented on with such success that the results have been widely
discussed.
All of the 114 freshmen were high school graduates. The first-year
course, on which the instructors based their estimates of the students,
contains the following subjects; physics, sewing, history, English,
drawing and colour, hygiene, chemistry, foods, accounting, and social
ethics.
Six mental tests were used, designed to answer the following questions:
(1) Can we demonstrate that we can reduce the number of students who are
dropped for poor scholarship or placed on probation for poor scholarship
by the use of our mental tests for admission?
(2) How do our mental test ratings of all the students compare with the
faculty opinion about the general ability of the students?
The first criterion referred only to those who were pronounced as
failures and dropped from college for inability to do college work, or
placed on probation as doubtful students with two thirds of the regular
programme. The second criterion had reference to the whole class,
including the good students. A letter was sent to all members of the
faculty asking them to indicate the student’s general ability as
compared to the general ability of the class. A list of names, with ten
numbered spaces after each name, was appended. The tests which agreed
fairly well with the pooled judgment of the faculty were retained. The
tests which failed in this regard were either improved or cancelled.
When the returns were complete the instructor’s estimate was determined
for each student and was used as a criterion for the tests.
The tests were analyzed both by correlation methods referring to the
group as a whole, and by inspection of scatter diagrams referring to
individual students. By devising a critical score it was possible to
arrive at a mental-test rating. The results of this system of rating
indicated, according to Prof. L. L. Thurstone, of the Carnegie
Institute, that:
(_a_) Seven out of eleven failures could have been eliminated at the
beginning of the year.
(_b_) Eight out of seventeen students placed on probation for poor
scholarship should have been eliminated at the beginning of the year.
(_c_) Not one of the students who were below the critical mental-test
rating was acceptable as a student. All of them should have been spared
the discouragement which comes from failure and should have been advised
to take up some other work.
(_d_) None of the acceptable students scored below the lower critical
mental-test rating.
(_e_) All of the freshmen rated high by the faculty were above the
average in the mental-test rating.
(_f_) Mental tests have been demonstrated to constitute a useful
criterion for admission to college.
In October, 1918, first-year men in Brown University were given two
series of psychological tests, an interval of several days separating
the administration of Series I and II. Emphasis was placed upon thought
and accuracy, rather than upon speed. Two hundred and ten students of
the same University took the Alpha test of the Army in January, 1919. Of
these men, 103 also had taken the Brown University tests, Series I and
II. This made a comparison possible.
Two hundred and twelve men took Series I. Both the average and median
were 66 on the basis of 100 as a maximum score. One hundred and
seventy-eight men, all of whom had taken Series I, took Series II. It
was administered after the students had begun military training of a
rigorous nature and when they were far from fresh. The composite score
of Series I and Series II, made from the records of one hundred and
seventy-eight men who had taken both tests, showed that the Brown
University Series proved as good as a measure of scholastic standing as
did the Army test for military fitness.
Prof. Stephen S. Colvin, of Brown University, writing on these
psychological tests, says that in addition to the evidence obtained by
correlating the test results and the students’ academic marks, as to the
relation between the scores of the psychological tests and academic
standing, there is further indication that the psychological tests
proved of considerable value in showing the probable success of a
student in his academic work.
During the first half of the year, eighty students were reported as
doing unsatisfactory work. Of these eighty students, thirteen had
received a score of “good” or “very good” in the psychological tests;
fourteen had received an average score: while in the cases of
fifty-three the score was either “poor,” or “very poor.” During the
second term, thirty-four men were reported as doing considerably above
average grade. Of those thus reported, five ranked “superior” in their
psychological tests; nineteen “very good”; seven “good”; two “average”;
and one “poor.”
Interesting results were noted in intelligence tests at the University
of Illinois on March 6, 1919, when nearly 3,500 students, who were
distributed in twenty-four different halls, were examined
simultaneously. The Army test (Alpha) was used. Various members of the
faculty, including deans, volunteered for special preparatory training
to act as examiners and alternate examiners. It was an interesting
spectacle to witness eminent men voluntarily in the rôle of students and
being “tested.”
In a summary of the results of the tests, Dr. David Spence Hill says:
“_The smallness_ of difference between median scores of classes within
each college of the large groups of students _is insignificant_. As
between freshmen, sophomores, juniors, and seniors the extreme
difference was less than 2 per cent. in the college of literature, arts
and sciences; less than 4 per cent. in the colleges of engineering, and
of agriculture; about 5 per cent. in the colleges of commerce, and less
than 3 per cent. in the three years of the graduate school. Differences
as small as these are safely to be accounted for by chance or by
variations of one kind and another.”
The report of the value as a whole of the intelligence test, signed by
members of the University staff, says, in part:
“On the whole, the experiment performed by the energetic coöperation of
nearly four thousand university people may be regarded as remarkably
successful for the purposes intended. If for no other reasons, it has
been worth while as a study of a device used already upon nearly two
millions of men engaged as soldiers in the great historic
undertaking—the World War. It has been a means of self-revelation to
many persons on the campus. When the statistics are all worked out in
careful detail we shall obtain new insight into some educational
problems.”
At Hamline University, St. Paul, Minn., the Alpha test was given to 74
men and 145 women, but reports on the results of the test are confined
to 61 men and 145 women. The median for the men tested was 129 and 133
for women. The higher level for women was accounted for by the fact that
there were more seniors and juniors among the women than among the men.
The medians for these two classes of women were 138 and 150
respectively, but for the men in the same classes, 132 and 130
respectively. A somewhat higher standing for women was evident when the
entire series of tests were considered, although the mathematical
problems in the tests were harder for the women.
In questions of practical judgment, disarranged sentences and analogies,
all of which involved nimbleness of wit, the women showed superiority to
the men. In questions of general information, however, the men
established a lead over the women, but of only 2.5 per cent.
Prof. Gregory D. Walcott, who reports the tests at Hamline, is not
convinced that the Alpha tests, designed for military purposes, are the
best for determining the fitness of students for college work. He says,
however, that the degree of correlation obtained in the Hamline tests
indicates that the Alpha tests are of tremendous value.
Intelligence tests are being used at regular intervals at the University
of Rochester. The method of application is described as follows by Louis
A. Pechstein, Professor of Psychology at the University.
“We call our freshmen to the campus a week early. The introductory week
is given largely to lectures on college ethics and problems of study.
During the first day of the week I give all the entrants both the Alpha
and the Otis Group Intelligence tests. The marks and groupings are
turned into the office and, so far as possible, we shall make up several
representative classes of men supposedly of the same general mental
make-up.
“During the first term we shall test the entire student body and then
begin to correlate with teachers’ opinions and grade records. In no
sense are we committed, but we shall try to influence our programme
making and section determination by the testing results. Then I shall
issue a report to each student regarding his standing, apparent strong
and weak processes, and try to help him in his development.”
Other reports from schools, colleges, and universities indicate the
widespread adoption of intelligence tests in determining the probable
measure of success which a student will attain in his studies, or
whether he is fitted, mentally, for the career he contemplates.
The group tests of intelligence have demonstrated their value in
educational work to such an extent that, following the lead of Columbia
University, a large number of prominent American universities and
colleges are employing tests of intellectual ability as at least partial
substitutes for the time-honoured college entrance examinations. Instead
of requiring each prospective student to take an examination in which he
would be required to demonstrate that he remembered the facts learned in
high school, the present scheme is to examine the men who desire to
enter college by means of the psychological tests designed to measure
general fitness and intelligence. The theory behind this movement is
that men should be allowed to enter college provided their intelligence
and mental capacity is such as would enable them to profit by the
instruction, regardless of whether such men could recall the required
percentage of the facts taught them by their high school teachers.
This same philosophy will undoubtedly spread very widely through the
high schools and elementary schools as well as through the colleges. A
child should be allowed to undertake that work for which he is fitted by
nature and intellectual capacity, regardless of what his past academic
training may have been. It is unreasonable to require young men who,
because of some accident, left school early in life and have continued
their education through their own efforts, to go back and begin with
younger pupils a course of study, which will have very little practical
value to them, before they are allowed to undertake the professional
courses they desire and are capable of undertaking at once. The
group-examination method, which is employed by the majority of the
Mentimeter tests, has been the greatest possible stimulus to the
employment of intelligence examinations, because of the great saving of
time which it affects over the method of individual examinations.
CHAPTER VIII
MENTAL TESTS IN INDUSTRY
The case for scientific mental tests as a prerequisite to the employment
of beginners in business and industry has been well put by Dr. Henry C.
Link. In addressing a convention of California railroad men, Doctor Link
said:
“Would you, gentlemen, enter into a contract to buy material from a
concern, the excellence of whose product you had grave reason to doubt?
Would you place orders to the extent of three and one half millions of
dollars a year, waive inspection of material, accept whatever was
offered you, and make no effort to get your money’s worth? You would
not—not if you expected to hold your job. And yet, that is what you are
doing with respect to the public education system of California. In 1916
the railroads of this state paid in operative taxes $7,151,583. Of this
sum 51 per cent., or $3,647,300, was used for purposes of public
education.
“_The boys and girls sent you from the public schools you take into your
service, sometimes after a perfunctory mental examination, generally
with none_; in other words, _you waive inspection_, and then complain of
the character of material after it has reached you and been paid for.”
It is, of course, in the case of the untried beginner in business or
industrial life, the boy or girl fresh from school who has as yet had no
opportunity to discover or to demonstrate his or her ability or
capacity, that the application of scientific mental tests is most
essential.
The skilled worker of long experience, master of his craft or of one or
another of the specialized mechanical operations that enter so largely
into modern industrial processes, has already found a definite place in
the scheme of things and a simple trade or performance test is all that
is required to indicate where that place is. For the present, at least,
we are concerned with the worker of this class only long enough to point
out, in passing, that a generally adopted scheme of intelligence
measurement might have disclosed the possession by any individual of
this group of abilities that would have given him a broader field and a
happier and more useful existence, had he and those responsible for
giving him a start in life been made aware of them early enough. Even
to-day, when he has been engaged in his narrowly limited field of work
for the better part of his active working life, he may have latent or
undeveloped mental capacity such as would qualify him for more
important, better-paid employment were some means provided for
disclosing its existence.
There is, in fact, no degree or kind of employment for which a more
intelligent and satisfactory selection of employees cannot be made by
means of properly devised mental tests, accurately applied, than by any
other method now in use. Under the direction of Dr. Walter Dill Scott
the Carnegie School of Scientific Salesmanship of Pittsburgh has
demonstrated the usefulness of the scientific method when applied not
only in the selection and training of salesmen but for the choosing of
men qualified for the most important executive positions in large
industrial and business establishments. A large number, possibly as many
as a hundred, of the largest industrial corporations of America have
already (1919) adopted in whole or in part some system of scientific
mental tests for the classification and grading of present employees,
the selection of new employees, and the filling of vacancies by
promotion. It is the unanimous testimony, whenever a properly devised
system of tests has been applied in accordance with scientific methods
and without prejudice, that the actual saving in time and expense as
well as in the disorganization resulting from a heavy “labour turnover”
has in every case been highly profitable from the employer’s viewpoint,
while it almost goes without saying that the benefit to the employee in
being accurately placed in the position in which he is best fitted by
his natural mental endowment and capacity to function makes for
individual contentment and satisfaction and for steadier and presumably
higher earning power than the old hit-or-miss method could possibly do.
Next to the beginner in industry or business, the boy or girl starting
his or her vocational career, the class to which the application of
scientific mental tests is of the greatest benefit to employer and
worker alike is the large group of unskilled, untrained workers, men and
women of no particular trade, the “floaters” and seasonal workers, who
turn their hands to whatever employment opportunity offers without
developing especial skill at any one recognized trade or occupation.
In our modern industrial system, a very considerable part of the
personnel of our factories, shops, and stores consists of this class of
untrained workers. They try their hands at many things and fail in most.
They constitute the majority of those who respond to “Help Wanted”
advertisements and are willing to try any sort of work; their chief
occupation in life is hunting for jobs.
This need not remain forever true. Because there is not in general use
any intelligent or accurate method of determining whether or not any one
of these unskilled, untrained workers possesses the elementary mental
capacities requisite for a particular sort of employment, it is not
surprising that most of them fail to make good in the jobs into which
they are indiscriminately shovelled. Yet the great majority of them do
possess mental capacity of a nature and degree which, once it is
ascertained, indicates their definite fitness for some particular sort
of work no less than it does their definite unfitness for many other
kinds of work which they are prone to undertake.
Just as war conditions brought into the Army an enormous mass of young
men whose capacity and special abilities had to be determined by
scientific tests before they could be assigned to the places where they
could most usefully serve in the military scheme of things, so the same
exigency of war brought into the industries of the country, largely
centred upon the production of munitions of war, millions of women
without industrial experience or vocational training but upon whose
efforts the nation had mainly to rely for the output of weapons,
ammunition, military equipment and accessories without which the Army
and Navy could not have functioned. In a large class of plants engaged
in munition production the chief demand was for sufficient muscular
strength, with a slight modicum of intelligence, for the operation of
automatic machinery. But in the vitally important work of inspecting,
testing, and sorting the finished product of even the most highly
perfected automatic machines and in many of the more delicate operations
of assembling and adjusting devices and apparatus made up of a number of
more or less complicated parts, intelligence and mental capacity of
several different kinds and ranging up to fairly high degrees were
called for.
In a number of the larger munitions establishments scientific mental
tests were adopted for the selection and assignment to particular tasks
of the women workers. Wherever this was done it was found that the
output was increased, a higher average of quality maintained, and the
labour turnover greatly reduced.
In one of the largest groups of munitions plants at Bridgeport, Conn.,
there was worked out, under the direction of Dr. Henry C. Link, a system
of scientific mental tests which checked up so closely with the actual
results obtained by the most skilful workers that their adoption for the
examination of all applicants for these positions resulted in very
definite time and money savings and increase in plant efficiency.
Two types of work, conducted side by side in the same room, were settled
upon as the most fruitful fields for the first experiment. The work
chosen was that of inspecting shells before they had been loaded, and of
gauging them for head-thickness. This work was being done by 330 girls,
two thirds of whom were engaged in inspection and one third in gauging.
The work of inspecting shells was done at a table constructed like an
upturned, shallow box. Upon this table was dumped a large box of brass
shells, not yet loaded, and all of exactly the same kind. The work of
each girl was to inspect these shells and throw out those that were
defective. A girl would first gather up a handful of shells, being
careful to have them all pointing in the same direction. Then she would
put both hands around the shells and turn them up so as to expose their
insides. She would then look down into every shell for dents, scratches,
stains, and other very minute defects. When any such defect was
discovered the shell was extracted from the pile and thrown into one of
three or four “scrap” boxes. The entire handful was then turned over and
the head of every shell examined for various defects. The shells were
then held in a horizontal position on the left hand and allowed to roll
from the pile into the right hand. Each shell, in rolling, exposed its
lateral surface and was closely scrutinized for scratches, dents, oil
stains, and other defects. The good ones were taken in the right hand
and dropped into a pocket at the right side of the table, through which
they fell into a box below.
This operation required good eyesight (in order to distinguish defects,
which frequently were so minute as to be indistinguishable to all but
the best of eyes); keen visual discrimination (the ability to determine,
with a few glances, which shells were defective); quick reaction
(ability to extract, as quickly as seen, the defective shell and toss it
into the appropriate box); accuracy of movement (ability to pick out the
right shell from a closely held handful); steadiness of attention
(ability to prevent bad shells from slipping by or unduly lengthening
the operation).
A set of eight tests was selected for the body of the experiment. The
first was a simple eyesight test. The second was a card sorting test.
The subject was given a pack of 49 cards, upon the face of each one of
which from 7 to 12 letters were distributed promiscuously. Twenty of the
cards contained the letter “O” and the rest did not. The subject was
asked to sort these into two piles, those which had “O” on them and
those which had not. The time required for this performance was taken
and the number of errors recorded. The object of the test was to bring
out the subject’s ability to pick out the essential element from a more
or less heterogeneous collection of elements, and also, in some measure,
to bring out the deftness of the subject in handling cards.
The third test was a cancellation test. The subject was requested to
cross out, with a pencil, every 7. The fourth was a simple “Easy
Directions” test. The fifth was a number-checking test, in which the
subject was asked to place a check opposite every group which contained
both a 7 and a 1. The sixth test was a tapping test, in which the
subject was required to push down, as rapidly as possible, a telegraph
key to which was attached a counter. The number of recorded thrusts over
a period of one minute constituted a record for that performance. The
seventh test was an accuracy test. This was given with the aid of a
brass plate with nine holes, graduated in size from ½ inch to ⅛ inch in
diameter. The subject was asked to take a brass-pointed pencil and
insert it into each hole, beginning with the largest and continuing
through the smaller ones, until the pointer touched the brass side of
one of them. The brass-pointed pencil was wired in circuit with the
brass plate containing the holes so that, whenever the brass point
touched the side of the hole or any part of the brass plate, an electric
contact was made which produced a click in a telephone receiver which
the subject held to her ear. At the start of the test, the subject was
instructed to put the brass pencil into each hole in succession until
she heard a click in her ear, when she was to start all over again. The
speed of the subject’s movements was controlled by a metronome, so as to
allow thirty trials per minute. This test occupied from two to three
minutes.
The eighth test was a steadiness test. This consisted of two brass bars
about twelve inches long, set so as to form a long, horizontal V. The
subject was asked to take the brass pointer and pass it along between
these two bars. The farther she went, the narrower became the space
between the bars. As soon as the brass pointer touched one of the bars
it produced a click in the telephone receiver. The point at which this
brass pointer touched was then read on a scale on the lower bar. Each
subject was given fifteen trials and the last ten were averaged and
constituted the subject’s average.
These eight tests were given to seventy-three girls, fifty-two of whom
were inspectors and twenty-one gaugers. The scores in the tests were
compared with the average daily work of the girls. This average was
obtained by recording the number of pounds of shells inspected by the
girls and the number of hours required for the work. It was found that
the inspectors who inspected the largest number of shells in a given
time attained the largest scores in the tests, thereby indicating the
value of the tests in determining whether an applicant for work as an
inspector had the mental capacity for the work.
The same tests were given to the twenty-one girls engaged in gauging the
head-thickness of shells. This work does not require the use of the
eyes. The operator simply picks up a handful of shells and, with or
without looking, tries the head of each shell on a gauge. The gauge is a
piece of steel with two notches or openings. The shells which are too
small pass through the first opening and fall into a box of rejects
below. Those that do not fall through are tried on the second opening
and, if they pass through, they are of the right size. If they fail to
pass through they are too large and are thrown aside. The operator sits
in front of her gauge and tries each shell at one opening and then
another, just as rapidly as she can move her hands up and down.
The tests showed, in this instance, an entirely different set of
correlations. The comparative correlation scores follow:
════════════════════════════════╤══════════
TESTS INSPECTORS│ GAUGERS
────────────────────────────────┼──────────
Card Sorting .55│ .05
Tapping .14│ .52
Cancellation .63│ .17
General Intelligence .14│ .18
Number Group Checking .72│ —.19
────────────────────────────────┴──────────
Perfect agreement between average daily work and score in the test would
be indicated by a correlation score of 1.00, while lack of relationship
would be indicated by a correlation of 0 or nearly 0.
The score of the gaugers in the tapping test (.52) showed that they were
speedier and had greater endurance. This seems reasonable since, in the
operation of gauging, speed of movement and endurance are the chief
factors. In the visual discrimination tests, such as card sorting,
cancellation, and number group checking, the scores of the inspectors
were higher. This quality, however, was not necessary to successful
operation in gauging.
In other operations the results of these tests proved their value as a
factor in eliminating blunders in the employment office. Girls who
seemed, from observation, to possess the very qualities necessary for
one or another operation, frequently puzzled their superiors by their
failure to perform some highly important operation of their work. The
eight tests would have demonstrated this particular inability and would
have saved thousands of dollars lost through delay and mistakes. Similar
results were obtained in experiments with men workers.
In almost every industrial enterprise, clerical work of some kind or
another is necessary, and a problem of universal interest has developed
around the selection of clerks. The time required to “break in” new
employees runs from two weeks to two months, according to the nature of
the routine, and this process invariably is very expensive. By means of
standardized mental tests the whole process may be greatly simplified.
In an experiment recently reported tests were given to fifty-two men and
women engaged in clerical and near-clerical work. An aggregate number of
440 tests was given. The manager of the department had made a study of
these people and had attempted to rate them as to their actual ability.
The tests were classified under the head of tests for _technique_ and
tests for _intelligence_. By _technique_ is meant the speed and accuracy
shown by clerks in sorting tickets and papers, posting and adding
columns of figures, indexing and filing, and in other routine clerical
operations. The term _intelligence_ is interpreted to designate the
facility and success with which a clerk could master new tasks and
follow directions about new work assigned from time to time. The clerk’s
_technique_ was indicated by steadiness, arithmetic, card sorting, and
substitution-of-letters tests. The _intelligence_ tests included a
“hard-directions” test and an “abstract-relations” test, similar to
those given in the Mentimeter in this volume.
When all the tests had been given the results were computed and
tabulated so as to bring out the following points: (1) the rank of each
individual with reference to all the rest; (2) the relation of each of
four groups to each other; (3) the relation between technique and
intelligence. The results were then submitted to the office head, who
compared them with his records and with his own opinion of the relative
merits of the various individuals. This comparison showed a very marked
agreement between the testimony of the tests and the rankings of the
office manager.
The results of these tests so impressed the office manager that he
decided to give them to all incoming clerks. One of the first candidates
to be examined was a young woman who had recently been interviewed by
one of the office heads. The candidate was so unprepossessing in
appearance that in spite of signs testifying to her intelligence, the
office head was in doubt as to the advisability of hiring her. The
psychological tests were applied. When this was done the young woman did
remarkably well in every test. She was then hired, and proved herself so
ready and capable that it was decided to train her for the work of an
office assistant. In six weeks she had mastered the routine of four
different kinds of work. This was a striking instance in which the
testimony of the tests belied the testimony of observation.
Although there were certain inadequacies in the tests applied, as well
as in the judgments obtained from office heads, the value of the results
became more and more clear with each passing month. For example, 188
clerks recommended on the basis of the tests and followed up at
intervals of one month for a period of three months were estimated as
follows:
Percentage of those called good by their superiors
At the end of one month 75%
At the end of two months 89%
At the end of three months 92%
Another series of interesting experiments to determine the mental
capacity of workers in industry was directed at stenographers, typists,
and comptometrists. The work of these kinds of workers has been
specialized by the use of a standard machine, and in applying tests to
this kind of work it was necessary, therefore, to take into
consideration two important factors: first, the skill already acquired
by the workers at a certain machine; second, the aptitude which the
worker possessed for improvement in the use of the machine.
Relevant tests were given to two senior classes of more than three
hundred girls and boys in a commercial high school, to seventy-six
pupils in two business schools, to a group of twenty-two office typists,
to another group of nineteen stenographers, to over four hundred
candidates for positions as typists and stenographers, to three groups
of more than one hundred and forty comptometrists; and finally, to more
than one hundred and twenty candidates for comptometry. More than one
thousand persons were tested and more than five thousand tests were
given.
Tests for typists included copying, spelling, substitution, and the
Trabue Completion test. In the copying and spelling tests, office forms
were used. A number of words, purposely misspelled in characteristic
fashion, were mingled with words correctly spelled, and the applicant
was asked to check off those incorrectly spelled. It was discovered, in
the substitution test, that if an applicant without much previous
experience in typing does very well in the test, the indication is that
she has the necessary aptitude or potential ability to become a good
typist with practice. The success of the applicant in the Trabue
Completion test indicated his or her ability to complete sentences parts
of which are missing. The ability to do this is a great advantage to the
typist and one which will increase her capacity.
The Trabue Completion test also proved valuable in determining the
ability of stenographers. The most important test probably, for a
stenographer, is of her ability to take and transcribe dictation. Tests
were given as nearly as possible at the speed which was best adapted to
the applicant’s ability. The results were then graded on the basis of
the total time consumed and the amount of work done correctly.
In experiments for determining the ability of computing-machine
operators various tests were used. One of the most important was a
mental-arithmetic test. This was designed to determine the applicant’s
fundamental knowledge of arithmetic. Another was a numerical
substitution test. In each of the tests conducted the scores of the
applicants were compared with the rankings made previously by department
heads, and in most instances there was an agreement of sufficient
approximation to indicate the value of the tests.
Although still in its infancy, as it were, so far as its practical
application in industry goes, the scientific method of mental
measurement, wherever and whenever applied in accordance with true
psychological principles and by standards and methods devised by trained
psychologists, has so completely demonstrated its economic value and
social usefulness that its general adoption, as these facts become more
generally known, seems inevitable.
CHAPTER IX
HOW TO USE THE MENTIMETER TESTS
The Mentimeter tests differ from the Alpha tests, or from the Beta test
of the United States Army, from the Otis test, or from any other system
of tests now available, chiefly in their flexibility. Rather than
present to the public a certain fixed and invariable group of eight or
ten tests which are to be used wherever a measure of general
intelligence is to be employed, as has been done in other cases, the
present authors have chosen to present a wide variety of tests from
which each reader may select those for his use which actually give the
best results.
It is not probable that exactly the same tests would select men of high
intelligence in the graduate work of a university as would be needed to
select the intelligent men in a logging camp in the wilds of Canada or
our own Northwest. The present authors do not profess to know just how
much of each mental trait is required to make up a perfect superior
intelligence, and for that reason they have not attempted to propose any
single group of tests as the best measure of intelligence. The reader is
asked to “try out” such tests in the Mentimeter series as seem to him to
offer greatest promise of usefulness, and then to make up his own “team
of tests” in such manner as will best reveal the kind of intelligence in
which he is interested.
For the benefit of those who wish some suggestions as to the tests which
would probably be most useful in the main lines of work to which
intelligence tests may be applied, the authors here propose certain
tentative or suggestive lists which would seem to them to offer great
promise of successful use. For the classification of clerical workers in
business and industry, the following tests should at least be given
thorough trial:
MENTIMETER NO. TITLE
6. Completion of Form Series
7. Checking Identity of Numbers
8. Digit-Symbol Substitution
9. Completion of Number Relation Series
16. Naming Opposites
23. Completion of Sentences
24. Analogies
28. Arithmetic Reasoning
It is possible, of course, that some employer who makes the trial will
find a half dozen other tests that show more accurate results in
classifying clerical workers than will be shown by any test in the above
list, but such a thing will probably not happen, for the type of test
which has been useful in similar situations will probably prove useful
again. If such a thing did happen, however, the employer would be
foolish and unscientific to retain the list suggested above when he knew
of a better list.
In the classification of the intelligence of labourers, the authors
would suggest that the following tests be given fair trial:
MENTIMETER NO. TITLE
2. Pictorial Absurdities
3. Maze Threading
5. Dividing Geometric Figures
6. Completion of Form Series
9. Completion of Number Relation Series
18. Range of Information
28. Arithmetic Reasoning
29. Practical Judgment
For classifying public school pupils according to their general
intellectual power and ability to learn, the authors propose that the
following tests be employed until a different selection has been proved
to be superior:
MENTIMETER NO. TITLE
2. Pictorial Absurdities
3. Maze Threading
8. Digit-Symbol Substitution
16. Naming Opposites
20. Reading Directions
23. Completion of Sentences
28. Arithmetic Reasoning
29. Practical Judgment
As being more strictly education tests rather than tests of intelligence
the reader’s attention is invited to the following list:
MENTIMETER NO. TITLE
10. Addition
17. Spelling
19. Reading: Vocabulary
21. Reading: Interpretation
25. Handwriting
26. English Composition
27. Poetic Discrimination
28. Arithmetic Reasoning
The most profitable list from the point of view of social entertainment
would seem to be the following:
MENTIMETER NO. TITLE
2. Pictorial Absurdities
3. Maze Threading
5. Geometrical Figures
6. Completion of Form Series
18. Range of Information
20. Reading Directions
22. Disarranged Sentences
23. Sentence Completion
24. Analogies
27. Poetic Discrimination
29. Practical Judgment
30. Logical Conclusions
Whatever the purpose for which the tests are to be used, the best
results can be obtained only by securing from the original publishers
the carefully printed forms prepared by the authors of the tests.
Mimeographed copies of test blanks or privately printed blanks are
certain to differ so much from the true form that the results obtained
therewith cannot be directly compared with the official results.
Long experience has likewise demonstrated, fairly clearly, that the best
results will be obtained in any industrial organization or educational
staff by making one person chiefly responsible for the proper
administration of the intellectual and educational measurements. If a
personnel director is at hand who can study his tests just as
scientifically as he studies his men, progress and improvement in the
methods and results are inevitable.
Measurements of intelligence are by no means the only or final criteria
by which the successful personnel manager wins success in his work and
saves money for his employers. He makes use of every piece of
information about his men that it is possible for him to pick up
anywhere. The trade tests particularly offer a wide field in which
measurements of intelligence may be supplemented and made more useful.
Of two men who are to-day working in the same trade, receiving the same
wages and making the same score on their trade tests, that one is more
promising who has the higher intelligence score. On the other hand, of
two equally intelligent men, as measured by the intelligence tests, that
one who has attained within a given time the higher proficiency in his
trade is superior.
The chief value of the group intelligence tests will probably always be
in the classification of large groups of persons into smaller,
well-defined groups, the members of which groups may then be studied
more carefully and by more exact methods in the hands of a trained
psychologist, if necessary. Until the group method of examination was
developed, making it possible to test the intellectual ability of every
employee without tremendous expense in time and money, it would have
been most foolish to talk about maintaining a continuous inventory of
the mental strength of an organization, and yet such an inventory is now
possible—just as possible as the record of the condition and capacity of
each machine owned by the company.
Prospective users of the Mentimeters need to bear in mind that mental
powers are far less constant in their amounts than are the dimensions
and measurements of a piece of steel or lumber. Even the length of a
steel rail varies between winter and summer, but the variation that
occurs in the strength of mental connections from day to day or from
hour to hour is very much greater than the variations of the steel rail.
Except by chance one would not obtain exactly the same score a second
time in taking a Mentimeter test, or any other test of mental ability.
Being for the most part constructed on the “increasing difficulty” plan,
however, the Mentimeters will prove much less influenced by recency of
drill and nearness to the lunch hour than will most other tests,
especially less than those speed tests which measure how many simple
tasks one can do within a given time limit. The Mentimeter ideal is to
test power rather than speed.
No single set of tests should be used as final and conclusive in the
public schools with regard to the kind of work which a given boy or girl
should undertake. The Mentimeter tests may be used as a first
“drag-net,” but those caught in this net should then be carefully
studied by the most refined methods known to psychologists before being
recommended for particular types of special instruction or sent to
special schools. One of the most hopeful signs in the entire educational
field is the number of cities that are employing psychologists to follow
up the results of group examinations in the schools. Many of the state
universities have established bureaus to serve the local communities[1]
in such matters. The very finest measurements are of no avail unless
something is done about the results disclosed.
Footnote 1:
There has recently been established in Teachers College, Columbia
University, New York City, a Bureau of Educational Service, the
Director of which would be glad to answer questions or advise with any
one interested in measuring intelligence or educational results,
regardless of the state or community in which one may live.
For each of the Mentimeter tests, the authors have classified the
possible scores into five general groups: Superior, High Average,
Average, Low Average, and Inferior. This classification is very rough
and should not be wrongly interpreted. An individual who is tested with
three or four or more of the Mentimeter tests should not be expected to
receive the same classification in each test. In the Handwriting test,
for example, a person might well be expected to make a rating of
“Superior” in _quality_ of writing while making only “Low Average” in
_speed_ of writing. The same person might well make a score on the test
of Poetic Discrimination which would classify him as “Inferior.”
Although there is a tendency for people who are superior in one line to
have high abilities in other lines, it is only a general tendency, which
will not hold good in all cases and with regard to all varieties of
ability.
For the most accurate scientific work the reader will probably disregard
entirely the fivefold classification of scores mentioned above. The
finer distinctions made by the numerical scores will be studied, and
interpretations will be made for the specific purposes of the examiner.
It is probable, for example, that comparatively few children at the age
of eight years would be classified as being better than “Inferior,” if
these rough general classifications were to be the only record kept of
performance on these tests. On the other hand, very few clerical workers
of proved ability and success would make a classification as low as
“Average,” except possibly in a few specialized-ability tests. The
important point to be considered by the teacher of a second-grade class,
or by an employer of clerical workers, or by any other person who wishes
to make serious use of these tests, is the relation of the scores in the
test to the relative abilities of the persons in the special group
tested. The tentative classification of scores made at the end of each
section of the chapter which follows this is for human beings in general
and will not fit well any specialized group of persons.
In order to assist readers who have no statistical training in the
evaluation for their special purposes of any particular Mentimeter test,
a few pages will be devoted to an elementary statement of how to try out
scientifically the relationship between a test, on the one hand, and
demonstrated ability in any special line of endeavour, on the other. It
may be stated here again that not all traits of mind are important in
every task that must be done in life. Some positions require only a
little intellectual ability while others require a great deal, and some
tasks require very great development of a few traits which may be very
little called for in other equally important tasks. The authors have
used their best judgment as to which tests will probably select the type
of persons needed in a certain type of position, but the judgments of
other equally experienced men would be just as good. The final proof of
reliability in a test can come only by actual trial of that test upon
men of various degrees of demonstrated ability in the trade or
profession concerned. What follows is a statement of how to measure this
correspondence between demonstrated degree of success and score in a
test, or between the scores of the same persons in two or more different
tests.
No measure of relationship between success in life and success in a test
can be any more accurate than the original measures of success from
which the calculation is made. If the measures of success in life are
unreliable, then the measure of their relationship to success in a test
will be even more unreliable. The more definite and certain one can be
of his measures of success, the more reliable will his measure of
relationship be.
In productive labour, especially where payment is based upon the number
of standard articles produced in a day, or upon the number of standard
operations performed in a given time, the records of actual performance
are probably the best measures of success available as a standard
against which to judge the reliability of a test. The record for one day
or for one week would be less reliable usually than the record for a
month or a longer period.
In many business organizations and industries there is no such
satisfactory standard of success as individual production records, and
in such cases it is necessary to make use of the judgments of foremen,
supervisors, or superintendents. These are far less satisfactory records
of efficiency and are subject to gross errors and prejudices, but they
are the only available measures of many workers. If the rating as to
ability is the consensus of the judgments of two or more supervisors,
each making his rating without any reference to that made by any other
person, the result is much more reliable than the rating of any single
supervisor would be.
Very grave errors creep into a rating of efficiency where the ratings
are made by different supervisors, each supervisor rating only a few
men. Even where a detailed schedule of qualities is listed, each to be
given a definite weight or importance in making up the total rating, as
in the Army Rating Scale, the degree of ability which one man’s
experience leads him to call “Average” will call forth a rating of
“Superior” from another equally able supervisor whose experience has
been with slightly different people. If individuals A, B, and C are
rated by the first supervisor and individuals D, E, and F by the second,
it is not at all safe to assume that C is rated fairly in relation to D.
Only when two individuals are rated by the same supervisors upon the
same scale and under the same conditions is it legitimate or safe to
assume that their relative abilities are well indicated by the ratings.
Assuming that the reader has obtained a reliable order of merit for the
individuals he is using as a check upon the value of the Mentimeter
tests, no test should be considered useful which does not result in
approximately this same order of merit. The tests are, of course, so
short and so crude that it is not to be expected that any test will,
except by chance, show exactly the same order of ability as the
production records or supervisor’s ratings furnish, but some tests will
show much closer correspondence than others. Those tests which
correspond most closely should be employed, while those tests which do
not correspond at all should not be employed, regardless of any
statement of the authors or any preconceived ideas of the reader as to
what tests ought to foretell ability in any particular line of work. The
proof of a test or of any method of prognostication lies in the degree
to which it actually arranges people in the order of their relative
efficiency in the tasks for which one seeks to foretell success.
A mere glance at a record such as that shown below for twenty-eight
sixth-grade pupils would show that there was a real relationship between
the scholarship marks, the teacher’s estimate of intelligence, and the
results of educational measurements taken by an outsider.
SCORES AND RATINGS OF SIXTH-GRADE CLASS
═════════════════╤═════════════════╤═════════════════╤═════════════════
NAME OF PUPIL │ EDUCATIONAL │TEACHER’S RANKING│ SUMMARY OF
│ MEASUREMENTS │ OF INTELLIGENCE │ TEACHER’S MARKS
│ SCORE │(1 IS BRIGHTEST) │ IN SCHOLARSHIP
│ (NO. OF ERRORS) │ │
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
Adelaide │ 36. │ 19│ 85
Ruth │ 16.5│ 15│ 90
Alexander │ 25.5│ 7│ 93
LaMonte │ 46.5│ 6│ 93
Earl │ 76.5│ 18│ 77
│ │ │
Joseph │ 20.5│ 20│ 85
Amadeo │ 75. │ 14│ 85
Leo │ 48. │ 3│ 93
William │ 53.5│ 9│ 82
Isabel │ 25. │ 21│ 76
│ │ │
Ida │ 36.5│ 4│ 94
Hazel │ 15. │ 10│ 90
Frederick │ 65. │ 26│ 86
Charles │ 58.5│ 13│ 85
Edward │ 30. │ 1│ 95
│ │ │
Benjamin │ 62.5│ 24│ 76
Bruce │ 56. │ 22│ 87
Alden │ 55. │ 12│ 87
George │ 60.5│ 17│ 87
Alice │ 29. │ 11│ 88
│ │ │
Almira │ 15.5│ 5│ 96
Helen │ 16.5│ 2│ 90
Elizabeth │ 65.5│ 23│ 75
Amelia │ 24.5│ 8│ 92
Edwin │ 19. │ 16│ 89
│ │ │
Robert │ 67. │ 28│ 71
Edna │ 47. │ 27│ 78
Samuel │ 72. │ 25│ 80
─────────────────┴─────────────────┴─────────────────┴─────────────────
The things which are not so evident at a glance are the degrees of
relationship between these three types of measures. Is the relation of
educational measurements to the teacher’s estimates greater than the
relation of the measurements to the marks in scholarship given by the
teacher? In order to measure precisely the relative degrees of
correspondence between various measures and estimates of the abilities
of individuals, it is quite evident that something more accurate and
exact than mere inspection is necessary.
For an explanation of the method by which the exact relationship may be
worked out mathematically between the results of a test and the true
abilities of the individuals tested, the reader is referred to pages
326–331 in the appendix. The discussion which will be found there of the
method of calculating a coefficient of coördination will not be
difficult to understand nor will the method be difficult of application
for any one who wishes to measure the exact reliability of any of the
Mentimeter tests or of any other test. For many purposes such a record
as is shown on the preceding page, giving the score of the individual in
each test used, will reveal the essential facts regarding the
correspondence between test results and demonstrated ability. The reader
should be cautious, however, about accepting a conclusion drawn from
casual observation of such a table as that shown on the preceding page
without checking up the accuracy of this conclusion by actually working
out the coefficient of coördination according to the method shown in the
appendix.
When the reader has tried out, upon a fairly large group of persons of
known ability, the Mentimeter tests which seem to him to promise
greatest usefulness, and when he has made his calculations and
discovered which tests actually do classify his people most accurately,
it will then be possible for him to make an intelligent scientific
selection of tests for practical use. Let us suppose, for example, that
an employer wishes to have a set of tests whereby he may select
intelligent sales-girls. By giving the ten or twelve tests which seem
most hopeful for the purpose to fifty or sixty saleswomen, who have been
in his employ long enough to demonstrate their relative degrees of
ability and intelligence, the five or six tests may be chosen whose
results show the closest relation to their demonstrated ability for
intelligent salesmanship.
The results obtained by the separate tests chosen should also be
compared, for two tests may measure practically the same mental trait
and have a very high coördination with each other. In such a case, it
would seem almost a useless waste to retain in the group two tests which
measured the same phase of ability. The one of the pair which showed the
less close relationship to the true ranking might be dropped from the
list without much loss to the total effectiveness of the group of tests.
A group of tests thus carefully selected would prove very helpful and
effective in the selection of untrained material for training or in the
classification of experienced employees according to their intellectual
qualifications for the type of position held by the people on whom the
validity of the tests had been proved.
The advantage of such a well-selected “team” of tests is not so much
that it selects various grades of ability more accurately than
supervisors could select it after many months of experience in trying to
train the new material, but that the tests make a satisfactory
classification immediately, which saves the salaries and time of those
applicants who would certainly fail in the training period. Even with
the very best coefficients of coördination between the tests and actual
demonstrated ability in the trade or position, the tests will not be
infallible. On the other hand, no supervisor’s judgment would be
infallible, either. And the supervisor would be much more likely to make
errors through personal likes and dislikes than the impersonal tests
could possibly be.
The tests are an invaluable aid, when they are themselves chosen with
the scientific care outlined above, although it would be a short-sighted
policy for any firm to trust entirely to the results of intelligence
tests in the employment of its personnel. Appearance, voice, education,
manners, physical size, and many other qualities are sometimes quite as
important as the degree of intelligence, and the intelligence tests do
not measure other elements of personality than the mental qualities.
Warning should also be given against using a particular set of
intelligence tests, selected because they show high correspondence with
ability in salesmanship, for example, as a measure of the intellectual
qualities of candidates for some other position. Sets of tests, selected
because they have been found accurate in classifying soldiers or school
children for instruction, may not be of maximum usefulness in
classifying machinists or business managers. The Mentimeter tests offer
a wide variety, from which it is proposed that only those shall be used
which have actually proved useful in classifying candidates for the
particular task concerned. There is no reason to believe that exactly
the same type of intelligence is required in all positions.
Having chosen certain promising tests for experiment, having proved the
validity of these tests by checking up the relation of their results to
the true abilities of a group of old employees or persons whose relative
capacities are known perfectly, and having selected those tests whose
results relate most directly to intellectual ability and least directly
to one another, one may begin to employ the tests thus selected for the
sorting and classification of new recruits or applicants. The question
which will at once confront the reader who is not experienced in the
employment of statistics of this sort is “How shall the test results be
recorded and interpreted?”
The answer to the question regarding test records is that the exact
score of each person should be kept for each test to which that person
is “exposed.” One difficulty with the records kept of certain other
group intelligence tests is that only the final total score is retained,
while all the wealth of detail furnished by the different tests included
in the series is lost. The total score on a series of six or eight
intelligence tests is worth keeping, but the separate scores on each of
the six or eight may prove to be even more illuminating than the total
score. Two candidates may make the same total score on a series of tests
but the one may make his points chiefly in memory tests with little help
from the tests calling for complex thought, while the other may do very
poorly in the memory work and very well in the thought tests. If only
the total score on the series were retained, the usefulness of the
series would be practically destroyed for many purposes.
For the interpretation of the result recorded on any test, one will need
to use some short but intelligible scheme for stating the true relation
of the score of any individual to the scores of the remainder of his
group or to the scores of the other group of old employees used as a
standard in selecting the tests to be regularly employed. It is not
always safe to say merely that Mr. K—— is below the average of his
group. As an extreme case of how unjust this might be, let us suppose
that in one of the Mentimeter tests, A made a score of 0; B made a score
of 2; C, a score of 1; D, 2; E, 3; F, 0; G, 10; H, 2; I, 3; J, 9; and K,
3. The average score of this small group, obtained by adding the eleven
scores and dividing by 11, is 3.18. Mr. K—— therefore obtained a score
which was below the average of the group, even though fewer than 20 per
cent. of his group made better scores than he. _The average score is too
much influenced by extremely low or extremely high scores._
To arrive at a proper perspective for interpreting the score of any
individual, it is necessary first of all to have a _distribution_ of the
scores made by all the persons in the group with which the individual is
to be compared. Such a distribution should show how frequently each
possible score was made. The table on the left illustrates the idea of a
distribution, using as material the scores quoted above for eleven
individuals tested by a Mentimeter test. This table shows that one
person had a score of 10, that one other had a score of 9, and that 3
was the next highest score made. The mode, or most common score, in this
distribution is a 2 or a 3, which fact makes K’s score of 3 appear as
quite typical of his group. The modal or most frequent score is a really
useful score with which to compare the record of any individual,
although it is not as safe a measure of the central tendency of a
distribution as is the median score.
DISTRIBUTION
═════════════╤═════════════
SIZE OF SCORE│ FREQUENCY
─────────────┼─────────────
10│ 1
9│ 1
8│ 0
7│ 0
6│ 0
5│ 0
4│ 0
3│ 3
2│ 3
1│ 1
0│ 2
─────────────┼─────────────
TOTAL │ 11
─────────────┴─────────────
The median score of a distribution is the middle score, than which there
are just as many larger as smaller. The median score is found by
beginning at one end of a distribution and counting through half of the
frequencies. To count through half of the eleven frequencies in the
above distribution would bring us into the midst of the three who had
scores of 2, and therefore 2 is the median score with which K’s score,
or the score of any other individual, should be compared.
The reader who is mathematically inclined may wish to find the median
point in the distribution, the point which bisects the distribution. To
find this, one needs to study his facts carefully and make such
assumptions as seem most probable for the facts which are not perfectly
apparent. For example, of the three persons who scored 2 points, one
individual may have had the third problem thought out and have been in
the very act of writing the correct answer to it when the time was up,
while another may have just finished problem two without having begun to
read the third problem, and the third person may have been right in the
middle of his thought about problem three. Not knowing what the exact
truth is, we may assume that of the three who had a score of 2, one’s
true score was between 2 and 2.33, another’s was between 2.33 and 2.66
and that the third’s was between 2.67 and 3.00.
If we count out the five who scored 3 or higher, we shall still require
half of the distance represented by the next highest individual in order
to have counted out 5.5 (half of 11). If our assumption is true, then,
we shall need to count half way down from 3.00 to 2.67 in order to find
the median point, 2.83. The calculation of the median point is not
necessary, however, unless there is a very large number of cases in the
distribution and unless very accurate comparisons must be made. In
passing it may be said that the calculation of the median point at 2.83
is just as sensible and just as accurate as the calculation of the
average point at 3.18, and that the median point is a much more useful
measure of the distribution than the more commonly used average.
The user of the Mentimeter tests will not, under ordinary circumstances,
be satisfied with interpreting an individual’s score merely by
indicating its direction from the median, mode or average of a group. It
will not usually be sufficient to say “He made the modal or most popular
score,” or “His score was lower than the average,” or even “His score
was higher than the median.” Some indication will be desired as to how
much better or poorer a given score is than the median, or just what
percentage of the standard group made better scores. An illustration of
the method to be employed in such calculations and a review of the
method of finding the median is given below in connection with a
distribution of scores on one of the Mentimeter tests. (See Mentimeter
No. 24, page 234.)
═════════════════╤═════════════════╤═════════════════╤═════════════════
I │ II │ III │ IV
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
SIZE OF SCORE │FREQUENCY: NO. OF│ TOTAL NO. FROM │ TOTAL % FROM
ANALOGIES TEST │COLLEGE GRADUATES│ LOWEST SCORES │ LOWEST SCORES
─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────┼─────────────────
30│ 2│ 129│ 100
29│ 4│ 127│ 98.5
28│ 10│ 123│ 95.3
27│ 22│ 113│ 87.6
26│ 32│ 91│ 70.6
│ │ │
25│ 20│ 59│ 45.8
24│ 18│ 39│ 30.3
23│ 8│ 21│ 16.3
22│ 4│ 13│ 10.1
21│ 2│ 9│ 7.0
│ │ │
20│ 1│ 7│ 5.4
19│ 2│ 6│ 4.7
18│ 1│ 4│ 3.1
17│ 1│ 3│ 2.3
16│ ...│ ...│ .....
│ │ │
15│ 1│ 2│ 1.6
14│ ...│ ...│ .....
13│ ...│ ...│ .....
12│ 1│ 1│ .8
11│ ...│ ...│ .....
│ ———│ │
TOTAL │ 129│ │
─────────────────┴─────────────────┴─────────────────┴─────────────────
Having distributed the scores obtained by a group of college graduates
on the Analogies test, the next important step toward their
interpretation is the totaling of the frequencies up to and including
those of each possible size, as shown in the third column of the
accompanying table. The fourth column is then prepared showing the
corresponding _percentages_ of the total number (129) of persons tested,
for each of the total frequencies shown in column III. The table as a
whole is then to be read from left to right. As an example, one may
begin at 20 in the first column and read as follows: “1 college graduate
made a score of exactly 20 points, making in all 7 individuals who
obtained a score of 20 points or less, which (7) is 5.4 per cent. of the
129 individuals tested.” Dropping the eye to the next percentage below
this line in column IV, one can interpret the score of the individual
who made a score of 20 as follows: “This is a poor showing for a college
graduate, for of 129 college graduates tested only 4.7 per cent. made a
lower score.”
A very popular method of interpreting a score is to tell in what quarter
or, as the statisticians would say, in what “quartile” of the
distribution a given score is found. The upper or first quartile of a
distribution is the range of scores below which 75 per cent. of those
tested have fallen. The second quartile is the range of scores below
which 50 per cent. are found but above which 25 per cent. of those
tested are found. The third quartile is the range below which only 25
per cent. are found and above which 50 per cent. are found, and the
fourth or lowest quartile is the range of scores in which are found the
lowest 25 per cent. of the scores made. The first and second quartiles
are above the median, while the third and fourth quartiles are below the
median. Obviously the individual who scored 20 points in the Analogies
test, and is included in the lowest 5.4 per cent. is also in the lowest
quartile of the college graduate scores. The point dividing the first
and second quartiles is called the 75 percentile, while the point
dividing the third and fourth quartiles is called the 25 percentile. As
was stated above, the median or 50 percentile divides the second and
third quartiles.
Columns III and IV in the foregoing table assist one quite materially in
calculating the median and the other percentile points. To find the
median, one will need to count half way through the distribution, in
this case to count out 64.5 scores (129/2 = 64.5). The 20 persons who
scored on 25, in the above distribution, are shown by column III to be
included in the lowest 59 scores and by column IV to be in the lowest
45.8 per cent. To include 64.5 (or 50 per cent.) of the scores, 5.5 of
the 32 individuals who scored on 26 will need to be taken (64.5 − 59 =
5.5); 5.5 is .17 of 32, so it will be necessary to take .17 of the
distance (26.0 up to 27.0) represented by a score of 26. This places the
50 percentile or median point at 26.17, if we assume that the 32
individuals obtaining a score of 26 were evenly distributed in their
exact values between 26.0 and 27.0, which is the safest assumption one
can make about these scores.
The 25 percentile is found by counting out one fourth of the
frequencies, beginning with the low-score end of the distribution. In
the case of the college graduates’ distribution on the Analogies test,
the 25 percentile is 24.63. The 75 percentile, which is found by
counting out three fourths of the frequencies from the low-score end or
one fourth from the high-score end of the distribution, is 27.26 in the
case of the analogies distribution shown above. The “middle 50 per
cent.” of the distribution, or the second and third quartiles, lie
between 24.6 and 27.3 according to these calculations. One may therefore
assert that the typical college graduate, meaning one who is within the
two middle quartiles of the college graduate distribution, should be
expected to make a score of 24, 25, 26, or 27 on the Analogies test in
the Mentimeter series.
Occasionally intellectual measurements are reported by tenths, the first
tenth being the tenth of the distribution having the highest scores,
just as the first quartile is the quarter containing the highest scores.
For practical purposes with the Mentimeter tests, however, it is
recommended (1) that the score made on each test be recorded, (2) that
the median score of the standard group, with which each individual’s
score is to be compared, be calculated, and (3) that the percentage of
the standard group making lower scores than that individual’s score be
used as an interpretation. For these simple interpretations, a table,
such as that shown on page 102 for college graduates in the Analogies
tests, practically completes the necessary calculations,[2] except for
the calculation of the median score. It will be fairly intelligible to
describe Henry Smith’s score as follows: “Smith has a score of 24 points
as compared with the median score of 26.2 points for his group. Only
16.3 per cent. of the college graduates make a poorer score than Smith,
but 69.7 per cent. make a better score.”
Footnote 2:
For the purpose of assisting the reader in keeping and interpreting
records of the Mentimeter tests, the authors have prepared a record
booklet which may be used with the tests to excellent advantage. It
will be found economical to use this booklet because of the guide
lines, headings, and practical suggestions which it contains, reducing
copying and memory work in the calculations to a minimum. It is
recommended also that calculating tables or a slide rule be used to
calculate the percentages called for in the final column of the
distribution tables. Such aids are very desirable because of their
contribution to the accuracy of results and to economy of time.
Assuming now that the reader has a fairly clear idea of how to
administer and record the results of the Mentimeter tests, the next
question to be answered is: “What shall be done about these test
records?” Measurement in any field does not change to any appreciable
degree the material which has been measured. The surveyor, for example,
who measures the area of a field makes very little impression upon the
soil over which he passes. A physician who measures the weight of an
infant does not thereby increase that weight or diminish it. In the same
way the psychologist who applies a Mentimeter test to a filing clerk,
does not by that act increase the efficiency of that clerk.
Measurements, of themselves, are of no value. Something must be done
about the result which is obtained or all of the expense in time and
money is of no avail.
The real purpose of a measurement is to tell facts about a situation
more exactly and with greater objectiveness than they could be told in a
description. A child may seem, on first appearance, to be under weight,
but in order to know definitely whether or not that is true it is
necessary to measure his age in terms of years, months, and days, to
measure his weight in terms of pounds and ounces, and to measure his
height in terms of feet and inches. All of these measurements taken
together, however, will not hinder the child’s growth or make him
develop more rapidly; they merely indicate what his present condition
is, without reference to what it may have been in the past or what it
may become in the future.
As a sample of the great benefit which may be obtained from knowing
mental facts exactly, we may consider the traditions and present status
of our public school systems. Education has in the past been pointed,
from the very beginning in the kindergarten toward the high school and
the college and ultimately the professional school in which lawyers,
physicians, ministers, and teachers were to be prepared. The child who
by nature was not inclined toward the consideration of abstract ideas
and theories soon found that the schools were not well adapted to his
interests.
The percentage of persons in our population who cannot successfully
think and work with abstract symbols and verbal ideas is very much
greater than most of us have been inclined to believe. We have stated or
implied that any boy who would stay in school long enough might fit
himself to become a United States Senator or possibly a great newspaper
editor, or lawyer. Those pupils who found it impossible to assimilate
the type of thing that was offered by the public schools have been
eliminated and sent out into the industrial world to find materials
which would correspond to their interests.
Educators have still further made the error of saying or implying that
it was the inferior people who were thus forced out of school. The
authors of the present book wish to assert their belief that the mind of
a man whose interests lie in handling people and concrete objects is not
at all inferior on that account to the mind of the man who handles ideas
and abstract conceptions.
Measures of intelligence have in the past been chiefly those which would
be favourable to the abstract thinker. The Alpha test, used in the Army,
proved conclusively to those who studied the results most carefully,
that fully half of our population can never succeed, even moderately, in
the manipulation of abstract ideas. The large proportion of our boys and
girls who come to school are absolutely doomed to be unsuccessful and to
become discouraged in their attempts to progress in the courses which
are commonly given, and yet the public supports these schools, and the
administrators of these schools try to claim that they offer “equal
opportunity to all.” Actually the kind of opportunity offered can be
used effectively by only a small percentage of the pupils. Unless the
child has the ability to interpret symbols and juggle ideas he is
declared to be inferior and is forced out to learn for himself how to
earn a living and to secure his rights.
The Mentimeter tests and other measures of intellectual abilities
provide the means whereby pupils may be classified, at the very
beginning of their education, according to the degree to which the
formal academic training will be assimilated. These tests make it
possible to select those who do not think abstractly but who require
concrete objects or persons as the material for their mental activity.
Unless the public recognizes that it owes an appropriate education to
these people just as surely as it does to the academic few, it will not
be long until this great group, in which our present schools develop the
habit of failure and discontent, will arise to overthrow the injustices
which our past aristocratic organization of society has handed on to
them.
It is not proposed that certain individuals be selected by the
Mentimeter tests and trained psychologists and then condemned to
training of a less respectable order than that which is now offered.
What is proposed is that by the use of intelligence tests students in
schools be classified and placed in classes where they can learn things
which it is within their mental power and interests to grasp and which
will be of practical value and of social significance in the development
of good citizens; rather than to continue, as we have in the past,
condemning this large majority of our population to failure in school
and elimination from the benefits of public taxation for education.
It is no disgrace for a blind man to be unable to paint beautiful
pictures, nor is it considered a great social injustice for a man of
ordinary size to be denied the opportunity of serving as a giant in a
side show. It should not be considered by any one that being a good
valet or mule driver or boot black or street cleaner is a less
respectable calling for a man whose mind demands concrete objects for
its exercise than the expounding of the gospel or explanation of legal
technicalities is to the man whose mind is inclined toward abstract
ideas and relationships. If we are to have an effective social
organization each person must do the type of thing for which his brain
and his physical body fit him, without feeling that he is thereby either
inferior or superior to any other person. We must help one another, each
supplying that service for which he is best fitted. To continue as we
have in the past, encouraging every child to look for a “white-collar
job” at the end of his educational career is to foster the monster of
discontent and unrest which threatens to destroy the very foundations of
modern society.
If the Mentimeter tests which follow can do no more than point out for
employers and educators the limits to which those who are dependent upon
them can go in the understanding and use of abstract ideas, they will
thereby have contributed materially to the happiness and contentment of
a weary world. Along with the results of the tests there must, however,
be this feeling of responsibility for one another and the recognition of
the need for “pulling together” for the common good, each man
contributing that for which his inheritance has fitted him, else we
shall continue to force men to learn failure and discontent in our
schools and thereby destroy the social structure we have been so long in
building.
CHAPTER X
THE MENTIMETER TESTS
Tests of the abilities of human beings may be classified upon a great
many different bases. It is possible, first of all, to classify them
according to the qualities of mind and body which they measure. The
reason it is difficult so to classify tests of mental ability is that
the mind refuses to be cut up into different parts, each one responsible
for a specific characteristic. No test can be solved by the use of one
and only one group of intellectual faculties. The results obtained in
any mental examination are the complex effects of an immense number of
different characteristics. No attempt has therefore been made in the
classification of the Mentimeters to say that one measures imagination,
another measures attention, and another some other quality. Almost every
quality enters to some degree in each test.
It is possible to classify tests according to the subject matter which
they contain. The Mentimeter tests are so arranged, where it is
possible, as to cover a very wide range of subject matter.
It is possible to classify examinations according to the activity
required of the candidate being examined. A number of the Mentimeter
tests call for _completing_ a series of objects or ideas, while a number
of others call for _memory_ of a certain sort, and still others require
_discrimination_ between certain differing elements. These differences
in the activity of the candidate examined, are not, however, the chief
distinctions to be made between the tests.
It is possible to classify measurements according to the number of
candidates that may be examined at the same time. Some tests cannot be
given readily to more than one person at a time, while other tests can
be given to several at the same sitting. In so far as possible, the
Mentimeter tests are so arranged that they can be given to large numbers
at the same sitting. This makes for economy of time and of effort on the
part of the examiner.
It is possible to classify tests according to physical characteristics
of the candidate examined, such as tests for infants, tests for
children, and tests for adults, or tests for the blind and tests for the
deaf. The first test in the Mentimeter series is for infants while the
remainder of the tests are intended to measure older people.
Tests may further be classified according to the language capacity of
the candidates who are examined. Certain of the Mentimeter tests are for
non-English-speaking persons primarily, while others are primarily for
those who speak English, and still others for those who read English.
The Mentimeter series of examinations which follows consists of thirty
different tests, the majority of which are modifications of tests which
have been used previously elsewhere. The first test in the series is to
be used as an individual test of very young children. The blank provided
furnishes brief suggestions, at each point, of what the procedure should
be, and also furnishes a place for the examiner to record the result of
his questions and observations.
Each examination booklet in the Mentimeter series has on its title page
blanks as follows:
┌────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ │
│ NAME______________________________________ │
│ │
│ AGE AT LAST BIRTHDAY_______LOCATION_______ │
│ │
│ __________________________________________ │
│ │
└────────────────────────────────────────────┘
The space headed “Location” is to be used to indicate the business or
industrial organization or the department of the candidate being
examined; or the grade, class, and school of a school pupil. These
blanks should always be filled out before the examination begins.
At the middle of the page directions are frequently given with examples
to serve in explaining concretely just what the nature of the test is
going to be. In the lower right-hand corner of the title page there
appears a blank, preceded by the words “Total Score.” This is to be
filled out by the examiner after the candidate has marked his paper and
after the examiner has scored the results.
Tests numbered from 2 to 10 are classified as tests for
non-English-speaking persons. They were designed originally, and can
best be used, as group tests, although the directions given on the
following pages for these members of the Mentimeter family are usually
in terms of an individual examination. If it had been possible to
prepare and furnish with this book large charts on which the explanatory
samples could be exhibited and the pantomime instructions clearly
demonstrated for a group of people at the same time, the instructions
would have been printed as for a group examination. Within the confines
of a title page of a test booklet only small examples can be presented,
and therefore the instructions are for measuring one individual at a
time. Any employer, teacher, or supervisor who plans to make use of
these tests for non-English-speaking persons would do well to prepare
the demonstration material in enlarged form in order to use it in giving
the tests to groups of individuals at the same time.
In giving a group test it is practically always necessary to obtain the
identifying information called for on the title page before the booklets
are opened or turned over. There is a distinct tendency for candidates
to try to glance at the pages which follow unless specific directions
are given as the papers are distributed that this must not occur.
The procedure in giving Mentimeters 2 to 10 to people who can understand
and even read English is very little different from the procedure to be
used with the foreign-language-speaking groups.
Mentimeters 11 to 15 cannot be given as group tests because of the great
amount of writing which this would entail. Group tests are most
efficient when candidates are required to do nothing other than check
the correct answers without having to write anything.
Mentimeters 16 to 30 may be given as individual examinations, although
they are planned as group examinations and the results obtained from
their use as group examinations will be superior to the results obtained
from their use as individual examinations.
In giving all of these tests it is very important that the printed forms
prepared by the publishers be employed and that the directions which
follow be carefully observed. The stencils furnished with the printed
test booklets make it possible for a clerk of average mental capacity to
mark and score the results of these examinations with great rapidity and
with just as much accuracy as could be obtained by specialists working
without such stencils. These stencils and the group method make
psychological examinations economical of administration.
The list of Mentimeter tests is as follows:
THE MENTIMETER TESTS
TEST FOR INFANTS
1. Typical Performance
TESTS FOR NON-ENGLISH-SPEAKING PERSONS
2. Pictorial Absurdities
3. Maze Threading
4. Dot Pattern Correction
5. Dividing Geometric Figures
6. Completion of Form Series
7. Checking Identity of Numbers
8. Digit-Symbol Substitution
9. Completion of Number Relation Series
10. Addition Tests
INDIVIDUAL TESTS FOR ENGLISH-SPEAKING PERSONS
11. Memory for Numbers
12. Repeating Numbers Backward
13. Memory for Sentences
14. Speaking Vocabulary
15. Word Discrimination
GROUP TESTS FOR PERSONS WHO READ ENGLISH
16. Naming Opposites
17. Spelling Tests
18. Range of Information
19. Reading: Vocabulary
20. Reading: Directions
21. Reading: Interpretation
22. Disarranged Sentences
23. Completion of Sentences
24. Analogies or Mixed Relations
25. Handwriting Tests
26. English Composition
27. Poetic Discrimination
28. Arithmetic Reasoning
29. Practical Judgment
30. Logical Conclusions.
MENTIMETER NO. 1
TYPICAL PERFORMANCES OF YOUNG CHILDREN
_Character of the Test._
The mental capacity of adult persons is indicated rather accurately by
the number and variety of things they have learned from the school of
life, omitting from the count so far as possible those things directly
taught by the formal schools. The intellectual capacity of an infant is
likewise indicated roughly by the changes which his brief experience in
life has brought about in his ability to control himself and his
immediate surroundings. At birth the child is practically without
control of his own body, except for certain sucking reflexes, certain
crying reflexes, and the reflex which causes it to grasp with its
fingers or toes the finger or pencil which is brought into contact with
them. These reflexes can hardly be said to be a part of the child’s
control of his own body, for the child could not avoid obeying them if
he so desired. The new-born infant is practically helpless even so far
as his own body is concerned. Any degree of control he may later develop
over his body or over other things outside is attained because he has a
system of nerve and brain cells capable of forming connections and being
modified by these connections and their results.
The degree to which the child’s nervous system is organized and supplied
with potential connections by inheritance is reflected very early in
life by the quickness with which it learns to control itself and its
immediate environment. The most ready method of testing this inherited
capacity is therefore to determine at any particular age just how
complex and adequate a system of control has been developed. The tests
for measuring infants and young children consist, then, in those
performances under specified standard conditions, which are typical for
children at various ages.
The Mentimeter for young children is based directly upon the findings of
Prof. Lewis M. Terman and his students in their investigations of
children from three to twenty years of age. This investigation was so
carefully devised and executed that to improve on the product, the
Stanford Revision of the Binet tests, would be almost impossible. The
tests for children three and four years of age presented in the
following pages are therefore not claimed to be new or original with the
present authors, who hereby express to Doctor Terman their admiration
for his excellent contributions in the field of psychological
measurements. The tests here suggested for children under three years of
age are modifications of those suggested by Doctor Kuhlmann. All
investigators in this field are, of course, indebted to the pioneers,
the French psychologists, Binet and Simon.
The method of this test series consists in putting the child into a
well-defined situation and observing how he acts. The situation may
consist partly in words or other noises impressing themselves upon his
ears, or it may consist largely in visual sensations, or even in
sensations of physical well-being in his own body. Under a given
situation a normal child of a given age or older will act in a certain
standard way. The measurement then is in terms of the age for which a
given child’s reactions are typical.
The test can best be given by one who is fairly familiar with the infant
to be tested, although interest in having the child make a good showing
should never be allowed to change one’s judgment of the facts as to the
child’s performance. Another danger of too great familiarity is that the
examiner may, without intention to do so, drill the child upon those
things which are later to be required in the test. In so far as the
parent knows what performances are to be included in the tests there is
real danger that the child will be “coached up” on these things, even at
as early an age as six months.
_List of Typical Performances._
THREE MONTHS (3 tests, credit 1 month each)
1. Control of eyes (Both eyes look in same direction. Follows with
eyes the movement of bright objects).
2. Hearing (Reacts with sudden start or scream to loud noises, such as
slamming of door, hand clapping. Turns eyes or head in direction
of less startling noises, such as opening of door, footsteps).
3. Muscular Control (Moves hand or toy directly to mouth without
striking other parts of body and face. Grasps or curls fingers
about rattle or pencil placed in hands).
SIX MONTHS (3 tests, credit 1 month each)
1. Muscular Control (Balances head without support. Sits ten minutes
or more when supported).
2. Self-Direction (Attempts to catch self when beginning to fall from
sitting posture. Reaches out for toys and near-by objects.
Attempts to pull self to sitting posture if given a hand to
grasp).
3. Enjoyment (Plays longer and more persistently with one toy than
with another. Laughs aloud when bounced on bed or when familiars
indulge in strenuous exercise).
ONE YEAR (6 tests, credit 1 month each)
1. Imitation of Movements (Can learn in half dozen trials to “wave
bye-bye,” put hands above head, or hide face in hands).
2. Locomotion (Creeps toward desired objects, or stands beside a chair
without other assistance).
3. Understanding (Looks at frequently observed objects when names are
mentioned: dog, ball, mama, flowers).
4. Obedience (Understands and usually obeys simple commands: “Lie
down! No, No! Spit it out!”).
5. Speech (Repeats simple syllables: “go, go; da, da; ma, ma;
bye-bye”).
6. Calls attention (Shouts exclamations, looks or even points to
objects of special interest: dogs, cats, train, carts, etc).
TWO YEARS (6 tests, credit 2 months each)
1. Speech (Names articles of food desired: milk, cracker, rice, etc).
2. Pictures (Points out familiar objects: boy, dog, cat, cow, man).
3. Obedience (Put ball in basket. Close the door. Bring the ball).
4. Imitation (Imitates actions of other children at play).
5. Discernment (Removes wrapping from candy; opens sack to get
cookies).
6. Self-Direction (Walks directly to desired locations; rides
“kiddie-kar” forward).
THREE YEARS (6 tests, credit 2 months each)
1. Parts of Body (Points to nose, eyes, mouth, hair).
2. Familiar Objects (Names key, penny, knife, watch, pencil).
3. Pictures (Enumerates objects in pictures: Dutch Home, Canoe, and
Post Office).
4. Able to tell own sex.
5. Gives last name.
6. Repeats sentences of 6 or 7 syllables.
FOUR YEARS (6 tests, credit 2 months each)
1. Discriminates between circles, squares, and triangles.
2. Counts four pennies.
3. Copies a square.
4. Comprehension of described situation.
5. Repeats four numbers in order: 4739 2854 7261
6. Repeats sentences of 12 or 13 syllables.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
A very large part of this test must be given informally. It will be
necessary to spend considerable time with each child examined in order
to make certain that the reactions observed are not merely random
movements which are not typical. For the tests of children three years
of age and above the reader should very carefully study the detailed
directions given by Professor Terman in his book, “The Measurement of
Intelligence,” published by Houghton Mifflin Company, if scientific
accuracy of results is necessary. The materials called for may be
secured from C. H. Stoelting and Company, 3037 Carroll Ave., Chicago.
The directions given below are intended to be elementary and to indicate
what is typical of children at each age rather than to serve as a
perfect guide for the most scientific examinations.
THREE MONTHS
At the age of three months an infant should be able to coördinate his
eyes; that is, to direct both eyes in the same direction and to move
them simultaneously. When bright objects are brought into his field of
vision and moved slowly from one side to the other, he should be able to
follow with his eyes. As a matter of fact, many infants have attained
this degree of control within the first week of their lives, but lack of
control to this extent at the end of three months is an indication that
special medical attention should be sought.
For several days after birth the infant does not ordinarily hear any of
the sounds or noises which occur in his vicinity. By the time he has
become three months old, it should be apparent, from the sudden start or
scream of the child when a door is slammed or someone in his
neighbourhood suddenly claps his hands, that the child actually hears
these noises. The average child at three months has become so familiar
with life and its evidences that he will be able to turn his eyes in the
direction of such noises as the opening of a door or the sound of
footsteps near his bed.
The first evidences of the child’s recognition of sounds or sights are
very difficult to interpret because they consist almost entirely in
awkward, random moving of the hands and feet. Gradually the child
develops some control over these movements and by the age of three
months should be able to move his hand, or a toy in his hand, directly
to his mouth without striking other parts of his body or face in the
process. The early tendency of the infant to curl his fingers about a
pencil or rattle which is placed in contact with them seems almost to
disappear during the first month, but by the age of three months the
child is again able to grasp such objects sufficiently to hold them for
periods ranging from thirty seconds upward.
SIX MONTHS
The control of his body has so improved by the time he has reached the
age of six months that the average child can balance his head without
support for several minutes. It is usually possible also for the child
to sit in a chair or on the bed with the support of pillows and bed
clothing for as much as ten minutes. Occasionally, of course, the child
will be able to sit alone as early as six months, but it is not wise to
encourage this practice. The lack of ability to sit when supported at
the age of six months is not necessarily an indication of lack of
intellectual power but may be due entirely to physical weakness.
Not only has the child at six months arrived at the stage where he can
balance his head and sit quietly when supported, but he has usually
begun to try to assist himself in various ways. Very frequently this
attempt at self-help will be evidenced by pulling movements intended to
bring him to a sitting posture when a hand is offered to him. There is
no hesitation in the ordinary child at six months in his reaching out
for toys or for a hand which is held toward him. Very frequently it will
be observed that such a child puts out its hand to catch itself if it is
beginning to fall from a sitting posture.
The child has usually begun to show signs of pleasure and displeasure
long before he has reached six months. This phase of development may be
indicated by his playing longer and more persistently with one toy than
with any other. It may be shown by much more animated activity when
certain familiar individuals are present than would be evidenced in the
presence of others equally well known. Very frequently children at this
age indulge in amused laughing aloud when bounced on the bed, or when
some well-known individual indulges in strenuous exercises accompanied
by vociferous exclamations while the baby is watching.
ONE YEAR
By the time a child has become twelve months old it will be possible to
teach it many little tricks and movements of a simple nature. The child
seems to imitate almost spontaneously the actions which are often
repeated by its parents or nurse. Six to twelve trials should be
sufficient to teach the average infant of one year how to “wave bye-bye”
when told to do so, or how to hold its hands above its head when asked
“How big are you?” or to hide its face behind its hands or behind one of
its covers when someone exclaims “Peek-a-boo.”
Some children never learn to creep before learning to walk. As a matter
of fact, it seems fairly certain that the child who creeps rapidly may
thereby postpone learning to walk. At the age of one year a child should
be able to stand beside a chair without other assistance than the
support given by the chair, or it should be able to creep very rapidly
toward its toys or any other desired objects. Frequently, of course,
children have learned to walk fairly well by the time they have attained
twelve months, but this is rather unusual and is not particularly an
indication of the degree of mental capacity.
The child of one year understands many common words applying to
frequently observed objects which have been repeatedly called to his
attention. When asked “Where is the dog?—where is the ball?—where are
the flowers?” and such questions the average infant will turn its head
and look toward the object mentioned, sometimes pointing, although this
is somewhat unusual.
Simple commands such as “Lie down! No-no! Spit it out!” and the like,
can be understood and are usually obeyed by children of this age.
The speech of a child at this age is of course very simple, consisting
of one syllable words, usually repeated. Such expressions as “ma-ma,”
“bye-bye,” “da-da,” “go-go,” may be expected in the average child. It is
unusual for an infant to combine two such expressions into a crude
sentence at this age.
The child at one year quite frequently has begun to attempt manipulation
of his environment as well as of his own body. Very frequently this will
be observed in shouts or exclamations accompanied by looking or even
pointing to objects which his familiars have previously pointed out to
him, such as dogs, cats, trains, carts, etc. These objects will
ordinarily not be named by the child, although peculiar sounds fitting
each one may frequently be distinguished. Another manifestation of this
same attempt at altering his environment will be the crying in which the
child will indulge when he desires to change his resting place or to
have something to eat.
TWO YEARS
By the time a child has become two years of age its speech has developed
to such an extent that it will be able to name, although frequently not
with clearness and distinct pronunciation, many of its toys and articles
of food. “Milk,” “rice,” and “cookie,” are examples of the most
frequently named objects. Many children have by this age also progressed
to the point where two or three or more words may be joined together to
form a crude sentence. There are on record children who by two years of
age were able to frame fairly good sentences and even to read from
simple books, but such records are very unusual.
At this time the child should be able to distinguish pictures of
familiar objects, such as dogs, cats, horses, men and boys. This will be
manifest not only in the child’s being able to name the objects to which
other people point in the picture, but when asked, “Where is the dog?”
the infant should be able to point to it if the picture is at all clear.
Simple commands should be thoroughly understood and the well-trained
infant will be able to obey without much delay such directions as “Put
the ball in the basket,” “Close the door,” “Bring me the doll,” and
“Show me the book.”
The average child at two years of age has become distinctly aware of
other children as persons more nearly related to itself than are the
adults with whom it is ordinarily associated. This reveals itself in
imitation of the actions of other children, such as waving the arms when
other children do so, hiding the face against the wall when other
children are playing hide and seek, and stepping rhythmically when other
children dance.
By the age of two years the average child can distinguish accurately
between that which is food and that which is not fit for eating. The
wrapping from candy or cookies or other well-liked food will be removed
or torn away before an attempt is made to eat the food. Frequently this
will result in great annoyance when the child opens sacks and packages
to which he is not entitled.
The child at this age has usually learned to walk quite erectly without
hesitation to any desired location. If the child is placed upon a
“kiddie-kar” his first reaction is to run it backward, but by the age of
two years he should be able to guide it well in going forward. Some
attempts will be made at running and a great many attempts at climbing
by the time the child has reached this age.
THREE YEARS
At three years of age a child when asked to point out different parts of
its body (nose, eyes, mouth, and hair) can do so without hesitation.
Familiar objects, such as a key, a penny, a pocketknife (closed), a
watch, and a pencil (common wooden) will be named at once if held out to
the child with the question, “What is this?”
The pictures used in the Stanford Revision of the Binet test may be
shown to the child with the direction “Tell me what you see in this
picture,” or “Look at the picture and tell me everything you can see in
it.” In response to such questions the child should be able to enumerate
different objects, such as the little girl, the window, the chair, and
the woman in the picture of the Dutch Home; or the men, the basket, and
the newspaper in the picture of the Post office.
At this age the child has had enough experience to be able to repeat its
last name and to know whether people call it a “girl” or a “boy.” The
question should be asked in the following fashion: “What is your name?”
If the answer is in terms of the given name only, then the question
should be amplified as follows: “Yes, but what is your other name?
Walter what?” If the surname is still not given, a fictitious one may be
framed and the question asked in some such fashion as follows: “Is your
name Walter Smith?” If the child is still unable to reply then it is
probable that he does not know the family name or is too frightened to
give it. In finding whether the child knows his sex the formula for a
boy should be: “Are you a little boy or a little girl?” For a girl the
question should be: “Are you a little girl or a little boy?”
At the age of three years a child should be able to repeat sentences
containing six or seven syllables. Those used by Terman are: (1) “I have
a little dog.” (2) “In summer the sun is hot.” (3) “The dog runs after
the cat.” In leading up to these repetitions it is well to ask the child
first to say single words, such as “school.” “Can you say school?” “Now
say, ‘I go to school.’” Then ask the child to say “I have a little dog.”
FOUR YEARS
By this time the child should be able to distinguish between circles,
squares, triangles, and other geometric forms. Ten drawings of circles,
squares, and triangles should be presented to the child and he should be
able to find one or two others just like the one to which the examiner
points.
The child should by this time be able to count pennies or buttons, at
least up to four, without any error. The child should be able to handle
a pencil well enough so that a square one inch each way could be copied
fairly well. The child’s memory has developed to such an extent that if
four numbers are repeated to him at the rate of one per second he should
be able to repeat them in correct order at once. Three trials should be
allowed and at least one of the three should be right. By this time,
also, a sentence of twelve or thirteen syllables should be remembered
correctly. The sentences used by Terman are: (1) “When the train passes
you will hear the whistle blow.” (2) “We are going to have a good time
in the country.” (3) “The boy’s name is John. He is a very good boy.”
The method of getting the child’s attention and leading up to these
longer sentences is the same as was described under Year Three.
The child’s judgment has developed by this time through experience and
precept to the point where an inquiry from the examiner as to “What must
you do when you are sleepy?” will bring forth a response indicating that
one should go to bed and sleep. The question of “What must you do when
you are cold?” should bring forth some such reply as, “Put on a coat,”
“Build a fire,” or “Stand next to the radiator.” The question, “What
must you do when you are hungry?” should bring forth such answers as
“Buy some lunch,” “Drink some milk,” or “Eat something.”
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The method of scoring is briefly indicated in the list of typical
performances printed on pages 115–117. The three tests at age three
months are each to be given one month credit. The three tests at six
months are likewise to be given one month credit for each successful
performance, as are the six tests at one year. The six tests at two
years, the six at three years, and the six at four years, are in each
case to be given a credit of two months each. The child who did
everything in the entire test correctly would then have demonstrated the
mental ability of the average child of four years or older. The child
who completes all of the tests at three months and one of the tests at
six months would then be rated as having mental ability typical of a
four-months-old-child. If the child were to fail on only one of the
tests at one year but to pass all those previous to one year, his mental
age score would be eleven months, according to this system of assigning
credits. It will frequently be found that a child does not pass all of
the one-year tests before being able to do one or two of the two-year
tests and so on. This should not make it more difficult to score the
test, for each particular performance has its value indicated in the
list which was given above.
It cannot be claimed that these tests, especially those below the
three-year-old level, have been fully standardized. They are, however,
very much better than the average parent or relative would be able to
prepare for him or herself. The mental age score which will result from
the use of these tests is not as reliable as will result from the use of
the Stanford Revision of the Binet tests with older children, but its
reliability is sufficient to point out cases of retardation in
intelligence or of distinct brilliance of mind.
THREE MONTHS
_Control of Eyes._ Both of the eyes should look in the same direction
and the child should be able to follow with its eyes the movements of
bright objects in order to obtain credit in this test.
_Hearing._ It will not be necessary for the child to react with a start
or scream to loud noises and also to react by turning the eyes in the
direction of less startling noises in order to obtain credit for
hearing. Either evidence, if clear, will be sufficient to warrant giving
credit.
_Muscular Control._ The grasping of a pencil or rattle should not be
taken as sufficient evidence of muscular control. The ability of the
child, however, to move his hand directly to his mouth as described
above will be in itself abundant evidence that the child merits a credit
in this test.
SIX MONTHS
_Muscular Control._ Either balancing the head or sitting with some
support for as much as ten minutes should be accepted as worthy of
credit.
_Self-direction._ The attempt to pull himself to a sitting posture
should not be taken by itself as evidence of credit in this test. Only
when it is accompanied by one of the other two evidences should it be
credited.
_Enjoyment._ Any two of the evidences of pleasure or displeasure listed
may be taken together as indication of credit being deserved.
ONE YEAR
_Imitation of Movement._ Any one of the movements described, which the
child learns within a short time by imitation, should give credit in
this test.
_Locomotion._ Either of the two methods of demonstration will be
sufficient.
_Understanding._ At least three familiar objects should be used in this
test with success before credit is allowed.
_Obedience._ At least two simple commands should be understood and
obeyed before allowing credit.
_Speech._ Not less than three different syllables should be used before
credit is allowed.
_Calling Attention._ No credit should be given at this point unless the
child very evidently attempts to excite interest and attention in two or
three different objects.
TWO YEARS
_Speech._ Any four distinct articles mentioned by the child when it
desires them should be sufficient evidence to give credit here.
_Pictures._ At least four different objects should be recognized and
pointed out before credit is allowed.
_Obedience._ Two simple commands of the type mentioned should be
sufficient to bring credit at this point.
_Imitation._ Only after repeated evidences of imitation of other
children should credit be given here.
_Discernment._ Repeated evidences should be required before credit is
allowed for this test.
_Self-direction._ Any one of the evidences described is sufficient.
THREE YEARS
_Parts of the Body._ Three out of four parts mentioned should be pointed
out before allowing credit.
_Familiar Objects._ Three out of five of the objects mentioned must be
named in order to obtain credit here.
_Pictures._ The child should name at least three objects in one of the
three pictures in order to obtain credit.
_Sex and Name._ Accuracy is necessary here.
_Repeating Syllables._ One of the three sentences should be repeated
absolutely without error.
FOUR YEARS
_Forms._ Out of ten trials, at least seven should be correct in order to
obtain credit.
_Counting._ No error should be allowed.
_Copying._ Out of three attempts, at least one should be fairly regular
and distinctly recognizable as a square.
_Comprehension._ Success must be attained in two of the three questions
in order to receive credit.
_Repeating Numbers._ One out of three trials should be absolutely
correct.
_Repeating Syllables._ One of the three trials should be without error
or two of the three trials with not more than one slight error in each.
The matter of nourishment and physical well-being may retard a child to
such an extent that his intellectual development is delayed. Great care
should, therefore, be taken not to interpret a low score on this test
too seriously. It should also be noted that familiarity with the test is
quite certain to cause parents to put forth special effort to instruct
the child along the lines required by the test. The test itself is
thereby invalidated. Only when no special instruction has been given at
any point covered by the test can one be satisfied that he is obtaining
a fair measure of the child’s ability.
The test booklet supplied for this test is not for the use of the
candidate being examined but for the examiner to use as a guide and
record of the examination. One such booklet should be used for each
individual examined, in order to be certain that no test is omitted or
wrongly scored and in order to have a record for comparison with future
tests of the same individual or of other individuals.
MENTIMETER NO. 2
PICTORIAL ABSURDITIES
_Nature of the Test._
One of the most popular tests in the Army Beta series was the mutilated
pictures test, in which the soldiers were to draw into each picture what
had been omitted. One great difficulty with this test was the tendency
of intelligent men to spend far too much time trying to draw
artistically the missing parts. The present test is a modification of
that test, so arranged that instead of the candidate being required to
draw a missing part he is only asked to make a check mark at the point
where there is something that does not fit the remainder of the picture.
The test booklet is arranged with two samples on the title page to show
clearly what is to be done when the candidate opens his booklet. By
having these samples painted on the wall or blackboard, it would be
possible to give the test to large groups of persons at once, although
the directions given below are for testing one individual only at a
time. Although listed as a test for non-English-speaking persons, some
oral direction should accompany the motions by which the test is to be
given, and English-speaking persons may be examined by this test as
readily as those who speak a foreign language.
The graduation of the pictures according to their approximate difficulty
makes the score in this test a real measure of the degree of absurdity
which an individual can detect. The pictures themselves were chosen from
as wide a field as possible in order to avoid undue advantage to persons
of one type of experience rather than another. Only intelligent persons
of fairly wide general experience will be able to make a perfect score
in the time allowed.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
The examiner and the candidate to be examined should be comfortably
seated at a table with the examination booklet between them. If it is
discovered that the candidate is left-handed, the examiner should sit on
the left, although under ordinary circumstances the examiner should sit
on the right. The blanks on the title page of the booklet should be
filled out by the examiner from any records he may have of the name and
age of the candidate (if persons who read and understand English are
being examined, several may be tested at once and each may be asked to
fill out the blanks for himself). For persons who do not understand the
English language the words which are used in the following explanations
will be more suggestive than informing. The chief part of the
demonstration will be the motions through which the examiner goes, and
therefore great care should be taken that these be as suggestive of what
is wanted as the examiner can make them. To secure uniformity of
procedure the routine outline below should be carefully followed.
The booklet should be opened by the examiner and the pictures exhibited
for not more than twenty seconds to the candidate, the examiner pointing
from one to another of the first half dozen pictures. He should then
close the book and call the attention of the candidate to the picture of
the rabbit on the title page. He should point to the rabbit’s ear and
then point to the inappropriate ear and shake his head. This pointing to
the two ears and shaking the head when pointing to the wrong type of ear
may be repeated as many as three times in order to impress on the
candidate that one of the ears is inappropriate. He should then take his
pencil and make a check mark above the ear which is incorrect.
[Illustration: Mark (✓) the thing that is wrong]
The examiner should then point to the second picture on the title page
and look questioningly at the candidate. He may then point to the chin
of the face represented and nod his head, “yes.” He may next point to
the nose and nod his head, “yes,” but when he points to the place where
the eye should be he should shake his head, “no,” and pretend to look
for the missing eye. When found, he should make a check a mark over the
misplaced eye and smile at his achievement. If special emphasis seems
necessary he may point again to the eye in its inappropriate position,
and shake his head, repeating the check mark above it.
If the candidate understands but does not read English the examiner may
trace with his finger while reading aloud the directions printed above
the test pictures. “Mark (✓) the thing that is wrong.” Exactly three
minutes (180 seconds) should be allowed from the time the examiner opens
the book and furnishes the candidate with a pencil.
[Illustration: Mark (✓) the thing that is wrong]
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
At the end of the three minutes the paper should be removed and scored
according to the following directions.
_Direction for Scoring the Test._
The score in this test is the number of pictures in which the absurd
element has been identified and checked. The stencil furnished with the
test booklets shows exactly where each check mark should be made thereby
saving some time for the person who marks the test. Where the proper
element has been checked and the check mark later removed, no credit
should be given. Credit should only be given where the final judgment as
expressed by the check mark corresponds to the key furnished with the
booklets.
A score from 0 to 6 indicates Inferior Ability
A score from 7 to 10 indicates Low Average Ability
A score from 11 to 17 indicates Average Ability
A score from 18 to 20 indicates High Average Ability
A score from 21 to 24 indicates Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 3
MAZE THREADING
_Nature of the Test._
A great many experiments have been made upon different types of animals
to determine how long it would take them to learn to secure their food
by going through an unusual “stunt” or travelling over a circuitous
route. Mice have been taught, for example, to travel a long distance and
through complicated mazes to secure their food, which is in such cases
usually placed at the centre of the maze. The effectiveness of learning
to thread a maze as a test of the intellectual capacity of the lower
animals is probably not superior to the effectiveness of the same sort
of learning as a measure of the intelligence of human beings. It is not
possible, however, to include in a book the long passageways and blind
alleys which would necessarily have to be built out of pretty
substantial material in order to keep men from breaking over its sides,
but the idea has so far as possible been carried out in the tests which
follow. It is quite certain that the ability to trace through a printed
maze with a pencil is not equal to the ability to walk through a
specially constructed maze of steel, but it is as near the same problem
as can be arranged on paper and printed in quantity.
The arrangement of mazes in this member of the Mentimeter family is such
that the number of mazes successfully threaded is a distinct indication
of the _complexity_ of maze which the individual can successfully
negotiate. The test is intended to measure the ability of any individual
whether he can read or understand the English language or not. If the
two examples shown on the title page are presented on a blackboard, or
other large surface, the test may very easily be given as a group test
by a skilful examiner, although the directions which follow are prepared
for the examination of one individual at a time.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
The examiner should be seated at a table at the right side of the
candidate to be examined. He should first of all secure the information
regarding the candidate’s name, age, and other important items, and
should then exhibit the mazes which appear inside the booklet, pointing
from one to the other in the first half dozen. Not more than thirty
seconds should be allowed for this part of the instruction. Turning back
to the title page the examiner should point to the first example,
pointing first at the entrance and then to the exit. By a motion at each
of these two cardinal points, made in the direction in which the arrow
points, he should make it clear that the idea is to move in the
direction indicated by the arrows. He should then trace his way fairly
slowly from the entrance to the exit.
[Illustration: Show by a line how you would pass through the drawings
below without touching any line]
Pointing to the second maze, first to the entrance and then to the exit,
the examiner should again signify that motion is to occur at these two
points. With his pencil as before he should trace his way from the
starting point to the finish, making not more than one error, which he
should correct by returning over the same route to the point where it
was made without lifting the pencil from the paper.
If the candidate can understand the English language the examiner should
then read the directions above the examples. “Show by a line how you
would pass through the drawings below without touching any line.”
[Illustration: Show by a line how you would pass through the drawings
below without touching any line]
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
The examiner should then open the booklet and give it to the candidate
with the instruction to begin at number 1 and trace his way from the
starting arrow to the finish. No demonstration should be made on the
mazes which appear inside the booklet.
Exactly four minutes after starting the test the examiner should stop
the candidate and remove the pencil.
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The total score in this test is the number of mazes correctly threaded
without error. Where a line has been crossed through accident or
unsteady holding of the pencil no penalty should be taken, but if a line
has been crossed and not recrossed to correct the defect, no credit
should be given for that particular maze. Full credit should be given
for the maze as being complete if the line stops at a point somewhat
before reaching the finish arrow, provided there is a straight path from
the end of the line drawn to some part of this sign of the exit.
Scores from 0 to 5 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 6 to 10 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 11 to 16 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 17 to 18 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 19 to 20 indicate Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 4
DOT PATTERN CORRECTION
_Nature of the Test._
The ability to recognize small elements of discord in an otherwise
symmetrical pattern is the feature which this test is planned to
measure. The test is very simple, even the most difficult elements in it
being very easy of solution. A pattern composed of dots is presented,
one dot being included which does not fit the remainder of the pattern.
The candidate is required to locate this extra dot in each pattern and
to draw a circle around it, indicating that it should be removed.
Although an attempt has been made in this test to arrange the elements
in the order of their difficulty, the last one in the series is so
simple that almost any one can locate the defect in a short time. For
this reason the test will not have wide usefulness except as a means of
diversion. The method for this test is borrowed directly from the work
of Doctor Pressey of Indiana University.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
The directions herewith presented are intended to be used by the
examiner in testing one foreign-speaking individual at a time. It would
be easily possible to paint on the wall the examples given on the title
page or to put them on a blackboard in such a manner as to enable the
examiner to test quite a large number of persons at the same time.
[Illustration: Draw a ring around the extra dot]
The examiner should demonstrate to the candidate first of all the nature
of the contents of the booklet and then should take up the two examples
appearing on the front page. He should trace the direction of the
different lines in the pattern with his pencil (without touching the
point of the pencil to the paper) and should finally draw a small circle
about the extra dot. After this circle has been drawn it would be
suggestive to the candidate to trace out again the pattern of the
example. When the candidate seems to get the idea, or when both examples
have been demonstrated, he should be given a pencil and the opened blank
with directions to go ahead. Only two minutes should be allowed for this
work, at the end of which time the blanks should be taken from the
candidate and scored according to the following directions.
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The score in this test is the total number of patterns in which the
extra dot has been correctly pointed out. In many cases the extra dot is
located in the centre of the pattern so that there is no really
unsymmetrical element in the test, but this should not interfere with
the scoring. The stencil provided with the test booklets makes it
somewhat simpler to score than it would otherwise be.
Scores from 0 to 8 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 9 to 14 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 15 to 20 indicate Average Ability
Scores of 21 or more indicate High Average or Superior Ability
[Illustration: Draw a ring around the extra dot]
[Illustration]
MENTIMETER NO. 5
DIVIDING GEOMETRICAL FIGURES
_Character of the Test._
This test is very easily used as a group test with people who can
understand spoken English. The test is also capable of being given to
groups of illiterate or foreign-speaking individuals, if the examples
used in the explanation are painted on a large blackboard to be placed
in the front of the room in full view of all those taking the
examination. In the absence of such a special blackboard, the test may
be used as an individual test with illiterate or foreign-speaking
persons.
Fifteen geometrical figures, such as squares, circles, triangles, and
the like, are presented on three pages of the examination booklet. To
the left of each figure are two or more small figures which, when
properly arranged, form the large figure on the right. The problem of
the candidate is to draw a line or several lines in the large figure on
the right to indicate how it might be divided to make up the small
pieces shown on the left. The first figures are quite simple and may be
very readily done by drawing one or two lines. The problems on the third
page require from three to five lines to be drawn and are distinctly
more difficult than the problems appearing on the previous pages.
It is very difficult to say exactly what functions of the mind are
measured by this test. The greatest difficulty with the test is that a
rather high minimum of intelligence is required in order to understand
what is necessary or desired. The two examples appearing on the title
page of the test booklet are not sufficient to demonstrate clearly to
the dull person just what he is to do. It is probable that dull people
will succeed very much better in this test if it is given as a test for
foreigners, using the special blackboard. The examiner could, in that
case, draw a line with chalk to show what is expected. The printed
directions on the test blank have been made as simple as possible, but
they are not wholly satisfactory for the lower ranges of intelligence.
The scoring of this test is somewhat more difficult than for the
majority of the other Mentimeter tests. It is intended that one point of
credit shall be given for each large figure properly divided. The
difficulty comes in being sure that the candidate has intended to draw
his lines at exactly the proper place. Inaccuracy may be the result of
not knowing where the lines should be placed, or it may be the result of
careless execution. If a line is misplaced through careless execution,
when it is perfectly clear that the right idea was present in the
candidate’s mind, full credit should be given for that element of the
test. If it is not certain that the candidate understood where the line
should be drawn, no credit should be given for that particular figure.
The stencils, which are supplied with each package of test booklets,
should be placed to the left of the five geometrical figures and
comparison should be made between the dotted lines of the stencil and
the marks made by the candidate in the corresponding figure on the
examination sheet. In the first square, for example, full credit should
be given whether the line is drawn horizontally or vertically through
the figure. The important thing is that two equal rectangles should be
created by drawing a single line. Similarly, for each other figure, the
important point to be considered is whether or not the lines drawn do
form the geometrical figures shown on the left. A little practice will
make it possible for the clerk who scores these tests to lay aside the
key itself and to carry it in memory.
Various forms of this test have been used by psychologists for a number
of years, although its most extensive use was in the Beta series of the
United States Army. The same test in modified form was used by Prof. E.
L. Thorndike in his tests of mental alertness in the air service. Many
individuals were found who could do this test fairly well without being
able to succeed with some of the others which were supposedly equally as
good for general purposes. On the other hand, many individuals of good
general ability were found who seemed lacking in the particular type of
ability necessary properly to divide these geometrical figures. On the
whole, however, the more intelligent men made higher scores than the
less intelligent men. Such low relationship between this particular test
and other tests of intelligence makes it particularly useful as one of a
series to be used for measuring the intelligence of men entering certain
mechanical trades where the recognition of the size and shape of objects
is of prime importance. Draftsmen, architects, supply clerks, and
candidates for similar positions would probably be rated more accurately
by this test than would writers, musicians, and academic students.
In the public schools such a test might give some indication of the
ability of children to succeed in mechanical or mathematical courses of
study. In social gatherings, a great deal of amusement might be found by
giving prizes to the individuals completing the entire fifteen figures
correctly and in the shortest time. It would seem desirable, however, to
omit the time limit when it is used for pure entertainment and to
measure with a stop-watch the exact amount of time required for the
individual. When all had finished the fifteen elements of the test, the
papers could be checked up for accuracy and the prize could be given to
the one who had finished correctly in the shortest length of time. This
will add an element of interest for it is quite certain that some of
those who finished first will have made errors, probably through
careless execution, and that someone who finished later in the game will
have drawn each line correctly.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
_a._ As an individual test.
The individual to be tested should be seated at the left side of the
examiner at a convenient table. The examiner should show the inside of
the test blank to the candidate and should then point to the similar
figures in the explanation on the title page of the booklet. He should
then point to the large figure in the first example, possibly tracing
its outline with his pencil. Then the attention of the candidate should
be called to the parts appearing on the left-hand side. (Their outlines
may be traced if it seems desirable.) Next, a movement should be made
with the hand as though one were placing the parts upon the larger
figure. This may be repeated two or three times, pointing first to the
various parts in order and then to the large figure with a rather broad
sweep of the hand. After such a study of the situation, the examiner
should draw the proper line and exhibit a smile of pleasure at having
successfully done the thing. He should point then to the parts of the
large figure which are thus created and by jumping his pencil from one
of the parts to the corresponding part on the left, he may fairly
clearly demonstrate that he has constructed, by his line, elements which
are similar to the elements appearing at the left.
[Illustration]
Similar pantomime may be used for the second example, possibly
introducing a variation by getting a line incorrectly drawn at the first
trial, erasing it as soon as it is apparent that the parts do not
correspond exactly with the parts appearing in the problem, and
redrawing the line so that the correspondence will be exact. The pencil
should then be handed to the candidate and the pamphlet opened up for
him to begin work. The candidate should be allowed to work for four
minutes with occasional signals to “Go ahead,” “Work fast” or “Hurry
up.”
_b._ As a group test for illiterate candidates.
A blackboard containing the two examples should be placed in full view
of all the candidates in the room. The test blanks should be passed to
the candidates, with well-sharpened pencils or pens and ink. The
examiner should then hold up in full view of the group a test blank
showing the three pages of figures on which they are to work. He should
then get the attention of everyone to the work by saying “Look” or
“Watch.” With a piece of chalk, he should then go through the pantomime
described above for giving the examination to an individual. Care should
be taken that none of the brighter candidates begins work before the
signal for everyone to work. When the two examples have been thoroughly
demonstrated on the blackboard, the examiner may turn to the group, open
up his test blank, and point to the first page of work to be done and
say, “Begin here,” “Go ahead,” “Work fast.” At the end of four minutes,
he should call “Stop,” should collect all papers, making certain as he
does so that some identification mark is present on the paper to show to
which candidate it belongs. No special explanation should be given and
no person in the group should be allowed to sit idle while the
examination is going on. If it is clear that the individual has not
understood, the examiner may say, “Do what I did,” pointing to the board
and then to the paper. Individuals may be told during the course of the
examination, if they seem to be doing nothing, to “Make your marks.”
_c._ As a group test for candidates who can read English.
Place each candidate at a table or chair with a writing surface, supply
him with a test blank and pencil or other writing instrument. While the
candidates are being supplied, the examiner should make the following
statement: “Do not open this booklet until you are told to do so. I
shall make explanations as soon as everybody is supplied.”
When all are ready, the examiner should hold up a copy of the test and
speak as follows: “There are three pages of work to be done. The page
before you shows two samples of the kind of thing you are to do. You
will notice at the right a large figure and at the left several small
figures. When properly placed together, these small figures will make
one of the large figures at the right. You are to draw a line, or
several lines, through the large figure at the right in such a way as to
make of it the small figures at the left.
“Now look at the examples before you. Is there any one who does not see
what line ought to be drawn in order to make the large figure show the
pieces which appear at its left? You will have four minutes in which to
do the work on the three pages. Work quickly, but be sure to draw your
lines correctly. If you complete the fifteen figures before I call
‘Stop,’ look back over your work to see that you have made no mistakes.”
If any candidate signifies that he does not understand, the examiner
might draw an imaginary line with his hand to show the direction in
which the line should be drawn in order to divide the figure properly.
As soon as it is certain that everyone understands how to divide the
sample figure, the examiner should say: “Now work rapidly and draw your
lines on the next three pages.” The time limit of four minutes should be
followed exactly.
[Illustration: Make the small figures by drawing lines in the large one]
[Illustration]
[Illustration]
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The examination score, if each figure of the series is correctly
divided, will be fifteen points. The stencils give but one solution to
each problem although solutions are possible in practically every case
by drawing the same lines in a different direction. The angle or
direction is unimportant and there is no need that the lines drawn by
the candidate correspond exactly in this respect with the lines on the
stencil. The important thing is to see that the proper lines are drawn
to make the necessary parts. The final score obtained by counting the
number of figures in which lines are properly drawn should be entered at
the lower right-hand corner of the title page of the booklet.
Scores from 0 to 2 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 3 to 5 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 6 to 10 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 11 to 13 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 14 to 15 indicate Superior Ability
In interpreting these results, it should be recalled that inferior
ability in this line of work may be found in individuals who have
average ability in some other intellectual fields. This test should not
be used extensively until it has been proven to have a high degree of
relationship with the characteristics required in the group for which it
is used as a selecting agency.
MENTIMETER NO. 6
COMPLETION OF FORM SERIES
_Character of the Test._
The Completion test is always very satisfactory because it shows in
itself just what should be done and does not require a great deal of
special explanation. The Form Series Completion test is particularly
valuable in that it does not depend upon the English language either in
its content or in the explanations to be made of it.
As with the majority of the other tests for non-English-speaking persons
this test is here described as a test of one individual at a time,
although it will be found very simple and easy to test a large group at
the same time if the examples which appear on the title page of the test
booklet can be painted on the wall or reproduced on a blackboard in such
a way that the examiner can demonstrate to everyone at once just what is
to be done. It is very desirable to examine large groups at the same
time if the provision for such demonstration can be made.
Previous Form Series Completion tests have required the candidate to
fill in the last characters of each line, everything being printed in
order up to within a few sections of the end. The present form, in which
the elisions are distributed through the series rather than being
grouped at the end, has the advantage that it may be made more difficult
by far than the previous forms. Although this test probably measures a
rather specialized type of intellectual ability, it is nevertheless
sufficiently well graduated in difficulty so that the result obtained by
it will show a close relationship to the result obtained in other more
general tests.
The problem of the candidate who is given this test is chiefly that of
solving, from the rather meagre data presented, just what the serial
order of the different forms may be. This undoubtedly calls for a
complex variety of special mental qualities, including imagination and
abstract reasoning ability. Nevertheless, it is hardly possible for the
authors to make any sort of estimate of just where this test will be
most valuable or just what it measures. It will certainly be interesting
and entertaining whether it works out to have any particular usefulness
or not.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
The candidate should be seated at the left of the examiner in order that
he may conveniently work upon the test booklet which should be placed on
a table between them. After filling out for the candidate the
information blanks giving name, age, and the like, the examiner should
show for fifteen or twenty seconds (not more than 20 seconds) the inside
of the booklet. He should then turn back to the title page and
demonstrate the nature of the test by means of the examples printed
there.
[Illustration]
Probably the best and most effective method of demonstration is that of
“jumping” the pencil rhythmically from one block to the next
corresponding one to show the rhythmic sequence of the same symbols.
When a block is reached in which the symbol has been omitted (but in
which the samples have been crudely marked with a fine pen), the
examiner should make an appropriate heavy mark such as is used in the
printed sections of each series. After any symbol has been written on
the explanation samples it would be very much worth while to skip
rhythmically along the line making certain that the sequence is
correctly followed. When it seems fairly certain that the candidate has
grasped the rhythmic nature of the forms, the examiner should open the
booklet, give him a pencil, and say “Put them in.” “Fix it up.” “Go
ahead.”
Allow exactly five minutes for this work. At the end of this time the
examiner should take the paper and score it as directed below.
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The score in this test is determined by the number of lines in which the
candidate has entered the correct forms to complete the line perfectly.
No credit should be given if any one of the sections remain unfilled or
be filled incorrectly. The stencil which is furnished with the test
booklets makes the task of marking the errors very much simpler than it
is without such aid. The total score obtained should be entered in the
lower right-hand corner of the title page of the booklet.
[Illustration: Fill in the missing forms]
Scores from 0 to 2 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 3 to 5 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 6 to 12 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 13 to 15 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 16 to 20 indicate Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 7
CHECKING IDENTITY OF NUMBERS
_Character of the Test._
Bank tellers and other clerical workers find it necessary very
frequently to compare signatures or numerical figures as to identity. A
test might be arranged in which it was necessary for an individual to
compare several sets of numbers all of the same length and general
appearance. Such a test would, however, resolve itself very largely into
a test of speed. The present form attempts to eliminate some of the
speed element and to take to itself as much as possible of the quality
of measuring the complexity which is necessary to cause an error in the
recognition of identity. There are thirty numbers to be compared with
another list of thirty in a parallel column. The first numbers have only
two digits but the number of digits is increased fairly regularly until
in the last pairs eleven digits in one column must be compared with the
eleven digits in another.
This test is probably as useful a measure of ability to notice small
details as it is necessary to make. The chief objection to it will come
from individuals who are not gifted by nature with the ability to think
in terms of numbers. This objection is not serious and will not be as
valid even in their own cases as those who make it are inclined to
believe. The test may be given as a group test if some means be provided
for demonstrating before the entire group at one time just what type of
activity is wanted. The directions given below are for giving the test
as an individual examination, but with slight modifications the same
directions will serve quite well for group examination. It is not
necessary, of course, for the candidates to understand the English
language if the examiner is thoroughly effective in his pantomimic
instructions.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
As soon as the proper record has been made of the age, the name, and
location of the individual being examined, the examiner may turn the
test leaflet and exhibit the two columns of numbers which appear on the
other side. This exhibition should not be made formally and should last
not more than twenty seconds. The pamphlet should then again be placed
title page up in front of the candidate.
1ST COLUMN 2ND COLUMN SAME DIFFERENT
356 356 ☐ ☐ A
738 758 ☐ ☐ B
The examiner should then compare the identity of the numbers in the
first example. The best way to do this would be to point first at the 3
in the first column then at the corresponding 3 in the second column,
nodding his head, “Yes.” The same pointing from one column to the other
should be done for 5 and for 6, the second column part of the pointing
to be accompanied in each case by nodding the head, “Yes.” As a summary
of this first example, the examiner may place his hand over the entire
three digits of the first column and then transfer it to the entire
three digits of the second column and nod his head, “Yes,” making merely
a check mark (✓) on that horizontal line under the word, “same.” With
the second example the same sort of pantomime may be used until 5 in the
second column has been compared with 3 in the first column, which should
be accompanied by a shaking of the head and the verbal exclamation, “No,
no!” The summary by means of placing the hand over 738 and then over
758, with another, “No, no,” may be omitted if it is quite clear that
the candidate has grasped the idea. In either case the examiner should
make the check mark under the word “different.” The sheet may then be
turned and the pencil handed to the candidate with the direction “Go
ahead. Mark them all.” Exactly two minutes should be allowed after
saying, “Go ahead.” At the end of two minutes the paper should be taken
by the examiner and scored according to the following directions.
If the numbers in the second column correspond exactly with those on the
same line in the first column, make a check mark in the square on that
line under the word “Same.” If the second set on any line differs in any
way from the first, check that line under the word “Different.”
1st COLUMN 2nd COLUMN SAME DIFFERENT LINE NO.
96 96 ☐ ☐ 1
83 88 ☐ ☐ 2
77 71 ☐ ☐ 3
33 35 ☐ ☐ 4
82 82 ☐ ☐ 5
641 644 ☐ ☐ 6
956 956 ☐ ☐ 7
507 507 ☐ ☐ 8
9572 9752 ☐ ☐ 9
1832 1832 ☐ ☐ 10
19560 19360 ☐ ☐ 11
94083 94083 ☐ ☐ 12
940817 940847 ☐ ☐ 13
329506 326506 ☐ ☐ 14
654938 654938 ☐ ☐ 15
6998701 6997801 ☐ ☐ 16
7105923 7105623 ☐ ☐ 17
2501036 2500136 ☐ ☐ 18
3674462 3674462 ☐ ☐ 19
61558543 61585543 ☐ ☐ 20
38910066 39810066 ☐ ☐ 21
17198591 17198591 ☐ ☐ 22
685342017 685342017 ☐ ☐ 23
317762849 317762849 ☐ ☐ 24
102435867 102435867 ☐ ☐ 25
3484657120 3484657210 ☐ ☐ 26
4686726631 4686726631 ☐ ☐ 27
6571018034 6571018034 ☐ ☐ 28
38797625147 38797652147 ☐ ☐ 29
26557239164 26557239164 ☐ ☐ 30
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The score in this test is the total number of pairs the identity of
which has been correctly checked, minus the total number of pairs in
which an error has been made in checking the identity. For example, if
the last line checked was the twenty-fifth line while two lines had been
omitted and errors had been made in checking three other lines, then
only twenty lines had been checked correctly, and three lines had been
checked incorrectly; so the resulting score would be seventeen points.
The maximum score obtainable is of course thirty points and will be
obtained only in case every pair has been checked without error. It is
possible with this method of scoring to obtain a score less than zero;
for example, if a person had checked correctly ten of the identities and
had made errors in checking fifteen others, the number of “rights” minus
the number of “wrongs” would be minus five. In such cases the score to
be entered on the lower right-hand corner of the candidate’s title page
is zero.
The stencil furnished with the test leaflets makes it possible to mark
this test with great rapidity and without mental fatigue. The point at
which care needs to be taken is in making certain that the total score,
computed by subtracting the number wrong from the number right, is
correct. For this reason the reader is advised to cross out the “line
number” of any pair incorrectly checked and to draw a circle around the
“line number” of any pair not attempted by the candidate. If this is
done consecutively down the page, there will be little difficulty in
calculating the total score.
Scores from 0 to 8 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 9 to 12 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 13 to 22 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 23 to 26 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 27 to 30 indicate Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 8
DIGIT-SYMBOL SUBSTITUTION
_Character of the Test._
Ability to master a language is usually very closely related to general
intellectual ability along academic or abstract lines. The relationship
between the age at which a child begins to talk and the length of time
required later by the same child to learn to use a foreign language
would probably be found fairly close.
The Digit-Symbol test has been used rather extensively and for many
years as a form of measuring the ability of an individual to learn a new
method of expressing himself. Many experimenters have used a
Letter-Symbol test rather than the Digit-Symbol, but there seems to be
little difference in the character of the results obtained.
The Mentimeter form of the test follows quite closely the corresponding
test in the Beta series used in the Army. At the top of the page there
appears a key showing just what symbol should be used to indicate each
number or digit. The test itself consists of 100 digits with empty
squares appearing below them in which one is to write, beneath each
digit, its corresponding symbol as shown by the key on pages 166 and
167. An intelligent person usually begins with the first digit and
supplies the proper symbol for it at each place it occurs in the test;
then begins with the second digit and goes through the entire test
writing the symbol for it, and so on. Those of average intelligence more
frequently try to supply the proper symbol for each different digit in
order as they appear in the test without going through the entire test
with each symbol separately. The method of the candidate in doing the
work should not, however, be allowed to influence the rating obtained on
the test, except as one method may produce a higher score than another.
Investigations which have been made seem to show that although the
symbols used are quite distinctly more difficult to write than the
digits themselves would be, it is nevertheless a better test to measure
the number of symbols the candidate can write under the digits than to
measure the number of digits one could write correctly under their
corresponding symbols. The relationship between ability in this test and
general ability to handle ideas and abstract notions is rather
remarkably close. It is probable, however, that if the test were
lengthened so as to require five or ten minutes rather than two and one
half minutes the correspondence with intellectual ability would be
increased.
This test will be very useful to employers seeking high-grade clerical
service and probably in selecting administrative or supervisory
officers. In the public schools it will be useful in some instances in
classifying pupils for instruction. As a diversion in the home or social
group it will have slight value.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
This test has ordinarily been given as a test of several individuals at
the same time. It is probable that it will not be as useful when given
to one individual at a time as when used as a group test. The
instructions are given here, however, as with the remainder of the tests
for non-English-speaking persons, with the needs of examining foreigners
individually uppermost in mind. By reproducing on the blackboard or on a
wall chart the introductory examples one may adapt with almost no change
the method of administration here described so that it will work equally
well with a group. It is advisable to prepare such introductory charts
and to give the tests as group tests rather than as individual tests,
not only with the Digit-Symbol Substitution test but also with the other
Mentimeters numbered from 2 to 10.
[Illustration: Key: This shows the mark for each number]
[Illustration: Make under each number the mark which should be there]
[Illustration: Key: This shows the mark for each number]
[Illustration: Make under each number the mark which should be there]
The individual to be tested should be shown the page on which he is to
work, for not more than twenty seconds, and should then be shown the two
examples appearing on the title page under the printed instructions,
“Make under each number the mark which should be there.” The examiner
should then compare his key and the digits appearing in the sample
series and should write in the proper spaces the appropriate symbols.
The idea of getting the symbol from a key will be emphasized and made
clear if the examiner at each point moves his finger or pencil from the
digit in the example to the digit in the key, then to the symbol in the
key and back to the empty space beneath the digit in the example. When
all the spaces of the example have been filled (this should be done very
slowly at first and then more rapidly toward the end of the example),
the examiner should open the booklet, supply a pencil, and say, “Now! Go
ahead! Put them in! Hurry up!”
Exactly two and one half minutes (150 seconds) should be allowed from
the time the examiner says, “Go ahead,” to the time he calls, “Stop!”
All papers should be closed immediately and handed to the examiner.
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The score in this test is the number of symbols correctly supplied.
Marking the errors is very much simplified by the use of the stencils
furnished with each package of test booklets. The number of symbols
correctly written should be recorded at the end of each line in the test
and the total for all lines should be entered in the lower right-hand
corner of the title page of the booklet.
Scores from 0 to 20 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 21 to 35 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 36 to 65 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 66 to 75 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 76 to 100 indicate Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 9
COMPLETION OF NUMBER RELATION SERIES
_Character of the Test._
This test may be given to any individuals or groups of persons who can
read and understand the arabic numerals. The directions furnished
herewith are for the measurement of a group rather than of an
individual, although with very slight modifications in instructions the
test leaflet may be employed in an individual psychological examination.
The title page of the leaflet contains fairly complete directions and
three samples of the number series to be completed. Persons who read
English readily will have a distinct advantage over those who must
depend upon oral instructions, but experience has shown that, even with
individuals who do not understand the English language, it is possible
to demonstrate on a blackboard, using the sample exercises, with
sufficient clearness to enable foreign language-speaking candidates to
grasp the idea of the work to be done. No comparisons should be made,
however, between results obtained by oral demonstration and results
obtained through the use of the instructions printed below, without
making allowances for the differences in method of administration.
The Number Relation Series test is so difficult to understand that it is
hardly worth while to employ this test with children below ten years of
age or with adults whose mental capacity is not equal to or better than
that of the ten-year-old school child. The method of marking the test is
quite simple when one is supplied with the stencil which is furnished
with each package of test blanks. The present form of the test is
somewhat different from those used elsewhere and it is difficult to say
just what phases of intellectual or mathematical ability are measured by
it. The Army intelligence tests included a number relation series test,
so arranged that the last two numbers in each series must always be
supplied by the person tested. Dr. Agnes Rogers, in her study of the
prognostication of mathematical ability, employed a test which is very
closely related to the one given here. Her results seem to show that
this form of test is a splendid measure of mathematical capacity in high
school pupils.
It is probable that this test will have very little usefulness in the
selection of employees in general, but that it may be found valuable in
discovering within an organization persons whose mathematical aptitude
would make them very useful in positions where the handling of figures
is an important part of the employee’s duty. In schools the chief value
of the test will probably be in assisting in the diagnosis of special
mathematical ability or lack of ability among pupils entering high
school. As a game for social amusement, it is not probable that this
test will be highly popular, except among those who are mathematically
inclined.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
Having supplied each candidate with writing materials the examiner
should announce as follows:
“I am going to distribute to you copies of a test which is intended to
measure certain special mental capacities. I shall pass it to you with
that side up which contains the directions. Do not turn it over or
examine the 20 problems which are to be solved. Write your name where it
says ‘Name’ and fill in the other blanks on the title page.”
The blanks should be distributed, taking care that each candidate
receives the blank right side up and that no candidate turns it over
before the command is given to begin work. When names, ages, and other
identifying pieces of information have been entered the examiner should
ask the candidates to look at the directions carefully while he reads
them aloud.
“The other side of this sheet has 20 series of figures, one or more of
the figures from each series being left out. You are to look carefully
at each series, to study out what kind of a series it is and then to
write on the dotted lines those numbers which have been omitted. Look at
the following samples.
Write on each blank the number omitted
2 4 6 8 10 .. 14 16 18 20 Sample A
16 11 7 .. 2 1 1 2 4 7 Sample B
2 .. .. 2 2 3 2 4 2 5 Sample C
“In Sample A each number is obtained from the previous number by adding
2 to it; therefore, 12 should be the number between 10 and 14. In Sample
B, each number is obtained from the next previous number by subtracting
1 less than was subtracted from the number before it—that is, 5 is
subtracted from 16 to obtain 11, 4 is subtracted from 11 to obtain 7, 3
should then be subtracted from 7 to obtain a 4 which is to be entered on
the blank. In Sample C, every other number is a 2 and therefore the
second blank space should contain a 2. Between the 2’s appear numbers,
each one of which is one more than the one which preceded it. On the
first blank in Sample C there should be a 1 in order to carry out this
scheme.”
“You will be allowed four minutes in which to complete the 16 series.
Begin with the first and complete as many as you possibly can. Ready!
Go!” At the end of four minutes after saying “Go” the examiner should
call “Stop! Time up! Give me your papers.” All papers should be
collected at once.
Unusual care will need to be taken in giving this test to avoid
variations in the directions used with the different groups examined. In
order to maintain absolutely comparable test conditions, no variations
from the language and routine given above should be allowed.
Write on each blank the number omitted
1 2 3 4 5 .. 7 8 9 10 Series 1.
10 12 .. 16 18 .. 22 24 26 28 Series 2.
12 11 10 .. 8 7 .. .. 4 3 Series 3.
1 3 .. 7 9 11 13 15 17 .. Series 4.
.. 39 37 35 33 31 29 .. 25 23 Series 5.
4 5 7 .. 14 19 25 32 40 .. Series 6.
1/64 1/32 1/16 .. ¼ ½ .. 2 .. 8 Series 7.
8 15 .. 29 36 43 .. 57 64 71 Series 8.
10 .. 15 16 20 21 .. 26 30 31 Series 9.
2 .. 8 10 .. 10 20 10 26 .. Series 10.
7 .. 10 11 13 14 .. .. .. 20 Series 11.
.. 4 9 16 25 .. .. 64 81 100 Series 12.
.. 4 7 14 17 .. .. .. 77 154 Series 13.
32 .. .. .. 28 29 26 27 .. 25 Series 14.
6 10 13 .. .. .. 15 13 10 .. Series 15.
60 55 .. .. 46 45 .. 46 48 .. Series 16.
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The score in this test is the number of series correctly completed
regardless of the number of blanks in the series. The maximum score
obtainable will therefore be 16 points. The stencil furnished with each
set of test leaflets will make it very simple to count the number of
series correctly completed. A convenient way of indicating that a series
is not correctly completed is to cross out the serial number of that
series. To indicate that the series was not attempted one might draw a
circle around the serial number of that series. The final score should
be entered on the title page of the leaflet in the lower right-hand
corner.
Scores from 0 to 1 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 2 to 4 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 5 to 8 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 9 to 11 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 12 to 16 indicate Superior Ability
It should be borne in mind that the type of ability measured by the
above scores is not necessarily a true indication of the general
efficiency of the possessor.
MENTIMETER NO. 10
ADDITION TESTS
_Character of the Tests._
This Mentimeter is composed of two parts, one of them measuring the
difficulty of the addition problems which a candidate can solve, and
being therefore a fairly good test of intelligence, the other measuring
the speed at which one can add fairly easy problems and therefore having
less relations to intellectual ability.
Teachers in school furnish the children with certain information and
knowledge or guide their pupils to the sources from which this
information and knowledge may be obtained. In Addition, this information
takes the form of “2 and 2 make 4,” “9 and 5 make 14” and such sums. The
instruction also involves such things as how to carry in addition, how
to add when a decimal point enters into the calculation, and all such
problems. The teacher also undertakes a somewhat different task, which
is the review and drilling of the pupils in order to make the
combinations which have been explained automatic in the minds of the
children. It is not sufficient for John to know that “3 and 5 are 8,”
but he must be able to write or say “8” without any hesitation whatever
when 3 and 5 are to be added.
In order to test the extent to which teachers have explained addition,
one would measure the pupils with a test which increased in difficulty
from the first problems to the last, undertaking to determine how
difficult a problem can be solved. In order to test the rapidity with
which the pupils have learned in their drill exercises to make the
different combinations, one would measure the speed with which they can
make the simple combinations. The first addition test which is given on
page 175 measures the extent of the information which the candidate has
gained, while the second measures the speed which the candidate has
developed by drilling upon addition problems.
Teachers in the public schools will undoubtedly wish to measure both the
speed with which their pupils do simple problems as a result of drill,
and the difficulty of the problems which the child can solve correctly
as a result of instruction. Of course the test for difficulty of
problems solved is not absolutely independent of the effect of drill,
although it is relatively much less dependent upon drill than is the
other test.
In industrial organizations the first test given will probably be found
most useful, while in social groups the greatest amount of entertainment
will probably be obtained from the second test. The reliability of the
results from the first test is very much higher than the reliability of
the results from the second test, for in the second case a difference of
one second in time allowed may make as much as one or two points
difference in the score obtained.
As with all of the other tests listed in this series of “Tests for
Non-English-Speaking Persons,” the Addition tests will bring more
satisfactory results, with much greater economy of time, if they are
administered as group tests. They are here described, however, as tests
for individual candidates in order that they may be given to foreign
language-speaking candidates without any other apparatus than that
furnished by the test booklets themselves. Any teacher or employer who
has a number of persons to be examined should prepare a blackboard or
wall chart on which to exhibit an enlarged copy of the examples used in
the introduction. By placing this at the front of the room in full view
of all candidates, the pantomimic instructions here described may be
used for non-English-speaking candidates, or simple verbal explanations
may supplement them for English-speaking persons.
_Directions for Giving Mentimeter 10a._
The examiner, after securing from the candidate his name, address, age,
and other pertinent information, should turn the examination leaflet and
exhibit, for ten or fifteen seconds, the addition tests which are to be
solved. The leaflet should then be turned over to the title page again
and attention should be called to the examples appearing on the middle
of this page under the heading “Add.” The examiner should point to the
first example
2
2
—
and placing his pencil on the lower 2 and then upon the upper 2 should
seem to hesitate for an instant and then write 4 underneath the line.
Looking at the second example
15
3
——
he should place his pencil on the 3 and then on the 5 and, with only an
instant’s hesitation, should write 18. Similarly, looking at the third
example,
23
25
16,
———
he should place his pencil first on the 6, then on the 5, then on the 3,
and write a 4 underneath the line; then place his pencil on the 1 and
then upon the two 2’s in order and write 6 at the left of the 4. With
this explanation the examination booklet should be opened and a pencil
supplied to the candidate with the instructions “Go ahead! Add them
all!”
MENTIMETER NO. 10A.
Add:
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7)
3 2 14 45 13 23 14
2 5 3 34 21 35 45
— 1 —— —— 22 30 83
— —— —— ——
(8) (9) (10) (11) (12)
34 197 374 796 7065375
67 225 49 867 8688256
95 659 623 745 2315553
52 316 5 933 1947272
—— ——— 548 542 3583419
65 213 5224362
——— 564 6869021
235 8518488
676 3493625
——— 2657176
———————
Four minutes’ time should be allowed for this test. At the end of the
four minutes the examiner should call “Time up” and take the paper.
_Directions for Scoring Mentimeter 10a._
The score in this test is the number of problems correctly solved. No
credit should be given for any problem unless each digit in the answer
is present, correct, and in its right place.
Scores from 0 to 5 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 6 to 8 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 9 to 11 indicate Average Ability
A score of 12 indicates High Average or Superior Ability.
_Directions for Giving Mentimeter 10b._
The examiner should open the booklet and demonstrate to the candidate,
for ten seconds, with just what nature of test he is to be confronted.
Then, after securing the necessary identifying information, the examiner
should point to the problems on the title page under the word “Add.”
Pointing to the 1 in the first example and then to the 2, he should
write 3 under the line. Pointing to the 4 and then to the 5, in the
second example, he should write 9 under the line. Pointing to the 4 and
then to the 7 in the third example he should write 11 under the line,
and should then pass his pencil and the opened booklet to the candidate
with the instruction, “Go ahead! Add them up!”
The most important point in this test is to make absolutely certain that
exactly thirty seconds (no more and no less) is allowed from the time
the examiner supplies the candidate with a pencil until the time he
calls “Stop!” Unless this time is kept absolutely uniform the results of
the test will be hardly worth considering. Whether the candidate begins
work or not, the time should be calculated from the instant he receives
his pencil and the opened booklet.
_Directions for Scoring Mentimeter 10b._
The score in this test is the number of correct answers obtained in
thirty seconds. Unless an answer is absolutely correct, it should have
no credit. If an answer is only partially finished when time is called,
it should not be credited as being the correct answer unless it is
sufficiently complete in both digits to prove that the right answer had
been obtained.
Scores from 0 to 9 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 10 to 21 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 22 to 32 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 33 to 44 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 45 to 60 indicate Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 10B
Add:
(1) (2) (3) (4) (5)
2 8 5 7 1
4 9 1 4 5
— — — — —
(6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
8 3 4 6 2
3 0 5 9 8
— — — — —
(11) (12) (13) (14) (15)
6 4 4 0 1
7 3 6 7 2
— — — — —
(16) (17) (18) (19) (20)
3 7 2 9 6
2 9 2 3 5
— — — — —
(21) (22) (23) (24) (25)
7 5 7 9 6
6 2 1 4 8
— — — — —
(26) (27) (28) (29) (30)
3 7 6 4 5
3 4 2 8 8
— — — — —
(31) (32) (33) (34) (35)
9 9 0 7 5
6 9 5 6 8
— — — — —
(36) (37) (38) (39) (40)
6 3 8 9 7
8 7 7 6 5
— — — — —
(41) (42) (43) (44) (45)
8 5 5 7 8
3 9 6 4 8
— — — — —
(46) (47) (48) (49) (50)
6 7 9 2 7
5 8 3 7 7
— — — — —
(51) (52) (53) (54) (55)
3 2 0 8 4
1 7 5 9 7
— — — — —
(56) (57) (58) (59) (60)
1 2 8 7 7
6 5 1 6 5
— — — — —
_Differences between Mentimeters 10a and 10b._
In connection with these tests of ability in addition, a few additional
words should be said to make somewhat clearer the differences between
educational tests and tests of intelligence. There is, of course, no
sharp line to be drawn between these two types of tests. Mentimeter No.
10b may be classified very certainly as an educational test because it
involves primarily the element of speed in simple additions which is not
an accurate index of intellectual capacity but depends almost altogether
upon specific drill. Improvement in ability to make a score in
Mentimeter No. 10a will come much more slowly than in the case of the
speed test in addition. Before a child can make progress sufficient to
carry him from problem 5 to problem 6 in Mentimeter 10a, he must be
instructed in the mysteries of adding zero to the sum of two other
numbers. Before he can make progress from problem 6 to problem 7 he must
learn to put down the 2 under the right-hand column of figures and carry
the 1 to the next column and add it with the digits printed there. Each
additional problem that he solves involves some new elements of
arithmetic knowledge which can be learned only by careful study and one
at a time.
In the speed test a larger score does not indicate ability to do
anything more difficult or to understand anything more complicated, but
merely more rapid doing of the things which are already fully
understood. In the other test, however, a larger score indicates greater
comprehension of more difficult situations and therefore an intellectual
capacity which is of greater magnitude.
The primary purpose of the Mentimeter tests is to measure intellectual
capacity rather than school training. For this reason very few tests
which may be classified as primarily educational have been included.
Where they have been inserted, they have been arranged to measure the
ability of the person to do more difficult tasks rather than his ability
to do simple tasks more rapidly.
MENTIMETER NO. 11
MEMORY FOR NUMBERS
_Character of the Test._
This test is planned as an individual examination to be given to any
candidate who understands the English language. The test is borrowed
directly from the Binet series and was used as a group test in the first
form of the Alpha examination in the United States Army.
The usefulness of this test is probably limited to the selection of
candidates for very simple mechanical operations and to the
classification of pupils in the schoolroom. It might be employed as one
of a series of tests in the selection of telephone operators, but its
use in such a case is probably more obvious than practical.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
The candidate should be seated comfortably in a quiet place and should
be instructed to listen carefully. The examiner should fill out the
blanks at the top of the title page, recording only such facts as seem
to be necessary. The examiner should then repeat the following formula:
“I am going to read to you sixteen series of numbers. The first series
will be very short and the last series will be quite long. When I have
read a series I want you to repeat all of the numbers it contained. I
shall read them slowly so that you can be sure to get them. Listen very
carefully and try not to forget any number. Do not repeat any number
until I have finished the whole series and stopped speaking.”
The examiner should announce each time just how many numbers will appear
in the series. The digits should be read at the rate of one per second,
taking care to avoid any rhythmic grouping of the numbers. The examiner
should look up expectantly as soon as he has finished reading a series.
No intimation should be given a candidate as to whether or not he is
being successful. The first series should be read as follows:
“The First Series contains two numbers which are, 5, 6.” As soon as the
candidate has repeated these numbers the examiner should say:
“The Second Series contains two numbers which are, 2, 7.”
First Series 5 6
Second 〃 2 7
Third 〃 9 3 5
Fourth 〃 4 1 6
Fifth 〃 7 4 9 3
Sixth 〃 4 8 5 7
Seventh 〃 9 5 7 3 8
Eighth 〃 6 8 1 2 4
Ninth Series 2 6 8 3 5 9
Tenth 〃 6 3 5 9 2 7
Eleventh 〃 9 5 8 3 6 2 4
Twelfth 〃 8 1 9 5 2 6 3
Thirteenth 〃 3 5 2 6 8 3 4 9
Fourteenth 〃 2 8 5 9 3 6 1 4
Fifteenth 〃 6 3 9 4 8 1 7 2 5
Sixteenth 〃 7 1 4 9 6 3 5 2 8
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The examiner should keep on the test leaflet, out of the sight of the
candidate, a notation of exactly which series cause failure.
Misplacement of any digit in the series should count as an error and
bring no credit for that series. The total score obtained by counting
the number of series in which each number was correctly repeated in its
right order should be written in the lower right-hand corner of the
title page of the leaflet.
Scores from 0 to 7 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 8 to 9 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 10 to 12 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 13 to 14 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 15 to 16 indicate Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 12
REPEATING NUMBERS BACKWARD
_Character of the Test._
This test can only be given as an individual examination and to people
who understand spoken English. The presence of other people in the room
where the test is being given is frequently the cause of low scores.
This test is borrowed bodily from the Binet series, in which it has won
a distinct place for itself as a useful measure of the ability to think
about symbols and abstract ideas.
This test will be of little value as an entertainment feature but will
be useful to the public school teacher, or to the employer who wishes to
have a brief but fairly accurate test to apply to individual people whom
he may be considering for positions of responsibility. The reliability
of the test is unusually high for an examination taking no more time
than is required for this.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
The examiner should read the following instructions clearly:
“I have twelve lists of numbers to read to you. I want you to listen
carefully as I read each list, and when I say ‘Now’ you are to repeat
the same numbers backward, that is, in the reverse order. For example,
if I should read the numbers, 3, 4, 5, when I said ‘Now’ you should
repeat them 5, 4, 3. If I read 9, 8, 7, you should say 7, 8, 9. You are
to say the same numbers I read, but you are to say them just backward
from the way I read them.”
The examiner should read each series very distinctly and at the rate of
one digit per second. About five seconds before the reading of each
series the examiner should call the candidate’s attention by saying,
“Now listen to this set.” Allow two seconds after reading the last digit
of each series before saying “Now,” or, “Now say them backward.” If the
candidate has not begun to repeat the digits within thirty seconds the
examiner should say “Now try this set” and should read the next list to
him.
First Series 5 8
Second 〃 6 4
Third 〃 3 5 2
Fourth 〃 8 4 9
Fifth 〃 7 3 9 4
Sixth 〃 5 2 6 8
Seventh 〃 1 9 2 5 3
Eighth 〃 4 2 8 9 6
Ninth 〃 8 3 6 2 5 7
Tenth 〃 1 5 9 6 4 7
Eleventh 〃 2 6 3 7 5 8 4
Twelfth 〃 3 8 2 6 4 7 5
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The score in this test is the number of series repeated backward without
error. Any misplacement in the order of the digits should be considered
an error and no credit should be given for that series. The examiner
will need to keep a record of just which series were correctly repeated,
and will need to keep this record from the view of the candidate being
examined, at least until after the examination is complete.
Scores from 0 to 4 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 5 to 6 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 7 to 8 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 9 to 10 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 11 to 12 indicate Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 13
MEMORY FOR SENTENCES
_Character of the Test._
At the age of two years and frequently before, the vocabulary of the
ordinary child has developed to such an extent that it contains two or
three hundred individual words which can be used rather effectively. By
the time the child is four years of age he has increased his vocabulary
very extensively and can repeat entire sentences, if they are not too
long, without error. The Mentimeter here provided is intended to measure
the complexity and length of a sentence which an individual can repeat
correctly after having heard it only once. The reliability of this test
is not very well determined and its field of usefulness is almost as
indefinite. It will be interesting in social groups as a recreation and
will be useful to the teacher in comparing her pupils, but it is
doubtful if it can be employed in industrial work with any large group
of employees. It would seem that it might, however, be found valuable as
a test of telegraphers, stenographers, and dictaphone operators. The
fact that it is to be given as an individual test still further limits
its usefulness.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
The examiner, after recording or having the candidate record on his
leaflet the identifying information required, should repeat the
following explanation:
“I have ten sentences which I shall read to you slowly, one sentence at
a time. You are to listen very carefully while I read and then after I
have finished reading a sentence you are to repeat it to me exactly as
it was read.”
Each sentence should be read only once. The reading should be done
slowly and distinctly with sufficient emphasis to make clear the meaning
of the sentence as well as the words spoken. The candidate should be
encouraged to try each sentence and should not be informed as to whether
or not his attempts are successful. The sentences to be read are as
follows:
1. It snows in the winter.
2. Men usually have more dignity than boys.
3. There is no excuse for being thoughtless about the rights of other
people.
4. The price of peace may sometimes be much greater than a nation can
afford to pay.
5. It is unfortunate that war should ever be necessary among civilized
nations.
6. Their harbour is a shallow body of water connected with, but
protected from, the open sea.
7. Conscience asserting itself as the voice divine within the human
soul is then a real actuality.
8. Each state appoints a number of electors equal to the whole number
of senators and representatives.
9. These discoveries—gunpowder, printing-press, compass, and
telescope—were the weapons before which the old science trembled.
10. The use of italic type is indicated in the author’s manuscript by
underscoring the letters, words, phrases, or sentences that are
to be italicized.
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The candidate is to be scored as successful on each sentence repeated
correctly, or repeated with the omission of not more than one
unimportant word such as “the” or “a.” The omission of more than one
word or of a word which changes or limits the meaning of the sentence
should be considered as a failure to remember what was said.
The examiner should keep on the test leaflet a note of just which
sentences were correctly repeated and which were not. The candidate
should not be allowed to see or know his record. The total score is the
number of sentences on which the candidate was successful.
Scores from 0 to 2 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 3 to 4 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 5 to 6 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 7 to 8 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 9 to 10 indicate Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 14
SPEAKING-VOCABULARY TEST
_Character of the Test._
One of the best measures of the intellectual capacity of a community or
of a race of people is the complexity of the language which they find it
necessary to use in their life and social intercourse. The speaking
vocabulary of a tribe or of an individual is therefore an unusually
accurate index of mental capacity. The present test of speaking
vocabulary is designed to be used as an individual test for measuring
the vocabulary of English-speaking persons. With some alterations in the
directions which are given below the test might be used as a group test,
but the results from such a group test would be quite different and
practically not comparable with the results to be obtained when the test
is given according to directions.
The individual to be examined need not be able to read English but must
be able to understand ordinary conversational words and sentences. The
examiner pronounces very distinctly the word which appears on his list
and asks the candidate to explain the meaning of the word. The list used
by the examiner contains fifty words, which are roughly graded, from the
most common and well-known words used in every-day life up to very
unusual and little-known words that would be found very rarely in
newspaper or magazine articles. Any definition is accepted which shows
that the candidate really understands the nature and use of the thing
mentioned.
This test is modelled directly upon the Vocabulary test included in the
Stanford Revision of the Binet tests. It has been shown by careful
scientific investigations that a test of this type is very reliable as a
measure of general intellectual capacity. The excuse for having, at the
end of the series, words which are little known and of no great
practical value is that without such words it would be impossible to
obtain a real measure of the vocabulary of writers, well-trained
lawyers, and other specialists in the use of the English language. The
good scientific test of intelligence always begins with elements which
are so simple that the dullest mind will master them and progresses
steadily to elements which are so complex and difficult that even the
keenest minds have difficulty in reaching satisfactory solutions.
A test of this sort measuring general vocabulary will be very useful to
employers in the selection of stenographers and other clerical workers.
In the public schoolroom teachers will find it very helpful in the
classification of new pupils coming to their room for the first time or
in the comparison of pupils who have been observed for a long period.
The disadvantage of the test is that it must be given to one individual
at a time. Such procedure makes it possible, however, for the teacher or
the psychologist to study the more or less intangible attitudes and
reactions of the pupil which cannot be observed in group examinations.
These peculiarities of the pupil are of tremendous value to the trained
psychologist or to the psychiatrist in making a careful diagnosis of
special mental defects.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
This test should not be given in the presence of outsiders. The examiner
should take the individual to as quiet a place as possible, should seat
the candidate in a comfortable chair, and converse with him until he is
thoroughly at ease and ready to answer any sort of question. The
examiner may write on his list the response which is made by the
candidate to each word in the vocabulary. The formula which should be
used by the examiner should be as nearly as possible that of ordinary
conversation, although care must be used to avoid suggesting by the form
of the question any clue to the proper response. Beginning with the
first word, after introducing the general idea by some such phrase as
“Now, I am going to ask you the meanings of a list of words,” the
examiner should say, “The first word is coat. What is a coat?”
If the candidate does not seem to understand, the question may be
repeated or it may be presented as follows: “You know what a coat is, do
you not? Well, what is a coat?”
Similarly, with the second word one could say, “What does the word buy,
b-u-y, mean? What is the meaning of buy?” If the candidate does not
understand, the question may be restated as follows: “Did you ever buy
anything? What does the word buy mean?” Special care should be taken at
all points to avoid suggesting the answer, giving special hints,
discouraging the candidate or telling him whether or not he is being
successful. He may be told at any time that he is doing well but he
should not be informed whether his answer is correct or incorrect.
Not more than forty-five seconds should be allowed to the candidate for
thinking about any one word. At the end of the forty-five seconds the
examiner should repeat the question. If at the end of thirty seconds
after the question is first repeated the candidate has still said
nothing, the examiner should pass on to the next word with this
introduction, “Well, here is another word. What does the word ‘book’
mean?” Under no circumstances should the candidate being examined be
allowed to take or to see the word list.
_Speaking-Vocabulary Test._
1. coat
2. buy
3. book
4. store
5. piano
6. rent
7. beef
9. disease
10. doubt
11. judge
12. fortunate
13. secretary
14. royal
15. canal
16. greed
17. blond
18. wealth
19. permit
20. wisdom
21. govern
22. license
23. compete
24. Jupiter
25. modesty
26. policy
27. measure
28. enthusiasm
29. percentage
30. league
31. socialism
32. logic
33. revere
34. sarcasm
35. taunt
36. opaque
37. débutante
38. reparation
39. decimate
40. rheostat
41. omniscient
42. beshrew
43. cheetah
44. behemoth
45. oriel
46. megalith
47. myelin
48. paleography
49. prosthetics
50. salep
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The score of this test is the number of words which the candidate
demonstrates clearly that he understands and can use. A list is provided
in the appendix showing the chief meanings and uses which are likely to
be mentioned by the candidate. A repetition of a word by the candidate
should not be counted as evidence that he understands. For example, the
candidate who replies that “doubt” means “when you doubt something” or
that “greed” means “when you are greedy” has not fully proved by such a
reply that these words are familiar to him. In such cases as those just
mentioned the examiner may well ask, “Does it mean anything more to
you?”
The best method of keeping record is to write on the test blank a
notation of what reply was received, although it will be sufficient to
make a check mark after each word satisfactorily explained and to cross
out each word that is unknown if from his reply there is no doubt about
the ability of the candidate to use the word. The maximum score
obtainable in this test is fifty words. The score actually received
should be entered on the title page of the test blank for purposes of
record.
Scores from 0 to 10 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 11 to 20 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 21 to 30 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 31 to 40 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 41 to 50 indicate Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 15
WORD DISCRIMINATION
_Character of the Test._
Intellectual ability has usually been attributed in the greatest degree
to those people who were best able to use their native language. This
test is calculated to measure the ability of individual candidates to
discriminate between the meanings of different words. Insofar as ability
to draw distinctions between similar words can be taken as a measure of
intellectual capacity, this test will be found useful.
It is quite certain to be entertaining as a social diversion and
distinctly useful as a measure of the general familiarity of any child
in the public schools with the English language. Industrial and
commercial establishments may very well find that it has a distinct
relationship to the kind of intelligence it would pay them to employ in
certain parts of their organization.
There is no simple way of converting this test into a group test because
of the added complexity of the problem which is presented when
candidates are asked to write their answers. It is very much simpler to
explain the difference between two words than to write out the
explanation. It is recommended that this test be given in a quiet place
where no persons other than the examiner and the candidate are present.
This rule, of course, will not apply when the test is used as a parlour
game.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
The examiner should use the regular printed leaflet which contains the
list of words to be explained. On the title page, he should enter such
facts about the candidate as will identify him and satisfy the purposes
of the investigation. The word list should not be shown to the candidate
at all. The examiner should make a notation on his word list showing
just what difference was mentioned by the candidate for each pair of
words.
When the examiner has put the candidate at his ease and is ready to
begin the test, he should read the following directions: “I have a list
of twenty-four pairs of words. I shall read one pair at a time, and I
wish you to tell me what differences you know between the two things
mentioned. First, what is the difference between a bird and a fish?” If
no answer is given within half a minute, the examiner may say: “You know
what a bird is, do you not? You know what a fish is, don’t you? Well,
what is the difference between a bird and a fish?” No additional help of
any sort may be given and not more than thirty seconds should be allowed
after the second asking of the question. The only formula to be used is:
“What is the difference between —— and ——?”
_What is the difference between_
1. A bird and a fish?
2. A snake and a fly?
3. A pen and a pencil?
4. An eagle and a chicken?
5. A book and a magazine?
6. An orange and a lemon?
7. A teacher and a preacher?
8. Luck and pluck?
9. Stone and china?
10. A balloon and an airplane?
11. To plod and to plot?
12. To wither and to shrivel?
13. To surprise and to astonish?
14. Rash and reckless?
15. Lonely and solitary?
16. Sorrow and sadness?
17. Plutocrat and autocrat?
18. A rascal and a rogue?
19. To plunder and to devastate?
20. To relinquish and to resign?
21. Shrewd and sagacious?
22. Dormant and quiescent?
23. Reconstruction and rehabilitation?
24. Reparation and indemnity?
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The score in this test is the number of pairs of words between which the
candidate gives at least one real difference. The differences which
appear in Appendix D are suggestive of the type of differences which may
be mentioned by the candidate, but the list there furnished is not
complete. One should not assume that the candidate knows the difference
between the two things for which the words stand until the candidate has
described one real difference pretty clearly. Such answers as, “Oh, they
are different, entirely different,” or “One is one thing and the other
is something else” should not be considered as correct in any respect.
The idea that the person knows a difference without being able to
explain it should not influence in any way the judgment of the examiner.
The difference must not only be known, but must be clearly expressed
before credit is given for any pair.
The total score possible in this test is twenty-four points. The total
score actually made by any candidate should be entered in the lower
right-hand corner of the title page of the leaflet.
Scores from 0 to 4 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 5 to 9 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 10 to 16 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 17 to 20 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 21 to 24 indicate Superior Ability.
MENTIMETER NO. 16
NAMING OPPOSITES
_Character of the Test._
The Opposites test in one form or another has been used for a long while
with remarkable accuracy as a measure of one’s familiarity with language
and his general intellectual competence. The Mentimeter form is superior
to the ordinary form of the Opposites test in that it is fairly well
graded in its difficulty, from simple problems to very difficult
problems, thus securing an added value as an intelligence test. It
differs from the Alpha form used in the Army in that it is necessary in
the Mentimeter test to write the word which is the opposite of the key
word given, while in the Army two words were given which might be
opposites or synonyms and the soldier was asked to check whether the
words meant the “same” or the “opposite.” One difficulty with the
military form was that if a man knew nothing at all about the words
used, he would, nevertheless, by chance have half of his answers
correct. In the present Mentimeter form, a man must not only use his
judgment to decide between two words but he must have fairly rich
associations between the key word and its opposites and be able to
select from all of these associations the one which is most appropriate.
This test may be given as an individual examination, but it is planned
as a group examination for as many candidates as can be conveniently
seated in the room provided for the examination. Only persons who can
read and write the English language should be tested with this
Mentimeter.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
As soon as the blanks on the title page of the booklet have been
correctly filled in, under the direction of the examiner, the candidates
should be asked to read silently the directions printed below these
blanks while he reads them aloud: “When you open your booklets, you will
find on the inside forty words each followed by a dotted line on which
you are to write a corresponding list of forty words. You are to write
after each word the word which in your mind means just the opposite to
the word that is printed. Notice the three samples printed below:
=On the line after each word, write the word which means just the
opposite of the printed word.=
(Samples) A. bad _good_
B. girl _boy_
C. down _up_
“The opposite of bad is ‘good’ and therefore ‘good’ has been written
after the word ‘bad’; the opposite of ‘girl’ is ‘boy’ and therefore the
word ‘boy’ has been written after the word ‘girl’; the opposite of the
word ‘down’ is ‘up’ and therefore ‘up’ has been written after the word
‘down’.
“You will be allowed exactly four minutes in which to write the
opposites of as many words as you know in the list. Begin with the first
word. Ready! Open your books! Go to work!”
Exactly four minutes after saying “Go!”, the examiner should call,
“Stop! Close your books and hand them to me!” The papers should be
collected immediately.
=On the line after each word, write the word which means just the
opposite of the printed word.=
1. good
2. rich
3. little
4. new
5. hard
6. dark
7. dirty
8. sick
9. north
10. empty
11. push
12. wrong
13. beginning
14. narrow
15. morning
16. nowhere
17. stale
18. busy
19. to float
20. smooth
21. wild
22. strength
23. innocent
24. wisdom
25. positive
26. inferior
27. ancient
28. result
29. stingy
30. abstract
31. partiality
32. diligent
33. frugal
34. spurious
35. elation
36. expedite
37. diffident
38. homogeneous
39. intrepid
40. sycophantic
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The score in this test is the total number of words for which the exact
opposite has been written. Some considerable time will be saved by using
the stencil provided with each package of test booklets. The total score
as finally obtained should be written in the lower right-hand corner of
the title page of the booklet.
Scores from 0 to 7 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 8 to 12 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 13 to 25 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 26 to 32 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 33 to 40 indicate Superior Ability.
MENTIMETER NO. 17
SPELLING TEST
_Character of the Test._
All of the investigations which have been made into the subject of
spelling in relation to general intelligence seem to indicate that good
spellers are “born and not made.” Of course intelligent people also are
“born and not made.” Strange to say, a person may be very intelligent
without being an expert speller or a person may be a fairly able speller
without being keen intellectually. This Mentimeter is therefore not to
be considered as reliable an index of intelligence as most of the
others.
There are two methods by which one might determine the ability of any
average individual in spelling. One might measure how difficult a word
was necessary in order to cause failure or one might take words all of
the same difficulty and measure what percentage of them were misspelled
by the candidate. List A in the series which follows is of the first
sort, measuring how difficult a word must be before it causes trouble
and List B is of the second sort, measuring how many words of the same
difficulty can be spelled correctly by the individual tested. These
words are selected from the Ayers Measuring Scale for Ability in
Spelling. Mentimeter List A consists of two words from each degree of
difficulty from B to Z in the Ayers list. Mentimeter List B is chosen
from List R of the Ayers Scale.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
Whether the examination is to be with List A or with List B the
candidates should be supplied with the Mentimeter leaflet and should be
asked first of all to write their names, ages and other necessary
information on the title page. When this information has been obtained
the examiner should read the following directions:
“I shall pronounce to you a list of fifty words. You are to listen
carefully and then to write on the blank provided for it the word which
I pronounce. Be very careful to form your letters distinctly in order
that I may know whether or not you know how to spell these words. Do not
ask any questions, for I shall not answer them. Each word will be
pronounced only twice, so listen carefully in order not to make it
necessary to ask for a further repetition.”
The examiner should pronounce each word very distinctly. He should,
before pronouncing the word, give the serial number of the word in order
that it may be recorded on the proper blank by the candidate. The
formula to be used should be as follows:
“The first word is ‘go,’—go.” After waiting for ten or not more than
fifteen seconds, the next word should be pronounced as follows: “The
second word is ‘at,’—at.”
It is the intention that each individual shall have ample opportunity to
understand the word to be spelled and to write his spelling of it, but
that the conditions shall remain uniform for all.
LIST A
1. go
2. at
3. can
4. run
5. ten
6. bed
7. good
8. little
9. like
10. book
11. make
12. hand
13. tell
14. five
15. spring
16. plant
17. game
18. hard
19. week
20. mile
21. summer
22. express
23. railroad
24. ticket
25. death
26. learn
27. district
28. pleasure
29. prison
30. family
31. factory
32. president
33. illustrate
34. education
35. century
36. difference
37. organize
38. estimate
39. foreign
40. difficulty
41. reference
42. secretary
43. athletic
44. February
45. preliminary
46. annual
47. decision
48. principle
49. judgment
50. recommend
LIST B
1. Christmas
2. interest
3. popular
4. treasure
5. search
6. complete
7. against
8. consider
9. tomorrow
10. general
11. distribute
12. injure
13. service
14. article
15. feature
16. manner
17. increase
18. convention
19. together
20. diamond
21. common
22. purpose
23. director
24. attention
25. already
26. according
27. provision
28. object
29. different
30. prefer
31. busy
32. vessel
33. prepare
34. wreck
35. promise
36. illustrate
37. secure
38. adopt
39. success
40. toward
41. machine
42. publication
43. visitor
44. salary
45. entertain
46. wear
47. education
48. avenue
49. combination
50. forenoon
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
No word should be given credit unless it is spelled correctly. If a word
is so illegible that the examiner cannot easily tell whether or not it
is correctly spelled it should be counted as wrong. The total number of
words correctly spelled should be entered in the lower right-hand corner
of the title page of the test leaflet, and should be followed by a
notation of the list used.
_In List A_
Scores from 0 to 20 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 21 to 35 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 36 to 45 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 46 to 50 indicate High Average or Superior Ability
_In List B_
Scores from 0 to 10 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 11 to 24 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 25 to 40 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 41 to 46 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 47 to 50 indicate Superior Ability
It is not to be expected that an individual’s score will be the same
exactly in List A as in List B or that his classification based on this
score will be just the same. The two lists are not perfectly adjusted in
this matter and if they were it would still be possible for a person of
“Average Ability” in List A to obtain “Low Average” scores in List B.
In public school work teachers will probably find List A more
instructive than List B, although List B will be almost as useful in
classifying pupils, especially when used in connection with the
following table of average results.
The average Second Grade pupil should spell 6 words in List B
The average Third Grade pupil should spell 14 words in List B
The average Fourth Grade pupil should spell 25 words in List B
The average Fifth Grade pupil should spell 33 words in List B
The average Sixth Grade pupil should spell 40 words in List B
The average Seventh Grade pupil should spell 44 words in List B
The average Eighth Grade pupil should spell 47 words in List B
MENTIMETER NO. 18
RANGE OF INFORMATION
_Character of the Test._
This test is a very entertaining and useful task for any group to work
upon. It is based upon the assumption that general intelligence will
result in the extension of one’s general knowledge and information about
affairs in many fields. The test requires, for its perfect solution,
knowledge of all sorts of facts in a great variety of fields.
The General Information test used in the Army Alpha series was very
frequently subject to criticism from officers and men because not a
sufficient number of questions was asked about matters which pertained
to their own field of work. The physicians, for example, expressed
regret that there were so few questions referring to medicine or
anatomy, while the engineers were just as much inclined to believe that
the test would have been improved had it included a larger number of
questions applying directly to their field. Of course the purpose of the
test is to avoid specializing in any particular field and to cover just
as wide a range as possible of general information.
An effort has been made to graduate the difficulty of the questions
asked in the Mentimeter form of this test, in order to obtain as much
additional merit as possible in the measurement of intellectual
capacity. This test will be useful in almost any educational or
industrial organization. It is probable, however, that its usefulness in
school will not be as great as in life outside of the schools. As little
of the material has been drawn from educational experiences as seemed
possible. A great deal of amusement can be obtained in a social group by
reading aloud the answers checked by members of the group.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
When the candidates are comfortably seated and provided with pencils,
the examiner should distribute the booklets to them with the request
that they be not opened until directions are given. When the information
blanks on the title page have been filled out satisfactorily, the
examiner should ask the candidates to read silently the directions
printed on the title page while he reads them aloud.
“On the inside of this booklet, when you are told to open it, you will
find 40 different sentences, at the end of each one of which there is a
list of words from which you are to choose the proper one to be the last
word. When you are told to turn the page, begin with the first sentence
and make a check mark (✓) in the little square in front of the best word
to use as an ending. Choose the word which will make the truest
sentence. Choose only one word for each ending. If you are not
absolutely certain which is the most truthful, make a guess and try the
next sentences. Ready! Go!”
(FOR TESTS SEE PAGES 204–207)
Make a check mark (✓) in the square in front of that one of the four
words which makes the best sentence and tells the most exact truth.
1. The JERSEY is a kind of ☐ COW ☐ DOG ☐ CAT ☐ HORSE
2. GOLF is played with ☐ CARDS ☐ DICE ☐ CLUBS ☐ BUTTONS
3. FATIMA is the name of a ☐ CIGAR ☐ CLOTH ☐ PIPE ☐ CIGARETTE
4. A SAW is used by a ☐ PAINTER ☐ PLUMBER ☐ CARPENTER ☐ PLASTERER
5. An EMERALD is ☐ GREEN ☐ RED ☐ BLUE ☐ BLACK
6. DETROIT is noted for its ☐ BREWING ☐ TEXTILES ☐ AUTOMOBILES ☐
PRINTING
7. A SPANIEL is a kind of ☐ SHEEP ☐ GOAT ☐ DOG ☐ MULE
8. MAUDE ADAMS is noted as a ☐ DANCER ☐ ACTRESS ☐ NURSE ☐ WRITER
9. CANDY is made by ☐ FORD ☐ HUYLER ☐ COLGATE ☐ MACMILLAN
10. The CIVIL WAR began in ☐ 1848 ☐ 1860 ☐ 1861 ☐ 1865
11. The SHERIFF is an officer of the ☐ CITY ☐ COUNTY ☐ STATE ☐ NATION
12. RUBENS is famous as a ☐ POET ☐ SCIENTIST ☐ CARTOONIST ☐ PAINTER
13. The HARLEY DAVIDSON is an ☐ AUTOMOBILE ☐ AËROPLANE ☐ MOTORCYCLE ☐
KITE
14. MEREDITH NICHOLSON is a ☐ HUMORIST ☐ NOVELIST ☐ POET ☐ MUSICIAN
15. BUILT LIKE A SKYSCRAPER is an “ad” for a ☐ BED ☐ TRUNK ☐
FILING-CASE ☐ STOVE
16. The KILOMETER measures ☐ ELECTRICITY ☐ DISTANCE ☐ GAS ☐ WATER
17. The TIBIA is in the ☐ LEG ☐ ARM ☐ CHEST ☐ HEAD
18. CORAL is found in ☐ TREES ☐ REEFS ☐ MOLLUSKS ☐ MINES
19. CLYSMIC is a kind of ☐ WINE ☐ CLOTH ☐ WATER ☐ METAL
20. UNCLE TOM’S CABIN was written by ☐ POE ☐ STOWE ☐ HAWTHORNE ☐ IRVING
21. JOHN HAY was a ☐ BANKER ☐ ENGINEER ☐ PREACHER ☐ STATESMAN
22. VASSAR COLLEGE is at ☐ POUGHKEEPSIE ☐ ITHACA ☐ BOSTON ☐ CAMBRIDGE
23. A SUBPOENA is used in ☐ INSURANCE ☐ MEDICINE ☐ LAW ☐ WAR
24. The number of a BANTU’S legs is ☐ ONE ☐ TWO ☐ FOUR ☐ EIGHT
25. SAMPSON BRASS is a character in ☐ SCOTT ☐ POE ☐ DICKENS ☐ BURNS
26. The HANDLEY-PAGE plane is made in ☐ FRANCE ☐ JAPAN ☐ ENGLAND ☐
AMERICA
27. The FALCON is an ☐ INSECT ☐ BIRD ☐ TOOL ☐ STONE
28. DRIBBLE is a term used in ☐ HUNTING ☐ THEOLOGY ☐ LAW ☐ ATHLETICS
29. PHEZ is a ☐ FABRIC ☐ DANCE ☐ GAME ☐ DRINK
30. HIGGINS manufactures ☐ FURNITURE ☐ BOOKS ☐ GLASSWARE ☐ INK
31. GUAVA is a kind of ☐ FISH ☐ BIRD ☐ ANIMAL ☐ FRUIT
32. An EQUILATERAL TRIANGLE is also ☐ RIGHT ☐ ISOSCELES ☐ SCALENE ☐
ACUTE
33. The BATTLE OF HASTINGS was in ☐ 1066 ☐ 1215 ☐ 1453 ☐ 1607
34. The AORTA originates in the ☐ HEAD ☐ FEET ☐ ALPS ☐ HEART
35. ENDIVE is a kind of ☐ STONE ☐ TOOL ☐ PLANT ☐ ANIMAL
36. SEOUL is in ☐ PERSIA ☐ KOREA ☐ INDIA ☐ SYRIA
37. JOSEPH PRIESTLEY discovered ☐ PONGEE ☐ AUSTRALIA ☐ OXYGEN ☐
PRINTING
38. The OBOE is used in ☐ MUSIC ☐ MEDICINE ☐ GEOLOGY ☐ RELIGION
39. CHALLIS is a kind of ☐ DISH ☐ DRINK ☐ DANCE ☐ CLOTH
40. A RHESUS is a kind of ☐ FISH ☐ BIRD ☐ ANIMAL ☐ REPTILE
At the end of four minutes the examiner should call “Stop! The time is
up!” He should use care to see that no answers are checked after the
signal to stop has been given.
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The score in this test is the number of sentences in which the right
conclusion has been checked. Credit should not be given for checking any
other word than the correct one. The use of the stencil, which is
provided with each package of test booklets, will save a great deal of
eye strain, mental fatigue, and time in marking these tests. This
stencil makes it possible for an ordinary clerk to score the 40
sentences accurately in a fraction of a minute.
The total score in the test should be entered at the lower right-hand
corner of the title page of the test booklet.
Scores from 0 to 3 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 4 to 10 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 11 to 23 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 24 to 30 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 31 to 40 indicate Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 19
READING VOCABULARY
_Character of the Test._
One of the most valuable measures of any individual or group of
individuals is the extent of the vocabulary found necessary for
communication and social activities. The Vocabulary test which is used
in connection with the Stanford Revision of the Binet test, and which is
quite similar to Mentimeter No. 14, has been shown to be unusually
reliable as a measure of general intelligence. The Reading-Vocabulary
test is probably not so widely usable as the Speaking-Vocabulary test,
but it can be applied as a group test and is therefore probably destined
to much more extensive usefulness than the individual test.
The Reading-Vocabulary test cannot, of course, be given to individuals
whose ability in reading is less than that ordinarily possessed by
third-grade public school children. The candidate must not only be able
to recognize the words that appear in the test and to know their
meanings, but he must also be able to classify them as belonging to a
particular group of objects. The method of the test requires the child
to make a check mark under the family name which would include the
particular word appearing on the vocabulary list. The instructions will
not be understood except by fairly intelligent persons, but for those
who can understand the instructions and who do their best on the test, a
very useful measure will be the result.
Although this test would seem at first glance to be particularly well
adapted to the selection of clerical workers, past experience has
convinced the writers that it is also useful in the selection of
organizers and directors of men as well as of organizers and directors
of thought. The relationship between the score in this test and the
general efficiency of an employee is unusually high.
Teachers will find the Reading Vocabulary a splendid index of the
advancement attained by new pupils coming into their rooms for the first
time or of the pupils who have been with them for some time. It is
useless to try to have pupils explain the meaning of magazine articles
or of selections from their geographies when they do not even understand
the words used in these discussions. It would be very much worth while
for a teacher, when she has employed this test, to compare the
difficulty of the words which cause the majority of her class to stumble
and fail with the difficulty of the words used in the ordinary
text-books of the school.
In any social group the classification of the forty words in this list
would be found rather interesting particularly when the errors made by
different members of the group were read aloud for the amusement of the
entire group. It should not be suggested, when the test is to be used in
this way, that there is any distinct relationship between achievement in
the test and achievement in life, else some of the group will be very
much disappointed in their scores.
Every effort should be made to have such a group feel that this was
simply a new type of puzzle. The results obtained under such conditions
should not be compared with the results obtained under the standard
conditions outlined below.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
The candidates to be examined should be comfortably seated and provided
with well-sharpened pencils. The examiner should then announce that the
booklets which he would distribute were not to be opened until
instructions to that effect were issued. Booklets should be distributed
unopened, one to each individual. Further directions should be issued as
soon as each candidate is supplied with the booklet, authorizing each
individual to write his name, his age, and such other information as is
desirable on the title page of the booklet. When these preliminaries
have been finished the examiner should say:
“When I ask you to open your booklet, you will find on the inside a list
of forty different words. The test is to determine how many of these
words you can read and identify. At the top of the page you will find
the words, Animal, Body, Bird, Colour, Clothes, Fish, Time, Tool, and
War. Each of the forty words to be identified is connected with or is a
kind of Animal, Body, Bird, Colour, or other kind of thing mentioned at
the top of the page. The page is ruled both ways. You are to look at
each word in the column on the left and to make a check mark at the
right of it, under the general word showing whether the word you are
marking is an Animal, a Body, a Bird, or something else. You will be
allowed exactly four minutes in which to check the words. Mark as many
of the words as you possibly can but be sure to check them correctly.
Ready! Go!”
Indicate the meaning of each of the forty words in the column on
the left by making a mark (✓) under the proper word.
CONNECTED WITH, OR A KIND OF
══════════╤══════╤════╤════╤══════╤═══════╤════╤════╤════╤═══╤══
│ANIMAL│BODY│BIRD│COLOUR│CLOTHES│FISH│TIME│TOOL│WAR│
──────────┼──────┼────┼────┼──────┼───────┼────┼────┼────┼───┼──
arm │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ 1
cow │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ 2
stocking │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ 3
yellow │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ 4
sparrow │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ 5
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
shirt │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ 6
calf │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ 7
hammer │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ 8
shin │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ 9
saw │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │10
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
wren │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │11
tan │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │12
cod │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │13
troops │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │14
year │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │15
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
conquer │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │16
stag │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │17
minnow │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │18
month │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │19
kimono │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │20
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
rampart │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │21
thigh │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │22
carmine │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │23
partridge │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │24
sturgeon │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │25
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
ratchet │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │26
interim │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │27
peccary │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │28
mauve │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │29
citadel │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │30
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
ephemeral │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │31
tartan │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │32
peritoneum│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │33
petrel │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │34
tench │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │35
│ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
vomer │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │36
burgonet │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │37
burin │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │38
desman │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │39
tinamou │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │40
──────────┴──────┴────┴────┴──────┴───────┴────┴────┴────┴───┴──
At the end of exactly four minutes the examiner should call “Stop! Time
up! Close your papers and hand them to me.” All papers should be
collected at once.
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The total score in this test is the number of words correctly checked.
The work of checking the accuracy of marks made by the candidates is
very much simplified by the stencil which accompanies each package of
examination booklets. This stencil indicates exactly where a check
should be made in each case.
The total number of words correctly checked should be entered in the
lower right-hand corner of the title page of the examination booklet.
Scores from 0 to 8 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 9 to 14 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 15 to 24 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 25 to 29 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 30 to 40 indicate Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 20
READING: DIRECTIONS
_Character of the Test._
In the United States Army an officer frequently calls one of his
orderlies to his desk and issues orders somewhat as follows: “Present my
compliments to Lieutenant Smith and ask him to report at my office
to-morrow afternoon at 3.15 for his orders regarding the disposition of
garbage from the kitchen of Company E. Tell Corporal Jones in Barracks
17 to take a detail of four men and report at 5.00 o’clock this evening
to Sergeant Katz at the Second Battalion Officers’ Mess. Deliver this
package to the Adjutant of the Base Hospital and ask him to let me know
at once what should be done with the S. C. D. papers brought to me this
morning by Lieutenant Johnson.” The orderly must be able to carry out
these orders without their repetition or explanation. He should reply,
“Yes, sir,” by way of making it clear that he has understood and will
obey the directions, but should say nothing more.
The first test in the Alpha series used in the Army was intended to
measure how complicated a series of directions could be grasped by the
soldier and executed without errors. The Mentimeter test differs from
its military counterpart in that the directions are to be printed rather
than spoken, and in that the increasing difficulty arises from the
increasing complexity and obscurity of the words employed rather than
from the length of the directions to be held in mind. Whether these
changes will increase or decrease the value of the test cannot be stated
in advance of actual trials.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
As soon as the candidates have been provided with pencils, writing
surfaces, and comfortable seats, the examiner should distribute the
examination leaflets with the instruction that the blanks at the top of
the title page be filled out at once and that no one should turn the
leaflet until the direction to do so be given.
The test should be introduced by the request from the examiner that
everyone look at the directions on the title page while they are being
read aloud, “When you are told to turn your leaflet and go to work, you
will find on the other side very full directions as to what you are to
do. This is a test to find out how well you can understand directions,
so read them carefully and do exactly what they tell you to do. Ready!
Turn your leaflets and go to work.”
Exactly three minutes should be allowed for this work. At the end of
three minutes the examiner should call “Stop! The time is up! Turn over
your leaflet and hand it to me.” The test sheets should be collected at
once.
Do what it says.
1. Write your name on this line. ..........
2. Make a cross in the square. □
3. Make a cross in the circle and a dot in the square.
□ ○ ▭
4. Make a figure 1 under the letter M and a figure 2 under the letter
W.
A N W V H M Z U Y
5. If Decoration Day comes in the winter, write the word “No.” If not,
write the word “Yes.” ..........
6. Cross out the shortest word in this sentence and draw two lines
around the ninth word.
7. Look at the three blanks printed below. On the first blank write
the number of days in a week, on the second the number of months in
a year, and on the third the number of years in a century.
__________ ___________ __________
8. Write in the square on the left the right answer to the question:
“How many dimes make a dollar?” In the second square make a small
circle, and in the third triangle write the letter “C.”
□ △ □ △ □ △
9. If a peck is a greater magnitude than a bushel, cross out the word
“pint” unless a pint holds a smaller quantity than a quart, in which
case draw a line under the first word after bushel.
QUART BUSHEL PECK PINT
10. If a centimeter is more than half as long as an inch, write in the
square the number of inches in a yard. If a meter is more than three
feet, then write in the circle the number of meters in a kilometer.
○ □
11. If the oscillations of a pendulum were not facilitated by any
other force than gravity, what would be the effect upon their
amplitude? Check the best reply:
It would gradually be
☐ augmented.
☐ flagellated.
☐ diminished.
☐ swaged.
12. If ontogeny invariably ingeminates phylogeny, circumscribe the
word giving the location of the OURCQ; if not, underscore the word
that locates the MANDIBLE.
England Foot Utah Face Peru France Arm India
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The score is the number of directions which were perfectly obeyed
without error. A failure to do any part of the thing directed or the
performance of extra things not asked should act to withhold credit for
an element. The total number of credits should be entered in the lower
right-hand corner of the title page of the test leaflet.
Scores from 0 to 2 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 3 to 5 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 6 to 8 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 9 to 10 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 11 to 12 indicate Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 21
READING: INTERPRETATION
_Character of the Test._
This test is a specially devised method of determining the ability of an
individual to secure from the printed page the ideas which are expressed
in sentences and paragraphs. It is probable that no single test of
reading can be devised which would measure all phases of the subject
equally well. This particular test attempts to measure the special
ability to interpret the meanings of sentences and paragraphs, although
it assumes that the words of which these larger units are composed are
recognized and understood by the reader.
The test is arranged with very simple sentences at the beginning
followed by more and more difficult sentences until at the last there
are statements the meaning of which very intellectual people might fail
to grasp at first sight. The questions which are asked regarding the
paragraphs likewise increase in difficulty so that the ultimate score
obtained by the candidate indicates rather distinctly how difficult are
the sentences or paragraphs he is able to understand and answer
questions about.
It is not probable that a great field of usefulness will be found for
this test in industrial life, although it might very well be used in any
establishment where the question of the degree of literacy in the
employee was of any importance. Tests fashioned on this order would be
tremendously valuable as a basis for classifying according to degree of
literacy the immigrants entering this country. Some such objective
measure as this is very much needed in the taking of the census. Where
at present almost any man or woman who can barely write his or her name
is entered on the census records as being able to read and write, the
crude examination for literacy which was employed by the psychologists
in the U. S. Army illustrates conclusively that about three times as
many people are unable to make any practical use of reading and writing
as the census figures would lead one to believe. It seems certain from
the facts obtained in the Army that at least one half of the population
of the United States would be unable to answer more than eight of the
sixteen questions included in this Mentimeter.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
It is particularly desirable that the room in which the test is given
should be well lighted and comfortable. Before distributing the tests
the usual caution, “Do not open this booklet until you are told to do
so,” should be given. One test booklet should then be given to each
candidate. As soon as all have received their blanks the examiner should
give the directions for filling out the information blanks on the title
page of the booklet. If very young children or very dull adults are
being examined it will be necessary to give specific directions about
these blanks. As soon as the blanks are filled the examiner should ask
the group to read silently the directions as he reads them aloud.
“When you are told to turn the page you will find on the inside three
paragraphs of printed matter. You are to read these paragraphs very
carefully and then, turning the page once more, you will find sixteen
questions about the three paragraphs you have just read. You are to
write the answers to the questions on the blank lines provided for the
purpose. You may turn back to the printed matter and look for the
answers as often as you need to, but you will only have ten minutes in
which to do your reading and the answering of the questions, so be sure
to answer all the questions you can. The first questions are easier than
those which follow, so answer them in the order in which they come.
“Remember that when I say ‘Go’ you are to begin reading and to read as
fast as you can, then to answer as many questions as you can on the next
page. Ready, Go.”
Exactly ten minutes after saying “Go” the examiner should call “Stop!
The time is up! Close your papers and hand them to me.” All papers
should be collected at once.
=FIND THE ANSWERS TO THE QUESTIONS BY READING WHAT IT SAYS BELOW=
Boys like to run and play in the street. Girls like to stay in the house
and play with their dolls. As the girls grow older some of them learn to
cook and to help their mothers in the home, while others learn to work
in shops, mills, and offices. Some boys learn as they grow up to work on
the farms, while others obtain positions in stores, mines, and
factories. Even before they grow to be men and women, people differ in
the things they enjoy and in the things they are able to do.
It is fortunate that people are so different, for the world has all
sorts of work that must be done. Wheat, corn, and cattle must be raised
to supply the world with food. Cotton and wool must be made into
clothing to keep us warm, while wood and stone must be made into houses
to protect us from the rain and the snow. The work of the world requires
that some people be farmers, others manufacturers, others merchants,
others doctors, and so on. If we were all exactly alike in our tastes
and abilities, much of the world’s work would have to be done by persons
whose inclinations and capacities were in fields of endeavour entirely
different from those in which they would be required to labour. The fact
that people are so different makes possible an adjustment whereby the
ability and interest of the labourer may be in proportion to the
difficulty of the undertaking to which he is assigned.
Perhaps nothing makes a larger contribution to the happiness and
contentment of the world than this adjustment of the individual to his
vocation, and yet the problem of securing such an adjustment is
complicated by an enormous number of practical difficulties. One of the
most annoying elements in this problem of adjustment has been the
impossibility of making expeditiously an effectual classification of
candidates according to native capacity and endowment. Psychologists and
statisticians have, however, during the past decade evolved methods of
intellectual measurement which demonstrate the feasibility and economic
utility of the procedure and adumbrate to some extent the social
satisfactions that will ensue when the science of personnel engineering
has been consummated.
=WRITE THE ANSWERS TO THESE QUESTIONS=
1. Who like to play in the street?
2. Where do little girls like to play?
3. Who learn to help their mothers?
4. Where do older boys find jobs?
5. In what two ways are people said to differ early in life?
6. What kinds of food are mentioned?
7. For what purpose do people work with wool and cotton?
8. What reason is given for building houses?
9. What is the topic of the first paragraph?
10. Why are differences between people spoken of in the second
paragraph as a wise provision of nature?
11. Check the right answer to this question: What does the second
paragraph suggest as the probable result upon the world’s work if
all people were just alike?
☐ It would not be done.
☐ Some of it would be improved.
☐ It would be well done.
☐ Much of it would be poorly done.
12. What characteristic of a task needs to correspond to the ability of
the worker?
13. What is suggested in the third paragraph as the probable result of
failing to place men in positions suited to their abilities?
14. It is quite common to determine a man’s ability by trying him out
in the job. What objection to this plan does any word in the
third paragraph suggest?
15. What procedure is said to be a practical means of saving time and
money in the selection of men for positions?
16. What is stated as a probable cause for general gratification at
some future time?
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The score in this test is the number of questions correctly answered. A
stencil is provided with each set of test booklets by the aid of which
it is fairly simple to mark an answer as right or wrong. An answer
should be considered wrong if it does not prove in itself that the
candidate had read the paragraph and obtained his information from it.
Any answer which is true in general life but which is not suggested by
the reading material on the previous page, should not be accepted.
Scores from 0 to 3 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 4 to 7 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 8 to 12 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 13 to 14 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 15 to 16 indicate Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 22
DISARRANGED SENTENCES
_Character of the Test._
Publishers and editors have for many years insisted upon having
intelligent compositors and type-setters. The printer’s pi is probably
as comprehensive a test of intelligence as any in the Mentimeter series.
In the Binet tests, one of the most interesting parts of the examination
is where children are asked to take certain words and rearrange them to
make a sentence. This is not exactly the same problem that the
type-setter faces with pi, but it is related to it. A disarranged
sentence test was used in the military examinations, but in order to
make the scoring simple and to include elements of intellectual capacity
other than ability to rearrange words, the soldiers were asked to check
the resulting sentence as “true” or “false.” Here again, without being
able to read a single word of the sentences which had been disarranged,
the soldiers would be able to make check marks in the correct place by
mere chance in half the cases. The method of scoring used in the Army
was calculated to overcome this difficulty, but even then the results
were not as reliable as they should be in the case of the Mentimeter
form presented below.
This test contains twenty-five sentences in each one of which the words
have been mixed up and disarranged so that a real amount of imagination
is necessary in order to guess what the sentence was in the first place.
The first sentence contains only three words and is very easily
arranged, while the later sentences are quite complicated and difficult.
In order to indicate what the true arrangement of the original sentence
was, each candidate is asked to place a period at the end of the word
which would be last if the sentence were properly arranged. The
resulting score may be taken as a fairly reliable index of ability to
“unscramble” words in sentences.
This test is very closely related to several of the other tests which
appear in the Mentimeter series in that it involves the ability to think
about words and the things for which words stand and the relationships
between these words and these things. The type of ability necessary for
this test is the sort which makes for success in education and the
learned professions, provided social and personal qualities are equal to
the intellectual attainments.
This test is also very entertaining as a parlour game and may be used
without offense to any one, if no mention is made of the relationship of
the results to mental ability.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
When the candidates have been seated and supplied with pencils, the
examiner should distribute copies of the test booklets with the
direction that none be opened until the instruction to do so is given.
After having the identifying information called for on the blanks of the
title page filled out by the candidates, the examiner should ask that
all candidates look carefully at their papers and read silently the
directions while he reads them aloud: “A sentence is a list of words
which says something that we can understand. When you open the papers,
you will find on the inside twenty-five sets of words which are not good
sentences as they stand, but which would make good sentences and would
sound sensible if they were changed around and put in a different order.
Look at the samples given below:
Sample A: KILL MICE CATS
Sample B: HAS BOOK IT PICTURES THE IN
“Sample A would make a good sentence if it were arranged in the order
‘CATS KILL MICE’ and therefore there should be a period after the word
‘mice’ to show the end of the sentence. In Sample B, we should have a
good sentence if the words were changed around to read: ‘THE BOOK HAS
PICTURES IN IT.’ The end of the sentence is ‘it,’ and therefore there
should be in sample B a period after the word ‘it.’
“When you turn the page, begin with the first set of words and study out
what the sentence would be, then put a period after the word which would
come last. Work right down the page until time is called. You will have
two minutes in which to put in the periods of as many sentences as
possible. Ready! Open your books! Go to work.”
Exactly two minutes after saying the word, “work,” the examiner should
call “Stop! Close your books! Give them to me.” The papers should be
collected at once.
Put a period at the end of the word which would come last if the words
on each line were arranged in a sentence.
1. IS WHITE SNOW 1
2. THE IS BIRD A ROBIN 2
3. WATER IN FISH SWIM 3
4. WHITE IN LIVE HOUSES PEOPLE 4
5. WITH TO ARE HEAR EARS OUR 5
6. THE IN SETS WEST SUN THE 6
7. GOOD FIGHT COUNTRY SOLDIERS THEIR FOR 7
8. WINTER THE COLDEST THE ARE MONTHS 8
9. IS A MILK AND FOOD HEALTHFUL GOOD 9
10. FROM EARTH DIAMONDS THE MINED ARE 10
11. FOOD VALUABLE POTATOES AS ARE A 11
12. AND ON GROW ORANGES TREES APPLES 12
13. FOUGHT FRANCE GERMANY AND AGAINST ENGLAND 13
14. ALWAYS DEEDS SHOULD BAD PUNISHED BE 14
15. SEVERAL OCEAN THE TAKES DAYS CROSS TO IT 15
16. FEW MAKING A IMPOSSIBLE AVOID IT TO IS MISTAKES 16
17. CAN NIGHTS ON BE MANY NOT THE SEEN MOON 17
18. CLOTHING USEFUL ARE FOR AND MAKING WOOL SILK 18
19. BY COMMONLY IS DEBATERS VERY METHOD IRONY A USED 19
20. EXTREMELY POISONOUS WARFARE MANY THE OF ARE IN USED GASES 20
21. UNFORTUNATE IT MANUAL CONSIDERED IS THAT SOMETIMES LABOUR
DEGRADING 21
22. CERTAIN THE ARE OF AND CRIMES NAMES BIGAMY LEGAL PERJURY 22
23. THE BETWEEN BY AND ARE DIFFERENCES STUDIED REASONING
PSYCHOLOGISTS HABIT BEING 23
24. MORE TRAITS DESIRABLE CHARACTER STEALING TIMIDITY OF AND ARE
MEEKNESS THAN 24
25. FACT CAN OBSERVED MAY KIND METHODS TO APPLIED EVERY STATISTICAL
THAT BE OF 25
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The score in this test is the number of sentences in which the period
has been correctly placed. If a mark appears to be accidental, it should
not be held against the credit of the candidate. The stencil provided
with the test leaflets simplifies very greatly the marking of this test.
The total number of points credit should be entered in the lower
right-hand corner of the title page of the test leaflet.
Scores of 0 to 3 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores of 4 to 7 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores of 8 to 16 indicate Average Ability
Scores of 17 to 20 indicate High Average Ability
Scores of 21 to 25 indicate Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 23
COMPLETION OF SENTENCES
_Character of the Test._
This is one of the most satisfactory group tests available for persons
with a reading knowledge of the English language. The test consists of a
series of sentences in each of which certain words have been omitted.
Dotted lines appear at those places where words are missing. The persons
being examined are asked to write on the dotted lines the words which
have been left out. The blanks left in the sentences are all of the same
length in order not to suggest the word to be used. The Mentimeter form
of the test contains 20 sentences, graduated in difficulty, from very
simple sentences which the average second-grade public school pupil can
complete easily, to very difficult sentences which the average college
student will be unable to complete satisfactorily within the time limit.
The ease with which one can understand what is to be done in this test
makes it particularly useful with children in the elementary schools,
and with adults of little education, as a measure of language ability
and general intellectual capacity in the manipulation of ideas and
words. Although it has been used by many teachers and supervisors as a
test of reading ability, it should probably be classified rather as an
intelligence test than as an educational measuring instrument. Teachers
do not and should not give direct instruction in the art of writing
missing words, for almost no situation will arise in practical life
where this sort of skill would be necessary.
It is very difficult to determine just what mental powers are tested by
the sentence completion test. Quite certainly the result obtained is a
complex effect. The person who is successful in this test must first of
all be able to read and understand the words which are actually present
in any sentence; he must have certain habits of associating other words
not present with those which do appear; from all of the words which come
to his mind as associates of the printed words, he must choose those
which fit most aptly the thought expressed; and from those words which
would fit into the thought of the sentence he must use good judgment in
selecting and writing the one which makes the smoothest and best
sentence. Lack of mental ability or of familiarity with the English
language will result in a poor showing at almost any step of the process
and in a low score in the test as a whole.
This test will probably be found most useful in selecting those
commercial and industrial workers who in the course of their work will
be called upon to make extensive use of language and printed symbols,
although it has been used successfully in many parts of the country in
the selection of salesmen, shop foremen, firemen, policemen, and other
non-clerical workers. The relationship between success in this test and
general success in life is extraordinarily close.
In the public schools this test is particularly valuable as a first
means of identifying pupils of unusual ability. Any child who makes five
or more points above the average for his grade should be further tested
with the Number Series Completion (Mentimeter No. 9) and the Analogies
tests (Mentimeter No. 24). If his scores in these tests are distinctly
above the average, he should be sent to the psychologist for special
examination, and if the psychologist’s findings agree with the findings
of these tests, as they usually will, then the child should be given
special opportunities for rapid progress and more varied activities in
school. Similarly, if a pupil obtains a score which is five or more
points below the average for his grade, he should be examined with the
Completion of Form Series test (Mentimeter No. 6) and the Pictorial
Absurdities test (Mentimeter No. 2), and if his scores in these tests
are also below the average, he should be referred to the psychologist
for special examination and recommendations as to type of instruction
best suited to his mental abilities.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
When all candidates have been seated and provided with convenient
writing materials, one copy of the examination booklet should be given
to each candidate. A general announcement should be given either before
distributing the booklets or while they are being distributed, to the
effect that no one is to open the booklet or turn it over until directed
to do so. The candidates may be instructed to fill out the blanks on the
title page if they are intelligent enough to understand what is wanted
on these blanks. If young children are being examined, the examiner
should state very clearly just what is to be done. For example: “Write
your name on the dotted line after the word ‘Name.’ Write your age at
your last birthday on the dotted line which follows the words ‘Age at
Last Birthday’.” Care should be taken that no child gets an unfair
advantage by opening his book and beginning work before the following
directions have been read aloud by the examiner while the children read
them silently from their booklets.
“When you open your booklets you will find on the inside twenty
sentences, from each of which one or more words have been left out. You
are to guess what words were left out and to write them on the dotted
lines which show where these words should be. Be very careful to write
the best word you can think of on each blank. Write only one word on
each of the blanks. Make each sentence sound just as sensible as you
can. You will have ten minutes in which to write. Work rapidly and
carefully. Ready! Go!”
Exactly ten minutes after saying, “Go!” the examiner should call “Stop!
Time up! Give me your papers!” All papers should be collected at once.
Write only one word on each blank.
1. The dog’s name .......... Jack.
2. Little children go .......... bed early.
3. The boy .......... two dollars to the Red Cross.
4. The little .......... likes .......... play with her dolls.
5. Puppies .......... kittens grow to be .......... and cats.
6. The best children .......... the most friends.
7. One should .......... be rude to his ..........
8. The poor .......... was hurt when he slipped and ..........on the
street.
9. It .......... amusing .......... watch men chasing their hats on
a..........day.
10. Almost any man .......... if he really tries.
11. The elephant is a favourite .......... with children because of
.......... .......... and shape.
12. The .......... who .......... a club and .......... a uniform was a
policeman.
13. .......... a hot day nothing .......... thirst so well as a
.......... of .......... water.
14. .......... is more than merely .......... a flag and cheering when
the soldiers .......... .......... home.
15. Anything .......... is not .......... doing .......... is hardly
worth .......... at all.
16. One .......... not .......... money to .......... worthy charity.
17. .......... learning a new operation it is sometimes .......... not
to .......... .......... all than to practise the .......... way
of .......... it.
18. Those things .......... .......... no fear .......... sometimes
.......... harmful.
19. .......... drink .......... one is .......... is a ..........
pleasure.
20. .......... one .......... their presence .......... not, ..........
does .........., .......... a rule, .......... one’s guests.
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The score in this test is the number of sentences completed perfectly
within the time limit. No credit should be given for any sentences in
which the language is not smooth and meaningful, although errors in
spelling should not be counted against the person tested. This test is
intended to measure ability to complete sentences rather than ability to
spell words. No credit should be allowed unless every blank in a
sentence has been properly filled. One error in any one of the blanks
will leave the sentence imperfectly done and therefore without credit.
The stencil for scoring this test is less convenient than those
furnished with the majority of the Mentimeter tests. The reason for this
is the very great possibility of new variations appearing, even after
long experience in scoring the test. When more than one blank appears in
a single sentence the question as to whether or not a certain word is
proper for one of the later blanks depends entirely upon what choice was
made in the first blank. It should be held in mind by those who score
this test that the stencil does not give all of the possibilities, but
only suggests the type of completion which should be considered correct.
Anything that is as good as the completions appearing in the stencil
should be given full credit, while anything which is not as perfect
should be considered incorrect.
The final score obtained by counting the number of sentences perfectly
completed should be entered in the lower right-hand corner of the title
page of the booklet.
Scores from 0 to 5 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 6 to 9 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 10 to 16 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 17 to 18 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 19 to 20 indicate Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 24
ANALOGIES OR MIXED RELATIONS TEST
_Character of the Test._
The Analogies test lends itself easily to wholesale or group
administration. It cannot be used with illiterate candidates but
requires at least three years of educational background in order to give
a satisfactory index of mental capacity. The test blank presents the
tasks to be done in a manner so easily understood that little
explanation needs to be given orally by the examiner. It is also simple
in its method of scoring and yields a very reliable measure of an
individual’s clearness of thought about the relations of words and the
things for which the words stand.
Psychologists have used various forms of this test for many years and
have found it unusually accurate and reliable. It is considered
particularly valuable as a test of ability to adapt one’s self quickly
and accurately to new situations, which is undoubtedly one of the most
important elements in what is called “general intelligence.”
The method of the Analogies test is known as the “controlled-association
method.” Two words are presented having a very definite relation to each
other. A third word is then presented, followed by a blank space upon
which the candidate is to write a fourth word which will have the same
relation to the third word as the second word has to the first. The
relation between the first two or key words in each element of the test
differs from the relation between the key words of the previous element,
resulting in a constant change in the problem to be solved, which
requires quick readjustments in the candidate’s thought processes. The
candidate must be intellectually alert to discover the true relation
between the key words, his mind must be well supplied by experience with
words and ideas associated with the third word, and then he must use
good judgment and discrimination in the selection of that word which has
the _proper_ relation to the third word. A slip at any of these points
will mean failure. The value of the present series as a test of
intelligence is greatly increased by the fact that there is a
progressive increase in the difficulty of the elements presented, so
that the _number_ of elements correctly supplied has a very definite
relation to the _difficulty_ of the tasks the candidate can do.
Because of its relation to intelligence, the Analogies test will be
found very useful in the classification of candidates for clerical and
administrative positions in industry. Any group of tests selected for
classifying such employees should contain a list of graded analogies
such as that here supplied. Unless a candidate makes a record of at
least fifteen correct responses out of a possible thirty in the three
minutes’ time allowed in the test, he should be studied very carefully
before being entrusted with a task where ideas and symbols must be
handled quickly. Such a man might be able to work with things and
people, but he will probably be found slow in his grasp of abstract
principles and ideas.
In the schoolroom, the Analogies test may be used with some confidence
in classifying pupils for instruction. If it is found that a pupil is
far below his grade in ability in this test, and if he is also found
below his grade in the Completion of Sentences and Number series, it may
be assumed that the pupil will probably not succeed in the abstract work
of the school. Such pupils should be sent to the clinical psychologist
for special study, and a special type of training should be prescribed
upon the basis of the psychologist’s diagnosis. In the same manner,
pupils unusually brilliant in the handling of abstractions may be
located through the use of this and other tests of this nature.
The Analogies test is also a very entertaining type of parlour
amusement, especially when some of the absurd answers are read aloud for
the amusement of the group. When it is so used, however, no suggestion
should be made of the relation between ability in this test and general
intellectual quickness, lest someone should take offence. If the test is
given without the exact and formal directions, and if the spirit of fun
is introduced by the examiner, certain clever persons are quite certain
to write words which have very amusing associations with the words which
serve to set the problems in the various lines.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
All candidates should be furnished with pencils and writing
surfaces—either tables, chair-arms, or writing boards. One test booklet
should be supplied to each candidate, the blank being presented unopened
and with the title page up. The examiner should announce clearly as the
papers are distributed that, “The booklets are not to be turned over or
opened up until the signal is given to do so.” Candidates should also be
directed to sign their names, ages, group numbers, and locations on the
blank spaces provided on the cover of the booklet for this information.
When each candidate has properly filled out the information blanks on
the outside of the test booklet the examiner should speak as follows:
“This test is to find out how carefully and how rapidly you can think
about the relations of words and of the things for which these words
stand. Now look at your papers and read silently the directions, while I
read them aloud.
“When you are told to open your booklets, you will find on the inside
thirty lines of words—three words and a blank space being printed on
each line. In each of these lines, the first two words are related to
each other in a certain way which you are to study out. You are then to
write, in the blank space at the end, a fourth word which has the same
relation to the third word as the second word has to the first.
“Look, for example, at the first sample, in which the second word is the
plural of the first. Boxes means more than one Box, so the fourth word
should be Cats, meaning more than one Cat.
Write a fourth word which fits the
third in the same way the second
word fits the first.
1st Sample: BOX Boxes CAT ........
2nd Sample: DOWN Up IN ........
3rd Sample: EYES See EARS ........
“In the second sample, the fourth word should be Out, because Up is the
opposite of Down, and Out is the opposite of In.
“In the third sample, the fourth word should be Hear, for See tells what
Eyes are used for, and Hear tells for what Ears are used.
“You will have three minutes in which to write the fourth word in the
thirty lines on the next pages. Work as rapidly as you can without
making mistakes. Be sure to stop as soon as I call ‘Time up.’ Now turn
your papers and begin.”
Allow exactly three minutes (180 seconds) after saying “Begin,” and then
say “Stop! Time up! Turn your papers over.” All papers should be
collected at once to avoid corrections with resulting unfairness.
Write a fourth word which fits the third in
the same way the second word fits the first.
FIRST SECOND THIRD FOURTH
1. CAR Cars DOG ........ 1
2. FRONT Back NEAR ........ 2
3. HAT Head SHOE ........ 3
4. BOY Boy’s CAT ........ 4
5. ICE Cold FIRE ........ 5
6. BIRD Flies FISH ........ 6
7. MEN’S Man HENS’ ........ 7
8. BREAD Eat WATER ........ 8
9. ACTOR Theater TEACHER ........ 9
10. HE Him SHE ........ 10
11. PRIEST Religion ATTORNEY ........ 11
12. CAT Kitten HORSE ........ 12
13. DO Did BUY ........ 13
14. SCULPTOR Statue PAINTER ........ 14
15. BOY Man LAMB ........ 15
16. TOP Bottom CEILING ........ 16
17. WATER Fish AIR ........ 17
18. TRAIN Engineer AUTOMOBILE ........ 18
19. STAND Stood BE ........ 19
20. CATTLE Herd FISH ........ 20
21. WORK Day SLEEP ........ 21
22. THREW Thrown ROSE ........ 22
23. GOOSE Gander DUCK ........ 23
24. BANTAM Fowl MERINO ........ 24
25. GIRL Girls’ WOMAN ........ 25
26. WRONG Right STEAL ........ 26
27. FOOT Feet AVIATRIX ........ 27
28. HOUSES House CRITERIA ........ 28
29. QUEEN Queens’ JONES ........ 29
30. PESSIMIST Optimist EXOTERIC ........ 30
_Scoring the Test._
The Analogies test is scored according to the number of lines in which
the candidate has written the proper fourth word. With each package of
test blanks a stencil is furnished by means of which any one may score
the results very quickly. The stencil is to be placed along the page
next to the written column of words, and where the written word on the
page corresponds to the word or words printed on the stencil at that
level the written word stands as correct. Where there is disagreement
between the written word and the words printed at that level on the
stencil, a diagonal line (/) should be drawn through the number at the
end of the written word to indicate that an error has been made. Where
no word has been written on the blank, the number at the end of the
blank may be circled to indicate the omission.
The final score should be written in the lower right-hand corner of the
front cover of the test booklet. This final score is found by adding all
the correct responses (the numbers not crossed out or circled). Since
there are thirty lines, the maximum score possible is 30.
Scores from 0 to 5 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 6 to 12 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 13 to 23 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 24 to 26 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 27 to 30 indicate Superior Ability
About 30 per cent. of a group of college graduates should be expected to
secure Superior ratings, about 50 per cent. High Average, and the
remainder only Average ratings.
Mentimeter No. 25
HANDWRITING
_Character of the Test._
Many pseudo-scientists have claimed the ability to interpret character
and intelligence, and the past and the future, by means of an
individual’s handwriting. The present test has no relation to such
misguided efforts. This test is designed to measure accurately the speed
at which one can write, and to indicate the general quality of the
product produced at that speed.
Large groups of individuals may be examined at the same time by this
test, although it may be used as a test of an individual if necessary.
It is quite certain that an individual who works at such a task as that
set by this test in the company of other people will succeed better than
if he works at it alone. The results obtained when an individual is
tested alone are not exactly comparable, therefore, to the results which
would be attained if he were tested in a group.
The general quality of one’s handwriting has very little relation to his
general intellectual ability. Some of our most intelligent men write a
hand which is hardly legible, and the authors have seen some beautiful
handwriting produced by feeble-minded children. It is, nevertheless,
worth while for many employers to have in their records of the
qualifications of employees an exact record of the speed and quality of
each employee’s handwriting. This record may never be of any use, but,
on the other hand, it may at some time be of very great value
unexpectedly.
In the public schools, measurements of handwriting quality may be
crudely done with the present Mentimeter or more accurately done with
the scales of Thorndike, Ayres, or Starch. It seems probable that by the
time children have attained the “Average” quality contained in the
Mentimeter and are writing at “High Average” speed it would be worth
while for the teacher to excuse them from further drill as long as they
maintain that standard in their every-day work. It will hardly be found
necessary in practical life outside the school to write a better quality
than “Average” except in a very few specialized occupations.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
Candidates should be supplied with pen and ink and seated at a
convenient table or desk. The test leaflet should then be passed out and
explanations given of how to fill out the blanks on the title page. When
all of the identifying information has been entered on the title page,
the examiner should direct as follows: “This test is intended to
discover how rapidly and how well you can write with pen and ink. Turn
your papers over and notice at the top of the page the two printed
lines:
“Mary had a little lamb
Its fleece was white as snow.
“When you are told to begin you are to copy these two lines over and
over again just as many times as you possibly can before I call ‘Stop.’
Try to use your very best handwriting every time you copy. I shall allow
you two minutes in which to write. As soon as I say ‘Stop,’ I want you
to hold your pen up so that I can see you have obeyed the command.
Remember that when I say ‘Write,’ you are to copy the two lines over and
over again as rapidly and as well as you can. Ready, Write.” Exactly two
minutes (120 seconds) after saying “Write” the examiner should call
“Stop! Hold up your pens! Now lay them down on the table. Blot your
paper and hand it to me.” All papers should be collected at once to
avoid unfair work.
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
Each handwriting leaflet is to receive two scores, one for quality of
handwriting and one for speed. The score in speed should be obtained by
counting the number of letters written and dividing the result by two,
this will be simplified somewhat by remembering that the sentence, “Mary
had a little lamb” contains 18 letters and that the sentence, “Its
fleece was white as snow” contains 23 letters, which makes 41 letters
for each time the two sentences are repeated. The score in speed thus
obtained by taking half of the total number of letters written should be
entered on the proper blank at the lower right-hand corner of the title
page.
Speed score from 0 to 30 indicates Inferior Ability
Speed score from 31 to 50 indicates Low Average Ability
Speed score from 51 to 75 indicates Average Ability
Speed score from 76 to 90 indicates High Average Ability
Speed score from 91 and upward indicates Superior Ability
The score in quality of handwriting is to be determined by comparing the
candidate’s handwriting with samples on the Mentimeter for Handwriting
Quality:[3] a grade of “A,” indicating superior quality, should be
assigned if the candidate’s handwriting is as smooth, beautiful and
legible as the sample marked “A,” or if the quality more nearly
approaches the quality of sample “A” than the quality of sample “B.” The
sample should be given a rating as quality “C” if its general beauty and
quality be nearer to the printed sample “C” than to printed samples “B”
or “D.” =Give to any sample that grade which indicates the printed
quality that most nearly equals it in beauty, legibility, and general
merit.=
Footnote 3:
The samples in the Mentimeter are selected from the Thorndike list and
have the following values on the Thorndike Scale E, “Inferior” equals
8.0; D, “Low Average” equals 10.5; C, “Average” equals 12.2; B, “High
Average” equals 13.4; A, “Superior” equals 16.
In making a record of any candidate’s performance in the handwriting
test both quality and speed should be recorded. “C–71” would mean that
in the Mentimeter test this individual had written quality “C” at a
speed of 71 letters per minute. The speed and quality together are
necessary in order to know the entire truth about one’s handwriting, for
many people produce a beautiful handwriting by taking great pains and
wasting much time.
[Illustration: Mentimeter for Handwriting Quality]
MENTIMETER NO. 26
ENGLISH COMPOSITION
_Character of the Test._
Only persons who have had the benefit of a fairly complete elementary
school education will succeed very emphatically in this test of ability
to write a composition in the English language. The test may be given to
large numbers of people at the same time just as readily as to a single
individual. The result of the test is, however, a very good index of the
general intellectual capacity of the individual, unless he is
handicapped by lack of familiarity with the language.
The most common use which most of us have for ability at composing in
English is in writing letters to our friends or to those with whom our
business brings us into contact. For this reason, the test consists in
the statement of a condition under which any one of us might find
ourselves and in asking the candidates to write an appropriate letter.
The result is graded into one of five groups, according to its general
quality.
The problem presented to the candidate is fairly complex. First of all,
he must be able to understand the situation described by the examiner
and to appreciate what type of letter would be most appropriate under
these circumstances. He must also be able to write the words which would
express his feelings in the described situation, and in order to make
his feelings clearly understood he should be able to punctuate and
organize his sentences effectively. The result is a useful index of the
general efficiency and maturity of any candidate who has been taught to
write in English.
In industrial life there are many types of positions for which persons
whose ability to compose written English need not be better than
“Inferior,” although there are other positions which would require “High
Average” quality of English composition. The advantage of the following
Mentimeter lies in the possibility it gives of identifying more exactly
just what quality is meant when one speaks of “High Average” composing
ability.
In the public schools the Mentimeter will serve as a crude basis for
classifying the general quality of the compositions written, but for
highly scientific work it would be desirable to secure some form of the
“Hillegas Scale” which is much more exact and well standardized. A very
entertaining evening could be enjoyed by giving this test to a group of
people gathered together for social purposes, especially with a group
which had tired of the ordinary means of entertainment. Reading the
products written should in such a case be entrusted to some one or two
individuals of good reading ability and wise judgment. Frequently the
results would contain very amusing paragraphs.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
Each candidate should be comfortably seated and provided with writing
material before any instructions are given. It will usually be well to
furnish paper on which there are lines, as many people find the lack of
ruling a distinct hindrance to the flow of their thoughts. When everyone
is ready, the examiner should direct that each individual write his or
her name, age, address, and any other information which seems desirable.
The following directions should then be given:
“This test is planned to discover how well you can use the English
language in expressing your thoughts and feelings. Imagine yourself
employed in a large business house in the city. While you are waiting to
find out whether or not you are going to be one of those fortunate
people who will be granted a vacation, imagine that you receive a letter
from a friend in the country asking you to spend your vacation on the
farm. Since you do not know that you will have a vacation, it is
impossible for you to accept the invitation at once, but it is necessary
for you to acknowledge the fact that you have received the invitation.
Write a letter to this friend in the country saying that the invitation
has been received and that you appreciate it. You need not make the
letter long, but write it just as well as you can.” At least twenty
minutes should be allowed for the writing of this letter. At the end of
twenty minutes all papers should be collected, whether the letters are
complete or not—enough will have been written to demonstrate the quality
of letter each can write.
MENTIMETER FOR QUALITY OF ENGLISH COMPOSITIONS
Quality: Superior, A.
MY DEAR JEAN:—
Your letter made me peculiarly happy this morning. The joys of last
Summer so wrapt themselves about me that, instead of hurrying down
Broadway to business, I was sitting on the veranda with you and little
Bobby at sunset watching the Hudson creep slowly in and out among the
hills. One by one the little villages dropt out of sight as the fog came
down from the Catskills, crept across the river, up through the woods
and finally nestled among the neighbour’s fir trees. Black crows cawed
as they flew lazily over the house, and the little birds came up close
to the edge of the woods to sleep in the barberry bushes. Bobby said
they came up close so we would hear if anything got them. The little
dear! Tell him I have saved a number of stories for him—two new ones
about light-houses.
I am rather doubtful as to whether I will be granted a vacation this
year. Business conditions are so far from normal, and we are very short
of help. However, I may be lucky, and if I am nothing would make me so
happy as to spend every day of it with you and little Bobby. I expect to
know definitely by the end of next week concerning my vacation and shall
write to you immediately.
I thank you more than I can say, Jean. Your invitation has made me very
happy.
Sincerely,
Quality: High Average, B.
MY DEAR MR. SMITH:
I appreciate your invitation expressing the desire to entertain me again
at your farm during my Summer vacation. I should enjoy coming back this
Summer, although I have occasionally been afraid that I was something of
a hindrance to your work. It is such a change for me to get to the
country that I shall certainly come if possible.
I shall let you know just as soon as I find out whether or not I am to
have a vacation this Summer. Thanking you for your kind invitation, I
remain,
Sincerely yours,
Quality: Average, C.
MY DEAR FRIEND:
Your letter of June 10th has been received, and in reply I would say
that I am not sure that I will get my vacation this summer. The boss
hasn’t said anything about vacations yet. I would like to come just as
much as you would like to have me, but I can’t promise until the old man
lets us know. I’ll write to you just as soon as I learn what to expect.
Thanks for your invitation.
Yours,
Quality: Low Average, D.
DEAR FRIEND
I got your letter alright, but it don’t look like I was going to get any
vacation this summer. We have all been tryin to hint to the boss about
how tired we all was but he has to be knocked down to take a hint I
guess.
I sure do hope he lets me off. You know how I’d like to come and I want
you to keep plenty of green truck growin in the gardin for me to eat.
Yours truly
Quality: Inferior, E.
DER FREND
id lik to cum out to yer farm ef the flise ant tou bad but i got to wate
the boss hant told us we can tak ar vakashins yit hous the frut & burys
this yere il cum ef i can
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
Each composition should be compared with the five contained on the
Mentimeter for English Composition quality. Give the written composition
a mark as “Average,” “Superior,” or “Low Average” according to its
quality. If a composition seems to be better than the one on the
Mentimeter which is called “Average” but poorer than the one called
“High Average,” try to decide which it is nearer in general quality.
“Average,” therefore, will mean that a composition is nearer in its
quality to the sample printed as “Average” than it is to the sample
printed as “High Average,” or to the sample printed as “Low Average.”
Any composition which is distinctly better than “Superior” should be
rated as “Superior,” and any composition which seems poorer than the one
printed as “Inferior” should be rated as “Inferior.”
MENTIMETER NO. 27
POETIC DISCRIMINATION TEST
_Character of the Test._
Differences in the intellectual abilities of people manifest themselves
in three fairly distinct ways: first, in ability to accomplish results;
second, in ability to think clearly about the situations in which they
find themselves; and third, in the feelings which these situations
arouse. Practically all of the tests now available for measuring
educational achievements or intellectual ability are concerned primarily
with the ability to do or to think about situations. This member of the
Mentimeter family is concerned chiefly with the way in which one _feels_
about different types and qualities of poetic expression. The test
cannot be given to illiterate or foreign language speaking persons. It
is planned as a group test of persons who read and understand English
readily.
The test consists of six short stanzas selected from recognized English
poets.[4] Two false versions of each stanza have been prepared and
appear on the same page with the original. The group being examined are
asked to read each version, trying to think how it would sound if read
aloud, and to choose the one which they like “best” and the one which
they consider the “poorest” poetry. The differences between the false
versions and the true in the first set are smaller than the differences
found in the succeeding ones. The score obtained by any individual
therefore depends upon how small a difference he can notice.
Footnote 4:
The Best Version in each set is selected from the writings of
recognized poets:
Set I William Wordsworth in “She Dwelt Among.”
Set II Agnes Millay in “My Tavern.”
Set III Percy Bysshe Shelley in “To——”
Set IV Algernon Charles Swinburne in “Étude Réaliste.”
Set V Edward Coote Pinkney in “Health.”
Set VI James Thompson in “Sunday Up the River.”
Mr. Earl Hudelson contributed the Middle and Poorest Versions for Set
II. One of the present authors is responsible for the mutilated forms
of the other selections. A much more scientific and accurate
instrument for measuring poetic discrimination is being developed by
Prof. Allan Abbott and one of the present authors.
Although this test is very interesting and entertaining its reliability
is not determined and its usefulness is as yet questionable. It
certainly would have no great value in industrial life and only small
importance in public school work; its chief service will be
entertainment in the home and at social gatherings. It is surprising how
poor the judgment of many people is regarding the quality of poetic
products. It would be interesting at social affairs at which this test
is used to make a tabulation of just how many of those present have
selected each different version.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
The examiner should distribute the examination booklets and writing
materials with the following instruction:
“Do not open this booklet until I tell you to do so. Notice on the title
page a number of blanks for your name, your age, and the like. Fill out
these blanks at once but do not look inside the booklet.”
As soon as the blanks on the title page have been filled the examiner
should ask the candidates to read carefully the directions while he
reads them aloud.
“When you open your book you will find six different sets of poetic
stanzas. Each set appears in three different versions. You are to read
each version carefully, trying to think how it would sound if read
aloud, and then to record on the blank space provided for it which
version you think is ‘best,’ which version you think is ‘poorest’ and
which version you think is of ‘middle’ value. If you decide that version
Y is best then write ‘Y’ after the word Best. If Z is the worst, then
write ‘Z’ after the word Poorest, and ‘X’ after the word Middle.
“Think carefully about each set and choose the one which you really
think is the best poetry. You will be allowed fifteen minutes in which
to read and decide about the six sets. Begin with set No. I and take
them in order. Ready! Open your papers and begin work.”
Exactly fifteen minutes after saying “Begin” the examiner should call,
“Stop! The time is up. Let me have your papers.” All papers should be
taken up at once.
SET I
Read each version carefully and try to think how it would sound if it
were read aloud.
Which version is the poorest poetry, and which is the best poetry?
=Best= ........
=Middle= ........
=Poorest= ........
_Version X_
Once there was a violet,
Growing near a stone;
It reminded me of a star
All alone in the sky.
_Version Y_
A violet grew by a mossy stone,
Where it was hard to see;
It looked like a star, for it shone
As pretty as could be.
_Version Z_
A violet by a mossy stone
Half hidden from the eye!
—Fair as a star, when only one
Is shining in the sky.
SET II
Read each version carefully and try to think how it would sound if it
were read aloud.
Which version is the poorest poetry, and which is the best poetry?
I’ll keep a little tavern
Below the high hill’s crest,
Wherein all gray-eyed people
May set them down and rest.
=Best= ........
=Middle= ........
=Poorest= ........
_Version X_
There shall be plates a-plenty,
And mugs to melt the chill
Of all the gray-eyed people
Who happen up the hill.
Ay, ’tis a curious fancy—
But all the good I know
Was taught me out of two gray eyes
A long time ago.
_Version Y_
There shall be dishes a-plenty,
And something to take off the chill
Of as many gray-eyed people
As are willing to climb the hill.
’Tis truly an odd fancy,
But everything good that I know
I learned out of two gray eyes
Many years ago.
_Version Z_
And when those gray-eyed people
Have entered in the gate,
We’ll pass the cheering mug around,
And also pass the plate.
It may sound rather funny,
But I was helped a lot
By someone who had gray eyes
When I was a little tot.
SET III
Read each version carefully and try to think how it would sound if it
were read aloud.
Which version is the poorest poetry, and which is the best poetry?
=Best= ....
=Middle= ....
=Poorest= ....
_Version X_
Music, when faint voices cease,
Continues in the memory—
Odours, when the violets fade,
Linger where their smell was made.
_Version Y_
Music lives in the memory,
Though the songster’s voice is done.
Sweet odours haunt the nose,
Though the violets that waked them are gone.
_Version Z_
Music, when soft voices die,
Vibrates in the memory—
Odours, when sweet violets sicken,
Live within the sense they quicken.
SET IV
Read each version carefully and try to think how it would sound if it
were read aloud.
Which version is the poorest poetry, and which is the best poetry?
=Best= ....
=Middle= ....
=Poorest= ....
_Version X_
No rosebud yet has e’er been seen,
Or flower in tropic lands,
To equal these, more beauteous e’en—
A baby’s hands.
_Version Y_
No rosebuds yet by dawn impearled
Match, even in loveliest lands,
The sweetest flowers in all the world—
A baby’s hands.
_Version Z_
No flower that grows,
In this or any other lands,
Compares with these, of daintiest rose—
A baby’s hands.
SET V
Read each version carefully and try to think how it would sound if it
were read aloud.
Which version is the poorest poetry, and which is the best poetry?
=Best= ....
=Middle= ....
=Poorest= ....
_Version X_
She speaks in tones of silver
With the voice of morning birds,
And every word that’s spoken of her
Echoes the music of her words.
_Version Y_
Her every tone is music’s own,
Like those of morning birds,
And something more than melody
Dwells ever in her words.
_Version Z_
Her tones are pure as silver chimes,
Her notes of birdlike beauty;
The words she speaks are at all times
Replete with life and beauty.
SET VI
Read each version carefully and try to think how it would sound if it
were read aloud.
Which version is the poorest poetry, and which is the best poetry?
=Best= ....
=Middle= ....
=Poorest= ....
_Version X_
A pipe and a book,
By the side of the brook,
With the world and her troubles forgot;
Just to read and to smoke,
Man forgets that he’s broke,—
And he finds, after all, that he’s not.
_Version Y_
Give a man a pipe he can smoke,
Give a man a book he can read;
And his home is bright with a calm delight,
Though the room be poor indeed.
_Version Z_
Let a man smoke,
And let a man read;
A pipe and a book in any old nook,
Lend peace which is wealth indeed.
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The score in this test is determined in a somewhat more complicated
manner than is the case of any other of the Mentimeter series. Two
points are allowed each candidate for selecting as “Best” the original
version in any set and one point of credit is allowed for selecting the
poorest version as “Poorest.” It will be observed that the maximum score
on any set will be three points if the candidate arranges the versions
in the correct order, two points for selecting the best and one point
for selecting the worst. This makes the total maximum score, for six
sets, eighteen points.
The correct order of merit for each set of selections has been
determined by the judgment of approximately one hundred competent
judges. It is as follows:
SET I II III IV V VI
Best Z X Z Y Y Y
Middle Y Y X X Z Z
Poorest X Z Y Z X X
Write the final score obtained on the total of the six sets in the lower
right-hand corner of the title page of the examination booklet.
Scores from 0 to 3 indicate Very Inferior Ability
Scores from 4 to 7 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 8 to 11 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 12 to 14 indicate Superior Ability
Scores from 15 to 18 indicate Very Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 28
ARITHMETIC REASONING
_Character of the Test._
Teachers in schools have for a long while based a large part of their
judgment about any individual’s intellectual ability almost exclusively
upon the facility with which he solved arithmetic problems. Although the
ability to solve arithmetic problems has not been so frequently
recognized by investigators as an index of intellectual ability as has
ability in English, the teachers have found it much easier to estimate
intellectual ability upon the basis of showing in arithmetic, because it
is easier to judge of success in arithmetic than to judge of success in
English or other fields. A child can either solve the problem or else he
cannot. This objective nature of the subject of arithmetic has made it a
very important subject for the teacher in deciding upon promotions.
In practical life, arithmetic has been recognized as being of value
because the training in arithmetic was supposed to enable a student to
keep other people from cheating him in financial transactions. The
writers have known employers, on a small scale, who used certain tricky
arithmetic problems as the basis upon which to judge the intellectual
ability of prospective employees. Arithmetic problems have had and will
continue to have a distinctive place in the measurement of intellectual
capacity. It is probable that this place is well deserved.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
As soon as the candidates are seated, they should be supplied with
pencils, and the examination leaflet should be distributed with the
instruction that it is not to be turned over until special instructions
are given to that effect. In order to keep the candidates busy, the
examiner should ask them to fill out the blanks on the title page,
giving name, age, etc. When this information has been obtained, the
examiner should ask the candidates to read the directions silently while
he reads them aloud.
“On the other side of your papers you will find fourteen problems in
arithmetic. The first problems are simple and easy and the last ones are
more difficult. Begin with the first problem and solve as many as you
can in the four minutes after I say ‘Go!’ Write your answer at the
right-hand side of the questions on the dotted lines provided for the
answers. You may figure on the left-hand side or on the back of the
blank, if you wish. Solve as many problems as you can but be sure to get
the answer right. Ready! Go!”
Allowing exactly four minutes after saying the world “Go!” the examiner
should call “Stop! Turn your papers over. Give them to me.” All papers
should be collected immediately.
Write the answers to these problems on the blanks
Use the other side of the sheet to figure on
ANSWERS
1. How many are 5 men and 3 men? ..........
2. If you earn 2 dollars each day, how much do you earn in
6 days? ..........
3. If you have 10 nickels and lose 3 of them, how many
would you have after you found 2 of those that were
lost? ..........
4. How many benches will be needed in order to seat 20
people at a picnic, if 4 people sit on each bench? ..........
5. If James sold 3 Sunday papers for 5 cents each and then
bought an apple for 3 cents and an orange for 4 cents,
how much money had he left? ..........
6. How much change should you get from a dollar bill after
buying 39 cents’ worth of potatoes, 12 cents’ worth of
celery, and 26 cents’ worth of butter? ..........
7. If the price of lemons is 2 for 5 cents, how many can
you buy for 40 cents? ..........
8. If 29 merchants each bought 34 quarts of canned peas at
a wholesale house which had previously sold 2,387
quarts of the same brand, what was the total number of
quarts of this brand sold? ..........
9. If a wholesale merchant sold for $50 sugar which he had
purchased for $45 and thereby gained 1 cent per pound,
how many pounds of sugar were there? ..........
10. If four and a half pounds of fancy onions cost 27 cents,
how much will eight and a half pounds cost? ..........
11. Half of the people in a certain city block were born of
American parents, one eighth have American fathers and
foreign-born mothers, one eighth have American mothers
and foreign-born fathers, and both parents of the rest
are foreign-born. Of the 1,200 people living in this
block, how many have American fathers? ..........
12. A factory used 1,288 tons of coal in 23 days. During the
first ten days after a new addition to the factory was
opened, the average daily coal consumption was 78
tons. How many more tons were burned per day than
previously? ..........
13. A man spent for cigars and tobacco one sixteenth of his
wages for one day. He spent five times as much for
food, and half of what remained for repairs on his
watch, which left him a dollar and a half. How much
did he receive per day? ..........
14. At the middle of the month a merchant had $1,200 in the
bank. He deposited $30 each day for six days and on
Monday morning wrote checks for two thirds as much as
his deposits for the week. Tuesday afternoon he
deposited a check one fourth as large as his balance
in the bank. What was his balance on Tuesday night? ..........
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The score in this test is the number of problems with absolutely correct
answers. No credit should be given for partially correct answers. The
total score of the test should be entered on the blank at the lower
right-hand corner of the title page.
Scores from 0 to 3 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 4 to 7 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 8 to 10 indicate Average Ability
Scores of 11 and 12 indicate High Average Ability
Scores of 13 and 14 indicate Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 29
PRACTICAL JUDGMENT TEST
_Character of the Test._
This test is applicable to all persons who can read English as readily
as the average third-grade public school pupil. For persons of less
ability to read but of good ability to understand English, the questions
may be asked orally in an individual examination. The results obtained
when the questions are asked orally should not be compared with the
results obtained when the printed test booklets are employed in a group
examination. It is very strongly recommended that the test be used
primarily as a group test, according to the instructions given here, in
order that direct comparisons may be readily made between the results
obtained in various places by different examiners.
The present form of the test is a lengthening of the form used in the
Army Alpha series. Twenty-four elements are contained in the Mentimeter
form, while only sixteen elements were used in the Army form. Another
advantage of the present form over the military edition is the more
definite attempt at arrangement of the elements in the test according to
their difficulty. Having the series graduated in difficulty, from easy
to hard, is a distinct advantage, particularly with young or dull
persons, who quickly stop trying unless their first efforts are
successful.
The use of questions, in the answering of which thoughtful judgment
about every-day affairs would be required, has always been a favourite
method of discovering the degree of intelligence possessed by a child or
by an adult. Binet, the French psychologist who developed the mental age
scale for testing feeble-minded subjects, included in his series a
number of test questions of this type. The Stanford Revision of the
Binet tests includes three such questions in the Eight-Year-Old series,
and three other more difficult questions in the Ten-Year-Old list.
The chief modification of the method in adapting it for group testing
was the supplying of three or four answers from which the subject should
select the correct reply. This change makes the markings of the results
quite simple, but it takes from the test itself some of its virtue as a
measure of the richness of ideas possessed by the person tested. Instead
of having to think out an appropriate answer, one needs only to read the
answers printed and to use good judgment in selecting the one to be
checked as “best.”
The Mentimeter form of the test, although superior in its length and
arrangement to the military version, is nevertheless not yet ideal as an
intelligence test. The simplest questions and answers that can be
printed are too difficult for first- and second-grade school pupils to
read and understand, while the most difficult questions and answers one
could devise would not be general enough in their subject matter to be
included in a “general intelligence” test. In other words, the range of
ability that this test will measure is not so wide as that measured by
some other Mentimeter tests, with the result that the speed of reading
and of making judgments plays a larger part in determining the final
score than it would in a perfect intelligence test. In spite of the
large part played by speed, the test is a useful index of _ability to
learn_ in certain lines of work where rapid decisions on practical
problems are necessary.
It is probable that the Practical Judgment test will be found more
useful in the measurement of intelligence among school children and
clerical workers than in the classification of general employees,
although the reader may find unexpected relationships between this test
and certain routine occupations. Reliance should be placed upon it only
after it has demonstrated in actual trials that it has a close
relationship to the special ability desired.
Its use in social gatherings as a form of entertainment will be greatest
where each person marks the papers of some other member of the group and
reports the judgments found incorrect. Most persons are surprised, when
they come to look over their booklets carefully, to find how many
foolish errors have crept into their records while working at high
speed. In order to increase the number of imperfect records and thereby
add somewhat to the amusement of the group, the examiner may announce
and use two minutes as the time limit, and urge everyone to try to work
all of the 24 questions in that time. The general confusion will be
increased if the examiner signals the end of the first minute and the
end of a minute and a half. Under such conditions, of course, no serious
use can be made of the results obtained. The score on the test is not to
be used seriously except where the instructions and procedure are
exactly as specified below.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
Candidates should be comfortably seated at a table or supplied with a
convenient writing board. A well-sharpened pencil (or pen with ink)
should be in the hands of each candidate before any blanks are passed
out. The test booklets should then be distributed, the announcement
being clearly made beforehand that “no one will be allowed to open the
booklet or turn it over until the signal is given to do so.”
When each candidate has been supplied with a test booklet, title page
up, the examiner should say: “Now, write your name on the blank
following the word Name.” After a pause long enough to allow this
direction to be carried out, the examiner should continue with a similar
instruction for each of the other pieces of information required by the
title page blanks. “Age at last birthday” should be insisted upon, if
there is any question of reporting age in any other way. Group numbers
and locations may be left blank where only small numbers of persons are
being tested and where there is no probability of getting the papers
from one place mixed with those from some other place. The name of the
school, factory, or city will usually be sufficient for the blank headed
“Location.”
After the necessary identifying information has been entered at the top
of the title page, the examiner should ask the candidates to read
silently the directions while he reads them aloud. He should then read
slowly and distinctly:
“The following pages contain 24 questions and 4 answers to each
question. You are to vote for the best answer to each question by making
a check mark (✓) in the square that stands before it. The questions are
not hard, and you will be allowed 3 minutes to check the best answers,
but be sure to work carefully and rapidly. Vote only for the one best
answer to each question. Turn the page! Go!”
At the end of exactly 3 minutes after saying “Go!” the examiner should
call “Stop! Close your booklets and pass them to me.” All papers should
be collected at once in order to avoid unfairness and cheating.
=MARK (✓) THE SQUARE IN FRONT OF THE BEST ANSWER TO EACH QUESTION=
1. What should one do when he is thirsty?
☐ Cry until someone gives him a drink.
☐ Eat a piece of salt pork.
☐ Get a drink of water.
☐ Read a Coca Cola advertisement.
2. Why do children like to eat candy?
☐ It makes them fat.
☐ It tastes good.
☐ It is good for them.
☐ It is a cheap food.
3. What should one do if it is raining when he starts to work?
☐ Put on lighter clothing.
☐ Wear a raincoat.
☐ Call up the office.
☐ Stay at home all day.
4. What is the thing to do when your house catches fire?
☐ Try to find out how it started.
☐ Ring the alarm and try to put out the fire.
☐ Run in the other direction.
☐ Watch it burn and calculate your insurance.
5. What should one do if he accidently steps on someone else’s toes?
☐ Call for help.
☐ Run for the doctor.
☐ Ask the person’s pardon.
☐ Take his own part.
6. Why do the leaves fall off the trees in the autumn?
☐ The frost has killed them.
☐ To protect the flowers from freezing.
☐ To enrich the ground.
☐ So that one can see farther.
7. Why do people wear heavier clothing in January than in June?
☐ To protect them from the colder weather.
☐ Because it looks better with furs.
☐ Everybody else does it, especially in January.
☐ It makes a good impression on other people.
8. Where might one expect to find the largest number of expert
swimmers?
☐ At the circus.
☐ At the beach of a summer resort.
☐ At a Sunday School picnic.
☐ At a moving picture show.
9. What should a person do when he is late getting started to work in
the morning?
☐ Wait until the next day.
☐ Think up some excuse to make.
☐ Try to make time by hurrying.
☐ Blame it on the street cars.
10. Why do school houses usually have flag-poles?
☐ For the boys to exercise on.
☐ To show where to have a flag drill.
☐ To display the flag and inspire patriotism.
☐ To decorate the school yard.
11. Why does water freeze in winter?
☐ It is warm in summer and we need ice.
☐ So the children can skate.
☐ Water always becomes solid at low temperatures.
☐ So it can be put in refrigerators.
12. What is the best way to stop up a hole by which mice enter the
kitchen?
☐ Stuff it with paper.
☐ Place a pile of rags in front of it.
☐ Put a corn cob in it.
☐ Nail a piece of tin over it.
13. Why is milk a good thing to feed young children?
☐ It comes from cows that eat fresh grass.
☐ It is an easily digested and wholesome food.
☐ It is so pure and white to look at.
☐ It can be bought in pint or quart bottles.
14. What kind of light is best for a reading table?
☐ A tallow candle.
☐ A mercury vapour lamp.
☐ A coal oil lantern.
☐ An incandescent electric bulb.
15. What is the purpose of advertising food products?
☐ To make people hungry.
☐ To decorate street cars and magazines.
☐ To make people think about eating.
☐ To create a demand for special brands.
16. Why is harness put on horses?
☐ So that their strength may be utilized.
☐ So that their beauty will be recognized.
☐ To match the colour of the carriage.
☐ To keep them warm.
17. Why do people put food in refrigerators?
☐ To get it out of the way.
☐ The low temperature keeps it fresh.
☐ To help ice men make a living.
☐ Because the law requires it.
18. Why are fire escapes more frequently put on tall buildings than on
one-story buildings?
☐ A tall building is more likely to burn down.
☐ They would spoil the looks of a low building.
☐ Low buildings have fire extinguishers.
☐ One could jump from one-story buildings.
19. What should one do with a baby when it cries?
☐ Discover and remove the cause of its crying.
☐ Spank it and put it to bed.
☐ Get it a drink of water and rock its cradle.
☐ Give it a bottle of milk or sing to it.
20. Why is country air considered more healthful than city air?
☐ It has fewer impurities in it.
☐ Trees and grass grow in the country.
☐ More people die in the city.
☐ The wind is stronger in the country.
21. Why do railroads use electric engines in some cities?
☐ They run faster than steam engines.
☐ They look better than steam engines.
☐ To avoid making the city smoky.
☐ In order to make less noise.
22. What is the main purpose of lightning rods?
☐ To decorate the roof of the house.
☐ To make the lightning strike somewhere else.
☐ To show which way the wind blows.
☐ To remove the electricity from the air.
23. What is the safest altitude and speed for flying in an airplane?
☐ Low and slowly.
☐ Low and rapidly.
☐ High and rapidly.
☐ High and slowly.
24. What is the chief purpose of newspaper headlines?
☐ To make the paper attractive.
☐ To show what actually happened.
☐ To help one decide where to read.
☐ To guide public opinion wisely.
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The score in this test is the number of questions correctly answered. A
stencil is furnished with each package of tests, which makes it possible
to check up at a very rapid rate the accuracy of the votes cast, without
ever reading a single word of the answers. The stencil is merely to be
adjusted to the page, according to directions given on its face, and
where the check mark made by the candidate corresponds to the printed
mark on the stencil the question has been correctly answered, while if
there is not agreement between stencil and candidate’s check no credit
is to be allowed on the question. Any fairly careful clerical worker can
learn in two minutes to score such a test with a stencil as rapidly and
accurately as a thoroughly trained psychologist could do it.
The final score should be entered in the lower right-hand corner of the
front or title page, where it will be easily associated with the name
and other information about the candidate.
Scores from 0 to 3 indicate Inferior Ability
Scores from 4 to 8 indicate Low Average Ability
Scores from 9 to 14 indicate Average Ability
Scores from 15 to 19 indicate High Average Ability
Scores from 20 to 24 indicate Superior Ability
MENTIMETER NO. 30
LOGICAL CONCLUSIONS TEST
_Character of the Test._
This test is to be given to large groups of individuals at the same
time, although it may be given as a part of an individual examination.
It will not be found worth while to give this test to individuals who
have not had at least the equivalent of an elementary school education.
The solution of the problems contained is so difficult that not more
than half of the pupils of the sixth or seventh grade of the elementary
school would be able to answer correctly more than five or six of the
problems.
The method of the test is to present a short hypothesis, introduced by
the word “if” and followed by four different conclusions introduced by
the word “then.” The individual being examined should read carefully the
first part of the statement and understand exactly what it means, and
should then put a check mark before the conclusion which would logically
follow the hypothesis. There are twelve of these problems, beginning
with one which is quite simple and elementary, and progressing to more
difficult and more complex statements of a similar nature. The
explanations by which this test is introduced are illustrated by an
example and are not difficult to understand. The difficulty of the test
lies in keeping clearly in mind just what are the implications of the
introductory statement or hypothesis.
The present test is almost entirely new, both in its form and in its
content. The nearest approach to this particular test was made by Dr.
Agnes L. Rogers at the suggestion of Professor Thorndike, when she
prepared a list of six problems of which the following is a good sample:
“P is larger than Q, R is smaller than Q, therefore P is ........ R.”
The blank is to be filled in. It will be observed that the present
Mentimeter differs from Doctor Rogers’s test in that names of familiar
persons or objects are used in place of the capital letters and that
four conclusions are stated from which the subject is to select the
proper one, rather than leaving to the subject the formulation of his
own conclusion.
Because of its newness, it will be impossible to state here just what is
measured by this test, but certainly the ability to read and understand
the words is one factor, and the ability to think clearly about the
logical implications of these words is another very important element
making for success. The ability to see the relations between the words
is probably as near to what may be called “logical ability” or
“reasoning” as to any other popularly recognized “mental qualification.”
Although Doctor Rogers found a coefficient of correlation of .65 between
her form of the logical reasoning test and a composite measure of
mathematical ability, the present Mentimeter is so different that its
true value can only be indicated by the comparisons which its users will
be able to make between their results and the most accurate measures
obtainable of special ability.
This test will probably have very little usefulness in commercial or
industrial fields, although it may be very helpful for a professional
group such as lawyers, educators, etc., in the selection of clerical or
professional assistants. In the public schools, it is quite certain that
it should not be used below the high school grades. Even in the high
school, it is probable that only those with very great ability in
handling abstract ideas and symbols of ideas will be able to make a high
score.
The subject matter of those statements which appear in the test is such
as would not be found in ordinary life and has very little value in
itself. As an entertainment feature, this test will not be successful
except among a very specially selected group of people who believe
themselves to be extraordinarily keen intellectually. It might be held
in reserve as a special “stunt” for any persons who seem to think that
they have demonstrated their “high-brow” qualities by making high scores
in other tests. Shortening the time limit from five minutes to three
minutes would further add to the consternation of such persons.
_Directions for Giving the Test._
The examiner should distribute one test booklet to each candidate,
announcing at the beginning of the distribution that the booklets should
not be opened or turned over until an order to that effect is given.
Since the blanks on the front cover of the booklet will be
self-explanatory to any person capable of taking the test, the examiner
may direct that each candidate fill out the blanks on the title page of
his booklet as soon as he receives it.
When the information blanks have been filled satisfactorily the examiner
should ask the candidates to read the directions silently while he reads
them aloud. This reading should be at a very deliberate rate and in
good, clear tones:
“The following pages contain twelve sentences, each sentence being
printed with four different endings. Only one of these endings can be
true if the first part of the sentence is true. You are to decide which
ending or conclusion is truest or agrees best with the first part, and
to make a mark in the square standing in front of that best ending.
Notice the example:
“If roses cost more than violets, then violets
☐ cost more than roses
☐ cost as much as roses
☐ do not cost as much as roses
☐ do not cost less than roses
“The only one of the four endings which can be true, if the first part
of the sentence is true, is the third, ‘violets do not cost as much as
roses,’ so the square in front of this third conclusion should be
check-marked.
“You will have five minutes in which to read and mark the twelve
sentences. Think carefully and get all of your marks correctly placed.
Ready! Go!”
At the end of five minutes exactly, call “Stop! Time up! Give me your
papers.” All papers should be collected at once.
=MARK (✓) THE SQUARE IN FRONT OF THE TRUEST ENDING TO EACH SENTENCE=
1. If John is older than James, then John is
☐ younger than James
☐ older than James
☐ not as old as James
☐ not older than James
2. If Mary is younger than Will, then Will is
☐ younger than Mary
☐ not older than Mary
☐ not as old as Mary
☐ older than Mary
3. If Dot is taller than Pet, then Pet is
☐ as tall as Dot
☐ shorter than Dot
☐ not shorter than Dot
☐ taller than Dot
4. If May is heavier than Jean, then Jean is
☐ not lighter than May
☐ as heavy as May
☐ not heavier than May
☐ heavier than May
5. If Walter runs faster than William, and William runs faster than
David, then David runs
☐ faster than Walter
☐ as fast as William
☐ as fast as Walter
☐ slower than William
6. If Edna is smarter than Bertha, and Bertha is not as smart as
Mabel, then Mabel is
☐ not as smart as Edna
☐ not as smart as Bertha
☐ smarter than Edna
☐ smarter than Bertha
7. If Mr. Jones is wealthier than Mr. Smith, and Mr. Smith is poorer
than Mr. Brown, then Mr. Smith is
☐ not as poor as Mr. Jones
☐ richer than Mr. Jones
☐ not as rich as Mr. Jones
☐ not poorer than Mr. Jones
8. If Robert is noisier than Harold and Harold is as noisy as George,
then George is
☐ not noisier than Robert
☐ noisier than Robert
☐ noisier than Harold
☐ not as quiet as Robert
9. If Henry drives faster than Joseph, and Joseph drives no more
slowly than Peter, and Peter drives more rapidly than Edgar, then
Edgar drives
☐ as rapidly as Henry
☐ no more slowly than Joseph
☐ as swiftly as Peter
☐ less rapidly than Henry
10. If Monday was cooler than Wednesday, and Tuesday was cooler than
Monday, and Thursday was hotter than Wednesday, then Monday was
☐ not hotter than Tuesday
☐ not cooler than Thursday
☐ not warmer than Thursday
☐ cooler than Tuesday
11. If Mrs. Brown is exactly as extravagant as Mrs. Smith, and Mrs.
Smith is less extravagant than Mrs. Jones, then Mrs. Jones is
☐ more frugal than Mrs. Brown
☐ not as frugal as Mrs. Brown
☐ less extravagant than Mrs. Smith
☐ not more extravagant than Mrs. Smith
12. If there were four parades in a month, and the first was larger
than the fourth, and the third was smaller than the second, and
the second was not smaller than the first, then the fourth was
☐ larger than the second
☐ equal to the second
☐ not smaller than the second
☐ not larger than the second
_Directions for Scoring the Test._
The score in this test is the number of sentences for which the correct
conclusion is checked. The stencil furnished with the test booklets
makes this process of counting the number correct so simple that a child
can do it almost at a glance. The degree of intellectual capacity is
indicated roughly by the score as follows:
Scores 0 to 1 indicate Low Average or Inferior Ability
Scores 2 to 5 indicate Average Ability
Scores 6 to 8 indicate High Average Ability
Scores 9 to 12 indicate Superior Ability
Attention should be invited here again to the fact that this is a new
test and that its reliability and implications will need to be carefully
tested and measured before one can be sure what it measures or how
accurate it is.
CHAPTER XI
TRADE TESTS OR TESTS OF SKILL
While the determination of individual skill in the performance of a
given operation is not, strictly speaking, a test of intelligence or of
mental capacity, it has been established that the most accurate and
speedy method of discovering the precise degree of skill possessed by
any artisan is closely analogous to the scientific method of mental
measurement. It has been found, moreover, that there is quite a close
relation between an individual workman’s skill at his trade and the
degree of mental capacity disclosed by the Mentimeter or similar
scientific tests; the more intelligent the worker, the greater his skill
if he has any natural aptitude for his trade.
Many persons view with skepticism the idea that a workman’s degree of
skill at his trade can be determined by tests that require but a few
minutes. A month, they argue, is little enough for an expert foreman to
classify justly the men under him, after observing their skill with his
own eyes. When it is proposed that those who apply the tests for any
trade need not themselves be skilled in it and may, in fact, know
nothing about it, it is no wonder that they doubt the practicality of a
method so foreign to previous conceptions and practice.
Psychologists have long realized that the same methods by which mental
qualities, abilities, and capacities are determined, analyzed, and
measured, could be applied to the measurement of manual dexterity or the
combination of manual dexterity, judgment, perception, adaptability, and
patience that, taken together, make the skilled workman. For, as the
reader who has perused this book thus far will long since have
recognized, there is included in the foregoing list of qualities a
predominance of those which come quite definitely under the
classification of mental abilities or capacities. As has been previously
pointed out, it is impossible to separate mental and physical powers,
and psychologists do not regard the mind as a separate entity, but
merely as a convenient term for the definition of certain of the higher
physical powers and their manifestations. And just as a certain type of
nervous (physical) organism manifests itself in the development of
abilities which we are accustomed to term “intellectual” or “mental,” so
the abilities which we call “physical” or “manual” are merely other
manifestations of a different type of nervous organism.
The principal distinction, scientifically, between a trade test and an
intelligence test, is in the purpose to be served by the test. In the
intelligence test the aim is to ascertain the subject’s general
_capacity_; in the trade test, to discover his present _ability_ or
degree of skill in some special direction. Capacity, as has been
previously pointed out, is only to be measured in terms of demonstrable
ability, so that in the application of trade tests, although limited in
their scope to a single class or kind of ability, there is also
obtainable as a by-product a partial measure of the subject’s mental
capacity.
While trade tests devised by psychologists had been demonstrated, in a
number of industries, to be superior to any other method, both in
picking the most skilful workers from among all applicants for
positions, and in transferring workers from one department to another in
large industries, it was in the classification and placement of the
personnel of the Army during the war that the first really large-scale
demonstration of the precision and effectiveness of scientifically
devised trade tests was made. While one group of psychologists, working
under the direction of the Surgeon-General’s Office, was engaged in
classifying the Army personnel by means of intelligence tests the
Personnel Branch of the Operations Division of the General Staff,
organized and officered by trained psychologists, was undertaking the
task of determining the special technical and vocational ability of the
millions of men drawn into the Army through the medium of the selective
draft.
This personnel organization had a multiplex duty to perform. First, it
had to ascertain with precision what particular kinds of work had to be
done in the preparation of an army for battle and in its transport and
maintenance. This involved not only finding out just what needed to be
done but translating this need into terms of trades and occupations.
For example, the Army might report that it needed a number of men
capable of making all sorts of repairs to electric generators and
motors. The Personnel Division proceeded to analyze the special
qualifications required of electricians to enable them to meet this
demand. These were listed, along with the qualifications required for
every other army occupation, in a thick book entitled Trade
Specifications Index. There were 239 pages in this book and in it were
set forth in specific detail the exact qualifications needed by 565
different kinds of trade and technical experts. Chauffeurs, for
instance, were classed as auto drivers, auto drivers with pigeon
experience, motorcycle drivers with pigeon experience, plain
motorcyclists, heavy auto-truck drivers, motor truck drivers, and plain
chauffeurs. There were sixteen different classes of electricians, each
of which required a man with special experience and knowledge. Nine
different kinds of chemists were used in the Army.
It was a big job, in the first place, to determine exactly how men
should be classified. After the classification had been decided upon, it
then became necessary to devise simple, rapid, and accurate methods of
placing every enlisted man in the Army in his proper classification, and
then of so indexing three or four millions of men that any particular
demand could be met. For example, one camp might ask for three farriers,
nine sanitary engineers, two car carpenters, six boilermakers, and a
pipe fitter. It was necessary that some system be perfected to permit of
the filling of this order instantly by taking the men qualified to
perform these duties out of the camps where they were undergoing
military training.
The whole system had as its basis a card for each soldier, on which, by
a simple system of marginal numbers, punch holes, and coloured index
tags the record of each man’s precise ability was kept. Every man, as he
was inducted into the service, was required first to make a preliminary,
rough classification of himself—that is to say, he recorded himself as a
tailor, a blacksmith, or a milk wagon driver. But the Trade
Specifications Index was as precise in its detail as a dictionary. It
was, in fact, a collection of definitions of what was meant by
occupational titles which had vague or various meanings in different
parts of the country. Thus, a man might have classified himself as a
tailor who, if called upon to make a uniform, would have been unable to
do so. Tailoring had to be subdivided, from simple pressing and
repairing up to expert fitting. One might be a good coat maker while
another had never worked on anything but trousers.
So there was devised a system of trade and occupational tests to which
every man claiming skill at a trade was subjected, and which determined,
as nearly as it is humanly possible to do, exactly the degree and kind
of vocational skill possessed by every man in the Army.
When the problem of formulating tests was analyzed, it was seen that
certain requirements were fundamental. Trade tests to be absolutely
satisfactory,
1. Must differentiate between the various grades of skill;
2. Must produce uniform results in various places and in the hands of
individuals of widely different characteristics;
3. Must consume the least amount of time and energy consistent with the
best results.
Now it must be recognized that trades useful in the Army are of many
kinds and of widely differing requirements. Trade ability in any one of
them, however, means about the same thing. It means that the workman is
not simply the possessor of a single item of information, nor simply
able to execute one particular movement required by the trade, but that
he has many items of information more or less systematized together with
the ability to execute various movements not only singly but in
combinations.
While there are all degrees of trade ability among the members of any
trade, it is convenient to classify them in a few main groups.
Ordinarily the terms Novice, Apprentice, Journeyman, and Journeyman
Expert (or Expert) are employed. The Novice is a man who has no trade
ability whatever, or at least none that could not be paralleled by
practically any intelligent man. The Apprentice has acquired some of the
elements of the trade but is not sufficiently skilled to be entrusted
with an important task. The Journeyman is qualified to perform almost
any work done by members of the trade. The Expert can perform quickly
and with superior skill any work done by men in the trade.
It is sometimes desirable that the Trade test should differentiate
between the skill of different members of the same group, for instance,
of the journeyman group. It is essential that it should differentiate
between the journeyman and the apprentice and the apprentice and the
novice. Trade tests devised to make this classification are of three
kinds: oral, picture, and performance.
The oral tests are most generally used because they are of low cost and
they may be applied to a large number of men in a comparatively short
time and without much equipment. They are satisfactory in determining
the presence or absence of trade ability and in many instances determine
the degree of ability with such accuracy that no other tests are
required.
As a preliminary to the preparation of a trade test, there is required a
thorough inquiry into the conditions of the trade. This inquiry has a
threefold purpose:
1. To determine the feasibility of a test in this field. Does the trade
actually exist as a recognized trade? It was found, for example, that
the trade of gunsmith was not a recognized trade, though there were gun
repairers.
2. To determine the elements which require and permit of testing. In
other words, can men be graded in it according to degrees of skill? In
some trades it was found that the trade required simply the performance
of a single set of operations and there were no gradations among the
members of the trade.
3. To determine the kinds of tests that can be used. Some trades, such
as truck driving and typewriting, are mainly matters of skill, and for
them performance tests are better than oral tests. Other trades, such as
interior wiring and power-plant operation, are mainly matters of
knowledge. For these trades oral and picture tests are best.
After having discovered by inquiry that the trade is a recognized trade
and can be tested, information is collected from all available sources.
In the Army’s preparation of trade tests experts in the trade, trade
union officials, the literature of the trade, trade school authorities,
employers, and the like were consulted. In this way it was discovered
what are the elements of the trade and what constitutes proficiency in
it.
As a result of this collection of information it was possible to compile
a number of questions, usually from forty to sixty, each of which called
for an answer that showed knowledge of the trade. Experience in the
formulation of such questions has shown that a good question meets the
following requirements:
1. It must be in the language of the trade.
2. It must be a unit, complete in itself and requiring no further
explanation.
3. It must not be a chance question that could be answered by a good
guess. The extreme example would be a question calling for the answer
“yes” or “no.”
4. It must be as short as possible and must be capable of being answered
by a very short answer.
5. It must not be ambiguous; the meaning must be unmistakable.
After the large number of questions originally formulated has been
sifted down by application of the requirements stated above and others
of less importance they are used in a preliminary sampling on a number
of artisans engaged in the trade, usually from nine to twelve, whose
answers indicate the merits of the different questions and their grades,
from easy to difficult. In this sampling, tradesmen from different shops
or plants are tried in order to guard against specialized methods or
modes of expression confined to a single locality. At least two
examiners worked on each set of questions at this stage, in the Army’s
work, to get the benefit of more than one point of view for revision.
This preliminary sampling affords a means of checking on the following
points:
1. Is the test applicable to trade conditions?
2. Does the test represent good trade practice?
3. In what way can parts be profitably modified, supplemented, or
eliminated?
4. Does the test represent the whole range of the trade, from the novice
to the expert?
5. Is it a representative sampling of the whole range of trade
processes?
In the light of the answers to these questions, the test is revised
during this sampling process and is then ready to be formulated. This
formulation consists of limiting the questions to a small enough number
to be handled in a short space of time and to a wide enough range to
represent every possible degree of trade skill. The questions are
tabulated and are then ready to be used in the final sampling process.
Final sampling is made by testing twenty men who are known to be typical
representatives of each group (novice, apprentice, journeyman, expert).
Among the novices tested are some highly intelligent and mature men of
good general knowledge but no trade ability. Three testing stations were
used in the Army’s work: one in Cleveland, one in Newark, and one in
Pittsburgh, in order to get the benefit of wide geographical
distribution. Examinations were given to men whose record in the trade
was already known and who were tested as nearly as possible in the same
manner as men in the camps.
The results of this final sampling are turned over to experts who make a
careful study of the results and of the answers to each question. This
enables them to determine the relative value of each individual question
and the selection that makes a proper balance.
If a trade test is good, a known expert, when tested, is able to answer
all, or nearly all, the questions correctly; a journeyman is able to
answer the majority; an apprentice a smaller part, and a novice
practically none. This does not mean that each question should be
answered correctly by all the experts, a majority of the journeymen,
some apprentices but no novices. There are a few questions which show
this general result. A graphic curve when plotted for such a question is
almost a straight line.
Other types of questions, however, are more common. Some show a distinct
line of cleavage between the novice and the apprentice. Novices fail,
but apprentices, journeymen, and experts alike answer correctly. There
are likewise questions that are answered correctly by nearly all
journeymen and experts but only a few apprentices, and questions that
only an expert can answer correctly.
Each type of question has its value in a good test. The main requirement
is that the tendency of the curve should be upward; a question which is
answered correctly by more journeymen than experts or more apprentices
than journeymen is undesirable and is at once discarded. A proper
balance is made of the others.
One task still remains; namely, that of calibrating the test. As each
question is allowed four points, it becomes necessary to determine how
many points should indicate an expert, how many a journeyman, etc.
Obviously the way to do this is to note how many points were scored by
the known experts and the known journeymen when they were tested.
Ordinarily the expert scores higher than the journeyman and the
journeyman higher than the apprentice. It frequently happens that a few
journeymen score as high as the lowest of the experts and a few
apprentices as high as the lowest of the journeymen. There are
consequently certain overlappings between the classes. In calibrating,
the object is to draw the dividing line between classes so that the
overlapping shall be as small as possible.
When these dividing lines, or _critical scores_ as they are usually
called, are established, the test is ready for editing, printing, and
distribution to camps.
Picture tests are made in practically the same way as oral tests. The
peculiar characteristic of picture tests is that the questions making up
the tests relate to illustrations of trade tools and appliances.
The performance tests are now being used in many trades for those who
make a satisfactory showing in the oral or picture tests. These
performance tests are devised by conference with experts in the trade.
They consist of some apparently simple tasks that can be performed
quickly and with a small amount of apparatus but that nevertheless
indicate clearly the degree of skill of the performer. As a result of
experience the following have been drawn up as the requirements for a
good performance test:
1. It should require the smallest possible quantity of tools and
materials and these should be capable of standardization;
2. A journeyman should not require more than 45 minutes to perform it;
3. It should be typical of the work required;
4. The operations should be exact so that a correct standard form of
product is always obtainable. Performance tests undergo much the same
processes of sampling as do the oral and picture tests and they are
calibrated in the same way. The principle followed here, as elsewhere,
is that the value of a test lies not in its theoretical exactness but in
its proved ability to pick out and classify correctly men of all degrees
of skill within the trade. If the test does classify men in the groups
in which they are known to belong, then it can be relied upon to
classify correctly men about whom nothing is known in advance.
The method which the Army pursued is adaptable for any private
enterprise. The work done under the direction of the Army General Staff
in analyzing the essentials of nearly seven hundred trades and
subdivisions of trades and in preparing tests for a large proportion of
these was pioneer work, the results of which, in the shape of the tests
themselves, while not issued for general distribution, are available as
a time-saving guide to those who are interested in the building and
application of trade tests.
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
INTELLIGENCE RATINGS IN THE ARMY
Reprinted from The Personnel Manual
(Vol. II of The Personnel System of the United States Army)
_Purpose of the Intelligence Tests._—Under the direction of the Division
of Psychology, Medical Department, and in accordance with provisions of
General Order No. 74, mental tests are given all recruits during the
two-weeks detention period. These tests provide an immediate and
reasonably dependable classification of the men according to _general
intelligence_. Their specific purposes are to aid:—
(1) In the discovery of men whose superior intelligence suggests their
consideration for advancement;
(2) In the prompt selection and assignment to Development Battalions of
men who are so inferior mentally that they are suited only for selected
assignments;
(3) In forming organizations of uniform mental strength where such
uniformity is desired;
(4) In forming organizations of superior mental strength where such
superiority is demanded by the nature of the work to be performed;
(5) In selecting suitable men for various army duties or for special
training in colleges or technical schools;
(6) In the early formation of training groups within a company in order
that each man may receive instruction and drill according to his ability
to profit thereby;
(7) In the early recognition of slow-thinking minds which might
otherwise be mistaken for stubborn or disobedient characters;
(8) In eliminating from the army those men whose low-grade intelligence
renders them either a burden or a menace to the service.
_Nature of the Tests._—The tests were prepared by a special committee of
the American Psychological Association. Before being ordered into
general use they were thoroughly tried out in four National Army
Cantonments, and from time to time have undergone revision to increase
their practical usefulness. Between May 1 and October 1, 1918,
approximately one million three hundred thousand men were tested.
Three systems of test are now in use:—
(1) _Alpha._ This is a group test for men who read and write English. It
requires only fifty minutes, and can be given to groups as large as 500.
The test material is so arranged that each of its 212 questions may be
answered without writing, merely by underlining, crossing out, or
checking. The papers are later scored by means of stencils, so that
nothing is left to the personal judgment of those who do the scoring.
The mental rating which results is therefore wholly objective.
(2) _Beta._ This is a group test for foreigners and illiterates. It may
be given to groups of from 75 to 300 and requires approximately fifty
minutes. Success in Beta does not depend upon knowledge of English, as
the instructions are given entirely by pantomime and demonstration. Like
Alpha, it measures general intelligence, but does so through the use of
concrete or picture material instead of by the use of printed language.
It is also scored by stencils and yields an objective rating.
(3) _Individual Tests._ Three forms of individual tests are used: The
Yerkes-Bridges Point Scale, the Stanford-Binet Scale, and the
Performance Scale. An individual test requires from fifteen to thirty
minutes. The instructions for the Performance Scale are given by means
of gestures and demonstration, and a high score may be earned in it by
an intelligent recruit who does not know a word of English.
All enlisted men are given either Alpha or Beta according to their
degree of literacy. Those who fail in Alpha are given Beta, and those
who fail to pass Test Beta are given an individual test.
As a result of the tests, each man is rated as A, B, C+, C, C−, D, D− or
E. The letter ratings are reported to the Interviewing Section of the
Personnel Office, and are there copied on the Qualification Cards (in
the square marked Intelligence). The Psychological Report, after the
grades have been copied on the Qualification Cards, is forwarded from
the Interviewing Section to the Mustering Section of the Personnel
Office, where each soldier’s letter rating is copied on the second page
of his Service Record. A copy of the Psychological Report is also sent
by the Psychological Examiner to the Company Commander, who uses it in
the organization of his company. In some camps the entering of
Intelligence Grades on Service Records has been left to company
commanders, but accuracy and uniformity is secured by having these
grades entered in the Mustering Section of the Personnel Office when the
Service Records are being started.
The psychological staff in a camp is ordinarily able to test 2,000 men
per day and to report the ratings to the Personnel Office within 24
hours. Personnel Adjutants will coöperate in arranging the schedule of
psychological examinations so as to secure from them maximum value (See
Chapter IV for the proper coördination of the work of the Psychological
Examiner with the work of other officers in a camp.)
_Explanation of letter ratings._—The rating a man earns furnishes a
fairly reliable index of his _ability to learn_, _to think quickly and
accurately_, _to analyze a situation_, _to maintain a state of mental
alertness_, _and to comprehend and follow instructions_. The score is
little influenced by schooling. Some of the highest records have been
made by men who had never completed the eighth grade. The meaning of the
letter ratings is as follows:
A. _Very Superior Intelligence._ This grade is earned by only four or
five soldiers out of a hundred. The “A” group is composed of men of
marked intellectuality. “A” men are of high officer type when they are
also endowed with leadership and other necessary qualities.
B. _Superior Intelligence._ “B” intelligence is superior, but less
exceptional than that represented by “A.” The rating “B” is obtained by
eight to ten soldiers out of a hundred. The group contains a good many
men of the commissioned officer type and a large amount of
non-commissioned officer material.
C+. _High Average Intelligence._ This group includes about fifteen to
eighteen per cent. of all soldiers and contains a large amount of
non-commissioned officer material with occasionally a man whose
leadership and power to command fit him for commissioned rank.
C. _Average Intelligence._ Includes about twenty-five per cent. of
soldiers. Excellent private type with a certain amount of fair
non-commissioned officer material.
C−. _Low Average Intelligence._ Includes about twenty per cent. While
below average in intelligence, “C−” men are usually good privates and
satisfactory in work of routine nature.
D. _Inferior Intelligence._ Includes about fifteen per cent. of
soldiers. “D” men are likely to be fair soldiers, but are usually slow
in learning and rarely go above the rank of private. They are short on
initiative and so require more than the usual amount of supervision.
Many of them are illiterate or foreign.
D− and E. _Very Inferior Intelligence._ This group is divided into two
classes (1) “D−” men, who are very inferior in intelligence but are
considered fit for regular service; and (2) “E” men, those whose mental
inferiority justifies their recommendation for Development Battalion,
Special Service Organization, rejection, or discharge. The majority of
“D−” and “E” men are below ten years in “mental age.”
The immense contrast between “A” and “D−” intelligence is shown by the
fact that men of “A” intelligence have the ability to make a superior
record in college or university, while “D−” men are of such inferior
mentality that they are rarely able to go beyond the third or fourth
grade of the elementary school, however long they attend. In fact, most
“D−” and “E” men are below the “mental age” of ten years and at best are
on the border-line of mental deficiency. Most of them are of the “moron”
grade of feeble-mindedness. “B” intelligence is capable of making an
average record in college, “C+” intelligence cannot do so well, while
mentality of the “C” grade is rarely equal to high school graduation.
_Evidence that the Tests Measure Military Value._—It has been thoroughly
demonstrated that the intelligence ratings are very useful in indicating
practical military value. The following investigations are typical:
1. Commanding officers of ten different organizations representing
various arms in a camp were asked to designate:
(_a_) The most efficient men in the organization;
(_b_) Men of average value;
(_c_) Men so inferior that they were “barely able” to perform their
duties.
The officers of these organizations had been with their men from six to
twelve months and knew them exceptionally well. The total number of men
rated was 965, about equally divided among “best,” “average,” and
“poorest.” After the officers’ ratings had been made, the men were given
the usual psychological test. Comparison of test results with officers’
ratings showed:
(_a_) That the average score of the “best” group was approximately
twice as high as the average score of the “poorest” group.
(_b_) That of men testing below “C−” 70 per cent. were classed as
“poorest” and only 4.4 per cent. as “best.”
(_c_) That of men testing above “C+,” 15 per cent. were classed as
“poorest” and 55.5 per cent. as “best.”
(_d_) That the man who tests above “C+” is about fourteen times as
likely to be classed “best” as the man who tests below “C−.”
(_e_) That the per cent. classed as “best” in the various letter groups
increased steadily from 0 per cent. in “D−” to 57.7 per cent.
in “A,” while the per cent. classed as “poorest” decreased
steadily from 80 per cent. in “D−” to 11.5 per cent. in “A.”
The following table shows the per cents. for each letter group:
══════════════════════╤══════╤══════╤══════╤══════╤══════╤══════╤══════
│ D− │ D │ C− │ C │ C+ │ B │ A
Total number │ 29│ 60│ 121│ 231│ 229│ 191│ 104
Classed with “best” │ 0.0%│ 6.7%│ 19.0%│ 26.0%│ 39.3%│ 53.4%│ 57.7%
Classed with “poorest”│ 79.3%│ 66.0%│ 57.9%│ 31.2%│ 24.9%│ 16.7%│ 11.5%
──────────────────────┴──────┴──────┴──────┴──────┴──────┴──────┴──────
Considering that low military value may be caused by many things besides
inferior intelligence, the above findings are very significant.
2. In an infantry regiment of another camp were 765 men (Regulars) who
had been with their officers for several months. The company commanders
were asked to rate these men as 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 according to “practical
soldier value,” “1” being highest, and “5” lowest. The men were then
tested, with the following results:
(_a_) Of 76 men who earned the grade A or B, none was rated “5” and
only 9 were rated “3” or “4.”
(_b_) Of 238 “D” and “D−” men, only one received the rating “1” and
only 7 received a rating of “2.”
(_c_) Psychological ratings and ratings by company commanders were
identical in 49.5 per cent. of all cases. There was agreement
within one step in 88.4 per cent. of cases, and disagreement of
more than two steps in only 7/10 of 1 per cent. of cases.
3. In another camp the company officers of a regiment were asked to
designate the ten “best” and ten “poorest” privates in each company. The
officers had been with their men long enough to know them thoroughly.
Comparison of the officers’ estimates with the results of intelligence
tests brought out the following facts:
(_a_) Of 156 men classed with the ten “best” in their respective
companies, only 9 tested below C−.
(_b_) Of 133 men classed with the “poorest” ten in their respective
companies, only 4 tested above C+.
(_c_) Men above C+ are 7.3 times as likely as men below C− to be
classed with the ten “best.”
(_d_) Men below C− are 10.8 times as likely as men above C+ to be
classed with the ten “poorest.”
(_e_) An “A” man is 11.7 times as likely as a man below C− to be rated
“best”; but a man below C− is 13.5 times as likely as an “A” to
be rated “poorest.”
4. The same experiment was made in still another camp. Officers of 36
different companies picked the ten “best” and the ten “poorest” men in
each company. Of the “poorest,” 62.22 per cent. tested below C− and only
3.06 per cent. above C+. Of the “best,” 38 per cent. tested above C+ and
only 9.72 per cent. below C−. According to this investigation, a man
below C− is 6.4 times as likely to be “poorest” as to be “best.” A man
above C+ is 12.5 times as likely to be “best” as to be “poorest.” A man
rating A is 62 times as likely to be “best” as to be “poorest.” A man
rating D− is 29.3 times as likely to be “poorest” as to be “best.”
5. Where commissioned officers are selected on the basis of trying out
and “survival of the fittest” it is ordinarily found that about 80 per
cent. are of the A or B grade, and only about 5 per cent. below the C+
grade. Of non-commissioned officers chosen by this method, about 75 per
cent. are found to grade A, B, or C+, and only 5 per cent. below C.
Moreover, there is a gradual rise in average score as we go from
privates up through the ranks of privates first class, corporals,
sergeants first class, O. T. S. candidates, and commissioned officers.
This is seen in the following table:
═══════════════════════╤═══════════════════════════════════════════════
│ PER CENT. EARNING EACH LETTER RATING
───────────────────────┼─────┬─────┬─────┬─────┬─────┬─────┬─────┬─────
Various Groups (Whites)│D− or│ │ │ │ │ │ │A and
│ E │ D │ C− │ C │ C+ │ B │ A │ B
8,819 Commissioned │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
Officers │0.0 │ 0.01│ .25│ 2.92│13.8 │34.6 │48.4 │83.
9,240 O.T.S. Candidates│0.0 │ 0.14│ .98│ 6.16│19.5 │36.4 │36.8 │73.2
3,393 Sergeants │0.0 │ 1.05│ 4.05│14.2 │27.3 │32.5 │20.9 │53.4
4,023 Corporals │0.0 │ 1.33│ 7.33│20.33│31.3 │26. │13.7 │39.7
81,114 Literate │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
Privates │0.22 │10.24│21.48│28.79│20.48│12.38│ 6.37│18.75
10,803 Illiterate │ │ │ │ │ │ │ │
Privates │7.8 │41.16│29.11│14.67│ 4.43│ 1.95│ .52│ 2.47
───────────────────────┴─────┴─────┴─────┴─────┴─────┴─────┴─────┴─────
6. Experience shows that “D” candidates admitted to Officers’ Training
Schools almost never make good, and that the per cent. of elimination
among the “C−” and “C” students is several times as high as among “A”
students. For example, in one of the Fourth Officers’ Training Schools
100 per cent. of the “D” men were eliminated as unsatisfactory, 55 per
cent. of the “C−” men, 14.8 per cent. of the “B” men, but only 2.7 per
cent. of the “A” men. In another Fourth Officers’ Training School 76.2
per cent. of the men rating below C were eliminated in the first six
weeks, 51.5 per cent. of the “C” men, and none at all of the “A” or “B”
men. These findings are typical.
The psychological ratings are valuable not so much because they make a
better classification than would come about in the course of time
through natural selection, but chiefly because they greatly abbreviate
this process by indicating _immediately_ the groups in which suitable
officer material will be found, and at the same time those men whose
mental inferiority warrants their elimination from regular units in
order to prevent the retardation of training. Speed counts in a war that
costs fifty million dollars per day and requires the minimum period of
training.
_Directions for the Use of Intelligence Ratings._—In using the
intelligence ratings the following points should be borne in mind:
1. The mental tests are not intended to replace other methods of judging
a man’s value to the service. It would be a mistake to assume that they
tell us infallibly what kind of soldier a man will make. They merely
_help_ to do this by measuring one important element in a soldier’s
equipment, namely, intelligence. They do not measure loyalty, bravery,
power to command, or the emotional traits that make a man “carry on.”
However, in the long run these qualities are far more likely to be found
in men of superior intelligence than in men who are intellectually
inferior. Intelligence is perhaps the most important single factor in
soldier efficiency apart from physical fitness.
2. Commissioned officer material is found chiefly in the A and B groups,
although of course not all high-score men have the other qualifications
necessary for officers. Men below C+ should not be accepted as students
in Officers’ Training Schools unless the score on the Officers’ Rating
Scale indicates exceptional power of leadership and ability to command.
3. Since more than one fourth of enlisted men rate as high as C+, there
is rarely justification for going below this grade in choosing
non-commissioned officers. This is especially the case in view of the
likelihood of promotion from non-commissioned rank. Even apart from
considerations of promotion, it is desirable to avoid the appointment of
mentally inferior men (below C) as non-commissioned officers. Several
careful studies have shown that “C−” and “D” sergeants and corporals are
extremely likely to be found unsatisfactory. The fact that a few make
good does not justify the risk taken in their appointment.
4. Men below C+ are rarely equal to complicated paper work.
5. In selecting men for tasks of special responsibility the preference
should be given to those of highest intelligence rating _who also have
the other necessary qualifications_. If they make good they should be
kept on the work or promoted; if they fail they should be replaced by
men next on the list.
To aid in selecting men for occupational assignment, extensive data have
been gathered on the range of intelligence scores found in various
occupations. This material has been placed in the hands of the Personnel
Officers for use in making assignments. It is suggested that those men
who have an intelligence rating above the average in an occupation
should be the first to be assigned to meet requirements in that
occupation, and after that men with lower ratings should be considered.
6. In making assignments from the Depot Brigade to permanent
organizations it is important to give each unit its proportion of
superior, average, and inferior men. If this matter is left to chance
there will inevitably be “weak links” in the army chain.
Exceptions to this rule should be made in favour of certain arms of the
service which require more than the ordinary number of mentally superior
men; e. g., Signal Corps, Machine Gun, Field Artillery and Engineers.
These organizations ordinarily have about twice the usual proportion of
“A” and “B” men and very much less than the usual proportion of “D” and
“D−” men.
The first two columns in the following table illustrate the distribution
of intelligence grades typical of infantry regiments and also the
extreme differences in the mental strength of organizations which are
built up without regard to intelligence ratings. The last column to the
right shows a balanced distribution of intellectual strength which might
have been made to each of these two regiments.
═════════════╤══════════════╤═══════════════════════════╤═════════════
INTELLIGENCE │INTERPRETATION│ ACTUAL DISTRIBUTION │ BALANCED
RATING │ │ │DISTRIBUTION
─────────────┼──────────────┼─────────────┬─────────────┼─────────────
│ │1st Regiment │2nd Regiment │
─────────────┼──────────────┼─────────────┼─────────────┼─────────────
A │Very Superior │ 1.0% │ 6.0% │ 3.5%
B │Superior │ 3.0 │12.0 │ 7.5
C+ │High Average │ 7.0 │20.0 │13.5
C │Average │15.0 │28.0 │21.5
C− │Low Average │25.0 │19.0 │22.0
D │Inferior │31.0 │13.0 │22.0
D− │Very Inferior │18.0 │ 2.0 │10.0
─────────────┴──────────────┴─────────────┴─────────────┴─────────────
Unless intelligence is wisely distributed certain regiments and
companies will take training much more slowly than others and thus delay
the programme of the whole organization.
7. “D” and “D−” men are rarely suited for tasks which require special
skill, resourcefulness, or sustained alertness. It is also unsafe to
expect “D,” “D−” or “E” men to read or understand written directions.
8. Only high-score men should be selected for tasks that require quick
learning or rapid adjustments.
9. It should not be supposed that men who receive the same mental rating
are necessarily of equal military worth. _A man’s value to the service
should not be judged by his intelligence alone._
10. The intelligence rating is one of the most important aids to the
Personnel Office in the rapid sorting of the masses of men in the Depot
Brigade. _In no previous war has so much depended on the prompt and
complete utilization of the mental ability of the individual soldier._
It is expected, therefore, that the psychological ratings will be
regularly used as an aid in the selection, assignment, and
classification of men.
APPENDIX B
THE ARMY “ALPHA” AND “BETA” TESTS
With Instructions and Method of Scoring
_Instructions for giving Alpha Test 1._ (To be read aloud by Examiner.)
TEST 1, FORM 8.
1. “Attention! ‘Attention’ always means ‘Pencils up.’ Look at the
circles at 1. When I say ‘go,’ but not before, make a figure 2 in the
second circle and also a cross in the third circle.—Go!” (Allow not over
5 seconds.)
2. “Attention! Look at 2, where the circles have numbers in them. When I
say ‘go’ draw a line from Circle 1 to Circle 4 that will pass _below_
Circle 2 and _above_ Circle 3.—Go!” (Allow not over 5 seconds.)
3. “Attention! Look at the square and triangle at 3. When I say ‘go’
make a figure 1 in the space which is in the square but not in the
triangle, and also make a cross in the space which is in the triangle
and in the square.—Go!” (Allow not over 10 seconds.)
4. “Attention! Look at 4. When I say ‘go’ make a figure 2 in the space
which is in the circle but not in the triangle or square, and also make
a figure 3 in the space which is in the triangle and circle, but not in
the square.—Go!” (Allow not over 10 seconds.)
N. B. _Examiner._—In reading 5, don’t pause at the word “circle” as if
ending a sentence.
5. “Attention! Look at 5. If ‘taps’ sounds in the evening, then (when I
say ‘go’) put a cross in the first circle; if not, draw a line _under_
the word No.—Go!” (Allow not over ten seconds.)
6. “Attention! Look at 6. When I say ‘go’ put in the first circle the
right answer to the question: ‘How many months has a year?’ In the
second circle do nothing, but in the fifth circle put any number that is
wrong answer to the question that you just answered correctly—Go!”
(Allow not over 10 seconds.)
7. “Attention! Look at 7. When I say ‘go’ _cross out_ the letter just
after F and also draw a line _under_ the second letter after I.—Go!”
(Allow not over 10 seconds.)
8. “Attention! Look at 8. Notice the three circles and the three words.
When I say ‘go’ make in the _first_ circle the _last_ letter of _first_
word; in the _second_ circle the _middle_ letter of the _second_ word,
and in the _third_ circle the _first_ letter of the _third_ word.—Go!”
(Allow not over 10 seconds.)
9. “Attention! Look at 9. When I say ‘go’ _cross out_ each number that
is more than 50 but less than 60.—Go!” (Allow not over 15 seconds.)
10. “Attention! Look at 10. Notice that the drawing is divided into five
parts. When I say ‘go’ put a 4 or a 5 in each of the two largest parts
and any number between 6 and 9 in the part next in size to the smallest
part.—Go!” (Allow not over 15 seconds.)
11. “Attention! Look at 11. When I say ‘go’ draw a line through every
odd number that is not in a square, and also through every odd number
that is in a square with a letter.—Go!” (Allow not over 25 seconds.)
12. “Attention! Look at 12. If 4 is more than 2, then (when I say ‘go’)
cross out the number 3 unless 3 is more than 5, in which case draw a
line _under_ the number 4.—Go!” (Allow not over 10 seconds.)
“During the rest of this examination don’t turn any page forward or
backward unless you are told to. Now turn over the page to Test 2.”
FORM 8 GROUP EXAMINATION ALPHA GROUP NO. ____
Name _______________________________________ Rank ________ Age ____
Company ____________ Regiment ___________ Arm ________ Division ____
In what country or state born? ______ Years in U. S.? ____ Race ____
Occupation _______________________________________ Weekly Wages ____
Schooling: Grades, 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8: High or Prep. School, Year 1.
2. 3. 4: College, Year 1. 2. 3. 4.
========================================================================
[Illustration:
TEST 1
Division of Psychology, Medical Department U. S. A.
Authorized by the Surgeon General, Feb. 8, 1918. Edition, May 20,
1918. 100,000
]
_Instructions for Giving Alpha Test 2._
TEST 2.—ARITHMETICAL PROBLEMS
“Attention! Look at the directions at the top of the page while I read
them. Get the answers to these examples as quickly as you can. Use the
side of this page to figure on if you need to. I will say stop at the
end of five minutes. You may not be able to finish all of them, but do
as many as you can in the time allowed. The two samples are already
answered correctly.—Ready—Go!”
After 5 minutes, say “Stop! Turn over the page to Test 3.”
=TEST 2=
Get the answers to these examples as quickly as you can. Use the side of
this page to figure on if you need to.
SAMPLES 1 How many are 5 men and 10 men? Answer ( 15)
2 If you walk 4 miles an hour for 3 hours, how
far do you walk? Answer ( 12)
1 How many are 60 guns and 5 guns? Answer ( )
2 If you save $9 a month for 3 months, how
much will you save? Answer ( )
3 If 48 men are divided into squads of 8, how
many squads will there be? Answer ( )
4 Mike had 11 cigars. He bought 2 more and
then smoked 7. How many cigars did he have
left? Answer ( )
5 A company advanced 8 miles and retreated 2
miles. How far was it then from its first
position? Answer ( )
6 How many hours will it take a truck to go 42
miles at the rate of 3 miles an hour? Answer ( )
7 How many pencils can you buy for 60 cents at
the rate of 2 for 5 cents? Answer ( )
8 A regiment marched 40 miles in five days.
The first day they marched 9 miles, the
second day 6 miles, the third 10 miles,
the fourth 6 miles. How many miles did
they march the last day? Answer ( )
9 If you buy 2 packages of tobacco at 8 cents
each and a pipe for 65 cents, how much
change should you get from a two-dollar
bill? Answer ( )
10 If it takes 4 men 3 days to dig a 120–foot
drain, how many men are needed to dig it
in half a day? Answer ( )
11 A dealer bought some mules for $2,000. He
sold them for $2,400, making $50 on each
mule. How many mules were there? Answer ( )
12 A rectangular bin holds 200 cubic feet of
lime. If the bin is 10 feet long and 5
feet wide, how deep is it? Answer ( )
13 A recruit spent one-eighth of his spare
change for post cards and twice as much
for a box of letter paper, and then had
$1.00 left. How much money did he have at
first? Answer ( )
14 If 3½ tons of clover cost $14, what will 6½
tons cost? Answer ( )
15 A ship has provisions to last her crew of
700 men 2 months. How long would it last
400 men? Answer ( )
16 If an aeroplane goes 250 yards in 10
seconds, how many feet does it go in a
fifth of a second? Answer ( )
17 A U-boat makes 8 miles an hour under water
and 20 miles on the surface. How long will
it take to cross a 100–mile channel, if it
has to go two-fifths of the way under
water? Answer ( )
18 If 134 squads of men are to dig 3,618 yards
of trench, how many yards must be dug by
each squad? Answer ( )
19 A certain division contains 5,000 artillery,
15,000 infantry, and 1,000 cavalry. If
each branch is expanded proportionately
until there are in all 23,100 men, how
many will be added to the artillery? Answer ( )
20 A commission house which had already
supplied 1,897 barrels of apples to a
cantonment delivered the remainder of its
stock to 37 mess halls. Of this remainder
each mess hall received 54 barrels. What
was the total number of barrels supplied? Answer ( )
_Instructions for Giving Alpha Test 3._
TEST 3.—PRACTICAL JUDGMENT
“Attention! Look at the directions at the top of the page while I read
them. ‘This is a test of common sense. Below are sixteen questions.
Three answers are given to each question. You are to look at the answers
carefully; then make a cross in the square before the _best_ answer to
each question, as in the sample:
“‘Why do we use stoves? Because
☐ they look well
☒ they keep us warm
☐ they are black
“‘Here the second answer is the best one and is marked with a cross.
“‘Begin with No. 1 and keep on until time is called.’—Ready—Go!” After
1½ minutes, say “Stop! Turn over the page to Test 4.”
=TEST 3=
This is a test of common sense. Below are sixteen questions. Three
answers are given to each question. You are to look at the answers
carefully; then make a cross in the square before the best answer to
each question, as in the sample:
SAMPLE Why do we use stoves? Because
☐ they look well
☒ they keep us warm
☐ they are black
Here the second answer is the best one and is marked with a cross. Begin
with No. 1 and keep on until time is called.
1 It is wiser to put some money aside and not spend it all, so that
you may
☐ prepare for old age or sickness
☐ collect all the different kinds of money
☐ gamble when you wish
2 Shoes are made of leather, because
☐ it is tanned
☐ it is tough, pliable and warm
☐ it can be blackened
3 Why do soldiers wear wrist watches rather than pocket watches?
Because
☐ they keep better time
☐ they are harder to break
☐ they are handier
4 The main reason why stone is used for building purposes is because
☐ it makes a good appearance
☐ it is strong and lasting
☐ it is heavy
5 Why is beef better food than cabbage? Because
☐ it tastes better
☐ it is more nourishing
☐ it is harder to obtain
6 If some one does you a favor, what should you do?
☐ try to forget it
☐ steal for him if he asks you to
☐ return the favor
7 If you do not get a letter from home which you know was written, it
may be because
☐ it was lost in the mails
☐ you forgot to tell your people to write
☐ the postal service has been discontinued
8 The main thing the farmers do is to
☐ supply luxuries
☐ make work for the unemployed
☐ feed the nation
9 If a man who can’t swim should fall into a river, he should
☐ yell for help and try to scramble out
☐ dive to the bottom and crawl out
☐ lie on his back and float
10 Glass insulators are used to fasten telegraph wires because
☐ the glass keeps the pole from being burned
☐ the glass keeps the current from escaping
☐ the glass is cheap and attractive
11 If your load of coal gets stuck in the mud, what should you do?
☐ leave it there
☐ get more horses or men to pull it out
☐ throw off the load
12 Why are criminals locked up?
☐ to protect society
☐ to get even with them
☐ to make them work
13 Why should a married man have his life insured? Because
☐ death may come at any time
☐ insurance companies are usually honest
☐ his family will not then suffer if he dies
14 In Leap Year February has 29 days because
☐ February is a short month
☐ some people are born on February 29th
☐ otherwise the calendar would not come out right
15 If you are held up and robbed in a strange city, you should
☐ apply to the police for help
☐ ask the first man you meet for money to get home
☐ borrow some money at a bank
16 Why should we have Congressmen? Because
☐ the people must be ruled
☐ it insures truly representative government
☐ the people are too many to meet and make their laws
_Instructions for Giving Alpha Test 4._
TEST 4.—SYNONYM—ANTONYM
“Attention! Look at the directions at the top of the page while I read
them.” (Examiner.—Read slowly.)
“‘If the two words of a pair mean the same or nearly the same draw a
line under “same.” If they mean the opposite or nearly the opposite,
draw a line under “opposite.” If you cannot be sure, guess. The two
samples are already marked as they should be.’—Ready—Go!”
After 1½ minutes, say “Stop! Turn over the page to Test 5.” (Pause.)
“Now you have to turn your books around this way.” (Examiner illustrates
the necessary rotation.)
=TEST 4=
If the two words of a pair mean the same or nearly the same, draw a line
under _same_. If they mean the opposite or nearly the opposite, draw a
line under _opposite_. If you cannot be sure, guess. The two samples are
already marked as they should be
SAMPLES good—bad same—opposite
little—small same—opposite
1 no—yes same—opposite 1
2 day—night same—opposite 2
3 go—leave same—opposite 3
4 begin—commence same—opposite 4
5 bitter—sweet same—opposite 5
6 assume—suppose same—opposite 6
7 command—obey same—opposite 7
8 tease—plague same—opposite 8
9 diligent—industrious same—opposite 9
10 corrupt—honest same—opposite 10
11 toward—from same—opposite 11
12 masculine—feminine same—opposite 12
13 complex—simple same—opposite 13
14 sacred—hallowed same—opposite 14
15 often—seldom same—opposite 15
16 ancient—modern same—opposite 16
17 enormous—gigantic same—opposite 17
18 confer—grant same—opposite 18
19 acquire—lose same—opposite 19
20 compute—calculate same—opposite 20
21 defile—purify same—opposite 21
22 apprehensive—fearful same—opposite 22
23 sterile—fertile same—opposite 23
24 chasm—abyss same—opposite 24
25 somber—gloomy same—opposite 25
26 vestige—trace same—opposite 26
27 vilify—praise same—opposite 27
28 finite—limited same—opposite 28
29 contradict—corroborate same—opposite 29
30 immune—susceptible same—opposite 30
31 credit—debit same—opposite 31
32 assiduous—diligent same—opposite 32
33 transient—permanent same—opposite 33
34 palliate—mitigate same—opposite 34
35 execrate—revile same—opposite 35
36 extinct—extant same—opposite 36
37 pertinent—relevant same—opposite 37
38 synchronous—simultaneous same—opposite 38
39 supercilious—disdainful same—opposite 39
40 abstruse—recondite same—opposite 40
_Instructions for Giving Alpha Test 5._
TEST 5.—DISARRANGED SENTENCES
“Attention! Look at the directions at the top of the page while I read
them.” (Examiner.—Read slowly.)
“The words _a eats cow grass_ in that order are mixed up and don’t make
a sentence; but they would make a sentence if put in the right order: _a
cow eats grass_, and this statement is true.
“Again, the words _horses feathers have all_ would make a sentence if
put in the order _all horses have feathers_, but this statement is
false.
“Below are 24 mixed-up sentences. Some of them are true and some are
false. When I say ‘go,’ take these sentences one at a time. Think what
each _would_ say if the words were straightened out, but don’t write
them yourself. Then, if what it would say is true draw a line under the
word ‘true’; if what it would say is false, draw a line under the word
‘false.’ If you cannot be sure, guess. The two samples are already
marked as they should be. Begin with No. 1 and work right down the page
until time is called. ‘Ready—Go!’”
After 2 minutes, say “Stop! Turn over the page to Test 6.”
=TEST 5=
The words A EATS COW GRASS in that order are mixed up and don’t make a
sentence; but they would make a sentence if put in the right order: A
COW EATS GRASS, and this statement is true.
Again, the words HORSES FEATHERS HAVE ALL would make a sentence if put
in the order: ALL HORSES HAVE FEATHERS, but this statement is false.
Below are twenty-four mixed-up sentences. Some of them are true and some
are false. When I say “go,” take these sentences one at a time. Think
what each would say if the words were straightened out, but don’t write
them yourself. Then, if what it would say is true, draw a line under the
word “true”; if what it would say is false, draw a line under the word
“false.” If you can not be sure, guess. The two samples are already
marked as they should be. Begin with No. 1 and work right down the page
until time is called.
SAMPLES a eats cow grass true false
horses feathers have all true false
1 oranges yellow are true false 1
2 hear are with to ears true false 2
3 noise cannon never make a true false 3
4 trees in nests build birds true false 4
5 oil water not and will mix true false 5
6 bad are shots soldiers all true false 6
7 fuel wood are coal and for used true false 7
8 moon earth the only from feet twenty the is true false 8
9 to life water is necessary true false 9
10 are clothes all made cotton of true false 10
11 horses automobile an are than slower true false 11
12 tropics is in the produced rubber true false 12
13 leaves the trees in lose their fall true false 13
14 place pole is north comfortable a the true false 14
15 sand of made bread powder and is true false 15
16 sails is steamboat usually by propelled a true false 16
17 is the salty in water all lakes true false 17
18 usually judge can we actions man his by a true false 18
19 men misfortune have good never true false 19
20 tools valuable is for sharp making steel true false 20
21 due sometimes calamities are accident to true false 21
22 forget trifling friends grievances never true false 22
23 feeling is of painful exaltation the true false 23
24 begin a and apple acorn ant words with the true false 24
_Instructions for Giving Alpha Test 6._
TEST 6.—NUMBER SERIES COMPLETION
(N. B. _Examiner._—Give these instructions very slowly).
“Attention! Look at the first sample row of figures at the top of the
page—2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 12, the two numbers that should come next are, of
course, 14, 16.
“Look at the second sample—9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4; the two numbers that should
come next are 3, 2.
“Look at the third sample—2, 2, 3, 3, 4, 4; the two numbers that should
come next are 5, 5.
“Now look at the fourth sample—1, 7, 2, 7, 3, 7; the next two numbers
would, of course, be 4, 7.
“Look at each row of numbers below and on the two dotted lines write the
two numbers that should come next.—Ready—Go!”
After 3 minutes, say “Stop! Turn over the page to Test 7.”
=TEST 6=
SAMPLES 2 4 6 8 10 12 _14_ _16_
9 8 7 6 5 4 _3_ _2_
2 2 3 3 4 4 _5_ _5_
1 7 2 7 3 7 _4_ _7_
Look at each row of numbers below, and on the two dotted lines write the
two numbers that should come next.
3 4 5 6 7 8 ..... .....
8 7 6 5 4 3 ..... .....
10 15 20 25 30 35 ..... .....
9 9 7 7 5 5 ..... .....
3 6 9 12 15 18 ..... .....
8 1 6 1 4 1 ..... .....
5 9 13 17 21 25 ..... .....
8 9 12 13 16 17 ..... .....
27 27 23 23 19 19 ..... .....
1 2 4 8 16 32 ..... .....
19 16 14 11 9 6 ..... .....
11 13 12 14 13 15 ..... .....
2 3 5 8 12 17 ..... .....
18 14 17 13 16 12 ..... .....
29 28 26 23 19 14 ..... .....
20 17 15 14 11 9 ..... .....
81 27 9 3 1 ⅓ ..... .....
1 4 9 16 25 36 ..... .....
16 17 15 18 14 19 ..... .....
3 6 8 16 18 36 ..... .....
_Instructions for Giving Alpha Test 7._
TEST 7.—ANALOGIES
“Attention! Look at the first sample at the top of the page: Sky—blue ∷
grass—table, _green_, warm, big.
“Notice the four words in heavy type. One of them—_green_—is underlined.
Grass is _green_ just as the sky is blue.
“Look at the second sample: Fish—swims ∷ man—paper, time, _walks_, girl.
“Here the word _walks_ is underlined. A man walks and a fish swims.
“Look at the third sample: Day—night ∷ white—red, _black_, clear, pure.
“Here the word _black_ is underlined because black is the opposite of
white just as night is the opposite of day.
“In each of the lines below the first two words are related to each
other in some way. What you are to do in each line is to see what the
relation is between the first two words and underline the word in heavy
type that is related in the same way to the third word. Begin with No. 1
and mark as many sets as you can before time is called.—Ready—Go!”
After 3 minutes, say “Stop! Turn over the page to Test 8.”
=TEST 7=
SAMPLES sky—blue ∷ grass— table _green_ warm big
fish—swims ∷ man— paper time _walks_ girl
day—night ∷ white— red _black_ clear pure
In each of the lines below, the first two words are related to each
other in some way. What you are to do in each line is to see what the
relation is between the first two words, and underline the word in heavy
type that is related in the same way to the third word. Begin with No. 1
and mark as many sets as you can before time is called.
1 shoe—foot ∷ hat— =kitten head knife penny= 1
2 pup—dog ∷ lamb— =red door sheep book= 2
3 spring—summer ∷ autumn— =winter warm harvest rise= 3
4 devil—angel ∷ bad— =mean disobedient defamed good= 4
5 finger—hand ∷ toe— =body foot skin nail= 5
6 legs—frog ∷ wings— =eat swim bird nest= 6
7 chew—teeth ∷ smell— =sweet stink odor nose= 7
8 lion—roar ∷ dog— =drive pony bark harness= 8
9 cat—tiger ∷ dog— =wolf bark bite snap= 9
10 good—bad ∷ long— =tall big snake short= 10
11 giant—large ∷ dwarf— =jungle small beard ugly= 11
12 winter—season ∷ January— =February day month Christmas= 12
13 skating—winter ∷ swimming— =diving floating hole summer= 13
14 blonde—light ∷ brunette— =dark hair brilliant blonde= 14
15 love—friend ∷ hate— =malice saint enemy dislike= 15
10 egg—bird ∷ seed— =grow plant crack germinate= 16
17 dig—trench ∷ build— =run house spade bullet= 17
18 agree—quarrel ∷ friend— =comrade need mother enemy= 18
19 palace—king ∷ hut— =peasant cottage farm city= 19
20 cloud-burst—shower ∷ cyclone— =bath breeze destroy West= 20
21 Washington—Adams ∷ first— =president second last Bryan= 21
22 parents—command ∷ children— =men shall women obey= 22
23 diamond—rare ∷ iron— =common silver ore steel= 23
24 yes—affirmative ∷ no— =think knowledge yes negative= 24
25 hour—day ∷ day— =night week hour noon= 25
26 eye—head ∷ window— =key floor room door= 26
27 clothes—man ∷ hair— =horse comb beard hat= 27
28 draw—picture ∷ make— =destroy table break hard= 28
29 automobile—wagon ∷ motorcycle— =ride speed bicycle car= 29
30 granary—wheat ∷ library— =read books paper chairs= 30
31 Caucasian—English ∷ Mongolian— =Chinese Indian negro yellow= 31
32 Indiana—United States ∷ part— =hair China Ohio whole= 32
33 esteem—despise ∷ friends— =Quakers enemies lovers men= 33
34 abide—stay ∷ depart— =come hence leave late= 34
35 abundant—scarce ∷ cheap— =buy costly bargain nasty= 35
36 whale—large ∷ thunder— =loud rain lightning kill= 36
37 reward—hero ∷ punish— =God everlasting pain traitor= 37
38 music—soothing ∷ noise— =hear distracting sound report= 38
39 book—writer ∷ statue— =sculptor liberty picture state= 39
40 wound—pain ∷ health— =sickness disease exhilaration doctor= 40
_Instructions for Giving Alpha Test 8._
TEST 8.—INFORMATION
“Attention! Look at the directions at the top of the page while I read
them.” (Examiner.—Read slowly.)
“Notice the sample sentences: People hear with the—eyes—ears—nose—mouth.
The correct word is _ears_, because it makes the truest sentence. In
each sentences below you have four choices for the last word. Only one
of them is correct. In each sentence draw a line under the one of these
four words which makes the truest sentence. If you cannot be sure,
guess. The two samples are already marked as they should be—Ready—Go!”
After 4 minutes, say “Stop! Turn over the page to Test 1 again. In the
upper right-hand corner, where it says ‘Group No. —,’ put the number
101” (or 102, 103, etc., according to the number of this group in the
examiner’s series of groups).
=TEST 8=
Notice the sample sentence:
People hear with the eyes ears nose mouth
The correct word is ears, because it makes the truest sentence.
In each of the sentences below you have four choices for the last word.
Only one of them is correct. In each sentence draw a line under the one
of these four words which makes the truest sentence. If you can not be
sure, guess. The two samples are already marked as they should be.
SAMPLES People hear with the eyes ears nose mouth
France is in Europe Asia Africa Australia
1 The apple grows on a shrub vine bush tree 1
2 Five hundred is played with rackets pins cards dice 2
3 The Percheron is a kind of goat horse cow sheep 3
4 The most prominent industry of Gloucester is fishing
packing brewing automobiles 4
5 Sapphires are usually blue red green yellow 5
6 The Rhode Island Red is a kind of horse granite cattle
fowl 6
7 Christie Mathewson is famous as a writer artist baseball
player comedian 7
8 Revolvers are made by Swift & Co. Smith & Wesson W. L.
Douglas B. T. Babbitt 8
9 Carrie Nation is known as a singer temperance agitator
suffragist nurse 9
10 “There’s a reason” is an “ad” for a drink revolver flour
cleanser 10
11 Artichoke is a kind of hay corn vegetable fodder 11
12 Chard is a fish lizard vegetable snake. 12
13 Cornell University is at Ithaca Cambridge Annapolis New
Haven 13
14 Buenos Ayres is a city of Spain Brazil Portugal Argentina 14
15 Ivory is obtained from elephants mines oysters reefs 15
16 Alfred Noyes is famous as a painter poet musician sculptor 16
17 The armadillo is a kind of ornamental shrub animal musical
instrument dagger 17
18 The tendon of Achilles is in the heel head shoulder
abdomen 18
19 Crisco is a patent medicine disinfectant tooth-paste food
product 19
20 An aspen is a machine fabric tree drink 20
21 The sabre is a kind of musket sword cannon pistol 21
22 The mimeograph is a kind of typewriter copying machine
phonograph pencil 22
23 Maroon is a food fabric drink colour 23
24 The clarionet is used in music stenography book-binding
lithography 24
25 Denim is a dance food fabric drink 25
26 The author of “Huckleberry Finn” is Poe Mark Twain
Stevenson Hawthorne 26
27 Faraday was most famous in literature war religion science 27
28 Air and gasolene are mixed in the accelerator carburetor
gear case differential 28
29 The Brooklyn Nationals are called the Giants Orioles
Superbas Indians 29
30 Pasteur is most famous in politics literature war science 30
31 Becky Sharp appears in Vanity Fair Romola The Christmas
Carol Henry IV 31
32 The number of a Kaffir’s legs is two four six eight 32
33 Habeas corpus is a term used in medicine law theology
pedagogy 33
34 Ensilage is a term used in fishing athletics farming
hunting 34
35 The forward pass is used in tennis hockey football golf 35
36 General Lee surrendered at Appomattox in 1812 1865 1886
1832 36
37 The watt is used in measuring wind power rainfall water
power electricity 37
38 The Pierce Arrow car is made in Buffalo Detroit Toledo
Flint 38
39 Napoleon defeated the Austrians at Friedland Wagram
Waterloo Leipzig 39
40 An irregular four-sided figure is called a scholium
triangle trapezium pentagon 40
_Directions for Scoring in Alpha Test._
GENERAL RULES
1. Each item is scored either right or wrong. No part credits are given.
2. In general, items evidently corrected stand as corrected.
3. In tests where the score is “Number Right,” only wrong items need be
checked in scoring. In Tests 4 and 5, where the score is “Right minus
Wrong,” wrong and omitted items must be separately checked.
4. Indicate the last item attempted by drawing a long line under that
item and out into the margin.
5. Enter the score for each test in lower right-hand corner of the test
page and encircle it. When the test has been rescored, a check mark may
be made beside the circle.
6. Red or blue pencil increases accuracy of scoring.
TEST 1.
(Score is number right.)
1. No credit is given for any item in which _more_ is done than the
instructions require.
2. In an item where something is to be written “_in_” a given space,
give credit if a mark crosses a line from haste or awkwardness: give no
credit if the position is really ambiguous.
3. Where something is to be underlined or crossed out, give credit if
two or three underlinings are made in the required place, and give
credit for any method of crossing out.
4. _Item 2._—The pencil line must begin and end either on the
circumference or within the circles indicated. It may touch the
intermediate circles, but must not cut through them.
5. _Item 6._—In the circle marked “not 12” there must be some number
which is not 12, such as 5, 0, 27.
6. _Item 9._—The proper numbers must be crossed out to receive credit.
7. _Item 10._—In Form 5, “2” alone and “3” alone, but not “2 or 3,” in
each of the two largest parts; “5” alone and “6” alone, but not “5 or
6,” in the next to the smallest part, are correct. Similarly for other
forms.
8. _Item 11._—The lines must cross, or at least touch, the proper
numbers; they may or may not cut the accompanying letters. Mere
indication of the square, triangle, etc., is not sufficient.
9. _Item 12._—Underlining in place of crossing out is wrong.
TEST 2.
(Score is number right.)
1. Answer may be written on dotted line or elsewhere near its problem.
2. If two answers are given to any problem count as wrong.
3. If it seems clear that, by a slip, one answer has been put in the
wrong bracket, and the next answers are all thus misplaced, give credit
for the answers that are right even if misplaced.
4. Omission of dollar sign is permissible.
5. Omission of decimal point is permissible in items, 2, 9, 13, and 14.
Fraction may be expressed as decimal in item 15.
TEST 3.
(Score is number right.)
1. Any clear method of indicating answer is given full
credit—underlining, checking, etc.
2. If two answers are marked, count as wrong unless one is clearly
indicated as final.
TEST 4.
(Score is number right minus number wrong.)
1. Any clear method of indicating answer is given credit.
2. When both “Same” and “Opposite” are underlined, counts as _omitted_,
not as wrong.
3. If only “Same” is underlined right down the column, score for the
test is zero. Similarly if “Opposite” is underlined right down the
column.
TEST 5.
(Score is number right minus number wrong.)
Same rules as for Test 4.
TEST 6.
(Score is number right.)
1. If only one number is written, give no credit.
2. If only one of the numbers is right, give no credit.
3. If four numbers are written, as frequently happens with certain items
(i. e., 33, 11 instead of 3, 3), give full credit.
TEST 7
(Score is number right.)
1. Any clear indication other than underlining receives full credit.
2. Underlining of any of the first three words of an item does not
remove credit.
3. If two or more of the last four words are marked, give no credit.
TEST 8.
(Score is number right.)
Same rules as for Test 7.
TOTAL SCORE AND RATING
The result of examination Alpha is expressed in a total score which is
the sum of the raw scores of the several tests. The raw scores are
obtained as follows:
═════════════════════════════════════════
TEST METHOD OF SCORING MAXIMUM RAW SCORE
─────────────────────────────────────────
1 R 12
2 R 20
3 R 16
4 R − W 40
5 R − W 24
6 R 20
7 R 40
8 R 40
———
Total 212
─────────────────────────────────────────
Letter ratings are assigned on examination Alpha as follows:
══════════════
RATING SCORE
──────────────
A 135–212
B 105–134
C+ 75–104
C 45–74
C− 25–44
D 15–24
D−[5] 0–14
──────────────
Footnote 5:
Recalled for further examination.
All ratings above “D−” are entered and reported at once. Men whose
scores are below “D” are recalled for examination Beta. Ratings of “D−”
may not be given in Alpha, unless recall of the men for Beta is
impossible.
_Method of Giving the Army Beta Tests._
In practice the Beta tests, reproduced in facsimile on pages 313 to 322
following, are given with the assistance of a blackboard chart on which
the different tests are painted in white, so that the examiner can show
them to the entire group before they see them on their examination
papers. There are also required for giving the Beta tests a set of
cardboard cubes for the examiner’s use in explaining Test 2, and a set
of cardboard pieces cut to the shapes of the figures in Test 7, though
of much larger size. The assistance of a demonstrator is also required.
_Procedure._
It is most important that examination Beta be given in a genial manner.
The subjects who take this examination sometimes sulk and refuse to
work. E. and his assistants will find it necessary to fill out most of
the headings for the men before the examination begins. The time
required for this preparatory work may be used to advantage in making
the men feel at ease. As the demonstration preparatory to each test
requires some time, the “pencils up” command is omitted in examination
Beta. The examiner’s platform should be so high that he can readily see
whether or not the subjects are working. Great care should be taken to
prevent the overanxious from beginning work before the command “Go.”
Seating conditions should be such that subjects cannot copy from one
another and the rule that copying shall not be allowed should be
enforced strictly. The blackboard should at all times be kept clean so
that the visual conditions may be excellent and constant. The blackboard
figures for Test 1 should be exposed when the subjects enter the
examining room. _As soon as a test has been demonstrated and the men
have been told to go ahead, the blackboard should be covered and kept
covered until time is called._ It should not be turned to the next test
until the men have been ordered to stop work on a given test. Care
should be taken to have the physical conditions of examination
reasonably uniform.
With the exception of the brief introductory statements and a few
orders, instructions are to be given throughout by means of gestures
instead of words. These gestures accompany the samples and
demonstrations and should be animated and emphatic.
It is absolutely necessary that directions be followed closely and
procedure kept uniform and definite. Variations of procedure are more
likely to occur in Beta than in Alpha, and there is serious risk that if
allowed they will lessen the value of results. E. should especially
guard against using more or fewer gestures or words for one group than
for another. Oral languages should be rigidly limited to the words and
phrases given in the procedure for the different tests.
Whether the men get the idea of the test and enter into it with the
proper spirit will depend chiefly on the skill with which the examiner,
the demonstrator, and the orderlies carry out their respective parts.
Examiner and demonstrator especially should be selected with the
greatest care. An examiner who succeeds admirably in giving Alpha may
prove to be entirely unadapted for Beta. Both examiner and demonstrator
must be adept in the use of gesture language. In the selection of a
demonstrator the Personnel Office should be consulted. One camp has had
great success with a “window seller” as demonstrator. Actors should also
be considered for the work. The orderlies should be able to keep the
subjects at work without antagonizing them and to keep them encouraged
without actually helping them.
_The demonstrator should have the single task of doing before the group
just what the group is later to do with the examination blanks._ The
blackboard is his Beta blank. Before examination Beta can be given
satisfactorily the demonstrator must be letter perfect in his part. Both
E. and demonstrator must be very careful to stand at the side of the
blackboard in order not to hide the drawings.
As soon as the men of a group have been properly seated, pencils should
be distributed and also examination blanks with Test 8 up. While this is
being done E. should say “Here are some papers. You must not open them
or turn them over until you are told to.” Holding up Beta blank, E.
continues:
“In the place where it says name, write your name; print it if you can.
(Pause.) Fill out the rest of the blank about your age, schooling, etc.,
as well as you can. If you have any trouble we will help you.” The
instructions given under segregation may be used for filling out the
Beta blank. E. should announce the group number and see that it as well
as the other necessary information is supplied. Before the examination
proceeds each paper should be inspected in order to make sure that it is
satisfactorily completed.
After the initial information has been obtained, E. makes the following
introductory remarks:
“_Attention!_ Watch _this_ man (pointing to demonstrator). _He_
(pointing to demonstrator again) is going to do _here_ (tapping
blackboard with pointer) what _you_ (pointing to different members of
group) are to do on your _papers_ (here E. points to several papers that
lie before men in the group, picks up one, holds it next to the
blackboard, returns the paper, points to demonstrator and the blackboard
in succession, then to the men and their papers). Ask _no questions.
Wait_ till I say ‘Go ahead!’”
In general, when instructing the group to turn from test to test, E.
holds up a Beta blank before group and follows his own instructions as
he gives them. As soon as he has turned to desired test or page he says,
“This is test X _here_; look!” (Pointing to the page.)
To suggest to the group the necessity of working rapidly the
demonstrator, after proceeding very deliberately with the early samples
of each test, hurries as soon as he has worked out the last sample
problem.
(1) to record his response as fast as he can,
(2) then to catch E.’s eyes for approval and
(3) finally, to slip away from blackboard, drawing curtain as he does
so.
After the personal data called for on page 1 of blank have been gathered
and recorded, the orderlies’ vocabulary in Beta is rigidly restricted to
the following words, or their literal equivalents in Italian, Russian,
etc.: _Yes_, _No_, _Sure_, _Good_, _Quick_, _How many?_ _Same_, _Fix
it_. Under no circumstances may substitutional explanations or
directions be given.
TEST 1—MAZE
“Now turn your papers over. This is Test 1 _here_ (pointing to page of
record blank). Look.” After all have found the page, E. continues,
“Don’t make any marks till I say ‘Go ahead.’ Now _watch_.” After
touching both arrows E. traces through first maze with pointer and then
motions the demonstrator to go ahead. Demonstrator traces path through
first maze _with crayon_, slowly and hesitatingly. E. then traces second
maze and motions to demonstrator to go ahead. Demonstrator makes one
mistake by going into the blind alley at upper left-hand corner of maze.
E. apparently does not notice what demonstrator is doing until he
crosses line at end of alley; then E. shakes his head vigorously, says
“No—no,” takes demonstrator’s hand and traces back to the place where he
may start right again. Demonstrator traces rest of maze so as to
indicate an attempt at haste, hesitating only at ambiguous points. E.
says “Good.” Then, holding up blank, “Look here,” and draws an imaginary
line across the page from left to right for every maze on the page.
Then, “All right. Go ahead. Do it (pointing to men and then to books).
Hurry up.” The idea of working fast must be impressed on the men during
the maze test. E. and orderlies walk around the room, motioning to men
who are not working, and saying, “Do it, do it, hurry up, quick.”
At the end of 2 minutes E. says, “Stop! Turn over the page to Test 2.”
[Illustration: Test 1]
TEST 2—CUBE ANALYSIS
“This is Test 2 _here_. Look.” After everyone has found the page—“Now
watch.” The order of procedure is as follows:
(1) E. points to the three-cube model on the blackboard, making a rotary
movement of the pointer to embrace the entire picture.
(2) With similar motions he points to the three-cube model on shelf.
(3) E. points next to picture on blackboard and asks, “How many?”
(4) E. turns to cube model and counts aloud, putting up his fingers
while so doing, and encouraging the men to count with him.
(5) E. taps each cube on the blackboard and motions to demonstrator,
asking him “How many?”
[Illustration: Test 2]
(6) Demonstrator (pointing) counts cubes on blackboard silently and
writes the figure 3 in proper place.
In the second sample of this test, when E. counts cubes of model he
(1) counts the three exposed cubes;
(2) touches the unexposed cube with pointer; and
(3) without removing pointer turns model, so that hidden cube comes into
view of group. In other respects procedure with second and third samples
is the same as with first.
In counting the 12–cube model, E. (1) counts the top row of cubes in the
model (left to right), (2) counts the exposed bottom row (right to
left), (3) taps with pointer the end cube of hidden row, (4) turns the
entire model around and completes his counting. E. then holds model in
same place as drawing and counts (in the same order as above) the cubes
on blackboard, counting lines between front and top row as representing
the hidden row. He then asks demonstrator “How many?” Demonstrator
counts the cubes on blackboard (pointing but not speaking) and writes
the response.
Throughout the demonstration the counting is done deliberately, not more
rapidly than one cube per second.
At end of demonstration E. points to page and says, “All right. Go
ahead.” At the end of 2½ minutes he says, “Stop! Look at me and don’t
turn the page.”
TEST 3—X-O SERIES
“This is Test 3 _here_. Look.” After everyone has found the page—“Now
watch.” E. first points to the blank rectangles at the end, then traces
each “O” in chart, then traces outline of “O’s” in remaining spaces.
Demonstrator, at a gesture, draws them in. E. then traces first “X” in
next sample, moves to next “X” by tracing the arc of an imaginary
semicircle joining the two, and in the same manner traces each “X,”
moving over an arc to the next. He then traces outlines of “X’s” in the
proper blank spaces, moving over the imaginary arc in each case, and
motions to demonstrator to draw them in. Demonstrator, at a gesture,
fills in remaining problems very slowly, standing well to the right of
the blackboard and writing with his left hand. E. points to page and
says, “All right! Go ahead. Hurry up!” At end of 1¾ minutes he says,
“Stop! Turn over the page to Test 4.”
[Illustration: Test 3]
TEST 4—DIGIT—SYMBOL
“This is Test 4 _here_. Look.” After everyone has found the page—“Now
watch.” E. points to first digit of key on blackboard and then points to
the symbol under it. Same for all nine digits in key. E. then (1) points
to first digit of sample, (2) to the empty space below digit, (3) points
to corresponding digit of key, (4) points to proper symbol under digit
in key, and (5) traces the outline of the proper symbol in the blank
space under the digit in the sample. Same for first five samples.
Demonstrator, at a gesture, fills in all the samples, working as
follows: (1) Touches the number in first sample with index finger of
right hand; (2) holding finger there, finds with index finger of left
hand the corresponding number in key; (3) drops index finger of left
hand to symbol for number found; (4) holding left hand in this position
writes appropriate symbol in the lower half of sample.
[Illustration: Test 4]
Similarly with the other samples. While working, demonstrator should
stand as far as possible to the left, doing all the samples from this
side.
At the end of demonstration E. says, “Look here” and points to key on
page, repeating the gestures used in pointing on the blackboard at the
beginning of the demonstration. Then, “All right. Go ahead. Hurry up!”
Orderlies point out key to men who are at a loss to find it. At the end
of 2 minutes, E. says: “Stop! But don’t turn the page.”
TEST 5—NUMBER CHECKING
“This is Test 5 _here_.” After everyone has found the page, “Now watch.”
In this demonstration E. must try to get “Yes” or “No” responses from
the group. If the wrong response is volunteered by group, E. points to
digits again and gives right response, “Yes” or “No” as the case may be.
E. points to first digit of first number in left column, then to first
digit first number in right column, then to second digit first number in
left column and second digit first number in right column; nods head,
says “Yes” and makes an imaginary cross at end of number in right
column. Motions to demonstrator, who makes an “X” there. E. does the
same for second line of figures, but here he indicates clearly by
shaking head and saying “no” that certain digits are not identical. E.
repeats for three more sets and after each, looks at group, says “Yes?”
in questioning tone and waits for them to say “Yes” or “No.” He repeats
correct reply with satisfaction. Demonstrator checks each after group
has responded, or at signal from E. if group does not respond.
Demonstrator then works out remaining items, pointing from column to
column and working deliberately. E. summarizes demonstrator’s work by
pointing to the whole numbers in each set and saying “Yes” (indicating
X) or “No”; if “No,” he shows again where the numbers are unlike. E.
then points to page and says “All right. Go ahead. Hurry up!” At the end
of 3 minutes E. says “Stop! Turn over the page to Test 6.”
=Test 5=
650 650
041 044
2579 2579
3281 3281
55190 55102
39190 39190
658049 650849
3295017 3290517
63015991 63019991
39007106 39007106
69931087 69931087
251004818 251004418
299056013 299056013
36015992 360155992
3910066482 391006482
8510273301 8510273301
263136996 263136996
451152903 451152903
3259016275 3295016725
582039144 582039144
61558529 61588529
211915883 219915883
670413822 670143822
17198591 17198591
10243586 10243586
659012534 659021354
388172902 381872902
631027594 631027594
2499901354 2499901534
2261059310 2261659310
2911038227 2911038227
313377752 313377752
1012938567 1012938567
7166220988 7162220988
3177628449 3177682449
468672663 468672663
9104529003 9194529003
348465120 3484657210
8588172556 8581722556
3120166671 3120166671
7611348879 76111345879
26557239164 26557239164
8819002341 8819002341
6571018034 6571018034
38779762514 38779765214
39008126557 39008126657
75658100398 75658100398
41181900726 41181900726
6543920817 6543920871
6543920817 6543920871
TEST 6—PICTORIAL COMPLETION
“This is Test 6 _here_. Look. A lot of pictures.” After everyone has
found the page, “Now watch.” E. points to hand and says to demonstrator:
“Fix it.” Demonstrator does nothing, but looks puzzled. E. points to the
picture of the hand, then to the place where finger is missing and says
to demonstrator: “Fix it. Fix it.” Demonstrator then draws in finger. E.
says, “That’s right.” E. then points to fish and place for eye and says,
“Fix it.” After demonstrator has drawn missing eye, E. points to each of
the four remaining drawings and says, “Fix them all.” Demonstrator works
samples out slowly and with apparent effort. When the samples are
finished E. says, “All right. Go ahead. Hurry up!” During the course of
this test the orderlies walk around the room and locate individuals who
are doing nothing, point to their pages, and say “Fix it. Fix them,”
trying to set everyone working. At end of 3 minutes E. says, “Stop! But
don’t turn over the page.”
[Illustration: Test 6]
TEST 7—GEOMETRICAL CONSTRUCTION
“This is Test 7 _here_. Look.” After everyone has found the page, “Now
watch.” Examiner points to the first figure on blackboard. He then takes
the two pieces of cardboard, fits them on to the similar drawings on
blackboard to show that they correspond and puts them together in the
square on blackboard to show that they fill it. Then, after running his
finger over the line of intersection of the parts, E. removes the pieces
and signals demonstrator, who draws solution in the square on
blackboard. The same procedure is repeated for the second and third
sample. Demonstrator works out fourth sample, after much study, pointing
from the square to the forms.
Demonstrator first draws the two small squares in the upper half of the
large square, then the two triangles in the remaining rectangle. Each
small figure is drawn in by tracing its entire circumference, not merely
the necessary dividing lines. While drawing each small figure in the
large square, demonstrator points with index finger of left hand to the
corresponding small figure at left of square, taking care not to
obstruct the view. At end of demonstration E. holds up blank, points to
each square on the page and says, “All right. Go ahead. Hurry up!” At
end of 2½ minutes, “Stop! Turn over the page.” Papers are then collected
immediately.
_Scoring the Beta Tests._
GENERAL RULES
1. In general, items evidently corrected stand as corrected. The only
exception to this rule is in the maze test.
2. In tests where the score is number right, only wrong items need be
checked in scoring. In Test 5, where the score is right minus wrong,
wrong and omitted items must be separately checked.
3. Enter the score for each test in lower right-hand corner of the test
page and encircle it. When the test has been rescored a check may be
made beside the circle.
[Illustration: Test 7]
4. Red or blue pencil increases accuracy of scoring.
TEST 1.
1. One half point for each correctly completed half of maze. A half maze
is correct if drawn line does not cross any line of maze (except through
awkwardness) nor an imaginary straight line across the opening of a
wrong passage.
2. Allow much leeway in the cutting of corners.
3. Spur running into any blind passage counts wrong for that half-item,
even though erased.
4. When two lines are drawn, one straight across the page, the other
correct, full credit is given.
TEST 2.
Score is number right.
TEST 3.
1. Score is number right.
2. Any incomplete item receives no credit.
3. Count any item correct if intended plan is carried out. Disregard
additional unnecessary marks, such as circles between the crosses of
items 2 and 4 in first part of line, etc.
TEST 4.
1. Score is one third of number of correct symbols.
2. Use leniency in judging form of symbol.
3. Credit symbol for 2 even though reversed.
TEST 5.
1. Score is right minus wrong (number of items checked that should be
checked minus number of items checked that should not be checked).
2. If other clear indication is used instead of crosses, give credit.
3. If numbers which should not be checked are marked by some other sign
than is used to check similar pairs, count as though not marked.
4. If all items are checked, the score for the test is zero.
TEST 6.
1. Score is number right.
2. Allow much awkwardness in drawing. Writing in name of missing part or
any way of indicating it receives credit, if idea is clear.
3. Additional parts do not make item wrong, if proper missing part is
also inserted.
4. Rules for individual items:
_Item 4._—Any spoon at any angle _in right hand_ receives credit. Left
hand, or unattached spoon, no credit.
_Item 5._—Chimney must be in right place. No credit for smoke.
_Item 6._—Another ear on same side as first receives no credit.
_Item 8._—Plain square, cross, etc., in proper location for stamp,
receives credit.
_Item 10._—Missing part is the rivet. Line of “ear” may be omitted.
_Item 13._—Missing part is leg.
_Item 15._—Ball should be drawn in hand of man. If represented in hand
of woman, or in motion, no credit.
_Item 16._—Single line indicating net receives credit.
_Item 18._—Any representation intended for horn, pointing in any
direction, receives credit.
_Item 19._—Hand and powder puff must be put on proper side.
_Item 20._—Diamond is the missing part. Failure to complete hilt on
sword is not an error.
TEST 7.
1. Score is number right.
2. Allow considerable awkwardness in drawing.
3. Extra subdivisions, if not erased, make item wrong.
4. Rules for individual items:
_Item 1._—Line of division may be slightly distant from true centre, and
need not be straight.
_Item 3._—Lines of semi-circumference must start from or near corners of
square.
_Item 4._—Line must not start from corner.
4. TOTAL SCORE AND RATING
The result of examination Beta is expressed as a “total score,” which is
the sum of the raw scores of the several tests. The raw scores are
obtained as follows:
═════════════════════════════════════════════════
TEST METHOD OF SCORING MAXIMUM SCORE
─────────────────────────────────────────────────
1 Half point for each half maze 5
2 Number right 16
3 Number right 12
4 One third of number right 30
5 Right minus wrong 25
6 Number right 20
7 Number right 10
———
Total 118
─────────────────────────────────────────────────
Letter ratings are assigned on examination Beta as follows:
══════════════
RATING SCORES
──────────────
A 100–118
B 90– 99
C+ 80– 89
C 65– 79
C− 45– 64
D 20– 44
D−[6] 0– 19
──────────────
Footnote 6:
Recalled for individual examination.
All ratings above D− are entered and reported at once. Men whose scores
fall below D are recalled for individual examination.
Ratings of D− may not be given in examination Beta, unless recall of the
men for individual examination is impossible.
APPENDIX C
METHOD OF CALCULATING THE COEFFICIENT OF COÖRDINATION
(See Pages 95–97)
A simple method of determining precisely the degree to which the mental
test of 28 school children reflects or is related to their scholarship
records and the teacher’s estimate, as shown in the table on Page 96, is
to plot the relationship graphically, which has been done in the
accompanying diagrams.
In each diagram a heavy diagonal line shows approximately where the
plotted points would fall if the relationship were perfect between the
numbers of errors in the educational measurements and the other measure
of ability. It is clear that the relationship shown in each diagram is
far from perfect, but it is not clear from the diagrams which rating of
the teacher is most nearly approximated by the educational measurement
scores. To discover this relative degree of relationship, a mathematical
calculation must be made. For the purposes of testing the correspondence
between the scores in the various Mentimeter tests and the production
records or supervisor’s ratings of the group of persons tested, it is
sufficient to calculate what is best called “a coefficient of
coördination.”[7]
Footnote 7:
Calculated by a somewhat more complex formula, approximately the same
measure of relationship might be found, called by the more familiar
name “coefficient of correlation.”
The first step in the calculation of a coefficient of coördination is
the transformation of the original scores into figures indicating order
of merit. In the case of the sixth-grade class here referred to, the
teacher’s ratings of intelligence need not be changed, for they are
exactly the kind of ratings necessary: 1 indicating the brightest and 28
the dullest pupil, so far as the teacher was able to judge her pupils at
the end of a year’s work. Since the educational measurements scores
reported are the number of errors made by each child, the rank of the
child making the smallest numbers of errors will be 1, while the rank of
the pupil making the largest number of errors will be 28. On the other
hand, the scholarship marks are the summaries of the teacher’s
percentage marks for a half year, hence the best pupil is the one making
the highest percentage. In scholarship, then, the highest percentage
should get the rank of 1 and the lowest percentage a rank of 28.
[Illustration: Graphic picture of relation between test results and
intelligence ratings given by teacher]
[Illustration: Graphic picture of relation between test results and
scholarship marks given by teacher]
The first three columns of the following table give ranks in the place
of the original figures which indicated numbers of errors in
measurements and percentage in scholarship. Where two or more
individuals are entitled to the same rank, the figure used is the middle
value of the ranks. Thus in the case of the educational measurements
scores, two girls made 16.5 errors. There are but two pupils making
better showings, and therefore Ruth and Helen would normally rank third
and fourth, but since we have no evidence as to which should rank third
and which fourth, each is given a rank of 3.5. Similarly it will be
observed that Alexander, LaMonte, and Leo each obtained a percentage of
93 in scholarship, therefore the three boys named share equally the
fourth, fifth, and sixth rank, each being given 5 as a rank; and the
next highest pupil, Amelia with a percentage of 92, is given 7 as a
rank.
═══════════════════════════════════════════════════
RANKING OF SIXTH-GRADE PUPILS
────────────┬────────────┬────────────┬────────────
Name of │ A │ B │ C
Pupil │Educational │ Teacher’s │Scholarship
│Measurements│ Ranking │ Marks
────────────┼────────────┼────────────┼────────────
│ │ │
────────────┼────────────┼────────────┼────────────
Adelaide │ 12 │ 19│ 18.5
Ruth │ 3.5│ 15│ 9
Alexander │ 9 │ 7│ 5
LaMonte │ 14 │ 6│ 5
Earl │ 28 │ 18│ 24
│ │ │
Joseph │ 6 │ 20│ 18.5
Amedeo │ 27 │ 14│ 18.5
Leo │ 16 │ 3│ 5
William │ 17 │ 9│ 21
Isabel │ 8 │ 21│ 25
│ │ │
Ida │ 13 │ 4│ 3
Hazel │ 1 │ 10│ 9
Frederick │ 23 │ 26│ 16
Charles │ 20 │ 13│ 18.5
Edward │ 11 │ 1│ 2
│ │ │
Benjamin │ 22 │ 24│ 26
Bruce │ 19 │ 22│ 14
Alden │ 18 │ 12│ 14
George │ 21 │ 17│ 14
Alice │ 10 │ 11│ 12
│ │ │
Almira │ 2 │ 5│ 1
Helen │ 3.5│ 2│ 9
Elizabeth │ 24 │ 23│ 27
Amelia │ 7 │ 8│ 7
Edwin │ 5 │ 16│ 11
│ │ │
Robert │ 25 │ 28│ 28
Edna │ 15 │ 27│ 23
Samuel │ 26 │ 25│ 22
────────────┴────────────┴────────────┴────────────
───────────────────────────────────────────────────
════════════╤═════════════════════════════════════════
│ DIFFERENCES IN RANKINGS
────────────┼─────────────┬─────────────┬─────────────
Name of │ A to B │ A to C │ B to C
Pupil │ │ │
│ │ │
────────────┼──────┬──────┼──────┬──────┼──────┬──────
│ d │ d^2 │ d │ d^2 │ d │ d^2
────────────┼──────┼──────┼──────┼──────┼──────┼──────
Adelaide │ 7. │ 49. │ 6.5│ 42.25│ 0.5│ 0.25
Ruth │ 11.5 │132.25│ 5.5│ 30.25│ 6. │ 36.
Alexander │ –2. │ 4. │ –4. │ 16. │ 2. │ 4.
LaMonte │ –8. │ 64. │ –9. │ 81. │ 1. │ 1.
Earl │–10. │100. │ –4. │ 16. │ –6. │ 36.
│ │ │ │ │ │
Joseph │ 14. │196. │ 12.5│156.25│ 1.5│ 2.25
Amedeo │–13. │169. │ 8.5│ 72.25│ 4.5│ 20.25
Leo │–13. │169. │ –11. │121. │ –2. │ 4.
William │ –8. │ 64. │ 4. │ 16. │ –12. │144.
Isabel │ 13. │169. │ 17. │289. │ –4. │ 16.
│ │ │ │ │ │
Ida │ –9. │ 81. │ –10. │100. │ 1. │ 1.
Hazel │ 9. │ 81. │ 8. │ 64. │ 1. │ 1.
Frederick │ 3. │ 9. │ –7. │ 49. │ 10. │100.
Charles │ –7. │ 49. │ –1.5│ 2.25│ 5.5│ 30.25
Edward │–10. │100. │ –9. │ 81. │ –1. │ 1.
│ │ │ │ │ │
Benjamin │ 2. │ 4. │ 4. │ 16. │ –2. │ 4.
Bruce │ 3. │ 9. │ –5. │ 25. │ 8. │ 64.
Alden │ –6. │ 36. │ –4. │ 16. │ –2. │ 4.
George │ –4. │ 16. │ 7. │ 49. │ 3. │ 9.
Alice │ 1. │ 1. │ 2. │ 4. │ –1. │ 1.
│ │ │ │ │ │
Almira │ 3 │ 9. │ –1. │ 1. │ 4. │ 16.
Helen │ –1.5 │ 2.25│ 5.5│ 30.25│ –7. │ 49.
Elizabeth │ –1. │ 1. │ 3. │ 9. │ –4. │ 16.
Amelia │ 1. │ 1. │ 0 │ 0 │ 1. │ 1.
Edwin │ 11. │121. │ 6. │ 36. │ 5. │ 25.
│ │ │ │ │ │
Robert │ 3. │ 9. │ 3. │ 9. │ 0 │ 0
Edna │ 12. │144. │ 8. │ 64. │ 4. │ 16.
Samuel │ –1. │ 1. │ –4. │ 16. │ 3. │ 9.
────────────┼──────┴──────┼────── ┴──────┼──────┴──────
│Σd^2 = 1790.5│ 1411.5 │ 611.0
────────────┴─────────────┴─────────────┴─────────────
The coefficient of coördination, being an index number to show the
closeness with which two rankings correspond, is dependent upon the
differences between the rankings of the various individuals in the two
measures being compared. The formula used is ρ = (6Σd^2)/n(n^2 − 1),
where ρ stands for the coefficient of coordination, d stands for the
difference between an individual’s rank in the two measures, and n
stands for the number of individuals ranked in the two traits. The
capital sigma, Σ, stands for the sum of whatever follows it, in this
case the squares of the differences between the two rankings.
We may now employ the formula to find the coefficient of coördination
between rank in educational measurements and rank in the teacher’s
judgment as to intelligence. The difference between the ranks in column
A and column B of the above table is given in the fourth column.
Adelaide had a 12 in column A and a 19 in column B, so the difference
(7) appears in the fourth column and its square (49) in the fifth
column. Similarly the difference between Ruth’s 3.5 and her 15 is 11.5,
the square of which is 132.25. Finding the squares of all the
differences between rank in A and rank in B, and adding these squares
together at the bottom of the table gives 1790.5, which may now be
substituted in the formula for Σd^2. n, the number of pupils is in this
case 28, and therefore n(n^2 − 1) is 28 (28 squared less 1) = 28 (784 −
1) = 28 × 783 = 21924. The substitution in the formula then goes as
follows;
ρ = 1 − (6Σd^2)/(n(n^2 − 1)) = 1 − (6 × 1790.5)/(28 × 783) = 1 −
10743./21924. = 1 − .490 = .510
The coefficient of coordination between rank in the educational
measurements and rank in the teacher’s estimate of intelligence for the
sixth grade class is .51, which suggests the question of how to
interpret a coefficient after it is found.
A coefficient of 1.00 would mean perfect coördination and would only be
found when there were no differences whatever between the two rankings
considered. Such a perfect relationship will probably never be found,
except by some freak of chance, for even when a group of persons is
retested with the same test there is almost certain to be some change in
their relative standings. A coefficient of 0.00 would indicate no
relation whatever between the two rankings, while a coefficient of –1.00
would mean perfect correlation of a negative sort, the person getting
highest in one measure getting lowest in the other, the person scoring
next to the highest in one scoring next to the lowest in the other, and
so on. Perfect negative correlation is as infrequent as perfect positive
correlation.
The coefficient found between the teacher’s estimates of intelligence
and the results of educational measurements, .51, indicates a really
useful degree of coördination. Unless a Mentimeter test shows a
coefficient of coordination of .25 or more with the production records
(or other reliable measure of true ability), it may be considered as
having little value in helping to select and differentiate men for that
particular line of work. If the coefficient is above .5, the test is
quite useful, and the nearer the coefficient approaches 1.00 the more
confidence one may place in the test as a means of selecting and
classifying men in that particular field.
The sixth column of the table on page 329 gives the difference between
the test results rankings and the scholarship marks rankings, and the
seventh column gives the squares of these differences, the sum of these
squares being given at the bottom of the seventh column as 1411.5. By
substituting in the formula,
ρ = 1 − (6Σd^2)/(n(n^2 − 1)) = 1 − (6 × 1411.5)/(28 × 783) = 1 −
8469./21924. = 1 − .386 = .614,
it appears that the tests more closely correspond with the average of
the scholarship marks given by the teacher than with the teacher’s
estimate of intelligence. This is partly to be explained by the fact
that the tests given were measurements of ability in school subjects
rather than tests of intelligence, and still more by the fact that the
teacher gave scholarship marks on the basis of relatively objective
examinations while her estimates of intelligence are always wholly
subjective.
The eighth and ninth columns on page 8 give the differences between the
ranks in the teacher’s estimates of intelligence and the ranks in the
scholarship marks given during a half year. The coefficient of
coördination worked out from these differences is
.833 (ρ = 1 − (6 × 611)/(28 × 783) = 1 − 3666/21924 = 1 − .167 = .833)
which would seem to indicate that the teacher drew very heavily on her
knowledge of the relative scholarship of her pupils in making her
estimates of their intellectual capacities.
The three coefficients worked out above for 28 pupils in a sixth grade
are typical of the mathematical relationships the reader will wish to
work out between known degrees of ability in a certain type of work and
the results of the Mentimeter tests. The coefficients of coördination
for the sixth-grade pupils studied above are, between
Educational Measurements and Estimated Intelligence = .51
Educational Measurements and Scholarship Averages = .61
Estimated Intelligence and Scholarship Averages = .83
No method of forecasting degree of success in one line of work from
quality of performance in another task (or in a test) will give a
perfect coefficient of coordination of 1.00, but the nearer the
coefficient approaches 1.00 the more reliance one may put in the test
which furnishes such a ranking of the individuals.
APPENDIX D
CORRECT ANSWERS FOR MENTIMETER TESTS
The advantages of a carefully standardized test over an ordinary
examination which any one might prepare for his own use are chiefly the
characteristics implied in the word “standard.” A standard test is one
which has been carefully prepared after extensive experience with
similar tests; one which is made exact and objective by the most minute
specifications as to how it shall be applied, marked, scored, and
interpreted; and one on which many persons of varying degrees of proved
ability have been tested and reported, for comparison with the results
to be obtained later from testing other persons of undetermined degrees
of ability. The purpose of this section of the appendix is to make
definite and unmistakable the answers to the questions asked in the
Mentimeter tests, in order that each reader may mark and interpret the
results of these tests in exactly the same way, that is, in the
“standard” way.
As was stated in the body of the discussion, each package of test
booklets sold is accompanied by a “stencil” which fits over the pages of
the printed test in such a manner as to bring the correct answer
directly alongside the answer checked or written by the candidate
examined, with the result that there is small opportunity for errors in
the judgment of the persons marking the answers. If the word checked or
written corresponds with the word or words printed on the stencil at
that point, the question has been answered correctly, while if the word
checked or written by the candidate is less applicable than the one
appearing on the stencil, the response is to be marked incorrect. With
the aid of the stencils the Mentimeter tests may be marked correctly by
inexpensive clerical assistants in from one third to one tenth of the
time that would be required for the same work by the most intelligent
men working without the stencils.
No attempt has been made to print here an exhaustive list of correct
answers to each question. The answers printed as correct are merely
typical in most cases of the quality of replies that should be accepted.
Anything as appropriate as or more appropriate than the printed answer
may be given full credit, while anything less satisfactory is to be
given no credit at all. To print here all of the correct answers to each
question would take more pages than can be allowed for this section of
the Appendix and would in many cases cause more confusion than clearness
of thought. It is suggested that any question of right or wrong answers
which is difficult to decide should be settled arbitrarily by the reader
and that a note be kept of just how the matter was decided, in order
that any later investigator may have the benefit of his judgment. In
some of the tests new solutions will continually be appearing, even
after it seems certain that all of the correct answers have been found
and catalogued.
_MENTIMETER NO. 1_: Typical Performances of Young Children.
Success in this test is measured by performances in response to
_situations_ created by the examiner to a much greater degree than by
answers to _questions_ asked by the examiner. The directions themselves
give the answers in most cases, and in the other cases the correct
answers depend upon such facts as the name or sex of the individual
being tested. No set of answers is printed here for these tests,
therefore, since to do so would be to reprint exactly the directions
appearing on pages 115 to 128, which the reader should consult carefully
and even commit to memory before undertaking to apply the tests to any
infants or young children.
_MENTIMETER NO. 2_: Pictorial Absurdities.
In order to receive credit the check mark on each picture should be
placed in such a way as to indicate unmistakably the part of the picture
which is incorrect—in such a way as to leave no doubt whatever as to the
candidate’s having found and identified the incongruous element. The
following are the elements that should be checked in each picture:
1. The front leg or foot.
2. The lower spout on the water pitcher.
3. The mouth on the forehead.
4. The horns (either one may be checked) on the horse’s head.
5. The candle on the right arm of the electric fixture.
6. The rat’s ears.
7. Either end of the spy-glass.
8. The next window to the rear on the third floor.
9. The postage stamp.
10. The sock used as a necktie.
11. The long stem of the lowest leaf.
12. The flag (flying in the opposite direction from the smoke and
weather vane).
13. Either of the lights on the Ford.
14. The left front foot.
15. The man between first and second base (third man from the right).
16. The space between 4 and 5.
17. The claw hammer with which the man is driving the spike.
18. Either of the five fingers of the right hand.
19. The driver (facing the tail).
20. The ball being played by the man at the right.
21. The incandescent electric bulb.
22. Either of the roller skates.
23. The knife in the man’s right hand.
24. Either of the counterbalance weights on the drivewheels.
_MENTIMETER NO. 3_: Maze Threading.
No list of correct answers can be printed for this test. The stencil
provided with the test blanks shows exactly what the correct and most
economical threading of each maze is, but the reader can find this
solution for himself if he will take the time and make the effort. No
credit should be given for any maze not completely traced or for any
maze in which a printed line has been crossed. A candidate who has
gotten into a “blind alley” but has retraced his way and ultimately been
successful in getting through the maze should have full credit for that
particular maze.
_MENTIMETER NO. 4_: Dot Pattern Correction.
Here again, the only way of giving the correct solution of each problem
is by means of the transparent stencil furnished with each package of
test blanks. That dot which can be “cut out” and still leave a perfectly
symmetrical figure is the one which should be circled in each pattern.
This is frequently at the very centre of the pattern, although the
centre is not the correct one if by removing it the pattern is left
unsymmetrical.
_MENTIMETER NO. 5_: Dividing Geometric Figures.
Only a transparent stencil can give a clear impression of the correct
solution of each figure. In dividing a circle into two equal parts it
makes no difference in what direction the diameter is run—in other
words, any correct solution should be accepted and given full credit.
_MENTIMETER NO. 6_: Completion of Form Series.
Only the stencil supplied with the test blanks can represent adequately
the correct completion of each series. No credit is given in a series
unless each blank is correctly filled.
_MENTIMETER NO. 7_: Checking Identity of Numbers.
1. Same
2. Different
3. Different
4. Different
5. Same
6. Different
7. Same
8. Same
9. Different
10. Same
11. Different
12. Same
13. Different
14. Different
15. Same
16. Different
17. Different
18. Different
19. Same
20. Different
21. Different
22. Same
23. Same
24. Same
25. Same
26. Different
27. Same
28. Same
29. Different
30. Same
_MENTIMETER NO. 8_: Digit-Symbol Substitution.
The reader may, by reference to the Key printed at the top of the test
sheet, determine for himself the correctness of any symbol written by a
candidate. The stencil furnished with the Test Blanks makes it possible
for one to score this test very accurately with a very small expenditure
of time and effort. In scoring this test with the stencil the
correctness of the entire list of 100 characters can be checked in less
than a minute by an ordinary clerk.
_MENTIMETER NO. 9_: Completion of Number Relation Series.
No credit is to be given on any line unless all of the missing numbers
are correctly supplied. The score is the number of _lines_ completed
correctly in every detail.
—— —— —— —— —— 6 —— —— —— —— Series 1
—— —— 14 —— —— 20 —— —— —— —— Series 2
—— —— —— 9 —— —— 6 5 —— —— Series 3
—— —— 5 —— —— —— —— —— —— 19 Series 4
41 —— —— —— —— —— —— 27 —— —— Series 5
—— —— —— 10 —— —— —— —— —— 49 Series 6
—— —— —— ⅛ —— —— 1 —— 4 —— Series 7
—— —— 22 —— —— —— 50 —— —— —— Series 8
—— 11 —— —— —— —— 25 —— —— —— Series 9
—— 10 —— —— 14 —— —— —— —— 10 Series 10
—— 8 —— —— —— —— 16 17 19 —— Series 11
1 —— —— —— —— 36 49 —— —— —— Series 12
2 —— —— —— —— 34 37 74 —— —— Series 13
—— 33 30 31 —— —— —— —— 24 —— Series 14
—— —— —— 15 16 16 —— —— —— 6 Series 15
—— —— 51 48 —— —— 45 —— —— 51 Series 16
_MENTIMETER NO. 10_: Addition Tests
Test A: Addition Knowledge or Power.
1. 5
2. 8
3. 17
4. 79
5. 56
6. 88
7. 142
8. 248
9. 1397
10. 1664
11. 5571
12. 50362547
Test B: Addition Speed
1. 6
2. 17
3. 6
4. 11
5. 6
6. 11
7. 3
8. 9
9. 15
10. 10
11. 13
12. 7
13. 10
14. 7
15. 3
16. 5
17. 16
18. 4
19. 12
20. 11
21. 13
22. 7
23. 8
24. 13
25. 14
26. 6
27. 11
28. 8
29. 12
30. 13
31. 15
32. 18
33. 5
34. 13
35. 13
36. 14
37. 10
38. 15
39. 15
40. 12
41. 11
42. 14
43. 11
44. 11
45. 16
46. 11
47. 15
48. 12
49. 9
50. 14
51. 4
52. 9
53. 5
54. 17
55. 11
56. 7
57. 7
58. 9
59. 13
60. 12
_MENTIMETER NO. 11_: Memory for Numbers.
1. 56
2. 27
3. 935
4. 416
5. 7493
6. 4857
7. 95738
8. 68124
9. 268359
10. 635927
11. 9583624
12. 8195263
13. 35268349
14. 28593614
15. 639481725
16. 714963528
_MENTIMETER NO. 12_: Repeating Numbers Backward.
1. 85
2. 46
3. 253
4. 948
5. 4937
6. 8625
7. 35291
8. 69824
9. 752638
10. 746951
11. 4857362
12. 5746283
_MENTIMETER NO. 13_: Memory for Sentences.
1. It snows in the winter.
2. Men usually have more dignity than boys.
3. There is no excuse for being thoughtless about the rights of other
people.
4. The price of peace may sometimes be much greater than a nation can
afford to pay.
5. It is unfortunate that war should ever be necessary among civilized
nations.
6. Their harbour is a shallow body of water, connected with, but
protected from, the open sea.
7. Conscience asserting itself as the voice divine within the human
soul is nothing less than a real actuality.
8. Each state appoints a number of electors equal to the whole number
of senators and representatives.
9. These discoveries—gunpowder, printing-press, compass, and
telescope—were the weapons before which the old science trembled.
10. The use of italic type is indicated in the author’s manuscript by
underscoring the letters, words, phrases, or sentences that are
to be italicized.
_MENTIMETER NO. 14_: Speaking-Vocabulary Test.
_Any explanation, which demonstrates conclusively that the candidate
knows the nature and use of the word or object mentioned by the
examiner, should be accepted and given credit_, regardless of the
logical or grammatical form of the statements. The explanatory words and
phrases given below are not intended to serve as logical definitions or
as exhaustive explanations, but merely to indicate the various types of
thing that a given word might signify. In examining very intelligent
adults, meanings not listed below but nevertheless correct and
appropriate may be encountered. If any standard dictionary lists as
authentic the meaning given by a candidate, it should be accepted
without challenge. Repetitions by the candidate of the word to be
explained should not be accepted as an explanation. For example, “buy”
is not explained by “Buy is when you buy something.” An explanation, to
be satisfactory, should be in terms entirely different from the thing to
be explained, although explanations otherwise quite simple are
acceptable here.
1. An article of clothing, a covering or something to wear.
2. Obtaining possession or rights in an object in exchange for a price
or other consideration.
3. Written or printed matter, usually bound in covers for convenience
in reading.
4. A supply of goods or a place where such goods are kept. To lay away
or deposit such supplies.
5. A musical instrument or term.
6. To have or gain temporary possession or rights, in return for some
price or favour. The price paid for such rights. An opening or
torn place, especially in cloth.
7. The flesh of cattle, especially when used as food.
8. A custom or rule established by a legislature or governing
authority, or by the nature of the facts concerned.
9. A malady, illness, or infirmity, frequently accompanied by pain or
weakness.
10. Uncertainty or hesitation in belief; dread, fear, distrust, or
suspicion.
11. An officer who decides disputes or acts as umpire. To decide, pass
judgment, or compare the relative merits of ideas, opinions, or
objects.
12. The coming or occurrence of something considered desirable but not
foreseen as certain. Lucky.
13. One who attends to letters, papers, or business matters for another
individual or group of individuals. A writing desk.
14. Kingly or magnificent. Characteristic of or related to a king or
ruler.
15. A watercourse or channel, usually artificial. A tube or duct.
16. An eager desire or longing, usually of a selfish nature.
17. A person of fair hair, skin, and eyes. Light coloured.
18. Property or possessions having money value. Riches. Goods.
19. To allow, let, authorize, or give consent. A license or permission.
20. Sagacity, knowledge, discretion. Ability to judge or discern,
especially in matters of conduct.
21. To direct or control action. To manage, supervise, or exercise
authority.
22. Authority or permission to do or act. Excess of freedom or abuse of
liberty. To authorize or grant permission.
23. To strive for the same prize or object. To contend in rivalry.
24. The largest of the planets. A Roman god.
25. Humility, self-control, diffidence. Proper delicacy and propriety
about self and actions.
26. A scheme or plan to be followed. Procedure based on material
interest rather than on higher principles. A certificate of
insurance or of money due under certain conditions.
27. The act or instrument used in determining the exact degree or
quantity of a thing. The unit of amount. A division or part of a
tune or other object. To determine degree or quantity.
28. Inspiration, ecstasy, emotion, eagerness, or the object of such
manifestations.
29. Rate of interest, commission, or discount. Number of parts
concerned in a hundred.
30. A measure of distance or area. An agreement between two parties for
accomplishing a common task. To combine for mutual support.
31. A theory or system of social reorganization. Social reform through
political agencies. A theoretically ideal society or state.
32. The science of exact reasoning. The laws or method of abstract
thought. A treatise on thinking or reasoning.
33. To regard with reverence, respect, or veneration. To adore.
34. Satire, ridicule, contemptuous remarks, bitter taunts.
35. Sarcastic reproach, invective. To deride, revile, or reproach with
insulting words.
36. Not transparent, dark, impervious to rays of light. Unintelligible,
stupid.
37. One making a first appearance in society or before the public.
38. Act of repairing or restoring. Giving satisfaction or compensation
for a wrong or injury.
39. To take the tenth part of or to destroy a considerable proportion
of a group.
40. An instrument used to regulate an electric current.
41. Knowing all things. Infinitely wise. One who is possessed of
universal knowledge.
42. To curse or treat basely. Used in imprecations, frequently with
little meaning.
43. A cat-like animal resembling the leopard found in India, Persia,
and Africa.
44. A very large and strong animal—especially one mentioned in the
Bible.
45. A bay window, particularly one which projects from the face of a
wall.
46. One of the great stones or boulders used in prehistoric monuments.
47. A soft, white substance that forms a protecting sheath about the
centre of medullated nerve fiber.
48. An ancient manner of writing. Ancient writings, or the study of
such writings.
49. The branch of surgery that treats of adding artificial parts to the
body to replace natural parts which are wanting.
50. The dried tubers of various orchids, used for food, like tapioca.
_MENTIMETER NO. 15_: Word Discrimination.
_Any real difference_ named by the candidate between the two words to be
compared should be given credit _whether it appears in the following
list or not_. The list merely points out some of the outstanding
differences between the words of each pair, but does not attempt to list
all of the possible differences. Any difference mentioned by the
candidate which is confirmed by any standard dictionary should be
sufficient to give full credit.
1. A bird lives in the air : A fish lives in the water
flies swims
has feathers has scales
2. A snake is long : A fly is short
is a reptile is an insect
crawls flies
has no wings or legs has wings and legs
3. A pen writes only when it has : A pencil writes without ink
ink
is made of steel or is made of lead or soft
hard metal material
does not have to be has to be sharpened
sharpened
4. An eagle flies very high and : A chicken flies very low and but
long distances a short distance
is wild is domestic
is not good for food is good for food
5. A book usually has a hard cover : A magazine has a paper cover
is usually one story, is several stories, by
by one author different people
is published once is published
periodically
6. An orange has a reddish yellow : A lemon has a bright yellow
colour colour
is spherical in shape is oblong in shape
is usually larger than is usually smaller than
a lemon an orange
is usually sweet is usually sour
7. A teacher works in a school : A preacher works in a church
usually teaches usually addresses
children grown-ups
deals primarily with deals primarily with
academic subjects religious subjects
8. Luck comes to a person by chance : Pluck is part of a person’s
character
is a temporary is a permanent
advantage advantage
comes to everyone is characteristic of a
few
9. Stone is a natural product, made : China is made artificially of
of mineral matter fine earth or clay
is used for buildings is used for dishes
is thick and coarse is thin and fragile
10. A balloon depends on the wind : An airplane is run by a motor
for motion
has a large gas bag has no gas bag
moves slowly moves rapidly
11. To plod is to work or travel : To plot is to scheme or plan,
slowly but steadily usually for evil to someone
else
is to toil, to drudge is to conspire, to
intrigue
12. To wither is to fade, to lose : To shrivel is to dry up, to draw
freshness into wrinkles
is to languish is to shrink
flowers wither vegetables shrivel
13. To surprise is to come upon one : To astonish is to strike one
unawares, or unexpectedly with sudden wonder or
amazement
14. Rash means overhasty in counsel : Reckless means careless, utterly
or action heedless of consequences
means undertaking a means indifferent or
matter without thoughtless
sufficient reflection
15. Lonely is to be without desired : Solitary is to be absolutely
companions alone remote from society
16. Sorrow is pain of mind from loss : Sadness is being downcast or
or disappointment unhappy
is deep seated, lasting may be transient,
passing
17. Plutocrat is one whose wealth : Autocrat is an absolute
gives him power or influence sovereign, having usually
inherited authority
18. A rascal is a mean, tricky : A rogue is an idle, mischievous
person person
19. To plunder is to take goods by : To devastate is to lay waste, to
force, to pillage desolate, to ravage
20. To relinquish is to abandon the : To resign is to formally return
thing which has been or give up an office, to
possessed, or the object of submit, to acquiesce, to
pursuit abdicate
21. Shrewd means artful, malicious, : Sagacious means one of keen
cunning, of less dignity than penetration and judgment, one
sagacious with a comprehensive as well a
penetrating mind
22. Dormant means sleeping, not in : Quiescent means resting, in a
action state of repose
23. Reconstruction means to form : Rehabilitation means to invest
anew again with some right or
dignity
means to build over
again
deals more largely with deals largely with
material things mental and spiritual
things
24. Reparation means restoration, : Indemnity means immunity from
renewing, repairing damage loss or damage
done
remuneration for injury
has more of the idea of has more of the idea of
replacing things paying for things
destroyed destroyed
_MENTIMETER NO. 16_: Naming Opposites.
Except in special cases indicated below, no credit should be allowed for
adding “not” or “un” or any other negative prefix to the printed word.
An entirely different word should be used as the opposite of the printed
word. Those words printed in parentheses in the following list should
not be given credit as being satisfactory opposites. Words not printed
below but as satisfactory opposites as those printed should be given
full credit, while words as unsatisfactory as those printed in
parentheses should not be given credit.
1. bad, poor (not good)
2. poor, needy, indigent
3. big, large, great (tall)
4. old, ancient
5. easy, soft
6. light (white)
7. clean, pure
8. well, healthy
9. south
10. full, filled
11. pull
12. right, correct
13. end, ending
14. wide
15. evening, afternoon (night)
16. somewhere, everywhere
17. fresh
18. idle
19. to sink (to swim)
20. rough, ragged
21. tame, domestic
22. weakness
23. guilty
24. ignorance, stupidity
25. negative, uncertain
26. superior
27. modern, new
28. cause
29. generous, liberal
30. concrete, specific
31. justice, impartiality
32. dilatory, sluggish
33. extravagant, wasteful, uneconomical
34. genuine, real
35. depression, melancholy
36. delay, impede, hamper
37. confident, bold, immodest
38. heterogeneous
39. cowardly, irresolute, fearful
40. slanderous, scurrilous, vilifying
_MENTIMETER NO. 17_: Spelling Tests.
The word lists themselves furnish the correct answers and therefore no
further set of answers is needed here. See pages 199–200 for the lists.
_MENTIMETER NO. 18_: Range of Information.
1. COW
2. CLUBS
3. CIGARETTE
4. CARPENTER
5. GREEN
6. AUTOMOBILES
7. DOG
8. ACTRESS
9. HUYLER
10. 1861
11. COUNTY
12. PAINTER
13. MOTORCYCLE
14. NOVELIST
15. FILING-CASE
16. DISTANCE
17. LEG
18. REEFS
19. WATER
20. STOWE
21. STATESMAN
22. POUGHKEEPSIE
23. LAW
24. TWO
25. DICKENS
26. ENGLAND
27. BIRD
28. ATHLETICS
29. DRINK
30. INK
31. FRUIT
32. ISOSCELES
33. 1066
34. HEART
35. PLANT
36. KOREA
37. OXYGEN
38. MUSIC
39. CLOTH
40. ANIMAL
_MENTIMETER NO. 19_: Reading Vocabulary.
1. BODY, TOOL
2. ANIMAL
3. CLOTHES
4. COLOUR
5. BIRD
6. CLOTHES
7. ANIMAL, BODY
8. TOOL, FISH
9. BODY
10. TOOL
11. BIRD
12. COLOUR
13. FISH
14. WAR
15. TIME
16. WAR
17. ANIMAL
18. FISH
19. TIME
20. CLOTHES
21. WAR
22. BODY
23. COLOR
24. BIRD
25. FISH
26. TOOL
27. TIME
28. ANIMAL
29. COLOUR
30. WAR
31. TIME
32. CLOTHES
33. BODY
34. BIRD
35. FISH
36. BODY
37. WAR
38. TOOL
39. ANIMAL
40. BIRD
_MENTIMETER NO. 20_: Reading, Directions.
1. The name should be written _on the line_.
2. There should be a cross or an x _in the square_.
3. There should be a cross or an x in the circle and a dot or period
in the square.
4. There should be a 1 under the letter M and a 2 under the letter W,
in the list of capital letters beginning A, N, etc.
5. The word “Yes” should be written _on the dotted line_.
6. The word “in” should be crossed out and the word “and” should have
two lines or circles around it.
7. The word “seven” or the figure 7 should be written on the blank at
the left, “twelve” or 12 on the middle blank, and “one hundred”
or 100 on the blank at the right.
8. “Ten” or 10 should be written in the square on the left, a small
circle should be written in the second square, and the letter “C”
in the triangle at the right.
9. There should be a line drawn under the word “Peck.”
10. The word “thousand” or 1000 should be written in the circle.
11. The square in front of the word “diminished” should have a check
mark or cross on it.
12. There should be a line under the word “Face.”
_MENTIMETER NO. 21_: Reading, Interpretation.
Answers must show conclusively that the questions and the sentences
answering them were read and understood by the candidate.
1. Boys.
2. In the house.
3. Girls.
4. On farms, in stores, mines, and factories.
5. In the things they enjoy and in the things they are able to do.
6. Wheat, corn, and cattle.
7. To make clothing to keep us warm.
8. To protect us from rain and snow.
9. Differences between people.
10. Because the world has all sorts of work that must be done, or it
makes possible the adjustment of people to the different tasks to
be done.
11. Much of it would be poorly done.
12. The difficulty of the task.
13. Discontentment and unhappiness.
14. “Expeditiously” suggests a lack of economy in time and money.
15. Intellectual measurements.
16. The consummation of the science of personnel engineering.
_MENTIMETER NO. 22_: Disarranged Sentences.
The most frequent arrangement of the words in each sentence is indicated
below by the last word. Any other arrangement of these words which
produces a perfectly logical and grammatical sentence may be accepted.
Very few sentences will be found that are not already provided for in
the concluding words listed below.
1. WHITE.
2. ROBIN. BIRD.
3. WATER.
4. HOUSES.
5. WITH.
6. WEST.
7. COUNTRY.
8. COLDEST.
9. FOOD.
10. EARTH.
11. FOOD. VALUABLE.
12. TREES.
13. GERMANY. ENGLAND. FRANCE.
14. PUNISHED.
15. OCEAN.
16. MISTAKES.
17. NIGHTS. SEEN.
18. CLOTHING. USEFUL.
19. DEBATERS.
20. WARFARE. POISONOUS.
21. DEGRADING. UNFORTUNATE.
22. CRIMES. BIGAMY. PERJURY.
23. PSYCHOLOGISTS.
24. STEALING.
25. FACT. OBSERVED. APPLIED.
_MENTIMETER NO. 23_: Completion of Sentences.
It is impossible for any one to make out a complete list of all the
possible completions of any group of twenty sentences such as those
included in this test. The list of completions given below is therefore
merely suggestive of the perfect sentences which may be made and is not
intended in any way to be exhaustive. Anything which is as good as the
completion listed below should be given full credit. Anything which is
not so satisfactory should not be given credit.
1. _Is_ or _was_.
2. _To._
3. _Gave_, or _gives_.
4. _Girl_ or _child_ in the first blank, and _to_ in the second blank.
5. _And_ in the first blank, with _dogs_ in the second blank.
6. _Have_, _make_ or _gain_.
7. _Not_ or _never_ in the first blank, with _parents_, _friends_, or
_sister_ in the second blank.
8. _Boy_, _man_ or _child_ in the first blank, with _fell_ in the
second blank.
9. _Is_ or _was_ in the first blank, with _to_ in the second blank,
and _windy_ in the third blank.
10. _Succeeds_ or _can_.
11. _Animal_ in the first blank, _his_ or _its_ in the second blank,
and _size_ in the third blank.
12. _Man_ in the first blank, with _carried_ or _carries_ in the second
blank, and _wore_ or _wears_ in the third blank.
13. _On_ in the first blank, _quenches_ in the second blank, _drink_ in
the third blank, and _cold_ or _pure_ in the fourth blank.
14. _Patriotism_ in the first blank, _waving_ or _carrying_ in the
second blank, _come_ or _go_ in the third blank, and _marching_
in the fourth blank.
15. _That_ or _which_ in the first blank, _worth_ in the second blank,
_well_ in the third blank, _doing_ in the fourth blank.
16. _Does_ or _can_ in the first blank, _give_ in the second blank,
_every_ in the third blank.
17. _When_ in the first blank, _better_ in the second blank, _practice_
in the third blank, _at_ in the fourth blank, _wrong_ in the
fifth blank, _doing_ in the sixth blank.
18. _Which_ or _that_ in the first blank, _cause_ in the second blank,
_are_ in the third blank, and _very_ or _most_ in the fifth
blank.
19. _To_ in the first blank, _when_ in the second blank, _thirsty_ in
the third blank, and _great_ or _real_ in the fourth blank.
20. _Whether_ in the first blank, _likes_, _desires_ or _welcomes_ in
the second blank, _or_ in the third blank, _one_ in the fourth
blank, _not_ in the fifth blank, _as_ in the sixth blank,
_insult_ in the seventh blank.
_MENTIMETER NO. 24_: Analogies or Mixed Relations.
As with several of the other lists of answers, no attempt is made here
to give an exhaustive list of the correct solutions. The words which
appear below are standard. Anything as good as this standard list should
be accepted while anything inferior to the printed solutions should not
be given credit.
1. Dogs
2. Far, distant
3. Foot
4. Cat’s
5. Hot, warm, heat
6. Swims, swim
7. Hen
8. Drink
9. School, classroom
10. Her
11. Law
12. Colt, foal
13. Bought
14. Painting, picture, portrait
15. Sheep, ram
16. Floor
17. Bird, birds, fowl
18. Chauffeur
19. Was, were, been
20. School, shoal
21. Night
22. Risen
23. Drake
24. Sheep, animal, beast
25. Women’s
26. Give, donate, buy, return
27. Aviatrices
28. Criterion
29. Joneses’
30. Esoteric
_MENTIMETER NO. 25_: Handwriting.
The reader will be able to count the number of letters written per
minute and thereby obtain the score in this test without any key. For
the quality of the results of such a test the reader will compare the
handwriting of each candidate with the samples printed on page 239.
_MENTIMETER NO. 26_: English Composition.
This test, like the test for handwriting quality, is a test of the
quality of products produced by the candidates rather than of the
difficulty of problems solved. Therefore, no set of correct answers is
necessary. The quality of the candidate’s composition should be compared
directly with the quality of the printed samples appearing on pages 242
to 244.
_MENTIMETER NO. 27_: Poetic Discrimination.
The correct order as determined by the judgments of scores of capable
judges of English Poetry is as follows:
Best Middle Poorest
In Set No. 1 Z Y X
In Set No. 2 X Y Z
In Set No. 3 Z X Y
In Set No. 4 Y X Z
In Set No. 5 Y Z X
In Set No. 6 Y Z X
_MENTIMETER NO. 28_: Arithmetic Reasoning.
In giving the correct answers below each figure has attached to it the
word indicating the commodity concerned. No answer should be considered
incorrect, however, because it omits the words “dollars,” “lemons” or
“men.”
1. 8 men
2. 12 dollars
8. 9 nickels
4. 5 benches
5. 8 cents
6. 23 cents
7. 16 lemons
8. 3373 quarts
9. 500 pounds
10. 51 cents
11. 750 people
12. 22 tons
13. $4.80
14. $1575.00
_MENTIMETER NO. 29_: Practical Judgment Test.
1. Get a drink of water.
2. It tastes good.
3. Wear a raincoat.
4. Ring the alarm and try to put out the fire.
5. Ask the person’s pardon.
6. The frost has killed them.
7. To protect them from the colder weather.
8. At the beach of a summer resort.
9. Try to make time by hurrying.
10. To display the flag and inspire patriotism.
11. Water always becomes solid at low temperatures.
12. Nail a piece of tin over it.
13. It is an easily digested and wholesome food.
14. An incandescent electric bulb.
15. To create a demand for special brands.
16. So that their strength may be utilized.
17. The low temperature keeps it fresh.
18. One could jump from one-story buildings.
19. Discover and remove the cause of its crying.
20. It has fewer impurities in it.
21. To avoid making the city smoky.
22. To remove the electricity from the air.
23. High and rapidly.
24. To help one decide where to read.
_MENTIMETER NO. 30_: Logical Conclusions Test.
1. Older than James.
2. Older than Mary.
3. Shorter than Dot.
4. Not heavier than May.
5. Slower than William.
6. Smarter than Bertha.
7. Not as rich as Mr. Jones.
8. Not noisier than Robert.
9. Less rapidly than Henry.
10. Not warmer than Thursday.
11. Not as frugal as Mrs. Brown.
12. Not larger than the second.
THE END
------------------------------------------------------------------------
TRANSCRIBER’S NOTES
1. P. 98, changed “to errors” to “to make errors”.
2. Silently corrected typographical errors and variations in spelling.
3. Anachronistic, non-standard, and uncertain spellings retained as
printed.
4. Footnotes have been re-indexed using numbers.
5. Enclosed italics font in _underscores_.
6. Enclosed bold font in =equals=.
7. Superscripts are denoted by a caret before a single superscript
character, e.g. M^r.
*** End of this LibraryBlog Digital Book "Measure Your Mind - The Mentimeter and How to Use It" ***
Copyright 2023 LibraryBlog. All rights reserved.