TABLE XI
| 88 experiments with each | |||
| Right | Left | No tendency | |
| Subjects | 4 | 7 | 3 |
| Av. % of difference in favor of | 25.6 | 23.1 | 3.4 |
The results give us again our inevitable three classes, and in many cases a difference-value surprisingly large when we reflect on the simplicity of the conditions. That the omission of complicating features was of importance is shown by the fact that more of the observers (11 out of 14) show a marked error than in any other case. Clearly enough the various factors introduced tend to eliminate the space-error, but when in any case it does enter, it is even then capable of rising to as high a degree on the whole as in the uncomplicated series, as is shown by the fact that in but four cases does the new value surpass the best of the old, and in three of these by a trifling amount.
It is interesting to note that the three cases of minimum space-error show a well-defined tendency to be determined by distribution.
b. Possible Bases of this Error. The outcome of these special experiments is that the factors found in the groups are at least not directly responsible for the situation that we are considering. The divergence among the observers shows this. In hunting after the cause for this apparent influence of side, we look first for changes in the peripheral, and then in the central, processes that precede the judgment. The material used for the experiments of Table XI seems approximately to have equalized all the objective factors in the two groups. How could there be anything further in the peripheral process whereby group could be differentiated from group? The most evident thing is that the visual stimulus is received in a different way from the two groups. There is a definite peripheral mechanism whose factors seem essentially to be two, however variously they may be combined: (a) The relative amount of time given to each group; (b) the order in which the groups are viewed.
The observers were instructed and continually reminded to equalize the amount of attention devoted to the group; but as this is not wholly a voluntary matter, the possibility of failure to conform has to be reckoned with. Experiment must therefore be employed to test the influence of these factors before one can fall back upon a central process as the cause for this tendency to favor a side.
c. Its Relation to Differences between the Groups in Length of Look. The material was the same used for the experiments of Table XI. The method was the same with the following necessary exceptions: The longer exposure was double the shorter (4/5 sec. to 2/5 sec.), and 2/5 sec. elapsed between the two. Further, the experiments were so arranged as to equalize the influence of the order of exposure with respect to both side and relative length. The means for effecting successive exposure took the earlier form described in the introduction to Section II.