HABIT FORMATION: THE LABYRINTH HABIT
The problem method, of which the ladder and door-opening tests of the preceding chapter are examples, has yielded interesting results concerning the individual initiative, ingenuity, motor ability, and ways of learning of the dancer; but it has not furnished us with accurate measurements of the rapidity of learning or of the permanency of the effects of training. In this chapter I shall therefore present the results of labyrinth experiments which were planned as means of measuring the intelligence of the dancer.
The four labyrinths which have been used in the investigation may be designated as A, B, C, and D. They differ from one another in the character of their errors, as well as in the number of wrong choices of a path which the animal might make on its way from entrance to exit. In the use of the labyrinth method, as in the case of the discrimination method of earlier chapters, the steps by which a satisfactory form of labyrinth for testing the dancer was discovered are quite as interesting and important for those who have an intelligent appreciation of the problems and methods of animal psychology as are the particular results which were obtained. For this reason, I shall describe the various forms of labyrinth in the order in which they were used, whether they proved satisfactory or not. At the outset of this part of my investigation, it was my purpose to compare directly the capacity for habit formation in the dancer with that of the common mouse. This proved impracticable because the same labyrinth is not suited to the motor tendencies of both kinds of mice.
[Illustration: FIGURE 25.—Labyrinth A. I. entrance; O, exit; 1, 2, 3, 4, blind alleys.]
The first of the four labyrinths, A, appears in ground plan in Figure 25. It was constructed of wood, as were the other labyrinths also, and measured 60 cm. in length and width, and 10 cm. in depth. The outside alleys were 5 cm. wide. In the figure, I marks the starting point or entrance to the maze, and O the exit through which the mouse was permitted to pass into its nest-box. Any turn in the wrong direction which the animal made in its progress from entrance to exit was recorded as an error. The four errors, exclusive of the mistake of turning back, which were possible in this labyrinth, are indicated in the figure by the numerals 1, 2, 3, and 4. By retracing its steps a mouse might repeat any one or all of these errors, and add to them the error of turning back.
In the experiments a mouse was permitted to enter the maze from a small box which had been placed by the experimenter at I, and an accurate record was kept of the number of errors which it made in finding its way from entrance to exit, and of the time occupied. Each of five dancers was given 31 tests in this labyrinth. The number of tests per day varied, as is indicated in Table 36, from 1 to 4. The results of the tests, so far as errors and times are in question, appear in the table. T at the head of a column is an abbreviation for time, E for errors.
The dancers did not learn to escape from this labyrinth easily and quickly. In fact, the average time of the thirty-first test (198") is considerably longer than that of the first (130"). The number of errors decreased, it is true, but even for the last test it was 6.6 as compared with only a little more than twice that number for the first test. The last column of the table furnishes convincing proof of the truth of the statement that the animals did not acquire a perfect labyrinth-A habit. Was this due to inability to learn so complex a path, or to the fact that the method is not adapted to their nature? Observation of the behavior of the mice in the experiments enables me to say with certainty that there was no motive for escape sufficiently strong to establish a habit of following the direct path. Often, especially after a few experiences in the maze, a dancer would wander back and forth in the alleys and central courts, dancing much of the time and apparently exploring its surroundings instead of persistently trying to escape. This behavior, and the time and error results of the accompanying table, lead me to conclude that the labyrinth method, as it has been employed in the study of the intelligence of several other mammals, is not a satisfactory test of the ability of the dancer to profit by experience. That the fault is not in the labyrinth itself is proved by the results which I obtained with common mice.
TABLE 36
RESULTS OF LABYRINTH A TESTS WITH DANCERS
AVERAGE
TEST DATE No. 1000 No. 2 No. 6 No. 4 No. 5 FOR ALL
1905
T E T E T E T E T E T E